Liow, it’s all your own doing

Malaysiakini Your Say
 | Jul 17, 11

‘You lied with a straight face. Put simply, you shot yourself in the foot. Your lie has blown right back in your own face.’

Liow: Someone out there trying to get me

DannyLoHH:
 In his first public statement, the health minister used words like irresponsible, serious allegation with the aim to tarnish the name of Malaysia, if it didn’t happen means it didn’t happen, and it’s the truth to describe the non-occurring of police shooting water canon and tear-gas canister into Tung Shin Hospital compound.

The video is widely circulated online, which clearly shows that the attitude of Liow Tiong Lai is defensive of the police and dismissive of enquiries regarding mounting video and photographic evidence. In short, he has shot his own foot on TV.

There is nobody out there trying to get him, he had dug the hole himself. It would show more character if he owed up and apologise than continue with this charade of trying to spin his way out of the mess he put himself in.

Dark Archon
: Who’s is out to make you step down, Mr Minister? How could they? But wait! Remembering your statement immediately this issue surfaced, you tried to play down the police brutality issue based solely on the hospital board’s information and brush aside mounting evidence, both from pictures and videos caught during the rally.

To the netizens, you lied with a straight face. In simple word, you shot yourself in the foot. Your lie has blown right back in your own face.

Should you step down? Well, if you have any dignity left in you, you should. But then again, you’ve probably learned from the best liar; the PM for lying to the Bersih organisers prior to the rally about the stadium venue. Because of that, you’ll probably still squirm your way around this mess you created in the first place.

Anonymous_4182:
 Why did you have to lie in the first place? Who were you trying to protect? Who were you trying to please? Why were you so loud and angry and clear as if you were telling the truth during interview?

Are these people coming to your rescue? No minister, you actually wanted the lie, hoping that the matter will end for your own selfish benefit. You brought this on yourself.

Anonymous11:
 Your real enemy is your arrogant attitude and mannerism, thinking too highly of yourself despite of your obvious lacking in capability.

Didn’t your parents and teachers teach you to be humble and that you should always respect others regardless of who they are, wherever and whenever you are? Didn’t they teach you to be quick to listen but slow to speak?

Lim Chong Leong:
 Quite clearly ‘Brutus’ Liow in his eagerness to please his Umno masters, dug the hole himself and jumped in.

But his statement here is also clearly indicative that in his short political career, he by being Brutus (and that also his own doing), has made many enemies within and outside MCA that he is now afraid of his own shadow. I have neither respect nor sympathy for this traitor.

Swipenter:
 Liow Tiong Lai, you bring this revulsion by the public unto yourself:

1) You defended the indefensible actions of the police firing tear gas and chemical-laced water into the grounds of TSH (Tung Shin Hospital).

2) You dragged the management of TSH in your defence of the police. What you did was nothing but bring shame to yourself, TSH and the noble aims of the founding fathers of the hospital.

TSH maybe be a private hospital but many, if not all, of their doctors still provide minimal costs medical care to poor patients on their own time.

AnesthMO:
 Under pressure, politicians show their true colours – no decency, no integrity, no empathy.

Quigonbond:
 We should not expect less from a BN politician to be able to cook up conspiracy theories with little credibility. No one is trying to boot out Liow except himself.

Had he not done himself the favour of appearing ignorant, lacking objectivity or professionalism, to come out so quickly to defend the police and only later backtracked to say he’s just relaying what he’s been told, no one would have gone after his neck.

It’s his own doing, and he shouldn’t blame anyone for it.

Onyourtoes: You are a cabinet minister, you have cabinet meetings, can you not ask the home minister to come up with a statement unequivocally stating whether or not the police has shot tear gas and chemically-laced water into Tung Shin hospital’s compound (and not building or premises)?

The police are under the home minister, surely the police knew whether or not they have done the wrong thing. We are not trying to spin anything. It is you who are trying to deflect the hot potatoes that now land on your lap.

It does not matter some have leveleld false accusations on you. Just answer the issue at hand. No one is interested in your post, except maybe your president, who is itching to get back on the gravy train.

Cala:
 The fact that Liow Tiong Lai has to clarify repeatedly about the true meanings of his July 12 statement made at Tung Shin Hospital points to a gap of his own perception about the police action at the rally and the reality.

What is there to interpret when a picture says a thousand words? Typical of a foot-soldier under the Umno-led BN regime, Liow loves to draw his own conclusion about things that happened around us independent of logic and facts.

After five decades of fattening themselves in one way or another, none of them seems capable of engaging in a simple discourse.

(Remember how Chua Soi Lek belittled at the numbers of Bersih 2.0 participants? Sure, FRU/police will shower MCA marchers with “love” and “flowers” upon meeting them on the streets.)

In sum, Liow and gang can only indulge in incoherent uttering that make fools of themselves.

Jimmy Ng:
 Liow Tiong Liar.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 18 July 2011, 11:56 am and is filed under
Bersih
,
Health
,
Human Rights
,
Police
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Malaysia in the Era of Globalization #74

By
M. Bakri Musa

Chapter 9: Islam in Malay Life

Reform in Islam

Islam is fortunate in that right from the very beginning it has a tradition of revival and reform. A tradition of the prophet has it that Allah will send every so often unto each ummah those who will renew the faith. Implicit in this hadith is the recognition of a community’s dynamism. The great Muslim reformists of the 19th and early 20th Centuries were handicapped because their native lands were under Western colonization. Many were necessarily consumed with the battle to free themselves from colonialism and by association, Western influences.

            They understandably regarded the West as an enemy of Islam. Nonetheless despite such burdens, reformists like Muhammad Abduh of Egypt and Pakistan’s Muhammad Iqbal were able to forge a new understanding and insight into Islam. While many reformists of his time were consumed with the futile effort of trying to bring Islam back to its glorious past, Iqbal was forward looking. He rightly distinguished between the eternal and immutable principles of the Quran on the one hand, and those laws, regulations, and practices that were the products of human interpretation.

            While he rightly acknowledged the great contributions of earlier scholars and ulama, Iqbal reemphasized the necessity for present-day Muslims to use their God-given akal (intellect) to forge new meanings and interpretations to serve modern society. He was rightly contemptuous of the fiction of the “closing of the gate of ijtihad” (rational discourse)” of the 11th Century, and with it the arrogant presumption that everything had been decided and that no fresh insight or thinking was warranted. All that was needed was for the faithful to follow what had been established. That particular hubris resulted in the subsequent stagnation of Islam.

            Like many contemporary reformists, Iqbal believed that Muslims must once again emulate our earlier brethrens and reassert our right to ijtihad, that is, to reinterpret and reapply Islam to changing social conditions. More significantly, this right belongs to all Muslims and not just the ulama. He felt strongly that the views of individual members of the ummah must be heard and that the mechanism for this can be achieved through a variety of mechanisms. To him, modern participatory democracy is indeed an idealized form of the Muslim concept of mesyuarah (consultation). This is his take on the Westminster model of democracy: “It is…the spirit of the British Empire that makes it the greatest Muhamadan Empire of the World.”

            Iqbal was the product of the great universities of the West (Cambridge and Munich) and the beneficiary of the finest tradition of liberal education. Having seen the best of the West – its dynamism, unrivalled intellectual fervors, and powerful technology – he was not nearly so dismissive of Western achievements. Iqbal was very unlike those ulama who had never ventured beyond their villages and whose intellectual horizons rarely extended beyond the worn-out pages of ancient religious texts. Although Iqbal was very much aware of the excesses and weaknesses of the Western tradition as exemplified by its legacy of colonialism, exploitative capitalism, and rampant secularism, nonetheless he viewed such central Western values as the equality of man, and the rights and dignity of the individual as very much the ideals of Islam also.

            While traditional ulama may contemptuously dismiss Iqbal because of his Western training, they cannot easily reject Muhammad Abduh. He was after all, one of them, having served as the Grand Mufti of Egypt. He rejected the orthodox notion that constrained Muslims to a literal reading of the Qur’an and sunnah. Clearly he felt that Muslims were mistaken in rejecting the ideas of the West simply because they originated with non-Muslims.

            Later 20th Century reformists carry on the Iqbalian tradition. Unlike Iqbal, they were not burdened by having to live under colonial rule or foreign domination. Indeed many benefited from the West in terms of their education and freedom. I will mention two in particular. One is Sudanese Mahmoud Taha. He excelled under the British as an engineering student at the rigorous Gordon College (the precursor of the University of Khartoum) and had a thriving private practice before turning to politics, occasioned by the turn to extreme fundamentalism of the Sudanese military government. He feared that the government’s headlong rush to implement Shari’a would severely disadvantage and disenfranchise the significant Christian population. Unchecked this would only lead to a destructive civil war.

            His observation was particularly prescient. He was not against Shari’a, rather the form in which it was to be implemented. There were too many provisions that were simply inconsistent with modern and widely accepted concepts of justice and simple fairness. He founded the Republican Brotherhood, a movement whose objective was to reform the Shari’a to meet the demands of a modern pluralistic populace. Sadly the military rulers interpreted that to be apostasy, a capital crime under Shari’a. Taha was executed in January 1985.

            In a turn of events that could only be interpreted as divine intervention (or perhaps simple justice), those same military leaders were later killed in yet another military coup. The Sudanese Supreme Court in reviewing the appeal brought by Taha’s daughter, reversed the earlier decision and excoriated those who participated in the sham trial. It was of course too late for Taha.

            Mahmoud Taha’s enlightened views are now widely accepted by the Sudanese and others. Equally significant, his many disciples, in particular Abdullahi An-Na’im, are carrying forward his torch. Na’im is uniquely positioned to spread that message from his vantage point as a professor at a leading American university. With the vast resources afforded by Emory University, An-Naim is able to effectively propagate Taha’s ideas to the wider world. An-Naim’s translation of Taha’s seminal work, The Second Message of Islam, and An-Naim’s own tome, Toward an Islamic Reformation, represent some of the most original and enlightened interpretations of Islam and the Shari’a.

            Taha’s basic thesis is that we should, like earlier Muslims, go back to the Qur’an and divine its immutable and eternal theme, and then reformulate a new set of laws to meet the needs of contemporary societies. Just as the ancient Muslims were able to reconcile the apparent inconsistencies and contradictions in the interpretations of the various passages of the Qur’an and successfully formulated a remarkable set of laws, so too should modern Muslims do likewise. While ancient Muslims out of necessity emphasized the later passages of the Qur’an that was revealed to the prophet while he was attempting to build the first viable Muslim community at Medinah, present-day Muslims having successfully established our community, must now go back to the Qur’an and ponder its earlier messages, the Meccan verses, that address the idealistic and universal values of Islam.

            Early Muslims introduced the concept of naskh (abrogation), to justify their emphasizing certain Qur’anic passages over others. Volumes have been written on this topic, with some denying entirely the very concept. Nonetheless the reality remains; that is, the Shari’a relies on certain passages of the Qur’an while de-emphasizing or simply ignoring others. Thus it justifies capital punishment for apostasy by referring to the Medina verses while ignoring the Meccan passages that encourage Muslims to lead a life of peaceful coexistence with non-believers, and that there be no compulsion in religion.

            As Muslims accept the Quran to be infallible and consistent, perceived differences must therefore be just that – a matter of perception. Thus instead of analyzing to death particular Quranic verses to support one’s viewpoints – the atomistic approach – present-day Muslims should instead emphasize the totality of the message. In the words of the late Fazlur Rahman of the University of Chicago, we should deduce from the particularities of the Qur’an its underlying unifying principles, and then apply those same principles to specific present-day situations. Obviously modern society differs from those of the prophet’s time, but the moral principles and imperatives remain the same.

Next:   Confusing Examples For Principles

                This entry was posted on Monday, 18 July 2011, 1:58 pm and is filed under
Bakri Musa
,
globalisation
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Not exactly a chip off the old block

Malaysiakini Your Say
 | Jul 17, 11

‘Whichever way we look at it, we should be happy that there are people like Marina. The PM should take note of her comments.’

Marina ticks off gov’t in its handling of Bersih

David Dass:
 Marina Mahathir is an extraordinary person. Strongly principled and steadfast. It says something about her father, Dr Mahathir Mohamad. Like him or not, agree with him or not, it is clear that freedom of expression is something that is allowed within the Mahathir family.

Whichever way we look at it, we should be happy that there are people like Marina emerging from within the country. The PM should take note of her comments. Many support the sentiments expressed by Marina.

S Ambiga is perceived to have done something good. She is not perceived in racial terms. Bersih is not perceived to be a non-Malay, Christian-funded and communist-inspired organisation.

Imprisoning Dr D Jeyakumar is really madness. He is no communist. He is no extremist. He is no threat to the security of the nation. He is a compassionate doctor, a specialist who has dedicated his life to the welfare of the people.

He has embraced socialist principles, and like PAS and Umno, is pursuing the welfare state. He should be commended, not remanded.

Stories:
 Marina, you should really lay the blame squarely where it belongs – your father’s feet. If not for his manipulation of the executive, judiciary and all the levers of power, we would not be in this position today. Isn’t PM Najib Razak one of his proteges?

This smacks of hypocrisy. I agree with your sentiments on July 9, but you are unfortunately tainted and thus not credible. You need to prove yourself more. This isn’t quite enough, I’m afraid.

Anonymous_3dba: We can’t put the blame on Marina. She did not choose to be Mahathir’s daughter. The fact she stood up and speak her mind is a good indication of a right-minded person.

To me, she is another force to be reckon and should be recognised. Hats up to you, Marina.

Quigonbond:
 I like how Marina puts it – we respect each other’s views and that’s it. If only Mahathir would have been kinder to others before throwing them into Kamunting or retiring them from politics on false accusations.

One treatment for family and friends, another for the rest.

Anonymous_3ee5: Marina, how about speaking up on behalf of the detainees during the 1987 Operasi Lalang crackdown, Hindraf and the fight for a clean judiciary?

Survivor:
 Whether Marina speaks to her father is none of our business. Both are adults and have their own views and inclinations.

If we have to despise Mahathir but love Marina, because one has a different viewpoint or done something we may not like, and the other may have views that are in syn with you, then to me, that is democracy.

Let’s respect each other. Personally, I may have great reservation on Mahathir for his support for Perkasa, I do not have bad things to say about Marina. But for Mukhriz, I sigh.

Rayfire:
 Marina, a big thank you from the Bersih generation. You are a true leader and we respect you for your stand on Bersih. God bless you.

Black Mamba:
 Marina must know the ills that are with Najib’s administration today were the creation of her father. She can’t forgive the sins of her father nor can the people forget his evil actions while he was PM.

By getting rid of Najib does not make her brother, Mukhriz, any more qualified for the deputy prime minister’s post.

KJ John:
 My highest respect for Marina in her ability and posturing of “agreeing to disagree with her father in an agreeable way.”

That is the mark of a solid and three generational family culture and it augurs well as a role model for other ‘3G’ families. I too totally disagree with my dad over many issues and yet we remain good friends.

Sarajun Hoda:
 Personally, I have nothing against the government, although sick of their acrid excesses as if they own this country – beg for power, steal from the coffers and yet expect the very people who put them into power to be grateful to them.

Too much power has concentrated at the top, made them so very arrogant, haughty, self-aggrandising and the selected few up there failing the nation’s trust very miserably.

It really does not look like BN will continue to be in power after the next GE. I predict they will lose 10 states and Putrajaya.

I have always reminded the government, if it falls, it will entirely be the blunders of the police which have too much power and can continue on with impunity and attorney-general Abdul Gani Patail’s handling of investigations and his selective prosecution. BN, whatever comes in future is your own doing. Please do not blame others.

It is time BN is reminded to feel grateful to the people for keeping them so long in power. Say thanks, Najib.

Wira:
 If you ask a thief whether he would support the presence of a vigilante corps, what do you think the answer would be?

I believe Putrajaya responded reflexively to Bersih. When they started to think, it was probably already too late.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 18 July 2011, 12:03 pm and is filed under
Bersih
,
Najib Razak
,
Police
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Pak Samad: Umno playing race card on Bersih 2.0

By
Nigel Aw

Jul 18, 11 | MalaysiaKini

Umno, the commanding political party in the BN, is using the threat of Malays losing their political power to shore up its support base in countering the electoral reform demanded by Bersih 2.0, says national laureate A Samad Said.

Any implementation of the eight demands by Bersih 2.0, which includes postal voting reform, a major source of votes for the ruling coalition, is expected to erode its stranglehold on power.

“This (racial politics) is often raised by Umno. Most recently (with Bersih 2.0), there were also suggestions that Malay (political) power was being eroded,” Samad said.

“All the prime ministers and deputies have been Malay, all the menteri besar are Malays except for Penang; Even among the MPs, many are Malays, so what is the excuse?

“This shows political power is in Malay hands, but yet the Malays are screaming of being threatened… it means the Malay leadership is at fault,” Samad added.

On June 26, Umno-owned Malay daily Utusan Malaysia published an article attacking Bersih 2.0 chief Ambiga Sreenevasan, claiming she had a track record of angering Muslims and Malays.

A day before that, 30 Parti Sosialis Malaysia (PSM) members were arrested in Penang allegedly for ‘waging war against the Agong’, a symbol of Malay power.

In the fourth and final part of an exclusive interview with Malayskini, this leading figure in the world of Malay literature shares his views on racial politics.

‘Umno has some reflection to do’

The 76-year-old poet and novelist said it was time Umno took responsibility and stopped blaming others for its failure.

“When they are pressed, they use racial politics and the Emergency Ordinance (EO) for convenience, which is unhealthy.

“The Malay leadership has to take responsibility for the ills in the Malay community. They are the cause of these ills.

“It’s been (more than) 50 years (since independence), if they cannot galvanise (the Malay community), then they should reflect, not use racial politics to strengthen their position,” Samad said.

Despite the attacks against Bersih 2.0, he believes that the best in Malaysian unity was seen on July 9.

“During the demonstration, there were Indians, Chinese, and Malays – you don’t feel nervous standing by them, all of them wanted to membersihkan (clean) our democracy.

“It’s something good, it’s a very good start,” he added.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 18 July 2011, 5:27 pm and is filed under
Bersih
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


PAS: MCA, Gerakan approved nightspot ban in 1997

The Malaysian Insider
 | July 18, 2011

KUALA LUMPUR, July 18 — PAS today called MCA and Gerakan hypocrites for criticising the Kedah ban on entertainment outlets, pointing out that the two parties had approved the law when it was passed during the rule of the Barisan Nasional (BN) in the state.

“It was this group that supported the enactment in 1997 when it was debated before,” PAS information chief Datuk Tuan Ibrahim Tuan Man said in a statement carried on PAS website Harakah Daily this morning. “Suddenly, they want to become heroes supposedly because they want to protect the rights of the non-Muslims.”

Tuan Ibrahim, who is PAS Pahang commissioner, also countered accusations that the state’s decision yesterday to revoke the ban was due to the Islamist party’s subservience to DAP and dared all BN-controlled states to impose the same restrictions.

Instead, Tuan Ibrahim said it was a smart move because operators had now agreed to help the state government ensure that Muslims would not patronise their outlets and were prepared to be reprimanded if they violated the enactment.

“This is a new chapter because the Kedah government, under PAS’s leadership, has successfully enforced an enactment that benefits the Muslims in the state, something which Umno never achieved despite its long rule,” he said.

Tuan Ibrahim also claimed that Kedah Muslims knew of BN’s failure in this respect, saying the federal ruling pact had never made any effort to create a conducive environment in the state for the Ramadan month.

“Do not, in their eagerness to attack PAS in this issue, forget that the Muslims know they have done nothing,” he said.

“Now, Muslims are waiting for when Umno, which has always claimed to be the true patriots of Islam, would enforce this same restriction on the states they rule.”

Kedah Mentri Besar Datuk Seri Azizan Abdul Razak announced recently that the state would enforce the Entertainment and Entertainment Outlet Enactment 1997, which bans entertainment outlets from operating during the Muslim fasting month.

The announcement drew flak from PAS’s non-Muslim partner DAP in the Pakatan Rakyat (PR), with numerous leaders urging the state government to revoke the ban.

MCA also repeated previous claims that PAS would never abandon its Islamic state agenda and a PAS-DAP relationship would only erode the rights of non-Muslims.

PAS’s national leadership stepped in and following a meeting, announced yesterday that the ban would be revoked and operational guidelines would be set.

According to PAS president Datuk Seri Abdul Hadi Awang, the Kedah government was merely enforcing a law enacted by the BN government and the matter had been spun out of context in the media.

He said that only non-Muslims would be allowed to patronise the outlets.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 18 July 2011, 1:46 pm and is filed under
Gerakan
,
MCA
,
PAS
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


5,000 private doctors call for Jeyakumar’s release

Malaysiakini
 | Jul 19, 11

The Federation of Private Medical Practitioners’ Associations, which represents some 5,000 private doctors nationwide, has joined hands with others in the medical profession in calling for the release of Sungai Siput MP Dr D Jeyakumar.

“We are extremely concerned at the continued detention of our colleague, Dr Jeyakumar Devaraj, whom we all recognise and acknowledge as a law-abiding, competent, kind and diligent doctor.

“His public service record is exemplary and, to the very best of our knowledge, he is certainly not a threat to our society,” the federation said in a media statement today.

It quoted Jeyakumar’s long tenure in government service and charitable work as “selflessly serving the rakyat”, reminding that the good doctor was well known for his capacity for charity and kindness for all under his care, regardless of ethnicity and religion.

“We, appeal to have the detention order against Dr Michael Jeyakumar lifted,” said the statement, which also appealed for the release of the other Parti Sosialis Malaysia members who are being detained under similar circumstances.

Jeyakumar and five other PSM members are currently being held under the Emergency Ordinance for alleged involvement in planning the outlawed Bersih 2.0 rally for electoral reforms.

Prior to this, 176 medical practitioners have issued similar calls for his release.

[More to follow]

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 19 July 2011, 5:18 pm and is filed under
Bersih
,
Health
,
Human Rights
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


DAYAK AWAKENING: Accomplishing Big Dreams Together.

by
Duwen Babat

(Preparerd for “Is it time for a Dayak Reawakening” forum in KL on 18.7.11)

1. Introduction.

1.1 This opinion of mine is to briefly address specific subjects that could give significant impact to the rural population especially the Dayak community in Sarawak. Thus, issues pertaining to urban areas and matters of national implication are not discussed in this paper.

1.2 I must acknowledge that there are many good developments that have been and being carried out and suggested by various parties such as financial support to the elderly and single mothers, treated water, electricity, tarred roads and bridges. As such, I would not dwell on this topic as I support it completely, and of the opinion that such programs are basic necessities that the government is obligated to provide to its citizens.

1.3 The rural electorates continue to play a very vital role in deciding the outcome of the parliamentary and state election in Malaysia. However, despite their importance the Dayak rural populations continue to be marginalized and remained among the poorest since the formation of Malaysia on 16 September 1963.

2. Big Dreams.

2.1 Let’s start by asking ourselves with this question – Do we have a vision for the Dayak community? Vision is about big dreams. We could not dismiss on the importance of a vision. A vision provides a leader with a clear direction (Tampai ti terang mai bansa datai nuju adan). Leadership without a clear vision becomes self-focused and purposeless. Vision inspires greatness and unites a strong team. Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. delivered a speech on “I Have A Dream” that inspired the Black American greatly resulting in the enactment of Voting Rights Act, 1965 and equal opportunity for all Americans. UMNO’s agenda is on “Ketuanan Melayu” and DAP pursues “Malaysia For Malaysians”.

2.2 Since the split of SNAP into various parties (PBDS, SPDP, PRS), the Dayak politicians have become disarrayed. This is reflected by the birth of several parties such as PBDS, SPDP and PRS whereby the position in the party supersedes the interest of the Dayak community. At the same time, the Dayak in PBB maintained exclusive position for themselves. The Dayak, either in PBB or PRS or SPDP subjected themselves to the agenda of BN which is dictated by UMNO. The rewards for their loyalty in BN have resulted in complacency, self-focused and placed rural Dayak in a disadvantage position. The Dayak in SUPP remains purposeless to their community as the agenda of the party is primarily to champion the cause of the Chinese community. The perseverance of some SNAP leaders must be commended for their fighting spirit to keep the party alive for the Sarawakians although the party continues to fail in their attempt to be represented in the state DUN. Thus, the Dayak need to be reawakened with new hope and vision in order to preserve its identity, remain relevant and important in Sarawak and Malaysia and progress in line with the global environment.

2.3 My topic on the Dayak awakening is on accomplishing big dreams together. Let’s acknowledged the fact that no single party or race could rule Sarawak. Sarawak is very diverse in term of race and religion. Partnership among the various parties or races will be the roadmap towards a developed and peaceful Sarawak. God created diversity, and He has expressed that His kingdom belongs to all races by anointing prophets for the Jews and the Gentiles. Partnership is propagated by God (Ecclesiastes 4:9). Any attempt to propagate racial dominance is against the will of God and will not last forever as reflected by the abolishment of slavery in the U.S.A and the defeat of apartheid in South Africa.

2.4 The successes of BN for the past many years were attributed to the partnership of the various parties of various races. This is an important lesson for the Dayak. The Dayak must face the reality that very soon Dayak will not be a majority race in Sarawak as the government’s aggressive push for mega plantations and the SCORE would attract foreign labors who could be Malaysianised by a stroke of a pen. Further, the Dayak must realize that the ruling government is decided by voters in the democratic election process. However, despite being the majority race for now, the Dayak ranked second after the Chinese in term of the number of voters.

2.5 Therefore, I would think that a vibrant vision that recognized the need for partnership with other races in the state is appropriate. With this in mind, I would think that the Dayak should champion “Equal Rights And Opportunity For Rural Sarawak (EUROS)”, thereby eradicating poverty by year 2020. Considering that the gap between the poor and the rich is very wide; the development in rural areas are still lacking; job opportunities in the government is biased towards one race; the beneficiary of natural resources is in the urban centers and in the hands of some individuals only; and the 18 Points Agreement on the formation of Malaysia is ignored, such vision would be apt. This vision is not new. There are many activists championing this issue currently and their efforts could be made more powerful through partnership with a stronger organization. As John C. Maxwell, the author of several best sellers on leadership, writes, “Nothing of significance was ever achieved by an individual acting alone.” Further, EUROS is an issue that is expected to be relevant in Sarawak for the next many years.

3. How do we achieve EUROS?

I will focus my discussion in three areas, namely, politic, commerce, education and employment. Some of the notions are as follow.

3.1 Partnership In Politic.

3.1.1 The majority poor are the Dayak (Iban, Bidayuh, Orang Ulu, and others) and they reside mostly in the rural areas. Generally, the Dayak are very patriotic of their identity although such patriotism in the last few elections could be overcome by cash rewards and promises for developments. Cash rewards flourishes during election time due to many factors that include poverty, less inform on the issues, weak political structure, etc. Also, it could speculated that the break-up of Dayak dominated parties were due to the influence of money politics. As such, it is a tremendous hurdle for the Dayak to lead in politic without partnering with other political parties or races due to financial constraints.

3.1.2 PBB which is an alliance of Parti Bumiputra and PESAKA will no doubt continue to dominate within the BN. It is envisaged that in any new seat delineation, PBB is likely to demand for at least a simple majority (51%) in the state BN so as to continue its dominance and lead the political agenda in Sarawak. The BN formula in seat allocation has resulted in other parties such as PRS, SPDP and SUPP merely as minor partners in the BN. Such practice will likely sideline PRS and SPDP in the future.

3.1.3 The Dayak leaders in the PBB are expected to be firmly loyal to the PBB and may block any attempt by the Dayak from other political parties to join them in order to protect their position. We have seen this happened when some former PBDS members were rejected from joining PBB. Meanwhile, the Dayak leaders in PRS, SPDP and SUPP will continue to be the vehicles for delivering MRP projects instead of being the movers and shakers in policy making and rendering major developments to the rural community.

3.1.4 DAP strength is mainly in the urban areas and biased towards the Chinese. DAP will continue to be relevant as long as there are issues such as corruption, inequality among the races, suppression by the authorities, etc. However, DAP must not underestimate SUPP’s ability to change and regain its position in the state politic. After all, SUPP possesses the resources at its disposal.

3.1.5 In view of the current situation whereby the Chinese is mainly represented through DAP and outside the BN umbrella, the Dayak may want to consider partnership with the DAP to champion the EUROS. It would be better for the rural community to be strongly represented in both side of the political divide as it provides a check and balance in the government. As we have seen, more meaningful developments have been carried out in the rural areas since the political tsunami in 2008. These developments were expedited as a result of PR politicians who were harping on the issues on behalf of the rakyat. This is an evident that a strong Dayak representation in both sides of the political divide will benefit the Dayak community at large.

3.1.6 The formulas for partnership for the consideration of all parties are as follow.

– DAP continues to maintain its brand name as the party has strong heritage and proven itself to be credible in representing the rakyat.

– A platform for the Dayak would be to use existing local party such as SNAP or STAR or PRS or SPDP.

– The DAP and the Dayak through the chosen local party should merge by forming an alliance ala PBB style. For the purpose of this paper, I would name the alliance as Sarawak Dayak & DAP Alliance. Its acronym name shall be “SADA” (In Iban, SADA means voice of the people). It will be seen as a local party and entrusted a lead role in the partnership. This is so as the preference of the Dayak for local party is still very strong. However, it is necessary that the chosen party needed to be transformed with leaders who subscribe to the partnership and its vision.

– Another option for the DAP is to disregard an alliance with existing local party; instead, establish a partnership from the onset with new Dayak leaders and rebrand itself as SADA.

3.1.7 Some ideas for the success of the partnership would be as follow.

3.1.7.1 SADA should be based on respect and equal footing. It should not be modeled like the PBB whereby the Dayak is limited to occupy the number two position. Also, it should not replicate the SUPP style whereby the Dayak are used to make up for the numbers in the party.

3.1.7.2 Provide representation for the Dayak in the DAP national high decision making body through appointment during the initial period. A truly democratic election process for the top leadership in the DAP will sideline the Dayak from being represented. This was demonstrated in the PKR national leadership election in 2010 whereby non of the Sarawak PKR leaders were elected to the top party position through the election process. This is so because the majority of the electors will continue to be from Malaya (Malaya is an Iban word for Peninsular Malaysia).

3.1.7.3 Provide opportunity for the Dayak leaders to be election candidates in the urban areas to provide opportunities and ensure sincerity in the partnership. Likewise, the Chinese should be allowed to contest in the Dayak majority areas. It is proven by the BN that Chinese candidates are acceptable by the rural Dayak community.

3.1.7.4 Some Dayak still harbor with the idea that the chief minister position of Sarawak is their traditional rights by virtue of being the majority race. While I do not disagree with such idea, we must also review its relevance to the current and future situation. I believe it is more important for the Dayak to gain its equal rights and opportunity and strengthen their identity in line with the progress of Malaysia rather than being obsess with the chief minister position per se. As I have said in item 2.4, Dayak population will soon be relegated to second or third position and this will invalidate such claim that the chief minister position belong to the majority race. Further, Dayak insistence on the chief minister position could lead to intense politicking for the position that could result in self-centeredness and ignore the interest of the Dayak community. Dayak’s continuous claim on the chief minister position has undoubtly attracted political opponents to divide and rule the community.

3.1.7.5 Communicate the agenda of SADA via party channel in the rural areas. I would think that one of the main reasons for the defeat of PKR party in the rural areas in the recent 10th state election on 16 April 2011 was due to weak party machineries. An immediate step to establish SADA branches and recruit membership must be initiated. Lack of or without clear communication on the agenda of SADA will paralyze the partnership.

3.1.7.6 The integrity and character of the leaders selected as candidates for the election will make a difference for the rural voters. A candidate who loves people and generous would win their heart. Dayak values personal relationship, thus an arrogant personality would not fit well to the community. Someone with proven track record in championing the cause of the community would be ideal.

3.1.7.7 Restore the 18 Points Agreement on the formation of Malaysia. The position of Sarawak as equal partner in Malaysia, the rights for religious freedom, the rights of indigenous races, immigration, and others must be respected by all Malaysians.

3.1.7.8 Ubah (Change). We could expect the call for change will be bolder by certain segment of the society. Local and global events also provide us with wisdom that “ubah” attract enemies as well. Many “Tuai Rumah or Pengulu” in the recent 10th state election on 16 April 2011 became so fearful of losing their position that they have to work very hard and loyal to the BN. The BN successfully planted fear in them with examples in Perak whereby the headmen were removed by the PR government. To change is a risk to the headmen. Thus, SADA must assure the “Tuai Rumah or Pengulu” that their position is protected and they are partners in the government.

3.1.7.9 Partnership with the Dayak in Malaya. There are thousands of Dayak in Malaya especially in the Klang Valley, Johore, Kemaman and Penang. They are a good avenue to plant the seed for change in Sarawak due to their exposure on the political development in Malaya and global issues. They could be a very effective channel to influence their parents, relatives and friends in Sarawak. However, both BN and PR are not looking at this opportunity seriously now. DAP may wish to consider a full-time appointment for the Dayak in Selangor or Penang state government. The appointee(s) shall be responsible for the affairs of the Dayak in Malaya. Such appointment will be seen as recognition to the Dayak community and would go a long way.

3.1 Partnership In Commerce.

The key to change the political landscape in the rural areas is to uplift the living standard of the dwellers. Rural area in Sarawak is huge and provides both opportunities and challenges as well. Opportunities to uplift the income of rural Dayak are as follow.

3.1.1 Recognize clearly and boldly that the NCR land belongs to the landowners. The rural dwellers depend on the land, river and jungle produce for their livelihoods. Endorsing the NCR land is recognizing their rights and respect for their livelihoods.

3.1.2 Establish Dayak owned corporations to participate in the NCR land development. The biggest owner of the NCR land is the Dayak, and yet there is no support by the government to establish Dayak owned corporate entities. There are opportunities for oil palm and sugar cane plantations and mills, large scale agro farming, etc. Large scale plantations are owned and controlled by the government agencies or big corporate players sidelining the less fortunate land owners. The Dayak need the opportunities and financial support to get started, that’s all.

3.1.3 It is a known fact that the NCR land owners reap better benefits from small holdings, yet such opportunity is not promoted by the government. SADA must put this as a top priority in order to raise the income level of the rural Dayak. SADA must commit to provide assistance for small holding in the form of education on commercialization and planting, subsiding seedling and fertilizers, etc.

3.1.4 Establish wholesaling networks to benefit the small retails in the rural areas. Based on my some 20 years experience in the FMCG industry, I could see the challenges facing small retail in the rural areas. Their key challenge is being cut off from the supply chain. Many of the retailers are not serviced or neglected by the wholesalers/distributors due to some shortcomings in the supply chain resulting in small margin and stagnation in their business. With the robust development in plantation (oil palm & rubber), the income of the rural settlers will definitely be higher thereby providing opportunity for better retail business in the village. A small retail shop in a long house with 200 dwellers could give a monthly profit of some RM400 to RM1,000 a month depending on location, product offerings, etc. A micro credit loan to the shop keepers could be channeled in the form of supplies (not cash) via the distributor in order to avoid mismanagement of the funds. This initiative will help to curb the rising cost in the rural areas too. (Although my experience in distribution has been primarily in Malaya, I would be prepared to re-establish my network in Sarawak to support any party interested in this endeavor.)

3.1.5 Develop modern commercial centers that provide space for retailing, bazaar for the agro produce and promote tourism.

3.2 Equal Opportunity In Quality Education and Employment.

3.2.1 Provide scholarship especially for the deserving students from low income group (monthly household income of RM1,000 or less). My key message is opportunity. Let me elaborate this with my own testimony. I was not a top scorer in my examination. But I was given an opportunity to pursue higher education and I succeeded up to a master degree. I climbed up the corporate ladder holding up to a general management position in the American Fortune 500 company. Now I am a small time entrepreneur of my own without receiving any assistance from the government. I believe that poverty could be overcome with equal opportunity in quality education. Thus, a completely merit based system will not provide an opportunity that I have experienced. A scholarship dedicated for the poor rural students irrespective of race and religion should be initiated to support students with the right aptitude for learning and hard work.

3.2.2 Establish Mission High School (ala MARA Science College) in all districts to raise the competency of mathematics, science and English. The school would be opened to the poor of all races and funded fully by the government. The headmasters of the schools must be restored to the Christians to preserve the identity of mission schools and demonstrate compliance in the freedom of religion as enshrined in the 18 Points Agreement and the Constitution of this country. Weak command of English has placed rural students at a disadvantage to gain quality higher education and unable to compete for employment in the MNCs. Also, this initiative will instill Christians’ confidence in SADA as well.

3.2.3 Introduce Equal Opportunity law that provide equal opportunity for employment in the government and private sector and that does not discriminate based on race, religion, gender and physical condition. Further, such law should promote recruitment from the low income group to bridge the gap between the poor and the rich.

4 Focus In Rural Development.

I would now shift my focus on the implementation aspects of the rural development. As I have observed, lots of problems on rural developments are due to the implementation in the field. Thus, I would like to focus my suggestion on the delivery and financing aspects only.

4.1 Establish a Rural Development Ministry with a full minister position and supported with three Assistant Ministers (AM). The AM will be responsible for the smooth implementation of the developments in various rural areas. The AM are to be located in the rural areas that are of political importance to SADA. Such location could be Bandar Sri Aman, Kapit and Marudi. This will propel rural development and provide employment to the rural folks. It is necessary for the AM to be closer to the rural folks in order to facilitate developments.

4.2 Finance rural development through shared concept. Rural areas are deprived from getting funding from the government due to the priority in urban development. In order to ensure commitment to the rural areas, I would suggest that the government of the day introduce a shared financing concept. This model will compel three parties, namely, the government, investor and the kampong folks to jointly commit for development arising from the commercialization of natural resources extracted within 20 kilometers radius from the village. This shared concept is illustrated as follow.

– The natural resource (timber, coal, etc) is found within 20 kilometers from village A, B and C with 150 households.

– Investor X is granted a license by the government to extract and commercialize the natural resource.

– The government imposes a 10% requirement on the turnover to be allocated for development to village A, B and C.

– All three parties (government, investor and kampong folks) benefit from the commercialization of the natural resource. The investor gain from the profit; the government earns from the taxes and able to provide funding for the developments that benefits the dwellers.

5 Key Success Factors.

5.1 Vision. The Dayak need a vision that glorifies the community. In the Book of Proverb 29:18, God teaches us that where there is no vision, the people perish. SADA must remain focus on the vision and become the entrusted body to champion it to the Dayak community.

5.2 Leadership. We have learned from the Book of Nehemiah that successful rebuilding of a nation requires the partnership of action oriented God fearing leaders and God. Action will always beat inaction. This is the difference between the winners and losers. Leaders who are God’s centered will bring equality, justice and blessings to their nation. Thus, it is important that SADA select leaders that glorify God and the community. I would think that new faces in politic would be more acceptable than a recycle leaders with poor tract records.

5.3 Finance. To allocate 50% of oil & gas royalty to rural development. This will ensure commitment towards achieving the vision.

5.4 Opportunity. While meritocracy would be the ideal, we must not forget that an opportunity give new life to mankind. Men were not saved by merit but by the grace of God who gave new life through Jesus Christ. Therefore, the rural Dayak must be provided with equal opportunity to raise their living standard in line with their brothers and sisters in the urban areas and the rights to share the wealth of the state of Sarawak. The basis for opportunity may disregard meritocracy at the initial stage but it does not discriminate on race, religion, gender and physical outlook.

6 Lastly but not the least, I would like to remind all of us on God’s word in Proverb 16:3 that says “Commit to the Lord whatever you do, and your plans will succeed.” I wish all of you success.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 19 July 2011, 1:01 am and is filed under
Dayak
,
Sarawak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


‘Economist’ report on Bersih rally ‘censored’

Hazlan Zakaria & Wong Teck Chi
 | Jul 19, 11

Malaysiakini

Opposition parliamentarians have claimed that the July 16 edition of The Economist has been defaced by the Home Ministry in an apparent attempt to censor a report on the Bersih 2.0 rally for electoral reform.

“The Economist July16 issue has been censored/black inked on Bersih story by Home Ministry,” reads a tweet by Ipoh Barat MP M Kulasegaran.

In photos distributed via micro-blog site Twitter, the report headlines ‘Political affray in Malaysia: Taken to the cleaners’ shows lines blacked out by what seems to be a permanent marker pen.

Malaysiakini could not immediately verify the claim, but a comparison with the
online version
 reveals that the lines struck out refer to allegations of police and government misconduct:

– ‘and one man died of a heart attack’, in the first paragraph.

– ‘The march itself was then banned, although the authorities offered Bersih a stadium to meet in – and then withdrew the offer’, in the second paragraph

– ‘The heavy-handed police tactics have provoked a lot of anger; the government has conceded an official investigation into claims of police brutality. In one instance (caught on film), police seemed to fire tear gas and water cannon into a hospital where protesters were sheltering from a baton charge’, in the fourth paragraph.

 When contacted, Kulasegaran criticised the action as “uncalled for”.

“In this day and age only a police run state would do this. They are trying to hide writing which could be true, because (they are afraid) it will be read by the public and they will believe it. The government is still (suffering from) denial syndrome.”

The DAP leader however, dismissed the attempt as ineffectual as the full article is “available online anyway”.

PKR vice-president Tian Chua also tweeted on the matter and posted photos of the censored pages: “I’m sure @TheEconomist readers are intelligent enough to know how to get the full article, but the censorship reflects the stupidity & insecurity of an autocratic regime.”

He observed that the portrayal of the “Jews as bogeyman (by Umno owned-daily) Utusan (Malaysia) & @TheEconomist censorship signify an insecure regime”.

[More to follow]

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 19 July 2011, 3:13 pm and is filed under
Bersih
,
Media
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Khalid, the videos are all in YouTube

Malaysiakini Your Say
 | Jul 19, 11

‘How can the people trust the police with the video footage? They’ll probably use it as evidence to arrest more people.’

Police urge public to submit Bersih 2.0 rally videos

Joker:
 Deputy inspector-general of police Khalid Abu Bakar, if you were sincere, just go to YouTube. You can find lots of videos there.

You can also call up some of the participants such as PAS’ Abdul Hadi Awang, Marina Mahathir, Anwar Ibrahim, Nurul Izzah, Khairy Jamaluddin, maybe even Information Minister Rais Yatim since he is investigating whether the people there were paid to rally.

You can also interview your own officers and take their statements first so you can later match it against other statements.

Lim Yeu Chuen:
 Khalid, after the way you have handled matters and your arrogance in dealing with Bersih, now you want people to trust you with their evidence? You must either be a dreamer or a person who does not know what trust is. Trust must be earned, and your have not earned it.

NuckinFuts:
 How can the people trust the police with their footage? They will probably use the footage as evidence to arrest more people, or use them to get some university students expelled.

Multi Racial:
 This is the same old trick. They asked for the public to provide them with video and photo evidence. It is likely nobody will surrender anything to them without knowing what they are going to do to you. Since nobody surrenders any evidence, they will conveniently close the case.

Moo:
 Investigations should be done by a third-party non-government-influenced body, with representatives from both NGOs and police. The Royal Malaysian Police (RMP) image had long been in tatters. You don’t need footage to convince the public anymore. The damage has been done.

Want to have trust restored? Stand up against the real crime. Be a real police for once, stop asking for duit kopi and bribes, protect the people instead of bullying them, catch the real criminals and uphold the law. Need us to teach you how to discharge your responsibilities?

DannyLoHH:
 If the deputy IGP still command some semblance of credibility, such calls would definitely be heeded by the public.

Alas, he has lost all credibility when he denied that the police had shot tear gas and water cannon into the compound of a hospital. He has no credibility whatsoever to ask the public to trust him, the IGP, and hence the police.

Based on what he could assure the public that video evidence would not be buried? His words?

One Brain Cell: Do not hand your videos over to him. Give Suaram copies to present to Suhakam. The cops said immediately after the rally that they had also been videoing the event and had proof the cops acted properly. You show us yours, we’ll show you ours.

I did not bring knife to demo, says protester

Rayfire:
 The mainstream media have long lost their credibility due to their insistence in painting the wrong picture of events whenever it reflects badly on the government.

If they can’t stick to professional journalistic practices, they might as well get out of the business. Don’t be a thorn in the people’s flesh just to be in the good books of the government. Report it as it is.

People who were there that day were unarmed, but were strong-willed enough to remain calm despite being bombarded by tear gas and water cannon – these were the real Malaysians whom you can’t just create out of thin air.

No weapons, and no bombs. It was more of a carnival. The only violence seen that day was by the police under orders of the Home Ministry.

Ong Guan Sin:
 Read this development together with the plastic-bottle molotov cocktails claims, and we all can tell that whoever is in power in this country is in absolute deficit of integrity.

Kelvin Tan:
 Anyone in Malaysia who has a keen eye can see very clearly for themselves that the guy in the picture is holding a small white flag pole with the small spherical knob and a small portion of the pole visible. Berita Minggu is sub-standard.

Kim:
 Isn’t it sad that the mainstream media, which is supposed to give factual reports, has become the authorities’ tools to deceive readers, willing to stoop so low as to turn what is right into wrong and white into black, and vice versa.

If this trend were to continue, this country will be hopeless as the younger generations will be lost, their minds confused as to the values promoted by those in power.

Yellow Boxer:
 Umno newspapers are capable of doing anything. Whatever you hold, they can make it out into a knife. Will they verify the claim? Not in a million years. They are out to get Pakatan Rakyat by hook or crook. They don’t care about truth and facts.

Quigonbond:
 We shouldn’t be surprised that the picture is doctored. After all, we already have certain porno video, and if you think back a bit longer, a distorted photograph is one of the reasons we lost our case in the International Court of Justice over Pulau Batu Puteh.

RR:
 As a senior citizen, I’ve always been concerned about riots and the resultant bloodshed that may affect the whole nation.

But after seeing the way the government has manipulated the Bersih 2.0 rally (which was to be a peaceful one) to give the impression it is a demon to destroy the nation, I think it is about time that PAS and PKR, in particular, go to the millions of Malays, particularly the young in the kampung and suburban areas, to tell the real truth and reality of the situation so that race or religion is not abused by the ruling Umno-BN.

Calling S Ambiga as anti-Islam, branding welfare-minded doctor-politician Dr Michael D Jeyakumar as a communist and to put him in jail with false allegations, are cruel and atrocious. So PAS, PKR and DAP, do your job discreetly for the next general election.

Tuah PJ:
 The mainstream newspapers should publish an apology to Abdul Razak Endut. This young man is a people’s hero.

I am sure he used his own money and time to come and protect the rally goers, unlike the Umno goons. He did not need to be paid with allowance. This is true patriotism. I wish there were many more Abdul Razak Enduts.

Ethnicmalaysian:
 It’s not a knife. It’s clearly a three-foot parang, the sort the police ‘found’ in Sogo and similar to the one they ‘found’ in Aminulrasyid Hamzah’s car. That’s clearly indisputable.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 19 July 2011, 11:35 am and is filed under
Bersih
,
IT
,
Police
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Kit Siang to Hisham: How about NST, Berita Harian?

Malaysiakini
 | Jul 19, 11

DAP parliamentary leader Lim Kit Siang has urged Home Minister Hishammuddin Hussein to act fairly and equally against all publications instead of indulging in selective persecution over the coverage of the Bersih 2.0 rally of July 9.

Reacting to the disclosure by a PAS volunteer that he had been falsely accused of holding a knife and rock-throwing during the Saturday demonstrations, Lim asked whether New Straits Times (NST) and sister-publication Berita Minggu would be hauled up by the home ministry to answer claims their reports had distorted the events of that day.

Lim also cited the ministry’s summoning of three Chinese-language dailies last week over claims they had reported favourably on what the authorities had branded were “illegal assemblies”.

It is understood that the editors who were called to Putrajaya belonged to Sin Chew Daily, Nanyang Siang Pau and China Press.

PAS’ Unit Amal volunteer corps member Abdul Razak Endut had on July 16 told a ceramah in Kuala Lumpur that the ‘knife’ he was purported by Berita Minggu to have been holding was actually a Malaysian flag that he had rolled up in his hand.

The ‘rock’ Berita Minggu’s caption accused him of hurling at the police was a tear gas canister that he was throwing back to them to protect the peaceful demonstrators behind him, Abdul Razak said in his talk.

The same image of Abdul Razak was also featured on NST’s New Sunday Times’ front page with the title “Peaceful?”

Both New Sunday Times and Berita Minggu are Sunday editions of NST and Berita Harian, which are in turn published by New Straits Times Press (M) Bhd (NSTP).

NSTP had on July 11 denied rumours that the picture referred to was doctored.

“These rumours alleged that the man pictured allegedly about to throw something at Federal Reserve Unit policemen was “an Arab” superimposed on a picture of Bersih 2.0 demonstrators running away from tear gas on Saturday.

“This is an insult to the dedicated press photographers who were tirelessly working throughout the city, at times putting their own safety at risk, to capture these images for readers,” said the company in its clarification.

NSTP photo editor Zahari Zakaria has refuted allegations that the photo was edited, saying it was “neither doctored nor manipulated”.

NSTP did not, however, address the caption to the Berita Minggu photograph which read: “Seorang perusuh membawa pisau dalam perhimpunan haram” (A rioter brings a knife to illegal rally) and another subheadline read: “Perusuh guna senjata, batu, lawan polis” (Rioters use weapons, rocks to fight police).

Chiding the two publications over the mater, Lim described NST and Berita Harian as having violated “all the basic tenets of journalism of truth, fair play and responsibility” and committed a “great disservice” to the plural Malaysian nation-building”.

“Has the Home Ministry “hauled up” New Sunday Times and Berita Minggu for their “doctored” false photograph on the front page of “a violent protestor” at the 709 rally?” Lim asked in reference to the July 9 gathering.

He also questioned whether Umno-owned Utusan Malaysia had been issued a show-cause letter for its religiously- and racially-charged reports on those critical of the BN-led government.

Lim said all journalists and management personnel in NST and Berita Minggu should “step up” and “own up” to the “photographic falsification” of Abdul Razak instead of maintaining their silence over the matter.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 19 July 2011, 5:16 pm and is filed under
Bersih
,
Hishammuddin
,
Media
,
Police
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Najib/Hisham – have you lost all power over Utusan spin-doctors?

UMNO’s spin doctors in Utusan Malaysia are scraping the bottom of the barrel bringing out of the woodwork discredited personalities to weave lies which positively damage Malaysia’s national interests and international image.

The latest incident is the surfacing of the discredited Inspector-General of Police, Tan Sri Rahim Noor who gave an interview with Mingguan Malaysia on Sunday alleging the Bersih 2.0 rally could open the door to Jews and Israel to infiltrate Malaysia as there were parties who wanted countries like Malaysia that was against Jews and Israel to be toppled.

Although Rahim Noor established his professional career as Special Branch Director (just as he destroyed his service as IGP because of his criminal assault of Anwar Ibrahim in the infamous “black eye” episode in 1998), he could have no evidence for his sensational allegation in the Mingguan Malaysia interview apart from a very fertile figment of imagination.

However, based on Rahim Noor’s unsupported allegation, Utusan Malaysia carried an editorial yesterday as good as warning that the “Jew are coming” as a result of the Bersih 2.0 rally.

Either the Utusan Malaysia spin doctors  have the full endorsement and a blank cheque from the Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib  Razak and the Home Minister Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein to spin their worst, or  the Umno spin doctors are totally out of control and  neither the Prime Minister nor the Home Minister has the  power to exercise any control over them even when they go on a rampage positively damaging Malaysia’s national interests and international image.

Which is which, Najib and Hishammuddin?

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 19 July 2011, 6:07 pm and is filed under
Bersih
,
Hishammuddin
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Where do PSM 6 fit into the ‘larger’ picture?

Malaysiakini Your Say
 | Jul 19, 11

‘Chandra, where’s the larger picture with the detention of Dr Michael D Jeyakumar under the Emergency Ordinance?’

July 9: Look at the bigger picture, says Chandra

Loyal Malaysian:
 Yes, Chandra Muzaffar, the rakyat is looking at the bigger picture. It is Umnoputras like yourself who have chosen to look at it through blinkered dark glasses.

A Samad Said, the conscience of our nation, has openly accused Umno of playing the racial card, and any impartial observer will conclude the same, guilty as charged. Where’s the larger picture in the detention of Dr Michael D Jeyakumar and the other PSM 6 under the Emergency Ordinance, Chandra?

Josephine:
 To thwart the efforts of Bersih 2.0, the BN government and its cohorts have spun a long list of red herrings, aimed at deflecting people’s objective appraisal of the eight demands for electoral reforms.

One main line of attack was in the form of support by Pakatan Rakyat. BN spun it in such way that made Bersih look like it was ‘hijacked’ by Pakatan. It is untrue that Pakatan is calling the shots at Bersih, which is a coalition of 62 non-political NGOs.

But even if it is true, does it make it wrong for the rakyat to ask for the Election Commission (EC) to mend its ways? After all, wasn’t BN also asked to join Bersih’s efforts, which for reasons best known to PM Najib Razak that BN had declined?

I also hear that S Ambiga was said to have a hidden agenda. I was also told that Ambiga is lobbying to get a judge position. But haven’t Malaysians known by now that the shortest route to get anything good is by being a friend of BN?

G Annamalai:
 I used to love to listen to Chandra’s talk during my varsity days. It was vibrant, energetic and was sort of an inspiration. Now it’s the opposite.

By the way Dr Chandra, what have you got to say about Dr Jeyakumar’s detention under ISA? Bother to comment?

Abil:
 What is there to look at a bigger picture, when the government could come up with false charges of communism against social activist Dr Jeyakumar and the other five PSM members and put them under EO?

Chandra, you would have fought for him when you were in Aliran, but now having sold your soul to the highest bidder, you need to look inside you first before asking the rakyat to look at a bigger picture.

Pants On Wire:
 Dr Chandra used to earn my respect from his Aliran days. Now I see a man, sickly embedded with the establishment and no better than some of the Umno apple-polisher politicians.

Perhaps the comfort of working with the pro-government NGO at the expense of your much touted values far out weight the latter.

Anti-Fascist:
 Dr Chandra, I used to read a lot of your papers and writings and they were good especially the years when you were the Aliran president.

But in recent years, I must say I am very disappointed with your analysis of issues and the stand that you arrive at. There is a vast difference between the Chandra then and the Chandra now.

Frankly, I don’t pay much attention to your writings now because you have changed; you have, to use your own words, become more partisan to the extend your analysis becomes faulty and you compromise your integrity on things that matters. I sincerely hope you would return to the Chandra that we used to know.

Anonymous_4031:
 I agree with most of the points raised by Dr Chandra. But the demands of Bersih are old issues which opposition leaders have been raising long before Bersih 1.0 and Bersih 2.0 were born. I, for one, have witnessed all the 12 general elections.

What is wrong for the opposition parties to join the Bersih march? Even Marina Mahathir and her daughter joined the rally.

Obviously, you see the opposition parties taking advantage of the cause of Bersih, and why not? Bersih’s demands are the opposition parties’ demands.

Yes, all people should look at the bigger picture. Fair play in sports, and in politics, is what all are crying for.

Ruben: Chandra Muzaffar, I had a lot of respect for you when you were a professor in USM (Universiti Sains Malaysia). I admired the political forums that you facilitated. But all of that has vanished and actually I feel sorry for you.

Anonymous_4031:
 The abolition of indelible ink (which cost RM2.4 million of taxpayers’ money) just days before the 2008 polls was telling. The EC chairman, flanked by IGP and AG, announced with a straight face that somebody might try to sabotage the election with the indelible ink.

Later, the home minister told the whole truth: the sabotage was a lie. So, who was trying to fool who? Was there a hidden motive to abolish the indelible ink?

Anonymous_3e8f:
 The Bersih rally was not the type of demonstrations that the Umno goons are famous for (KLSAH hall, American embassy, PKR headquarters).

The parties that created havoc are the PDRM under orders of the ‘cow-head’ minister. Bersih 2.0 marchers were of all ages and from all walks of life. There was not a single case of violence or vandalism on their part despite the barbaric behaviour of the PDRM.

Avatar1:
 Dear Chandra, today you are talking of the bigger picture, but do you know that you were defeated in 1999 general election against Tan Chai Ho due to electoral fraud?

You were leading during the vote count and suddenly a large amount of so-called postal votes brought you down. I am sure you will remember that moment for we were there to support you in your bid for the Bandar Tun Razak seat.

What Bersih wants is a fair and clean elections and the eight demands are not something that cannot be fulfilled by a transparent and democratic government. You preach good governance, but you practice something else just to please the powers-to-be.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 19 July 2011, 11:37 am and is filed under
Bersih
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Auntie Bersih spooked by Facebook attention

Kow Gah Chie
 | Jul 20, 11

Malaysiakini

Eleven days after inspiring netizens for her heroic role in the Bersih 2.0 rally, Auntie Anne Ooi has gone into hiding.

Ooi, 65, said she is stunned by the attention she has received on the Facebook page set up for her, which has gained more than 40,000 ‘likes’ to date.

She has been praised as the ‘Malaysian Lady of Liberty’ and held up as an icon of the Bersih 2.0 cause for clean and fair elections.

For a retired teacher who has led a simple life and who has no knowledge of social media, the intense attention has come as a culture shock.

“I’m so frightened by all this ‘madness’ in Facebook,” she said when met on Monday night.

“I lead a life with no TV, no newspaper, no nonsense. I read only good books. (Now) I dare not go home. All this madness frightens me. Everything is so unbelievable.”

Ooi, who had been an English teacher for 35 years, said her daughter’s house “is now my shell” and said she dared not go out in public, except to church.

She expressed her wish to be left alone and pleaded with the public to give her time to adjust to the situation.

“Please give me time. I know I have courage… until I can handle Facebook, only until then…,” she told Malaysiakini on the sidelines of a seminar organised by the DAP.

The party’s parliamentary leader Lim Kit Siang had invited her to the seminar on Dayak issues.

Ooi, wearing a blue T-shirt and pink flowery long pants, soon caught the crowd’s attention.

Upset over media attention

At one point, Ooi was visibly upset over the media attention, and she threatened to leave the event and go home.

“I am angry with the media. I am angry with the photographer who took my photos. You all didn’t ask my permission. I am even angrier at Facebook (netizens),” she fumed.

But she soon calmed down, saying she understands that the media and the photographer had to perform their duty.

She agreed that the coverage of the Bersih 2.0 rally had been beneficial to the country’s struggle for democracy.

Ooi had gone alone to the rally on July 9 and she was stopped by the police and asked to explain why she was wearing a bright yellow shirt.

She persisted and joined the crowd at Petaling Street which later marched to Jalan Pudu, where she was tear-gassed and doused with chemical-laced water several times.

Despite the ordeal, she remained with thousands of protesters until the rally ended six hours later.

Photographs of her at the rally holding a flower stalk soon caught the attention of netizens, turning her into an instant celebrity.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 20 July 2011, 2:28 pm and is filed under
Bersih
,
IT
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Bersih rally sounds death knell of tyranny

It seems to me the recent Bersih rally could have sounded the death knell of tyranny and overnight Ambiga has become the people’s iconic hero for electoral reform

By
N H Chan

The picture on the front page of the Sunday Star, 10 July 2011 spoke louder than words. It showed the huge crowd of peaceful but bold Bersih supporters flying in the face of the cowardly might of the police who were decked out in full riot paraphernalia. They must be daunted by the sea of placid, mostly young, people facing them.

Those in the front rows were seated on the road and those at the back were standing. All were unarmed and none were menacing the police. They were all peaceful demonstrators who were trying to put across to the imbeciles in power the people’s right to peaceful assembly and to show that they were united in their call for a clean and incorrupt general election.

The BN regime may say anything they like but the fact that the common people could come out in large numbers in silent protest only goes to show that the regime has lost its credibility. The regime and its underlings the police behaved as expected of tyrants – typical of all bullies they were afraid of their own shadow – they saw the ghosts of the insurgency of Chin Peng and the CPM (Communist Party of Malaya) being revived; see the Sun of Friday, July 8, 2011 where the former Perak chief police officer and Special Branch commander Yuen Yet Leng gave his thoughts to Maria J. Das in an interview. He said:

If you are going to sport a picture of Chin Peng on your t-shirt, you are only asking for trouble. How do you expect the police not to take action?

I agree with what the Special Branch had done. This problem has been thrown in the police’s lap and involves national security and public order.

…

The CPM has the same ideology as … Mao Zedong who believed that the highest form of struggle is an armed struggle, and not a political struggle.

He must be joking! I am astounded by the man’s naivety. I think he is still living in the past which is a pity for one of our country’s heroes (but then I also have the same problem, I could remember the past vividly but I could not remember what I said or promised yesterday). He was the CPO Perak when I was a Judicial Commissioner in Ipoh back then in 1970. He was one policeman I have admired for his dedication to make Ipoh safe from criminals. He brought down the crime rate in Ipoh. I remember the occasion when he told me that at a police road block at Simpang Pulai which is on the outskirts of Ipoh, the police had arrested the occupants of a car when they found weapons for committing armed robbery hidden in its boot. On interrogation they admitted they were en route to Penang because it was perilous for them to commit the crime in Ipoh as there was a fierce Chinese judge there.

To be fair I must also point out that Mr Yuen was supportive of the reason for the people’s negative perception of the police. For example:

Das: … many people question why the police seem to act against only certain parties, while others who make seditious comments and threats get away. Won’t the public equate this with police persecution?

Yes and no. The police usually back the effort of the incumbent government of the day so long as it acts by the rule of law, but they need to be more courageous to act when supporters of the government go too far. When they are hesitant, they are bound to be accused of being unfair. Being balanced will earn the police some respect.

He also said:

… there is nothing wrong with Bersih 2’s demands and the incumbent government must hear the genuine worries of the people. They need to pry things apart and deal with people who are sincere with their concerns. Then legitimate complaints can be looked into.  … the timing is such that there appears to be a united front against the government, and this frightens them.

Returning to the hullabaloo of the police on the involvement of national security and public order, don’t they know, as all of us already know, that communism as an ideology had collapsed with the fall of the Berlin wall and the disintegration of the Soviet Union? There is no more threat from any idea of communist expansionism from Chinese communists as China has turn to capitalism and has prospered as the world’s second largest economy next to America. It is true that China is still being governed by an oligarchic regime. One must be a member of the communist party to form the government because it is the ruling party as China is a one party totalitarian state, just as Malaysia has also become an oligarchy with the UMNO led Barisan Nasional remaining in power for some 54 years.

To say that this country is a democracy is laughable. Democracy has become an anachronism in Malaysia. As in China the ruling BN coalition will not tolerate dissent in any form as the Bersih episode on 9 July 2011 had graphically exposed to us common folk that the police have used excessive physical force to quell the rally of peaceful protestors who were only asking for the reformation of the electoral system to a fairer and incorrupt one – so that when the crowd was heard to have shouted “reformasi” it did not mean that they were for the opposition party PKR. We have read about police brutality against peaceful demonstrators from eyewitnesses account in loyarburok and in Malaysiakini and we also see them in graphic detail as the incidents of the use of excessive force by the police on the hapless protestors were recorded live on mobile phones by those who were there for all the world to see on Youtube.

Yet in the Star, Monday 18 July 2011, the deputy prime minister Muhyiddin said that what had emerged through the alternative media and YouTube were scenes that seem to show the police had acted in a cruel manner. “What was not shown were prior scenes where the police were provoked and taunted”, he said. Obviously the deputy prime minister has never heard of the well known proverb, ‘sticks and stones will break my bones but words can never hurt me’. In any case, a policeman should be patient and tolerant when conducting crowd control. They should try to defuse the anger instead of being short tempered and responding with unequal force. However, I think the negative public perception of the police in this respect will be difficult to erase.

In any case, one notices the glaring difference in the integrity of the government in the UK and ours. In the hacking scandal involving the News of the World and the London police we do not see the prime minister or the home minister or any minister coming out to defend the police. Instead they were embarrassed and concerned so much so that an emergency session of parliament was called. Even Britain’s police chief had to resign. On the other hand, in Malaysia, we have the deputy prime minister Muhyiddin coming out in defence of the police when in fact he should be concerned and should suggest an investigation into the heavy handed conduct of the police in handling the crowd. In this country we throw integrity to the wind! Even our police chief did not resign – the fact that in some areas the police had responded and reacted with unequal force should have made him responsible as a commander.

The police have justified their harsh crackdown on the peaceful demonstrators of Bersih for the reason of national security and public order. But as I have explained above any prospect of a revival of a communist insurgency in this country is a myth. To say that the CPM has the same ideology as Mao Zedong (whose idealogy should have died with him) who believed that the highest form of struggle is an armed struggle and, therefore, there is every danger of an armed insurrection being revived in this country is an unjustifiable assumption in this day and age. Only imbeciles could have imagined that! That is why I say these people are afraid of their own shadow. If you are afraid of your own shadow then you must be a coward. You are also a coward, if not a madman, if you donned your suit of armour like Don Quixote who battled imaginary dragons in the form of windmills or riot gear ready to do battle with unarmed and peaceful street protestors to quell a whimsical or imaginary insurrection in the farcical interest of national security and public order.

 To be fair, it is reported in the Star, Wednesday 13 July 2011 under the headline No plans to hold another Bersih that the Bar Council has said something nice about some policemen:

The Bar Council thanked Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Ismail Omar for allowing the council’s monitoring teams to observe the rally and for acknowledging the council’s impartiality in conducting the observation exercise.

“Many of our monitors noted a significant number of police officers were polite towards the leaders of the public rallies, participants and the monitoring team,” council president Lim Chee Wee said …

However, the council said unnecessary physical force was used in some instances.

I suppose not all policemen are the bad guys. There are some decent ones still around. Just as there are some decent Umno guys around like the chief of Umno Youth Khairy Jamaluddin who has shown magnanimity to Ambiga. When we leave matters to the younger generation we do not find animosity and recrimination. They are prepared to talk and discuss on how the country’s electoral system could be reformed. Bravo and I salute them.

Next, there is this pithy assessment from the Star, Thursday 14 July 2011 by Baradan Kuppusamy:

Awakening the young voters

The Bersih 2.0 rally was a success by some measure because Pakatan Rakyat supporters braved police restrictions, roadblocks and barbed wire to gather in the city centre calling on the Government to institute electoral reform.

There eight-point demand included issues that the opposition had been campaigning on for many years, like a clean electoral roll, reforming postal voting and a minimum of 21 days campaigning.

These are fundamentals of a basic election system in a democratic society and few citizens would find these objectionable.

Saturday’s rally, therefore, had an unprecedented impact on society at large and on the election system …

While Saturday’s rally was smaller in size compared to Bersih’s first rally in November 2007, the effects were the same – the awakening of young people to political action to rally for a basic right in defiance of the police.

…

The rally proved its point that a large number of Malaysians can gather, despite police action, and march peacefully.

The message of Bersih is unequivocal, the people, especially the young people, of this country have been awakened and are no longer afraid of being intimidated by a bullying police force and they will take political action to rally for their basic rights in defiance of the police who they know are the minions of the avaricious people who are greedy for power. For after all, the awakened young people are only exercising their universal right of assembly that has been endorsed by the United Nations as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights which says that “Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association”.  For after all the Bersih demands are not outrageous nor are they extravagant or unusual – most are matters that the opposition has been canvassing in Parliament perennially. As the writer of the above article has said, “These are fundamentals of a basic election system in a democratic society and few citizens would find these objectionable”.

Yet the Bersih movement and those who support them are being suppressed by those people who are clinging on to power and their minions the police force. Decent and normally law abiding citizens are suppressed just for voicing out their grouses for electoral reforms. The answer is plain for all to see. When we, the people, see our elected representatives failed us in Parliament; when our grouses or grievances have fallen on deaf ears in Parliament where the majority is the errant BN coalition which has been clinging on to power for more than half a century; when all else failed in the legislative process, the common people of this country have no other choice but to resort to political action of their own and the only avenue that is available which can carry their message across most effectively is to rally for their cause even to the extent of open defiance of police action against them.

Strange as it may seem, the powers that be seemed to have missed the point. The point is that the Bersih movement does not belong to or support the opposition or any political party. It is an apolitical movement. But it supports democracy which is a government of the people, by the people and for the people. When a government does not listen to the people’s grouses and does not take action on them then it is not a government for the people. And a government which is not for the people is not a democratic government, it is a dictatorship. The message of Bersih, which is in fact the people’s message, is loud and clear – we, the people of this country, do not want a dictatorship! Since we do not want a dictatorship, at the next general election we will vote the dictators out of office and replace them with a new coalition even to the extent of voting in the opposition. And if the new order were to fail the people too, then we will replace them at another election. And finally if any of our political parties were still to fail us again then, as a last resort, we may have to vote only for individuals who are for the people and who are incorruptible. There must be plenty of suitable candidates to choose from for our representation in Parliament from the Bersih movement itself. Like Ambiga I do not have the stomach for politics in this country. There are much braver souls around.

Having said all that, one may still ask, what is the point then for a street demonstration albeit a peaceful one? The point is to bring out the people’s dissatisfaction and their grouse for a clean and incorrupt government. The multitude’s belief is that the only way to attain their goal is for a clean and incorrupt forthcoming general election. And when that had fallen on deaf ears the only avenue left for the people to voice their discontent is to rally in an orderly and peaceful demonstration like the Bersih walk to Stadium Merdeka although they never made it there as they were blocked by the police.

Now that you know what is at stake, my dear readers, you can go straight to Loyarburok.com to read about how the police have used excessive force on the peaceful demonstrators. In particular, do read this article “Ambushed like Animals, I Had to Walk-Crawl”. Here is an excerpt:

There was no sense of danger because the police had so far let us go ahead. Sure, we all knew that eventually they would arrest the BERSIH and political leaders but we had no clue of how inhumane it was going to be.

When we found ourselves maneuvered into the tunnel, we started running as fast as we could.

Even if we had never imagined that we would be tear-gassed in the tunnel, there was that imminent danger.

I was in the middle of the crowd when I reached the end of the tunnel, relieved to be out of the ominous place. But by then, there was screaming because the FRU had started shooting tear gas straight towards at us. I saw it with my own eyes, the FRU was aiming directly at the people, and not over our heads.

The message was clear to me: to hurt and maim as many as possible, even though these were peaceful demonstrators, many of whom are respected political leaders of our country. It was only after that I had heard that Anwar Ibrahim and his bodyguard were badly hurt for being shot at, along with another PAS politician who was in front of the crowd.

After reading this you should also read the other articles about the Bersih rally in loyarburok.

After you have read all those articles in loyarburok, do you want to support Bersih? We should not be afraid of threats and coercion anymore. Bersih is not a society or association or club. There is no subscription or membership. You don’t have to join it. It is a movement and whenever there is an outcry by the people we can show our support for the movement by voting out the incumbent government of the day at the next election. We have the power of the people. You don’t have to be loyal to any political party. Always be ready to tell those in government that they are our servants who should serve the people. We, the people, have put them there and we the people can remove them in the next election. Any government must be for the people. It is not to be a government for those in authority or in power. That kind of attitude among those who governed us will no longer be tolerated by the people who had put them there in the first place. Shortly stated, we do not want a dictatorship at all. It is democracy that the people want and that means the government must always be for the people.

A government for the people does not incarcerate its citizens without a trial or on trump up charges or use draconian laws to terrorize and overawe its citizens or to stifle dissent. A government for the people are not intolerant of the people’s grouses. A government for the people does not shoot tear gas cylinders directly at peaceful demonstrators nor would it use physical force on them – they should not copy the violent methods used by the dictators of the Middle East on their own people. I could go on and on. But I think you have got the picture.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 20 July 2011, 10:31 am and is filed under
Bersih
,
NH Chan
,
Police
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Bersih rally was 1Malaysia in action

Yin Ee Kiong | Jul 20, 11

Malaysiakini

EYEWITNESS

There’s light at the end of the tunnel and it is not from an on-coming train.

Malaysians are slowly but surely emerging from the dark hole that we have been in for well over 40 years. I am once again confident of our country’s future; recent events have convinced me of this.

I would be the first to admit that I have often doubted the resolve of Malaysians in the face of repression and abuse of power by its authorities. I look at Indonesia, Thailand, Philippines, even Myanmar, and wonder at the courage of their citizens who fight for change against almost insurmountable odds.

Then I look at ourselves and wonder why we seem so useless. Or perhaps we are not really useless – perhaps we are just a little more patient. However, 40 years of abuse of power will wear away even the patience of a saint. On July 9, that patience evaporated.

Bersih 2.0 rally day

No one seems to know what was going on. One minute it was reported that the police had given a permit for a rally at Stadium Merdeka and an hour later, the news was that no permit had been given. This was exactly the problem faced when relying on the Internet, text-messages and emails that were the only alternatives to the mainstream media, which people now trust less and less.

Upon ringing up my contacts, I was put in touch with someone who told me to meet up at a restaurant in Brickfields at 11.30am. By that time, the police presence was already noticeable in Little India. As I entered the restaurant, a familiar voice called out my name.

In the dim light, I could only make out a set of flashing teeth. When my eyes finally adjusted to the light, I realised that it was M Kulasegaran, the MP for my constituency, Ipoh Barat. The ex-Perak speaker V Sivakumar and Klang MP Charles Santiago were also present, along with other opposition assemblymen and MPs.

From the restaurant, we moved to Fatima Church, which is around the corner. It was decided that the church offered a safe sanctuary. Those who knew the terrain planned the route that we would take to Stadium Merdeka. We were to take the side streets and lanes as the main roads were blocked.

On the way, we stopped at the Temple of Fine Arts, which has a vegetarian restaurant of apparently fine repute. However, the management was not exactly welcoming. The police followed us – in plainclothes and uniform. They waited on the other side of the road.

It was suggested that we move off in twos and threes to our destination. Some decided to have lunch at the place before the main event. Kula (left) opined he could protest louder on a full stomach. I preferred an empty tummy, in case I had to run; but the restaurant would not admit me because I was ‘inappropriately attired’.

A stranger from out of town, I followed the general flow of pedestrian traffic. By this time, I was on my own, safe in the knowledge that I alone did not constitute an illegal assembly and therefore should not attract unwanted attention. In Malaysia, a gathering of five or more constitutes an illegal gathering.

Menacing sight

As I got nearer to the stadium, the flow of people got larger. It was now not only Indians (who I had followed from Brickfields), but also Chinese and Malays. Before long, the trickle of people turned into a flood and the crowd swelled by the thousands.

There were the young – well prepared with scarves, bottles of water and salt. And there were the old – less prepared but equally determined. There were middle-aged women and men.

I was particularly impressed by a phalanx of Malay girls in full tudung and masks. They were well drilled and marched as a disciplined group to the front of the demonstration. There were also Red Crescent girls who stood by to offer first aid if needed.

We marched as one, shouting “Hidup Bersih”, “Hidup Rakyat”, with clenched fists pumping up and down. A white-haired Chinese lady confessed to me that she did not really understand what was being shouted but she made her quota of noise anyway.

The stragglers were encouraged to catch up by a diminutive old man wearing a haji cap, who was blowing his whistle and waving everyone forward. They swept to the front, compacting the already dense sea of angry protesters.

Someone started singing ‘Negara Ku’, and this was taken up by the crowd. I have never been so proud as I stood tall with my fellow Malaysians, rededicating ourselves to ‘hidup bersatu dan maju’.

The tear gas and water cannons had not started but there were already many teary eyes, mine included. After a standstill during the national anthem, we moved forward again. The police were now in sight, rows and rows of them backed by a red water cannon truck.

Thirty metres of asphalt separated them from us. They were silent and menacing; we were chanting “Reformasi”, “Hidup Bersih” and “Hidup Rakyat”, fists punching the air in defiance.

Then the water cannon advanced and the crowd surged back, many running helter-skelter. I decided that it was not a problem as long as we stood out of range and encouraged others to stand their ground. The others, upon seeing that we were not drenched, came back.

Before long, the water cannon ran out of water and the crowd surged forward again, now much braver, taunting the police. After a refill, the water cannon came back again and we moved back out of range. This cat-and-mouse game went on for a while, and then the police fired tear gas into the crowd.

We ran but we could not escape the tear gas. It stung our eyes and we choked. Out came the salt and wet towels. People were passing salt and hand towels around to those who had none but there wasn’t enough to go round. I failed chemistry, so I don’t know how sodium chloride neutralises the effects of the tear gas, but I know it helped.

The heavens respond

After the pandemonium, we regrouped and once again sang the national anthem to tell the police that we are patriotic and loyal citizens who should not be subjected to such treatment.

From the crowd, a voice cried “Hujan!”, beseeching the heavens to rain upon us, and this was taken up by some. Believe it or not, in the next half hour, it poured cats and dogs. Rain was what we needed for the water cannon and tear gas to have little effect.

God had smiled on us; we felt that nothing could go wrong.

The rain did more than just stop the tear gas and water cannon. It cooled tempers on both sides. There was a stalemate, and both sides were content to stare at each other, not doing anything to provoke further reaction.

News went around that there had been arrests with other groups – hundreds of them, including the head of Bersih 2.0 as well as some national politicians.

It was apparent then that the rally at the stadium was not to be. The prime minister’s promise on this was not worth the breath expended on it. The crowd was angry but resigned to this fact. A half-day’s protest had notified the government about the people’s sentiments.

Ours was only one group, there were other groups which converged in other parts of KL. To my knowledge, no one was arrested on our side but news filtered through that more than 600 others were.

There were no Malays, Chinese or Indians at the demonstration, only Malaysians united by a common cause. This was the true 1Malaysia and not the sham espoused by the government. If this is a glimpse of the future of our country, then there are grounds for optimism.

I have always maintained that it is Umno-BN which has divided the people to serve their own interests: the Malays, Chinese and Indians have no quarrel with one another.

I am proud of my fellow Malaysians who, when it counted, overcame race and religion to come together as one.

Hidup Malaysia!

YIN EE KIONG is a writer and activist who currently lives in Indonesia.

This series relates eyewitness accounts of the Bersih 2.0 July 9 rally in Kuala Lumpur for clean and fair elections. If you were there and have an interesting story to share, email us at
[email protected]
 by Friday, July 22.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 20 July 2011, 3:47 pm and is filed under
1Malaysia
,
Bersih
,
nation building
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.