GLCs upset with Nazri for misleading explanation in Tajuddin Ramli saga

By
Debra Chong

The Malaysian Insider

Aug 13, 2011

KUALA LUMPUR, Aug 13 — Several government-linked companies (GLCs) are perturbed by Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz’s attempts to justify Putrajaya’s intervention into ongoing lawsuits against Tan Sri Tajuddin Ramli and claimed the de facto law minister was giving out misleading information.

Nazri claimed an out-of-court settlement was the best solution. — File picA source close to several parties named in the lengthy series of suits and counter-suits involving Tajuddin pointed out that the former poster boy for Bumiputera entrepreneurship had lost his RM13 billion countersuit against national debt restructuring company Danaharta in 2009.

Among several documents obtained by The Malaysian Insider, a High Court judgment on December 7, 2009 showed trial judge Anatham Kasinather had awarded a total sum of RMRM589,143,205.57 to Danaharta, its two subsidiaries and its four managing directors named as Datuk Azman Yahya, Datuk Abdul Hamidy Hafiz, Datuk Zukri Samat and Datuk Kris Azman Abdullah.

The same trial judge had also dismissed Tajuddin’s RM13 billion countersuit against Danaharta and its agencies a month earlier on November 12, 2009.

The source related that the GLCs and their directors were stunned with disbelief at Nazri’s reasoning that an out-of-court settlement was the best solution to save the federal government billions of ringgit in legal claims.

“Nazri misled the public when he said ‘Our total claims by the companies against Tajuddin are only half a billion ringgit. That is why we said we should sit down and talk’. His claim that Tajuddin has the bargaining power and that the GLCs were disadvantaged is nonsense. The RM13 billion against Danaharta was also plucked from thin air,” the source told The Malaysian Insider yesterday on condition of anonymity.

“Tajuddin was the only one who owed money and Danaharta did not owe him anything,” the source said and quizzed: “So what is there to negotiate?”

Tajuddin allegedly caused MAS to suffer losses in excess of RM8 billionFederal Court judge Tan Sri Md Raus Sharif has been put in charge of managing the ongoing slew suits involving a total 38 parties, including Danaharta and Malaysia Airlines (MAS), due to Tajuddin’s appeal after losing his counter-claim.

The cases have been dragging on for the past 1½ years and have yet to be fixed for hearing at the Court of Appeal.

Nazri had told The Malaysian Insider yesterday that he had written to GLCs earlier this month seeking for them to withdraw their suits, worth at least RM2 billion, to buy time for all concerned parties to reach a “win-win” agreement and put an end to the prolonged financial saga involving Tajuddin.

The minister in the Prime Minister’s Department had said that to defend himself, Tajuddin, who is facing millions in legal claims for allegedly causing MAS to suffer losses in excess of RM8 billion during his tenure, had made a whopping RM13 billion counter-claim.

“Our total claims by the companies against Tajuddin are only half a billion ringgit. That is why we said we should sit down and talk,” he said.

Datuk Seri Najib Razak directly stepped into the fray yesterday to defend his administration’s intervention, saying the move should be seen as an “off-site” solution and not be misconstrued as an out-of-court settlement.

The Najib government’s move to settle all outstanding claims against Tajuddin appears to be an attempt to wipe the slate clean in a financial saga that goes back decades to the height of Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad’s administration.

MAS had first lodged a police report against Tajuddin in 2002 for allegedly causing the flag carrier to suffer losses in excess of RM8 billion. Tajuddin was the executive chairman of the airline from 1994 to 2001.

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 13 August 2011, 8:55 am and is filed under
Financial Scandals
,
Good Governance
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Reason why MoCS rally called off

Written by
Francis Siah

Saturday, 13 August 2011

CPI

Press Statements

Foreword by Dr Lim Teck Ghee

Readers who have been following the progress of the MoCS ‘Walk for Democracy and Reform’ assembly in Kuching will be as disappointed as we are that the event has been called off. This development, though disappointing is not unexpected given the extraordinary pressure on Francis and the small group of stalwart supporters during the last few weeks. The perverted use by the government of the law enforcement agencies for its political ends has long been a feature of Barisan Nasional rule in Malaysia; and this has proven to be the case once again.  It will not be the last time.

Refusal to provide permits for legitimate public gatherings and events organized by the opposition is part of the standard operating procedure of the police force. Other not so subtle forms of denial of our constitutional right to freedom of assembly are the use of restraining orders, which with the connivance of a sycophantic judiciary, is meant to prohibit leaders and supporters from gathering anywhere close to the vicinity of any planned rally that is perceived as drawing attention to the corruption, abuses and bad governance of the ruling elite.

Increasingly, our men in blue and black in the police and judiciary (not to mention immigration, education, and other government agencies) are no longer the neutral civil servants which was the intent of the federal constitution when it was drawn up. Increasingly they appear to be the private police force, private judicial officials and private civil servants of the current ruling political parties.

Predictable and disappointing though the turn of events has turned out to be, what is more disappointing is the response from Sarawakians and other fellow Malaysians to the decision to call off the rally. These people should know better. Instead of casting stones at MoCS chief Francis Siah and the MoCS movement and directing their bile at the wrong target, they should get off their fat backsides and do something – anything – to show that they are part of the movement for change.

In the letter of explanation by Francis Seah which we are reproducing below, he drew attention to this quote by G. E. Woodberry “Defeat is not the worst of failures. Not to have tried is the true failure”.

In addition to this, I would like to add the following: If the mountain does not move, let’s  work together to move the route around the mountain.

****************************

‘Why I called off the rally’ by Francis Seah

Dear MoCS fellows and friends,

So this is how it ended — an anti-climax. I am also very disappointed with my decision. But I had to make one for MoCS.

Only God knows why I finally decided to call it off.

The past month has been a confrontation with the police when it should have been the ‘termite’. It’s not worth it in this case. The real ‘enemy’ is not the police.

Deputy Commissioner Law Hong Soon advised me to think over the responsibility and burden on me personally (and not on MoCS because legally, MoCS does not even exist although we managed to register the name as a company.)

I have thought this over and over again. Personally, I have no experience in organising a public rally of this scale (contesting an election is different). Anyone gets hurt, injured or maimed, I am responsible. Anyone get arrested, I will be responsible.

I feel responsible for my fellows and friends. The eight who were served the Restraining Order (RO) are all my good friends. One is a cousin. Even Mohd Salleh Ahmed who has absolutely nothing to do with MoCS was somehow caught in the crossfire. He is a businessman and I don’t wish to bring trouble to him or his family and business or to any of my friends.

I have to be honest and say that if any of the eight were to be arrested because of the rally, I have no personal resources to help in any way.

So far, no one here or elsewhere has told me that they would assist should anything happen to the eight served with the RO. Here again, the burden is on me.

Already, armchair critics in their comfort zone have started lambasting me in web portals and blogs, as expected.

Here are a few samples:

“What a coward Siah… Already have millions in his pocket I guess.”

“Francis Siah bo lan pa. Coward. Full of excuses. Why can’t he walk alone?”

“No guts to do, don’t talk so loud. You should know what’s coming even before you announce the rally, why back off now, citing a flimsy excuse of public safety? If you don’t march, there will be more longer-term, more entrenched danger to public safety, and the arrests will still continue. Coward!”

I won’t pretend by saying that I’m not hurt by those insults.

The only thing I can do to console myself is to say that these critics will never be able to accomplish what we have so far. These people will never lift a finger to help if MoCS gets into trouble or faces constraints. They just sit comfortably in front of their PCs and enjoy hurling insults at others. So why should I worry so much!

I’m glad I’m not a politician running for public office. I do not need public support to attain a political goal. Why bother whether they want to support me or not?

FIRST ANNIVERSARY OF MoCS

It is now 2.15am on Aug 13. Today is the first anniversary of MoCS. I recall this day one year ago when I sat down together with See Chee How and Jasmine at a press conference at Kuching Airport to announce the establishment of MoCS.

Little did I realize how difficult and turbulent the journey would be. I have no experience too in heading an NGO. But it was one hell of a ride, and unfortunately, an expensive one too.

I’ve also given my word to the original eight initiators of MoCS that I would take a year off work to head MoCS.

I also recall that I would set a one-year time frame, perhaps a too ambitious one, to lead the MoCS campaign to oust the termite within 12 months.

The deadline is up today and I’ve failed to get rid of that old insect. But I’ve kept my word and today, I’ve completed my ‘term’.

Now it’s time to pass the baton.

Yes, CHANGE WE CAN,

— FS

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 13 August 2011, 6:42 pm and is filed under
Human Rights
,
Police
,
Sarawak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Tajuddin intervention –  Is it “the bailout of all Umnoputra bailouts” ?

The two recent headlines of
“Nazri says Tajuddin intervention could save Putrajaya billions”
 and
“Najib: Tajuddin intervention ‘off-site’ solution, not settlement”
have raised more questions than given answers since the public revelation that the Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department, Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz had instructed all government-linked companies (GLCs) to withdrawal their civil suits against the former Malaysia Airlines (MAS) chairman Tan Sri Tajuddin Ramli.

It boggles the imagination as to how the withdrawal of all suits against Tajuddin could save the Federal Government billions when it has entered the national folklore that it is the Malaysian taxpayers who are the real  victims of the Tajuddin-MAS financial bailout in 2000  to the tune of billions of ringgit – starting with the RM1.8 billion government buy-back of Tajuddin’s 29.09 per cent stake in MAS at RM8 per share representing a premium of RM4.32 or 117 per cent over the market price at RM3.68 per share when the deal was signed on 20th December 2000 and followed by MAS police reports from 2002 that Tajuddin had caused the national flag carrier to suffer losses in excess of RM8 billion.

Are Najib and Nazri seriously suggesting that after causing MAS, the Federal treasury and the Malaysian taxpayers to suffer some RM10 billion losses, Tajuddin is still in a position to virtually hold Putrajaya to ransom to force a “global settlement” of all civil suits filed by GLCs especially MAS, TM and Prokhas (formerly Dahaharta) as to require the lawyers of all GLCs concerned to hand over their cases to a known Umno lawyer?

The latest “Tajuddin intervention” has all the makings of being “the bailout of all Umnoputra bailouts” couched as  “Its looks like a bailout, sounds like a bailout but its not a bailout” – and the onus is on Najib and Nazri to produce all relevant information to convince the long-suffering Malaysian taxpayers and public  that it is not so.

There is now the  latest twist in this “bailout of all Umnoputra bailouts” with The Malaysian Insider report today that several GLCs are perturbed by Nazri’s attempts to justify Putrajaya’s intervention in the ongoing lawsuits against Tajuddin as they claimed the de facto law minister was giving out misleading information.

The Malaysian Insider reported:

“A source close to several parties named in the lengthy series of suits and counter-suits involving Tajuddin pointed out that the former poster boy for Bumiputera entrepreneurship had lost his RM13 billion countersuit against national debt restructuring company Danaharta in 2009.

“Among several documents obtained by The Malaysian Insider, a High Court judgment on December 7, 2009 showed trial judge Anatham Kasinather had awarded a total sum of RMRM589,143,205.57 to Danaharta, its two subsidiaries and its four managing directors named as Datuk Azman Yahya, Datuk Abdul Hamidy Hafiz, Datuk Zukri Samat and Datuk Kris Azman Abdullah.

“The same trial judge had also dismissed Tajuddin’s RM13 billion countersuit against Danaharta and its agencies a month earlier on November 12, 2009.”

This is totally at variance with Nazri’s claim that his intervention would save Putrajaya billions, as Tajuddin, who is facing millions in legal claims for causing MAS to suffer losses in excess of RM8 billion during his tenure, had made a whopping RM13 billion counter-claim.

Nazri had said: “Our total claims by the companies against Tajuddin are only half a billion ringgit. That is why, we said we should sit down and talk.”

Nazri has been accused of “plucking from thin air” the figure of RM13 billion against Danaharta as Tajuddin was the only who owed money and Danaharta did not owe him anything.

Public confidence has been greatly shaken by this intervention and the Malaysian public are entitled to the fullest information about all the civil suits,  criminal reports (and anti-corruption investigations) which GLCs have made against Tajuddin if Malaysians are  to be convinced that the Tajuddin intervention is not to become “The Bailout of all Umnoputra Bailouts”.

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 13 August 2011, 12:18 pm and is filed under
Financial Scandals
,
Good Governance
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Mainstreaming the lunatic fringe?

—
Mustafa K Anuar

The Malaysian Insider

Aug 14, 2011

AUGUST 14 — In the recent past, middle-ground Malaysia has borne witness to a series of disturbing public expressions by certain groups and individuals that border on ethnic slurring, slander and rabid racism.

And many a time, these public expressions have without exception insulted the intelligence of the average Malaysians, irrespective of ethnic and religious backgrounds.

What’s equally disturbing is that such articulation has caused hurt, pain and even outrage among the people who have been subjected to these irrational outbursts from the lunatic fringe. ‘Lunatic fringe’ here refers to the fanatical, extremist or irrational members of society who seem to be on the rise lately. Perkasa and other groups of similar disposition come to mind immediately.

This political posturing of the lunatic fringe could possibly pose a threat to our ethnic relations as well as national security.

And yet de facto law minister Nazri Aziz insists irrationally that Malaysia’s political landscape has changed so drastically that what was taboo or “sensitive” a few years ago is now acceptable to Malaysians.

“Sensitive matters are now being discussed in the open,” he told The Malaysian Insider (20 May 2011) recently. He added, “When something is mentioned all the time, it becomes less sensitive and this is a good thing because then things can be mentioned but people will not take offence of it.”

Nazri’s statement was made in the context of the recent claim by certain blogs and subsequently quoted by the irrepressible and irresponsible Utusan Malaysia that the Christian community in Malaysia was involved in a conspiracy to replace Islam with Christianity as the official religion of the federation. This matter, as it turned out, became easy fodder for groups such as Perkasa to publicly express their dismay and disgust and to agitate — although armed with no iota of evidence!

Freedom of expression or freedom to incite?

The minister’s ‘explanation’ seems to imply that freedom of expression and of the press is in full swing in contemporary Malaysia. Is this really so?

I don’t think so. If anything, this so-called freedom of expression has been applied by the powers that be in a very selective manner. When was the last time Malaysians were encouraged, let alone permitted, to publicly discuss pertinent but ‘sensitive’ issues such as religious conversion that has implications on a couple’s children, meritocracy, the brain drain, institutional racism, the NEP; history text books and the ISA, to name but a few?

Anyway, to follow the minister’s argument to its logical conclusion, does freedom of expression provide the licence to the citizenry to mouth racist remarks that could well spark ethno-religious uneasiness or even conflict in multi-ethnic and multi-religious Malaysia? Have the authorities subscribed to the creed that freedom of expression includes the right to cause hatred among ethnic and religious communities?

If so, wouldn’t this new political philosophy run counter to and make a mockery of Prime Minister Najib Razak’s recent plea at Oxford University for moderates from all religious communities to join hands in promoting justice, freedom, hope, compassion and goodwill (The Malaysian Insider, 17 May 2011) ? Or was that mere PR spiel for the international crowd?

If the Najib administration is serious about reining in the extremist and irrational elements in our midst, one would have thought that he and his cabinet ministers would have reprimanded and condemned the wild utterings of the lunatic fringe. Of course, we’re not suggesting that the federal government make use of such undemocratic legal tools as the ISA, but at the very least Malaysians expect him to make a public statement to categorically denounce such extremist expressions.

And in the case of the Umno-owned Utusan Malaysia, one would think that the supposedly concerned prime minister, who is also the Umno president, would have taken the paper to task for having published unverified reports and commentaries that invariably hurt the feelings of certain segments of Malaysian society, thus causing disharmony and dissatisfaction among Malaysians..

Nazri’s assertion that everyone is entitled to speak their minds could possibly help groups such as Perkasa to delude themselves into believing that they have been entrusted to represent the sentiments and interests of ‘the Malay-Muslim community’. To be sure, many Malays and Muslims — who believe that Islam stands for peace, justice and mutual respect and at the same time abhors slander, divisiveness, and enmity — are averse to many of the things expressed in their name by Perkasa and its ilk.

It is in moments like this that one is baffled by the elegant silence displayed by many religious leaders, particularly the Muslim religious authorities. One would think that the Muslim religious leaders would be in a better position to rein in these social recalcitrants in keeping with the true teachings of Islam. — Aliran

* Dr Mustafa K Anuar is assistant secretary of Aliran.

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 14 August 2011, 1:05 pm and is filed under
Najib Razak
,
nation building
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Pua threatens to sue Najib, Nazri for Tajuddin Ramli bailout

By
Clara Chooi

The Malaysian Insider

Aug 14, 2011

KUALA LUMPUR, Aug 14 — DAP MP Tony Pua threatened legal action against Datuk Seri Najib Razak and Datuk Seri Mohamed Nazri Aziz today, saying they would be sued for negligence if Putrajaya fails to recover the billions in debts owed by Tan Sri Tajuddin Ramli.

The Petaling Jaya Utara MP predicted the directive ordering all government-linked companies (GLC) to withdraw their suits against the former Malaysia Airlines (MAS) chairman would likely see him escaping scot-free.

“If the current Attorney-General is unwilling to consider the above action against the Prime Minister due to the complete lack of independence of the former’s office, Najib can be assured that full, open and transparent investigations will be carried out by the Pakatan Rakyat (PR) government against his misdeeds should we secure victory in the next General Election,” Pua warned in a statement today.

“This is to ensure that those who have knowingly and negligently caused losses to the government’s coffers will be held accountable and will not be let off unpunished,” he added.

The DAP national publicity secretary demanded an assurance from both PM Najib and Nazri, a senior Cabinet minister, that Tajuddin would be made to settle a bulk of his debts to the GLCs and reminded them that it involved taxpayers monies.

He said if the GLCs heeded the directive and withdrew all civil suits against Tajuddin before a settlement is achieved, the companies would no longer have any avenue to claim any compensation or damages from the tycoon.

“This is because they would not be able continue with the existing suit against Tajuddin once they are withdrawn.

“At the same time, because the claims were for actions which occurred more than six years ago, the GLCs will not be able to initiate new legal actions against Tajuddin as it would be time-barred,” Pua  said.

An out-of-court settlement with the GLCs, he added, would grant Tajuddin little or no incentive to settle any of his debts once the suits are withdrawn.

“This is unless of course, the intended ‘settlement’ is not with the GLCs but a clandestine ‘off-site’ solution with Najib, as suggested by the latter,” said Pua, mocking the prime minister’s explanation on the matter.

Spotlight was cast on Tajuddin and the country’s ailing flag carrier MAS after a letter penned by Nazri, a senior minister in Najib’s Cabinet, was obtained by The Malaysian Insider, revealing a directive from the administration urging all GLCs to drop its suits against the fallen tycoon.

Tajuddin is presently facing billions in legal claims against him, following accusations by MAS in 2002 that he had caused the carrier to suffer losses in excess of RM8 billion.

After his letter surfaced, Nazri defended the administration’s move, saying it would not spell a debt bailout for Tajuddin but was merely a suggestion to the GLCs to work out an out-of-court settlement with the former MAS chairman.

When responding to the matter on Friday, Najib appeared to play down the issue, describing the intervention as an “off-site” solution.

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 14 August 2011, 11:05 am and is filed under
Financial Scandals
,
Good Governance
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


History or Soviet-style propaganda? That is the question

by
Andrew Aeria

The Malaysian Insider

Aug 15, 2011

AUG 15 — If anyone from the Ministry of Education held an honest, open and non-patronising discussion with our secondary schoolchildren on the subject of history as it is presently taught in school, they would discover that a huge majority of students view it as a painfully boring and utterly worthless subject.

They would also discover that students learn practically nothing from the subject. Instead, students only force themselves to memorise vacuous facts about people and events merely to pass their exams; an indoctrination exercise that defeats the whole purpose of why we educate our children in the first place.

I should know. I taught an introductory-level university course, “Malaysian Social History” to undergraduates for a few years. And to my astonishment, I discovered how intellectually and emotionally impoverished my undergraduates were about history. Not that they had not studied and even passed the subject with flying colours in their SPM/STPM exams, but because what they had previously memorised in school was simply not worth remembering! Stunned by their lack of interest in the subject, I examined the current school history syllabus and its teaching methods. I discovered to my horror and dismay that it is presently more predisposed to Soviet-style propaganda instead of being a subject that nurtures a passionate appreciation of our rich heritage and common humanity.

Hence, I was pleasantly surprised when I was invited by a group of concerned parents and scholars in mid-May to participate in the formation of a committee to assist the government revise the current history syllabus to be more representative of facts, events, processes and personalities in all its diverse, kaleidoscopic dimensions.

Calling ourselves Kempen Sejarah Malaysia Sebenar (KemSMS), the campaign comprises over 20 distinguished individuals from academia and other reputable civil society organisations from all over the country. KemSMS aims to hold workshops to highlight and raise public awareness about the inaccuracies and inadequacies of our current history syllabus. KemSMS also aims to undertake scholarly reviews of the current syllabus so as to input our informed views as a complement to the on-going parallel government review process of our history syllabus and its teaching.

I came away from that Sunday afternoon meeting with the impression that KemSMS wants to present a well-researched, substantive, informed, coherent and persuasive argument that the history taught in our schools should focus on the role and contributions of all communities.

KemSMS also hopes to convince the Ministry of Education that the history taught in schools should be a people’s history; one that gives adequate recognition to a broad spectrum of social movements and which is people-centred instead of being elite-focused. In other words, the history our children learn about should be social history rather than one that focuses on select individuals and key events that politicians wish to glorify for their own partisan ends. As well, it should focus on the roles and contributions of women and not only of men. It should also have a liberal and progressive outlook.

Furthermore, the subject matter of history should encompass all regions in Malaysia, i.e. it should account fairly and give due emphasis to Sabah and Sarawak and not only be KL- or peninsula-centric. Finally, history as taught in schools should place Malaysia in a wider regional and global context that celebrates our common humanity despite our unique, diverse civilisations.

KemSMS clearly has its work cut out for it. But all long journeys begin with a first step. I am optimistic. — Aliran

                This entry was posted on Monday, 15 August 2011, 7:20 pm and is filed under
Education
,
History
,
nation building
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Lest we forget

By
Masterwordsmith
 |August 14, 2011

The Malaysian Insider

AUG 14 — While Malaysians express outrage about the RM8-RM9 billion MAS scandal and the ‘reverse takeover’ of the national airline company through Air Asia — which is another multi-billion ‘backdoor asset stripping’ exercise — lets us not forget the RM6-RM7 billion patrol boat fiasco. As Dr Mahathir said: Melayu mudah lupa. Well, let us not lupa this.

In February ‘11, Defence Minister Datuk Seri Dr Ahmad Zahid Hamidi announced via a Bernama statement that the government has agreed to allocate RM6bil to build six second generation patrol vessels for the Royal Malaysian Navy. The rationale given for the expenditure was to “boost the economy while benefiting 632 vendor companies”. The Defence Minister clarified that they would ensure that “at least RM2bil of the allocation will benefit these vendor companies which are strategic partners of Boustead Naval Shipyard Sdn Bhd”.  Then, many Malaysians were up in arms after that disclosure.

In October last year, The Star reported that the construction of six patrol vessels by Boustead Heavy Industries Corp Bhd (BHIC), a maritime engineering and defence-related services provider, may only begin as early as the fourth quarter of this year. Analysts estimated it would take another year before BHIC’s letter of intent (LOI) is firmed up and construction of the patrol vessels begin.

“This is as seen with the company’s Scorpene service job, which took a year for the LOI to be firmed up via the letter of award,” ECM Libra said in a research report. (
CLICK HERE for more.
)

Today, The Australian announced that AUSTAL has won a $330 million contract to produce eight new patrol boats for the Australian customs service. The eight boats will be built in Henderson, south of Perth. The contract is for the design, construction and through-life support of eight Cape Class patrol boats for the Australian Customs and Border Protection Service.

What is most interesting about the report is that the total value of the project is $330 million, including a $280 million design and construction contract and an In-Service Support contract worth $50 million.

So the Australians can build EIGHT NEW PATROL BOATS at AUS$330 million (RM1.016 billion) @ 127 million per boat while in Malaysia, six new patrol boats cost us SIX BILLION RINGGIT at RM1 BILLION per boat.

Can you see the RIDICULOUS DIFFERENCE in figures?

Apart from that, The Austal site reports:

The In-Service Support contract extends for a minimum period of eight years and encompasses a full range of intermediate and depot level maintenance activities. Further options can be exercised by the Australian Customs and Border Protection Service for In-Service Support for the life of the Cape Class Patrol Boat Fleet.

The eight 57.8m Cape Class Patrol Boats will play a significant role in protecting Australia’s borders from multiple maritime threats, and have been designed to have greater range, endurance and flexibility, as well as enhanced capability to operate in more severe sea conditions than the current Customs’ fleet.

According to The Star, AmResearch Sdn Bhd says the value of the six new patrol vessels can reach RM8bil, based on a 20% mark-up from the first batch’s price tag of RM6.7bil.

In that report, ECM Libra adds that the new order for six patrol vessels with combatant capabilities, littoral combatant ships, has more technical specifications than the first-generation batch which amounted to some RM1bil per vessel.

“We believe per unit cost should be higher. Assuming a value of RM1.2bil per vessel, the contract will provide BN Shipyard with an RM7.2bil orderbook that will likely last it five to seven years,” it adds.

The recent contract, which has been long awaited, is part of a privatisation agreement with the Government for the construction of 27 units of patrol vessels, where six have been completed. In 1998, BN Shipyard was awarded a contract to construct and deliver six patrol vessels to the Royal Malaysian Navy. They took EIGHT YEARS to deliver the first two patrol boats in 2006 which are being used to patrol the waters off Sabah and Sarawak. Two more delivered in 2009 are guarding the east coast of the peninsula.

According to the BHIC’s 2009 annual report, the remaining two patrol vessels were launched in November 2008 and July last year respectively.

HwangDBS Vickers Research says the second-generation patrol vessels will be built at BHIC’s Lumut shipyard, which is currently 50 per cent utilised. However, AmResearch estimates that 30 per cent of BN Shipyard’s contract will be undertaken by BHIC’s Penang shipyard (Jerejak).

Interestingly, BHIC was awarded a contract worth some RM1.3bil by the government to service the two Royal Malaysian Navy Prime Minister-class Scorpene submarines in August.

The contract was given to its subsidiary, Boustead DCNS Naval Corp Sdn Bhd, a joint venture with DCNS SA, a French defence company, and was effective for a period ending Nov 30, 2015.

The contract differed in value from the original letter of intent of RM600mil dated June 4, 2009 due to the inclusion of a full submarine integrated logistics support package.

AmResearch points out that the group’s earnings track record has disappointed in the past year and it maintains FY10 to FY12 forecast earnings pending a significant quarterly earnings improvement and the actual award of the new patrol vessels contract.

The Star reported that for the six months ended June 30, BHIC’s net profit was down 4 per cent to RM31.5mil as a result of cost escalations due to delays in completing certain shipbuilding projects, coupled with reduced contribution from associates. Revenue fell 18% to RM192.9mil from a year ago.

Interesting!

The bottom line is that the six patrol boats Malaysia is purportedly building should not even cost RM1 billion for all six, and certainly far from RM1 billion per unit as announced.

Can the authorities clarify the state of affairs? Six billion ringgit is certainly a lot of money!

I remember back when Tun Ghafar Baba was the Deputy Prime Minister when in a ceramah in Terengganu, he started by saying that the government has spent millions. Then he stopped and said, “let us not talk about millions.” Today we no longer talk about millions. We talk about billions.

I don’t.

I don’t know how much one billion is, said Ghafar. If I sit and count one billion, I will die before I can finish. That is how much 1 billion is. It is a lot of money.

Well, if Ghafar was still alive today, he will be shocked that we no longer talk about 1 billion. We talk about tens of billions. And if Ghafar was born ten times over, he would still not be able to count to that figure.

Remember – for all the billions spent, or purportedly spent, CHANGE IS IMPERATIVE and we need YOUR VOTE for that MASSIVE SWING TO MAKE IT HAPPEN!

Let’s do it! — masterwordsmith-unplugged.blogspot.com

                This entry was posted on Monday, 15 August 2011, 11:52 am and is filed under
Defence
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Malaysia in the Era of Globalization #78

By
M. Bakri Musa

Chapter 9: Islam in Malay Life

Reform in Islam

Islamic Economics

The success and vitality of the modern economy is based on the availability of credit. It is credit that makes the economic world spin smoothly. “Credit is the vital air of the system of modern commerce,” observed Daniel Webster. “It has done more, a thousand times, to enrich nations, than all the mines of all the world.” A plaque on Wall Street, the heart of American capitalism, declares, “Credit: Man’s Faith in Man.” Credit is predicated on the promise that it will be repaid.

            Shakespeare’s words in Hamlet, “Neither a borrower, nor a lender be: For loan oft loses both itself and friend….” is only true if we do not repay our loans and the gratitude that goes with them. Indeed not repaying our debts can give rise to even worse consequences, as victims of the mafia and triads will testify. Even threats of defaulting can be devastating, as Argentina is now discovering.

            Ancient Muslim traders must have had a system of credit and promissory notes; they could not be hauling their gold and silver bullions on their caravans, risking robbery. The hang-up today’s Muslims (and also others) have on the issue of credit rests on the related question of interest (riba) and usury.

            The usual argument that interest is sinful arises because of the connotation of extortion. If a father needs money to buy food or medicine for his children, yes it is indeed sinful to charge him any interest at all for the money. If the recipient is truly needy, then simply donate the money. That is the basis of zakat or tithe, one of Islam’s five pillars. If I charge the poor soul an exorbitant interest rate (usury) and if he fails to repay me (as he surely would), do I then break his leg, mafia style? That would not only be sinful but also criminal. You need not wait till Judgment Day to be punished; you go to jail right here on earth, and deservedly so. Nor can I make him my slave to pay off his debt. Slavery and indentured labor have long been banned.

            On the other hand, if I have some spare funds that I do not need right away (for example, savings for my children’s education) and an entrepreneur could use that capital to start his business, I see no reason why I cannot be rewarded for letting him use my idle money. After all my money is like any other property I own. If he uses my car, for example, I can charge him a rental fee, so why cannot I charge him a similar “rent” (which is what interest is) for the use of my money?

            Another way of looking at it, my lending him money is comparable to my providing him a service. Therefore I should be suitably compensated for that, just as surely as had I repaired his hernia. Besides, my lending serves the greater society, not just the two of us. His company would employ workers and produce useful goods. Had I kept my money under my mattress, nobody would benefit.

            There is no question that riba is prohibited in Islam. It says so clearly in the Qur’an as well as in the various ahadith. The crux of the issue is to the actual meaning and intent of that ancient Arabic word. Words have a way of acquiring different meanings with time. Earlier I alluded to the term “poet,” which was highly pejorative during the prophet’s time. Likewise, what riba meant to the ancient Bedouins cannot be simplistically and literally be transferred to all forms of costs of capital in modern economics. One simple reason is that many of these modern financial instruments were non-existent in the prophet’s time. There was no such thing as venture capital or corporate bonds in ancient times.

            Another reason for the prohibition of riba is that Islam prohibits “making money on money,” which interests and other forms of the costs of capital imply. One can, however, make money by trading on goods and services, and Islam encourages this. The distinction between money and tangible goods is that the former has no “intrinsic value,” thus trading on it is equivalent to gambling. The value of money is what society puts on it. While this is true for paper money, it is not necessarily so for gold and silver, Islam’s ancient currencies. Those precious commodities do have intrinsic industrial values quite apart from their aesthetic (thus acquired) ones. Silver for example is an important ingredient in film imaging. And gold is useful in certain precision engineering as well as in pharmaceuticals.

            For modern Islamic scholars to simply equate riba to all forms of interests is unwarranted. As I will show shortly, there are conceptual differences in the various forms of costs of capital (interest) and that, stripped of its mystery, trading on capital (money) is no different from trading in other goods and services.

            Going to my earlier example, how I charge that entrepreneur for the cost of renting my property (capital) is a separate issue. I could for example, share in the risk, that is, seek part control of his company. This is the basis of modern venture capital. When his company is successful, I would sell my shares and recoup my principle plus the “rent” or profit of my money, thus rewarding me for my earlier savings. If I do not want to take the risk of losing my principle, I could pre-sell my shares for a preset price to another willing individual. In this way if the company becomes very successful he gets a bigger reward, if it fails then he takes the risk. This after all is the basis of share options. These are all manifestations of the costs of my money, that is, interest. Or to use my preferred term, reward on savings and investments.

            Alternatively I could claim a percentage of the final product. This is common in rural Malaysia where farmers would “rent” their idle rice fields in return for a portion of the harvest. The landowner may decide not to get the harvest and would prefer to sell his share back to the farmer and merely collect the cash. Whatever it is, there is a cost for the use of capital, in this case, his land. You may label this cost in whichever way: interest, stock options, dividends, part ownership, share of harvest, or whatever.

            Muslim theologians have no difficulty grasping and agreeing to this concept of borrowing as the lender shares the risks with the borrower. This in contrast, in their view, of putting money is a simple savings account where the depositor bears no risks of losing his money (capital). That is only a matter of degree. There is a small risk, but thanks to modern safeguards banks today are very safe. But back in the early 20th Century in the West and in many Third World countries today, you risk losing your precious money should the bank goes belly up. Indeed many Third World citizens today (including many Malaysians) see an unacceptable risk in their local banks and thus put their money in foreign banks. Similarly, many an investor had lost their capital investing in Third World Railroad bonds.

            Thus when an investor seems to invest his funds “passively,” in reality it is far from that. He has to be prudent and investigate the risks and balance the rewards. Even in choosing a bank, not only has he to be careful to choose one that gives the best returns (interests) but also one that is safe, convenient, an offers superior services. All these require diligent evaluations. There is no such being as a passive investor. Thus we could look upon interest as rewards for the diligence of the investor.

            Viewed another way, interest or costs of capital may be considered as profits on the trading of that capital which happens in this case to be money, instead of land or rice.

            In the ordinary trading of goods and services, there is a fair and right price, determined by the free market of willing buyers and sellers. But if one party monopolizes a commodity and starts hoarding it in order to exact an exorbitant price to rake in the maximum profit, than that is rightly considered illegal (and sinful). America has elaborate antitrust and other laws to prevent business collusion and other anti-competitive behaviors.

            Similarly in the trading of capital (money), there is a legitimate cost beyond which it becomes not only exorbitant but creates other serious consequences. Usurious (excessively high) interest rates are bad not only for individuals but also for society. They will extinguish all economic and business activities. There is no redeeming social or economic value in that. The economy would simply collapse.

            Malaysia was smart enough not to heed the advice of the IMF during its recent [1997] economic crisis to jack up interest rates to levels that would cripple an already ailing economy, just to support the currency and satisfy the IMF bureaucrats. The bane of many Latin American countries is that their interest rates are so high that they choke off all economic activities.

            It is interesting that in the current economic crisis in America triggered by the bust in the housing market, its central bank has purposely kept the interest rate very low.

            The voluminous Islamic literature on interests and credits can be divided into two categories: one, usually written by religious scholars who are well versed in Islamic literature but woefully ignorant of modern economics; two, works of competent economists but whose knowledge of Islam consists of selective quotations of the Qur’an and hadith to support their positions. Rare indeed is an exposition that compares and contrasts accepted and well-tested concepts and principles of modern economics and banking with traditional Islamic understanding of the subject. The reason for this is that few economists are well grounded in Islamic learning, and fewer still are religious scholars who also understand modern economics. The ulama’s versions are long on erudite recitations of the Qur’an, hadith, and traditions. They strain to create qualitative differences between various terms which, stripped of their semantic gymnastics, are nothing more than a continuum on the risk-versus-returns spectrum.

            The few notable exceptions to this sorry state of affairs are the contributions of Rice University’s economist Mahmoud El-Gamal. He readily admits to not being an Islamic scholar but he has the advantage of at least being a native-born Arabic speaker and thus can read the original Islamic texts and relate those terms and practices into their modern counterparts.

Next:   Dealing With the Concept of Interest

                This entry was posted on Monday, 15 August 2011, 11:48 am and is filed under
Bakri Musa
,
globalisation
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Question of DAP joining BN to replace MCA does not arise at all

The media has been abuzz following the Sin Chew Daily interview with Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department, Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz and his  notion that DAP should join the Barisan Nasional.

The question of DAP joining the Barisan Nasional to replace MCA does not arise at all.

DAP is not a Chinese party fighting for Chinese rights but a Malaysian party fighting for the rights of all Malaysians whether Chinese, Malays, Indians, Ibans, Kadazans or Orang Asli as common Malaysian citizens who are entitled to an equal place under the Malaysian sun.

DAP leaders have toiled and sacrificed for their political beliefs in the past 45 years, persecuted and prosecuted in court,  detained under the Internal Security Act for as long as four year and nine months, jailed and disqualified as MP and barred from elective office for five years for standing firm and steadfast on a matter of principle to fight for the rights of all Malaysians transcending race and religion – all these sacrifices not just for the DAP to replace MCA in the Barisan Nasional.

Right from the beginning, the vision and commitment of DAP leaders is for a Malaysia where all Malaysians, regardless of race or religion, can unite in a common Malaysian patriotic endeavor to form an efficient, clean and transparent government to build a   just, democratic, progressive, prosperous and competitive Malaysia.

DAP must always act not just for the Chinese but for all communities in Malaysia.

Only a new politics and a new national compact, breaking completely away from the politics of “divide and rule” along ethnic lines, subordination of public interests to private greed resulting in destruction of independent national institutions, rampant corruption and cronyism where privatization has become piratisation and NEP an instrument to foster Umnoputras in the name of bumiputras, can save Malaysia.

DAP is fully committed together with PAS and PKR to ensuring Pakatan Rakyat success in 13th general elections to restore the constitutional rights assured to all Malaysians regardless race and religion and bring about fundamental changes so that a new start could be made to fully develop Malaysia’s potentials particularly our human resources and talents  to be an united, successful and great Malaysian nation.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 15 August 2011, 2:17 pm and is filed under
DAP
,
MCA
,
Pakatan Rakyat
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


There are options available to save Chinatown

By
Moaz Yusuf Ahmad
 | August 15, 2011

Free Malaysia Today

The members of The Association for the Improvement of Mass-Transit (Transit) have been following the MRT proposal since it was mooted (in fact even earlier than that).

One of our biggest complaints about public transport projects is that we have public displays, not public consultation.

In the case of the MRT project (or any other railway) must follow certain “fixed points” (many of which are also put in place without public consultation) and the operator is only required to share the “optimal” alignment with the public.

This was the way that the LRT and KL monorail were designed, according to the Railways Act.

The recent issue over land acquisition along Jalan Sultan in Kuala Lumpur (part of KL’s “Chinatown” for the MRT project, is a clear example of weaknesses in our laws, namely the Railways Act (and its replacement, the Pengangkutan Awam Darat or PAD Act) and the National Land Code.

More importantly, they show us what happens when public consultation is rejected in favour of public display.

No one wants to say that they are “against development” so generally, the public does not pay close attention to government projects unless they are directly affected.

In this case, the issue only came to light when the Form-E notices of land acquisition were “delivered” in the affected areas – even though the station diagrams and maps had been on public display for three months in various government offices and online.

Many people are asking why land must be acquired if the station is underground.

Well, a look at the map of the MRT station alignment (see http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5059/5504888343_3996ba8c0f_b.jpg) shows that Jalan Sultan is narrow and curves just east of Jalan Petaling. As a result part of the station box and the tunnel come under existing buildings.

According Section 44 of the National Land Code 1965, in order to build underground you must acquire the land – you cannot simply acquire the underground or above ground portion.

Some of those who object are suggesting that the MRT station should be placed across the river (between Kuala Lumpur railway station and the Pos Malaysia headquarters), or under the parking lot west of Jalan Panggang.

Unfortunately, in either case, the MRT would still run under buildings, necessitating land acquisition.

Other options

Of course we could amend the section of the National Land Code to make land acquisition unnecessary, but that should have been done many years ago as it would have saved a lot of headache and probably got us a better public transport system.

The problem is that it would also place the government in a tough situation if any land located above an underground tunnel were to collapse.

The other issue that people must realize is that the MRT is passing through Jalan Sultan because of what are described as “fixed points” at KL Sentral and the proposed Warisan Merdeka development – the 100-storey tower that many Malaysians have objected to.

Also, what Prasarana is giving us is the “optimal” alignment between those two points.

Perhaps there are other options that may not be as “optimal” but could still be reasonable choices.

But Prasarana does not have to share the other options with the public, thanks to a quirk in Malaysian law (both in the Railways Act and PAD Act) that has unfortunately not been addressed

In the spirit of compromise, we took a look at those options.

One option would be to route the MRT along Jalan Kinabalu instead. This would require the MRT to pass under the north west corner of the Federal Territory Syariah Court, cross under Jalan Sultan Sulaiman, cross under the east parking lot of Kuala Lumpur railway station, and the fountain garden in front of Wisma Tun Sambanthan.

This would allow a station at Kuala Lumpur railway station (providing an important interchange with KTM services which is not part of the current proposal).

There would also be an interchange with the Pasar Seni LRT station (though it would be a bit of a walk, similar to the walk between Dang Wangi LRT station and Bukit Nanas Monorail station).

The MRT would pass near the Maharajalela monorail station (another interchange), then follow Jalan Stadium past Stadium Merdeka, Stadium Negara, and the Warisan Merdeka development, to finally link with Jalan Bukit Bintang as originally planned.

The bus option

Another advantage of this proposal would be to improve public transport access to Klang bus station by opening up the Jalan Kinabalu roundabout (just south of Pasar Seni LRT station) to buses so they can access the Klang bus stand using Jalan Sultan Mohammed without having to travel through Jalan Petaling and Jalan Sultan.

Actually, this is something that should have been done long ago to make it easier for buses to access Klang bus stand without having to face the jams on Jalan Petaling and Jalan Sultan, and no matter what happens with the MRT proposal it should be done anyways!

The other option is a simple and effective one, and would probably not require any land acquisition – simply route the MRT under Jalan Tun Tan Cheng Lock, placing the Pasar Seni MRT station on the west side of the Klang River just south of the Pos Malaysia headquarters and Menara Dayabumi (which would allow better access to Kuala Lumpur station).

The MRT would then travel under Jalan Tun Tan Cheng Lock to Jalan Pudu, and then tunnel underneath the LRT alignment to a new interchange at Plaza Rakyat and Puduraya bus terminal. From Plaza Rakyat the MRT would turn towards Jalan Bukit Bintang as originally proposed.

As you can imagine, Transit would much rather see the government revive Plaza Rakyat instead of building the Warisan Merdeka.

Perhaps they can rename Plaza Rakyat, calling it Plaza Warisan Rakyat instead.

The advantage of this proposal would be an improved connection to Kuala Lumpur railway station (by locating the MRT station on the west side of the river), as well as an improved connection to the Ampang LRT at Plaza Rakyat.

Since the government has said that they intend to use Puduraya bus terminal to replace Kota Raya (once the express buses are moved out to new terminals at Sungai Buloh and Gombak), this would also allow the MRT to interchange with Kuala Lumpur’s current and future main bus terminal.

And most importantly, an important piece of Kuala Lumpur’s heritage would be preserved.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 15 August 2011, 11:55 am and is filed under
Transport
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Through my aging eyes – Our Children face a tough future

By Edwin Bosi

On 1st May this year the Tamanza clan celebrated the “refurbishment” of our forefather’s shelter at the Tuavon Katagazan cemetery. Years ago their graveyards were dug their bones brushed clean and relocated to Katagazan with full traditional rituals. There was no official or designated graveyard then so the dead were buried in the private plot of land. My grandfather Kandavu Tamanza was laid to rest in a 5-acre land in Kg Kibabaig Penampang. My grandmother Lokuja Buko was buried in another piece of land nearby while our great grandfather Tamanza was buried in Kosigui. The relocation involved all three graves. For the Kadazan, relocation of remains involves the high priestesses or Bobohizans and is steep with ancient rituals.

I remember the high priestess and her assistant going though the process of opening a communicating channel between the living and the death. A white cockerel was sacrificed. It was here that I saw the arts of negotiation been applied to the utmost. It appeared that the “bobohizans” were in a trance as they “talked” with the spirits of those who had long departed. My late dad vouched that the voices of his father were actually recognisable through and from the “murmurs” of the main Bobohizan. The deal was sealed fairly quickly with one condition for a sacrificial pig and no substitute. The priestess conceded that our grandfather and his mother were very understanding unlike some of the cases she had dealt with before.

I recalled seeing a big brown jar about three feet tall with a small hole on its bottom. My granddad was buried in this jar. My dad said he recalled how his dad suddenly popped out of the jar during the mourning period taking everyone by surprised. He was quickly “pressed” back into the jar and the lid secured more properly. My dad said that the elders “talked” to him while tucking him back into the jar. Somehow the talking made him relax and he was back “safely” inside the jar. His bones were still intact inside the jar when it was unearth although there was some browning. My brother took the jar home only to be reprimanded by mom. Always a good son he quickly returned the jar to the grave site. I remember watching my late uncle Bangit brushing off the dirt and talking to the skeletal remains, wrapping them in a piece of white cloth before keeping them in a smaller pots at Katagazan.

Grandmother Lokuja was buried in a wooden coffin. I was amazed by the accuracy of my dad in pointing out the spot where she was laid to rest after all those years. There was no more noticeable sign left as it was covered with thick vegetation. It must have been the “tomindaton” trees that gave him the clue. I was present during the digging and indeed, after about five feet they hit the coffin lid dead on the spot. We were asked not to look down as the lid was opened. They were afraid that the air from the coffin maybe hazardous. The sides of the coffin were still intact but the bottom had been “eaten” away by roots. The fine roots did not disturb the skeletal remains in fact they kept the bones in its proper “layout”. I noticed she was wearing the “tangkong” or a belt lined with metal rings commonly used by a Kadazan woman during special occasions. Something else attracted my attention on that particular day. I notice the bones were submerged in about six inches of clear water which quickly sipped in and disappeared into the ground when the coffin was exposed. We never had the opportunity to see our grandparents from our father’s side.

As a child I remember sitting down with my siblings and cousins listening to our grandma stories. My mom’s mother Martha Ligama was a fantastic story teller with lots of sense of humour. Looking back I realised that all the stories have an implications to our lifestyle. The rabbit and tortoise story was my favourite. We would plead with grandma to tell us more stories while we took turns to “crash” or “pound” her betel nuts. If only I had a video. That was to me the starting of our informal education, our grandma as the main teacher. On the other hand living with our parents then was full of discipline. The body language and in particular the eyes of our parents said it all. You usually speak only when you are spoken to although there was more flexibility with mom.

My dad loved telling story about his dad travelling around the villages on horseback or rather on a pony. My granddad was a well-to-do man. He had so many properties and upon his death many were “lost” or sold off to support my dad’s education and to upkeep the young family of two boys and two girls. My mom also came from an equally well-to-do family. If they had sold off all their inherited properties my parents were multi-millionaires in their own rights. But they had chosen to live a simple life. My parents never knew or keen about investment then.

My dad had a short formal education at St Mary’s Sandakan. My mom a 100% housewife and never attended school. From a teacher during the Japanese occupation, a general worker and later retiring as Senior Assistant District Surveyor was a fantastic achievement for my father. To him, the colonial bosses are fair and your promotion depends entirely on your attitude towards the job. Despite her lack of education, my mom was instrumental, supportive and insisted that her three daughters must have good education. There are seven of us in the family, three girls and four boys. All of us are University graduates except my eldest brother who opted to stay on his job and retiring as an Accountant.

Scholarships were easy to obtain then. Out of the seven, only one of us worked in the private sector. Only two are still with the civil service while four are enjoying our pension. We have built nice concrete homes, have cars and have seen the world. Like our parents we are particular about education for our children. Scholarships are now so difficult to secure but not to some. My children went to local universities under the government student loans. They are paying back on instalment and I insist that they do so. I can see that our children will have to struggle hard and face a very challenging, tough and unstable future for them and their children. Sabah is now overwhelmed with legalised foreigners. For the Kadazans, getting good education is the key to their future. They may have to look for greener pastures elsewhere. I strongly recommend Kadazan parents to let their children go pursue excellence wherever and whatever it takes. To me the future of our children in Sabah has been hijacked.

Politics in Malaysia is all about race and religion. The existence of race-based political parties contributed to the poor racial harmony in the country. It gets worse when racial and religious extremists try to exert their superiority. We blamed the Colonial master for using “divide and rule” tactic but UMNO perfected it and used this strategy to the optimum. As a non-Muslim Native I see a slow and gradual marginalisation by the BN government. The downfall of PBS in 1994 and the entry of UMNO into Sabah had the greatest impact on the life of all non-Muslim Natives. Today in the civil service the non-Muslim Natives have lost its position and advantages. Instead of rising above they are now keeping the jobs at the bottom – receptionists and janitors. The good and qualified are not even considered for higher office such as Ambassador or High Commissioners or even as Directors in the Government-Linked Companies upon retirement. Article 153 of the nation’s Constitution is our safeguard but sadly the non-Muslim Natives are deliberately ignored and sidelined.

As Tan Sri Simon Sipaun said, the good old days are over for genuine Sabahans. He reminded us of the crime-free country we were in. He talked about fairness and merits as criteria for promotions. Tan Sri made me giggle when he talked about body snatchings while making me depress when he touched on the problem of illegal immigrants. The non-Muslim Native political leaders did not play their part effectively in standing and fighting for the rights of the community they belong to. In short they were either gutless or contented with the benefits and perks. But there are always two sides of a coin. The people on one hand continued to vote in the very leaders that fail to deliver. I must borrow Tun Mahathir’s word, “you deserve the government you voted in”. As I reflected the past I see the passive side of the non-Muslim Native and I think the merry-making and easy-going nature have gotten the better of them. This layback attitude must change if the non-Muslim Native community wants to make a comeback.

Our parents who have inherited down their properties (lands) did not look further than having food on the table and to raise a decent family. I have only a few piece of land from my parents that I hope I can hold on to them before handing them down to my children. During my working life I did not try to amass more property (land) although I tried to apply but they did not come through. I did not have the money to procure any lands either. I took a loan on my house and hopefully it is cleared as I reached the magic 55. We just did not have the extra money to acquire more property. As government servants it is a no-no to be in business otherwise you will be taken in by the Anti-Corruption Agency (ACA). But many government staffs nowadays have opulent houses and expensive cars. Maybe the administrative system has changed?

But try I must as meeting ends meet is itself so challenging now. The price of commodity and essential goods are running wild and there is nothing to laugh and be merry nowadays. Wages and salaries remain stagnant. Life is going to be sombre and blue. It does not make sense why prices are going higher and higher, subsidies been withdrawn when we are an oil and gas producing country. It does not make sense why we ran out of cooking oil when Sabah has the largest oil palm plantation. In a nutshell it is all about managing the country and managing it well. Unless there is a political change and change of management soon this present direction we are been led to will continue to be pitched dark with no sign of even a glimmering ray of light at the end of the tunnel.

[
Published in Borneo Post Sunday 14th August 2011
]

                This entry was posted on Monday, 15 August 2011, 11:45 am and is filed under
Edwin Bosi
,
Sabah
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


A short rebuke of Ezam Mohd Nor

By
Art Harun
 | August 16, 2011

The Malaysian Insider

AUG 16 — Dear Ezam,

With reference to your manic and almost maniacal spewing of hatred last Friday, I just have this to say to you.

You are an embarrassment.

This is Ramadan. Muslims fast during Ramadan. Good Muslims do not only fast and suffer mere physical pain during the fasting — a six-year-old can do that — but they reflect upon themselves and upon their surroundings and they abstain not only from food and drinks, but also from all things evil and ungodly.

The hunger pangs and thirst which Muslims suffer during the fast are just the surface of something which is deeper and more meaningful. Good Muslims correlate the mere physical abstention to a more meaningful spiritual experience. Without the spiritual experience and realisation of fasting, the act of fasting becomes and is reduced to a mere ritual and yearly routine.

Perhaps it was not a surprise that you did what you did last Friday. That is because, well, you are just being yourself.

Jihad in Islam has been totally misunderstood, by the non-Muslims and Muslims alike. And who is to blame for such misunderstanding when there are people like you going around running amok after Friday prayers and rabidly calling for jihad and threatening to burn down news portals?

May I ask you Ezam Mohd Nor, exactly against who were going to jihad? All Christians in Malaysia? The Damansara Utama Methodist Church? Oh yes, against those Christians who are conspiring to proselytise all Muslims in Malaysia and elsewhere. Yes, I forgot. But exactly who are they? And where are they?

Jihad does not mean declaring a war. The word “jahada”, which is the base word for jihad, simply means “to strive” or “to struggle”. Throughout time, this word has been twisted, manipulated and misinterpreted by Muslims and non-Muslims alike. The result is that Islam has been painted with this black image of suicide bombers seeking martyrdom and of cartoons like yourself running amok after Friday prayers and in the compound of a mosques no less.

The Quran ordains:

“Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for Allah loves not transgressors.” (2:190)

Yes. It asks us to fight and strive. But only in the cause of Allah and against those who fight us. We are not asked to look for fights. Even if circumstances require and demand us to fight, the Quran implores us not to transgress limits.

May I therefore ask you Ezam, was there any party fighting us last Friday? If so, who? And did you not stop to think that you were not transgressing the limits last Friday considering the nature of our society?

What is the best jihad of all jihads? You think it’s burning down other people’s offices is the best? Well please go and study the Quran and the traditions.

You gave a fiery speech. You called for a jihad. You threatened to burn down news portals (assuming it is possible to do so). Well, you could have used your speech in a better way, namely, to call people to the ways of Allah. That is true jihad. Allah commands:

“Who is better in speech than one who calls (other people) to Allah, works righteous, and declares that he is from the Muslims.” (41:33)

Do you know what was the best of jihads to Prophet Muhammad? On another occasion, a man asked the Prophet Muhammad:

“Should I join the jihad?’ He asked, ‘Do you have parents?’ The man said, ‘Yes!’ The Prophet said, ‘Then strive by serving them!” (Sahih Al-Bukhari, No. 5972)

Yet another man asked the Messenger of Allah:

“What kind of jihad is better? He replied, ‘A word of truth in front of an oppressive ruler!’” (Sunan Al-Nasa’i, No. 4209).

So please Ezam, take your jihad away. Islam does not need your kind of juvenile jihad. — art-harun.blogspot.com

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 16 August 2011, 2:39 pm and is filed under
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Chinatown land buy: ‘Prasarana abusing law’

By
Teoh El Sen
 | August 16, 2011

Free Malaysia Today

PETALING JAYA: Syarikat Prasarana Negara Bhd, a 100% government-owned transport company, is abusing the law for the purposes of profit in making “unnecessary” property acquisitions in Chinatown, the DAP alleged today.

DAP publicity chief Tony Pua said the National Land Code 1965 was specifically amended in 1990 to allow for the acquisition of underground land without affecting surface property.

“This was done by inserting Part Five (A) (section 92A to 92G) under Clause 3. The amendment enables the disposal of ‘underground land’, which can either be alienated or leased or be subject to right of use,” he said.

“Clearly then Prasarana is attempting to hijack the above pieces of land which affect the heritage shoplots in Kuala Lumpur’s Chinatown for the purpose of making profit and not with the aim of undertaking the MRT project 100 feet underground,” said Pua, the Petaling Jaya Utara MP.

“Such action for profit is clearly an abuse of the Land Acquisition Act 1960 and done in bad faith,” he added.

Pua urged Prasarana to “stop making outrageous excuses” and immediately withdraw its order to landowners to give up their property as it is possible to use the land without acquiring their property.

Pua quoted Prasarana project development director Zulkifli Mohd Yusoff as saying last week that the acquisition of Chinatown land was a must as “Section 44 of the National Land Code 1965 states that property owners not only have the right to the plot itself but also the air space above and ground below”.

During a meeting with the affected property owners, Zulkifli also said Prasarana had consulted the Attorney-General’s Chambers on whether it was possible to tunnel undernearth existing properties without having to acquire them.

“The above ‘excuse’ for the compulsory acquisition of land above the tunnel is complete and utter nonsense. Either Prasarana is trying to get away by telling tall tales, or the Attorney-General’s Chambers does not know what laws have been passed in this country,” said Pua.

Underground amenities

He said the amendments to the National Land Code were specifically made to allow for the construction of underground amenities, including railways.

“When the amendments were debated and passed in Parliament on Dec 15, 1989, the then deputy land development minister, Mohd Khalid Mohd Yunus, had presented the bill and clarified that this was to enable the construction of underground car parks, underground railways and underground pipes and other conduits,” Pua said.

Last week, property owners in Petaling Street cried foul when it was made known that Prasarana was acquiring their private land and 34 shoplots in the area to make way for the Jalan Sultan portion of the MRT project.

Others also said that the area was an important part of the city’s heritage.

Prasarana is acquiring 500 to 600 lots of private land, which is about 20% of the total land area needed for the project.

The track alignment, which was approved by the government a few months ago, will run along Jalan Sultan from KL Sentral and cut through the arch that bears the name “Petaling Street”. The station, along with its tracks, will be built underground, cutting its way through portions of Chinatown.

During the briefing last week, Zulkifli said: “You cannot stop the acquisition.”

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 16 August 2011, 2:23 pm and is filed under
Transport
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


First shocker of Parliamentary Select Committee on electoral reforms

My first reaction yesterday to the announcement by the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak of a parliamentary select committee on electoral reforms is to welcome the proposal as it is a vindication of the 709 Bersih rally for free and  fair elections – provided it is a genuine and sincere attempt to clean up the various defects and flaws  in the electoral system.

However, the first shocker of the PSC on electoral reforms is the report that the Parliamentary Select Committee would have its first meeting tomorrow to discuss “everything that needs to be done” and reach a consensus on the matter.

How can this be when the Parliamentary Select Committee has not yet been formed and  the respective Pakatan Rakyat parties have not been consulted and their agreement sought with regard to the PSC’s terms of reference and its membership?

A Parliamentary Select Committee can only be formed by Parliament, which is not in session and will only convene on October 3 for the start of the 2012 budget meeting.

In view of the importance and urgency of the matter, an emergency meeting of Parliament is fully justified.  Will the Prime Minister convene an emergency meeting of Parliament to approve the establishment of the Parliamentary Select Committee on electoral reforms?

The Barisan Nasional government should not act unilaterally and arbitrarily in the establishment of the PSC on electoral reforms but must fully consult and secure the agreement of the respective PR parties on important matters like the terms of reference, scope of review,  time-frame and membership of the PSC.

Bersih 2.0 should be fully involved in the PSC review and recommendations for electoral reforms.

There should be firm undertaking by the Prime Minister of full co-operation by the Elections Commission and all relevant departments with the Parliamentary Select Committee and that there would be no sabotage or subterfuge of any kind by any government department using “official secrets”,  “national security”  or other excuses to stone-wall requests for information.

This was what happened to the previous Parliamentary Select Committee on Integrity which was formed in the previous Parliament. Although  the then Prime Minister  Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawai agreed with its formation, the Select Committee which was chaired by a Minister, Tan Sri Bernard Dompok met hostile reception from government departments when they were asked “sensitive” information, resulting in the resignation of the Chairman and the Select Committee producing no report when Parliament was dissolved in February 2008.

This time, Najib must give categorical assurance that the report and recommendations of the Parliamentary Select Committee on electoral reforms would be completed, made public and implemented by the government and Parliament.

Most important of all, Najib must also give the categorical assurance that the electoral reforms proposed by the Parliamentary Select Committee would implemented in time for the next general elections.

The bona fide and credibility of the proposal for a Parliamentary Select Committee on electoral reforms would be thrown immediately into question if the PSC is formed unilaterally and arbitrarily without full consultation and agreement of the respective PR parties and if the various assurances that it would be a serious exercise are not forthcoming.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 16 August 2011, 11:11 am and is filed under
Bersih
,
Election
,
Parliament
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Jais acting like Gestapo

By Dr Chen Man Hin, DAP life advisor

JAIS should be open minded and not act like a Gestapo arm of Umno.

Since when did the constitution allow an organisation to barge into a religious building (church, temple) and boss around in the name protection of Islam?

It is the tradition that a religious building is open to everyone who wishes to pray, to seek advice or just to seek solace and respite. There is no compulsion for a person to enter or to leave.

So why was Jais so steamed up as to gate crash a social gathering in Damansara Utara Methodist Church, just because a few Muslims were present and having a conversation with other friends?

Jais inspectors could have joined the gathering and participated in the discussions to find out what was is going on. they could have left quietly if satisfied it was a social gathering, and not a meeting to preach to Muslims to convert them to a different faith.

So what was all the drama, action and fuss about? Why is there a phobia of Malay Muslims opting out of Islam? The cause of the phobia is the aim of Ketuanan Melayu which preaches that with Malay unity, Islam, the Malays will remain strong and powerful.

This ketuanan policy has led to the misconception that Muslims and non-Muslims cannot meet together especially on non-Muslim premises. It is this narrow concept that has blocked the integration of the races in the country.

In contrast, the Buddhist could mix easily with Christians, Hindus with Christians or Christians with Sikhs. Similarly, in Sarawak, the Dayaks, Melanaus, Kadazans, Chinese, and other races mix with each other freely. There is no phobia of proselytisation of Muslims by other religions.

Umno should learn from the example of Indonesia, which is the second largest Muslim country in the world, but it has a per capital income of US$ 3033 which is much lower than in US$ 8030 of Malaysia. So where is the rationale for Umno to insist on a Ketuanan Melayu policy which will only keep most Malayus poor like their counterparts in Indonesia.

PR has a Ketuanan Rakyat policy, which states that all Malaysians are equal. We stress on religious freedom, democracy, justice and transparency to unite the people of Malaysia, and become a country that progressive, prosperous and successful.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 16 August 2011, 2:21 pm and is filed under
Dr. Chen Man Hin
,
Islam
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Pakatan demands to head polls review committee

By
Shannon Teoh
 | August 16, 2011

The Malaysian Insider

KUALA LUMPUR, Aug 16 — The federal opposition has demanded that they chair the prime minister’s parliament parliamentary select committee (PSC) on electoral reforms.

In a press statement issued this evening, Pakatan Rakyat (PR) said that Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s announcement “validates issues on electoral reform raised by Pakatan Rakyat and Bersih 2.0 and we consider it a huge feat and win for democratic forces in Malaysia.”

However they want a PR MP to chair the new committee.

“To prove good faith, we request the prime minister to incorporate the following demands (that) the head of the parliamentary committee should be from the opposition,” said the release sent by the coalition’s secretariat.

It also demanded that “these reforms must be finalised, announced, and completed, in toto, before the 13th General Election.”

Dewan Rakyat Deputy Speaker Datuk Wan Junaidi Tuanku Jaafar had poured cold water on hopes that the Najib administration’s parliamentary select committee (PSC) on electoral reforms can quickly draw up recommendations, stating instead that it would take a year before it concludes discussions.

With speculation that Najib will call snap elections soon, Wan Junaidi’s comments could mean that the parliamentary panel would only present its findings after the next national polls.

The Umno president has also delayed party polls that was due in April this year but the party’s constitution requires that it can only be delayed by 18 months, which is in October next year — exactly when Wan Junaidi believes the PSC will begin wrapping up.

PR added today that the Election Commission (EC) must “be held to account for all its seemingly partisan actions and statements, which have lead to the erosion of public confidence.”

“Reforms must be enacted to the Election Commission itself in order to restore integrity to this institution that is supposed to safeguard democracy,” it said.

The opposition also demanded that all recommendations especially the eight-point demand by electoral reforms movement Bersih be heard.

It also noted that meanwhile, there is “nothing stopping Barisan Nasional from immediately addressing the flaws highlighted thus far” such as its claims of unfair access to the media and over 1,600 foreigners who have been given the right to vote.

Najib had announced the PSC yesterday in a major concession to Bersih after a month of damage control in which his administration and reformist image took a battering in the international media.

Tens of thousands took to the streets to support Bersih’s July 9 rally for clean and fair elections in defiance of warnings of police action, which finally resulted in nearly 1,700 arrests, scores injured and one ex-soldier dead.

The government crackdown led to international criticism and a group of Malaysians even protested when Najib visited London, a rare experience for any Malaysian prime minister abroad.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 16 August 2011, 5:36 pm and is filed under
Bersih
,
Pakatan Rakyat
,
Parliament
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


PM proposes bipartisan panel for polls reform

Nigel Aw | Aug 15, 11 7:38pm

Malaysiakini

Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak announced today that the government will set up a parliamentary select committee to discuss electoral reforms before the next general election.

“Recently there have been demands for free and fair elections. The government’s response is that we will propose the setting up of a parliamentary select committee soon, which will be made up of members from both BN and opposition,” he said.

Najib said this in a speech at a ‘buka puasa’ event at the Malaysian National News Agency (Bernama) headquarters in Kuala Lumpur.

“The committee will discuss all electoral reforms that needs to be implemented in order to achieve bipartisan agreement without any suspicion that there is manipulation by the government,” he said.

Najib stressed that his administration will not form the government unless it is truly elected by the people.

“Don’t think that we do not want a clean process of electing the government, we are committed to the tradition of parliamentary elections,” he said.

Earlier, the premier pitched his father and former prime minister Abdul Razak Hussein’s (right) legacy to highlight his commitment to parliamentary democracy.

“During May 13, my father was the chief of National Operations Council and he had absolute power. My father said to me that he was fearful of the power he had. I was in school then and could not understand him, but now in my position (as prime minister), I understand why absolute power is dangerous.

“It was fashionable in the 70s to continue with absolute power but my father returned power to the people through Parliament and elections,” he said.

DAP: Committee should be led by opposition

The announcement comes following more than a month of pressure on the government and the Election Commission (EC) after tens of thousands of protesters took to the streets to demand electoral reform.

In an immediate reaction, DAP supremo Lim Kit Siang hailed the move as a vindication of electoral reform group Bersih 2.0 and the massive rally it organised on July 9.

“(To set up) a parliamentary select committee on electoral system (is the) first time Najib admits to gross electoral defects. Can Najib guarantee reforms in time for the 13th general election?” he said in a Twitter posting.

Lim added that the committee should be headed by an opposition MP with the full cooperation of the EC and relevant government departments.

However, the prime minister made no mention of the participation of civil societies in the committee as proposed by Bersih 2.0 chief Ambiga Sreenevasan.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 16 August 2011, 12:23 am and is filed under
Bersih
,
Elections
,
Parliament
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


The myopic Malaysian

Mariam Mokhtar | Aug 15, 11

Malaysiakini

If we are not happy with our car, we fix it or change to a better model. If we are dissatisfied with our clothing, we change tailors or buy another dress. If the restaurant food which is served is rubbish, we demand a refund or send it back to the kitchen. Some of us are even prepared to marry another woman if the current one(s) are unsatisfactory. So why not political parties?

Various people have urged Prime minister Najib Abdul Razak to resign but some people are hesitant because they fear that Najib’s deputy, Muhyiddin Yassin would take over.

To think that Muhyiddin (right) is the only choice means that Malaysians are still in a coma, or are too lazy to exercise their grey cells, or perhaps cannot see beyond their noses. Have these myopic Malaysians forgotten that Malaysia does have an opposition? And that they have a choice?

Should the opposition return to the drawing board to make their arguments for good governance a little more clear? Are their policies neither practical nor appealing to the grass-root voters?

No one is saying the opposition are perfect but are we prepared for more years under Umno/BN? Should we sacrifice our children’s futures? Can our nation’s finances bear the strain of Umno/BN’s mismanagement? To say that we cannot unseat Najib because Muhyiddin is waiting on the sidelines is both daft and irresponsible.

If we think that we do not have enough capable people ready then why have we not identified and nurtured those whom we see have the potential to be our future leaders?

In the meantime, there is a lot of unease about the state of our nation. Why can’t we behave like democratically minded citizens and exercise our democratic right and might?

This government is receptive to the public’s views. Their driving force is fear. They can and do make U-turns.

For months, the government talked about amending the Printing Presses and Publications Act (PPPA) to cover online content and the Home Minister Hishammuddin Hussein and the Information, Communication and Culture Minister, Rais Yatim, warned about an imminent ban.

Although Najib was fearful of Facebook and Twitter in triggering the rebellion in Egypt, he later backed down on censoring the Internet. The backlash from Malaysians would have caused him irreparable damage.

Last week, Umno Senator Ezam Mohd Nor declared that he would wage war against those who tarnished Islam. He threatened an arson attack on the online news portals and warned Muslims working for Malaysiakini and Malaysian Insider.

He said, “Don’t be a (Brutus) for the infidel’s agenda. You can find employment elsewhere,” and “We give you a last warning. If you don’t stop, we’ll burn.”

The world knows we train water cannons and fire tear-gas canisters at peaceful protesters and that two foreign lawyers were deported in as many weeks. The BBC and CNBC are aware Najib and Sarawak Chief Minister Taib Mahmud paid for a golden gloss to be painted over their tarnished images.

Myopia causes untold damage

Yesterday, Ezam retreated like a dog with his tail between his legs. Ezam’s myopia has cost Umno untold damage, especially during Ramadan.

Umno/BN can and do make U-turns, but all for the wrong reasons.

After 54 years, Umno/BN have failed miserably. See how our people behave, the lawlessness and corruption. Instead of investing in the family unit, the community and the people, Umno/BN invests in billion ringgit mega-projects which are phallic symbols of Umno’s political dominance.

The government can forget about enticing the smartest and most skilled Malaysians, including Malays, to return and contribute towards the Malaysian economy, if they continue to use race and religion as divisive tools. Unlike the Umno/BN politicians, money is not everything to these people. Moreover, ‘1Malaysia’ does not mean equality; ‘1Malaysia’ is a farcical con.

The constitution says everyone is free to practise the religion of his choice and yet myopic Muslims claim absolute ownership of the word; ‘Allah’ and are prepared to use violence to defend their ownership.

When our leaders destabilise our fragile community using religion, how many Muslims are prepared to protest that the message of tolerance, peace and understanding is gone?

When a Muslim insults or converts someone of another faith, where are the Muslim voices of condemnation?

Polygamous marriages are conducted with ease, despite the assurances of the religious department. No one is belittling the extraordinary efforts of the single mother bringing up a family (often without much money or help), but, many Muslim men do not adhere to the tenets of the religion and polygamous marriages invariably cause the breakdown of many families. Many children, especially sons, grow up without a firm father figure.

In some states, child marriages are conducted with ease. In others, Muslim families record a high number of incestuous relationships. The Muslim youths’ high dependence on drugs is an open secret.

When Aleesha died after her bid to change her name and gender was rejected by a court, where was the Muslim censure? Even in Pakistan, which harboured Osama bin Laden, transsexuals are treated with more dignity and given a new name.

Muslims fear the moral police and are prepared to risk their lives perching on window ledges because they fear the humiliation of being caught. Single mothers who are thought to ‘kill’ their babies risk capital punishment even though the baby is stillborn, and unmarried underage teenagers who have sex must get married, even if they are unprepared for a marriage that is destined for failure.

azlanIncredibly, there are no howls of protest from the holier-than-thou, myopic and heretical Muslims who care more about the number of inches their tudung covers their face, or that the food they eat has been prepared and served by a non-Muslim and is therefore, considered non-halal.

These myopic Malaysian Muslims have strange values in life. They are silent about our gambling and alcohol consuming VVIPs, who are custodians of Islam in Malaysia. They are also prepared to close one eye to their corrupt leaders and politicians who are alleged to have raped their maids or alleged to have had extramarital affairs or alleged to have committed murder and other crimes.

Malaysia’s main political party, Umno will find it difficult to shed the image of the arrogant ‘Dumno party’. Umno is steeped in corruption, internal feuding and U-turns. Women in the ministerial ranks serve only as a token presence. These women have scant knowledge of women’s issues and have few creative solutions to offer. They are women who tow the party line and who are afraid to stand up against fellow politicians who belittle them.

The opposition may have made some progress with sections of our community but there is still a long way to go before being fully accepted.

Malaysians need to seize the opportunity for political reform and ensure that Malaysia is only led by patriotic people who have the interests of Malaysians at heart. Politicians and institutions who permit foreigners to enter by the back door are the real traitors. Perhaps the myopic Malaysian cannot see that.

____

MARIAM MOKHTAR is a non-conformist traditionalist from Perak, a bucket chemist and an armchair eco-warrior. In ‘real-speak’, this translates into that she comes from Ipoh, values change but respects culture, is a petroleum chemist and also an environmental pollution-control scientist.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 16 August 2011, 5:31 pm and is filed under
Mariam Mokhtar
,
Muhyiddin Yassin
,
Najib Razak
,
nation building
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


You are no better than a thug

—
Azrul Mohd Khalib

The Malaysian Insider

Aug 16, 2011

AUG 16 — I read with much disappointment and irritation at Senator Mohd Ezam Mohd Nor’s behaviour as reported in “Ezam threatens ‘jihad’ against those proselytising Muslims” (August 12). Malaysians should reject the politics of intimidation, scare mongering and violence which appears to be espoused by Ezam.

He has also misrepresented the Jais raid situation as one where Islam is under attack. Let us be clear: Islam in Malaysia is not and has not been under attack. Both Hasan Ali and Ezam know it.

It is not necessary to play the martyr (Hasan Ali) or the defender of the faith (Ezam). The latter’s threats to wage war and to burn the offices of both Malaysiakini and The Malaysian Insider are criminal in nature and I call upon the necessary authorities to address them appropriately.

It is not necessary to resort to such bullying tactics and to bring down the level of engagement to that of thugs, samsengs and Ah Longs in a back alley. Such a person is surely morally bankrupt.

If presenting the truth or an alternative perspective of how Malaysians view current events is considered by the senator to be attributes of being agents against Islam, then I shudder at how far we have gone to blindfold or gag ourselves in denial of the diverse realities which exist in this country.

I am also alarmed at the extent to which certain factions are willing to go to ensure that their views are the only ones which matter. Their determination to accuse non-Muslims of being disrespectful to Islam has become irrational.

“Jais woes” are of its own making. Jais or any religious department for that matter does not merit unthinking obedience by all and they must learn to be accountable for their actions. If Jais’ actions are valid and proven justified with the necessary evidence, then the law provides guidance as to what needs to be done.

If this is another knee-jerk reaction to an unsubstantiated accusation of proselytisation and conversion of Muslims and Jais acted wrongly, then the least it could do is to apologise. As Malaysians, we are a very forgiving society and understand that mistakes happen. However, what we must not and cannot tolerate are making threats to harm and inflict violence onto others, and placing arrogance, ego, pride before the peace of the country and her people.

The threats of Ezam are an embarrassment and disgrace to right-thinking Muslims in Malaysia and should be treated with the appropriate contempt.

Senator Ezam. As a member of our Parliament, you owe all of us, Muslims and non-Muslims alike, an apology for your threats to inflict violence unto others.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 16 August 2011, 9:28 am and is filed under
Islam
,
nation building
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.