Grounding Those High-Flying Kampong Boys

By
M. Bakri Musa

As I reflect on the many sordid scandals that have blighted Malaysia over the years, I am struck by one sobering observation. That is, the principal players are Malays like me, and of my vintage.

            There are exceptions, of course. The mega-ringgit Port Klang Free Zone Development is one. Then there was the Malaysian Chinese Association’s Deposit Taking Cooperative debacle of the mid 1980s. So as not to slight the Indian community, there was the equally ugly affair of MAIKA, the investment arm of the Malaysian Indian Congress.

            In East Malaysia there was the Chief Minister of Sabah, one Osu Bin Haji Sukam, who skipped on his multimillion-pound gambling debt incurred in a London casino. His Haji father would roll over in his grave on that one. On a far grander scale with respect to sheer avarice and outrageous obscenity would be the still-to-be-fully-accounted glutton of another chief minister, this one of Sarawak. Purists may argue that these two characters are not Melayu tulen (“pure” Malays), so I will not focus on them.

            That would still leave me with plenty of loathsome characters with whom, embarrassingly, I share far too many ready commonalities. Meaning, among others, we were poor, from the kampong, and the first in our family to go to college.

            Stated differently, in an unguarded moment, scratch a bit and our “kampongness” would ooze out of our pores. I could readily swap old familiar stories with these high-flying former kampong Malays, of having to light pelita (kerosene wick lamps) in order to study at night, of hauling water in pails hung at the ends of a bamboo pole painfully strung across the shoulder, and of back-breaking plowing of rice fields with our primitive cangkul (hoe).

            Those are not just distant hazy memories. Every time I visit my kampong, I am painfully reminded of this harsh reality.

The
Laggak
 (Swagger) of These Malays

I meet many of these high-flying Malays when they visit America on their taxpayer-paid junkets; you could not have guessed their humble origins from their laggak (swagger).

            One official stayed at the presidential suite of a five-star hotel, the sort usually reserved for President Obama. She then had the audacity to complain that her car in which she was driven in was not the latest luxury model! As for her flight, it was first class all the way.

            Recently Prime Minister Najib stayed at a $20,000-a-night penthouse suite of the Darling Hotel in Sydney while his wife splurged on a $100,000 shopping spree in a single day. Even if those figures were in our devalued ringgit, that would still be obscenely extravagant. Najib’s wife denied that Australian report, but having seen her behaviors while visiting America, I believe the Australian account. Najib’s predecessor was even more indulgent, what with his fondness for custom-made, ultra-luxury, Airbus and yacht!

            Najib and his wife, self-styled Malaysia’s “first couple,” compare themselves to our sultans, who in turn model themselves after the British and Saudi monarchs. More the latter as the House of Windsor is now much more restrained; not so the House of Saud, still amply funded by their overflowing oil wells. Ours are fast drying up.

            With such extravagances at the top, no wonder lesser kutus (characters) try to outdo each other. Consider one Khir Toyo, a former dentist. Thanks to a liberalized legal definition, this son of a Javanese immigrant is now Melayu tulen. He fancied himself a shrewd businessman who could drive a hard bargain and thus secured for himself a mega-mansion at half-price! The only problem was that his “victim” was someone who did considerable business with Selangor while Toyo was its Chief Minister.

            It was of course no shrewd bargaining, merely of, as Prime Minister Najib would inelegantly but nonetheless accurately put it, “Gua tolong lu, lu tolong gua!” (You scratch my back, I’ll scratch yours!). A more appropriate term would be extorting, but then this Khir Toyo was a product of our all-Malay education system and had only recently learned English; hence his inability to discern the not-so-subtle difference between negotiating and extorting.

            Too bad this Toyo did not use his negotiating prowess to secure for Selangor similar lean contracts! Thank God that he is now a former chief minister! He would still be Chief Minister if Barisan Nasional had won the last election. This point is worth pondering come the next general elections.

            The latest but by no means most egregious example of these sordid scandals involves the National Feedlot Corporation, tasked with spearheading a meat-production industry to help poor rural dwellers. At least that is the rationale, hence the generous government low-interest loans.

            The principal there is one Dr. Salleh Ismail; he is now more known as the husband of a federal minister. Many Malays who reach the top today are not known for their brilliance; they may have degrees but often from third-rate universities or even blatant degree mills. Imbecility is the norm at the highest levels. Salleh however, is the exception. He is one of the early Malay PhDs in science, and not just any doctorate but one from Cornell. He is precisely the sort of Malay the government should be rewarding. So I have no problem with his getting the cattle project instead of some incompetent UMNO operatives or science-illiterate retired civil servants. Nor do I quibble with his putting his children on his company’s payroll; after all it is his company.

            As with any project, the best way to get the best candidate or price would be through competitive bidding. Today, there are many more qualified Malays with proven entrepreneurial flair especially in this field of rearing animals. Many also have proven research expertise directly in the area. The likes of Salleh Ismail are no longer a rarity.

            My greatest disappointment is with Dr. Salleh using taxpayer-subsidized loans to buy luxury condominiums. The irony of his getting special Bumiputra discounts! Dr. Salleh is of course free to do what he wants with his personal assets. Equally if not more reprehensible would be the responsible ministers and treasury officials; they should have disbursed the loan conditionally and in phases, upon proof of satisfactory performance.

            This “cow gate” scandal pales in comparison to an earlier and much more expensive one involving Tajuddin Ramli and Malaysia Airlines. Like Salleh, Tajuddin is the son of a villager from Kedah, a predominantly Malay and very poor state. Like Salleh, Tajuddin too still has many poor relatives back in the kampongs. You would think that the memories of their still miserable relatives in the kampong would put a damper on the laggak of these high-flying Malays.

Shaming By Showing Them Up

Dr. Salleh is from Kelantan. I was on vacation there once and witnessed the appalling poverty that tugged at my sensibilities. I wonder whether Salleh feels that way too when he visits Bacok; those villagers could well be his cousins, once or twice removed. He could have invested in building homes for them and his would-be franchise farmers instead of splurging on luxury condos. He would then be hailed a hero instead of yet another spouse or relative of an UMNO minister hogging the public trough.

            To develop our society we must give young Malays, especially those from the kampongs, a first-class education that would prepare them for the best universities, the kind that Dr. Salleh was privileged to partake. That is our only hope. Yes, some will forget their humble origin and be consumed with their newly-acquired luxury tastes, courtesy of Ketuanan Melayu of course. However, there will more than a few with enough conscience; their modest behaviors would then shame these high-flying pseudo-sophisticated kampong Malays with their taxpayer-supported laggak.

            There is a viral video on the Internet showing Gary Locke, the current American Ambassador to China, carrying his own luggage and ordering his coffee at an airport cafe. Locke is an American Chinese, but his very American style – singularly lacking in pretensions – is causing much discomfort among Chinese officialdom.

            We have many brilliant and unassuming former children of the kampongs. They are doing their best under very trying circumstances for our nation. I am humbled and more than just a bit embarrassed in their presence. Unlike Dr. Salleh or Khairy, these Malays are not married or related to top UMNO operatives. Many would consider that plain unlucky, but those smart dedicated Malays feel otherwise. They consider themselves lucky to be spared the corrupting influences around them.

            In my forthcoming book Liberating the Malay Mind, I profiled a few of these admirable individuals. One in particular, Professor Badri Muhammad, deserves special mention. Like Dr. Salleh, Badri was also from a village in Kelantan and obtained his PhD (Dalhousie, in chemistry) a few years earlier than Dr. Salleh. Badri’s legacies however, are not luxury condominiums or multimillion-ringgit companies, but his children, biological as well as academic, the many undergraduates and doctoral candidates he inspired and guided. Yes, his biological children too have done well, sporting degrees from top universities, including one, Adam, a Carnegie Mellon PhD in engineering.

            Here is another significant difference; despite Badri’s modest academic income, he was able to give his children a superior education sans JPA, MARA, or other Ketuanan Melayu crutches. Contrast that to one Rafidah Aziz, also of my vintage. Like other UMNO officials, she too had her share of scandals. On a visit to America many years ago she bragged about her daughter getting a MARA “scholarship.” Tiada maruah! (No sense of shame.)

            With characters like Dr. Salleh, Tajuddin Ramli, Rafidah Aziz and Khir Toyo, it is tempting to indict Malays of my generation. However, I am certain that Malays like Badri are not the exceptions. There are for example Syed Mokthar Albukhary and Zaid Ibrahim; both were named as Asia’s philanthropic heroes by Forbes magazine a few years ago. Syed Mokthar gave generously to causes like education while Zaid has dedicated a home for the disabled in Kota Baru.

            You do not realize how slothful you look until you are in the company of the well-groomed. Thus we need more Malays like Syed Mokthar, Zaid Ibrahim and my recently-departed dear friend Dr. Badri Muhammad to shame and bring to the ground these high-flying former kampong boys and girls, as Ambassador Locke is now doing to Chinese officials.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 20 February 2012, 10:04 am and is filed under
Bakri Musa
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Seeking lessons from the star-studded debate

By
Dr Mustafa K. Anuar
 | February 20, 2012

The Malaysian Insider

FEB 20 — Saturday’s much-hyped debate, “Chinese at a crossroads: Is the two-party system becoming a two-race system?”, between Democratic Action Party (DAP) Secretary-General (and also Penang Chief Minister) Lim Guan Eng and Malaysian Chinese Association (MCA) President Dr Chua Soi Lek captured the attention and imagination of many concerned Malaysians and predictably made it to the front page of the MCA-owned Sunday Star.

Starting from the front-page story, headlined “Raising the bar”, the Sunday paper took the readers through to the inside pages, particularly pages 6, 8, 10 and 12, with everything that to do with the debate.

This ranged from news reports to interviews with individuals who had intensely watched the debate to commentaries by the paper’s usual columnists. The common thread that tied these items together was generally a positive slant towards the MCA president, i.e. the purported protagonist, which is really not news at all to mainstream media-weary Malaysians.

But if there’s a lesson to be learnt from all this excitement it is that Malaysians from all walks of life, as also observed by the Sunday Star, do crave for, nay demand, good debates and level-headed discussions about things that matter to their collective political, economic, social and cultural life. Debates test the oratory and argumentative skills of the politicians concerned.

But more than that, debates and discourses inform the ordinary rakyat that there are always two, if not more, dimensions to an issue, which eventually can help them make an informed decision or choice. This is also true of media coverage of issues and events. Papers like The Star would raise the bar if they allow sufficient space for a diversity of voices other than that of the Barisan Nasional (BN) folks.

To be sure, consumers of Malaysian mainstream media have over many years invariably received information and opinions primarily coming from BN politicians. The Pakatan Rakyat (PR) alliance has been relatively under-reported by the mainstream media.

If anything, PR often gets to the front pages of the mainstream press only for the “wrong reasons.” This is, of course, not to say that the misconduct of the PR shouldn’t be highlighted. What we’re saying is that misdeeds such as corruption and poor governance (as well as good policies and measures) are not the preserve of certain political parties, and thus the mainstream media should report accordingly as journalistic ethics would demand so.

Ordinary Malaysians do not like to be browbeaten or, more so, lied to, especially by politicians and their elected leaders because obviously it is so insulting to their intelligence. Hence, for example, in major financial scandals such as the ones surrounding the recent National Feedlot Centre and, not too long ago, the Port Klang Free Trade Zone, and controversies such as the proposed 1 Care project and the Lynas plant, readers and viewers would expect the mainstream media to provide details from various sources of information — and not just those coming from the authorities and the ruling party.

Let the readers be the judge after reading the news. This also applies to Saturday’s debate. It would do the readers justice if this Sunday newspaper had given Lim Guan Eng more editorial space rather than a brief inclusion in the “What they said” box on page 6.

In a sense, there isn’t a need for a deliberate dumbing down by the country’s mainstream media for many Malaysians are capable of thinking critically and don’t, as some politicians would insist, become easily confused or duped.

Incisive commentaries are also most welcome but they shouldn’t be, as it is the SOP (if not the DNA) of most mainstream press these days, focused only on the misdeeds of politicians from Pakatan. For instance, when it comes to personalities like Anwar Ibrahim and Lim Guan Eng, certain Star columnists become visibly animated and livid in their so-called analyses.

And this brings us to the Sunday paper’s editorial, headlined “Public entertainment is no sin and cinemas are no vice.” The paper’s opinion revolved around the issue of PAS’s  Selangor assemblyman Dr Shafie Abu Bakar who apparently wanted to ban cinemas in the area of Bangi.

While one may disagree with the said politician pertaining to his questionable argument about cinemas leading to vice, in the interest of journalistic fairness and democracy, Shafie deserves a right of reply from the paper as he is indeed the maligned party.

In this editorial, the Sunday paper also went on to rightly argue that it was about time PAS’s partners in PR stated “clearly where they stand on these public interest issues. Let the public know; elections require people to make informed choices, so failure to inform people of their options amounts to gross neglect and wilful negligence.”

True, as mentioned above, the rakyat can make informed choices and decisions only after they manage to get as much information as possible. However, most mainstream media, particularly those newspapers that claim to be championing the voice of the ordinary rakyat, have neglected their social responsibility to impart vital and adequate information to the general public.

Public debates involving politicians, to be sure, aren’t the be-all and end-all in a democracy because the rakyat as citizens can — and should — take their discourses up to another level instead of just being mere spectators to debates. They can, for instance, participate in petition campaigns, public forums, and street demonstrations. This is what is meant by participatory democracy.

In a democracy, dissenting voices are part and parcel of societal life just as opinions in agreement with the government have their rightful place. So is it asking too much for an equal space in the media for dissent? After all, to quote big chief of The Star Wong Chun Wai, “dissent does not make one subversive and anti-national.”

It is hoped that The Star — and the rest in the journalistic fraternity — walks the talk, and not leave some ordinary Malaysians starry-eyed.

__

Dr Mustafa K. Anuar, an academic by profession, is intrigued by Homo sapiens, especially those who behave as if they’re Permanent Residents of Planet Earth and whose appetite for economic and political power is insatiable and, last but not least, others who rock ‘n’ roll.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 20 February 2012, 2:29 pm and is filed under
Media
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


The case of not leading by example

By
Zakiah Hanum
 | February 20, 2012

The Malaysian Insider

FEB 20 — I was driving down the coastal road yesterday when I saw an army van ahead of me. The driver was in his fatigues, puffing away at the wheel.

While it may not be offence for people to smoke while driving, I find it unbecoming for a soldier on duty to do so. Fastidious you may think, but there is more as the said soldier drove through the red traffic light.

This type of errant behaviour amongst our uniformed personnel is not altogether unfamiliar, albeit this is the first time I have witnessed an army personnel flout the law. I have seen the police break traffic rules many times. I have also observed bad-manners and crass behaviour in local police officers on several occasions.

It’s distressing when such offences are observed. It sets me to question what is to happen to society when the very people tasked to protect it cannot comply with the basic rule of law, the very law that they are supposed to enforce, champion, and defend. How can laws be enforced when the enforcers do not abide by them? Surely the army and police should be leading by example? What happens when society can no longer look up to the law enforcers and the military for compliance and good conduct?

The faults committed may seem trivial and more often than not we do not even think that we ought to report such offences, which in itself is already a norm. Part of the fault lies in our apathy; we tend to react (if we react at all) with scorn and contempt, but we do not lodge formal reports either due to fear or simply due to our ‘tidak apa’ attitude. More often than not the fault lies in our ‘tidak apa’ attitude, which requires systematic re-education and campaigning to beat.

I for one will shrug my own feeling of apathy and discard my “tidak apa” tendencies by lodging a written complaint to the military tonight. And now to recall the registration number of the vehicle in question.

Should I be fussed?

                This entry was posted on Monday, 20 February 2012, 10:10 am and is filed under
Law & Order
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


BN defensive as Penang tops manufacturing investment

By Lee Wei Lian

The Malaysian Insider

Feb 21, 2012

KUALA LUMPUR, Feb 21 — The performance of Pakatan Rakyat controlled states in attracting manufacturing investment prompted a minister today to play up the federal government’s role in their success.

The Ministry of International Trade and Industry released figures today that showed that the federal opposition controlled states of Penang and Selangor had recorded the highest levels of approved manufacturing investment in 2011, at RM9.1 billion and RM8.74 billion respectively.

This is the second year in a row that Penang and Selangor have topped the ranks for approved manufacturing investment and a sharp contrast to 2009 when Sarawak attracted the highest levels of manufacturing investment and Penang came in fourth.

Another Pakatan Rakyat (PR) state, Kedah came in fourth in 2011 with RM6.13 billion, behind Barisan Nasional (BN) controlled Sarawak which was in third place at RM8.45 billion.

The economic performance of PR states is closely watched as many voters and analysts use it as a gauge of whether the coalition is a viable alternative to the ruling BN.

Minister for International Trade and Industry Datuk Seri Mustapa Mohamed said in a media briefing today that Penang had done well since the 1980’s due to strong support from the federal government.

He also said that not all federal opposition controlled states had done well.

“If my (opposition) friends want to say that Penang has done well because it’s ruled by the opposition, what do you say about Kelantan?” said Mustapa.

Kelantan, Mustapa’s home state which is administered by PAS, recorded only RM444 million in approved manufacturing investment last year.

The minister said that the federal government had continued to invest in Penang, including the expansion of the island’s airport and the construction of a second link to the mainland.

“We’re not saying that the state government’s haven’t done anything, but the federal government is working very hard,” he said.

Mustapa added that the federal government had spent large sums of money developing infrastructure in Penang, the Klang Valley and in the Iskandar region in south Johor.

In terms of total investment however, Penang lost out narrowly to Sarawak which received a huge boost from oil and gas investments.

Sarawak attracted some RM14.35 billion in total investment last year, to Penang’s RM14.038 billion

Sabah was third with RM13.68 billion, followed by Selangor at RM13.47 billion and Johor with RM12.64 billion.

Mustapa said that Sabah, Sarawak and Johor were the beneficiaries of huge oil and gas investments with Petronas alone investing RM6.7 billion in Sarawak.

In Johor, it was the huge investment by Dialog in the Pengerang oil terminal that made up the single largest chunk of the state’s investment.

US newswire Bloomberg had in October last year described Penang’s growth into Malaysia’s “biggest economic success” despite the federal government’s focus on Johor and Sarawak, as a boost to PR’s credibility.

It pointed out that under the Najib Administration’s Economic Transformation Programme (ETP), the federal government is promoting RM65.8 billion worth of private sector-led projects for Johor and a mere RM375 million for Penang.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 21 February 2012, 9:12 pm and is filed under
Economics
,
Penang
,
Selangor
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Budaya samseng: Itulah dalil jelas nak kehilangan kuasa

— Aspan Alias

The Malaysian Insider

Feb 20, 2012

20 FEB — Hari ini saya mendengar apa yang berlaku di Semberong, Johor malam tadi. Mengikut laporan, kereta ketua pembangkang, Anwar Ibrahim, telah dibaling dengan berbagai-bagai objek pada 11.30 malam tadi dan ini merupakan satu budaya yang sedang terbentuk didalam Umno, iaitu budaya samseng. Budaya memaki hamun dalam Umno sudah meningkat kepada budaya samseng pula.

Tidak perlu seseorang itu untuk memihak kepada mana-mana pihak tetapi jika benar perkara ini berlaku, maka sahlah Umno sedang membentuk satu budaya samseng, sebagai satu lagi kaedah untuk menakut-nakutkan orang ramai dari menyokong pihak yang menentang Barisan Nasional.

Kelakuan kumpulan yang mengganggu program pihak PR ini adalah satu tindakan yang telah keluar jauh dari moral politik apatah lagi yang melakukan perkara yang tidak bertamaddun ini adalah di kalangan pemuda Melayu.

Tindakan mereka ini dibiarkan sahaja oleh pihak penguatkuasa undang-undang, iaitu pihak polis kita. Politik ini adalah perang psikoloji bukannya peperangan terbuka seperti peperangan tentera diantara dua negara yang bersengketa.

Apa yang dilakukan oleh pihak yang menyokong parti pemerintah ini menunjukkan indikasi yang amat jelas, yang parti pemerintah sedang berada didalam keadaan yang panik kerana takut dengan sokongan pihak alternatif yang kian hari kian membesar dan kuat.

Yang amat menjijikkan pihak tertentu tidak dapat menerima hakikat yang mereka adalah seperti telur dihujung tanduk bersabit dengan sokongan rakyat terhadap mereka. Oleh kerana sudah terlalu biasa dengan kuasa sejak berdekad-dekad dahulu, kehilangan sokongan dan kuasa ini amat memedihkan mereka. Sakitnya ibarat memisahkan kulit dengan daging.

Bahagian Semberong ini adalah kawasan yang diwakili oleh Hishammuddin Husein, Menteri Dalam Negeri negara kita. Apa yang berlaku ini memang menjejaskan imej menteri itu, apatah lagi tindakan polis mendiamkan sahaja apa yang berlaku dihadapan mata kepala mereka itu adalah menakutkan kepada sesiapa yang kuat berfikir tentang masa depan anak-anak dan generasi kita.

Setelah kita mencapai kemerdekaan selama 54 tahun, kita masih lagi terbelenggu dengan budaya samseng yang menjijikkan ini semata-mata untuk mendapat kemenangan undi didalam pilihanraya. Kalau beginilah keadaannya, apakah perbezaannya diantara pemerintahan diktator dengan pemerintahan demokrasi?

Kalau begini keadaan elok kita haramkan sahaja semua parti dalam negara ini dan kepada siapa yang sedang memerintah, perintahlah negara ini sesuka hati seperti mentadbir reban ayam mak bapak kita.

Bagi saya kelakuan dan gelagat samseng ini adalah kerja yang amat hina sekali dan tidak pula mendapat teguran dari parti mereka. Takkanlah untuk mengekalkan kuasa ahli-ahli serta penyokong parti pemerintah sanggup menjadi kumpulan haram samseng dan mengganggu kegiatan parti lain.

Bagaimanakah negara dan rakyat untuk membuat persediaan untuk menjadi rakyat negara maju yang berpendapatan tinggi jika masih terkongkong dengan budaya rakyat negara dunia ketiga. Tidak hairanlah kenapa setangah rakyat kita berpendapat yang negara kita ini adalah negara Zimbabwe atau Congo yang berlainan namanya.

Bagaimana kita boleh mengaku yang negara kita adalah negara yang aman sedangkan samseng-samseng berkeliaran disana-sini untuk memerhatikan segala kegiatan yang asasi bagi rakyat yang inginkan perubahan.

Keinginan perubahan yang sedang dilakukan oleh rakyat ini adalah hak mereka. Negara ini bukannya BN yang punya tetapi dipunyai oleh semua rakyat yang berbagai kaum, agama, budaya dan cara hidup mereka.

Sampai bila mereka hendak terus berkuasa dengan menakut-nakutkan rakyat? Pemimpin BN khususnya Umno nampaknya sudah hilang hidayah sehinggakan cara samseng kini menjadi begitu lumrah. Bulan lepas dua kejadian di mana usaha setengah pihak untuk menganjurkan perkumpulan untuk politik diganggu di Selangor sehinggakan ada yang telah dimasukan ke hospital kerana kecederaan yang di alami hasil dari tindakan samseng ini. Entah apa imbuhan yang mereka dapat dari tindakan samseng mereka ini tetapi ia nyata merupakan satu budaya yang ketinggalan zaman.

Rakyat harus melakukan sesuatu untuk menolak budaya ini. Semua diantara kita tahu bagaimana hendak melakukannya. Kita lakukan penolakan ini dengan cara yang paling berhemah dan kita tidak boleh terikut-ikut dengan budaya samseng yang menjijikan ini. Hanya lakukan sesuatu yang dihalalkan oleh undang-undang didalam peti undi semasa pilihanraya nanti.

Kita ambil tindakan dengan memberikan reaksi terhadap kegiatan samseng ini dengan cara yang terbaik sesuai dengan “attribute” manusia yang merupakan secantik-cantik kejadian Tuhan ini.

Pihak yang cuba membetulkan keadaan ini jangan sesekali menggunakan kata-kata kesat dan tindakan samseng seperti yang dilakukan oleh mereka yang sedang merasa tertekan ini. Kita mesti yakin jika sesuatu pihak itu berkelakuan seperti samseng ini sahaja sudah menunjukkan yang mereka sedang berada dihujung hayat kuasa yang ada pada mereka sekarang ini.

Jika kita dinesta dan dihamburkan dengan kata-kata kesat hanya beristighfar banyak-banyak. Kita tunjukkan perbezaan diantara kita dengan mereka. Perbezaan inilah yang sedang diperhatikan oleh rakyat ramai sekarang ini. — aspanaliasnet.blogspot.com

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 21 February 2012, 12:05 am and is filed under
Politics
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Highway to hell

— Lucius Goon

The Malaysian Insider

Feb 21, 2012

FEB 21 — The thing that troubled me most about the latest expose in Malaysia is the seemingly cozy relationship between the current Umno lawyer and the former chief justice, who incidentally is a former Umno lawyer.

I am beyond griping that the contract was not awarded through an open tender because open tender means competition and competition means level playing field — all the things that our friends like Ibrahim Ali, Mahathir Mohamad don’t like.

But it does disturb me that there appears to be a business nexus between an Umno lawyer Hafirizam Harun and Tun Zaki Azmi. In most developed countries, judges and especially chief justices keep an arms length from lawyers because they don’t want to be accused of bias or bringing the judiciary into disrepute. The more strict judges do not even socialise with lawyers.

So I can’t imagine the head of the Supreme Court of the USA or India or even the Chief Justice of Singapore getting a government contract or being involved in a business with a lawyer, especially one who acts for the government.

It just does not appear proper and throws up all kinds of permutations, not the least of which is the blurring of lines between the independence of the judiciary and the government.

If today there is a bunch of conspiracy theories on the Perak outcome and any other decisions which went the way of the government while Zaki was the CJ, the Najib administration have only themselves to blame.

Even by the recent bungling standards of the administration, this was a bad, bad one.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 21 February 2012, 7:58 pm and is filed under
Corruption
,
Good Governance
,
Judiciary
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Najib has completely demolished MCA lie that “A vote for DAP is a vote for PAS” when he  decided to be a Chua Soi Lek clone with his own warning to Malay voters that  “A vote for PAS is a vote for DAP”

I am still intrigued what were the considerations behind the decision of the Prime Minister and UMNO President, Datuk Seri Najib Razak on Sunday to be a Chua Soi Lek clone, adopting the MCA President’s sophistry to warn Malays that “A vote for PAS is a vote for DAP” implying most falsely, irresponsibly and mischievously that DAP has an anti-Malay, anti-Islam and anti-Malay Rulers agenda.

Is it beyond the political comprehension of Najib and his political strategists that the first consequence of Najib adopting the Chua Soi Lek sophistry is to completely demolish the MCA’s No. 1 political weapon against the DAP – falsely warning the Chinese voters that “A vote for DAP is a vote for PAS” resulting in an Islamic state and hudud Islamic laws?

Najib and his political strategists have seriously underrated the intelligence of the Malaysian electorate in assuming that they could not see through the insanity, illogicality and idiocy of a Barisan Nasional political campaign with MCA on the one hand warning Chinese voters that “A vote for DAP is a vote for PAS” on the ground that DAP will be a stooge of PAS while UMNO warns Malay voters that “A vote for PAS is a vote for DAP” as PAS will be puppet of DAP!

Najib and his political strategists have clearly a very low opinion of Malaysian voters assuming that they could get away with such political chicanery and mendacity of the first magnitude, and could believe that “DAP is stooge of PAS” and “PAS is puppet of DAP” one and the same time if the Najib and Chua falsehoods are to be believed.

I am utterly shocked that Najib and his political strategists cannot understand a simple truth – that these two canards, one  warning Chinese voters that “A vote for DAP is a vote for PAS” and the other warning Malay voters that “A vote for PAS is a vote for DAP” trying to arouse the politics of fear among the Chines and Malay voters are diametrically conflicting which mutually destroys and cancels each other like MAD (mutually assured destruction) weapons.

The  Barisan Nasional’s politics of fear might work if such lies and falsehoods are used only against one community, whether to frighten the Chinese that “A vote for DAP is a vote for PAS” or to scare the Malays that “A vote for PAS is a vote for DAP” but not when both MCA and UMNO try to create fear among the Chinese and Malay communities with diametrically conflicting messages which cancels each other out.

Najib and Chua will be reduced to political jokers if not idiots if they continue these spout two conflicting canards against the Malay and Chinese voters at the same time.

Is Najib going to ban Chua and MCA from trying to  scare the Chinese voters with the line “A vote for DAP is a vote for PAS” so that UMNO could sound more credible with its warning to Malay voters that “A vote for PAS is a vote for DAP”?

This is a great difference between the Pakatan Rakyat and Barisan Nasional.

Barisan Nasional is the by-word for hypocrisy and dishonesty, with not only different but diametrically conflicting messages for different communities.

Although Pakatan Rakyat  parties of PKR, PAS and DAP have our political differences, we believe in clean and honest politicking, and we  have only one common national message to all Malaysians to save Malaysia from the abuses, corruption, injustices and decadence of Barisan Nasional rule!

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 21 February 2012, 3:18 pm and is filed under
1Malaysia
,
DAP
,
MCA
,
Najib Razak
,
Pakatan Rakyat
,
PAS
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Of press prostitutes and cowed media

Comment

by
Thomas Lee Seng Hock

Perhaps the most despicable matter that has come out of the great debate between DAP secretary-general Lim Guan Eng and MCA president Chua Soi Lek on Saturday 18 February 2012 is the contemptible lie by a mercenary spin writer of a mainstream English daily that Guan Eng demanded another debate presumably to repair damaged over his scarred image for losing to Soi Lek.

The claim by such a contemptuous writer is certainly deliberately made to run down Guan Eng and present him in bad light among the general public, since it has been known, and even agreed to by Soi Lek a few days prior to the great debate, that Guan Eng wanted a second round to be held for the benefit of the non-Mandarin speaking public since the first debate was in Mandarin.

Furthermore, the paper this mercenary writer writes for has acknowledged and published a brief admission of its error in reporting a statement attributed to Guan Eng that claimed he said “We do not agree the prime minister must always be a Malay because we want the people to decide.” Yet, he repeated the erroneous statement in his comment, either deliberately to perpetually spread the lie, or is an ignorant fool who doesn’t know what is really happening.

The National Union of Journalists (NUJ) has expressed indignation at DAP national election publicity bureau chief Hew Kuan Yau for likening journalists to prostitutes, and demanded that he apologise for the derogatory comment.

Although, I understand the NUJ feeling on the matter, I cannot help but have to agree with Hew’s statement that there are journalists who will sell their principles and souls for material gains. The above mercenary spin writer is a good example.

Many people will recall that back in the mid-1990s, two identical comments on the performance of a company were published in two English dailies under two different by-lines, i.e. names of different writers. It seemed that both established business editors were “selling” their bylines to the company who had assigned a professional ghost writer to churn out the comment, and paid the business editors for using their names in the comment to enhance its value and newsworthiness.

I believe such practices may still be common. If such cases are not press prostitution, what is?

A few years ago, I wrote a comment on the types of journalists we have, and I have updated it here as I think what I said then is still relevant and significant.

I have worked as a journalist and editor in the mainstream news media since 1975, in the now defunct National Echo, the New Straits Times, the Malay Mail, The Sun, and The Star, and had also served as the NUJ secretary-general in the late 1970s and early 1980s.

Throughout the 35 years in the newspaper industry, I have worked with all sorts of editors and journalists, and have identified five types of journalists in the media fraternity.

First, there are the EEs — Editorial Eunuchs, who take orders from their political emperors, and write and spin stories to promote the emperor’s cause. These political appointees are usually in top and senior positions, not because they are good journalists or great writers, but because of their connection to powerful political godfathers. They are first-class cronies. Many are ghost writers for their political masters. Some are made Datuks or given various civil awards, even at relatively young age. Several have become millionaires.

Secondly, there are the PPs — Press Prostitutes, who have sold their souls and principles to gain favours and privileges from their political and/or business clients. They will write what pleases their political masters. The amount of hampers and gifts they receive during festive seasons is perhaps a good indication of their rising status in their media organization. (Perhaps the Malaysia Anti-Corruption Commission should consider looking at this practice of giving editors hampers, gifts and big fat ang pows during festive seasons).

Thirdly, there are the MMs — Media Marionettes, the puppets who have no brains but are used and abused by opportunists to advance their own political or business agenda. The manipulative opportunists usually feed such journalists with twisted information and deceive these gullible writers to propagate their schemes of things. Our education system has produced many such gullible, unthinking, uncritical, and dumb people; and not a few are found in the media organizations.

Fourth, there are the JJs — Junket Journalists, those who will write anything for the sponsors of their overseas trips. Let me illustrate how some big corporate companies use such overseas junkets to bribe editors and journalists to do their biding. Company A has a product which an NGO considers harmful to the people. The NGO keeps issuing press statements on its research on the harmful product and the newspapers keep publishing the statements. Company A wants to put a stop to such bad publicity of its product. So, it organized a week-long trip for senior editors to visit the product’s factory in Japan. Everything was paid for and provided for, including pocket money for shopping. The editors had a thoroughly good time. On their return, they repaid their wonderful host by stopping all negative reports on its product.

Finally, there are the WWs — Wise Writers, the rare breed who know how to survive through the controlled press situation and get their honest views into print without rousing the suspicion of their media bosses, who are usually political cronies. There are very few such honest writers with integrity and principles, and they are usually not in positions of power. Many of them, like yours truly, retire poor.

It was the English author Edward Bulwer-Lytton who coined the famous metonymic adage “The pen is mightier than the sword” in 1839 for his play Richelieu; Or the Conspiracy.

And it was the 18th Century French Emperor Napoleon Bonaparte who confirmed the truth of Edward Bulwer-Lytton’s figure of speech with this profound statement: “I fear the newspapers more than a hundred thousand bayonets.”

We can now understand why the ruling Barisan Nasional federal government is getting jittery, fidgety and paranoid over the increasingly popular news portals in cyberspace published by the various independent-minded journalists and bloggers, and also the component parties of the alternative coalition Pakatan Rakyat.

The massive swing of votes to the alternation alliance during the political tsunami of March 2008 is due in no small measure to the power of the cyber media.

The NUJ plans to hold an EGM on its so-called Code of Ethics for Journalists. I suggest that it should consider asking all its members to pledge not to accept any gifts, money or hampers from any politicians or businessmen, but surrender them to their companies for distribution to the poor and needy in the community.

The NUJ immediate past president Hatta Wahari is a good example of a true committed journalist who made a bold and brave stand in defence of press freedom, and lost his job in the process. It has been a long time since any leader of the NUJ has stuck his or her neck out to speak out against the abuse and exploitation of the media, especially in the mainstream newspapers.

Hatta certainly deserves our accolade and support for speaking out, without fear or favour, on the very fundamental matter of press freedom, despite the very real risk of jeopardizing his career.

An outspoken and crusading journalist is usually a marked person, and a file will be opened to record every little mistake he makes, to build a case against him. There will be trumped-up charges like sexual harassment, etc to get rid of any journalist who dares to stand up and speak out against abuses in his newspaper company.

So, are there press prostitutes among our journalists?

NOTE: Thomas is currently the media consultant to the Penang state government, but will soon be unemployed as his short-term contract expires in min-March and will not be renewed. He was the NUJ general secretary end-1970s and early 1980s. He can be contacted at
[email protected]
.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 21 February 2012, 12:21 pm and is filed under
Media
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Perak Pakatan demands explanation over highway contract

By Clara Chooi

The Malaysian Insider

Feb 21, 2012

KUALA LUMPUR, Feb 21 — Perak Pakatan Rakyat (PR) leaders cried foul today over the award of a lucrative RM2.2 billion highway contract to companies linked to former Chief Justice Tun Zaki Azmi and Umno lawyer Datuk Hafarizam Harun, two key figures in the Perak constitutional crisis of 2009.

They demanded both men and the Najib administration explain the award and yesterday’s allegation by controversial blogger Raja Petra Kamaruddin that the deal was Barisan Nasional’s (BN) gift for their help in toppling PR in the northern state.

“(Prime Minister Datuk Seri) Najib Razak and the Works Ministry must come out to refute this allegation with proof that they carried out an open tender process and the award was based on the firms’ proper qualifications, track record and expertise in the field.

“As an MP and the former mentri besar of Perak, I demand an explanation from the authorities… failing which, this allegation would hold true,” PAS’s Datuk Seri Mohammad Nizar Jamaluddin told The Malaysian Insider.

Nizar, who once led the Perak PR government, said the allegation was unsurprising as both men had been central figures during the year-long constitutional impasse that saw an endless series of legal suits mounted.

As an example, the Bukit Gantang MP said Hafarizam had even joined an Umno delegation to several Middle Eastern countries like Jordan, Syria and Egypt in a bid to justify the ruling party’s power grab on the point of law to Malaysian students there.

Nizar’s former colleague in the Perak PR government, Datuk Ngeh Koo Ham, shared his sentiment.

The Perak DAP chief charged that both Hafarizam and Zaki had already “compromised their principles” by allowing their political affiliations to interfere with their duties in the legal profession.

“With or without this allegation, these two have already soiled their careers,” he told The Malaysian Insider.

The Beruas MP, who once held the post of senior state executive councillor in the Perak PR government, pointed out that Zaki was once Umno’s disciplinary board chairman and has appeared numerous times for Umno cases.

“Such persons should never be a judge, let alone the country’s Chief Justice. He is obviously biased. Obviously, his appointment was political,” he said.

Ngeh also raised a complaint against Hafarizam, whom he alleged had once warned all government-linked companies and state agencies against engaging DAP’s team of lawyers for any legal matter.

He claimed the prominent lawyer had done so openly and even through the media, clearly indicating that the latter had lost his “sense of professionalism”.

“He (Hafarizam) tried to instil fear in the legal profession whereby under the Act, we are supposed to act without fear or favour and uphold justice,” said Ngeh.

In a blog posting yesterday, Raja Petra alleged that the Najib administration have awarded the contract for the construction of the Kinrara-Damansara Expressway (Kidex) to Emrail Sdn Bhd And Zabima Engineering Sdn Bhd as a reward to the two men for their role in the infamous Perak power grab of 2009.

Hafarizam is a director in both firms while Zaki’s wife, Toh Puan Nik Sazlina Mohd Zain, is a director in Emrail.

Hafarizam confirmed the award today but said that any suggestion of a deal struck because of his role in the Perak constitutional crisis in 2009 was “tainted with mala fide (bad faith) and intended to bring me and Tun Zaki into public odium, scandal and disrepute.”

“This is a serious allegation. The prime minister must respond to it because it not only concerns the question of transparency and accountability in public works projects but also the independence of judiciary.

“Whether or not it is true, whether there is substance to this claim, there should be a full response from the prime minister,” DAP’s Ipoh Timor MP Lim Kit Siang told The Malaysian Insider when contacted.

“Both the government and the named persons should explain the allegation. Why was the project awarded to their company if not for the Perak case?

“Their involvement in the case and ‘reward’ look very fishy,” said Perak PKR vice-chairman Chang Lih Kang.

The Edge Financial Daily had reported on February 17 that the government had called a tender for the Kinrara-Damansara Expressway (Kidex).

The announcement mentioned that seven companies are bidding for the job, which includes Bina Puri, Mudajaya, and Pesona Metro Sdn Bhd.

“The tenders are just out and it is not certain yet on the tenure of the concession as the CA has not been finalised,” said a source.

The highway will link Kinrara and Pusat Bandar Damansara and will divert traffic on the LDP.

According to The Edge, the concession was suppose to be awarded to PLUS Expressways but Pesona Metro Sdn Bhd has been tipped as a frontrunner for the project.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 21 February 2012, 3:45 pm and is filed under
Corruption
,
Good Governance
,
Judiciary
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


The emasculation of our judiciary

— Art Harun

The Malaysian Insider

Feb 21, 2012

FEB 21 — In any Westminster-styled democracy, a country’s administration consists of three main machinations, namely, the Legislative, the Executive and the Judiciary. The Legislative makes laws. The Executive runs the country. Lastly, but by no means the least, the Judiciary adjudicates disputes and determines them.

The Judiciary does not only adjudicate disputes amongst private citizens but also, more importantly, disputes between the citizens and the Executive (the government). In a branch of law called “administrative law”, the Judiciary inherently has the power to issue four kinds of orders against the Executive. These are traditional judicial powers which are paramount towards ensuring that rules of law are complied with not only by the people but also by the Executive.

Firstly, the Court may issue a certiorari order to quash any decision of the Executive. Secondly, an order of prohibition may be issued to restrain the Executive from doing any act. These two orders are usually issued if the act complained of is illegal, improper or made without power (ultra vires). Thirdly, the Court may issue an order of mandamus to compel the Executive to do certain act.

Fourthly, and perhaps most importantly, a writ of habeas corpus, may be issued by the Court to compel the government to produce and free anybody who is improperly detained.

These are the traditional powers of the Judiciary. They exist for hundreds of years and have throughout the years been refined in order to keep up with the demands of modern governance.

Prior to June 10, 1988, Article 121 of our Federal Constitution provides:

“Subject to clause (2), the judicial power of the Federation shall be vested in two High Courts of co-ordinate jurisdiction and status.”

Judicial powers are powers “which every sovereign authority must have to decide controversies between its subjects, or between itself and its subjects, whether the rights relate to life, liberty, or property. [1]” For a democracy to work, the Judiciary must, as of right, be possessed of these powers. Otherwise, the so-called democracy is no more a democracy, where rights, freedom and liberty cannot be adjudicated and determined by an independent Judiciary possessed with the necessary powers to do so.

Tun Dr Mahathir was full of respect for our Judiciary. At the Asean Law Association General Assembly on October 26, 1982, he was reported as saying:

“I will always respect the Judiciary. We do not expect the courts to be pro or anti Government, only pro the Constitution and pro the law. The Government always considers the Constitution and the law carefully before we do anything so we expect the Judiciary to be free to judge our alleged trespasses without fear or favour, but in accordance with the law, in accordance with the law of evidence and procedure justly and fairly. We shall always respect their judgments…”

His loving relationship with the Judiciary, however, lasted slightly longer than Katy Perry’s marriage to Russell Brand.

When the Courts made several decisions against the government, particularly in the Berthelsen’s case — where the Court held the government’s cancellation of a journalist work permit was unlawful — he became displeased. This was followed by the High Court’s decision to issue a habeas corpus writ for the release of Karpal Singh from a detention. In the midst of it all, Justice Harun Hashim declared Umno illegal and dissolved the party.

Tun quickly forgot what he said in 1982. He then viewed the Judiciary as trying to take over the administration of Malaysia from his government.

Tun Dr Mahathir was reported in the November 24, 1986 issue of Time magazine, as saying:

“The Judiciary says, ‘Although you passed a law with certain thing in mind, we think that your mind is wrong , and we want to give our interpretation.’ If we disagree, the courts say, ‘We will interpret your disagreement.’ If we go along, we are going to lose our power of legislation. We know exactly what we want to do, but once we do it, it is interpreted in a different way, and we have no means to interpret it our way. If we find that a court always throws us out on its own interpretation, if it interprets contrary to why we made the law, then we will have to find a way of producing a law that will have to be interpreted according to our wish.”

He then moved the Parliament in 1998 to amend Article 121 of our Constitution. Now, it is stated that the Courts will only have judicial powers “as may be conferred by or under Federal law.” That means Malaysia is the only Commonwealth country whose Courts do not have judicial powers unless the Legislative says so.

On March 18, 1988, in moving for the above amendment, Tun Dr Mahathir said in the Parliament:

“… to achieve a balance the country needed a civil service and Judiciary which did not involve itself in politics … But unfortunately lately we find incidents where some members of the Judiciary are involved in politics … By possessing qualities termed as ‘fiercely independent’, these members are indirectly involved with ‘opposition politics’. And to display that their independence is really ‘fierce’ they often bend over backwards to award decisions in favour of those challenging the Government.”

With the amendment passed, the Courts quickly became impotent and subservient to the Legislative. Unfortunately too, members of the Legislative are also members of the Executive. That put paid to any semblance of checks and balances between the powers that be and the Judiciary.

When the people have legal disputes, where else do they go but the Courts? However, with the 1998 amendment, the Courts are powerless to assist in more than many instances.

The present administration has pledged transformation. Socially, promises have been made to review and even repeal draconian laws such as the ISA, Printing Presses and Publication Act, Police Act and many others. That is to be lauded.

Any national transformation, however, would not, in my humble opinion, be complete until and unless the position of the Judiciary is restored to its rightful position. It is humbly urged that the present administration look into re-amending Article 121 of the Federal Constitution to its former position. — art-harun.blogspot.com

[1] Professor Aun Min, Wu in The Malaysian Legal System, pg 283

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 21 February 2012, 1:18 pm and is filed under
Judiciary
,
Mahathir
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


What I think

Joan Lau

The Malaysian Insider

Feb 21, 2012

FEB 21 — I was shocked to read our Home Ministry has ordered an immediate stop to the sale of “Where Did I Come From?”, an illustrated book for children that explains well… where we all come from.

I remember buying that book for my youngest brother when he was just six or seven years old.

It’s a lovely book that teaches you the proper names for the various parts of the anatomy (penis rhymes with peanuts) and told about how your parents fell in love, had sex and made you.

Sure, there are naked people in the book — illustrated, mind — but there is nothing pornographic about it.

Now, more than 35 years after I first bought that book for my brother — who by the way did not become a deviant or pervert — they are saying the book “might be suitable for children at the writer’s country of origin” but is not suitable for Malaysia.

What absolute rubbish!

I reckon if more kids grew up reading “Where Did I Come From?” we may actually have fewer “accidents” resulting in unwanted pregnancies.

At the end of the day, you can see porn everywhere should you choose to.

Instead what I find obscene is the people at the Home Ministry treating a book that teaches basic sex education to children as pornography.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 21 February 2012, 10:46 pm and is filed under
Education
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Berniaga buluh kasap: Hujung hilang pangkal lesap

— Aspan Alias

The Malaysian Insider

Feb 21, 2012

21 FEB — Saya terbaca berita yang beberapa veteran Umno telah bertemu secara tertutup untuk mencari jalan bagi menyelesaikan masalah yang dihadapi oleh orang Melayu. Diantara yang hadir itu ialah Dr Mahathir Mohamad, Ibrahim Ali, Presiden Perkasa, TS Sanusi Juned, Datuk Khalid Yunus serta beberapa orang kuat Perkasa termasuk ketua wirawatinya dan pemuda kepada pertubuhan yang sangat ‘famous’ itu.

Saya bersetujulah apa yang mereka lakukan itu, tetapi yang saya nak sentuh kali ini ialah mereka yang berjumpa itu ialah dikalangan orang-orang yang telah memecah belahkan umat Melayu dahulu. Bermula dengan tindakan Dr Mahathir menggunakan peguam Sri Ram untuk mematikan Umno dan terus menyekat usaha sekumpulan ahli Umno untuk menghidupkan Umno lama benar-benar telah memecah belahkan orang Melayu. Orang Melayu berada dalam dua kumpulan; yang satu adalah kumpulan yang sayangkan Umno asal itu dan yang satu lagi kumpulan yang membawa ahli-ahli Umno ke dalam pertubuhan baru yang bernama Umno baru.

Dalam perpecahan inilah tersingkirnya Ketua Hakim Negara semasa itu, Tun Salleh Abas yang telah mengambil keputusan untuk membawa semua sembilan orang hakim-hakim Mahkamah Agong untuk menghakimkan kes tuntutan bekas ahli-ahli Umno untuk menghidupkan parti itu. Dr Mahathir tidak bersetuju kerana beliau mahukan Umno yang baru untuk menyingkirkan semua pemimpin yang tidak sebulu dengannya.

Maka berpecahlah orang Melayu khususnya ahli-ahli Umno dalam banyak kumpulan. Selepas itu dipecahkan orang Melayu dengan Raja-Raja mereka dalam krisis Umno dengan Raja-Raja Melayu dahulu. Sanusi Junid yang merupakan ‘general’ Dr Mahathir merupakan orang yang melaksanakan perintah Dr Mahathir untuk melupuskan Umno untuk digantikan dengan Umno yang ada pada hari ini. Salah seorang dari kumpulan itu Dato Haji Khalid Yunus telah membuat kenyataan pedas terhadap Raja-Raja Melayu sehingga tidak ada tolok bandingnya.

Sejak dari itu orang Melayu berpecah belah dan sekarang kumpulan ini jugalah yang berjumpa secara tertutup untuk membetulkan orang Melayu. Saya menganggap tindakan mereka ini tidak akan kemana-mana dan Melayu tetap akan berpecah belah sehinggalah pemimpin-pemimpin jenis ini tidak lagi terlibat dalam Umno.

Elok ramai-ramai baca kembali akhbar-akhbar perdana seperti Utusan, dan kumpulan NST pada tahun 1993 untuk kepentingan mereka yang tidak berada atau bergiat didalam Umno semasa itu. Kepada pemimpin seperti Hishamuddin, Shafie Apdal dan yang lain-lain yang tidak pernah menjadi ahli Umno yang dulu elok baca semuanya ini.

Kepada semua yang garang-garang yang kononnya pejuang Melayu dan Umno elok memulakan membaca semuanya ini kerana ia akan menjadikan mereka lebih faham kenapa orang Melayu kini berpecah belah. Sekarang orang melayu sudah jemu dengan perpecahan ini, maka mereka sekarang mahu bersatu kembali tetapi bukannya dibawah Umno. Mereka sudah letih dengan kerenah kepimpinan Umno yang bercakap tentang perjuangan orang Melayu tetapi sampai sekarang orang Melayu tidak kemana jua.

Tempoh 54 tahun dengan retorik kosong ini sudah cukup untuk orang Melayu bersabar. Jika Umno diberikan kuasa lagi kali ini dalam pilihanraya sekali lagi isu yang sama akan kita dengari dan begitulah sampai bila-bila.

Akhirnya orang Melayu ini akan masuk angin keluar asap. Berniaga pula ibarat berniaga buluh kasap; hujung hilang, pangkal lesap. —
http://aspanaliasnet.blogspot.com/

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 22 February 2012, 11:07 am and is filed under
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


DAP milik siapa?

– Oleh Fairuz Azhan

Roketkini

22 February 2012

Apabila orang Melayu dilihat mendekati atau pun menyertai DAP, antara komen-komen yang biasa didengar adalah, “Apalah sertai DAP, kalau ya pun mahu sertai pembangkang, masuklah PAS atau PKR.”

Secara peribadi komen seperti ini sudah beberapa kali saya dengar secara peribadi daripada kalangan rakan-rakan, saudara-mara dan juga bekas-bekas pensyarah saya. Seolah-olah tanggapan orang ramai adalah DAP sebuah parti untuk orang bukan Melayu sahaja dan jika orang Melayu ingin turut serta dalam perjuangan DAP ia bagaikan sesuatu yang amat pelik seperti makhluk asing mendarat di bumi.

Memang tidak dinafikan bahawa orang Melayu sememangnya minoriti dalam DAP, sebagaimana kaum bukan Melayu minoriti PKR dan hampir tiada bukan Melayu dalam PAS.

Tetapi yang lebih teruk lagi, UMNO hanya membenarkan orang Melayu menyertainya, walau pun ada ramai keturunan India semakin menguasai parti itu. Begitu juga MCA dan MIC yang masing-masing hanya membolehkan kaum Cina dan India sahaja bersama mereka.

Kita harus bertanya dan mengkaji mengapa andaian yang bersifat kaum (tidak semestinya perkauman) ini terjadi apabila Melayu bersama dengan DAP.

Dua perkara yang menjadi punca salah faham

Saya melihat ada dua sebab yang utama.

Yang pertama adalah kerana biasanya jika orang-orang Melayu menyokong parti pembangkang, sebahagian besar menyertai PAS yang mana hampir kesemua ahli mereka merupakan Melayu-Islam. Sejak 1999 pula, PKR turut menjadi pilihan untuk orang Melayu.

Mungkin barangkali itu adalah pilihan dan keselesaan individu masing-masing. Jadi ada yang menganggap sesiapa yang “keluar” dari ruang selesa itu telah melakukan sesuatu yang pelik dan ganjil.

Yang kedua adalah kerana propaganda-propaganda yang bersifat jahat dan fitnah daripada jentera UMNO-BN yang menggambarkan pada umum bahawa DAP merupakan parti anti-Melayu, anti-Islam, dan anti-Raja, menyebabkan orang Melayu menjauhi dan tidak sama sekali mahu mendekati DAP.

Ini sangat jelas apabila jika orang Melayu menyertai DAP, merekalah paling dihentam, dikritik dan dilabel seperti ‘pengkhianat bangsa’ dan sebagainya. Ahli-ahli PAS dan PKR yang berbangsa Melayu, walau pun truut dicerca dan dihentam, label ‘pengkhianat bangsa’ itu sudah pun disimpan khas buat ahli-ahli DAP dari kalangan Melayu sahaja.

Hairan juga kerana label ‘pengkhianat bangsa’ itu pula tidak pernah digunakan untuk para pemimpin Melayu yang pecah amanah atau mencuri wang Baitulmal, Tabung Haji, Amanah Ikhtiar Malaysia, projek perumahan kos rendah dan sebagainya untuk kepentingan diri dan keluarga mereka sehingga sanggup membiarkan umat Islam, khususnya mereka yang miskin dan berpendapatan rendah, hidup merana dan melarat.

Berbeza keadaannya apabila fitnah dilemparkan kepada beberapa Melayu yang berani menyertai DAP atas dasar mahu mereformasikan negara dan memperjuangkan kebajikan dan hak semua anak bangsa tanpa mengira kaum dan agama.

Ujian-ujian yang sukar seperti ini juga menyebabkan orang Melayu tidak terdorong untuk memilih DAP sebagai wadah perjuangan.

DAP hanyalah sebuah parti politik

Namun demikian, apa yang diperjuangkan oleh DAP tidak pernah pro mahu pun anti mana-mana kaum atau agama. Ia hanyalah sebuah parti politik berbilang bangsa yang tidak berteraskan kaum (dan bebas untuk sesiapa sahaja menganut apa-apa agama) serta memperjuangkan demokrasi sosial.

Mungkinkah demokrasi sosial yang memperjuangkan keadilan dan peluang saksama serta memastikan mereka yang paling miskin dan berpendapatan rendah diberi keutamaan, amat ditakuti oleh UMNO-BN?

DAP sepanjang sejarahnya tidak pernah menghalang mana-mana individu menyertai perjuangan mereka berdasarkan warna kulit mahu pun kepercayaan agama. Malah ia amat menggalakkan penyertaan masyarakat pelbagai lapisan. Tidak seperti kebanyakan parti lain yang telah mengkhaskan parti mereka untuk kaum-kaum tertentu.

Fitnah paling besar bahawa DAP sebuah parti cauvinis Cina amat tidak masuk akal sama sekali. Sejak awal penubuhannya, para pemimpin dan ahli DAP kebanyakannya berpendidikan Inggeris (selaras dengan sistem pendidikan pra dan pasca-Merdeka) dan tidak memilih kaum sebagai asas perjuangan. Sudah ada pemimpin dan ahli Melayu pada saat kewujudan DAP 46 tahun lalu.

Sepanjang zaman pula, hari ini Pengerusi DAP ialah Karpal Singh manakala Naib-naib Pengerusinya terdiri daripada Tunku Abdul Aziz dan M. Kulasegaran. Isu-isu yang diperjuangkannya menjangkau apa yang boleh diperjuangkan oleh kombinasi UMNO, MCA, dan MIC, malah meliputi isu-isu yang gagal ditangani oleh PBB, SUPP dan PRS di Sarawak serta UPKO, LDP dan PBS di Sabah. Bukankah ini melambangkan kepelbagaian masyarakat Malaysia? Di mana cauvinis Cinanya?

Persepsi masyarakat hanya boleh dibetulkan dengan mencari kebenaran. Namun setelah indoktrinasi generasi ke generasi bahawa DAP ini parti orang cauvinis Cina, segala yang palsu telah diangkat sebagai kebenaran.

Fitnah pemimpin UMNO

Antara fitnah paling jahat adalah beberapa dakwaan pihak tertentu yang masih dipercayai segelintir masyarakat Melayu adalah kononnya DAP merupakan pencetus tragedi 13 Mei 1969. Ada yang sanggup memfitnah kononnya  Lim Kit Siang telah mengucapkan kata-kata ‘Orang Melayu pergi mati’ di Kuala Lumpur pada ketika itu, walhal beliau sudah pun berada di Kota Kinabalu kerana membantu kempen pilihan raya di Sabah.

Segala rekod dan bukti menunjukkan bahawa beliau tidak berada di Kuala Lumpur ketika 13 Mei, tetapi fitnah yang maha dasyat itu tetap disebarkan. Malah Kit Siang tidak pernah menyebut kata-kata hasutan itu. Itulah kebenarannya.

Semua pihak sedia maklum bahawa UMNO-BN hanya bergantung kepada kebencian kaum untuk mengekalkan kuasa. Apa-apa hal, mereka memerlukan objek kebencian dan mereka  memilih DAP (sebagai ganti nama Cina) sebagai kambing hitam.

Jika di negara lain, kerajaan yang korup dan hanya mementingkan kroni serta sanggup membiarkan kaum sendiri melarat sudah lama akan dicampakkan. Namun di Malaysia, dengan kekalnya undang-undang berat sebelah dan zalim, UMNO-BN mampu mengekalkan kemandiran parti mereka dengan menanam perasaan lemah diri atau inferiority complex di kalangan Melayu dan mengugut untuk menakutkan kalangan bukan Melayu.

Tawaran DAP

Di sini DAP menawarkan alternatif untuk rakyat Malaysia termasuklah orang Melayu. Sesiapa jua boleh menyertai DAP tanpa diskriminasi warna kulit mahu pun agama. Alternatif yang disediakan DAP dalam arus perdana perjuangan politik di Malaysia adalah jelas dari dulu sampai sekarang iaitu perjuangan demokrasi sosial dan sebuah Malaysia untuk Rakyat Malaysia.

Malah, jangan terkejut, suatu hari nanti Melayu akan menjadi majoriti dalam DAP, asalkan Melayu itu adalah dari kalangan mereka yang demokrat, adil, tidak perkauman dan tidak sempit agama, serta memperjuangkan peluang saksama untuk semua.

Bukan warna kulit atau kepercayaan agama yang menjadi ketentuan. Hanya prinsip dan perjuangan yang menentukan kejujuran, keikhlasan dan hati budi seseorang insan.

Saya fikir bahawa perjuangan demokrasi sosial adalah sesuatu yang amat baik diwajar diterima oleh rakyat Malaysia. Ia menjamin kebajikan sosial golongan masyarakat yang memerlukannya di samping kemakmuran ekonomi yang dibawa oleh sistem pasaran yang dipantau oleh kerajaan yang cekap, akauntabel dan telus.

Ini lebih jauh lebih baik daripada apa yang kita ada sekarang, iaitu ekonomi monopoli untuk kroni dan campur tangan kerajaan dalam ekonomi demi kepentingan diri dan keluarga sedangkan peruntukan dan projek entah ke mana, rakyat terus terseksa. Yang menderita itu termasuk mereka dari kalangan Melayu.

Oleh kerana DAP sebuah parti yang memperjuangkan semua bangsa di Malaysia, maka ia sentiasa menjemput dan menggalakkan semua kaum untuk menyertai perjuangan demi keadilan dan demokrasi. Jemputan ini tentunya ditujukan kepada orang Melayu juga. – Roketkini.com

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 22 February 2012, 7:57 pm and is filed under
DAP
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Huge O&G growth a poser for Malaysia’s future

By Lee Wei Lian

The Malaysian Insider

Feb 22, 2012

The government would be unable to finance its operational expenditure without oil revenues, according to the World Bank. When last year’s investment figures were released yesterday, one statistic stood out — the stunning 132.7 per cent growth in the mining sector — and painted a picture of a two-speed economy where oil-and-gas was booming while other sectors grew slowly or even registered declining investment.

This comes as the World Bank warned last November that Malaysia is too dependent on fossil fuel revenues, with its non-oil primary deficit having doubled in the last five years to almost 20 per cent of GDP.

The other concern is that oil and gas would continue to compete for talent and funds that could be used to broaden the country’s economic and wealth base, especially in home-grown science and high technology, areas in which Malaysia is an insignificant player.

The windfall from petroleum has also bolstered government coffers to the point that the World Bank noted in 2009 that non-oil revenues are insufficient to finance federal operational expenditure.

The country’s reliance on government spending funded by oil revenues also threatens to dull the urgency to develop the country’s competitiveness through gains in productivity and innovation.

Investment in the mining and quarrying sector — which is dominated by the oil-and-gas industry — more than doubled from RM3.14 billion in 2010 to RM7.3 billion in 2011.

At this rate, investments in oil-and-gas are on track to overtake services and even manufacturing, the nation’s largest contributor to exports.

Investment in services shrank from RM10 billion in 2010 to RM9 billion in 2011, while manufacturing investment barely registered any growth, rising only 2.5 per cent from RM16.11 billion to RM16.51 billion.

States like Sarawak and Sabah already appear precariously dependent on oil and gas — national oil company Petronas alone accounted for nearly half of Sarawak’s total investment last year.

Figures provided by the World Bank in a 2009 report also show that oil-and-gas revenue increased from 5.1 per cent of GDP in 2004 to 8.6 per cent in 2009.

Another issue stemming from the lure of petro-dollars is that companies wanting to cash in have initiated a flurry of ambitious projects, only to have them run into major difficulties.

The multi-billion Asia Petroleum Hub in Johor, once billed as one of the world’s largest integrated terminal, was placed under receivership by its financier last year.

A US$7 billion (RM21 billion) trans-peninsula pipeline initiated by Trans-Peninsula Petroleum Sdn Bhd that runs from Kedah to Kelantan, launched in 2007, has apparently either been delayed or cancelled.

While oil and gas is a valuable contributor to a diversified economic base, the country must be mindful not to allow it to distort the economy.

The planet is littered with examples of oil-rich countries that failed to graduate to developed country status, such as Nigeria and Venezuela.

Critics of Australia’s mining boom maintain that its reliance on minerals has led to the country being less enterprising than it could otherwise have been.

Even within Malaysia, the states with the most oil-and-gas resources — Sabah, Terengganu and Sarawak — remain largely poorer and less developed than the resource-lacking states like Penang and Selangor.

The country, already admittedly stuck in the middle-income trap, must also ensure that it can escape the grasp of a more subtle but no less insidious one — that of the resource trap.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 22 February 2012, 11:15 am and is filed under
Finance
,
Oil
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


The time has come for more public debates

Kee Thuan Chye | Feb 21, 2012

Malaysiakini

COMMENT

Why don’t we have more debates between our politicians, and have these debates telecast live? This is a thought on many minds after the debate between Lim Guan Eng and Dr Chua Soi Lek.

Why not, indeed? After all, people were still talking fervently about the debate the day after – in homes, offices, coffeeshops and social media.

We now have a clear indication that there are two main players in the political field – BN and Pakatan Rakyat – which makes it conducive for a series of debates on a series of national issues to be held between representatives from both sides.

Although some of their politicians are already addressing issues in their own ceramahs, such gatherings are being audited by only a small proportion of the people.

Live telecasts will bring their views to the major populace. And that is something essential for a healthy democracy.

Right now, there is so much spinning going on about both coalitions – not only in the mainstream media but also in blogs and online news websites – that it is often difficult for the public to decide what is the truth.

The best solution to that is to hear the words from the horses’ mouths. So let the politicians speak directly to the people. Then the people can gauge from their mannerisms, body language, speech and language what they are all about, and perhaps even whether what they say is believable.

I think we are mature enough as a people for something like this. In fact, I think, going by the buzz before and after the Lim-Chua debate and the keen interest shown on the issues brought up by the speakers, many of us hunger for it.

Equal air time

The question is, whether the government feels secure enough to let such debates go on national television.

For the Lim-Chua debate, Astro was the telecast medium, but Astro programmes reach out only to its subscribers. For something of import like political leaders debating national issues, the proper medium should be TV1 or TV2, the government channels. These reach out to everyone who has a television set.

The time has come for the government to open up this facility to accommodate the opposition as well. This would be in keeping with Prime Minister Najib Razak’s promise to make Malaysia “the best democracy in the world”.

And as these TV channels are funded by the people’s money, the opposition should by right have access to them. But this, sadly, has not been the case. In fact, not only does the government shut out the opposition, it also uses these channels paid for by the people to promote its own propaganda and to paint a negative picture of the opposition through media spin.

It’s time to pressure the government to change this attitude.

Bersih 2.0, in its campaign for free and fair elections, demands that all contesting parties and candidates at elections be given free and fair access to the media. This is worthy of support. In fact, it should be insisted that this “equal air time” rule be implemented not only during election campaigns but at all times.

In a democracy, it should be a natural occurrence for the ruling party as well as the opposition to have equal coverage in the media daily.

But this principle has been hijacked by the ruling coalition and made worse by the fact that its component parties own newspapers and other media outlets. And the mainstream media is controlled as well by the Printing Presses and Publications Act (PPPA).

The time has come for change. If there is no law to forbid political parties from owning media companies, then the Home Ministry should not be allowed to decide who can start a newspaper or radio or television station, as is the case under the PPPA, so that opposition parties can start their own.

The Home Ministry should also not be allowed, as it is also under the PPPA, to suspend or revoke the licence of any media outlet.

Najib vs Anwar debate

But coming back to the issue of public debates and having them telecast live, I think it should particularly be extended to those who aspire to become our prime minister.

Of course, there is no mechanism now that allows the prime minister to be voted for by every citizen, unlike in some other countries. But that doesn’t mean we cannot hear from the prospective candidates before the general election.

And since our system is such that the leader of the coalition that wins the majority of the seats in Parliament usually becomes the prime minister, we could have a public debate between the leaders of BN and Pakatan.

They could face the public and address questions on national issues. They could tell us their plans for the country’s development. They could show us how sincere and trustworthy they are.

This is what transpire in the US presidential debates that have been held since 1960, and it seems an apt model to follow.

Americans would largely agree that such debates help them get a better idea of the concerns at stake and of the man who could eventually decide the nation’s destiny during his term of office.

Indeed, the main target of these debates are voters who have yet to decide whom to vote for and those who are not partisan to any party. As there are many fence-sitters in Malaysia, a debate between the coalition leaders would be a great help.

PM need not be afraid

As many as one-third of the American population have been watching the live telecasts of the debates through the years, which means they generally look forward to these important occasions. It is even noted that the outcomes of a few elections could have been decided by these debates.

The most famous outcome is the one in 1960 in which John F Kennedy contested against Richard Nixon. That was also the first time the presidential debates were held. According to Time magazine, it is “now common knowledge” that without that debate, “Kennedy would never have been president”.

In Malaysia, before the next general election comes about, it would be a great occasion for voters if they could see BN leader Najib Razak engage in a debate with Pakatan leader Anwar Ibrahim.

The challenge to a debate has already been made by Anwar – on the subject of Pakatan’s 100-day reforms if it wins Putrajaya.

This could however be amended to something more in keeping with the next general election. Both leaders could be asked instead to address the urgent problems faced by the nation and the solutions they have to solve them, and also the concrete measures they plan to take to ensure a bright future for every citizen.

Najib need not be afraid of taking up the challenge. After all, his aides have been going around promoting him as a “cool guy”, regardless of whether it’s true. It is Anwar who may have a tougher time because of the sex scandals he’s been tarnished with and his recent gaffe over Israel.

A public debate between the two would really be something. Perhaps they could even battle it out in a series of debates, like the US presidential ones, so that they could cover more ground.

I’m sure that if it happens, Malaysians will stop what they’re doing and watch these two in action. I think it’s something whose time has come, and we will be more than ready for it.

So how about, Najib and Anwar?

——————————————————————————–

KEE THUAN CHYE is the author of the new book ‘No More Bullshit, Please, We’re All Malaysians’.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 22 February 2012, 9:22 am and is filed under
Anwar Ibrahim
,
Lim Guan Eng
,
Najib Razak
,
Politics
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Budaya vandalisma semakin berkembang

— Aspan Alias

The Malaysian Insider

Feb 23, 2012

23 FEB — Apabila terfikir kembali tentang isu penyenaraian FELDA, saya tidak dapat melihat apa kah sebabnya yang kerajaan mahukan penyenaraian ini dilakukan dalam apa juga keadaannya. Saya tidak faham kenapa setiap badan-badan serta agensi kerajaan yang maju sentiasa berakhir dengan kerosakan.

Dulu MAS merupakan sebuah syarikat penerbangan yang premium jika berbanding dengan syarikat-syarikat penerbangan lain di dunia ini. Oleh kerana MAS begitu berjaya di bawah pengurusan Saw Huat Lai dan kemudiannya dikembangkan lagi oleh Tan Sri Aziz Abd Rahman maka setiap mata mereka yang meleleh air liur telah menjualkannya kepada Tajuddin Ramli. Sejak penyerahan MAS kepada Tajudin Ramli, MAS telah menjadi apa yang kita lihat pada hari ini.

MAS mengalami kerugian sehinggakan kerajaan terpaksa melakukan “bail-out” dengan membeli kembali saham-saham syarikat itu dengan harga yang sama yang dijual kepada Tajudin sebelumnya. Kerugian yang dialami oleh MAS begitu besar sehinggakan MAS tidak lagi boleh bangun sampai ke hari ini.

Hari ini MAS telah dipergunakan oleh AirAsia, dalam satu “share swapping” yang sangat menyedihkan mereka yang memahami keadaan sebenarnya. Tindakan “share swapping” ini pula diberikan sokongan oleh pihak kerajaan (Khazanah).

MAS mendapat hanya air lelehan dari AirAsia sahaja. Kita tidak boleh berbuat apa-apa kerana mereka yang telah kita berikan amanah untuk menjaga kepentingan rakyat itu tidak jujur dan hanya memikirkan kepentingan diri mereka sendiri.

Banyak lagi insiden-insiden buruk seperti ini telah dilakukan oleh pihak yang berkuasa. Sekarang ini penjenayah kolor putih ini sedang cuba untuk memerah dan merosakkan FELDA pula. Di mana sahaja ada wang yang besar di situlah pemimpin berlumba-lumba untuk mengambil kesempatan.

Sesungguhnya FELDA tidak payah disenaraikan terutamanya KPF itu. Jika sungguh niat pimpinan Najib Razak ini ikhlas dan mahukan juga ada penyenaraiannya elok di senaraikan anak-anak syarikatnya yang banyak telah membuat keuntungan besar dalam mana KPF itu sendiri membeli saham dalam syarikat IPO yang baru itu. Ini lebih bermakna.

Tetapi masalahnya niat kenapa hendak menyenaraikan FELDA serta koporasinya itu tidak dapat kita bayangkan. Tentulah ada niat yang terselindung dan akan diketahui oleh mereka yang mempunyai niat yang tersembunyi itu.

Apa sahaja agensi kerajaan yang membuat banyak keuntungan, di situlah ramai pemimpin berlumba-lumba untuk merosakannya. Kadangkala saya tefikir juga yang pimpinan kita merupakan kumpulan yang suka melakukan vandalisma terhadap semua perkara yang baik dan kukuh yang telah dilaksanakan oleh pimpinan yang terdahulu.

Atau dalam bahasa kasarnya mereka ini merupakan kumpulan “makhlok perosak” yang tidak ingin melihat kejayaan kepada rakyat dan negara ini. Usahkan hendak membina kejayaan yang baru… yang sudah berjaya pun hendak dirosakan. — aspanaliasnet.blogspot.com

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 23 February 2012, 10:46 pm and is filed under
Felda
,
Good Governance
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Lim should have said PAS never killed a Mongolian

YOURSAY Malaysiakini

Feb 23, 2012

YOURSAY ‘By right, it’s Umno which should be upset over Guan Eng’s remark. But then again, MCA as always is doing Umno’s dirty job.’

Police report on Penang CM’s alleged racist remark

Boiling Mud:
 Selangor MCA’s public and services complaints bureau deputy chief Alan Liew said the Chinese community did not understand the true meaning of Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng’s remark and was worried that the latter was playing on racial issue.

Liew, please do not play up racial discord when there was none to begin with regarding the said remark. And most importantly, kindly refrain from citing the Chinese community for whatever political agenda you may have.

Given the shift in the political landscape, I certainly doubt the Chinese community considers MCA as their representative. Can’t the MCA leaders get this simple fact right?

Changeagent:
Perhaps, Lim Guan Eng should have said that ‘PAS never killed a Chinese, Indian or Malay’ instead. This way, the MCA leaders cannot misconstrue his statement as being racist.

Cala:
 If my memory serves me right, I think Lim Guan Eng was making a reference to MCA chief Dr Chua Soi Lek’s remark made earlier, when the latter was quizzing DAP for being submissive to PAS despite the threat of hudud law purportedly could be implemented under Pakatan Rakyat rule.

Lim was trying to allay the fear by saying (I guess) there has been no evidence that any Chinese has been killed by the Islamic party.

Anonymous123:
 Who said we don’t understand LGE’s statement? The statement was simple and there was no racial undertone at all.

Since CSL (Chua Soi Lek) tried to scare Chinese by stating PAS hudud law, LGE’s (Lim Guan Eng’s) statement implied ‘why the fear?’

Yeow:
 I think it is time everyone gave the MCA some recognition for their achievements and what they have done for Malaysians. So here is the roll call for the high achievers in MCA:

Tan Koon Swan
, former party president: In 1986, he was sentenced to two years’ jail by the Singapore High Court for criminal breach of trust relating to the collapse of Pan Electric Industries. Subsequently, he was jailed in Malaysia for a similar offence.

Ling Liong Sik
, former president and long-time minister: He has been charged with cheating and misleading the government in the Port Klang Free Zone (PKFZ) scandal.

Chan Kong Choy
, former deputy president and minister: He has charged with several counts of deceiving former PM Abdullah Badawi into approving deals linked to PKFZ.

Chua Soi Lek
, current president: He resigned as health minister in 2008 after being featured in a sex video with a woman who was not his wife.

Bozo:
 Come on, MCA. This is only a debate. Don’t take it so seriously. Do you really understand what LGE meant by that statement? Please grow up and contribute more to the Malaysian community than to attack DAP only.

LGE has done a great job and give him credit where it’s due. Don’t harbour any ill-feelings just because MCA was beaten badly in the last GE. It’s time for MCA to re-strategise and transform itself.

Jacky@1Malaysia:
 Use your head and try to understand what LGE meant in the context of CSL’s rhetorical challenge to DAP about working with PAS.

CSL said PAS will likely introduce hudud which punishes criminals by cutting of their limbs when LGE replied that PAS never killed a Chinese, as opposed to the death of TBH (Teoh Beng Hock) and customs officer Ahmad Sarbaini.

Annon77:
 These MCA leaders are a joke. More of this and you’ll be extinct like Gerakan. This is the microcosm of all that is wrong with the party:

1) You’ve just reinforced the perception that your party offers nothing. You went to a debate and couldn’t hack it so you made a police report on something that is totally not racist.

2) How brave – only when a Chinese makes a comment that you dare to report. Where were you when Perkasa was attacking the Chinese community?

3) This is a great showcase of our national education system. You fail to comprehend the context nor the meaning of the remark so you made a police report and in the process undermine yourself and your lame-duck party.

Why:
 I wonder why MCA not make police report against Perkasa when Ibrahim Ali asked all the Chinese to stay at home and stock on food during the Bersih rally. Is MCA working with Perkasa to oppress the Chinese?

ACR:
 It was quite perceptive of LGE to comment in the manner that he did bearing in mind the role Harun Idris, then Selangor MB and Umno Youth leader, played in the 1969 incident.

But the logic of Liew is puzzling – if PAS never killed a Chinese in its entire history, why should he worry that PAS will do something to the Chinese if they do not support PAS?

I think a police report against Liew for making a false report is in order.

Unspin:
 It is hard to decide who won the debate last Saturday because both speakers were good albeit out of context.

But given that a police report was made regarding a minor aberration (Allan Liew, try debating in front of 300 people and you would know how difficult it is to keep a logical mind), shows that those in MCA thought that Lim Guan Eng has clearly won the debate.

Pemerhati:
 Quote: “Liew said the Chinese community did not understand the true meaning of this remark and felt worried and afraid as Lim was playing on racial issue.”

I wonder what Liew would say if Lim Guan Eng had instead said that PAS never killed a Mongolian.

Not Convinced:
 By right, it’s Umno which should be upset over Guan Eng’s remark, not MCA.

But then again, MCA – in lodging the police report – as always is doing big brother Umno’s dirty job.

——————————————————————————–

The above is a selection of comments posted by Malaysiakini subscribers. Only paying subscribers can post comments. Over the past one year, Malaysiakinians have posted over 100,000 comments. Join the Malaysiakini community and help set the news agenda. Subscribe now.

————————————————————————————————-

Police report on Penang CM’s alleged racist remar
k

Lee Long Hui | Feb 22, 2012

Malaysiakini

The MCA today lodged a police report over a racist remark it alleged DAP secretary-general Lim Guan Eng made during the debate with MCA president Chua Soi Lek last Saturday.

Selangor MCA deputy head of public and services complaints bureau, Allan Liew Sin Kim (right), lodged a police report against the Penang chief minister at the Kajang police station, accompanied by five other complainants.

Liew says in the police report that Lim had uttered, “PAS never killed a Chinese” during the wrap-up session of the head-to-head debate which was telecast live.

Liew said the Chinese community did not understand the true meaning of this remark and felt worried and afraid as Lim was playing on a racial issue.

He therefore wants the police to investigate whether Lim had violated “any racial issue laws”.

More than 10 complaints within three days

Speaking to the press after lodging the report, Liew said he wanted the police to investigate whether Lim had incited racial sentiments through his remark.

Liew claimed that he had received more than 10 complaints from the Chinese community over the last three days, all against Lim’s remark.

“I don’t understand the meaning, but let us imagine, if the Chinese community doesn’t support PAS, what will happen?”

Liew asked Lim to apologise to all Malaysians and withdraw his remark before the police started the investigation.

“As the chief minister of Penang, Lim should not have come up with this ‘irresponsible and vulgar’ remark.

“Only a gangster or street fighter will come out such a vulgar remark,” Liew added.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 23 February 2012, 12:47 pm and is filed under
DAP
,
Lim Guan Eng
,
MCA
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Mahathir should not try to wriggle out of his responsibility to the nation to account for the MAS scandal reducing in less than a decade one of the continent’s top-fliers into the sick man of the airline industry

Former Prime Minister Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad should not try to wriggle out of his responsibility to the nation to account for the Malaysian Airline System (MAS) scandal, reducing in less than a decade one of the continent’s top-fliers into the sick man of the airline industry.

Mahathir was too fast off-the-mark when he dismissed Datuk Zaid Ibrahim’s call that he “write a book” on why MAS was privatised to Tan Sri Tajudin Ramli in 1994, claiming that he was not in charge of the loss-making national carrier.

Mahathir is trying to re-write the history of his 22 years as Prime Minister to make Malaysians believe that he was a very “blur blur” Prime Minister who did not know what was going on in the various Ministries under him – not only disclaiming responsibility for the worst judicial crisis in the nation’s history with the sacking of the Lord President, Tun Salleh Abas and two Supreme Court judges, Tan Sri Sulaiman Pawanteh and Datuk George Seah; the darkest period of human rights violations with the Internal Security Act mass arrests under Operation Lalang but also the series of financial scandals under his watch including the MAS debacle.

Mahathir has proven during the Royal Commission of Inquiry into the Lingam Video Tape scandal that he is a master of selective memory, but this does not qualify him to rewrite the history of his 22 years as Prime Minister, particularly episodes causing far-reaching bane to the healthy political, economic and social development of the country.

What is Mahathir’s credibility when he can totally disclaim responsibility for the major scandals under his premiership, or is the MAS scandal, which has destroyed an internationally-acclaimed airline causing the country tens of billion of ringgit of losses, another “heinous crime without criminals” like Mahathir’s first financial scandal in 1983 – the RM2.5 billion Bumiputra Malaysia Finance (BMF) scandal?

It is in the public domain that one-time high-flying tycoon Tan Sri Tajudin Ramli had claimed that former premier Mahathir had made him buy MAS to help bail out Bank Negara after the central bank suffered massive foreign exchange losses due partly to speculation in foreign currency markets.

Tajudin purchased a controlling stake of 29 percent in Malaysia Airlines in 1994 from Bank Negara, paying eight ringgit per share when the market price was around half that.

The purchase was disguised as a commercial deal as “it was essential for the public and the international investment community to perceive the entire transaction as a normal commercial arms length deal (which clearly it was not)”.

Tajudin said he was reluctant to buy the under-performing MAS, but Mahathir had told him he was performing “national service”.

Tajudin took out a RM1.8 billion loan to buy the airline but he signed an “Overriding Agreement” in which he could eventually sell the carrier back to the government, which would indemnify him against any losses suffered.

Tajudin said he had been told to keep mum on the deal, and that he was not allowed to manage the airline according to normal commercial practices, but had to consult the government.

In 2000, the government bought back the loss-making airline in a mega bailout after Tajudin’s loans became non-performing and were taken over by then-national asset management agency Danaharta.

The government paid eight ringgit per share, more than twice its market value, in the purchase.

A bare denial by Mahathir about such a secret deal between him when he was Prime Minister and Tajudin on the MAS deal lacks credibility whatsoever and he should not try to wriggle out of his responsibility to the country to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth about the sorry MAS scandal.

Is it because of this secret deal between Mahathir and Tajuddin in the nineties indemnifying the latter for any losses in the MAS deal that explains the lack of transparency in the recent settlement in court between Tajudin and government-linked corporations (GLCs), casting a dark shadow on the Najib’s premiership on accountability, good governance and integrity and sure to cause a further plunge in the country’s Transparency Interntional Corruption Perception Index next year?

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 23 February 2012, 5:22 pm and is filed under
Financial Scandals
,
Mahathir
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.