ARTICLE 1
Better Future In Store With BN At The Helm – Wednesday, 13 June 2012 00:04
KUALA LUMPUR — Najib Tun Razak says Barisan Nasional (BN) is in the position to fulfil the aspirations of young people seeking further opportunities for advancement and better quality of life.
The prime minister said under the BN, a better future was in store for them and other Malaysians.
He noted that BN had proven that it could deliver what the people wanted for the country through the implementation of the government’s transformation agenda.
The level of trust and confidence of the people in the government hadincreased due to the success of the implementation of the national transformation policy, Najib said during a one-hour chat with members of the public via the NSTLive Chat Session on the NST website on Tuesday.
“I’m encouraged by the response that I can gauge directly from the rakyat, especially when I meet them during my countless visits throughout the country,” he said.
Asked when the general election would be held, Najib said he was looking at all possibilities before making a decision.
The prime minister pointed out that BN had to re-invigorate itself by choosing new talents with a view to striking a balance between the older and new generation of leaders.
He said there was a need to ensure continuity by maintaining a number of current leaders who were still popular with the people.
Asked on suggestions that it would be tough going for the BN to tackle urban areas, Najib said the government would continue its engagement with urban voters, including the Chinese community.
He said it was to make them understand that their future would be better with BN at the helm towards ensuring peace, stability, harmony and a more prosperous society.
On security, Najib said although the general crime rate had fallen, more could be done to ensure a safer environment for the people.
(Bernama)
[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]
Use that mandate to grant :
1) Freedom from Apartheid/Fascism (Article 1 Human Rights Charter)
2) Freedom from Religious-Persecution/Religious-Supremacy. (Article 18 Human Rights Charter)
3) Equality for all ethnicities and faiths in all aspects of policy, Law and Constitution. (Surah An Nisa 4:75)
;or there really is no reason to vote BN again. How can a coalition that does not use the people’s mandate to ensure equality or even update laws presume to say there will be a better future? Stagnation and unending apartheid is not a future.
ARTICLE 2
Why race and religion? Why not quality of PM? – Tuesday, 12 June 2012 Super Admin – From Jackson Yee CS, FMT
Karpal Singh has been quoted saying, “As long as I live, I will continue to fight for a non-Malay to be prime minister”. The Malaysian Federal Constitution under Article 43 (2) (a), “the Yang di-Pertuan Agong shall first appoint as Prime Minister to preside over the Cabinet a member of the House of representatives who in his judgement is likely to command the confidence of the majority of the members of that House;…”.
Dr Kua Kia Soong has written a commentary with regards to the statement made by the learned historian, Prof Emeritus Khoo Kay Kim. Khoo claimed that Malays were the natives of Tanah Melayu, Malaysia’s name before independence, and that the Malays formed the majority in the country.
Needless to say, the supreme law of the land in Malaysia is Federal Constitution. The law does not set down any qualification on the race of the Prime Minister. The convention of being a Malaysian Prime Minister has been a Malay and Muslim male. However, as a political realist, and not a strict legal positivist, and as a non Malay Malaysian, I’m of the view that they were both right.
Legally, anyone could be the Prime Minister of Malaysia as long as he is Malaysian and commands the confidence of majority of the members of the Parliament. Politically speaking, only a Malay could be the Prime Minister, considering Khoo’s historical point of view as per the current situation in Malaysia.
The hard truth that we must accept is, either you are a non Malay or Malay. Malaysia consists of approximately 22 million population, of which more than 60% of the population is of Malay-Muslim race. The human primordial instinct in addition to the general lack of advanced, critical liberation of thoughts, owed to the aggravated factors post-Mahathirism period, would never allow himself to choose someone out of his race.
We, as a Malaysian have been strongly poisoned by the effect of racial and religious segregation in the public society. The main issue should be – what quality the next Prime Minister, if there is a successor of Prime Minister Najib Razak should possess and be able to gain the confidence of majority of the Malaysians?
In view of all the issues of race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, etc (factors to be discriminated upon an inborn cause), we, as a part of society, should have moved beyond this tribal instinct of categorisation when voting the Prime Minister.
There is a public duty for all eligible voters to be able to see through this and to choose only the capable, charismatic, confident, and upholds the rules of law, principle of justice, and common underlying values which enshrined through the unity of all the members of society.
I would urge the discussion on the qualification of Prime Minister move beyond race and religion and focus on the quality of a Prime Minister should possess.
[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]
Why race and religion? Why not end of APARTHEID. Tuesday, 12 June 2012 from @AgreeToDisagree
Not-a-Turbanless-Sikh has been quoted saying, “As long as I live, I will continue to fight for the END OF APARTHEID”. The Malaysian Federal Constitution under Article (?) SPecial Privileges
Suhakam, Suaram and so many Human Rights oriented NGOs, have written commentary upon commentary or filed lawsuit upon lawsuit without regards to the statement made by so many unlearned historians of the Reid Commissions recommendatin that Special Privileges were to end after 15 years from 1969. Neither review nor action by so many term limitless politicians to address this has occured even after 4 times the allotted period has passed. And APARTHEID continues unabated in Malaysia.
Needless to say, while the supreme law of the land in Malaysia is Federal Constitution, the law DOES SET down any qualification on the period of SPECIAL PRIVILEGES (or Bumiputra Apartheid) in the REID COMMISSION which states a recommended 15 year limit on SPECIAL PRIVILEGES. The convention of a Malaysian Prime Minister being a Malay and Muslim male is discriminative and disenfranchising though not an absolute necessity excepting the sense of insecurity of the lower classes and less educated.
This is fostered by racist and self serving factions in political parties using Bumiputra Apartheid to enrich themselves and not even the poor Malays! However, as so many so called ‘political realists’, are unable to apply strict legal positivism and activism, so many non Malay Malaysians, have capitulated to the view that APARTHEID can be ignored.
Legally and by all agreements with the UN Charter as signed by Malaysia, anyone could be the Prime Minister of Malaysia as long as he is Malaysian and commands the confidence of majority of the members of the Parliament. Politically speaking, only a Malay could be the Prime Minister is simply APARTHEID. The system however does not allow a one-man, one-vote opportunity for the citizens to select who is to be Prime Minister and is sadly limited to ‘Representative Democracy’ where only 222 MPs can choose rather than ALL citizens, something almost no MPs wishes to broach or implement, being generally power mad and wishing to sequester those wide sweeping powers (which should be reduced) that the PM has. As of now under BN the PM holds several cabinet MInisters’ posts, which is untenable and causes conflict of interest no end with not a single MP addressing this fact. By the above issues (perhaps also the refusal to lower election deposits so that not only the rich can participate), BN and PR are the hegelian dialectic colluding against the citizentry that a 3rd Force is needed to displace by.
The hard truth that Malaysians must accept is, either we are UNHCR compliant or not (in which case Malaysia is no longer a signatory of the UNHCR). Malaysia consists of approximately 22 million population, of which more than 60% of the population is of Malay-Muslim race. The human primordial instinct in addition to the general lack of advanced, critical liberation of thoughts, owed to the aggravated factors post-Human Rights Council membership period, would never allow Malaysia to allow continuance of APARTHEID.
We, as Malaysians have been strongly poisoned by the effect of racial and religious segregation in the public society by MPs who contravene the Human Rights Charter Article 1. The main issue should be – what compliance of Malaysian Laws and Malaysian Constitution, if APARTHEID is to end to be able to gain the confidence of majority of the WORLD’s non-apartheid states?
In view of all the issues of race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, etc (factors to be discriminated upon an inborn cause), we, as a part of society, should have moved beyond this tribal instinct of categorisation when accepting Laws and Constitution, especially more so for our MPs.
There is a public duty for all incumbent MPs to be able to see past this and to choose and allow only the Human Rights Charter compliant Laws and Constitution (amending the all outdated and apartheid laws and articles of constitution), and upholds the rules of EQUALITY, principle of justice, and common underlying values which enshrined through the unity of all the NATIONS OF THE WOLRD.
I would urge the discussion on the continuation of APARTHEID LAWS and APARTHEID ASPECTS OF CONSTITUTION, move beyond race and religion and focus on the needs basis of citizens who are poor and impoversihed to have special privileges rather than on the basis of race and religion. Who the PM is does not matter, that APARTHEID continues means Malaysia is a FAILED STATE where Human Rights are concerned. The articler above this one, focuses on the lameness of cults of personality, a REAL STATESMAN ONLY focuses on the ISSUE. And *THE ISSUE* is APARTHEID.
ARTICLE 3
Courts, not minister, should decide Penang local government elections, says MP – by Clara Chooi – June 13, 2012
KUALA LUMPUR, June 13 — Penang today disagreed with Putrajaya’s claim that a recent state-passed enactment to restore local government elections was invalid, saying that only the courts could decide such a matter.
State executive councillor Chow Kon Yeow told the housing and local government minister to respect Penang’s jurisdiction in the matter, adding that the latter should be helping the state restore local elections instead of the contrary.
“I wish to remind the minister that, it is for the court — and not for him — to decide whether the Penang Local Government Elections Enactment is constitutional and valid.
“He has acted wildly beyond his jurisdiction and once again shows just how little respect the Barisan Nasional (BN) federal government has for the wishes of the people,” Chow said in a statement here.
Chor had told the Dewan Rakyat yesterday that the enactment, passed by the Penang legislative assembly last month, contravenes Section 15 of the Local Government Act 1976 (Act 171), which states that local government elections “shall cease to have force or effect”.
But Chow refuted this, insisting that in the first place, Section 15 of the Act was ultra vires the Federal Constitution.
Articles 113 and 114 of the Federal Constitution states that the Election Commission (EC) is responsible for conducting elections.
As such, said Chow, the Constitutional provisions should still apply.
“Further to that, the Penang government, through a Gazette notification, had exempted all the local authorities within Penang from applying Section 15 of the Local Government Act.
“This would result in Section 15 not being applicable in Penang and is the first step towards seeking a court declaration to compel the EC to conduct local government elections,” he said.
But Chow also noted that in a letter to the Penang government dated March 23, 2010, the EC had rejected the state’s request to restore local government elections.
“The Pakatan Rakyat (PR) Penang government through various attempts had written to the ministry as well as the EC to restore and conduct local elections; however, both the ministry and EC ignored Penang’s request,” he complained.
Chow added that the state had even written to the National Council for Local Government (NCLG) in July 2009, requesting that the topic of local government elections be brought up but this was rejected.
Faced with these hindrances, the Tanjong MP said the state assembly went ahead to pass the Local Government Elections Enactment (Penang Island and Province Wellesley) 2012 on May 9 this year.
He insisted that Chor, as minister, and the Attorney-General could not arbitrarily decide that the enactment was invalid.
“They have no jurisdiction over the matter. It is up to the court to decide whether the Enactment is constitutional, and Penang is ready to defend the right of her citizens in an independent court of law.
“If Penang’s citizens want free and fair elections to decide who represents their interest in local government, the federal government, much less Chor, have no business in forcing upon us an unreasonable decision that cannot be justified any longer,” he said
[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]
. . . and Penang is ready to defend the right of her citizens in an independent court of law. . . .
Once again, ad nauseum. Do a properly conducted unofficial unrecognized election in an official manner, THEN APPOINT the councillors the people chose in this EC unrecognized election. Stop writing to the Federal government run EC, while knowing there is no way there will be any amendment or cooperation, then using that refusal as an excuse to refuser the Rakyat Local Council Elections (in fact the CM’s and MB’s post, also Mayors in other towns, should be also on a one-man-one-vote basis like the USA President’s Election, not because Lim Guan Eng’s father seats Lim Guan Eng as CM in a blatant display of undemocratic NEPOTISM . . . ).
No need to involve the Federal government or write to the EC. There is enough power to APPOINT after conducting informal elections. Also instead of wasting tax monies on bribes to old folk then mothers (both groups should be offended by the offer) offer amendment of laws, waiver fines, lower utility bills or challenge nepotism politics. We want democracy, not bribery and pretentions!
Same old broken record of lame excuses. Read my older comments, PR idiots.
See response to Article 9 on link below on how the DAP can already informally hold Local Council Elections and apply the power they have instead if hiding behind technicalities :
ARTICLE 9 : Hanif pledges to be impartial as Bersih 3.0 panel chief – By Shazwan Mustafa Kamal – May 11, 2012
BTW 1 term as CM already up. We look forward to our NEW CM voted via a one-man-one-vote system that will prohibit nepotism and enhance democracy.
ARTICLE 4
SECRET IS OUT: Najib has no evidence at all Bersih 3.0 was a Pakatan plot – Kit Siang – by Lim Kit Siang – Wednesday, 13 June 2012 13:24
Question No. 4 during Question Time in Parliament today was the star attraction of the day as I had asked the Prime Minister to substantiate his allegation more than a month ago that Bersih 3.0 rally was a coup attempt by the Opposition to overthrow the government.
MPs from both Barisan Nasional and Pakatan Rakyat were expecting some “shocking” revelations to substantiate the very serious allegation by the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak in Gua Musang on 4th May and which had the immediate support of three former Inspectors-General of Police, Tun Hanif Omar, Tan Sri Rahim Noor and Tan Sri Musa Hassan that the Bersih 3.0 rally was a coup d’etat attempt by Pakatan Rakyat to overthrow the Najib government on April 28 itself!
The Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department, Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz, who replied on behalf of Najib, was however a total disappointment as he could not give even an iota of evidence to substantiate Najib’s allegation and went completely off tangent into a tirade against Bersih 3.0 and Pakatan Rakyat.
Nazri is entitled to his jaundiced views about Bersih 3.0 and Pakatan Rakyat but they do not constitute evidence that the Bersih 3.0 rally on April 28 was a coup attempt by Pakatan Rakyat to topple the Barisan Nasional government by force on April 28.
As I countered Nazri during my supplementary question, is the Najib government so weak that “salt and water bottles” (which was all that some of the peaceful Bersih 3.0 protestors were armed that day to defend themselves against any police tear gas and chemically-laced water cannons) could even topple it?
Nazri was deadly serious in his reply, saying “Don’t underrate salt and water bottles” saying that in Tunisia, the government was toppled by handphones when it did not have the support of the people.
No evidence at all!
The secret is now out – the Prime Minister and the three former IGPs have absolutely no evidence whatsoever to back the wild and reckless allegation that Bersih 3.0 rally was a coup attempt to topple the government by force, but the Najib government is mortally afraid of “salt and water bottles” because they can topple governments which have lost support of the people.
The challenge to Najib is to find out why despite all the big talk of transformations in various aspects of national life in the past three years, he is losing rather than gaining popular support.
As I repeated in Parliament this morning, the government’s misjudgment and mishandling of Bersih 3.0 and continuing demonization of Bersih 3.0 organisers and Pakatan Rakyat is an even bigger public relations disaster than the government’s initial misjudgment and mishandling of Bersih 2.0 rally of July 9, 2011.
For a start, Najib and three former IGPs Hanif, Rahim and Musa should have the decency to publicly apologise for the baseless allegation that Bersih 3.0 was a coup attempt by Opposition to topple the government by force.
Secondly, the government should dissolve the Hanif “independent advisory panel” inquiring into Bersih 3.0 violence and brutality, unless the panel’s has a secret agenda and term of reference – to come out with a finding that Bersih 3.0 rally was a coup attempt by the Opposition to topple the government by force.
Instead, the government should give full support to the Suhakam inquiry into Bersih 3.0 to find out what went wrong on April 28 to result in the violence and brutality which marred a peaceful and momentous gathering of hundreds of thousands of Malaysians regardless of race, religion, class, region, age or gender in support of a common national cause – a clean election!
Lim Kit Siang is the DAP adviser and MP for Ipoh Timur
[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]
Hegelian eclectic puppet. Asking for apologies AGAIN instead of amending laws. Apologies have no effect on the way the country is run. Voters do you know what this nepotistic and term limitless MP has caused the nation under guise of ‘leadership’? In asking for apologies which people may never give even under extreme torture in some cases, means nothing in policy or law and a wastee of taxpayer monies by demanding apologies on your cash time. Another self aggrandizement oriented media circus, courtesy of nepotistic family bloc DAP.
ARTICLE 5
Shahrir: It’s the candidate that counts in winning an election – Monday, 11 June 2012 Super Admin
(The Star) – It is not the symbol but the candidate that counts in winning an election, says Tan Sri Shahrir Abdul Samad.
The Johor Baru MP, who once contested and won on an Independent ticket, said he chose the “three keys” symbol during a by-election for the seat.
“The reason was because almost everybody had keys. It was something anyone could relate to,” he said, when interviewed by The Star.
Shahrir added that his “keys” were red against a bright yellow background.
“The colours were outstanding as none of the other parties competing at that time had used the bright combination,” he said.
He added, however, that the symbol was not the key to his success in that 1988 by-election.
Shahrir said he promoted his symbol through stickers and pamphlets as well as when going door-to-door.
“I then left it to the voters to decide who would be most suitable to represent them.”
Shahrir, who won the Johor Baru seat as a Barisan Nasional candidate in 1978, said his success as an Independent was purely due to his bond with the people in the constituency.
He was sacked from Umno in the events leading to the Malaysian constitutional crisis and Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah’s challenge to then prime minister and party president Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad.
He then resigned from the seat and ran for re-election in the resulting by-election as an Independent. A year later, he returned to Umno.
Shahrir, who was Federal Territory minister before his sacking, said many politicians and political parties would blame “the whole world” if the electorate rejected them.
He said these disgruntled people would also blame the police and the Election Commission for their failure.
“They should never belittle voters. I believe that if you work hard and build a heart-to-heart connection with the people, there is no reason why you should not win,” said Shahrir, who was also once a Welfare, Youth and Sports minister and a deputy Trade and Industry minister.
He added: “No matter how many posters you put up, or how attractive your symbol may be, the people will vote for the person who they believe has the essence of leadership.”
[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]
Does Samad believe in EQUALITY and ENDING APARTHEID? Only candidates that believe in in EQUALITY and ENDING APARTHEID count in an election.
ARTICLE 6
WHERE ARE THE POLICE WHEN U NEED THEM: Bersih’s Chin Huat attacked by bikers – Saturday, 09 June 2012 16:35
KUALA LUMPUR- Bersih steering committee member Wong Chin Huat accused police today of focusing on quashing protests instead of crime after he was left with a bloodied face from being mugged by a group of bikers this morning.
The Monash University lecturer wrote on social media platform Facebook that he was jogging near his home in Section 18, Petaling Jaya at 7.40am when he was surrounded by a group of as least five young men who attacked him when he tried to flee.
“I had been a victim of police violence. Today I become a victim of police failure in deterring crime. No, it was not politically motivated. They were only after money.
“But rising crime rate is political. Was told another man was robbed recently in that neighbourhood. Where are the police when we are not demonstrating?” he wrote, referring to clashes between police and supporters of Bersih’s April 28 rally for free and fair elections.
Wong has just been discharged from Universiti Malaya Medical Centre after an X-ray.
Police turned on the people at Bersih 3.0
Bersih’s planned sit-in at Dataran Merdeka had descended into chaos after some protestors tried to enter the historic square which the court had barred to the public and the past month has seen authorities and those backing the rally blaming each other for the violence that resulted.
Several dozen members of the public have come forward with allegations of police brutality while the police and Home Ministry insist they have evidence that some who attended the rally wanted bloodshed and even death.
The government has set up a panel to investigate the April 28 violence, but the choice of former police chief Tun Hanif Omar has been widely criticised after he compared the movement to communism and accused the organisers of an attempted coup.
The April 28 rally that saw tens of thousands gather at six different locations before heading to Dataran Merdeka was peaceful until about 2.30pm when Bersih leader Datuk Ambiga Sreenevasan asked the crowd to disperse.
But her announcement was not heard by most of the crowd who persisted to linger around the historic square which the court had already barred to the public over the weekend.
Just before 3pm, some protestors breached the barricade surrounding the landmark, leading police to disperse the crowd with tear gas and water cannons.
Police then continued to pursue rally-goers down several streets amid chaotic scenes which saw violence from both sides over the next four hours.
Several dozen demonstrators have claimed that they were assaulted by groups of over 10 policemen at a time and visual evidence appears to back their claim but police also point to violence from rally-goers who also attacked a police car.
The police car then crashed into a building before some protestors flipped it on its side.
Opposition Leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim and PKR deputy president Azmin Ali have been accused of ordering the breach and are currently awaiting trial under the Peaceful Assembly Act for participating in an illegal street assembly.
–The Malaysian Insider
[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]
Wong Chin Huat accused police today of focusing on quashing protests instead of crime AFTER he was left with a bloodied face from being mugged by a group of bikers this morning.
After?!? The 2 events are completely unrelated. What kind of reporting is this? – DISLIKE
. . . was jogging near his home in Section 18, Petaling Jaya at 7.40am when he was surrounded by a group of as least five young men who attacked him when he tried to flee. “I had been a victim of police violence.
AHEM? Those were bikers right? How did they turn into police? – DISLIKE MORE
Today I become a victim of police failure in deterring crime.
Only this this line makes sense. LIKE
No, it was not politically motivated. They were only after money.
THEN WHY MENTION THE POLICE AT ALL??? DISLIKE
“But rising crime rate is political. Was told another man was robbed recently in that neighbourhood.”
But rising crime rate is political. Eh? Rising crime rate is ECONOMIC. Are you sure this is a Monash grad? The moron can’t even think straight. DISLIKE
Was told another man was robbed recently in that neighbourhood. Rating 0
Robbery is due to poverty, upbringing or religious teaching, not politics. In any case, only those who are brimming with wealth (or are by nature so greedy) should be concerned. How many homes does ‘Monash Chin’ have? Run for election, not talk rubbish here. Chin looks abit like Chua Soi Lek btw.
ARTICLE 7
DAP Fears Resisting PAS On State Enactment In Kedah – Chew Lee Giok – Saturday, 09 June 2012 00:08
The Bar Council’s view that the insertion of Section 22A to the Mufti and Fatwa (Kedah Darul Aman) Enactment 2008 which was passed by the Kedah state legislative assembly on 17 April 2012 is unconstitutional must be supported. DAP’s failure to comment on the matter indicates the Rocket is avoiding the issue, hoping that it will gradually fade away.
While the Bar Council’s response to this change in the state Enactment maybe somewhat delayed, but at least, it reflects the ground’s objection against this unconstitutional regulation and is anytime better than the muted response by Rocket leaders who dare not utter a sound. This shows DAP does not attach importance to the Federal Constitution, and dares not resist or question any moves by PAS.
The Rocket always claims to fight for the rights of the people, but does not do so. When it comes to non-Muslim rights, the people wonder if Kedah DAP state representatives had consented to the adoption of the Mufti and Fatwa (Kedah Darul Aman) Enactment 2008 and are sad that the only response DAP gave was that it was too late for them to oppose.
The insertion to this Enactment provides that a fatwa decided by a mufti or a fatwa committee, “whether gazetted or not, cannot be challenged, appealed, reviewed, denied or questions” in any civil or Syariah court despite any written law or rule to the contrary, is unfair against everybody.
Not living up to sworn oath
Kedah state assemblymen had sworn an oath to uphold the Constitution as it is the supreme law in Malaysia. This amendment cannot be considered a legislation for Kedah because it violates the oath. However, the Pakatan state legislators allowed this Clause to be inserted – contrary to the trust and support that the electorates placed in them.
Court jurisdiction & Separation of powers ousted
The amendment is unconstitutional as it removes the jurisdiction of the Courts. Article 121 of the Federal Constitution does not empower any state legislative assembly the legislative power to enact laws that exclude the jurisdiction of the Courts.
I also support the Bar Council’s stand on the separation of powers in a democratic framework which is theraison d’être to establish a system of checks and balances between the three branches of Government i.e. the Legislature, Executive and the Judiciary which each has its own role to avoid power abuse.
The ruling by the state legislature by Pakatan partners and religion-based regulations in Kedah have erroneously taken on a supreme authority and violates the doctrine of separation of powers which should be applied to all laws, Parliament Acts of state Enactments.
DAP leaders are not brave to disagree with PAS nor fight for the rights of all Malaysians. Such non-actions rendering everyone to be subjected to PAS is not conducive.
CHEW LEE GIOK is Wanita MCA Secretary General
(The views expressed above belongs to the author in its entirety and does not represent the opinion of Malaysian Mirror in any way)
[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]
This is not the only thing DAP has bee pretending will go away. The 90% of unkept campaign promises are a reminder of why DAP only won 1 term in Penang in the 1990s.
ARTICLE 8
Education the most divisive issue in Malaysia, says Anwar – by Shazwan Mustafa Kamal – June 09, 2012
PETALING JAYA, June 9 — Unequal access to education is causing division among the different races in the country, Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim said today, stressing the need for his Pakatan Rakyat’s (PR) free higher education policy to be implemented.
“Education is the most divisive, contentious issue in the country.
“I think once and for all everyone should be offered free education, allowance, boarding… then it will no longer a racial issue, or a question of (whether) Chinese and Indians get access as everyone will get access,” he told about 1,000 who attended an economic dialogue.
Anwar (picture) said this could be achieved by abolishing the need for repayment of National Higher Education Fund (PTPTN) loans to students.
“It’s not a populist policy to abolish PTPTN, we have the means.
“RM6 billion per year (is what we need). (Datuk Seri) Najib (Razak) said RM43 billion. I dispute that figure RM30 billion is what we need (to finance PTPTN repayment for students),” he said.
“The issue is not free education, it is democratisation of access to quality education.
“It is a question of policies and programmes that benefit the people. If we can understand this we won’t be lulled into complacency or incessant propaganda by mainstream media,” Anwar added.
Through careful and prudent spending of the country’s annual budget, Anwar claimed PR would be able to save RM37 billion a year.
RM24 billion from that amount, he said could be used to aid the needy.
The clash between PR and the ruling Barisan Nasional (BN) over the PTPTN loan scheme climaxed this week when loans to new students at Selangor-owned universities were frozen.
But the loans to Universiti Selangor (Unisel) and Selangor Islamic University College (Kuis) were restored on Friday following widespread condemnation from lawmakers on both sides of the divide and student activists.
But Higher Education Minister Datuk Seri Khaled Nordin insisted today Unisel’s appeal for PTPTN loans to be restored showed that Pakatan Rakyat (PR) could not deliver its promise of free education.
This was despite the PR-governed state announcing it would sell land owned by the university to raise RM30 million to help finance those being denied access to the student loans.
But Anwar said the move to freeze loans to universities owned by the state government his PKR controls was “a big mistake which angered people.”
“How can you threaten people like that? It was done out of sheer arrogance, and reversed because of (public) outrage.”
The federal government’s reversal yesterday was done after it drew fierce criticism from PR politicians who were joined by some Barisan Nasional (BN) leaders fearing a political backlash.
It came just days after the freeze was first announced and a day after Deputy Prime Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin defended as a “fair test” the move which was clearly aimed at laying bare PR’s campaign for free university education.
Umno Youth chief Khairy Jamaluddin and Deputy Higher Education Minister Datuk Saifuddin Abdullah also criticised the move early yesterday after Selangor had announced it would help those who could not access PTPTN loans.
PTPTN had confirmed earlier yesterday newly enrolled students at the Selangor Islamic University College (Kuis) were to join those in Unisel in being denied student loans.
But Saifuddin wrote on Twitter that “the Kuis rector has met me and I have informed the minister of his appeal that PTPTN loans not be frozen for his students. Kuis’ official letter will be sent shortly.”
The Temerloh MP also told The Malaysian Insider that he was awaiting a reply from Khaled after “informing him the freeze is being widely and strongly objected and seeks his good office to rescind it.”
The uproar over the freeze also led to BN Youth leaders voicing their disagreement, pointing out that the “test” was unnecessary as “it is clear Selangor cannot give free education.”
But these protests from members of the ruling coalition came after Selangor decided to raise RM30 million by selling land owned by Unisel to provide financial assistance to students who have been denied the loans.
An Umno leader told The Malaysian Insider that if Selangor were to succeed in funding the affected students, “it would mean they have passed the test” set by Muhyiddin.
[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]
NO . . . writer for Mr.NEPOTISTIC LIAR closet bisexual. **APARTHEID** and extreme religion is the most divisive issue. PTPTN can close down for all the rest of the country’s citizens care, but to allow extreme religion, nepotism, oligarchy and apartheid to continue means PR is no better than BN.
Strike 2. If Anwar attempts to hide apartheid again by sweeping apartheid issues via ‘education demogoguery’ Anwar might as well not run for election . . . undemocratic spinner chameleon. Apartheid will end, or Malaysia can quit the Human Rights Council and remove Malaysia’s name from the UNHCR list of signatories to properly signal Malaysia’s 3rd world status and damn all politicians who allowed 3rd World APARTHEID to persist. I am sure there are conscientious Malays or good Muslims who will ensure equality for non-Muslims in Malaysia, Anwar being a pretentious freak here, does not deserve a single vote along with DAP’s dhimmis or PAS’s undemocratic huded lovers.
ARTICLE 9
Anwar says will reveal bank accounts if Muhyiddin does the same – Sunday, 10 June 2012 Super Admin
(The Malaysian Insider) – Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim has said he is prepared to open all the accounts he owns only if Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin does likewise.
“If there’s a case he should have charged me. This shows how desperate Muhyiddin is.
“I challenge him open up every single case. I will open up every single account and Muhyiddin must do likewise,” he told reporters here.
“I challenge Muhyiddin to be investigated, I am prepared to submit everything,” said the PKR de facto leader.
The deputy prime minister had demanded Anwar clarify an allegation by ex-Bank Negara Assistant Governor Datuk Abdul Murad Khalid that the opposition leader owns 20 master accounts worth RM3 billion.
Muhyiddin said the allegation was not a small matter, and the former deputy prime minister must be responsible in promptly explaining the matter to the people.
“The figure (RM3 billion) mentioned is big. So, it is the duty of the opposition leader to clarify it. It is true or not. If not true, answer…the people want to know…the NGOs which are making the demands for an explanation also represent a large number of people.
“If untrue, Anwar must take action against the parties making the allegation, including the ex-Bank Negara Assistant Governor,” he told reporters after launching a State-level ‘Love Gardeners’ Programme at Dataran Sarang Buaya, here, today.
Muhyiddin who is also education minister, said Anwar’s authority and integrity would be affected if he did not clarify the allegation.
Last Tuesday, Perkasa president Datuk Ibrahim Ali was reported to have raised the status of the investigations by the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) on Abdul Murad’s allegation made almost 13 years ago.
Ibrahim said that the exposure by the Bank Negara Assistant Governor, among others, alleged that Anwar (picture) controlled 20 master accounts involving assets, shares and money worth RM3 billion, which were obtained when he was Finance Minister towards the end of the 1990s.
Newspapers today reported that several NGOs also urged MACC to speed up investigations in the claim as the matter was of public interest.
[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]
Shut up the both of these overgrown parasistes of the Rakyat. The Rakyat demands that BOTH creeps reveal cash and property assets in 1 week or no votes. In fact ALL MPs who do not reveal assets should no longer be voted. Anwar to Muhyiddin: ‘If you show me your bank accounts, I’ll show you mine . . . ‘ – ALL MPS will show ALL assets to the voters or else NO VOTES!!! Anwar could simply declare assets THEN have one up against Muhyiddin, instead Anwar engages in the nonsense that insults the voters on taxpayer funded Dewan time! We didn’t vote MPs to hear them play homosexual innuendo off the MP’s lack of accountability!
ARTICLE 10
SUNDAY INTERVIEW: ‘I have a vision for developing Penang’ – Sunday, 10 June 2012 Super Admin
MAN ON A MISSION: Gerakan secretary-general Teng Chang Yeow has been given the task of leading the Barisan Nasional charge to penetrate fortress DAP in Penang. The mission may be tough, many think it may be impossible. But Teng tells Sharanjit Singh how Penang under Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng is being administered aimlessly
Question: How tough is it for Barisan Nasional to win back the hearts and minds of the people of Penang?
Answer: Public perception of BN has not changed much since we lost the state in 2008.
However, I believe we will be able to convince the people that we are a better team. We will put up a good, sincere plan and make a concerted effort to explain in detail what we have in store for Penang.
Question: The thing is, people have a perception that everything that has gone wrong for Penang was caused by the previous state government. How are you tackling this?
Answer: That is the kind of accusation and perception that Pakatan Rakyat leaders have created in the minds of the people.
However, you have to realise that the leaders of the past are no longer in our new team. It is a new ball game now and we have a new approach.
We have a committed team that is looking into Penang development from a whole new perspective compared with the previous leadership. The previous leadership has laid the foundation and we will build on it.
Question: Whatever you say, people are still talking about how previous chief minister Tan Sri Dr Koh Tsu Koon messed up. What is your take on this?
Answer: People were angry with Koh’s leadership style. It was not about his development vision and projects for the state. The record of the number of projects that he brought in is there for everyone to see.
It is not my intention to protect him by saying this but I have to state the facts. Yes, people are critical and disappointed with his leadership style, but he built the foundation for Penang. He was the one who came up with the concept of low- and middle-cost housing, which was then something new for the whole country as well. Developers were not willing to build RM25,000 homes but he overcame that.
He was also responsible for connecting the whole of Penang to a central sewage treatment plant. This has created a cleaner discharge into the sea.
Koh was also responsible for the two national parks that we have in land-scarce Penang.
Question: People are angry with Koh’s leadership style as he was seen as too accommodative. How is your leadership going to be different?
Answer: In a leadership situation, you can be accommodative and you must be accommodative. Otherwise you will be accused of being too authoritarian.
However, one cannot be seen as too accommodative to the extent that one is seen as giving in to every demand. My style is that I am willing to listen but I will put my foot down when I have to.
I am prepared to listen and alter my decision but once it’s made, we have to implement it and get things moving.
Question: Immediately after your appointment as the state BN chief, DAP jumped and accused you of being an Umno stooge. What do you have to say about that?
Answer: It is the DAP game. They do it to weaken the image and standing of a particular leader, especially those from Gerakan and MCA, in the eyes of the Chinese.
Lim Guan Eng was heaping praises on Chong Eu (the late former Penang chief minister Tun Dr Lim Chong Eu) after becoming the chief minister. His father (Lim Kit Siang) on the other hand condemned Chong Eu to kingdom come when he contested in the 1990 general election.
Now is the son slapping the father or did Kit Siang make a grave mistake by doing a disfavour to Chong Eu back in 1990? Let us not forget this part of history.
Of course, there is no shortage of the negative things they said about Koh Tsu Koon. So, whoever is appointed to this position in their eyes, is a stooge of Umno.
Question: Lim Guan Eng continues to play the blame game. The latest is on the issue of hillslope development, where he has washed his hands and said it was all approved by the previous state government. You are the former state executive councillor for environmental protection. Is this true?
Answer: The state government should declassify all the files and minutes of exco meetings to see what decisions were taken and the basis of us making the decisions.
I may be wrong, but I don’t think we approved those projects in question at that point in time. The best thing for him to do is declassify the files and show people what we had approved and what has been approved after 2008.
The thing is, they are in power now and they can do something about it. Remember how the approvals for four high-rise projects in the heritage zone were revoked? Why is the state government not doing the same thing for hillside projects?
Question: Lim has accused the BN of being the darling of developers.
Answer: Yes, he said developers found it easier to work with us than him.
Why don’t you ask any developer in town who they prefer to work with? The answer is they prefer to work with the DAP government now because he (Lim Guan Eng) has allowed the increase in density anywhere in Penang.
In our case, we never allowed that and developers were unhappy with us. The best example is how the Low Yatt group packed their bags and left Penang. Now they are coming back and so are many other developers from Kuala Lumpur.
So, what is the basis of his claim? It has never been easier for developers in Penang. We were blamed by developers of taking too long to approve a plan.
It took three or four years during our time but today plans are approved much faster. It would be crazy for developers to prefer us over the present government.
Question: The state government is citing the increase in stop work orders to show how tough it has become for developers.Answer: What is the use of a stop work order issued today and lifted tomorrow? Have we seen any developer blacklisted or charged in court? The Gurney Paragon developer was slapped with a stop work order, but for how long? The project has been completed well within schedule.
Question: There seems to be confusion on your announcement on the free port status for Penang. Is it for the whole island or is it a plan to have a duty free area on the mainland?
Answer: It is the whole island. The duty free area on 3,000 acres of land by Penang Port Sdn Bhd on the mainland will complement the duty free status of the island.
We need both or we will be accused of having one state with two systems — a free port on the island and nothing on the mainland. What is there for them (the state government) to jump on?
They are just trying to confuse the people by saying that the free port proposal is no more and that I have compromised it for a duty free area on the mainland.
Question: You have a tough task ahead to fight Pakatan in Penang. How do you plan to do it?
Answer: It is a battle that we need to fight with competence, good strategy and a detailed war plan.
No one will go into battle without thinking of winning. Any general who has led a war will have this in mind.
I am leading a team of BN candidates into battle hoping to win. I don’t want to rate the chances but we must have a positive mindset.
When the DAP was badly beaten in the 1995, 1999 and 2004 general elections, Lim Kit Siang still had the fighting spirit. We may disagree with his style but he had the fighting spirit.
Question: Penang DAP leaders are saying that you are all thunder but no rain. How do you respond to that?
Answer: I thank them for paying so much attention to what I want to do but it is about time they start working on their own plans.
It shows how concerned they have become with what I want to do for Penang that they are having almost daily press conferences attacking me.
All I have done so far is to reveal plans that are implementable and they are already sweating.
Question: Are you saying they are rattled?
Answer: I don’t know but obviously they have not come up with anything after four years.
The direction of the state is actually aimless. They don’t have any policy or blueprint for Penang.
Lim shelved their own blueprint and adopted what Pemandu (Performance Management and Delivery Unit) planned for Penang.
How can you say you have a vision but allow others to spearhead their plans?
If we are the ones in this position we will tell Pemandu, “You have to adjust or modify your ideas for Penang to suit our plans. It is not we who will suit your plan. We are the ones who call the shots here not you Pemandu”.
On other fronts, we are also seeing a decline in sports. We have not seen the state team performing well in Sukma. What has gone wrong?
Everything is politicised and you just don’t see any social development programmes being undertaken by the current administration. – (NST)
[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]
Equality and end of apartheid first. Otherwise MCA will get no votes.
ARTICLE 11
Cash-rich Genting hungry for new gaming markets – June 08, 2012
A man walks past a Genting signboard at Genting Highlands July 27, 2009. — Reuters pic
KUALA LUMPUR, June 8 — Genting Berhad sits on more cash than any other gaming operator in the world, yet it is raising additional billions on the debt market, fuelling speculation that its stake purchase in Australia’s Echo Entertainment is just the beginning of an acquisition spree.
Genting, competing with Las Vegas Sands and MGM Resorts to dominate the Asian casino market, may target assets in Japan, South Korea and Mongolia, analysts said.
Of those markets, Japan may be the most attractive, according to Michael Paladino, a New York-based gaming analyst at Fitch Ratings.
“It could have the potential to be a larger scale (development) because of the size of the economy and the fact that it is a destination in itself, more so than other markets,” Paladino said.
With limited growth at home and a lagging share price, Asia’s second-largest gaming group by market capitalisation is looking to expand its global footprint.
The company, best known for its Genting Highlands casino complex and Singapore’s Resorts World at Sentosa, has invested in the Philippines and Vietnam after missing out on a concession in Macau more than a decade ago.
Genting Berhad is the investment holding company of the Genting Group, which comprises listed companies such as Genting Singapore, Genting Plantations and Genting Malaysia.
Genting Singapore said today it had acquired a small stake in Echo, sparking talk of a takeover of the US$3 billion (RM9 billion) Australia casino firm.
Genting Berhad was sitting on RM17.4 billion in cash and equivalents as of the end of March, so it could conceivably pay for a deal of that size without borrowing.
Last month, Genting said it got approval to raise US$636 million through a 20-year bond programme, after Genting Singapore raised a total of S$2.3 billion through perpetual securities in March and April.
Still, the company’s debt financing is more manageable compared to its peers. Genting Berhad’s debt-to-equity ratio was 0.57 versus 1.12 for Las Vegas Sands and 2.27 for MGM Resorts, according to Thomson Reuters data.
“It is in Genting’s interest to speed up the acquisition process,” said Loke Wei Wern, an analyst with CIMB Research. “They are paying out interest on their loans and that’s quite a lot of money.”
Although Genting’s casino properties in Malaysia and Singapore are highly profitable, growth is limited compared with the booming global gaming industry, putting the company under pressure to seek out more promising options.
Genting’s shares have fallen about 13 per cent so far this year, compared with a 0.6 per cent gain in the Thomson Reuters Asia Pacific Casinos & Gaming Index.
In Singapore, the government restricts casinos from marketing to locals, and junket operators are not allowed to provide credit to VIP players, which limits their appeal with high rollers.
“With (Sentosa) getting close to the end of its development phase, it’s the right time for the group to start looking at what could be coming up in future,” said Grace Ho, a fund manager at Lion Global Investors who covers Asian equities. — Reuters
[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]
Penny ante gaming from neighbourhood 4D outlets with private licences. No more of this mega casino in an inaccessible location with ‘highly trained’ croupier b.s. with ‘memory training’ advantage. Some of us are here to enjoy the atmosphere, not waste mega bucks a few times a year against extreme opponents, while trying to win a free meal or at most the month’s rent.
Ridiculous and unrealistic outlet paradigm. Of course again, no Muslims allowed for localized outlets, and this will be on a salary or asset based limit of 30% monthly salary limit or yearly asset 10% limit (i.e. salaried may lose up to 30% of salary monthly before beung barred entry, salaried may lose up to 10% of asset yearly before beung barred entry). This way people get to gamble reasonably and the casino does not end up bankrupting people, and licences are distributed to many people in easily accessible outlets.
ARTICLE 12
DAP men get council posts – Friday, 08 June 2012 Super Admin
(The Star) – Three of the five DAP leaders who were in the dark since March over their nomination to local council seats have received letters confirming their appointments.
Klang Parliamentary Liaison Committee chairman Ivan Ho has been dropped while two-term Sepang councillor Titus Gladwyn Gomez said he was still waiting for the letter.
K. Yogasigamany, who had served as a councillor in Shah Alam last year, has been appointed to the Selayang council this time.
“I received a call on Tuesday from the Selayang council asking me to collect the letter and to submit my particulars,” he said.
Their appointment comes after state DAP chairman Teresa Kok ticked off fellow state executive councillor Ronnie Liu in March for amending the list of nominees without the knowledge of the state DAP.
DAP adviser Lim Kit Siang chaired an emergency meeting on March 7 and ordered the list submitted by the state DAP to be followed and despatched a letter to Selangor Mentri Besar Tan Sri Khalid Ibrahim.
It is believed that Liu had removed six names as they were aligned to Selangor state legislative assembly speaker Datuk Teng Chang Khim. One of them, Tan Tuan Tatt later withdrew.
Another councillor, Chandran Subramaniam 52, also received his appointment letter and took his oath of office in Hulu Selangor yesterday.
He said he was informed of his reappointment when the councillors’ list was released in February but only received the letter on Tuesday.
Chandran had earlier claimed that two state DAP leaders had conspired to drop his name from the list of council nominees.
First-time councillor Nadasan Subramaniam said he had received a call confirming that he had been appointed to the Kuala Langat Council and would be sworn in on June 27.
Meanwhile Khalid, when contacted, confirmed that vacancies for 25 councillors were approved three weeks ago.
“The various councils are taking steps to fill them,” he said.
[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]
Much like the one for one vote of USA’s president, these posts belong to to NEUTRAL members of the public, and NOT partisan and corrupt members, nepotists, of any political party. These posts should be voted for by the local constituency’s residents and should be subject to limited terms. Also only appropriate members of the public with appropriate experience in planning, at most retired bureaucrats from appropriate departments who are also not to be members of any political party.
ARTICLE 13
Why PTPTN cannot be abolished – Friday, 08 June 2012 Super Admin
(The Star) – The Government cannot afford to abolish the National Higher Education Corporation Fund (PTPTN) as doing so now will result in RM43bil uncollected loans.
This money, said Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak, could be used for many important causes to help the rakyat.
“Within education itself, the setting up of technical universities offering free education requires significant resources.
“Also bear in mind that a good degree is a stepping stone to higher earnings, and that the taxes of some of the lower income households in our society contribute to that stepping stone,” he said in his latest posting on PTPTN in his 1malaysia.com.my website.
Najib admitted that PTPTN, which was first introduced 15 years ago, had not been without criticism.
“There have been calls to replace the system with free tertiary education for all as a measure of lessening the repayment burden on students.
“We have weighed the pros and cons of this. While abolishment does offer an instant respite to students still repaying their loans under PTPTN, there are other factors to consider,” he added.
As of now, he said, between 85% and 95% of tuition costs were already being subsidised by the Government, and student living expenses were factored into the PTPTN loans.
Furthermore, he said, the very principle of 100% subsidy of college and university fees was one that few countries had followed.
However, he said, the Government recognised that debt was an issue of concern to Malaysians, especially fresh graduates and that was why they were only required to start paying their loans after they found full employment.
[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]
Yes the government can. Hand the record of bad debt over to the police or local magistrates for each district to handle, and let the PTPTN close down and stop draining tax payer funds on top of losses in loans.
ARTICLE 14
Is Ikatan a platform for Ku Li? – RJ Rajah, FMT – Friday, 08 June 2012
Former Umno strongman Kadir Sheikh Fadzir has launched his new party, but is he merely babysitting it for Kelantan prince?
Months of speculation on the next move of former Umno minister and former MP for Kulim Bandar Baru, Abdul Kadir Sheikh Fadzir, comes to an end yesterday as he formed a new party, Parti Ikatan Bangsa Malaysia (Ikatan).
Everyone thought that the flamboyant Umno politician has retired for good when he was dropped as the candidate for the Kulim Bandar Baru parliamentary seat in Kedah in the 2008 general election.
The seat was then given to his younger brother Abd Aziz but he lost it to PKR candidate Zulkifli Noordin. Zulkifli eventually became a thorn in the flesh for PKR and later left the party.
In recent months, Kadir became a newsmaker once again when he came out in the open to criticise Umno and joined together with Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah to form a new NGO, Angkatan Amanah Merdeka (Amanah).
Kadir left Umno in March and was expected to join one of the Pakatan Rakyat parties but now has announced the formation of a new political party. It is also speculated that Kadir could be the new Pakatan candidate for Kulim Bandar Baru.
With the formation of a new party, Kadir has once against raised speculations that he is forming the new party and “parking” it for Tengku Razaleigh in the event the latter decides to leave Umno.
Tengku Razaleigh’s dilemma
During the recent visit of Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak to Kelantan, Tengku Razaleigh, popularly known as Ku Li, was prominently featured with him in the mainstream media suggesting that both of them enjoyed a good relationship.
However, as the general election nears, Umno circles are eagerly waiting whether Tengku Razaleigh would be fielded again for the Gua Musang seat in Kelantan which he has held for decades, both when he was in Umno or the opposition.
Najib is expected to retain Tengku Razaleigh as the Umno candidate for Gua Musang and Tengku Razaleigh himself has indicated that he would continue with Umno and has no intention of leaving the party.
At the same time, it is also clear that Tengku Razaleigh could easily win Gua Musang whether he is in Umno or not as he has proven in several general elections before.
In the general election held in 1990 and 1995, Tengku Razaleigh comfortably retained Gua Musang even as a candidate from Semangat 46, then joining with PAS.
Najib faces a dilemma when it comes to Tengku Razaleigh. If he drops him as a candidate, it is as good as a seat lost for Umno since Tengku Razaleigh would contest as an independent and even PKR and PAS may support him.
If Najib retains Tengku Razaleigh, there is a fear among Umno circles that Tengku Razaleigh may lead a faction from Umno to support Pakatan to form the next federal government.
If the results of the 13th general election lead to a hung Parliament, then Tengku Razaleigh, as an elected MP, may play a crucial role in deciding which political group should form the next federal government.
Being a royalty himself, his influence among the rulers would also be a crucial factor in deciding the next federal government.
[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]
Glacial. Anytime befor the next ice age Kuli. End apartheid, this ’embroyonic’ b.s. thing has been going on since the last election – slow moving old men and limitless terms hanging around apartheid political parties! Look elsewhere voters!
ARTICLE 15
Political dynasty: Bane or boon? – by Khoo Ying Hooi – Wednesday, 06 June 2012 12:51
In a recent interview with a news portal, PKR deputy president Azmin Ali said he was against the practice of dynasty politics in the country.
Though he “defended” Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim’s family members (wife Datuk Seri Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail and daughter Nurul Izzah are respectively the party’s president and vice president) whom he said were democratically elected to their posts, he warned PKR not to fall into the trap of “nepotism and cronyism” as in the case of Umno.
The practice of dynasty politics exists in both the Barisan Nasional (BN) and Pakatan Rakyat (PR). Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak is the son of the second prime minister, Tun Abdul Razak; Mukhriz Mahathir is the son of former prime minister, Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad; DAP secretary-general Lim Guan Eng is the son of senior advisor Lim Kit Siang; Karpal Singh’s sons, Gobind Singh and Jagdeep Singh, are both elected representatives; PAS Youth deputy chairman Nik Abduh is the son of PAS Spiritual Advisor Datuk Seri Nik Aziz Nik Mat, and the list goes on.
All over Asia
We have dynasty politics everywhere, although it is most apparent in Asia. For generations, political dynasties have dominated politics and governance in Asia, particularly in South Asia. Like the Nehru-Gandhi family in India, the Bhuttos of Pakistan are one of the world’s most famous political dynasties.
From the United States, India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh in South Asia, to Japan and China in East Asia and Singapore, Philippines in South-east Asia, prominent family background has proved to be a central factor for one’s ascendancy to the pinnacles of power. This phenomenon takes place regardless of the independent levels of economic development, cultural differences, and types of political systems.
A brief list includes: in the United States, former President George W. Bush (son of former President George Bush); in Argentina, President Cristina Fernández de Kirchner (wife of former President Nestor Kirchner); in Japan, former Prime Minister of Japan Yukia Hatoyama (grandson of former Prime Minister Ichiro Hatoyama); in Thailand, Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra (sister of former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra); and in the Philippines, former President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo (daughter of former President Diosdado Macapagal).
In the Philippines, for example, dynasty politics is very pervasive. Each time there’s an election, it serves as a regular reminder of the roles that feudal instincts and the family name play in that nation’s politics. The current president Benigno “Noynoy” Aquino III is the son of the former president Corazon Aquino.
According to Raymond “Mong” Palatino, a former civil society academic turned Congressman who blogs about Filipino politics, Aquino belongs to the most prominent family in the Philippines today – in fact to the most powerful political family in the past half century.
Shouldn’t there be safeguards
While dynasty politics continues to conquer the Senate and Congressional contests and political dynasties continue to dominate local politics so much that, there have even been demands for laws against these dynasties. Although Filipino law limits incumbents to three consecutive terms of three years each, families find a way to maintain their power through a loophole that allows relatives to run for the same office.
Such dominance, however, has grown more extensive in recent years. In a political landscape populated by family names, the prominence of so many dynastic elites makes it seem like a family business. Children of the dynasties seem to own a “licence” regarding their political power and positions while ordinary citizens can only accept the arrangement as destined.
So what are the possible consequences of the dynasty politics? Apart from contributing to corruption, the inequality in the distribution of political power may re?ect imperfections in democratic representation. The dominance of dynasties anticipates the expansion of political participation and empowerment of people. There are more fundamental problems, too.
They are also in a way preventing new talent, new ideas or literally, new blood from entering politics. A senior fellow at the Tokyo Foundation, Sota Kato, said, “it takes a blood test to get elected these days”. With dynasty politics, politics becomes about personalities alone and name recognition places a much more important role than the competence.
The Kennedys were the most famous Western political dynasty, while the Bush election as the second instance in American history of a father-son presidency ascertains that dynastic politics do not just happen in Third World democracies and dictator regimes.
So are we ready for another political dynasty?
-Khoo Ying Hooi
Commentator Response :
Wednesday, 06 June 2012 14:57 posted by FUCKBOLEHLAND
It is the practice of PARASITIC DYNASTY POLITIC in any country will typically sucks and inflicts gangrenous Hippocratic diseases to its people! So let the arguments be more objective, after all we aren’t the idiotic bunch that can’t differentiate in the complacency in between the grey areas?
Most developing and third world countries are suckers for this PARASITIC DYNASTY POLITIC syndrome and precisely this is WYSIWYG in the context of Malaysian Politics.
Isn’t it true, all this while we Malaysians are so engulfed with subscriptions to crazy political bigotry issues, divide and rule politics that we had forgotten that very common denominator that we are all wearing our pants that have transparent massive holes that expose our buttocks? That is the precisely the reason these PARASITIC DYNASTY POLITICAL syndrome naturally sodomize (excuse me- but its no shame its umeno favorite word) and castrated our balls that we are fucked up that we have no more voices to be heard. The moment we perceive a political leader as “the one that knows all” – we are all dead meat! The Malay proverb is precise “Bertuan tak Bertempat” – The old fucking Hang Tuah shitty crappy stuff is all nothing but all fucked up mess. All citizens must be the modern Hang Jebat that demands Transparency of Governance whoever rules the day!
So what is this fucking Hang Tuah shitty crappy stuff? Citizen’s NUMB SKULL Attitude! So WHAT do we have? Instead of the Prime Minister that works for its people and Malaysia – we have the PRIME MINISTER OF A PARTY! Instead of a Wakil Rakyat –We have a WAKIL PARTY! All the while these parasites are busy building mandates for their families, little empires and little napoleon mobs and cronies polluting the political agendas of the very votes that put them in office.
High time we Malaysians debunk our thinking about politics – Any government of the day that deviates from the aspirations of the context of the Constituency of Malaysia deserves to be shown to the backdoor exit!
[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]
2 term limits, no family blocs and no ‘continuity within family’ are the only rules for all tax payer paid for posts. This is a neutral public post, not a family business.
ARTICLE 16
AGREE OR NOT? Make English a compulsory pass in SPM and a credit to get Grade 1 – by Lim Guan Eng – Wednesday, 06 June 2012 13:36
To improve the standard of English to maintain our international competitiveness, the Education Ministry should consider to make it compulsory to pass the English language paper in Sijil Pelajaran Malaysia(SPM) and that a credit is essential to obtain Grade 1 in SPM.
The widely acknowledged weakening of the English language proficiency in Malaysia continues to weaken our global competitiveness in science, technology and the economy. The Ministry of Education’s latest attempt to improve English language proficiency is the policy to “Uphold Bahasa Malaysia and Strengthen the English Language” (MBMMBI), which serves to replace and reverse the policy of the“Teaching of Science and Mathematics in English” (PPSMI).
MBMMBI aims to increase the quality of both Bahasa Malaysia and the English language. Strategies include increasing the numbers of hours for the teaching and learning of both languages, encouraging teachers of respective languages to attend enhancement courses, strengthening the respective language curriculum, and using information technology via relevant software and internet portals to facilitate the teaching and learning of both languages.
Disparity remains
However, there continues to be a disparity between both languages as students must achieve at least a passing grade in Bahasa Malaysia in order to receive their Sijil Pelajaran Malaysia (SPM) and to enter public institutions of higher learning, but there is no requirement to pass the English language at any level of the Malaysian school system.
MBMMBI cannot arrest the weakening of English language proficiency if the Ministry of Education does not also make a passing grade in the English language as a pre-requisite to qualify for SPM. Requirements for SPM will be increased from the year 2013 with students needing to pass both Bahasa Malaysia and History to qualify. However, a passing grade in the English language is still not compulsory.
Global language
In its National Education Policy, the Ministry of Education has acknowledged that English is the global language of communication and language of knowledge that Malaysians must master in order to compete nationally and globally. However, this is not reflected in the allocation of teaching hours and the Ministry does not give incentive for students to improve their command of the English language.
Currently, National Schools are allowed an allocation of up to 360 minutes per week for the teaching and learning of Bahasa Malaysia and up to 300 minutes per week for the teaching and learning of the English language, whilst National-type Schools are allowed an allocation of up to 300 minutes per week for the teaching and learning of Bahasa Malaysia and up to 150 minutes per week for the teaching and learning of the English language. Making a passing grade in the English language compulsory to qualify for SPM and that a credit is required for Grade 1, would give students the incentive to put in extra effort to improve their English language proficiency.
Creating this incentive for students is necessary if the Ministry of Education is committed to strengthening English language proficiency. Or else Malaysia will lose out in future competitiveness with deteriorating standards in English when other countries are improving theirs.
Lim Guan Eng is the DAP secretary-general and Penang Chief Minister
[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]
Aiming at target demographic is good, but certainly long term, but method as opposed to going to the UN is bad and will definitely not pass the Education Ministry’s watch. Just going to make them more racist and defensive. This dirty trick mentality, irritate voter format, really is part of LGE’s sick make up! Giving the Chinese a bad name! Is winning everything? Not by irritating the host race with arbitrary law methods while ignoring amending of bad laws. Everyone should have a choice in what language whether they pass SPM or not. If they don’t know English, there will be no difference, this is middle school level b.s.. And racist as hell.
How about using the legal and fair method repeated ad nauseum to those mostly deaf ears, and forgetful mind where cnmapaign promises are concerned. Ethics is not something easy to learn, and this nepotistic feller here has 1 term left . . . after which if the Malays pull a Mubarak on ‘Beloved CM and Fam’ even some Chinese and for certain Indians will not hesitate to pull a Tahrir on DAP. 2 TERMS ONLY, don’t propose 2 decade plans (i.e. exclusion via education) so as to justify limitless terms, we can all see where this is going. How about the Malays get a Malay to challenge Guan Eng on the below 3 items :
1) Freedom from Apartheid/Fascism (Article 1 Human Rights Charter)
2) Freedom from Religious-Persecution/Religious-Supremacy. (Article 18 Human Rights Charter)
3) Equality for all ethnicities and faiths in all aspects of policy, Law and Constitution. (Surah An Nisa 4:75)
1 term as CM up Mr.Beneficiary of Nepotism, and too many terms as MP long up as well (could the courts or Bar Council apply new laws placing 2 term limits on all MPs?) . . . Had 15 mins (2 terms) ? so GTFO of the Dewan with the rest of your relatives!
ARTICLE 17
Understanding the powers of the King – Saturday, 02 June 2012 Super Admin
In a situation where there is no clear majority, the King can call on two opposing prime ministers-in-waiting to submit their lists of supporters within a specified amount of time, and it is up to the King to vet the lists in whatever way he sees fit as the Constitution is silent on the methodology. And because the claim of a majority must satisfy the Agong, the final decision rests in his hands alone, Dr Shad Saleem said. And this is the situation where the Agong can exercise his greatest power.
Joseph Sipalan, The Star
MALAYSIANS celebrate the Yang di-Pertuan Agong’s official birthday today as the first Saturday of June is mandated by the Malaysian constitution as His Majesty’s birthday.
To most Malaysians, the Yang di-Pertuan Agong is a celebrated figurehead at the helm of a unique system of government that recognises a constitutional monarchy and a functioning parliamentary democracy.
Unique, because unlike most other countries that recognise one royal family, we see a new lineage elected to the throne every five years from among the nine existing royal families in Peninsular Malaysia.
When the term figurehead is mentioned, the common assumption is that the King’s role is purely ceremonial and carries very little clout in terms of actual powers to dictate how the country is run.
This assumption is not entirely correct. The King’s powers are divided into five categories that cover the entire spectrum of his dominion – executive functions, legislative functions, judicial functions, other important duties and appointment of persons to important posts.
For the most part, the various clauses and sub-clauses that make up the categories require the King to act on the advice of the Prime Minister, and in certain cases from other people as well.
But there are instances where the King could be the one man who decides the future of not just aspiring prime ministers, but the entire country.
Constitutional law expert Prof Emeritus Datuk Dr Shad Saleem Faruqi explained that the King is bound by a clear set of guidelines when appointing a Prime Minister.
A prime minister in-waiting must first belong to the Dewan Rakyat, and secondly, in the opinion of the Agong, command the majority of the Lower House – which in this case would be the Dewan Rakyat.
This would be straightforward when the winning party in a general election commands a clear majority in the Lower House.
The King’s true powers however, only emerge in the case of a hung Parliament.
In a situation where there is no clear majority, the King can call on two opposing prime ministers-in-waiting to submit their lists of supporters within a specified amount of time, and it is up to the King to vet the lists in whatever way he sees fit as the Constitution is silent on the methodology. And because the claim of a majority must satisfy the Agong, the final decision rests in his hands alone, Dr Shad Saleem said. And this is the situation where the Agong can exercise his greatest power.
The Agong has even more discretion in deciding whether or not to grant a request to dissolve Parliament, as the Constitution does not state any specific grounds to justify the King’s decision to withhold consent.
While this clause allows a lot of leeway for interpretation, Dr Shad Saleem said, there were three conceivable scenarios where the King could freely exercise his right to not grant consent.
The first is when the ruling Government decides to call for snap polls immediately after losing a general election.
Unless the Agong feels that the winning party can form a strong and stable Government, the request can be denied.
The King can also say no if he believes a round of polls will be prejudicial to national interests such as the health of the economy, and likewise if the prime minister is using the polls to subvert the constitution, by gaining an unfair advantage over his opponents in his own party, for example.
It must be noted that while the monarch can refuse to allow a dissolution (of Parliament), he cannot directly call for one.
“That is the prerogative of the Prime Minister,” Dr Shad Saleem said.
The Agong can also refuse to give his assent to any Bill passed by both the Dewan Rakyat and Dewan Negara, if he finds that the Bill in question is unconstitutional.
Commentator Comments :
written by Ocassey, June 02, 2012 22:14:22
Ampun Tuanku,
The greater majority of the rakyat for the period since 1957 and after the formation of a greater
Malaya called Malaysia to date have been taken for a ride all these while and their minds and mentality have been replaced with the thoughts, wishes, schemes, assumptions and voices of the national leadership who continue to claim to that they are all in the interest of the well-beings of the rakyat in general . And any conflicting voices are only definitely from those who are trying to derail the good deeds and efforts of the government of the day with the intentions of trying to divide the rakyat ! The real culprits are none other than the ruling elites and all their cronies and government vehicles . The Education System have constantly been manipulated to deceive the voting rakyat with the major focus to undermine and stunt the progress of the younger generations and after more than 55 years at least three generations are glaringly now victims of a despotic government which will soon be upgraded to a police state on par to D.R. Korea ! Meanwhile the majority rakyat , voiceless and helpless , have been depending on the few political parties like Pas, DAP and PKR to defend their rights and amplify their voices which in the end will end up as usual to be bulldozed and neutralized by the bodies set up as vehicles of the government . Special NGOs and action groups set up specifically to vilify and demonize Pakatan Rakyat at the slightest sign of so-call dissent will face unending antagonizing disturbances and countless police reports to purposely keep such rakyat’s guardians endlessly going in and out of the courts to answer to police charges .
Where art thou , Majesties ,when the ordinary “majority” rakyat need you to protect them ? Rulers and the Monarch have forsaken the majority rakyat who consist of all races and religions . There was loud deafening silence from our kings when churches were touched , graves desecrated, cow-head paraded , pig head tossed into mosque and bodies popping off government building windows ? Where art thou when the defenseless rakyat marched in unison to your palace to hand you their petitions only to be halted , attacked, blasted with water-cannons ,tear-gassed and detained with all sorts of threats ,all in full view under the Malaysian skies ? You are the kings , and rakyat of all creeds and colors are your subjects . Every elected Adun and MP from all political parties including individual independent ones are clearly part of your government . We the rakyat have high expectation to be treated equally by our kings . 250,000 or more “Bersih” supporters peacefully walking to congregate at Dataran Merdeka cannot be misguided, erred , disruptive nor aggressive despite being cordoned off ,restricted ,intimidated by razor-blade wires and the police forces’ presence who had all the advantages of the upper hands of authority , weaponry and stealth tactics !
Ampun Tuanku .
+17
…
written by Loyal Malaysian, June 02, 2012 18:58:39
I believe we can use the unscrupulous and immoral power grab in Perak as a guideline as to what will happen in the scenario discussed!!
+9
…
written by upsidedown119, June 02, 2012 17:08:28
The grey area is the Agong’s opinion as to who commands the confidence of the majority in Parliament after the election. Remember the fiasco in Sabah when Pairin first won the state election? The point is whether his opinion is to be gauged objectively or subjectively? If subjectively, the Agong could appoint as PM an MP who does not have a majority immediately after the election but who have enough resources to subsequently ‘win’ over the confidence of the majority.
+4
…
written by bpchan, June 02, 2012 16:32:16
The King’s power…
What does power do, and Why? Who gave the power? Where the power came from where? What is power? can it be seen ? be touched?
Power is perception.
+7
…
written by Padayappa, June 02, 2012 15:45:53
Be careful what u say Kaneeneh, the Perak political crisis, downfall of Nizar goverment is actually part of monarchy hand play His function under constitution, not as ceremonial concept as you said. But up to situation.
+13
…
written by eloofk, June 02, 2012 15:39:13
Can the Agong not listen to the advice from a Prime Minister who has not obtained a mandate from the rakyat or if the Prime Minister is of dubious character, unfit to give sound advice for the benefit of a multi-relious and multi-racial society or if he is of unscrupulous hehaviour in his role as a minister or Prime MInister for that matter ???
+14
…
written by Kaneeneh, June 02, 2012 15:12:02
Monarchy, in whatever form, is ceremonial and an archaic concept. It drains a country’s resources to provide for the reign and is susceptible to wanton bribery for titles and connections.
[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]
The Agong cannot fairly ignore UNHCR or Asabiya issues which are the basic rights of ALL Humanity. In either case the Agong’s authority is not more (and also no civilsed person can accept such unrighteous laws and constitutional articles) than the UN or HRC, both of which Malaysia is part of AND cannot fairly support apartheid in Malaysia’s laws nd Constitution.
Tacitly endorsing this by keeping silent all this time does no wonders for Malaysia’s reputation. Bumiputra Apartheid and any who support bumiputra apartheid, are a social drain and disenfranchising psychic blight on citizens. Neglect of a serious nation harming issue and meaningless immobility mistaken as pride at the expense of the citizens is not the ‘Malaysian’ way. UNHCR or Asabiya issues are universally accepted and may not be negotiated about – especially when the issue is centered around exploitative disenfranchisement and erosion of integrity of society’s different groups for the benefit of a single race or faith. As per Adat, a host is gracious and does not devour their guests. Do the Malays in India and China get treated like the Indians and Chinese in Malaysia? Civilisation and respect for humanity, not Asabiya . . .
ARTICLE 18
When the mouth moves faster than the brain – Thursday, 31 May 2012 Super Admin
I know that many readers of Malaysia Today are young Malaysians, probably born after Merdeka or around that time. This means you do not know what happened in the 1940s and 1950s and how a formula for peaceful coexistence was hammered out between the Malays and the non-Malays. Hence it is good we reflect on the history of our country. And if we can understand and honour the spirit of the Merdeka Social Contract, then a lot of conflict can be avoided.
NO HOLDS BARRED
Raja Petra Kamarudin
The ‘Social Contract’ is not a written document, said one-time Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad. It is a verbal contract, explained Dr Mahathir. A verbal contract is not worth the paper it is written on, most lawyers would tell you (and I bet many Malaysia Today readers would not get the ‘punch line’ to this statement).
Anyway, verbal contracts are binding in certain situations. In Islam, a verbal contract is binding as long as there are witnesses of good standing (meaning, who have never been proven to have lied in the past) who can testify as to the existence of that verbal contract. Nevertheless, Islam encourages that all contacts be committed to paper to avoid possible disputes in future. After all, witness can lie or they might die.
Whatever it may be, does such a Social Contract exist? I am talking, of course, about the ‘contract’ between the Malays and the non-Malays when Merdeka was being negotiated with the British. Dr Mahathir says it is a verbal and not a written contract.
Okay, maybe there was no real ‘signing ceremony’, if that is what Dr Mahathir meant. I mean, when we launched ‘The People’s Declaration’ at the Blog House in the run-up to the March 2008 General Election, it was done in a proper and official ceremony. Six political parties including PKR, DAP and PAS turned up to ‘sign’ the Declaration. And each of the six party representatives gave speeches, not only to endorse ‘The People’s Declaration’ but also promising that if they won the election they would deliver on their promises.
Nevertheless, that was more than four years ago. And although these six political parties, three of them now in the Pakatan Rakyat coalition, did not win the federal government, Pakatan Rakyat did win five state governments, now down to four. But they do not want to fulfil their promise made pre-March 2008 in front of more than 100 people in the ceremony to launch ‘The People’s Declaration’.
In fact, I raised this matter with Anwar Ibrahim, Tian Chua and Tunku Aziz Ibrahim when they came to the UK on 2nd October 2010. You can see the three videos below. Then, not long after that, Anwar went to Australia and whacked me for what I said in London.
Is Anwar saying that we, the members of the civil society movements, do not have a ‘Social Contract’ with the six political parties not from the Barisan Nasional coalition? Of course we do. And it is more than just a verbal contract that Dr Mahathir is talking about.
So, a short while later, also in 2010, when we launched the Malaysian Civil Liberties Movement (MCLM), why such hostility? Why declare the MCLM as the enemy of Pakatan Rakyat? And now that you have declared us the enemy and we act like an enemy you are not happy about it. Was it we or was it you who declared war?
Anyway, that is not what I really want to talk about. As usual, I am just digressing. What I want to talk about is the Merdeka Social Contract, the so-called verbal contract that is the brunt of so much conflict and racial posturing.
Actually, it is not a verbal contract. It is a written contract. And it is written in the Federal Constitution of Malaysia. Hence Dr Mahathir, Ibrahim Ali, etc., are all wrong. Those born in Malaysia are Malaysians. They are not Chinese, Indians, pendatang, immigrants, or whatever. That was the agreed terms of the Merdeka Social Contract, which is part of the Federal Constitution of Malaysia.
It is wrong to refer to non-Malays as pendatang or immigrants. It is also wrong to treat them as such. They are as Malaysian as any other person born in Malaysia. No two ways about it.
Okay, and what else is in that Merdeka Social Contract? Well, one thing was that the Straits Settlements, the Federated Malay States and the Unfederated Malay States would no longer exist and they would all be merged into the Federation of Malaya or Persekutuan Tanah Melayu (later renamed the Federation of Malaysia).
In that same spirit, the institution of the Monarchy would be retained but the Rulers would be reduced from Absolute Monarchs to Constitutional Monarchs and governance would be transferred from the Palace to the elected/appointed Houses (Parliament and Senate) and the State Assemblies.
Furthermore, Islam would be the religion of the Federation and Malay would be the National Language. And in some states, mainly those with Rulers and not Governors, only a Malay/Muslim can be appointed the Menteri Besar.
Yes, that was the ‘Contract’ made between the Malays and the non-Malays in the run-up to Merdeka. And, in exchange for that, all non-Malays born in India, China, etc., would be given citizenship while those born in Malaya after Merdeka would get automatic citizenship. They would not be classified as foreigners or need to apply for citizenship.
And that is why, today, all of you who are not Malays are Malaysians and not Chinese, Indian, etc., nationals — unless you wish to give up your Malaysian citizenship and migrate. That is you right — to automatic citizenship. And no one can take away that right, not even Ibrahim Ali or Perkasa, because that was the Merdeka Social Contract that the Malays and non-Malays agreed on.
However, just as your citizenship cannot be taken away, as per the terms of the Merdeka Social Contract, you too must honour the other terms of that Contract. And those terms are, other than Islam being the religion of the Federation and Malay being the National Language, is that Malaysia would retain a Constitutional Monarchy. That was agreed in the Merdeka Social Contract.
Hence it is imprudent for you to question whether Malaysia should just abolish the Monarchy and change into a Republic (or question Islam as the religion of the Federation or Malay as the National Language). Doing so would mean you want to terminate the Merdeka Social Contract. And terminating the Merdeka Social Contract is dangerous because those who are not Malays would not receive automatic Malaysian citizenship.
I would vote in favour of retaining the Merdeka Social Contract. That would create lesser problems for all of us. Then Ibrahim Ali and Perkasa cannot demand that anyone’s citizenship be withdrawn. Your citizenship would be your right. Without the Merdeka Social Contract you would not be protected and would not automatically be granted Malaysian citizenship.
However, this would also mean we should not demand that Islam be removed as the religion of the Federation or Malay as the National Language. We cannot also demand that the Monarchy be abolished and for Malaysia to be turned into a Republic. That would be seditious, just as seditious as asking for Malaysian-born Chinese and Indians to be sent back to China and/or India.
I know that many readers of Malaysia Today are young Malaysians, probably born after Merdeka or around that time. This means you do not know what happened in the 1940s and 1950s and how a formula for peaceful coexistence was hammered out between the Malays and the non-Malays. Hence it is good we reflect on the history of our country. And if we can understand and honour the spirit of the Merdeka Social Contract, then a lot of conflict can be avoided.
So let us not allow a minor thing such as a car registration number spoil everything. Was His Highness the Sultan of Johor acting out of conduct (misconduct) when he tendered for ‘WWW 1’? Was there an element of fraud or corruption? Has there been fair play in His Highness winning the bid?
Do we question a Chinese towkay who wants to pay an exorbitant sum of money for a number ‘8’? What if Chua Soi Lek pays RM500,000 for ‘CSL 1’ to put on his car? Would we demand that Parliament be abolished because a Member of Parliament wasted RM500,000 of his own money on a car registration number?
Yes, I know, Raja Petra Kamarudin is saying all this because he is from the royal family so he wants to defend the Sultan, some of you are going to comment. So what if I want to defend the Sultans when they are right? Have I not whacked the Sultans many times when they are wrong? Have I not whacked the Perak Sultan for toppling the Pakatan Rakyat state government until my own family disowned me?
I have paid my dues. Hence I have earned my right to defend the Sultans when they do nothing wrong because I have whacked them when they are wrong. In that same spirit, if you can spend some time to view the three videos below, you can also see that I have earned the right to whack Pakatan Rakyat for not delivering on its promises.
[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]
i) This means you do not know what happened in the 1940s and 1950s and how a formula for peaceful coexistence was hammered out between the Malays and the non-Malays.
BUMIPUTRA APARTHEID **IS NOT** a formula for peaceful coexistence. There is a differnce between those who rioted and killed, the descendants of those who rioted AND those who did not riot as well as the descendants of those who did not riot at all. There is no such thing as Malays and non-Malays, therer is only the citizen who rioted or killed and the citizen who did not. Thos who did not WILL NEVER ACCEPT APARTHEID because they had nothing to do with the race riots. Recommend that ALL (but not even their descendants can be fairly targeted though perhaps just the immediate generation after – i.e. Lim Kit Siang being of that generation and participated and even revelled in the violence and child Lim Guan Eng (nepotist beneficiary without quorum CM) would be subject to Bumiputra Apartheid but the next generation of these Lims would not) who did not take part in the violence are not to be subject to BUMIPUTRA APARTHEID and that even the Malays who took part in the riots be stripped of their bumiputra status. Everyone else who did not raise a fist or weapon against the government or in general Malays (much less Islam – which incidentally is not even Malaysia’s native faith of Nusantaran Animism), demands as per the UNHCR Article 1 and the Asabiya Prohibition in the Quran – NOT be subject to apartheid.
ii) Do we question a Chinese towkay who wants to pay an exorbitant sum of money for a number ‘8’?
A Chinese towkay is not a ruler or symbol of the country. So nothing to bother about. Exceptionalism is expected of rulers, NOT plutocrat towkays that is why there were no criticisms. People expect nothing from towkays. But rulers are for everyone.
iii) . . . because that was the Merdeka Social Contract that the Malays and non-Malays agreed on. . . .
That included the Reid Commission’s recommendation that Malay Special Privileges were only supposed to last for 15 years after which they were to [otentially end after a review. Near 4 times that period has paseed, and the Malays have reneged on their side of the agreement which was to REVIEW after 15 years. So the Merdeka Social Contract is BROKEN and Malaysia’s signatory status of the Human Rights Charter signatory means Special Privileges contravene Article 1 of the HRC. On top of that Islam’s ‘Official Status’ means the Sin of Asabiya cannot be allowed by the politicians or any Muslim, which obviously included the rulers who likely come under the purview of Sunnite Islam’s highest authority at the Al Azhar University at Cairo. THERE IS NO CASE FOR BUMIPUTRA APARTHEID!
iv) I would vote in favour of retaining the Merdeka Social Contract. That would create lesser problems for all of us. Then Ibrahim Ali and Perkasa cannot demand that anyone’s citizenship be withdrawn. Your citizenship would be your right.
With the facts above, ANY Malays who votes in favour of retaining the so-called Merdeka Social Contract is a potential crypto-racist and potential war criminal capable of carrying out or even quietly assenting of what happened at Nazi Auswictz.
v) Without the Merdeka Social Contract you would not be protected and would not automatically be granted Malaysian citizenship.
ONLY if the review as per the Reid Commission, which the writer has selectively neglected to mention, is brought into consideration. The so-called ‘Merdeka Social Contract’ precludes the Reid Commission’s recommendations that the writer has again neglected to mention or put in historical context with. I strongly believe that Raja Petra Kamarudin is a crypto-racist posing as a refugee from the Malay Court. Very disappointing Raja Petra Kamarudin! Not a very Raja minded mindset you are exposing there by promoting a skewed version of history and inirectly apartheid as well. Thus falls another strawman of the UMNO racist (majority?) faction. At times like these PAS seems honest enough, at least they spew what they want to allow others to reject them, not lie, twist and turn and corrupt the minds of Malays with Asabiya and selective amnesia like this.
Malaysia is less than 1% of the Earths surface, no false flag drivel of any personae will make the greatest of nations of this and all future day accept a country that does not have :
1) Freedom from Apartheid/Fascism (Article 1 Human Rights Charter)
2) Freedom from Religious-Persecution/Religious-Supremacy. (Article 18 Human Rights Charter)
3) Equality for all ethnicities and faiths in all aspects of policy, Law and Constitution. (Surah An Nisa 4:75)
The lowest common denominator posing as an intellectual. The title Raja (Indian origin btw) is shamed, and the name Petra shames the great city of the Middle East, with Kamaruddin, is not even a Malay name to begin with. How many Malays remember their REAL names? And with the half-blood issues considered as well compounding the terrible wrongs promulgated above in the guise of studied politics, what we have here is a non-entity of personality in all spheres. If this paragraph offends someone who ‘ran away’ from Malaysia, do tell, I will remove . . . not so cool now? Thats for throwing 3rd world politics about in a world that will never accept BUMIPUTRA APARTHEID, via the pretense of the ‘so-called’ Merdeka Social Contract. Go away, put of touch racist old man. The citizens of today are no longer interested in racist diatribe, only beneficiaries with access would want to keep the ‘so-called’ Merdeka Social Contract that has kept even ordinary Malays from accessing wealth due them.
Finally Islam as official religion or any religion as official worldwide is just hot air. Unless a theocracy is intended, just leave religion alone to free choice. Saying a religion is official and then not having theocratic powers means there is no point making the religion official. Conversely, theorcacy if applied is just plain abuse of humanity or social freedoms. Citizens on an individual by individual basis could instead assent to being governed by any theocratic laws, official or not is a moot point.
ARTICLE 19
Blaming Dr Mahathir again – FROM AROUND THE BLOGS – Tuesday, 29 May 2012 Super Admin – by KTEMOC KONSIDERS
Most of us like to blame Dr Mahathir wakakaka. Well, here’s another item for you to blame him 😉
Were you aware that Azmin Ali was brought up by the Mahathir family – not the Doctor himself but I heard by his (Dr M’s) sister or aunt (can anyone help me here?).
So when Azmin reached working age, guess who recommended him for employment? Of course Uncle Mahathir!
And guess who Uncle Mahathir asked to employ Azmin Ali?
Wakakaka!
Yup, his deputy and then DPM manmanlai wakakaka!
Dr M would have said: “Anwar matey (wakakaka), ni Azmin, see if you can find him a job!”
And as they say, the rest is history.
But why should we blame Dr M for bringing these two inseparables together?
When I read RPK’s MACC ‘Deep Throat’ comes out of the closet I knew the MMM (know what M-cube stands for? wakakaka) would deny the revelation or give all sorts of excuses or accuse RPK of being an UMNO paid mole – yes, the very same MMM who would praise Yang Mulia RPK (wakakaka) for his amazing courage, assets and resources had he exposed instead Najib or Shahrizat or Mahathir’s corruption wakakaka.
But then, consolation prize, wouldn’t it be considered Dr M’s fault for bringing the two together as an inseparable pair? wakakaka. Go on, blame the old man wakakaka.
RPK also wrote:
One interesting document in that file is regarding the RM15,000 a month that Vincent Tan was paying Azmin Ali. It seems Vincent Tan not only financed the fall of Perak but is also financing the ‘other side’ as well. And, according to my ex-MACC Deep Throat, this is still going on. I suppose that is what most Chinese tycoons would do: hedge your bets by placing your money on all the horses in the race.
[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]
Tasty! Now lets hope one of the propaganda spinners makes a fluff piece out of this. Kutty and the Jambu (no prizes for guessing if ‘Dr’ gets thrown out of UMNO somehow – guess who the pairing would involve (some of us are LGBT supportive but this disgusts the hell out of me, well some connoisseur of Malay political gossip should be able to take up the challenge) . . . . Imagine the scandal . . . Anwar Sodomy Trial 3.0! In fact we dare UMNO (though UMNO is hated for racism and corruption, this should be quite a challenge to spin . . . ) to match every Bersih with a Sodomy trial (just gave Ambiga a chance to make lots of cash . . . )! Best of all, who knows this could lead to greater democracy for the Muslims interested in these issues . . .
ARTICLE 20
Let’s jointly condemn political violence – Tuesday, 29 May 2012 Super Admin – Nurul Izzah Anwar
Raja Nong Chik’s response to the “Night of Bloodshed in Lembah Pantai” reveals an attempt to distract and distort the facts of the incident.
The fact is that violence did take place which caused injuries to an elderly man and a young girl, both who rightly should be respected and protected by society. Unfortunately, it was not only an attack on innocent citizens but also an attack on democracy.
Firstly, the violence that occurred was fostered through the Lembah Pantai Umno-created climate of intimidation and political thuggery, clearly seen by several incidences on the night and prior to it as well. (In the cases of 1. Pekida protest at Masjid al-Ikhlasiah, Pantai Dalam; 2. the punching of Adam Adli at Flat PKNS 4 Tingkat Kampung Kerinchi by known Lembah Pantai Umn members; 3. TIBAI-Umno-organised ceramahs such as the one in Kampung Kerinchi recently.)
Secondly, the feeble attempt to distract the public’s attention by speculating and blaming KEADILAN for inviting outsiders to what he claims is local politics is demeaning to democracy and a disservice to the people of Lembah Pantai.
As the member of Parliament for Lembah Pantai I have always welcomed a long list of national leaders such as Najib Razak, Muhyiddin Yassin, Daim Zainuddin and other Cabinet ministers who have graced Lembah Pantai over the past few months. I do not see this as Umno inviting outsiders into local politics but rather as a recognition that KEADILAN is doing something right to deserve such attention.
Furthermore, the disproportionate attention and funds lavished on Lembah Pantai compared to other Kuala Lumpur constituencies by Raja Nong Chik as Federal Territories and Urban Wellbeing Minister, along with an unelected mayor, is proof that the government needs to work doubly hard when the majority of support in Kuala Lumpur is with Pakatan Rakyat.
Thirdly, with regards to the claim that there is lack of proof of those responsible, I invite Raja Nong Chik to jointly declare with me to condemn all forms of political violence and to jointly invite both the police and Suhakam to investigate fairly on this Thursday.
Finally, in the spirit of setting a healthy democratic example and to demonstrate that political violence is unacceptable, I wish to once again reaffirm my acceptance of Raja Nong Chik’s invitation to a public debate in two weeks’ time at the same location, Pantai Permai. I shall be there and wait for him to translate words into deeds as he appears to believe that all politics is local.
[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]
Family blocs in politics is a form of political violence far worse and more subversive and corrupting than physical violence. Nurul was saying? Some people think that the voters are only stupid enough to understand PHYSICAL VIOLENCE and not POLITICAL VIOLENCE, the most violent thing in politics in fact is the term limitless fanily bloc that GROWS and subsumes the entire political scene to the demise of democracy. Nurul has not spoken or directly endorsed :
1) Freedom from Apartheid/Fascism (Article 1 Human Rights Charter)
2) Freedom from Religious-Persecution/Religious-Supremacy. (Article 18 Human Rights Charter)
3) Equality for all ethnicities and faiths in all aspects of policy, Law and Constitution. (Surah An Nisa 4:75)
ARTICLE 21
PR Proposes Scrapping 30 Pct Bumi Equity Target – Thursday, 31 May 2012 00:09
KUALA LUMPUR — Pakatan Rakyat has proposed a radical policy shift from attaining the 30 per cent equity target for bumiputeras to a minimum household income of RM4,000 for each family, says Opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim.
In a statement on Wednesday, he claimed that the 30 per cent equity target policy had been hijacked by cronies and special interests to enrich themselves at the expense of the general public.
He also claimed that the disparity between rich and poor had widened significantly as a result of abuses done in the name of achieving the 30 per cent equity target.
(Bernama)
[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]
This is not exactly an overhaul to ensure :
1) Freedom from Apartheid/Fascism (Article 1 Human Rights Charter)
2) Freedom from Religious-Persecution/Religious-Supremacy. (Article 18 Human Rights Charter)
3) Equality for all ethnicities and faiths in all aspects of policy, Law and Constitution. (Surah An Nisa 4:75)
;but is very close though without fine tuned details like Vehicular-AP, Forced Conscriptions and Toll Booths and amendment of some laws. The Opposition still has meaning then, but like so many flashes on the pan to divert and strawman so far, we’ll see where this No.1 issue heads in a month or so. Very rare to hear about end of the apartheid system but better than none at all. Could some UN types advise Anwar on the Human Rights Article 1 aspect of governance? Otherwise 3rd Force only.
malaysiandemocracy 