Alumni: Seminar soiled alma mater’s reputation

Malaysiakini

May 8, 2014

The organisers of a controversial seminar at Universiti Teknologi Mara (UiTM) have discredited the institution which is dedicated to educating underprivileged Malays since 1956.

Dyana Yusoff (left), an UiTM alumni, said the seminar which allowed Indonesian Muslim scholars to demonise Christianity before students was not only anti-unity but also alienated UiTM’s Christian staff and students.

“This incident discredits my alma mater and I, along with many of my UiTM brothers and sisters, are definitely not happy with it.

“UiTM should have organised an inter-faith seminar highlighting shared basic principles across religions to show how our differences are superficial and our similarities are deep, encouraging understanding among different religions and strengthen unity and togetherness,” she added.

Dyana, who is also the political secretary to DAP parliamentary leader Lim Kit Siang, said participants may have even been duped into attending the seminar.

She said all UiTM undergraduates who were taking Sejarah Malaysia and ethnic relations courses, amongst others, were asked to attend the seminar and with class exemptions given.

“Looking at the title of the seminar, I myself as a graduate from UiTM was pleasantly surprised with UiTM’s openness to discuss a very sensitive issue and encourage intellectual discourse among the participants.

“Obviously, I was wrong after finding out that the content of the seminar was to demonise Christianity in the eyes of the participants.

“As stated in the event programme, there was a slot entitled ‘Christianity threat’ delivered by Tuan Haji Insan L.S Mokoginta from Indonesia,” she added.

Dyana urged UiTM not to stoop so low again in order to satisfy the agenda of certain parties who are “closed-minded, full of hatred and obviously very backwards.”

She also questioned why no action has been taken against the organisers while UiTM authorities were quick to punish student Mohd Fathihie Gadius for posting an anti-GST (goods and services tax) statement on Facebook.

The seminar was organised by Contemporary Islamic Studies Academy (ACIS), Warisan Ibnu Aaby and Majlis Agama Islam Selangor (MAIS).

The event was supported by Utusan Malaysia, Karangkraf Group of Companies, TV al-Hijrah, Zikay Group and Pantai Group of Companies.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 8 May 2014, 12:57 pm and is filed under
Religion
,
university
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


MCA should requisition for an emergency BN Supreme Council meeting for a policy decision to be taken on hudud as 11 or even 12 of the 13 component BN parties would oppose any hudud implementation

The Barisan Nasional BackBenchers Club (BNBBC) comprising  Barisan Nasional Members of Parliament have sprung a surprise on its website, lambasting  MCA and advising MCA leaders that they “should not spew nonsense or act as a hero as if trying to show the Chinese community that it fights for them” over the controversial hudud issue.

In an anonymous opinion piece on the BNBBC portal, MCA deputy president Datuk Dr Wee Ka Siong was  called “rude” for suggesting yesterday that the party will consider its membership in the ruling coalition should Umno continue to support hudud.

The BNBBC stand is a surprise as the question that is inevitably asked is whether it represents the views of all 133 BN MPs, i.e. 88  from UMNO, 14 from  PBB, 7 from MCA, 6 from Sarawak People’s Party (PRS), 4 each from MIC, Parti Bersatu Sabah (PBS) and   Parti Demokratik Progresif Sarawak (SPDB); 3 from UPKO; 1 each from Gerakan, SUPP and Parti Bersatu Rakyat Sabah (PBRS) or just the views of the 88 UMNO MPs.

If the BNBBC  anonymous opinion piece does not represent the consensus views of all the BN MPs, will the seven MCA MPs ask the BNBBC portal to publish an open retraction and apology?

Or will the MCA President Datuk Seri Liow Tiong Lai and the MCA Deputy President Datuk Wee Ka Siong just keep quiet as they do not want to jeopardise the three ministerial and five deputy ministerial seats the MCA leadership is hoping to get when there is a Cabinet reshuffle and MCA returns to the BN Cabinet and government before the reconvening of Parliament on 9th June?

In fact, this will be a crucial test whether to the MCA leaders, particularly to Liow and Wee, despite all the “hot air” the MCA is blowing recently, they are prepared to forgo all the three ministerial and five deputy ministerial seats on an important principle.

What Liow and Wee should do is to act on the advice of the former MCA President Datuk Dr. Chua Soi Lek and  immediately requisition for an emergency Barisan Nasional  Supreme Council meeting for a policy decision to be taken on hudud, as out of the 13 BN component parties, 11 or even 12  of them would oppose any implementation of hudud, whether PAS or UMNO.

Will this be on the immediate agenda of Liow and Wee?

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 8 May 2014, 3:43 pm and is filed under
Islam
,
MCA
,
Parliament
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


PAS MP slams UiTM event attacking Christianity, challenges ‘undercover priests’ claim

by Jennifer Gomez and Desmond Davidson

The Malaysian Insider

MAY 08, 2014

A PAS lawmaker has slammed a public university over a religiously-charged seminar which attacked Christianity, and challenged a claim that Christian priests were masquerading as football coaches to proselytise to Muslims.

Parit Buntar MP Datuk Dr Mujahid Yusuf Rawa said the speakers should make a police report over the accusation, and warned that statements made at the seminar were mala fide and dangerous if they failed to back them with evidence.

“The speakers and the organisers of the seminar risk being hauled up for making accusations which could threaten inter-religious harmony in the country which was already fragile,” said Mujahid.

He urged them to provide evidence to the police, and cited Article 11(4) of the Federal Constitution restricting the propagation of any faith to Muslims.

The seminar on the use of the word “Allah” and Christology, held last Tuesday at the Universiti Teknologi Mara (UiTM), heard one of its speakers, Abdul Karim Omar, claiming that undercover Christian priests have been sent to Malaysia under different guises, including working with Muslim children as football coaches, to proselytise and convert Muslims.

As a Muslim, I do have a certain perception and understanding of Christianity, but it is unfair for me to speak to an audience on behalf of Christians on whether Jesus is the son of God or is God himself, for instance… – Mujahid Yusuf Rawa.

Mujahid said the seminar should have called representatives from different faiths so that participants could listen to both sides of the debate and make their own conclusions.

“As a Muslim, I do have a certain perception and understanding of Christianity, but it is unfair for me to speak to an audience on behalf of Christians on whether Jesus is the son of God or is God himself, for instance.

“What right did they have talking about another faith in front of people?” he asked, adding that similarly, he would not appreciate a person of another faith commenting on Islam.

Saying Malaysia’s racial and religious harmony was not as good as it should be, Mujahid called on followers of all religions to be sensitive and work towards creating peaceful co-existence instead of spreading hate and fear.

“If this seminar was to conserve and preserve the Islamic faith, there is nothing wrong in that, but that does not give them the license to attack another faith.

“This is like adding salt to the wound, adding fuel to the fire,” said Mujahid, who has been actively promoting Christian-Muslim dialogue in the wake of the “Allah” controversy.

The seminar was jointly organised by the Academy of Contemporary Islamic Studies, UiTM, Warisan Ibnu Aaby and the Selangor Islamic Religious Council (Mais), and supported by Utusan Malaysia, Kumpulan Karangkraf, TV Al-Hijrah, Zikay Group and Pantai Bharu Group of Companies

At the seminar, copies of a book published by Mais on the threat of Christianisation and alleged evangelism among Malaysian Muslims were also distributed to more than 1,000 students in attendance.

The book, Pendedahan Agenda Kristian (An Exposure of the Christian Agenda), among others warns Muslims of “tricks” by Christians to sway Muslims from their faith, and claims that the main reason for apostasy among Muslims is Christianisation.

Another book on the name “Allah” tells why non-Muslims especially Christians should not be allowed to use the term.

Sarawak PKR chief Baru Bian said Muslim groups were emboldened in their insinuations and criticisms against Christians due to the weak government, as they knew Putrajaya would not take any action against them.

“This had emboldened them to make all the insinuations against Christians, the alleged attempts at proselytising Muslims and distributing copies of the book published by Mais on the threat of Christianisation and alleged evangelism among Muslims.

“It just showed how weak the Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak is,” Baru said on the controversial seminar.

“Has he made any strong statement against Datuk Zulkifli Nordin (the former deputy president of the Malay rights group Perkasa) or Perkasa before this?” he asked.

The Ba Kelalan state assemblyman said the seminar would cause more rift between Muslims and non-Muslims and the Malays with the other races in the country.

He also dismissed Abdul Karim’s claim that Christian priests on “undercover priests”.

“Just because they are Christians, don’t make them Christian missionaries”.

Baru said he was aware of Brazilian football coaches, who are Christians, who had held football clinics as he was also involved in a similar clinic in his constituency.

“I don’t think they are missionaries. What is wrong with Christians who want to contribute to young people of this country?” he asked.

“You cannot just accuse people of proselyting to Muslims.”

Parti Rakyat Sarawak (PRS) president Tan Sri Dr James Masing also expressed surprise and shock that UiTM had organised a seminar that could incite inter-religious misunderstanding and animosity among people of different faiths.

Masing called on the authorities, including the Education Ministry, to investigate.

“We cannot allow discussions like these which could incite religious tension and hatred in a multi-religious country like Malaysia,” Masing said, adding that had Christians discussed “10 ways for a Muslim to become  Christian”, they would have been hauled up for alleged sedition, referring to a speaker at the seminar who spoke on ten reasons why Christians should become Muslims. – May 8, 2014.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 8 May 2014, 8:18 am and is filed under
nation building
,
Religion
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


With no hard evidence, hunt for MH370 to get deeper, broader and pricier

By Holly Yan, CNN

May 7, 2014

(CNN) — After 61 days and no tangible evidence, officials from Malaysia, China and Australia will hunker down Wednesday to plot the next steps in the hunt for MH370.

Their tasks: Review all the information gathered so far and figure out what tools will be needed in the next stage of the search — a deeper, broader probe of the Indian Ocean.

Two things are certain: This new phase will be expensive and even more difficult.

Australia estimates it will cost $60 million, with the breakdown of who’s going to pay for what yet to be determined.

But perhaps the greatest challenge now will be scouring unchartered territory. A key element of the new phase will be a detailed mapping of the ocean floor.

“We know that the water is very deep,” Australian Deputy Prime Minister Warren Truss said this week. “And for the next stage involving sonar and other autonomous vehicles, potentially at very great depths, we need to have an understanding of the ocean floor to be able to undertake that kind of search effectively and safely.”

The next phase will focus on 60,000 square kilometers of the ocean floor, a process that could take six to eight months.

Truss said he’s not sure how deep the ocean is in the expanded search area because “it’s never been mapped.”

Search enters new, ‘more difficult’ $60 million phase

The tools

Searchers plan to use more highly specialized technology, including towed side-scan sonar and more autonomous underwater vehicles. Truss said most of the new equipment will likely have to come from the private sector.

“You can count on one hand the number of devices that can do this work, when you talk about towed sonar devices,” said Angus Houston, chief coordinator of the joint search effort, said Monday.

Truss said he’s optimistic that the new devices will be in the water within a month or two. In the meantime, he said, the Bluefin-21 drone will continue underwater missions.

The Bluefin-21 has already scanned 400 square kilometers of the Indian Ocean floor, but with no luck. The United States has authorized the use of the drone for another month. The cost? About $40,000 a day.

While the Bluefin-21 provides greater resolution than deep-towed sonar devices, the drone can only go about 4.5 kilometers deep.

Skepticism abound

Most Americans believe the search for missing plane should continue, but almost half think the mystery will never be solved, according to a new national poll.

The CNN/ORC International poll comes nearly two months after the March 8 disappearance of the plane carrying 239 people.

Nearly seven in 10 respondents, or 69%, say that the search should continue, though 79% believe there are no survivors.

According to the poll, 52% believe that the general public will eventually find out what occurred, but 46% say that the fate of the plane will always remain a mystery.

Only 26% of Americans say that the Malaysian government has done a good job managing the search and providing information to the general public.

The survey, which is based on interviews with 1,008 adult Americans conducted by telephone from May 2 through May 4, has an overall sampling error of plus or minus 3.5 percentage points.

Grappling with reality

As the days tick by, some relatives of passengers say the pain only gets worse.

“It’s gotten harder as time has gone on,” said Danica Weeks, whose husband Paul was on the plane.

“To be honest, I was confident … they were going to find it in this high priority search area. Obviously they haven’t. I’ve been preparing emotionally and physically to prepare a memorial for Paul.”

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 8 May 2014, 9:05 am and is filed under
MH 370
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Hate groups getting louder as long as Putrajaya stays mute

COMMENTARY BY THE MALAYSIAN INSIDER

May 09, 2014

In the past week, groups like Isma and others in academia have amplified their hatred for a section of the Malaysian population, going as far as to distort the country’s history to make it clear that Malaysia belongs to the Malays.

It does not help that Putrajaya has remained mute, except for some parties in the ruling coalition making some noises and calling for action to curb such talk. But the dominant Umno and its president, Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak, remain silent.

Also, these parties are not members of the administration and their voices have been ignored and in fact, Isma has even asked them to shut up.

If the prime minister cannot find it in himself to silence these groups that appear to ignore history and harmonious interfaith ties, then he and his government should just apologise to the Chinese and Christians for their inability to do anything about the matter.

Because their silence has emboldened a group funded and encouraged by the government to spew hatred and distort history of Malaysia – which is just more than Malays, Chinese, Indians as it also includes fellow citizens in Sabah and Sarawak.

The loudmouths at Isma should understand the meaning of the word trespass – the crime of going into someone’s land without permission – but that would be asking too much of the intellectually-challenged.

The fact is, Najib and Umno have encouraged the rise of groups like Perkasa and Isma rather than the usual blame that they rose up because of weak Malay support and stronger Chinese support for the opposition.

Results in the past two general elections show that the swing is among the Malay electorate, as much as it is among the Chinese and Indians – who are a minority in Malaysia.

Perhaps it is time for Barisan Nasional (BN) component parties such as the MCA, Gerakan, MIC and others to give the PM an ultimatum on quelling this dangerous trend of hate speech and distortion of the country’s history.

The PM’s silence on whether Chinese are trespassers will be nothing more than a confirmation that he shares the sentiment of Isma, a group purportedly about Islam but becoming more racist every day.

And that being the case, how can MCA or any other Chinese-based political party justify remaining in BN today? Perhaps the DAP is right, MCA does not want to jeopardise its place in the Cabinet while the Gerakan is still lamenting its loss unlike its former leaders who have the intellectual gravitas to challenge groups such as Isma.

Ultimately, the man whose face was emblazoned on all election posters and who pushed his 1Malaysia concept must open his mouth and speak his mind on this matter.

Does he want 1Malaysia to be a footnote in history or a laughing stock in Malaysia and the world?

Is his deafening silence a tacit realisation that his party is going the opposite way of his ideas and he cannot stop them? Or in fact, he agrees with them on this?

It is time the prime minister speaks, not squeaks. – May 9, 2014.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 9 May 2014, 6:45 pm and is filed under
1Malaysia
,
Najib Razak
,
nation building
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


In open letter, MH370 family members demand raw data be released to independent investigators

The Malay Mail Online

May 08, 2014

KUALA LUMPUR, May 8 — Almost 350 family members of passengers of the missing Malaysia Airlines flight MH370 are demanding raw data be released for independent analysis, preferably to the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution (WHOI), the non-profit research facility responsible for finding the remains of missing Air France Flight 447 in 2009, almost two years after it crashed into the Atlantic Ocean.

Amid questions about how the investigation has been conducted, the family members made the demand in an open letter sent to the leaders of Malaysia, China and Australia today.

In the letter they questioned how authorities could be certain the Boeing 777 had crashed into the Indian Ocean after vanishing without a trace two months ago.

“Due to the lack of physical evidence that MH370 ended in the Southern Indian Ocean, the families are in urgent need for the conclusion, based on [British satellite communications firm] Inmarsat data analysis, that the aircraft’s flight ended in that ocean to be reconsidered to confirm its accuracy,” they wrote.

In the letter titled “A PLEA FROM THE FAMILIES OF MH370,” the relatives argued the data analysis “only indicates a probable southern flight path.”

They said the data did not “support a definitive conclusion that no other flight path was possible.”

“We feel that it is necessary that the data be subject to independent third-party review. It is our hope that with out of box thinking, the whole world can help to look for the plane.”

The group of family members is calling itself “The Cry for Truth: Voice370”.

In the letter, it said it has the “sole intention of finding MH370 and our loved ones.”

Instead of governments leading the investigation, the families said all the data should be handed to the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute (WHOI) which found the remains of missing Air France Flight 447 in 2009, almost two years after it crashed into the Atlantic Ocean.

“In our view, that WHOI is not a commercial entity and its successful location of Air France 447 demonstrates that it has the experience and expertise to conduct the search for MH370 in an ethical manner,” the families said.

With the air and surface search now halted, a new search phase costing around A$60 million (RM181 million) will begin after existing visual and sonar search data is analysed and a contractor is found to lease the sophisticated equipment needed, officials said after meeting in Canberra earlier this week.

Experts have narrowed the search area where the plane is presumed to have crashed to a large arc of the Indian Ocean about 1,600km (1,000 miles) northwest of the west Australian city of Perth.

Last week, Malaysia released its most comprehensive account yet of what happened to Flight MH370, detailing the route the plane probably took as it veered off course and the confusion that followed.

The officials have said the focus will be on 60,000 sq km (24,000 sq mile) of seabed in the Indian Ocean that could take a year to search.

US President Barack Obama had publicly promised to commit more assets, but government sources say the United States is keen to begin passing on the costs of providing the expensive sonar equipment the officials say they are trying to source.

The United States said over the weekend that it would only contribute its sophisticated Bluefin-21 underwater drone for one more month, placing pressure on Australia, China and Malaysia to find funding for the next phase of the search. A majority of the 239 people on board were Chinese nationals.

Beijing-bound MH370 disappeared after leaving Kuala Lumpur on March 8 with 239 people on board.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 9 May 2014, 12:41 am and is filed under
MH 370
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


One year after GE13, lost in sea of politicking

Bridget Welsh

Malaysiakini

May 5, 2014

COMMENT
 Today marks the one year anniversary of the historic 13th general election. This election was pivotal in the country’s history as the incumbent BN coalition held onto power, with the opposition calls for ‘change’ unfulfilled.

Scholars have highlighted the fundamental shifts in the power of Umno, the imbalance of the opposition parties, the rise in influence and political awakenings of East Malaysia and the electoral irregularities, among many profound structural changes.

In other ordinary ways, Malaysian politics has also changed, with greater cynicism, insecurities and anger more prominent in public life. This is across the political divide. News reports feature troubling reports of increased racial tensions, political polarisation and continued shortcomings in governance.

This article highlights some of the ongoing dynamics in contemporary Malaysian political life, which are both worrying and offer promise ahead.

There is no question the last year has been a difficult one for Malaysia. Globally, the country came under the full glare of the international spotlight in what arguably will be the story of the year – the loss of MH370. Now everyone in the world knows where Kuala Lumpur is, and the seas and oceans around it.

The persistence of this issue in international headlines for over two months is a reminder of the lack of closure for the families of loved ones on board the missing plane and the country as a whole.

Malaysia has been blessed historically by a comparative lack of crises but MH370 shows the need for better preparation and the need to learn. What is of concern in the failure to properly release even the preliminary investigation report of the tragedy is an apparent unwillingness to acknowledge mistakes and strengthen the country’s responses in future.

The context of post-GE13 contributes to this childish stubbornness to embrace improvements. Political wrangling and insecurities are dominating the terrain, with those in power obsessed in staying there and those in the opposition myopically focused on getting there.

Even one year later, the country is still electioneering, with the focus on power rather than the people. This is perhaps one of the most serious losses of GE13 – a distancing of the interests of citizens and political leaders.

Even basic needs are being ignored, as evident by the water rationing. This issue is being used in a seemingly never-ending political game of blaming and one-upmanship. When will the federal and government leaders sit down and figure out a proper solution to the country’s water shortages? The sense one gets is: when the dams freeze over.

The impression is statesmanship is sorely lacking. It is not only MH370 that is missing. Some of this is a product of Prime Minister Najib Razak doing a disappearing act when a controversial issue emerges. When he reappears – usually well after an issue has evoked tensions and frustrations – his interventions are too little too late.

Power at all costs

For its part, the opposition has continued focusing on bringing out the country’s problems, with little attention to solutions to these problems.

Many of their messages are often stale, and returning to old solutions. Their main goal aims at changing the government, a refrain that only perpetuates the sense among ordinary citizens that leaders are focused on power, not people. Quality leadership is lost in the sea of politicking.

This void has been enhanced by the loss of important national leaders from political life, from the tragic deaths of Karpal Singh and Irene Fernandez to the quiet voices of Abdullah Ahmad Badawi and other leaders who can bridge the divided communities.

This lack of statesmanship is enhanced by the fact that both political sides are wracked in ongoing internal struggles for power.

For Umno, united it its desire to hold onto power at any cost, Najib continues to navigate challenges inside his party, led by none other than his mentor, Dr Mahathir Mohamad. While the current premier appears to have neutralised any immediate challenge, the sense of competition for position is ongoing in Umno, with shifts in positions a constant dynamic.

Najib has proved adept at managing the levers of this party with offers of projects, contracts and other rewards regularly used as appeasement. The reality is that Najib and his associates continue to watch their backs, distracted from governing.

To accommodate the need for funds, Najib has opted to implement the Goods and Service Tax (GST), a measure that has widespread public opposition as shown in recent polls.

While some recognise the need to improve the country’s revenue position, especially given the rising debt the country is absorbing and questions arising from that debt (as shown in the 1MDB scandal), ordinary people are only seeing the impact of rising inflation on their already strained finances.

Umno knows that the GST has the potential to be its death knell – a reason it is doing everything it can to break up the opposition through hudud and other religiously divisive issues and the use of institutions such as the judiciary to marginalise political opponents and parties alike.

Umno rightly fears that the GST will undercut the base of its political support, effectively betraying its base by imposing a higher cost of living and greater suffering. In their fancy cars behind guarded houses, they have lost perspective, unaware of even the price of kangkung.

Hudud returns

If Umno is violating its promise of rising incomes and improved welfare, the opposition has also moved down the road of disillusionment. This is occurring with PAS’ Kelantan government’s call for hudud.

In GE13 the opposition offered the promise of a multiracial country, a place for everyone under the Malaysian sun. The exclusionary path of Kelantan PAS has already lost the trust of non-Malays as shown with recent polling, as decades of trust building have evaporated. Many non-Muslims feel a sense of betrayal.

The party has effectively signaled that it is no longer interested in being a leader of the nation as a whole, but appears focused on securing its base in the rural heartland, especially in Kelantan where its performance under the new state leadership has been lackluster.

Its public rationale is that the move is for political power, to win support among Muslims. History has shown in that when PAS opts for a more exclusionary path, it is punished at the polls as occurred in 1986 and 2004.

By turning to religious law before better governance and the welfare of the broader community, Kelantan PAS has taken a path that is appealing to its core and distancing itself from the middle ground, especially younger voters.

More attention could be centred on deliverables, increasing jobs and welfare in the state to allow Kelantanese the means and opportunities to stay away from the crimes hudud is supposed to prevent. As shown in Egypt, the party would be better served by working on providing jobs and raising incomes, but this lesson appears not to be have been absorbed.

As in Umno, party divisions in PAS have contributed to this undemocratic move. There appears to be ongoing positioning people in the party, especially by those that did not do well in the party polls last November.

While clearly provoked by Umno, PAS has taken a parochial, exclusionary route that not only threatens the opposition Pakatan Rakyat coalition, but has the potential to tear at the fabric of Malaysian society in a way that will only bring greater tensions and conflict.

In falling for Umno’s bait, DAP has also escalated tensions. The opposition is now struggling to move away from zero-sum politics, as ordinary Malaysians look on in dismay or glee depending on their side of the political divide.

Kelantan PAS’s exclusionary path severely weakens the opposition’s ability to represent the nation, as does Najib’s similarly divisive move to implement an unpopular policy that will erode his political base, sharpen class and generation divisions (as the young are the most affected), and has the potential to deepen the trend that has featured in Najib’s tenure – the continued politicisation of political institutions to maintain political power, from the Election Commission to the judiciary.

Concerns are particularly acute in that both PAS’ and Umno’s moves place strain on the ability of institutions to govern fairly for all Malaysians. Pressures are already clearly evident. The rule of law especially is being challenged, with now multiple incidents of the police failing to uphold judicial decisions.

Wake-up call from youth

Given the worrying trajectories, is there any reason for hope? Increasingly the frustrations of citizens have featured centre stage, with the silent majority deafened from the political noise – much of it lacking decency and direction. The answer is a yes, but one couched in realism and caution.

The GST rally last week was full of young people urging change signals the expansion of a political awakening in Malaysia. GE13 did not mark the end of this process, but rather served as a marker for new paths and patterns of engagement.

Neither side did a good job of mobilising young Malaysians as shown in the split voting patterns among younger voters, but nevertheless the youth are finding their voice. The anti-GST rally was less about one side or another of the divide, but a loud wake-up call for fairer governance, one in which a younger generation is now leading.

Amidst the 50,000 crowd are leaders for the future, joined by a growing cohort of younger leaders in the political divide that are putting forward important issues such as education, security and the rule of law.

It is important to note that amidst the politicking are voices that are indeed focusing on meaningful issues and appear less obsessed about who is holding what position, be in the chief ministership of Selangor or a cabinet post.

My faith lies most with the young in Malaysia, who along with the sage wisdom of leaders who were socialised in the post-Mahathir era and national oriented civil society leaders, are speaking out and engaging important issues. They offer light in the darkness of the current political scene.

In 2008, I wrote that Malaysians were ahead of their politicians. I also wrote that change would not be a linear process. We continue to see these observations in current political life.

The opposition has the responsibility to move beyond focusing on attaining power and developing capacity to solve the nation’s problems by working together and forming a shadow cabinet. Even Cambodia’s opposition coalition that has refused to sit in parliament due to election irregularities have one. If the opposition is going to focus on its divisions it might as well get out of the business for running for national office.

For Najib, who has yet to become the label of reformer he has portrayed himself to be, Malaysians are awaiting your reforms, meaningful changes. Your clock is ticking, and already half of the country have decided you have passed your prime. Many in the other half were on the streets last week.

Malaysians on the whole deserve better than they have at the moment, and are rightly frustrated by the exclusionary turns of their leaders, but the fact that they are speaking out and sending clear messages of dissatisfaction offer promise, even if it is less promising than many hope for.

DR BRIDGET WELSH is associate professor of political science at Singapore Management University. She can be reached at
[email protected]
.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 9 May 2014, 6:31 am and is filed under
DAP
,
Najib Razak
,
PAS
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


The geopolitics of MH370

Economist

May 10th 2014 | KUALA LUMPUR | From the print edition

Having bashed Malaysia over the missing flight, China is now making up

THERE will be no let-up in the efforts to find the missing Malaysian Airlines jet Najib Razak, Malaysia’s prime minister, vowed on May 5th. Despite his promise, however, there is growing acceptance that it will take months even years to find any trace of flight MH370, which disappeared on March 8th. Hopes that any of its passengers might still be alive must also be cast aside. The new search area in the Indian Ocean will alone cover 60,000 square kilometres (23,000 square miles)—and that is on top of the 4,600,000 square kilometres already scoured. Because the focus of the search-and-rescue mission has now moved to the west coast of Australia, Malaysians have some breathing space to reflect on a traumatic two months in the glare of the world’s attention. The country has taken a battering, but the longer-term damage is another matter. The saga has emphasised how much Malaysia matters in the geopolitics of the region: the two Pacific superpowers, America and China, have both come to play big roles in the search for the missing plane, if in very different ways.

In any reckoning, Malaysia’s handling of the loss of MH370 has been a public-relations disaster. The tone was set during the first week by the authorities’ confusion, stonewalling and contradictory messages. One of the gravest flaws has been a deep reluctance to release information, however innocuous. This antagonised the victims’ families. And the problem persists. On May 1st the Malaysian government published a much-heralded report on the disappearance of the plane. This turned out to consist of just five pages, containing little new information. But, as one government adviser admitted: “If we had got this out there in the first week, there wouldn’t have been a nine-week drumbeat of everyone calling us lying bastards.”

Opposition politicians and critics of the government say that the damage to Malaysia’s reputation is a result of the country’s poor governance. Malaysia, the argument goes, is more authoritarian than democratic, with little transparency or accountability in government.

There is some truth to that. But government officials are justified in feeling frustrated that the failures of communication have overshadowed their success in efficiently putting together an extraordinary coalition of countries to look for the plane. On the technical side, many acknowledge that Malaysia has done an adequate job with the relatively limited means at its disposal. It has also gone beyond the call of duty in opening up to its search partners, sharing sensitive details of its military radar system, for example, with the Chinese.

One person who has stood up for Malaysia over MH370 is Barack Obama. During a recent long-scheduled visit to Malaysia, the American president went out of his way to laud the country’s leadership of the search operation. America has contributed a vast amount of equipment, man-hours and money to the search for the missing plane, out of all proportion to the three Americans (out of 227 passengers) lost on the flight. This has brought the two countries closer, at a time when America is searching for new and reinvigorated alliances in the region. Historically, there has been a good deal of anti-Americanism in Muslim-majority Malaysia, but for the time being that seems to have been stilled. Mr Obama got a hero’s welcome from everyone.

That in turn may help account for the zigzag course of China in the MH370 affair. The flight was en route to Beijing, and over half the passengers were Chinese. But rather than support the Malaysian government in the first month or so, China seemed to incite the distraught families into ever fiercer, often histrionic, criticism of Malaysian officialdom, perhaps to deflect attention from the possibility that the plane might have been downed by home-grown terrorists. The Chinese did nothing to dispel some of the alternative, wilder conspiracy theories circulating in Beijing.

In recent weeks, however, the tone has changed. The Chinese ambassador to Malaysia has told the Chinese-language press in Kuala Lumpur that his country accepts that the disappearance of MH370 was not some dark conspiracy and that Chinese-Malaysian relations are unaffected. The wave of criticism in the official Chinese press has largely abated. Perhaps China feels, in the regional battle of wills with America, that it needs good relations with Malaysia and that these were threatened by its attacks. Malaysia is China’s largest trade partner in the Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN). It also has a large ethnic-Chinese population, and thus could be helpful in its disputes in the South China Sea with other ASEAN countries, such as the Philippines and Vietnam, both firmly backed by America.

Mr Najib makes an official visit to China at the end of this month, marking the 40th anniversary of diplomatic ties between the two countries, initiated by Malaysia’s then prime minister, Abdul Razak, Mr Najib’s late father. With power so finely balanced in the region, China will strive to make the visit go smoothly, including keeping angry families at a face-saving distance.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 9 May 2014, 6:19 am and is filed under
MH 370
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Tweets on PAS forum on 13th May, 1969

1.Spoke at  interesting forum organised  by PAS Shah Alam last night entitled: “13 Mei: Rekonstruksi Sejarah n Pembinaan Malaysia Pasca Rasisme”

2. Other speakers MP Mujahid Yusuf whose father Yusof Rawa defeated Mahathir in 1969, Subky Latif and  Pemuda PAS leader Mohd Nasaie Ismail

3. Subky was veteran journalist I had known since 60s when he was with Utusan which had not degenerated to unethical disgrace to journalism today.

4. ’13 Mei ‘a blot in Malaysian history. It should not have happened, should not have been allowed to happen and all Msians must ensure there is no repeat.

5. 45 years after national nightmare in 1969, there is no authoritative account of what and how it happened – no Truth and Reconciliation efforts.

6. In my first speech in Parliament in Feb 1971 I called for independent inquiry into May 13 riots to prevent recurrence. Why no inquiry in 45 yrs?

7. Theories abound about causes of May 13.  Was it  a power-grab to topple Tunku as PM? Have those in power things to hide they cannot afford an enquiry?

8. Yet  four decades later there were despicable attempts by Umno hacks to rewrite May 13 in suddenly “discovering” I was in KL and caused the riots.

9. I was accused of urinating at the flagpole of Selangor MB Harun Idris provoking the riots – a great lie as I was never in KL those 513 days.

10. I was in Melaka on 11/12 May and in  Sabah on May 13. Police have all this info in their file on me. Yet Umno hacks and  cybertroopers concoct lies!

11. Mahathir should know all this. He was PM for 22 years and  Home Minister  for 14 years. Not surprised if he had ordered full search to pin something on me.

12. Mahathir vindictive and vengeful. In 1987 Ops Lalang mass ISA detentions Guan Eng and I were arrested on first day of crackdown and  last to be  released.

13. Have we learned lessons of 513? Appears not. In recent weeks evil stalk the land from Perkasa or ISMA with poison of hate speech unchecked!

14. Subky reminisced about DAP/Gerakan LKS/NaguibAlatas debate at MARA Auditorium in KL in 1968. He said he was off-duty but specially worked.

15. Debate: what constitutes Malaysian literature. Naguib/Gerakan – must be written in Malay/Indonesian. DAP – Malaysian-centric regardless of language.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 9 May 2014, 6:14 pm and is filed under
DAP
,
Mahathir
,
nation building
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Why the Official Explanation of MH370’s Demise Doesn’t Hold Up

Ari N. Schulman

The Atlantic

May 8 2014

Outside satellite experts say investigators could be looking in the wrong ocean.

Investigators searching for the missing Malaysian Airlines flight were ebullient when they detected what sounded like signals from the plane’s black boxes. This was a month ago, and it seemed just a matter of time before the plane was finally discovered.

But now the search of 154 square miles of ocean floor around the signals has concluded with no trace of wreckage found. Pessimism is growing as to whether those signals actually had anything to do with Flight 370. If they didn’t, the search area would return to a size of tens of thousands of square miles.

Even before the black-box search turned up empty, observers had begun to raise doubts about whether searchers were looking in the right place. Authorities have treated the conclusion that the plane crashed in the ocean west of Australia as definitive, owing to a much-vaunted mathematical analysis of satellite signals sent by the plane. But scientists and engineers outside of the investigation have been working to verify that analysis, and many say that it just doesn’t hold up.

A Global Game of Marco Polo

Malaysia Airlines flights are equipped with in-flight communications services provided by the British company Inmarsat. From early on, the lynchpin of the investigation has been signals sent by Flight 370 to one of Inmarsat’s satellites. It’s difficult to overstate the importance of this lonely little batch of “pings.” They’re the sole evidence of what happened to the plane after it slipped out of radar contact. Without them, investigators knew only that the plane had enough fuel to travel anywhere within 3,300 miles of the last radar contact—a seventh of the entire globe.

Inmarsat concluded that the flight ended in the southern Indian Ocean, and its analysis has become the canonical text of the Flight 370 search. It’s the bit of data from which all other judgments flow—from the conclusive announcement by Malaysia’s prime minister that the plane has been lost with no survivors, to the black-box search area, to the high confidence in the acoustic signals, to the dismissal by Australian authorities of a survey company’s new claim to have detected plane wreckage.

Although Inmarsat officials have described the mathematical analysis as “groundbreaking,” it’s actually based on some relatively straightforward geometry. Here’s how it works: Every so often (usually about once an hour), Inmarsat’s satellite sends a message to the plane’s communication system, asking for a simple response to show that it’s still switched on. This response doesn’t specify the plane’s location or the direction it’s heading, but it does have some useful information that narrows down the possibilities.

You can think of the ping math like a game of Marco Polo played over 22,000 miles of outer space. You can’t see the plane. But you shout Marco, and the plane shouts back Polo. Based on how long the plane takes to respond, you know how far away it is. And from the pitch of its voice, you can tell whether it’s moving toward you or away from you—like the sound of a car on the highway—and about how fast.

This information is far from perfect. You know how far the plane was for each ping, but the ping could be coming from any direction. And you how fast the plane is moving toward or away from you. It could also be moving right or left, up or down, and the speeds would sound the same. The task of the Inmarsat engineers has been to take these pieces and put them together, working backwards to reconstruct possible flight paths that would fit the data.

What’s the Frequency?

There are two relevant pieces of information for each ping: the time it took to travel from plane to satellite, and the radio frequency at which it was received. It’s important to keep in mind that the transit times of the pings correspond to distances between satellite and plane, while frequencies correspond to relative speeds between satellite and plane. And this part’s critical: Relative speed isn’t the plane’s actual airspeed, just how fast it’s moving toward or away from the satellite.

Authorities haven’t released much information about the distances—just the now-famous “two arcs” graphic, derived in part from the distance of the very last ping. But they’ve released much more information about the ping frequencies. In fact, they released a graph that shows all of them:

Inmarsat

This graph is the most important piece of evidence in the Inmarsat analysis. What it appears to show is the frequency shifts or “offsets”—the difference between the normal “pitch” of the plane’s voice (its radio frequency) and the one you actually hear.

The graph also shows the shifts that would be expected for two hypothetical flight paths, one northbound and one southbound, with the measured values closely matching the southbound path. This is why officials have been so steadfastly confident that the plane went south. It seems to be an open-and-shut verdict of mathematics.

So it should be straightforward to make sure that the math is right. That’s just what a group of analysts outside the investigation has been attempting to verify. The major players have been Michael Exner, founder of the American Mobile Satellite Corporation; Duncan Steel, a physicist and visiting scientist at NASA’s Ames Research Center; and satellite technology consultant Tim Farrar. They’ve used flight and navigation software like STK, which allows you to chart and make precise calculations about flight scenarios like this one. On their blogs and in an ongoing email chain, they’ve been trying to piece together the clues about Flight 370 and make sense of Inmarsat’s analysis. What follows is an attempt to explain and assess their conclusions.

What We Know

Although the satellite data provides the most important clues about the plane’s overall flight path, they’re not the only clues available. Authorities have some basic but crucial additional information about the flight that can help to make sense of the satellite math:

1. The satellite’s precise coordinates

The satellite in contact with Flight 370 was Inmarsat’s IOR satellite, parked in geostationary orbit above the Indian Ocean. The satellite is meant to be stationary, but its orbit has decayed somewhat, so that it actually rotates slightly around its previously fixed position. Its path is publicly available from the Center for Space Standards & Innovation.

2. The plane’s takeoff time and coordinates

16:41 UTC from the Kuala Lumpur airport.

3. The plane’s general motion toward or away from the satellite

From radar tracking, we know the plane traveled northeast, away from the satellite, over the first 40 minutes after takeoff, then westward, toward the satellite, until 94 minutes into the flight, when it was last detected on radar. Inmarsat spokesmen have stated that the ping distances got progressively longer over the last five hours of flight, meaning that the plane was moving away from the satellite during that time.

4. Two flight paths investigators think are consistent with the ping data

In addition to the frequency shift graph, the Inmarsat report includes a map with two “Example Southern Tracks,” one assuming a flight speed of 400 knots, the other a speed of 450 knots. Check it out:

Inmarsat

These bits of knowledge allow us to put some basic constraints on what a graph of the ping frequency shifts should look like. We’ll use more precise numbers later; for now, it’s helpful just to have some qualitative sense of what to expect:

5. Frequency shifts that should all be negative

When the plane is moving away from the satellite, the radio signal gets stretched out, so the frequency decreases. This means that the frequency shifts should be negative over most of the flight. Although there was an approximately one-hour period starting 40 minutes after takeoff when radar showed the plane moving westward, toward the satellite, the graph shows that no pings were sent during that time—so actually, all of the shifts on the graph should be negative.

6. Frequency shifts before takeoff that should be near zero

Plotting the satellite’s path in STK, you can see that it moves through an ellipse centered around the equator. Space scientist Steel has created this graphic of the satellite’s motion, including marks for its position when the plane took off and when it last pinged the satellite:

Duncan Steel.

The satellite’s motion is almost entirely north-south, and the plane’s takeoff location in Kuala Lumpur is almost due east of the satellite. This means that the satellite was only barely moving relative to Kuala Lumpur, so the frequency shift for a plane nearly stationary on the ground at the airport would be nearly zero.

7. Frequency shift graph should match map of southbound flight paths

The way the Marc-Polo math works is that, if you assume the plane traveled at some constant speed, you can produce at most one path north and one path south that fit the ping data. As the example flight paths on Inmarsat’s map show, the faster you assume the plane was moving overall, the more sharply the path must arc away from the satellite.

This constraint also works the other way: Since flight paths for a given airspeed are unique, you can work backwards from these example paths, plotting them in STK to get approximate values for the ping distances and relative speeds Inmarsat used to produce them. The relative speeds can then be converted into frequency shifts, which should roughly match the values on the frequency graph. (This is all assuming that Inmarsat didn’t plot the two example paths at random but based on the ping data.) We’ll put more precise numbers on this below.

The Troubled Graph

But the graph defies these expectations. Taken at face value, the graph shows the plane moving at a significant speed before it even took off, then moving toward the satellite every time it was pinged. This interpretation is completely at odds with the official conclusion, and flatly contradicted by other evidence.

The first problem seems rather straightforward to resolve: the reason the frequency shifts aren’t negative is probably that Inmarsat just graphed them as positive. Plotting absolute values is a common practice among engineers, like stating the distance to the ocean floor as a positive depth value rather than a negative elevation value.

But the problem of the large frequency shift before takeoff is more vexing. Exactly how fast does the graph show the plane and satellite moving away from each other prior to takeoff?

The first ping on the graph was sent at 16:30 UTC, eleven minutes prior to takeoff. The graphed frequency shift for this ping is about -85 Hz. Public records show that the signal from the plane to the satellite uses a frequency of 1626 to 1660 MHz. STK calculations show the satellite’s relative motion was just 2 miles per hour toward the airport at this time. Factoring in the satellite’s angle above the horizon, the plane would need to have been moving at least 50 miles per hour on the ground to produce this frequency shift—implausibly high eleven minutes prior to takeoff, when flight transcripts show the plane had just pushed back from the gate and not yet begun to taxi.

On the other side of the frequency graph, the plane’s last ping, at 00:11 UTC, shows a measured frequency shift of about -252 Hz, working out to a plane-to-satellite speed of just 103 miles per hour. But the sample southbound paths published by Inmarsat show the plane receding from the satellite at about 272 miles per hour at this time.

In other words, the frequency shifts are much higher than they should be at the beginning of the graph, and much lower than they should be at the end. Looking at the graph, it’s almost as if there’s something contributing to these frequency shift values other than just the motion between the satellite and the plane.

Cracking the ‘Doppler Code’

Exner, an engineer who’s developed satellite and meteorology technologies since the early 1970s, noted that the measured frequency shifts might come not just from each ping’s transmission from plane to satellite, but also from the ping’s subsequent transmission from the satellite to a ground station that connects the satellites into the Inmarsat network. In other words, Exner may have found the hidden source that seems to be throwing off the frequency graph.

Inmarsat’s analysis is highly ambiguous about whether the satellite-to-ground transmission contributed to the measured frequency shift. But if it did, a ground station located significantly south of the satellite would have resulted in frequency shifts that could account for the measured shifts being too large at the beginning of the graph and too small at the end. And sure enough, Inmarsat’s analysis states that the ground station receiving the transmission was located in Australia.

It’s possible to check the theory more precisely. Public records of Inmarsat ground stations show just one in Australia: in Perth. Using STK, you can precisely chart the satellite’s speed relative to this station, and, using the satellite-to-ground signal frequency (about 3.6 GHz), you can then factor the satellite-to-ground shifts out of the frequency graph. Finally, you can at last calculate the true satellite-to-plane speed values.

The results seem to be nearly perfect. For the first ping, you wind up with a satellite-to-plane speed of about 1 mile per hour—just what you’d expect for a plane stationary or slowly taxiing eleven minutes before takeoff. This finding seems to provide a basic sanity check for interpreting the graph, and led Exner to declare on Twitter, “Doppler code cracked.” He produced a new graph of the frequency shifts, shown below. The gently sloping blue line shows the shifts between the satellite and the ground station in Perth, while the dotted red line shows the newly calculated satellite-to-plane shifts:

Michael Exner

Why Inmarsat’s Analysis Is Probably Wrong

If this interpretation—based on the work of Exner, Steel, Farrar, and myself—is correct, it would allow independent experts to fully review Inmarsat’s analysis, verify its work and check to see if Inmarsat might have missed any important clues that could further narrow down the plane’s whereabouts.

The problem is, although this interpretation matches two basic expectations for the frequency graph, it still doesn’t match Inmarsat’s example flight paths. The new frequency values, calculated by Exner, show the flight’s speed relative to the satellite as only about 144 miles per hour by the last ping, but Inmarsat’s example flight paths show a relative speed of about 272 miles per hour.

It’s possible these outside experts have still erred or missed some crucial detail in their attempts to understand the Inmarsat analysis. But that just means that Inmarsat’s analysis, as it has been presented, remains deeply confusing, or perhaps deeply confused. And there are other reasons to believe that Inmarsat’s analysis is not just unclear but mistaken. (Inmarsat stands by its analysis. More on that in a minute.)

Recall that the Marco-Polo math alone doesn’t allow you to tell which direction pings are coming from. So how could Inmarsat claim to distinguish between a northern and southern path at all? The reason is that the satellite itself wasn’t stationary. Because the satellite was moving north-south, it would have been moving faster toward one path than another—specifically, faster toward a southbound track than a northbound one over the last several hours of the flight. This means that the frequency shifts would also differ between a northbound and southbound path, as the graph shows with its two predicted paths.

But this is actually where the graph makes the least sense. The graph only shows different predicted values for the north and south tracks beginning at 19:40 UTC (presumably Inmarsat’s model used actual radar before this). By this time, the satellite was traveling south, and its southward speed would increase for the rest of the flight. The frequency shift plots for northern and southern paths, then, should get steadily further apart for the rest of the flight. Instead, the graph shows them growing closer. Eventually, they even pass each other: by the end of the flight, the graph shows the satellite traveling faster toward a northbound flight path than a southbound one, even though the satellite itself was flying south.

One ping alone is damning. At 19:40 UTC, the satellite was almost motionless, having just reached its northernmost point. The graph shows a difference of about 80 Hz between predicted northbound and southbound paths at this time, which would require the satellite to be moving 33 miles per hour faster toward the southbound path than the northbound one. But the satellite’s overall speed was just 0.07 miles per hour at that time.

Inmarsat claims that it found a difference between a southbound and northbound path based on the satellite’s motion. But a graph of the frequency shifts along those paths should look very different from the one Inmarsat has produced.

Losing Faith

Either Inmarsat’s analysis doesn’t totally make sense, or it’s flat-out wrong.

For the last two months, I’ve been trying to get authorities to answer these questions. Malaysia Airlines has not returned multiple requests for comment, nor have officials at the Malaysian Ministry of Transportation. Australia’s Joint Agency Coordination Centre and the UK’s Air Accidents Investigation Branch, which have been heavily involved in the investigation, both declined to comment.

An Inmarsat official told me that to “a high degree of certainty, the proponents of other paths are wrong. The model has been carefully mapped out using all the available data.”

The official cited Inmarsat’s participation in the investigation as preventing it from giving further detail, and did not reply to requests for comments on even basic technical questions about the analysis. Inmarsat has repeatedly claimed that it checked its model against other aircrafts that were flying at the time, and peer-reviewed the model with other industry experts. But Inmarsat won’t say who reviewed it, how closely, or what level of detail they were given.

Until officials provide more information, the claim that Flight 370 went south rests not on the weight of mathematics but on faith in authority. Inmarsat officials and search authorities seem to want it both ways: They release charts, graphics, and statements that give the appearance of being backed by math and science, while refusing to fully explain their methodologies. And over the course of this investigation, those authorities have repeatedly issued confident pronouncements that they’ve later quietly walked back.

The biggest risk to the investigation now is that authorities continue to assume they’ve finally found the area where the plane went down, while failing to explore other possibilities simply because they don’t fit with a mathematical analysis that may not even hold up.

After all, searchers have yet to find any hard evidence—not so much as a shred of debris—to confirm that they’re looking in the right ocean.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 9 May 2014, 6:41 am and is filed under
MH 370
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Malaysia blighted by two “missing” disasters threatening to plunge the country into a failed state – the missing  MH 370, after 64 days with no clues or  end in sight and the “missing Prime Minister” tragedy

We gather for the announcement of the DAP/Pakatan Rakyat candidate for the Bukit Gelugor parliamentary by-election with mixed feelings – great  sadness that this occurred because of the untimely death of Karpal Singh, an irreplaceable people’s champion; and enormous sense of responsibility and challenge, as the by-election is taking place at a very critical stage of the nation’s development.

At the DAP Gelang Patah 13GE Anniversary Dinner last night, I called for a people’s awakening to launch a national movement of moderates against racial and religious extremists to save Malaysia from descending to become a failed state.

Let the Bukit Gelugor and Teluk Intan parliamentary by-elections, to be held respectively on May 25 and May 31, be the first two test cases of a Malaysian people’s awakening for a national movement against racial and religious extremists in the country.

In the past 12 months since the 13GE last May, Malaysia had been  blighted by two “missing” disasters threatening to plunge the country into a failed state – firstly, the missing  MH 370, after 64 days with no clues or  end in sight and secondly, the “missing Prime Minister” tragedy.

Both these two “missing” disasters had seriously highlighted the grave weaknesses and faultlines of the Malaysian nation and governance.

Today is the 64th day of the disappearance of the Malaysian Airlines Boeing 777 on March 8, and despite the world’s largest multi-national, longest and most expensive search on air, land, sea and under-sea for the aircraft and its 239 passengers and crew,  we are no nearer to an answer as to what happened in the early hours of March 8 to the routine flight from Kuala Lumpur to Beijing, as no wreckage had been found and there is absolutely no clue what actually happened or where the airliner had actually ended.

It is a great tragedy that after two months of search for MH 370 in the South China Sea, the Straits of Malacca, Andaman Sea and  the Indian Ocean, more and more people are asking whether the six-week multi-national search in the southern Indian Ocean based at Perth was  the wrong area.

Yesterday,  it was reported that  77 per cent of an  Australian poll don’t believe the search area off Western Australia in the south Indian Ocean is the right place to search – following reports MH 370 is claimed to be in Bay of Bengal, South China Sea, Gulf of Thailand, Maldives and Diego Garcia naval base.

Furthermore, the majority of the respondents or 71 per cent thought Australia should stop footing the hefty bill – which had incurred costs of over  RM100 million and will need more than another RM100 million in the next phase of the search.

Another poll in the United States showed that some  75 per cent of Americans do not believe that the Malaysian Government had done a good job managing the search and providing information to the general public.

Malaysians do not have to depend on polls in Australia, the United States or other countries to form their opinion about the MH370 disaster – as a Malaysian poll at the end of March showed that more than half of Malaysians surveyed believe that the government had been hiding information about MH 370’s disappearance.

What is indisputable is that never before in the 57-year of the nation has the Malaysian government and its accountability, transparency and good governance come under such intense and continuing  international scrutiny, and we were found wanting on these criteria, not only in the international but also the national court of opinion.

The second “missing” disaster after the 13GE is the disaster of the “missing Prime Minister”, which has plunged the country into the worst nation-building crisis with the rising and unchecked crescendo of ugly voices of racial and religious extremism whether by racist and chauvinist NGOs like  Perkasa and ISMA, threatening to tear apart the very fabric and integrity of the Malaysian nation.

Non-Malays and non-Muslims  are insulted as “pendatang”, “trespassers” and “intruders” utterly subversive not only of the Malaysian nation-building process, but of the official signature policy of Datuk Seri Najib Razak when he became Prime Minister in April 2009.

Najib launched  the Global Movement of Moderates and said at its inaugural international conference in Kuala Lumpur in January 2012:

“Malaysia has long been synonymous not with extremism but with moderation, tolerance, inclusivity and even acceptance.. In a predominantly Muslim country with substantial communities of Hindus, Buddhists, Christians, Taoists and Sikhs, we know well the ‘dignity of difference’. We have many ethnic groups, many religions, but we continually strive to be a harmonious and truly united nation predicated on the values of moderation and the spirit of 1Malaysia.

“We know that we are best and we are strongest when we actively embrace our differences rather than just putting up with them – and it is in that spirit that we come together at the first ever meeting of the Global Movement of the Moderates. But a truly global movement cannot be imposed from above – so we must awaken in all our countries and communities the triumph of truth over ignorance, falsehood and fear.”

All these claims and credentials  of “moderation” for Malaysia  came under challenge in the past few weeks when  never before in the nation’s history had there been such concentrated outpouring of racial and religious extremism, intolerance, hatred and venom.

Malaysia is facing a very dangerous period in  her nation-building when moderation, tolerance, inclusivity and even acceptance of Malaysia’s diversity of races, religions, languages and cultures are condemned as anti-national  and even akin to treasonous activities.

The leader of ISMA has been likened to Pauline Hanson of Australia in the 1990s, who shot to prominence with her racist and extremist views, and though such extremism got her initial political attention and momentary prominence in Australian politics, she was eventually relegated to the dustbin of history because her racism and extremism went against the grain of mainstream Australian opinion.

We may be seeing a similar phenomenon in Malaysia.

The greatest threat from the extremist racist and religious fulminations from Perkasa and ISMA is not their  advocacy by the extremist Perkasa and ISMA leaders, but the silence of those in authority, especially the Prime Minister himself, which is interpreted not only as given “immunity and impunity” to these extremist views, but even worse, as either agreement or condoning of such views.

MH 370 has disappeared for 64 days unveiling a shocking state of absence of accountability and  transparency as well as  lack of good governance of the Malayian government of the day.

For how long is the “disappearance of Prime Minister” be played out before Najib is prepared to come forward to declare not only his dissociation but  opposition to extremist views, whether on race on religion,  which makes total nonsense of his 1Malaysia policy as well as Movement of Global Moderates?

Or have  the racial and religious extremists in Perkasa and ISMA overawed,  overwhelmed and overpowered Najib and the UMNO/BN government?

If so, it is most important that the voters of Bukit Gelugor and Teluk Intan  should the pioneers in a Malaysia people’s awakening to spearhead a national movement of moderates against racial and religious extremists in the country to save the country.

(Media Statement on announcement of Ramkarpal Singh as  DAP Bukit Gelugor parliamentary by-election candidate in Bukit Gelugor on Saturday, 10th May 2014 at 12.30 pm)

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 10 May 2014, 3:34 pm and is filed under
Elections
,
MH 370
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


DAP and PAS have not changed their respective stands on hudud, but it is UMNO, MCA and Gerakan which have changed their stand!

Nobody would have thought that MCA go could lower than what it suffered  in the 13th General Elections last May,  when MCA surrendered three parliamentary seats to UMNO, namely Gelang Patah, Kuantan and Wangsa Maju and received  the worst clobbering in Malaysian electoral history when it was reduced to a mosquito “7-11” party.

But everyone was wrong, for MCA has plumbed to a lower depth, when it announced that it was not contesting the Bukit Glugor parliamentary by-election, with the MCA Secretary-General Ong Ka Chuan  insulting the intelligence of Malaysians by giving the most nonsensical of reasons: viz:

 “MCA will not participate in the poll as the party wants to fully focus on the hudud issue to protect the federal constitution.

“If we contest, some issues might crop up and divert us from our focus, which is to stop the PAS Private Member’s Bill from being tabled in Parliament on June 9.”

The press has reported that the  PAS Central Committee at its meeting in Kuala Lumour this morning decided that it will not present a private member’s bill on the implementation of hudud  in Parliament in June, referring the matter to the technical committee formed jointly by the Federal Govenment and the Kelantan State governments.

Now that PAS will not be tabling a private member’s bill on hudud implementation in the June meeting of Parliament, will MCA contest in Bukit Gelugor as the very reason for not participating in the by-election  has been completely demolished by the PAS Central Committee today.

Of course, this was not the real reason why MCA is not contesting the Bukit Gelugor by-election – which is MCA fear of an even more ignominous  defeat in Bukit Gelugor than during the 13GE last May.

If the MCA is to contest in Bukit Gelugor, it faces not the possibility and risk but the certainty of  the expose, not only in Penang but throughout Malaysia, of its perfidy and hypocrisy in launching a national sham campaign purportedly to defend the Malaysian Constitution when  in fact  it had betrayed not only the fundamental constitutional principles but also the sacrifices and memory of the MCA founders like Tun Tan Cheng Lock and Tun Tan Siew Sin on the hudud issue.

This is because DAP and PAS have not changed our respective stands on hudud, but it is UMNO, MCA and Gerakan which have changed their stand on hudud while putting up a great sham and pretence to hide their policy change on hudud.

Firstly, who can forget that when the then Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Dr. Mahathir Mohamad made the unilateral, arbitrary and unconstitutional announcement on Sept. 29, 2001 (“929 Declaration”) that Malaysia is an Islamic State, the first to rush forward to endorse such infringement of the secular Malaysian Constitution were the then MCA and Gerakan Presidents?

The only political voice to reject and repudiate the unconstitutional “929” declaration that Malaysia is an Islamic State was from the DAP.

Secondly, what is little noticed in the recent hudud controversy is the tectonic shift of Barisan Nasional and MCA/Gerakan policy on hudud.

On April 24, the Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak publicly announced that the Barisan Nasional Federal Government had never rejected hudud  – which was a clear violation of the Merdeka Constitution of 1957 and Malaysian Constitution 1963 and the stand not only of the first three Prime Ministers, Tunku Abdul Rahman,  Tun Razak and Tun Hussein, but also the struggles of the founders of MCA and MIC like Tun Tan Cheng Lock, Tun Tan Siew Sin and Tun V.T. Sambanthan.

What Najib announced on Aprl 24 was not Barisan Nasional and formerly Alliance policy for the past 57 years.

As Barisan Nasional operates on a principle of consensus, the disagreement of one of the 13 component parties in BN would suffice to block such a policy change.

In fact,  such a policy change would not have got the approval of the Barisan Nasional Supreme Council as eleven if not twelve of the 13 BN component parties would have rejected such a policy change – even if UMNO is solidly in support of such a policy change.

Why then have  the MCA President Liow Tiong Lai and Deputy President Wee Ka Siong given  their tacit support for such a major policy change by Barisan Nasional?

Can the Liow/Wee MCA leadership explain why they dare not requisition an emergency meeting of the Barisan Nasional Supreme Council to defend the secular basis of the Malaysian constitution – when there are more than enough votes to reject Najib’s unilateral, arbitrary and unconstitutional announcement of the Barisan Nasional Federal Governemtn on hudud?

Is the reason for the MCA perfidy and hypocrisy on the question of hudud all because of the greed of Liow and Wee for Ministerial appointments when MCA is finally taken back into the Cabinet and Government – with Najib dangling  the carrot of three MCA Ministers and five MCA deputy ministers?

If MCA is defending the  secular basis of the Malaysian Constitution for real, and not just launching a national sham campaign to mislead and deceive voters, then the first thing Liow and Wee must do is to make it crystal clear to Najib that MCA leaders would reject Ministerial and Deputy Ministerial offers unless Najib retracts the unilateral, arbitrary and unconstitutional announcement that the Barisan Nasional Federal Government never rejected hudud.

 (Media Conference in Batu Pahat on Sunday May 11, 2014 at 2.30 pom)

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 11 May 2014, 5:45 pm and is filed under
Elections
,
Islam
,
MCA
,
PAS
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


10 Questions for MCA President Liow Tiong Lai on whether MCA will compromise on the consensus principle of Barisan Nasional where UMNO cannot unilaterally decide in the name of the  other 12 component parties

MCA and Barisan Nasional’s decision not to contest in the Bukit Gelugor parliamentary by-election must rank as  the worst political cowardice in the 57-year electoral history of Malaysia.

This worst political cowardice of MCA and Barisan Nasional because of their fear of  suffering another ignominious defeat one year after the 13GE results last May, however, camouflages a hidden and  unworthy agenda for the by-election  – hoping to lull the DAP/Pakatan Rakyat leaders, members, supporters and the voters of Bukit Gelugor into complacency so as  to cause the lowest voter turnout in the constituency, and consequently to reduce the humongous majority of  41,778 votes won by Karpal Singh last May. Last year, the voter turnout for Bukit Gelugor was the historic high of  85.35  per cent!

Although MCA and Barisan Naisonal have “chickened” out of contesting in the Bukit Gelugor by-election, the nearly 82,000 voters of Bukit Gelugor should not  succumb to the opiate of  MCA and BN that the Bukit Gelugor by-election is unexciting and irrelevant when in fact, it and the Teluk Intan by-election are two important milestones in the post-13GE political struggle to restore justice, freedom, democracy and good governance in Malaysia.

I will be developing the case about the great importance of the two by-elections, Bukit Gelugor and Teluk Intan, in the coming weeks.

For today, I want to ask the MCA President Datuk Seri Liow Tiong Lai ten questions:

No. 1 – how could the MCA “eat its own words” in the less than 24 hours when on Saturday, both Liew and the MCA Secretary-General Ong Ka Chuan declared that the MCA would not be contesting Bukit Gelugor as MCA wanted to “fully focus on the hudud issue to protect the federal constitution…to stop the PAS Private Member’s Bill from being tabled in Parliament on June 9”, and on Sunday, Ong came out with a statement to clarify the MCA’s”real reason” for staying out of the Bukit Gelugor, without any mention of the hudud issue and admitting that a year after 13GE, MCA sees no positive signs that will allow it to win in the by-election.

No. 2 –  isn’t it true that the MCA’s earlier reason for staying out of the Bukit Gelugor by-election – to focus on the hudud issue – has deeply offended the UMNO “Big Brother”, which forced  the MCA leadership to “flip-flop” within 24 hours on its reason for not contesting in Bukit Gelugor, as Liow faced the risks of  losing the three MCA Ministers and five Deputy Ministers which Najib has dangled before him if he disregarded UMNO sensitivities?

No. 3 – if Liow and the MCA leaders cannot and dare not speak out fully and truly why they are staying out of the Bukit Gelugor by-election, i.e. over the hudud issue, who can expect MCA leaders or Ministers to  have the courage of conviction to stand by political principles whether in Cabinet or Government?

No. 4 –  isn’t this “flip-flop” of MCA reason why it is not contesting Bukit Gelugor by-election the best and latest proof that the MCA is not sincere or truthful about wanting to focus on the hudud issue?

No. 5 –  isn’t it true that DAP and PAS have not changed their respective stands on hudud and it is UMNO, MCA as well as Gerakan, which had changed their stand on hudud while putting up a great sham and pretence to hide their policy change on hudud?

No. 6 –  Is  Liow as the new MCA President (and this goes for the new Gerakan leadership) prepared to apologise for the 13-year betrayal of MCA (and Gerakan) when the MCA President (and Gerakan President) were among the first to fully endorse the unilateral, arbitrary and unconstitutional announcement by the then Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Dr. Mahathir Mohamad on Sept. 29, 2001 (the “929 Declaration”) that Malaysia is an Islamic State?

No. 7 –  why did Liow and the MCA leadership failed to repudiate the announcement by the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak on April 24 that the Barisan Nasional Federal Government had never rejected hudud – which was a clear violation of the Merdeka Constitution of 1957 and Malaysian Constitution 1963 and the stand not only of the first three Prime Ministers, Tunku Abdul Rahman,  Tun Razak and Tun Hussein, but also the struggles of the founders of MCA and MIC like Tun Tan Cheng Lock, Tun Tan Siew Sin and Tun V.T. Sambanthan?

No. 8 – why  Liow and the MCA leadership had failed to requisition for an emergency meeting of the Barisan Nasional  Supreme Council to reaffirm the erstwhile Barisan Nasional policy that its Federal Government rejects hudud, as  UMNO would be easily outvoted on this issue,  as at least eleven if not 12 of the 13 BN component parties would have rejected such a policy change – even if UMNO is solidly behind the Barisan Nasional policy change.

No. 9 – Arising from Question No. 8,  is Liow and the new MCA leadership now conceding that the Barisan Nasional has long ceased to operate on the principle of consensus, where the disagreement of one of the 13 component parties in BN would be sufficient to block any new decision, policy change or new policy formulation and that UMNO can unilaterally and arbitrarily act and decide in the name of MCA and the entire Barisan Nasional?

No. 10 – Is Liow and the MCA leadership prepared to take  an uncompromising stand to defend the consensus principle of Barisan Nasional where UMNO cannot unilaterally decide in the name of the other 12 component parties , that unless Najib retracts his unilateral, arbitrary and unconstitutional announcement on April 24 that the Barisan Nasional Federal Government had never rejected hudud, Liow and the MCA leadership would reject the offer of three MCA Ministers and five Deputy Ministers and would not return to the Barisan Nasional Cabinet and Government?

                This entry was posted on Monday, 12 May 2014, 4:07 pm and is filed under
DAP
,
Elections
,
Islam
,
MCA
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


GeoResonance adamant MH370 is in Bay of Bengal

by Eileen Hee

The Rakyat Post

KUALA LUMPUR, May 10:

Geological survey firm GeoResonance Pty Lt, based in Adelaide, said it hadn’t suffered any backlash from issuing its public claim to have found the wreckage of MH370 in the Bay of Bengal.

“We cannot judge about awareness that our business has created. What we know for sure is that our claim has unearthed numerous pseudo scientists in the form of media commentators,” said managing director Pavel Kursa.

He said GeoResonance had consulted its clients before approaching the media with the MH370 wreckage claim and its clients had encouraged the firm to alert the authorities.

GeoResonance’s clients mainly comprise mining companies searching for minerals, oil and gas hidden deep under ocean floors.

Asked if there had been any new interest in the firm’s services since the claim, Kursa told The Rakyat Post: “We have only received invitations to scientific conferences.”

As to possible questions raised about the impact of the claim on its business reputation, Kursa said: “We are busy doing survey projects.”

Touching further on the MH370 wreckage claim, he said: “There are people who tried to discredit our technology without having proper knowledge of what the company does.”

Having read that thus far only Bangladesh navy ships had gone to investigate the GeoResonance claims, he said: “As far as Bangladeshi Navy checking our findings, we firmly believe that our findings have not been checked at all.

“The media mentioned ‘three Bangladeshi ships scouring the Bay of Bengal’.  However, what does ‘scouring’ mean?

“We reported the precise location. Given the margin of error, the reported area size was only 500 sq metres! What was required is to send just one ship to the specified coordinates and check the location with a sonar.

“GeoResonance remains quietly confident on our reported finding in the Bay of Bengal.

“We are considering verifying the location ourselves. Two words to all the sceptics: ‘Test us!’

                This entry was posted on Monday, 12 May 2014, 9:16 pm and is filed under
MH 370
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


How to ensure poor get their share of scholarships

 – Koon Yew Yin

The Malaysian Insider

May 11, 2014

Since my retirement, I have been concerned with how we can solve the problem of the poor through educational mobility.

This has involved putting my money where my mouth is in a programme which helps needy families send their children to university through financing their first year.

Although Forbes, the media organisation has given recognition to me in its annual selection of Asian philanthropic heroes in 2011, I am the first to realise that my efforts at providing scholarships to the needy are modest and a drop in the ocean of need.

After much reflection, I would like to provide a practical and easy solution to the problem of too many deserving poor children having to chase and compete for too few scholarships.

My solution is a two-pronged one.

The first relates to government scholarships. These scholarships are, in fact, provided for by taxpayers so that taxpayers like me and other citizens have the right to ensure that the funds are not abused or misused and are fairly distributed.

My proposal applies not only to federal and state educational scholarships but also to scholarships provided by the government-linked companies, such as Petronas, Tenaga Nasional, Telekom and Bank Negara.

Targeting scholarship awards more equitably

Today, we have an upper class of Malaysians who have benefited from the New Economic Policy during the past half century through access to government scholarships.

These recipients of previous NEP scholarships (Malays and non-Malays) should now be disqualified from having their children apply for government scholarships except for the small proportion of scholarships awarded purely on a merit basis.

Instead, the greater proportion of government scholarships should be made available to the children of those families who have never received such scholarships in the past.

This will ensure that the children of poor and lower middle-class Malays as well as poor non-Malays, who cannot compete with the children of richer families, will compete among themselves for scholarships.

A small quantum of the number of government scholarships though can be based solely on merit and set aside for brilliant and outstanding students for which the disqualifying clause will not be applicable.

The following are some of the positive effects of my proposal:

It will create a more level playing field for all young Malaysians in the area of government and GLC scholarships.

It will make the children of Malays as well as non-Malays who have previously benefitted from the NEP more competitive and self-reliant.

It will also boost racial harmony.

It is an easy affirmative action programme to operate as all that is needed is the identification details of earlier education scholarships holders for vetting purposes as well as a simple question in the application form: has your father of mother been recipient of a government scholarship award previously?

Any affirmative action programme should have a beginning and an end. It must also justify its target beneficiaries and remove them from the queue once they have been provided with the opportunity and benefits.

Others formerly excluded or left out should now be put into the queue if they are in need.

Private sector participation

The other part of my strategy applies to the private sector. One reader in response to an article I wrote on the Chinese poor had provided the following comment:

“The super rich Chinese can do more by funding more educational organisation for the needy ones. As we know non-Bumi have minimum opportunity to study in full government-funded tertiary or vocational education. The capable and well networked Chinese should organise schools like early days when the Chinese merchants self-funded the Chinese schools. But nowadays the super rich Chinese are only interested in creating international school for their own profit. God will help those who help themselves. Let us help ourselves while waiting for the change in government.”

It is clear that the very rich and even rich – of whatever race – can and should do much more in providing educational access to the poor as well as middle class.

These private sector scholarships can have a higher proportion based on merit to balance the pro-poor one awarded by the government.

If this two-pronged strategy is adopted, we will have a greater measure of national unity and harmony, and quicker progress towards a more equitable and fair society.  – May 11, 2014.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 12 May 2014, 9:01 pm and is filed under
Education
,
nation building
,
university
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


New state general elections is best way to resolve the constitutional impasse in Terengganu caused by the resignation of three UMNO Assemblymen from UMNO, with no political party with working majority

With the resignation of the former Terengganu Mentri Besar, Ahmad Said and two other UMNO Terengganu State Assemblymen, Ghazali Taib and  Roslee Daud, from UMNO, new state general elections is the best way to resolve the constitutional impasse that has arisen in Terengganu as there is no political party with a working majority.

The composition of the Terengganu State Assembly is now BN 14; Pakatan Rakyat 15 and Independents 3.

The various scenarios that could arise from the constitutional crisis in Terengganu are:

•	Firstly, newly-installed Terengganu Mentri Besar Datuk Ahmad Razif Abdul Rahman conceding that he has lost the majority in the Terengganu State Assembly and the mandate given to him last night to form the new Terengganu State Government.

•	Secondly, the possibility of Pakatan Rakyat forming a State Government, which has now 15 as compared to Barisan Nasional’s 14 State Assembly seats.

•	Thirdly, the holding of new state general elections in Terengganu for the voters of Terengganu to decide the political future of the state.

As there is no effective majority in the first two scenarios, the best way to resolve the constitutional impasse in Terengganu caused by the resignation of the three UMNO Assemblymen from UMNO is to have new state general elections.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 13 May 2014, 12:33 pm and is filed under
Elections
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Will Liow advise Muhyiddin not to be “held to ransom” by the Terengganu trio who have resigned as UMNO Assemblymen, plunging the state into a constitutional crisis?

I could not have agreed more with the MCA President Datuk Seri Liow Tiong Lai who had advised UMNO Terengganu Assemblymen that they must “put people first, instead of their personal interests”.

It is very clear what Liow was trying to say when commenting on the former Terengganu Mentri Besar Datuk Seri Ahmad Said and two UMNO Assemblymen quitting the party to become independents after attending a Wesak celebration at Wisma Buddhist in Kuala Lumpur today.

Liow said: “The state government cannot be held at ransom. The purpose of us running for elections is to serve the people and we must ensure that the state government continues to do so.”

He hoped that the Barisan Nasional government would take immediate action to stabilise the situation in Terengganu.

The question is whether Liow would “walk the talk”.

Datuk Kadir Jasin, former editor of UMNO English-language newspaper, New Straits Times, said the Terengganu crisis caused by  the three UMNO assemblymen-turned-independent could be solved if the “price is right”.

It is reported that UMNO deputy president Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin is on his way to Terengganu to meet the Terengganu trio who have resigned from Umno  ”to find a solution to the current political impasse in the state”.

Ahmad Said, who was supposed to hold a press conference today, has decided to put it off till after Muhyiddin’s meeting.

Has Liow conveyed the MCA’s dismay and  opposition to the UMNO leadership being “held to ransom” by the Terengganu trio  in the Terengganu State Assembly?

I do not believe there are any Malaysian who thinks that the MCA President would dare to communicate to Muhyhiddin or the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak the MCA  opposition or reservation of UMNO leadership being “held to ransom” in having to deal with the  Trengganu trio on what would be the “right price” to end the constitutional impasse in Terengganu.

Would Liow dare to say that MCA would oppose any “deal” which Muhyiddin might reach with the Terengganu trio which smacks of the Barisan Nasional being “held to ransom”?

This is because Liow and the MCA leadership are themselves easily “held to ransom” so as  not to defend the founding principles of the Merdeka Constitution and the struggle of the early MCA Presidents like Tun Tan Cheng Lock and Tun Tan Siew Sin of Malaysia as a secular democratic nation with a constitution which is incompatible with hudud – all because of the carrot of three Ministers and five Deputy Ministers for MCA dangled by Najib.

MCA dared not contest in the Bukit Gelugor parliamentary by-election for MCA leaders  know that the by-election would provide an excellent opportunity for the DAP to expose MCA perfidy and hypocrisy in agreeing to a fundamental change of the 57-year policy of Alliance/Barisan Nasional stand on hudud, from one of rejection of hudud to one of not rejecting hudud, without any whimper of objection from MCA!

If the MCA President and the MCA leaders can be so easily “held to ransom”, what credibility do they have to raise objections to the Terengganu trio holding the Barisan Nasional/UMNO leadership to “ransom”?

One way to cut through all these maze of political perfidy and hypocrisy and the restoration of political integrity is for the holding a new state general elections in Terengganu.

Let MCA openly  call for the dissolution of the Terengganu State Assembly and the holding of the Terengganu state general elections to return the mandate to decide the future of the state to  the Terengganu voters?

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 13 May 2014, 6:43 pm and is filed under
Elections
,
MCA
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Some observations about the Terengganu drama

The Malaysian Insider

May 14, 2014

What was supposed to be a quick change of leadership in Terengganu has now blown into a full crisis for Barisan Nasional (BN), which could still lose the oil-rich state to their political foes unless all Umno assemblymen pledge loyalty to the state government.

Here are some observations of the last two days when Datuk Seri Ahmad Said’s (pic) resignation letter as menteri besar snowballed into him and two other Umno state lawmakers quitting the party. One is said to have returned to the fold.

1) Najib is weak

Let’s be honest. If Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak was strong and if he was feared in his own party, Ahmad Said and the other state assemblymen would think many times before holding Umno/BN to ransom.

But as it stands today, he is viewed as weak by everyone, from the motormouths at Ikatan Muslimin Malaysia (Isma) to royal households throughout the country.

They know that Najib is indecisive, unable to use the powers of incumbency to exert control and seemingly incapable of sparking a feel-good feeling about his administration across Malaysia.

The end result: even a small-time local politician named Ahmad Said can thumb his nose at Najib.

2) Remember the Perak power grab

If the roles were reversed, it would be reasonable to expect that some Umno bigwigs would be beating a path to the palace, claiming that Umno’s representative should be installed as the new Menteri Besar and that BN be allowed to take control of the state assembly ala Perak.

You can bet that all legal precedents would have been thrown out as was the case in Perak and that Umno would be in charge by now.

By contrast, PAS and DAP are asking for fresh polls; seeking to go back to the people for a mandate.

3) Prima donna politicians

Is it a case of egos? Was Najib trying to show he has the testicular fortitude to stare down a menteri besar without even considering that Malay customs and social culture dictate some niceties?

And what about Ahmad Said? Was he so embarrassed to what was tantamount to a sacking days before hosting a wedding feast for his daughter that pushed him to bring a government down?

It would appear that Umno politicians believe they are bigger than the party, or the government or the people that they serve. It is all about their interests and agendas.

But between these two alpha males of sorts, who will back down now in the interest of the party? Or can Deputy Prime Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin save the day for Umno?

If not, how much would it take to get the independents back to Umno?

4) Umno needs to out-crisis Pakatan?

Just as the Pakatan Rakyat (PR) parties were trying to paper over cracks caused by the hudud issue, Umno had to implode with the Terengganu crisis.

The pressure was on PR to head off an ideological split similar to the one that broke Barisan Alternatif in 2001 when PAS insisted on pushing for hudud laws despite protest from the DAP.

Just days after PAS relented to shelve the idea, Umno had to spark a crisis by removing Ahmad Said in what would appear to be unholy haste.

Was Umno’s timing just bad or the leadership was clueless at Ahmad Said’s resolve to keep the top state post? – May 14, 2014.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 14 May 2014, 9:05 am and is filed under
Najib Razak
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.