Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News
Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News |
- Malaysia’s social media election is already over
- Unreliable leaks and flawed intelligence
- Identifying Malaysia's Enemies & Appropriate Weaponry
- Anwar’s hand in Lahad Datu isn’t credible theory!
| Malaysia’s social media election is already over Posted: 25 Mar 2013 03:01 PM PDT
Since the last general election in 2008, Malaysia's Internet penetration has risen by over 300 per cent in 2012. Total Internet penetration had increased from 1,718,500 in 2008 to 5,839,600 in 2012, an increase of as much as 4,121,100. James Gomez, TMI The upcoming general election is not a "social media election". The so-called "social media election" is already over. Observers are just waiting for the results. Let me explain. Social media in Malaysia has been influential in keeping important political issues in the forefront in the last five years. Hence, when evaluating the social media-related outcomes of the next general election, it is the net impact of social media's political influence in the last five years and not just the campaign period that analysts need to consider. In Malaysia, broadcast media, like elsewhere, has over the years evolved into a fragmented viewership base. Viewers switch easily between free-to-air, subscription TV and videos on-demand mostly for their entertainment needs, leaving those interested in alternative local political news to look elsewhere. Meanwhile, Malaysian newspapers, particular the Malay- and English-medium ones that have traditionally reported on local political news, have seen a drastic drop in circulation since the last general election held in 2008. The two main Malay-language newspapers, which are Berita Harian (weekend edition Berita Minggu) and Utusan Malaysia (weekend edition Mingguan Malaysia), have suffered a decline in circulation from 1,147,126 in 2008 to 890,446 in 2012. Similarly, English-language newspapers such as the New Straits Times, The Star and The Edge saw their combined circulation drop from 936,664 in 2008 to 813,994 in 2012. But this fragmentation in broadcast media and slack in print media circulation is being taken up by the Internet. Since the last general election in 2008, Malaysia's Internet penetration has risen by over 300 per cent in 2012. Total Internet penetration had increased from 1,718,500 in 2008 to 5,839,600 in 2012, an increase of as much as 4,121,100. According to the Malaysian Digital Association's (MDA) February 2012 report, websites of the mainstream media, such as thestar.com.my, utusan.com.my and bharian.com.my, attracted 2,221,763, 1,171,578 and 769,772 unique browsers respectively. Alternative news websites such as malaysiakini.com and themalaysianinsider.com attracted 1,858,649 and 1,117,124 unique browsers respectively in the same period, demonstrating strongly their comparative strength. However access to social media sites is the highest according to the same MDA report. Sites such as facebook.com and youtube.com attracted 6,467,257 and 4,238,824 unique browsers while twitter.com attracted 926,874 unique browsers in the same period from Malaysia.
|
| Unreliable leaks and flawed intelligence Posted: 25 Mar 2013 01:52 PM PDT Singapore officials believed Anwar Ibrahim was involved in Sodomy II but the facts today have proven otherwise, calling into question the reliability of US intelligence cables. Amir Ali, Free Malaysia Today WikiLeaks has been used by the ruling government on several occasions to blame or tarnish Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim. First came the "leak" about Singapore's diplomatic officials linking Anwar to Sodomy II against Saiful Bukhari Azlan. Now we have accusations that Anwar is the man behind the Lahad Datu intrusion, and all because he had close ties with Nur Misuari, the troubled former governor of the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao. Let's look at the reliability of the diplomatic leaks by WikiLeaks and the accuracy of these sensational stories. Last year, Anwar, in a "live" dialogue-cum-interview with WikiLeaks boss Julian Assange, answered Assange on critical issues. They did not touch on the "leaked" diplomatic documents. Now what about the diplomatic comments revealed by WikiLeaks? Or let's ask the crucial question: How reliable are the diplomatic cables? The declaration by Saiful's father (that Anwar was not guilty of the sodomy) has not only tarnished those who accused Anwar of sodomy, it has also exposed the flagrant dishonesty of the Singaporean "officials" who claimed Sodomy II was real. The Jakarta Globe (quoting an AFP report) screamed: "Singapore leaders believe Malaysian opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim had sex with a male aide in a honey trap set by his enemies, according to leaked US cables published by WikiLeaks." The Centre for Policy Initiatives (CPI), in its article on the "Singapore leaks", reported that the US Embassy had recorded the opinions of Singapore officials in Malaysia, adding that their comments were blunt and none was complimentary. Slap in the face CPI cited the Sydney Morning Herald report on Dec 12 which quoted WikiLeaks as having stated that it (sodomy) was a "set-up job engineered by Anwar's enemies, and that Anwar did engage in sodomy". But the statement by Saiful's father (that Anwar was innocent) and his decision to join PKR are a big slap in the Singaporean officials' face. It also cast doubts on the trustworthiness of WikiLeaks' cables. There are two major aspects in the WikiLeaks' cables on Sodomy II. One is the report about Singaporean officials giving their views to US officials on the sodomy trial, and two, is the source who disclosed the "intelligence" to the Singaporean authorities. If the intelligence came from Malaysia, it is clear that the Singaporeans were duped into believing that the story was true. This shows how the "diplomatic" circles in this region can easily be deceived about national, regional and international issues. Singapore believed Anwar was involved in sodomy when the facts today proved otherwise. Read more at: http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/category/opinion/2013/03/26/unreliable-leaks-and-flawed-intelligence/ |
| Identifying Malaysia's Enemies & Appropriate Weaponry Posted: 25 Mar 2013 01:34 PM PDT
So, exactly how are decisions made in the ministry of defence to purchase the submarines, the corvettes, the frigates (costing billions) instead of more effective patrol boats to guard our coastlines? Dr Kua Kia Soong, SUARAM Adviser As the Global Day of Action on Military Spending, GDAMS 3.0 (15 April 2013) approaches, it is time for Malaysians to ask: Who are Malaysia's enemies and what appropriate weaponry do we need? One would think this is the first question the Ministry of Defence should ask in the multi-billion decisions to procure armaments now that the arms merchants are here again for LIMA 2013. Yet our National Defence Policy has never even been properly debated in parliament. Just a few months ago, the defence ministry would not have said that Malaysia's enemies were among the Suluks who have been coming back and forth between southern Philippines and Sabah all these years. After all, hadn't we helped to train MNLF fighters there against Marcos in the seventies? Wasn't this the reason why the Home Minister Hishamuddin said that the invaders at Lahad Datu were "neither militants nor terrorists" during the two or three weeks that they were already there? And haven't we got a "Rapid Deployment Force" (10 Paratrooper Brigade) ready to be dispatched to any flashpoint? One wonders what flashpoint scenarios they are trained for? Are they ready to be deployed only when there are secessionists fighting to take East Malaysia out of the federation? They certainly hadn't been prepared for the Sulu sultan's army to "turn". Don't be surprised if the "defence analysts" in the ministry have now shredded all their previous analyses about Malaysia's perceived "enemies". With the new-found enemies of the Malaysian state, the arms lobby has at last found a raison detre for their fabulous arms procurements. Heck, didn't we finally get the chance to use our F18 fighter bombers and Hawk 208 fighter jets against this so-called "rag-tag army"? Wouldn't armoured cars and tanks and mortars have sufficed in that four square kilometer area of land against that motley crew? In the end, were Malaysians given a clear picture of the efficacy of those fighter jet sorties? Whatever the reasons for sending in the fighter bombers and jets, the international arms merchants have now come to town to peddle their wares. The French have started advertising their 'Rafale' fighter jets in our mainstream newspapers, alongside bargains by 'Giant' and 'Tesco' for the attention of Malaysians. BAE are also desperately trying to flog their 'Typhoon' jet fighters in a RM10 billion deal they hope to clinch with a "Buy 1 - Get 1 free" gambit. They lost out recently to the French when the Indian government opted to buy 126 Rafale fighter jets instead, and are still fuming. But do we need any fighter jets at all, considering their cost is spiraling way out of control and they so quickly become obsolete? They will be even more obsolete when future air wars are fought using drones (Unarmed Aerial Vehicles)! Malaysians should be aware that the latest (US) F35 fighter jets cost at least half a billion ringgit a piece? Can we keep up with the race? What race? Who are we racing against? Who are our enemies?
The appropriate vessels for RMN When the bombardment finally began at Lahad Datu, it was mentioned that the navy had formed a cordon to prevent the intruders from getting away. It became clear that there has never been a cordon to prevent any intruders from getting INTO Sabah all these years. Looking at the geography of the area, it is evident that our two submarines (costing more than RM7 billion) sitting pretty in Sepanggar Bay and our six New Generation Patrol Vessels (costing RM9 billion) were not the most suitable vessels in such circumstances. This mismatch raises the question of the need for our navy to prioritise the deployment of appropriate alternative vessels. As part of the RM5 billion arms deal signed between Dr Mahathir and Margaret Thatcher in 1989, we procured two corvettes built by the Yarrow shipbuilders costing RM2.2 billion. (NST, 11.11.91) At the time, the Royal Malaysian Navy said they required sixteen offshore patrol vessels but due to financial constraints, the RMN could only afford four or five of these locally-built OPVs. Mindef had budgeted RM85 million per OPV. (NST, 25.11.91) Now, in the light of the latest incident at Lahad Datu, Malaysians will be in a better position to see the appropriate vessels that would be more suitable to secure the Sabah coastline. Before the Lahad Datu incident, the main "enemies" testing the capacity of our armed forces were the pirates in the South China Sea and the Straits of Malacca. There were no bigger "enemies" than those seafaring marauders. Are state-of-the-art fighter jets and submarines the appropriate defence equipmenty against pirates? These would likewise be inappropriate if "international terrorists" and suicide bombers choose to target Malaysia. So, exactly how are decisions made in the ministry of defence to purchase the submarines, the corvettes, the frigates (costing billions) instead of more effective patrol boats to guard our coastlines?
ASEAN needs to take ZOPFAN more seriously There is no end if we choose to embark on an arms race with our neighbouring countries. We simply cannot afford such an arms race and it is time ASEAN countries seriously talk about disarmament and joint defence agreements instead of an arms race within ASEAN. Our economic priorities need to be diverted away from military production toward production for human needs, and public expenditure diverted to more and better social services throughout ASEAN. Any disputes over territories should be settled through international arbitration as was done over Pulau Batu Putih with Singapore. The dispute of the Spratly Islands should be resolved the same way.
The Malaysian People are NOT the Enemy The Lahad Datu incident should act as a wake-up call for the Malaysian government that seems pre-occupied with treating its own people as the enemy. When we bear in mind that throughout the career of the Internal security Act since 1960, more than 10,000 people have been incarcerated for being "threats to national security". But hardly any have been charged for any crimes involving violence against the state. Then again, there have been at least two cases of Malaysians who have been killed in neighbouring countries for alleged terrorist activities. Yet, none of them were ever arrested under the ISA! This goes to show that our intelligence service has been focusing on the wrong suspects. As a former ISA detainee who was incarcerated for being a "threat to national security", I can vouch for the wanton wastage of security personnel on Malaysians who are simply not "enemies of the state". When I think of the number of state operatives who had been spying on me, arresting me, guarding me, interrogating me, accompanying me on family and hospital visits, I immediately wonder how they could be better deployed to prevent crimes being committed and watching out for the real enemies of the state. And when we multiply the cost 10,000 times since 1960, we will realize the enormous waste of human resources that could be better put to use! It was recently reported in the New York Times (13.3.2013) that Malaysia is among 25 countries using off-the-shelf spyware to keep tabs on citizens by secretly grabbing images off computer screens, recording video chats, turning on cameras and microphones, and logging keystrokes: "Rather than catching kidnappers and drug dealers, it looks more likely that it is being used for politically motivated surveillance," security researcher Morgan Marquis-Boire was quoted by NYT as saying. This is what I mean when I say our intelligence service is not focused on the job but wasting valuable resources spying on and apprehending the good guys! Indeed, if the Malaysian state had only focused on the job of catching the real criminals, Malaysia would be a much safer place instead of being the "nation of guarded communities" it has become today.
Militarism serves the ruling class Apart from the huge commissions that can be creamed from multi-billion arms contracts, the ruling class requires militarism to contain the oppressed and disgruntled sections of the population. A strong military is necessary to prop up the ruling class. At the same time, the military-industrial complex promotes the development of a specially favoured group of companies engaged in the manufacture and sale of munitions and military equipment for personal gain and profit. These armaments companies have a direct interest in the maximum expansion of military production.
Arms production is a green issue Military spending and arms production are very much green issues. The military- industrial complex not only produces toxic products, they produce weapons that kill indiscriminately. LIMA and other defence fairs are certainly not congruent with Malaysian leaders' stated commitment to peace and spiritual values. The green movement has a responsibility to work toward an end to the culture of war. This involves re-ordering our financial priorities away from wasteful and destructive arms production and procurement to the social well-being of the people. Ultimately, working towards a culture of peace is a vision that is only attainable in a society that respects human dignity, social justice, democracy and human rights.
|
| Anwar’s hand in Lahad Datu isn’t credible theory! Posted: 25 Mar 2013 01:27 PM PDT
No Suluk in his right mind in Sabah would ever want the state to be part of the Philippines or even Sulu. The Suluks fled the Philippines to get away from the Manila Government. Joe Fernandez There is quite a bit of material in the mainstream and alternative media hinting, suggesting and even accusing Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim as the arch villain behind the Lahad Datu intrusion and subsequent standoff. As the various conspiracy theories go, this is the weakest of them all. We can only await the proposed Royal Commission of Inquiry (RCI) on Lahad Datu with bated breaths. Anwar may have met Moro National Liberation Front (MNLF) leader Nur Misuari in Jakarta and Manila, as reported by several sources including Malaysia Today. However, such meetings by themselves tell nothing. Both men were longtime friends. The MNLF Leader may have wanted to catch up with the Opposition Leader because he's also the Prime Minister in Waiting. Moreover, Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak was then facilitating a peace process in the Philippines south without the MNLF. That could have been the only serious issue featured in the two reported Anwar-Nur Misuari talks. When Nur Misuari found that the Prime Minister of Malaysia had turned his back on him in the wake of the peace process, he could turn nowhere else but the Prime Minister in Waiting. This is akin to visiting western leaders not only calling upon the head of state and head of government of a country but also making time to meet with the Opposition Leader. Any suggestions that the Lahad Datu intrusion happened because Anwar wanted to swing the Suluk votes his way simply doesn't add up. It's Umno which has immediately added 12,000 postal votes in eastern Sabah in the wake of Lahad Datu. Home Minister Hishammuddin Hussein Onn said his ministry would build seven new police stations in Pulau Bum Bum, Pulau Banggi and Pulau Gaya, and five integrated customs, immigration and quarantine complexes under the Eastern Sabah Security Command. The ministry would also enhance its agencies, including the Marine Police, VAT69 Commando, General Task Force and Special Action Unit,.
Suluk, Bajau betrayed after supporting Malaysia Anwar may not have been banking on winning any Muslim seat in Sabah. He can only favour Sabah Umno crossing over en bloc if Pakatan Rakyat (PR) can seize the reins of power in Putrajaya. If the Suluk seats were shaky for Umno before Lahad Datu – they may still be -- it will be more due to the pro-tem United Sabah National Organisation (Usno) which has been making inroads in the 20-odd Muslim seats once held by the party before it was deregistered to make way for Umno. The Registrar of Societies (ROS), for all practical purposes, has refused to re-register Usno and this has caused considerable anger among the community. It's viewed as a kind of betrayal. Ironically, the Suluk and Bajau community leaders were the only ones who agreed to the formation of Malaysia. The Orang Asal community – Dusunic and Murutic groupings -- leaders wanted a period of independence before considering the idea of Malaysia again and asked for further details to be used for future reference. The Chinese leaders were against Malaysia. In Sarawak, the Sarawak United People's Party (Supp) even backed the local communists who operated from their jungle hideouts against the inclusion of their state in Malaysia.
Classification of voters in Sabah not acceptable There was No Referendum on Malaysia. The people were not consulted. The Suluk and Bajau communities have been complaining about being marginalized and disenfranchised ever since 1963 by the increasing influx of illegal immigrants from Celebes and other places. The response of the Umno leaders, according to Usno vice president Abdullah Sani, is that the influx of illegal immigrants was okay since they were all Muslims. This is unacceptable to the Suluks and Bajau. The Suluk in particular are against the continuing Bugis influx. There's no love between these two groups. The reason why the complaints of marginalisation and disenfranchisement by the Suluks have been ignored so far lie in the Election Commission delineating the voters in Sabah into four categories i.e. Muslim Bumiputera, non-Muslim Bumiputera, Chinese and Others. This means that the Suluks and other Muslim groups have been submerged, with one stroke of the pen, under the larger Muslim Bumiputera category. It may make perfect sense to self-serving Umno leaders' sitting in air-conditioned comfort in Putrajaya but it comes across as not practical and realistic to Sabahans. In Malaya, the Malay-speaking communities viz. Bugis, Javanese, Minang, Acehnese, Arab Muslims, Indian Muslims and the like are all classified as Malay in the electoral rolls. In Sabah, Putrajaya decided that the equivalent was Muslim Bumiputera. Again, it may be a convenient and politically expedient label to the Umno Government but the consensus of the man in the street is that it masks problems within the Muslim communities.
Jamalul Kiram III could only be after more money The Suluks, like other Sabahans, would have preferred voters in the state being classified, as reality on the ground dictates, into Orang Asal including Muslim; Suluk; Bajau; Other Muslims; Chinese; Others. The Other Muslims include the Brunei Malays or Barunai, Irranun and Banjar, among others. Orang Asal Muslims cover the Bisaya, Orang Sungei and Ranau Dusuns. The majority of the Orang Asal are Christians. The Suluks also can't understand why they cannot have their own political party, Usno, and why it was deregistered when Umno came to Sabah. The unhappiness of the Suluks in particular is the only thing that makes sense in view of the Lahad Datu intrusion but not that they are involved. The so-called Sulu Sultan, Jamalul Kiram III, obviously knew that sentiments among the Suluks were against Putrajaya and Umno in particular. He may have then decided that it was time to strike for more money from Putrajaya by using the moribund Sabah claim as the fig-leaf. The news along the political grapevine is that Jamalul Kiram had been engaged in on and off talks with Putrajaya for over a year until they were called off sometime last year before the peace process in the southern Philippines was put together. Jamalul apparently wanted more money against the measly RM 5,300 per annum that he has to share with the descendents of the other eight heirs of the Sulu Sultanate.
Mopping up in Lahad Datu fast turning into a farce If Jamalul had expected the Suluks in Sabah to rise up and rally to his cause, he was sadly disappointed. No Suluk in his right mind in Sabah would ever want the state to be part of the Philippines or even Sulu. The Suluks fled the Philippines to get away from the Manila Government. It makes no sense now for them to root for a Government which they despise. Patently, the odds are that other conspiracy theories on Lahad Datu are more credible than that linking Anwar with the bloody intrusion in recent weeks which is fast turning into a farce in the mopping up stage. It remains to be seen how all this will be spelt out in the forthcoming long-delayed 13th General Election. If the security forces even suspect that Putrajaya has blood on its hands in Lahad Datu, there are no prizes for guessing which way the additional 12,000 postal votes in eastern Sabah are going.
Further Reading: http://www.kinabalutoday.com/index.php/opinion/480-is-lahad-datu-stand-off-a-conspiracy http://malaysia-today.net/mtcolumns/55331-the-untold-story-of-the-lahat-datu-incident
Joe Fernandez is a mature student of law and an educationist, among others, who loves to write especially Submissions for Clients wishing to Act in Person. He feels compelled, as a semi-retired journalist, to put pen to paper -- or rather the fingers to the computer keyboard -- whenever something doesn't quite jell with his weltanschauung (worldview). He shuttles between points in the Golden Heart of Borneo formed by the Sabah west coast, Labuan, Brunei, northern Sarawak and the watershed region in Borneo where three nations meet.
|
| You are subscribed to email updates from Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. | Email delivery powered by Google |
| Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610 | |
