marahfreedom

Archive for the ‘Reid Commission’ Category

11 Articles on Malaysian Politics : Hegelian Dialectic from a Term Limitless Nepotist and Oligarch That Wastes Voters’ Time, UMNO’s Heavy Reliance on Violence Ratgher Than Statesmanship, UMNO’s Escapees, UMNO semi-escapee’s KITA’s Cautious Random Hopefulness, Damage Control for the Drawn In Protestors, Double Article Confirming Shameless Use of Collusive Media, LGBT and Narrow Communalism, DAP Confirms Uselessness on top of Nepotism, Fundo-leanings and Term limitlessness, DAP flounders but refuses to end apartheid – reposted by @AgreeToDisagree – 26th May 2012

In Apartheid, Bumiputera Apartheid, Islam, Malaysia, Muslims, OPZ, organic psychedelics advocacy, Organic Psychedelics Zone, Political Fat Cats, politics, pretentious, preventing vested interest, red light district legalisation, Reid Commission, social freedoms, sub-culture advocacy on May 25, 2012 at 7:11 pm

ARTICLE 1

Deafening silence from cousins Najib and Hisham: Are they behind the political thuggery? – by  Lim Kit Siang – Friday, 25 May 2012 17:28

The question Malaysians are asking is whether the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak and the Home Minister, Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussin are encouraging a political culture of aggression, thuggery and violence by their failure to condemn the recent series of disruptions and attacks on Pakatan Rakyat functions!

Is this the route for Malaysia to take to become the world’s best democracy as Najib had boasted after Bersih 2.0 on July 9 last year?

Is this the example Najib is setting for the world on what he meant when he called for a Global Movement of Moderates to isolate and marginalize the extremists?

Lembah Pantai, before that Merlimau

Yesterday, a Pakatan Rakyat ceramah in Lembah Pantai was pelted with eggs and stones, leaving several injured and bloodied.

Earlier this week, another PR ceramah in Pekan Bangi, Selangor was disrupted by a group who threw stones at the crowd.

Last Saturday, a high-tea event in Merlimau that was scheduled to feature Bersih 2.0 co-chairperson Datuk Ambiga Sreenivasan was blocked by protestors and two DAP Malacca State Assemblymen, Khoo Poay Tiong (Ayer Keroh ) and Tey Kok Kiew (Bandar Hilir) were pelted with eggs and stones, while several vehicles were damaged.

This morning, the office of PKR MP for Lembah Pantai Nurul Izzah in Pantai Dalam was pelted with more eggs while PAS Bukit Gantang MP and former Pakatan Rakyat Perak Mentri Besar Datuk Seri Nizar Jamaluddin complained that eleven cars were splashed with blue paint at his ceramah in Kampung Sayong Lembah, Kuala Kangsar yesterday.

Deafening silence

For more than a week, my call for the restoration of decency and civility to politics and public life in Malaysia had fallen completely on deaf ears as far as the Prime Minister, the Deputy Prime Minister, the Home Minister and UMNO/Barisan Nasional Ministers and political leaders are concerned – although one “uncivilized” act after another had marred Malaysian politics and public life like the Perkasa “funeral rite” in front of Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng’s house in Penang, the setting up of a burger stall and the “butt dance” by a group of armed forces veteran in front of Ambiga’s house at Bukit Damansara, Kuala Lumpur and the demonstrations by anti-Bersih groups outside Ambiga’s house yesterday.

The Prime Minister, the Deputy Prime Minister, the Home Minister, UMNO/Barisan Nasional Ministers and leaders are continuing to comment on all sorts of things under the sun but they are signally silent on the increase and escalation of incidents of aggression, thuggery and violence particularly at Pakatan Rakyat events and functions.

What message is Najib and Hishammuddin seeking to convey with their silence, which could only be construed as “silent blessing” for the spate of aggression, thuggery and violence at Pakatan Rakyat functions?

Najib and Hishammuddin must condemn and dissociate themselves from the increase and escalation of deplorable incidents at PR events if they do not want to be regarded as encouraging a political culture of aggression, thuggery and violence by their prolonged silence on the recent series of disruptions and attacks on PR functions!

Lim Kit Siang is the DAP MP for Ipoh Timur

Commentator responses :

Friday, 25 May 2012 22:53 posted by Observer

One cousin promised to bathe his keris in non-Malay blood in Oct 1987 and the other kissed the keris at the UMNO Youth general assembly. Across the causeway, Goh Keng Swee, one time Finance Minister of Singapore, brought soap flakes along to wash his own underwear in hotel bathrooms whenever he was overseas; his cousin, Tun Tan Siew Sin, Finance Minister of Malaysia, did the same while overseas. Nothing apocryphal about this story. Goh’s self-laundry chores may be checked in Google under Maurice Baker – one time Law Minister; Tun Tan’s was recounted by none other than P.M.Najib’s father’s right-hand man, then Chief Secretary to the government in the post May 13 days – refer to the June 2009 issue of Off the Edge. This is the same datuk – I thank the Merciful Lord for the kind of datuks we used to have – who told the story about Tun Razak not agreeing to his wife’s request to accompany him on a government flight although he the datuk, Chief Secretary of the Council, was willing to sanction it, and in the end poor gentle Toh Puan Rahah had no choice but to travel by taxi.

Our blood boils when we read about where we stand today as a sovereign nation within ASEAN. Working visit – which visit overseas if done at government expense is not a working visit? Do PMs all over the world doing working visits bring along their wife on every occasion?

Your cousin, Hisham’s nonchalant and sometimes illogical responses on major issues have not helped you either to build a credible solid team to lead Malaysia. But this silence from the two of you on the injuries inflicted by your thugs and goons is the last straw.

No more my friends, we can’t be friends anymore.

[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]

The defensive article went : “For more than a week, my call for the restoration of decency and civility to politics and public life in Malaysia had fallen completely on deaf ears as far as the Prime Minister, the Deputy Prime Minister, the Home Minister and UMNO/Barisan Nasional Ministers and political leaders are concerned – although one “uncivilized” act after another had marred Malaysian politics and public life like the Perkasa “funeral rite” in front of Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng’s house in Penang, the setting up of a burger stall and the “butt dance” by a group of armed forces veteran in front of Ambiga’s house at Bukit Damansara, Kuala Lumpur and the demonstrations by anti-Bersih groups outside Ambiga’s house yesterday.”

Pot calls kettle black. Do the decent thing and stop being a term limitless Mubarak (Egypt)/Gaddafi (Libya) Ali Abdullah Salleh (Tunisia) type MP/Governor who places their own children in CM’s posts without vote or quorum or holds an MP’s seat or committee post in a political party without term limits! This is DAP’s own ‘deafening silence’. As for the riots, one wonders if Lim Kit Siang had supported Hussein Onn’s race equal concept party, instead of being a narrow communalist, the riots would never have happened.

In retrospect. Lim Kit Siang was so racist that the riots happened. Hussein Onn made the first correct move, but Kit Siang failed to meet up to expectations and that is the single action that caused the racism and corruption we all have to remove this day. Where are those MP asset declarations? Local Councill Elections? Pretending everything is fine Kit Siang? No better than UMNO and term limitless and equally racist to boot. DAP members, please remove this undemocratic nepotistic term limitless oligarch if DAP is to move forward. DAP is not a family clan association, there must be limits in the committee or DAP continues being a Mubarak-Gaddafi-AliAbdullah Salleh type political party. 2 terms over Mr.Thick Skinned 3rd world political party ‘owner’ and nepotist par excellence? So GTFO of the DAP central committee and out of the Dewan! Unprincipled and undemocratic creep!

ARTICLE 2

Dr M warns of “unceasing” violence if Pakatan loses GE-13 – Friday, 25 May 2012 16:32

KUALA LUMPUR — Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad warned today that violence from protestors at the April 28 Bersih rally is only the beginning of “unceasing violent demonstrations” should Pakatan Rakyat (PR) lose  an election that must be held within the year.

The former prime minister said in a blog posting that the opposition will continue with their protests until the results of the 13th General Election are rejected and a new government is formed.

“Then they will try to hold a new election which they will manipulate,” said Dr Mahathir, who is still influential in the ruling Barisan Nasional (BN).

The long-serving prime minister’s statement comes just days after Putrajaya launched legal action against Bersih and PKR leaders over the April 28 rally for free and fair elections which had spiralled into chaos as protestors and police clashed on the streets.

Bersih leaders were sued by the government for RM122,000 of repairs to 15 vehicles allegedly damaged during the rally for free and fair elections while opposition leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim and two party leaders were charged with taking part in an illegal street protest.

“The massive and violent Bersih protests were preparations to reject the GE13 results if the opposition fails to win it. Their loss will be followed by unceasing violent protests until the election results are rejected.

“If they are allowed to take power using their violent methods, then democracy will be extinguished and a horrible fate awaits this country,” wrote Dr Mahathir, who was PM for 22 years until his resignation in 2003.

Both Dr Mahathir and current prime minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak have accused the opposition of engineering a coup via the Bersih protest.

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 chief Datuk Ambiga Sreenevasan asked the crowd to disperse.

But the former Bar Council president’s 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.

-The Malaysian Insider

[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]

Think Mahathir Vehicular APs, Mahathir Toll Booths, and Mahathir Ops Lallangs to put things in perspective. If dictator here is talking in continuation of ‘crushed bodies rhetoric’, lets hope USA will ignore ‘liberation efforts to end apartheid’ from India and China, with ‘interim government’ to ensure ‘smooth transition to democracy’ later.

ARTICLE 3

Zahid pushes PAS for view on non-Malay PM – May 25, 2012

Zahid said “it has been agreed that the (PM’s) post be held by a Malay”. — File pic
BAGAN DATOH, May 25 — PAS should state its stand on the issue of appointing a non-Malay as prime minister as championed by DAP national chairman Karpal Singh, said Umno vice-president Datuk Seri Ahmad Zahid Hamidi.

“PAS cannot be vacillating on this issue like they do over the PAS-Umno muzakarah (discussion) issue.

“Is what has been officially put forward by Karpal also the stand of PAS and Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR)?” he said after opening the Bagan Datoh parliamentary constituency’s 1Malaysia People’s Welfare Programme (KAR1SMA), here, today.

He was earlier asked to comment on a newspaper report quoting Karpal Singh as saying, “[As] long as I live, I will continue to fight for a non-Malay to be prime minister”.

Ahmad Zahid said: “Although the Federal Constitution does not state the race of a person to be appointed as prime minister, conventionally, it had been agreed that the post be held by a Malay.

“We urge that the people judge PAS’ stand and attitude in this issue.” — Bernama

[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]

Again to reiterate, personally, a Malay only Dewan with Malay only Cabinet and Malay PM without a single minority is not worth :

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)

;and any other UNHCR affirmative actions that protect the minorities which we leave the the non-racist, non-fundo Malay MPs above to ensure. Who cares for a puppet PM who is a minority and never grants the above 3 items? This whole article and argument is a MSM strawman intended to disregard Malaysia’s lack of the above 3 items. The refusal to grant the 3 items and not be all fundo or refuse to even legislate making 4D outlets allow all other types of gambling games or an adult services district, amend laws that are outdated, make citizens all truly equals, makes minority MP’s necessary.

ARTICLE 4

Don’t trust a party which doesn’t trust us – Hornbill Unleashed – by Sakmongkol AK47 – May 26, 2012

Why can’t Umno carry the Malays to greater progress? Because it’s a low trust organisation. It doesn’t trust the majority of Malays and it doesn’t trust the rakyat in general. It has ceased to become a political party. It has morphed into an organisation of black hands composed of three million members. It puts its trust on the three million members NOT on the rakyat. This is the principal reason why we must reject Umno.

It fears the rakyat and their judgment. The leader of Umno who calls others accursed bastards is willing to unleash the instruments of suppression on the rakyat, firing water cannons and spraying tear gas that immobilise people instantly. Where did the Umno government buy the new variety of tear gas? From Israel?

Umno is not trusted nor does it trust those outside itself. This is a hallmark of a backward organisation composed, like Dr Mahathir says, of a half-past six leadership belonging to an organisation which is rotten to the core, corrupt from top to bottom and made up of dullards. Mahathir said all that.

We have a simple proposition then. Can we bank our future on such an organisation? Why should we trust Umno with our future if it doesn’t trust us? We must reject Umno because we want to bequeath a better country to our future generation. We owe it to the next generation who are now struggling to cope up with the increasing cost of living, who can’t find jobs because the country is mismanaged economically, or managed by sub-standard leaders. We owe it to those who can’t afford a decent house because a house near where they work now costs RM700,000 per unit.

This coming election is for us to lose, NOT for Umno to win. We lose if we let our guard down and be complacent. We must continue to raise the people’s consciousness and reject the deceit and lies perpetrated by Umno. We must reject the Umno-controlled media instruments such as Utusex Malaysia, Berita Hairan and TV¾.

The only other organisation that operates like Umno by trusting people within an organisation and who has recently adopted the act of oath taking or bai’ah is the Cosa Nostra aka the Mafia.

Because of this, Umno can never stimulate or induce voluntary co-operation and sacrifice from others. Umno can only get co-operation and sacrifice by paying others. This ability of creating trust between social groupings which leads to co-operation is known among social scientists as social capital. The concept of social capital was developed famously by Francis Fukuyama.

The basic idea behind the concept of social capital is this. A society with high trust (trusting others beyond just its organisation or its own grouping) is able to develop and prosper better. A society with low trust will always remain low on the scale of progress, being able to prosper on the fringes and like the Mafia outside normal society.

Now, apply that concept to Umno. Umno trusts only its members. That is why it is obsessed about having three million members. If the rakyat doesn’t trust it, it hopes it can do it alone by trusting only its own members. It’s therefore a low trust organisation. Just as a low trust society occupies the lower end of the scale of progress, so does Umno.

Therefore, how can a low trust organisation that nowadays manages to invite only distrust and revulsion carry us forward? — sakmongkol.blogspot.com

* Sakmongkol AK47 is the nom de plume of Datuk Mohd Ariff Sabri Abdul Aziz. He was Pulau Manis assemblyman (2004-2008).

[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]

Glad to see all the some Malays formerly ensnared by UMNO are waking up.  How about getting into politics again Sakmongol (perhaps with the ‘at glacial speed’ Tengku Razaleigh?), but on the below 3 items instead :

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)

;to even challenge Chua Soi Lek in the hideous article below :

http://malaysia-today.net/mtcolumns/special-reports/49558-hudud-if-pas-and-umno-join-hands

We’d rather have a Malay MP who believes in and will endorse and grant the above 3 items than  a minority puppet who believes in the self effacing nonsense below :

Hudud: If PAS and Umno join hands… Friday, 25 May 2012 Super Admin

Offering a hypothetical scenario to illustrate his point on hudud, MCA president Dr Chua Soi Lek says if the two political superpowers come together, the rest will be rendered impotent.

“Not only PKR and DAP, even MCA would be impotent to do anything [about it]. Because PAS and Umno members combined are more than enough to form the government, let’s be honest about it,” he said.

RK Anand and Teoh El Sen, Free Malaysia Today

For MCA, its most potent weapon against its political adversaries is PAS’ theocratic ambitions.

MCA leaders constantly churn out press statements attacking both PAS and their traditional rival DAP over the possible implementation of hudud law, stoking fear in the hearts of the Chinese electorate.

In an exclusive interview with FMT yesterday, MCA president Dr Chua Soi Lek explained why this issue was of grave concern.

The veteran politician, who has a string of police reports against him for raising thorny issues, offered a hypothetical scenario of PAS working with Umno in the event Pakatan Rakyat formed the federal government.

“PAS would reach out to Umno and tell them that we want to run this country according to the teachings in the Quran and no Muslim would try to go against it, including Umno MPs.

“Not only PKR and DAP, even MCA would be impotent to do anything [about it]. Because PAS and Umno members combined are more than enough to form the government, let’s be honest about it,” he said.

Asked if PAS would consider courting its traditional rival for the Malay vote-bank at the expense of the Islamic party’s partners in the opposition bloc, Chua did not rule out the possibility.

“In politics, I have learned one thing. The possible becomes impossible and the impossible can become possible,” he stressed.

Responding to another question, the MCA president said PAS was flexing its muscles in Pakatan and pointed to the contradictory statements from the leadership regarding the muzakarah or dialogue with Umno.

“[PAS spiritual leader] Nik Aziz [Nik Mat] says what he wants and [PAS president Abdul] Hadi Awang says what he wants.

“Two weeks ago, Nik Aziz says we should talk with Umno, we have this muzarakah for Muslim
unity but Hadi Awang says ‘no’. Who do you want to believe? Hadi Awang or Nik Aziz?

“Who is telling the truth anyway. Or who is calling the shots? A lot of people in PAS I know say that it is Nik Aziz who calls the shots, not Hadi Awang,” he added.

‘Answer my questions, DAP’

Chua also conceded that MCA was often accused of using the same old propaganda with regard to hudud but denied that it was a scare-tactic.

“We are not frightening the Chinese. We feel that we have an obligation to tell the Chinese the implications of hudud, which many Chinese don’t understand and they think it only affects the Muslims,” he said.

For the past four months, Chua said, he had been raising the same questions but no DAP leader wanted to answer him.

“Number one, could DAP please assure us that when PAS really implements hudud, the non-Muslims would not be affected. Yes or no? Simple as that. Why are you not answering me?

“Number two, the implementation of hudud would have a great negative impact on the social, economic, political, educational [aspects] and the whole social fabric of this country that would affect non-Muslims and Muslims. Why is DAP not answering my questions? Why are you hiding?” he asked.

When pointed out that Pakatan leaders claimed that hudud was not in the common policy framework or the election manifesto dubbed Buku Jingga, he replied: “Yeah, that’s up to the rakyat to believe or not.”

[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]

MCA is rubbish as long as MCA does not address Malaysia’s lack of :

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)

Collusion with racists to parasite off their own minority via fearmongering about PAS and UMNO being ‘superpowers’ makes MCA the most despicable political outfit in the world.

ARTICLE 5

Zaid: No hudud even if PAS wins more seats than PKR, DAP – by G Vinod – Hornbill Unleashed – May 24, 2012

The Pakatan Rakyat Common Policy Framework did not include hudud in its provisionm says the Kitan president.

Kita president Zaid Ibrahim ruled out the possibility that hudud law would be being implemented once Pakatan Rakyat comes to power.

“The Pakatan Rakyat Common Policy Framework did not include hudud in its provision,” said Zaid.

He said this after launching his third book, “Ampun Tuanku: A Brief Guide to Constituional Government” at the Royal Lake Club here today.

The book was published by ZI Publications.

On May 12, Pas Ulama Council chief Harun Taib said the party would implement hudud law if the party wins more seats in Parliament than its allies in Pakatan.

However, top Pakatan leaders including PAS president Abdul Hadi Awang said the opposition pact was committed to its Common Policy Framework, which does not include hudud.

“Any move to introduce hudud will require the consensus of all three parties in Pakatan,” Hadi said.

Commenting on Hadi’s statement, Zaid, who is also the architect of the common policy, said PAS would not implement hudud even if it has more parliamentary seats than DAP and PKR.

“I believe PAS will not do it,” he said.

On another matter, Zaid urged the government to set up a royal commission of inquiry (RCI) to probe the violence that erupted during the Bersih 3.0 rally.

He said the independent panel set up by the government lacked the legal framework to do substantial investigation.

“Set up a royal commission of inquiry as it will have the powers to call witnesses and ask for evidence,” he said.

On April 28, scores of protesters and journalists were assaulted during the mammoth Bersih 3.0 rally.

The government later established an independent panel, headed by former Inspector-General of Police Haniff Omar, to probe the violence.

However, many quarters have cast doubts over the panel’s impartiality, saying Hanif had earlier called some of the rally participants communist sympathisers.

ARTICLE 6

Malaysia: Drop Charges Against Protest Participants – by Sahr Muhammedally – Hornbill Unleashed – May 24, 2012

Cases Appear Aimed at the Political Opposition

Tear gas canisters exploding 20 meters behind Jameh Mosque as Bersih participants are dispersing from the rally, April 28, 2012.

The Malaysian authorities appear to be using what happened at the Bersih demonstration as a pretext to prosecute political opposition leaders. These charges, and the actions by police at the Bersih rally, don’t inspire confidence that the Malaysian government is committed to protecting basic free expression rights.

Phil Robertson, deputy Asia director

(Bangkok) – The Malaysian government should withdraw charges against opposition leaders for their participation in the “Bersih 3.0” demonstration in Kuala Lumpur on April 28, 2012. A criminal charge sheet obtained by Malaysian media indicates that authorities will charge former deputy prime minister Anwar Ibrahim, president of the opposition Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR); Azmin Ali, PKR deputy president; and Badrul Hisham Shaharin, a PKR activist, with disobeying judicial orders and taking part in a prohibited street protest.

The Bersih movement, a coalition of some 150 organizations promoting reform of election laws and procedures, held a mass rally on April 28 at Dataran Merkeda (Independence Square). Days earlier, the authorities had obtained a judicial order to stop the protest, but Bersih proceeded with a demonstration in the area surrounding the square. The protest proceeded mostly without incident but ended with police using excessive force, including teargas and water cannons, and beating and arresting over 500 protesters.

“The Malaysian authorities appear to be using what happened at the Bersih demonstration as a pretext to prosecute political opposition leaders,” said Phil Robertson, deputy Asia director at Human Rights Watch. “These charges, and the actions by police at the Bersih rally, don’t inspire confidence that the Malaysian government is committed to protecting basic free expression rights.”

The PKR leaders are being charged under Malaysia’s new Peaceful Assembly Act, which went into effect mere days before the protest. The Malaysian parliament enacted the law in late 2011 as part of a billed legislative “reform” package, revoking an earlier law that prohibited all protests without permits and had been used to outlaw virtually all political protests.

The Peaceful Assembly Act bans so-called street protests and contains an overly broad list of areas in which all assemblies are banned ­– a list that makes it virtually impossible for protesters to hold demonstrations in urban areas, Human Rights Watch said. Anwar, Azmin, and Badrul are specifically charged under the act for engaging in a “street protest.”

Human Rights Watch called on the government to rewrite the Peaceful Assembly Act so that it conforms with international human rights standards.

“The best way to reform the Peaceful Assembly Act is to repeal it and draft a new law,” Robertson said. “The government needs to go back to the drawing board.”

Anwar gave a speech at the April 28 demonstration, but was not considered one of its organizers. He has twice been tried by the Malaysian government on charges of sodomy – cases widely considered to be politically motivated and aimed at keeping him from leading the political opposition. Anyone convicted under Malaysia’s criminal code becomes ineligible to be elected to parliament.

The Malaysian Bar Council, which deployed 78 observers during the protests, criticized police for excessive use of force during the rally. It issued a detailed report in early May documenting abuses by the police, including beatings, overuse and misuse of teargas, and deliberate efforts by police to prevent journalists from observing or filming their actions. Several senior government officials dismissed the findings of the Bar Council as “biased.”

In the wake of allegations about police misconduct during the protest, the government announced a panel to investigate the protests. The panel’s head, Hanif Omar, a former police inspector general, was quoted in various media reports stating that the Bersih assembly had been organized by “pro-communist people” involved in anti-government demonstrations in the 1970s.

Because of concerns about the panel’s objectivity, the Bersih coalition has refused to cooperate in the investigation. Suhakam, the Human Rights Commission of Malaysia, recently announced it will hold a separate inquiry.

“The statements by the government panel’s leadership raise concerns about its ability to impartially investigate the Bersih 3.0 protests,” Robertson said.

Correction: The original version of the news release “Drop Charges Against Protest Participants” released on May 22, 2012, incorrectly provided the estimate of the number of persons arrested at the April 28, 2012 “Bersih 3.0” rally as “as many as 1,700.” The correct number is over 500. The 1,700 figure was an estimate of the number of persons arrested at the “Bersih 2.0” rally in July 2011.

[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]

All charged could counter suit against BN for Malaysia’s lack of :

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)

; they could say that the anger at being ill treated by disallowed apostasy or imposed apartheid or the immense corruption leading to disparities in wealth distribution was uncontrollable and BN’s fault and sue the Supreme Court for failing them . . .

ARTICLE 7

Truth Will Out in Suhakam Inquiry – Wednesday, 23 May 2012 admin-s

In choosing to go ahead with its own inquiry, Suhakam is making a significant symbolic gesture. It is standing up to the Government and implying that the Government’s own panel does not inspire public confidence.

We have witnessed much madness and asininity displayed in the aftermath of the Bersih 3.0 rally of April 28, especially exemplified in the laughable antics of anti-Bersih groups, such as hawkers’ group Ikhlas, the army veterans who shook their buttocks in front of Bersih chairperson Ambiga Sreenevasen’s home, and the Kuala Lumpur Petty Traders Action Council.

Some of it can also be seen in the comments on the rally made by government leaders, including Information, Communications and Culture Minister Rais Yatim’s incredulous declaration that only 22,270 people took part in it. But most risible of all is the Government’s appointment of ex-Inspector General of Police Hanif Omar as chairperson of the so-called independent panel to investigate the violence that occurred on April 28.

So it is with considerable relief that we now welcome the decision of the Malaysian Human Rights Commission (Suhakam) to conduct its own public inquiry into the violence when earlier it had said it would wait for the Government’s panel. Suhakam decided to go ahead because the panel has yet to come out with its terms of reference, and also because it has received numerous complaints from the public about the police brutality committed during the rally.

This is a show of good sense amidst the show of puerile emotionalism by the anti-Bersih groups and anti-Bersih ministers. It restores faith in the belief that rationality still rules okay in our current tragicomic state. Critics may aver that a Suhakam inquiry will not amount to much and that it will not result in action. Suhakam’s findings on Bersih 2.0, in which it concluded that the police used excessive force during that rally of July 9, 2011, has apparently not been taken much notice of by the authorities.

After releasing the findings three weeks ago, all Suhakam could say was: “It is now up to the police to act according to the recommendations as Suhakam does not have enforcement power.” It has, however, not elicited a positive response from the police or the Home Ministry. They know Suhakam is a toothless tiger.

Even so, an inquiry into Bersih 3.0 conducted by Suhakam would still not be a futile exercise. First, it will give those who allegedly received brutal treatment by the police the opportunity to be heard. This is important because it gives them hope. It also provides a healing balm.

Second, it will galvanize the voiceless and instill in the Malaysian psyche that in a democracy, the downtrodden can speak up.

Third, as evidence is presented during the inquiry, it will be made known to the public how the police conducted themselves during the rally. The truth, in as far as it can be ascertained, will be made known. People who have been skeptical of Bersih and people who don’t read online news media will get a side of the story different from that spun by the mainstream media.  If they are ignorant of what the police did during the rally, the inquiry will help enlighten them.

Above all, in choosing to go ahead with its own inquiry, Suhakam is making a significant symbolic gesture. It is standing up to the Government and implying that the Government’s own panel does not inspire public confidence.

Indeed, one wonders if the Government itself, after having been lambasted for its appointment of Hanif and one or two other members, still has confidence in its own panel. If it did, why is it taking so long to formulate the terms of reference? It has been nearly two weeks since the panel was announced.

Has the Government realized that it did indeed make a mistake in appointing Hanif as the chairperson?

First, how could an ex-policeman be head of a panel that is investigating, presumably among other things, the possibility of police brutality? How neutral could he be?

Second, how could Hanif be the head when prior to his appointment, he had made the biased remarks that there were Communist sympathizers among the Bersih 3.0 rally participants, and that the movement was aimed at toppling the Government?

That he was wrong on the second point and obviously snatching at straws in invoking the long-dead Communist bogey shows thinking reflective of an insensible Malaysian. Can we, therefore, trust an investigative panel headed by such a person?

In any case, inquiry or no, informed members of the public have already delivered their verdict on what happened on April 28.

Many are the photographs and videos circulating in cyberspace of what the police did – beyond the parameters of responsible policing.

Their biggest mistake was attacking media personnel even after the latter had identified who they were.

What they did to reporter Mohd Radzi Abdul Razak of theSun was a severe indictment of their conduct. He was merely sitting down and having a cigarette when a group of seven to eight policemen charged him. He told them he was a reporter and showed them his media accreditation card. But they punched and kicked him, and he landed in hospital with injuries to his ribs, jaw and neck.

Photographer Muhammad Arif Kartono of The Malay Mail also showed his media accreditation card but it didn’t stop the cops from kicking him in the face and on the legs, and stomping him on his back.

Another mistake the police made was confiscating the memory cards of people taking photographs. It reinforced the idea that we are living in a police state.

This was exacerbated by Home Minister Hishammuddin Hussein’s explanation that confiscating memory cards was part of the police’s standard operating procedures. It had many people laughing till they had tears in their eyes. More comedy followed when the IGP, Ismail Omar, corrected Hishammuddin the next day.

Fortunately, many people escaped with their memory cards intact. Some of their photos show policemen kicking people who were already down on the ground and helpless. In many instances, they attacked in a gang – with several cops pouncing on a lone target.

The videos are even more convincing because they record live action. Apart from those showing policemen behaving like mobsters, there is one of a policeman who pointed a gun at a crowd. Was brandishing a dangerous weapon necessary? Should he not be hauled up?

Running around in our minds are these questions: Why did the police chase after the rally participants when their job should be to merely disperse them? Why did they allegedly enter restaurants and mosques to drag people out? Why did they allegedly beat up people who were not even taking part in the rally?

And why did many of them not wear their badge or identification numbers? Let’s hope the Suhakam inquiry will help answer these questions.

Meanwhile, the police should prove that they are capable of doing the right thing by arresting anyone who sets up stall outside Ambiga’s house if they don’t have a trading permit from  Dewan Bandaraya Kuala Lumpur. As the mayor of KL, Ahmad Fuad Ismail, has said, it would contravene the Street, Drainage and Building Act 1974. That is surely very clear. So let’s see what the police do about it.

[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]

Helping to pile more ingenuous ‘inquiries’, articles and comments while entirely ignoring Malaysia’s lack of :

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)

; is not going to change the fact that Suhakam’s neglect of the above 3 items had actually led to Bersih. File that lawsuit against the Home Ministry or PDRM backed by some QC or other International Criminal Court at Hague based ‘personality’, to end APARTHEID via delegations to the UN, NAM, BRICS or be considered as complicit in allowing apartheid to continue.

ARTICLE 8

Sun setting on Penang’s factories? On the contrary – a new dawn is here! – Written by  Zairil Khir Johari – Wednesday, 30 May 2012 13:35

With the general election closing in, the Penang Barisan Nasional (BN) leadership is certainly not short on promises.

Having recently assumed the hot seat, newly-minted state BN chairman Teng Chang Yeow has been eagerly peddling the coalition’s “alternative blueprint” for Penang, an election manifesto that includes a plan to restore free port status to the island while turning it into an international tourism hub, along with plans for an international financial centre, innovation park and aquaculture hub in mainland Seberang Perai.

And then, as if to prove that his fancy labelling actually carries some philosophical substance, he goes to great lengths to explain his vision of a post-industrial future for Penang, where he promises to transform the services sector into an engine of growth as a replacement to the manufacturing industry.

This is needed because, in his words, “the manufacturing sector has reached its peak in Penang. We have to look into other engines of growth.” He further adds that the state can no longer be dependent on manufacturing as there is a shortage of land, while acknowledging that the sector had helped build a strong foundation for Penang’s economy in the 1960s and 70s.

Other state BN leaders have echoed similar views, with Penang MCA adviser Datuk Koay Kar Huah opining that Penang is “oversaturated with manufacturing activities and it is time to consider other industries to stimulate its economy.”

Flawed reasoning

I find this notion that manufacturing has reached a sunset stage, and thus should be replaced by service-based industries, an extremely flawed one.

The fact is that it is impossible to divorce production from knowledge because the best way to learn how to make something is to actually make it, as the Japanese, Koreans and Taiwanese have proven. Once we are able to make it, we can then move on to innovating, adding value to the product, financing it, marketing it and finally consuming it. In other words, services spanning research, design, engineering, legal, financial and sales are in fact complementary offshoots of manufacturing, and should not be seen as its putative replacement.

As leading Cambridge economist Ha-Joo Chang points out, high-income knowledge economies that appear to be services-based are in fact highly industrialised economies. Citing Switzerland and Singapore as prime examples, he notes that the two countries rank second and third in the world in terms of manufacturing value-add per capita, behind only the industrial machine known as Japan.

At the end of the day, no other industry is capable of generating the same multiplier effect, both in terms of jobs and support services, as manufacturing. It is precisely for this reason that the Obama administration is now on a huge manufacturing drive in a bid to reinvigorate the sputtering American domestic economy. As former General Motors vice chairman Bob Lutz says, “Making things makes money.”

De-industrialization

What Teng and company are in fact trying to articulate is the concept of de-industrialisation in the context of a knowledge-based, post-industrial economy. The proposition they are putting forward is that the good old days of industry are gone and that future jobs will require working with our brains and not with our hands.

Taken at face value, such a premise may appear to make sense. However, further examination exposes a shallow and superficial logic. Firstly, would not better brains make our hands more efficient and result in better quality products?

Secondly, as the world progresses, would it not also be natural that consumption of technological goods will increase exponentially? As a result, more rather than less manufacturing will be needed to keep up with growing demand.

The key, therefore, is not in ditching manufacturing in favour of services but actually in seeking ways to create depth and specialisation, as well as to encourage higher productivity and use of technology in manufacturing.

Depth and specialization

Penang, with an established manufacturing base, must now seek not so much to broaden its range of products but to deepen its value chain. In other words, it is more about how we produce rather than what we produce.

It is naïve to argue that manufacturing has peaked. One only has to look at how the once-mighty British economy has declined to see how de-industrialisation has resulted in post-industrial decay, loss of productivity, high unemployment, rising inequality and the displacement of an entire generation.

The truth is, manufacturing holds even more potential than it did a few decades ago. Far from putting it on the backburner, efforts should be invested into enhancing the use of technology and automation, increasing production capacity and training the required human talent. Value-added growth in manufacturing will eventually result in value-added services and correspondingly, higher-paying jobs.

So, is the manufacturing industry in Penang headed for a sunset? To the contrary, I think a new dawn has just arrived.

http://blog.limkitsiang.com/

Guan Eng on working visit to Taiwan, eyes electronics and smart phone firms – Written by  Cheong Yin Fan – Wednesday, 30 May 2012 10:06

The Penang Chief Minister YAB Lim Guan Eng will be visiting Taipei, Taiwan for a short full day trip arriving on 29th and leaving on 31st May 2012. The purpose of the trip is to enhance better working relationship with existing Taiwanese corporations based in Penang as well as forge links with new prospective investors.

The Chief Minister will also meet several potential investors in the field of manufacturing. This investment trip hopes to also promote Penang as a suitable investment location of choice to new Taiwanese investors. As many electronic companies are looking at alternatives to traditional locations of investment, the Chief Minister hopes to put Penang on the radar screen, especially when they expand. These expansion plans are not immediate and may take up to 3 years, but Penang has to commence this engagement now with key Taiwanese companies to build up both interest and confidence.

Companies

The same approach was applied with the previous investment trip to Taiwan in 2010 that generated interest amongst Taiwanese companies. Following painstaking efforts undertaken these last two year, Phison Electronics headed by K.S. Pua, announced the setting up its engineering development and design centre in Penang. This centre will be their first out of Taiwan and will be engaged in the development and design of chip, system design as well as marketing.

The investment decision by Phison Electronics was considered a great achievement by Penang as KS Pua’s company is not just an ordinary electronics company but also a much sought after innovative and research-oriented company. An initial investment of US$1 – 3 million will be mainly on transferring talent and design technologies. A similar engagement process successfully conducted with Phison Electronics will also be repeated with other Taiwanese companies.

One of the key companies the Chief Minister is visiting is Taiwan’s top smartphone company, HTC Corporation. The Chief Minister will be accompanied by and Mr Lee Soo Cheran, Senior Manager of InvestPenang and Mr Wong Kim Fei, Press Officer to the Chief Minister.

Cheong Yin Fan is the press secretary to Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng

[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]

Look at the timing of the articles above. Pure nepotism if anything, and a reminder that family bloc politics that atre term limitless are the worst kind of affliction on political circles and civils society. There is no justification for Taiwanese to go to Malaysia for investment. Mainland China is 100s of kilometres nearer, and the Mainland Chinese do not discriminate against Chinese and non-Muslims using Bumiputra Apartheid. In China they 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)

; in Malaysia they have apartheid and a Chinese CM in Penang that has accepted a role of a dhimmi, a second class citizens, that was neither elected nor democratically selected by anyone except his own father. Who needs to go to a country to do business under such conditions and deal with such people? DIVEST NOW Taiwanese! Help the minorities here make a strong message against APARTHEID and Penang’s current 1 term wasted CM Lim Guan Eng is pandering to the racist Malays indirectly here. Penang’s current 1 term wasted CM Lim Guan Eng has refused to speak against APARTHEID and now wants to drag Taiwanese Chinese into what effectively is a hellhole for all minorities where dhimmitude(lite) is applied on everyone not a Malay or Muslim. What is wrong with this shameless CM who does not care about APARTHEID but wants lots of funeral funds? Taiwanese, do not be taken in, in fact, get Governor Ma Yingjeou to condemn the UNHCR violation that Bumiputra Apartheid represents as well as shame DAP’s nepotistic acceptors of second class citizenship. Taiwanese, do Malays in Taiwan get treated as second class citizens the way CM Lim Guan Eng accepts? Know who approaches the Taiwanese for investment, to make themselves look good while the Chinese are treated as second class peoples . . .

ARTICLE 9

Concentrating on LGBT Advocacy issues May 26, 2012

Irshad Manji’s name that had never known in Malaysia, suddenly became famous in all the wrong reasons. Born in Uganda of Egyptian mothers and father of the Gujerati Indian descent, his family emigrated to Canada in 1972 as the basis of the anti-Idi Amin in Uganda Asia.

People can become famous not only because of the general public acceptance, a person can become famous for its rejection of the general public. This is called kontraversi.

Irshad Manji and provoked controversy chose to introduce himself to the world. All in on the ground the right to freedom and to be more kontraversi when the argument associated with the name of Islam.

Practitioners and the biggest defender

On the issue of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transsexual (LGBT) we must distinguish between practitioners and fighters. Practitioners are those who regard the practice of unnatural sex is something that should be accepted by society. This means that sex and sexual practices of many of these practitioners are acts that can not be inverted.

For the proponents, they are not necessarily practitioners of this twisted, they are based on the question of rights alsan assume that these people also have the right to practice their culture without their imposed social isolation or “social sanction” for their actions. For any category of this group, the issue is essentially a claim that melantaikan unflagging question in human history of “human rights”

The question Fitr

It should be emphasized in terms of practice, are considered acts of LGBT inverted. It is considered inversion predicate because it is naturally induced from the premises or the nature of which are not in the right direction.

Man is made to be on track to their nature and proper sexual stimulation, when sexual orientation is in the wrong direction as in a kind and variety of stimuli, it has not made it a more human stimulus.

Even if the human remains is called the human element. We do not have to argue with religious or moral grounds to understand this reality. Do these people want us to accept this breech presentation? Religious and moral arguments only strengthen the nature of policies created by the Creator of human life.

Surah Rum from verse 30 of the Qur’an kesonsangan explain this by saying: “So hadaplah yourself to a religion that is far from error (breech presentation), which Allah has created man with the natural condition, it shall be no change in Allah’s creation, is true religion, but most people do not know ”

Freedom fighter

An opinion that the nature of God Rahmahnya accept everyone, regardless of what their practice is a repeat of the notion murji “ah the second Hijri century in resolving conflict on the theology of sin and the implications of defining the rules.

It grew from rationalization of political support of the two parties to a conflict that of Ali, and the Kharijites. Murji’ah birth as a compromise to both sides of the attitude of extreme relaxation and eventually led to adhere to the commandments of God. Today the notion Irshad Manji is plagiarism to a long theological debate over the second century, three and the fourth Hijri.

As a basic Muslim beliefs to the problem of harshness to the proposition must berpandikan the Shari’ah and not be left hanging on the ground Mercy of God. If not, do not need him to the Qudwah Hasanah (eg emulation) including berfitrah life.

Furthermore, the objects of a prohibition order and God is not seen in works alone but is seen to Maslahat law, whether for good or harm his servants to his servants.

Within this framework we recognize Mercy of God, not in the framework of a desire to justify our desires. In verse 49.50 Al Hijr insisted: “tell on my servants that I am the Forgiving and Merciful (49) And My punishment is a grievous Penalty is (50)”

Mercy of God must be understood as obedience to Maslahat that Allah created man and certainly Maslahat is linked to the nature of which God knows the benefits for humans. Definitely strayed from the path of LGBT this nature. How can we claim it to be the servant of God’s love when they run away from this line?

Allah, Most Gracious

Among the Love of God is inviting people to track human nature and not let nature continue in breech presentation. If it is God’s love that Irsyad Manji mean it’s true meaning, but if God’s love is to certify that there are people who have fled from their nature and should be left, this is a large deviation to the right of Allah.

Because Mercy of God, as Muslims we should memauti this fraternity to correct their nature not to let them. For the proponents of non-practitioners we only need to correct the perception of Human Rights to take advantage of what humans and harmless to humans.

Absolute freedom is not in terms, that there is glory Personal Freedom Human nature is essentially a guide. Imam Al Muhaddith and Scholars Izz ibn Sultan Al Salam (mngal 660h) says: “That is why the Qur’an encourages to practice obedience with good detail and depth of a little or a lot, large and small. Similarly, look ugly to deny things in detail and depth of slightly better or much, small or large “should be understood in the context of freedom and wrongdoing obedience to the Creator, is the Islamic version of Freedom.

It is unfortunate Irsyad Manji and proponents of LGBT in Malaysia who want to take the meaning of freedom of a society corrupted by the values ??of freedom and says it is from Islam.

Solution

As long as it is a matter of humanity, we can not expect it to end. What needs to be done is to link and merangkulkan both the LGBT and propagated in a continuous dialogue and ensuring that this group does not affect the existing harmony of nature is practiced today in our society.

Homosexuality remains one even bound by the sacred bond of marriage. Free sex is adultery that destroy cultural values ??of society. Transeksualiti collapse is not justified akhlaq but should be viewed as a “disease” that requires attention in a variety of perspectives.

Evil act remains wrong no matter what “brandnya” good remained good no matter what “brandnya” all based on the understanding the nature of which is a sign of God Glory to the universe.

* This is the writer’s personal views

[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]

Lame attempts at subversion are a sign of dishonesty and an attemot to steal free will from non-Muslims. What non-Muslims do is non of any Muslim’s business. Any group minds their own business and all others mind theirs. What any advocates is not to be subverted. What Muslims advocate also not to be subverted. This is freedom and civilisation, advocacy of one over the other is dishonest and spiteful social-combat/exclusion on non-combatants, something Muslims have extreme difficulty understanding. Truth remains truth democracy or minorities of one, even if privacy is destroyed, reputation is destroyed. I hope hellfires of invaded privacy apply to those who are so faithful.

Assign districts to each and every demographic and be done with the issue, stop discriminating and applying apartheid . . .

ARTICLE 10

DAMNING EVIDENCE the people have lost faith in electoral system – Tony – Written by  Tony Pua – Saturday, 26 May 2012 07:47

Merdeka Center’s latest survey results gives damning evidence that the people has lost faith in the country’s electoral system, despite the “best effort” by the Prime Minister, Dato’ Seri Najib Razak to set a transformation agenda.

The results clearly showed that Malaysians have very little confidence in the half-hearted steps taken by the Prime Minister which was intended to give a better perception of our electoral process.

Only 44% of Malaysians surveyed were “confident” that the electoral process was free from irregularity despite the Election Commission’s repeated insistence that our electoral roll is “the cleanest in the world”. Even so, only 5% of those surveyed did not think that an electoral roll clean-up before the next general election was necessary, while a whopping 92% thought a clean-up exercise is necessary.

Insincere PSC – the game is UP!

Among the key reforms sought by Bersih was the abolishment of postal voting, and this was supported by the survey outcome where only 37% thought it was “transparent and free from political interference”. The Parliamentary Select Committee (PSC) on electoral reforms had in the last sitting agreed to amend the postal vote system for the army into an early-voting system, but at the same time added some 300,000 names to the postal voter list.

The distrust of the PSC can be seen from the results which showed that only 34% thought it was “a sincere effort” from the BN government “to reform” while 43% thought it was an “attempt to cover up or divert public attention”.

Similarly 81% of Peninsula Malaysians support the call for a Royal Commission of Inquiry on the Sabah illegal immigrants issue, but the Prime Minister has chosen to ignore the demand from the people.

This is why hundreds of thousands attended Bersih

From the data which was collected before hundreds of thousands of Malaysians poured onto the streets of Kuala Lumpur to demonstrate and demand for free and fair elections, it proves beyond doubt that the “political transformation programme” commenced since Merdeka celebrations last year has failed to move Malaysians.

The result also fully justified why it was necessary for Bersih to take to streets despite being denied the opportunity to gather peacefully in Merdeka Square to demand free and fair elections for all Malaysians.

We call upon the Prime Minister to go the whole nine yards in real political and electoral reforms. The people does not want to see Dato’ Seri Najib put in place some pseudo-reforms which are in effect “1 step forward and 2 steps backward” type of new regulations.

The Prime Minister will have the opportunity to pass new laws seeking a full transformation of the electoral process when the Parliament commences its sitting on 11 June before dissolving it for the next General Election. Without true and thorough reforms from Dato’ Seri Najib, he will fail to win legitimacy even if he were to win the vote count in the 13th General Election as he will be seen as having won the elections through cheating and fraud, instead of via the support of the people.

Related Story: 92% of voters want electoral roll to be cleaned up before GE-13 is held

Tony Pua is the DAP MP for PJ Utara

[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]

The rakyat have lost faith in DAP who backs down against inequality.

“The (first) DVD says that DAP wants to abolish bumiputra subsidies, abolish the position of Islam as the country’s official religion, degrade the Council of Rulers, remove Bahasa Malaysia as the country’s official language and take away the special rights of Malays and bumiputra.

DAP responded with a pathetic :

“None of these have ever crossed our minds.http://thestar.com.my/metro/story.asp?file=/2012/5/24/north/11346421&sec=north

What does DAP mean “None of these have ever crossed our minds???

Barring 4 and 5 out of 7 mentioned which are 30% of the mentioned and truly sacrosanct, the other 70% mentioned are absolutely necessary to cross any responsible statesman’s or even responsible moderate and fair minded Muslim’s mind – think Asabiya prohibitions or Surah An Nisa) for Malaysia to end apartheid and become a 1st world nation.

NO EQUALITY IS POSSIBLE UNDER DAP THEN !!! Does DAP not understand the above?

Useless DAP party that is nepotistic, term limitless, does not want equality and even thinks about accepting Hudud will not get any minority votes . . . the UN and no country in the world accepts APARTHEID!

And DAP goes “None of these have ever crossed our minds. So whats the difference between MCA and DAP then? No difference at all! Both are sycophants that do not fight for equality.

Vote 3rd Force voters! Voters, BN is apartheid, corrupt, has allowed aspects of extreme religion, and refuses to use that mandate BN NOW ALREADY HAS to better Malaysia by granting above 3 items, PR if unable to address the lack of above 3 items, is self serving, non-pro-active, self glorifying, unable to keep their campaign promises, also very nepotistic, MPs term limitless like Ali ABdul Salleh, Mubarak and Gaddafi, vote instead for 3rd Force Parties like : KITA, JATI, MCLM (whats left of MCLM), PCM, Borneo Front, MoCS Sarawak, Konsensus Bebas, HRP/Hindraf and PSM, ABU, PRS, STAR etc..

BN racism, corruption, and PR for nepotism, clique politics that exclude grassroots, human rights and ethics aware law or political party reformers, real activists and intelligensia, both coalitions have no place in Malaysia OR THE WORLD. They are POLITICAL CRIMINALS. APARTHEID CRIMINALS that ignore UNHCR Article 1 AND the Quran’s remonstration against the Sin of Asabiya!

3rd Force is the only way forward for Malaysia!

ARTICLE 11

DAP rattled by propaganda DVDs – Thursday May 24, 2012

GEORGE TOWN: The distribution of two DVDs in Penang which the state DAP described as propaganda has the party hopping mad.

Penang DAP secretary Ng Wei Aik said the DVDs, titled Tanah Melayu Dilanggar Todak (Tanah Melayu attacked by swordfish) and Teoh Beng Hock — Finding The Truth, were inserted into mail boxes and distributed in public areas in the state.

The first DVD, which is in Malay, spells out the “failures” of Pakatan governments in Selangor, Perak and Penang.

Issues like the demolition of Malay-owned houses, the alleged banning of Maulidur Rasul processions in Penang and the Kampung Buah Pala dispute were also raised in the 16-minute DVD.

The second DVD, in Mandarin with English subtitles, is related to DAP aide Teoh who was found dead outside the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) headquarters in Shah Alam on July 16, 2009.

Ng said the DVDs “smacked of racism” and could incite the people.

“The (first) DVD says that DAP wants to abolish bumiputra subsidies, abolish the position of Islam as the country’s official religion, degrade the Council of Rulers, remove Bahasa Malaysia as the country’s official language and take away the special rights of Malays and bumiputra.

“None of these have ever crossed our minds. This DVD is a very serious and false item of propaganda and publicity,” Ng told a press conference at Wisma DAP in Rangoon Road here yesterday.

He estimated that at least 10,000 copies were in circulation.

Ng urged the police to investigate and stop the distribution of the DVDs.

http://thestar.com.my/metro/story.asp?file=/2012/5/24/north/11346421&sec=north

[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]

How many small trader gas tanks did Ng manage to confiscate (and resell on the black market?) during these 4 years? DAMNING EVIDENCE that the people have lost faith in the DAP which does not address Malaysia’s lack of :

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)

File that lawsuit against the Home Ministry or PDRM backed by some QC or other International Criminal Court at Hague based ‘personality’, to end APARTHEID via delegations to the UN, NAM, BRICS or be considered as complicit in allowing apartheid to continue.

7 Articles on Malaysia : Israel to Malaysia, Unhelpful demands of DAP, Cautious pullbacks of NH Chan (again no address of APARTHEID), UMNO Apologism by Malay writers, LGBT and Malays, Spinning the Reid Commission – reposted by @AgreeToDisagree – 12th February 2012

In 3rd Force, Abuse of Power, Bad By-Laws, bad laws, Constitution, critical discourse, criticism, Law, Malaysia, Native Rights, Nepotism, Reid Commission, unprofessional behaviour, vested interest on February 12, 2012 at 6:11 pm

ARTICLE 1

‘Haram’ to accept Israel, says Hadi – by Shazwan Mustafa Kamal – February 12, 2012

KUALA LUMPUR, Feb 11 — PAS will not accept any efforts to recognise Israel as a sovereign state as its very existence is “haram” (illegal), Datuk Seri Abdul Hadi Awang has said.

The PAS president charged that the two-state solution for Israel and Palestine, an initiative accepted by the Arab world, Malaysia as well as the Islamist party’s ally PKR went against Islamic principles.

PAS, along with PKR and DAP make up Malaysia’s opposition coalition.

“It is haram to accept the existence of a haram nation (Israel.) PAS, a party founded on Islamic principles reject the two-state solution, one for Palestine and one for Israel for the Zionist Jews.

“For us, only one country has rights and that is Palestine,” he said in a blog posting which was picked up by Umno daily Utusan Malaysia.

Abdul Hadi’s remarks are directly opposed to PKR defacto leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, who had during a recent Wall Street Journal interview expressed support for “all efforts to protect the security of the state of Israel.”

Anwar has clarified his remarks by saying he was referring to a “two-state solution”, and that his support was also contingent on Israel respecting the aspirations of Palestinians.

Abdul Hadi (picture) said today that Palestine, being one of the three holy lands for Muslims, did not just belong to the Palestinians, and that all Muslims had a religious duty to ensure the state’s sovereignty and independence.

“The country named Israel did not exist when Allah created this earth. It was created illegally after World War Two… this country is by Islamic law and by international law illegal, as it pillages land from its original people and ousts them from their home,” he said.

“For Muslims, it is a duty to free Palestine and to champion the oppressed,” added the Marang MP.

Anwar came under heavy fire from Umno and its media after his statement was published by the Wall Street Journal.

Former prime minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamed labelled Anwar a Jewish sympathiser and a leader who disregarded the plight of the Palestinians for making such remarks.

The opposition leader was forced to defend himself by stressing that his remarks in the newspaper meant that he supported a two-state solution, which he said was mentioned by Foreign Minister Datuk Seri Anifah Aman when the latter addressed the United Nations General Assembly in September last year.

But Anifah responded by saying Anwar’s interview “clearly shows full support for all actions taken by Israel to protect its security, unless he is accusing the Wall Street Journal of making a mistake.”

Muslim-majority Malaysia is a staunch supporter of Palestine and has no diplomatic ties with Israel.

Muslim politicians have long vied for support from Malays by denouncing what they say are inhumane acts of aggression by Israel towards its neighbour.

Anwar has previously been attacked as a supporter of the Zionist movement due to his interaction with prominent Jewish figures in the West.

But the opposition leader turned the tables on Umno and Barisan Nasional in 2010 when he claimed public relations firm APCO Worldwide, then contracted by Putrajaya, was responsible for both the 1 Malaysia and 1 Israel campaigns.

[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]

Israel may not have been created by Allah but Israel is a functioning country with (after a reasonable pullback of some unenable areas controlled) a distinct culture and people and language. Take Aboriginese Australia or Maori New Zealand for example. Surely Hadi cannot say because there was no mention in the Quran of these countries that they have no right to exist? Israel though having commited much abuse and taken much land beyond the earlier UN 1949 brokered deal, still cannot be considered Haram though a word-breaker. In that case, all countries not mentioned in the Quran are Haram. Does that mean all Muslims have to attack and colonise all the Quran un-mentioned (hence Haram) countries?

That would mean it is necessary for all non-Muslim countries unmentioned in the Quran to immediately make plans to defend against Muslims. Yet Saudi Arabia where the Islamic Cube of Kabaa stands under the purview of the House of Saud, UAE, Yemen, Oman, others including Iran (a very powerful country in the region), have met with many obviously non-Quran mentioned nations and recognizes these non-Quran states, what does this mean? That they did not take the opportunity to demand that those states be abolished?

Hadi needs to examine the common sense fact that 1400 years ago not all geography was accurate and that many countries were formed fairly late after WW1. Hadi surely cannot be recommending that ALL these countries be destroyed or unrecognized by Muslim countries? What would the prophet do? He’d ask them to be left alone and for Israel keep it’s word, stick to the 1949 peace deal by pulling back any land acquisitions to contracted agreements. This is where PAS fails occasionally. Hadi’s suggestion is out of context when considered against the 1949 UN Armistice and the fact that many nations are not mentioned in the Quran – lets put it this way the Prophet could not update the Quran but that does not mean that all nations not in the Quran do not exist by Allah’s will either. Why the lack of logic here Hadi?

ARTICLE 2

Apologise for paid-for interviews, Guan Eng tells PMO – by Shazwan Mustafa Kamal – February 12, 2012

Lim said the PMO should take BBC’s lead and express regret over paying for the interviews. — File pic
KUALA LUMPUR, Feb 12 — Lim Guan Eng today demanded the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO) apologise for paying RM84 million to a UK publicity firm to polish the Najib administration’s image through news programmes.

“Datuk Seri Najib Razak should direct his Prime Minister’s Office (PMO) to apologise for paying RM84 million to burnish the Najib administration’s image… just as the BBC is apologising for accepting payments in exchange for a positive image for countries with a poor record of democratic practices and corruption,” said the DAP secretary-general in a statement here.

The BCC has pledged to apologise for airing paid-for programmes that were favourable to some countries, including Malaysia.

UK daily The Independent reported yesterday the BBC will apologise to an estimated 74 million people around the world for a news-fixing scandal in which it aired as documentaries programmes that had been paid for in a deal with London-based publicity firm, FBC Media.

According to The Independent, the global apology by BBC is expected to read: “A small number of programmes broadcast on BBC World News between February 2009 and July 2011 broke BBC rules aimed at protecting our editorial integrity.

“These rules ensure that programmes are free, and are seen to be free, from commercial or other outside pressures.”

Making a direct reference to the FBC documentaries, it will say: “In the case of eight other programmes, all of which featured Malaysia, we found that the production company which made the programmes appeared to have a financial relationship with the Malaysian government.

The BBC Trust’s Editorial Standards Committee carried out an investigation into BBC World News in November and uncovered 15 breaches of editorial guidelines.

Eight of the breaches related to FBC programmes made about Malaysia due to an apparent “financial relationship” between the government and FBC Media, the TV production company.

The Independent pointed out that FBC Media made eight pieces for the BBC about Malaysia while failing to declare it was paid £17million (RM84 million) by the Malaysian government for “global strategic communications” that included positive coverage of Malaysia’s controversial palm oil industry.

The apology will be broadcast worldwide on the BBC’s World News channel to an estimated 295 million homes, 1.7 million hotel rooms, 81 cruise ships, 46 airlines and on 35 mobile phone platforms at four different times, staged in order to reach audiences in different time zones, the paper reported.

“This has also been confirmed by PM Najib Razak who last year admitted in a written parliamentary reply that the government had paid RM83.8 million to media consultancy company FBC Media for the duration of three years from 2007 for ‘consultancy services, advice and management of a communication campaign’.

“This was as part of a contract between the Prime Minister’s Office and FBC Media that was signed in 2007 and renewed twice,” added Lim today, who said that news of Malaysia’s involvement in the matter had “embarrassed” the country.

FBC Media and its parent company, FBC Group, went into administration last year — a legal term that allows a company facing bankruptcy to carry on business — following reports it accepted £17million from Putrajaya to burnish the Najib administration’s image on global broadcast networks.

FBC was set up in 1998 by award-winning US journalist Alan Friedman and other prominent media individuals who built a network of blue-chip clients that included the governments of Greece, Italy and Zambia, with contracts to promote tourism in Malaysia, Indonesia and Hungary.

FBC has been exposed to have also doubled up as a publicity firm for the Najib government and was paid millions of pounds to conduct a “global strategic communications campaign”.

But Putrajaya ended its RM96 million contract with FBC, which started in 2009, after it was revealed Malaysian government leaders regularly appeared in paid-for-TV programmes.

The Malaysian Insider has reported of PM Najib contracting a series of public relations strategists, including APCO Worldwide, to polish his personal image and his government’s locally and worldwide.

APCO’s time in Malaysia was marked by controversy after the opposition alleged the public relations firm was linked to Israel.

The most recent hire are members of the team behind former British PM Tony Blair’s “New Labour” campaign, who were reported to have started work to reinvent Najib as a moderate reformist.

[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]

Lim Guan Eng is a vexatious red-taper making meaningless demands of the coalition that can use this as an excuse to remove him from the Dewan. What good does an apology from PM Najib do for the Rakyat? Are you insulting the intelligence of the Cabinet and the voters? Who needs an apology when APARTHEID conditions are so bad, when social freedoms are not very certain?

Ask for equality instead you nepotistic parachute CM . . . in a one-man one-vote system LGE never have gotten the CM’s seat being PLACED there by his own father instead of being voted in – even against general dissent from Penang DAP (excepting Penang DAP lapdogs willing to be sidelined as per the 3rd world family/clique political party paradigm). The taxpayers and your voters did not vote you to demand MEANINGLESS apologies from the PM, we voted for MPs and Assemblymen who will help lower taxes, ease laws and end apartheid. Not ask for apologies to make yourself look good and Najib look bad. We don’t care about making Najib look bad only you do. END THE APARTHEID. To hell with this demand for this moron apology.

Guan Eng has effectively RAISED TAXES, WORSENED LAWS, and allowed APARTHEID to continue and even toyed with Hudud law while asking for special funeral funds, raises, displaced Buah Pala type residents, disallowed building on private property and worse. Being likely PAP funded AND a potential Xian-fundo alongside PAS’s own brand of fundamentalism, even the non-Xian Chinese might be in danger, much less the not-so-fundo Malays. There are votable people in DAP but the Lim and Singh dynasties, also PKR Anwar family bloc should just leave after their display of limitless terms and undemocratic nepotism. Gaddafi and sons (unless Libya takes up on my suggestion earlier on), Mubarak and sons (unless Egypt takes up on my suggestion earlier on), could do no worse, the people do not see how that coffeshop owner might be a better man for the job. Asking Najib to apologise is to give DAP face, but the voters do not need a DAP with lots of face, the voters need :

1) Freedom from Apartheid/Fascism
2) Freedom from Religious-Persecution/Religious-Supremacy.
3) Equality for all ethnicities and faiths in all aspects of policy, Law and Constitution.

Drop both BN and Pakatan’s nepotist family blocs and vote for 3rd Force Coalition where the empty seats are : KITA, JATI, MCLM (whats left of it, but homophobes could find it a good party that has 20 candidates), PCM, Borneo Front, Konsensus Bebas, HRP/Hindraf and PSM to grant the above 3 items. Look at the below form as well and choose your candidates who will end all toll concessions and make all citizens equal.


(errata on the pic, GDP should read national average wage)

ARTICLE 3

NH Chan: I’ll call a spade a spade – Chan does not believe he was challenging the judiciary- by Debra Chong – 12th March 2010

KUALA LUMPUR — Retired judge Datuk NH Chan today denied he was challenging the judiciary, but said he would not be cowed into keeping mum on judgments which twist the law.

“I’m not challenging them but I will criticise them when they make wrong judgments,” Chan told The Malaysian Insider.

The former Court of Appeal judge was responding to a recent essay by social activist, Martin Jalleh, under the headline “Charge NH Chan for contempt or resign, CJ?”

Jalleh had questioned Chief Justice (CJ) Tun Zaki Azmi’s silence in the face of Chan’s increasingly “blistering” criticism against the Bench and dared the top judge to take legal action to protect the reputation of the judiciary.

In the article dated March 10, Jalleh wrote: “NH Chan’s comments on members of the judiciary have no doubt been bold, blunt and blistering. He has accused judges of being blind, biased and being a bunch of ‘idiots’ and ‘fools’. He has thrown the gauntlet down.

“If the CJ disagrees with NH Chan’s criticisms he should haul the former Court of Appeal judge into court and demand that the latter shows cause for why he should not be cited for contempt! Does Zaki have the guts to take up the gauntlet or will he prefer to allow the judicial circus to go on?”

Chan, 74, disagreed with the writer’s view that he was “challenging” the judiciary.

“Martin Jalleh has challenged. I personally will never challenge. I’m a person who will not do anything stupid,” the ex-judge said.

“If you put your hand in a lion’s mouth, you may think you are brave, but the lion may close its mouth. What then? You may lose your hand,” he added.

The acerbic author of two books, most recently “How to Judge the Judges”, said he has never been afraid to speak his mind and was prepared for any action the judiciary may decide to take against him.

Asked if the CJ could have him charged for contempt of court, Chan replied: “They can do what they like because they have done it before.”

But Chan vowed to continue speaking up on issues that he feels have perverted the law, drawing attention to the inconsistencies in the grounds of judgments delivered by the Federal Court and the Court of Appeal in the last two years, most notably the Perak controversy over the sacking of its mentri besar.

“I’ll call a spade a spade,” said the retiree, who now lives in Ipoh.

[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]

Try calling a apartheid political party an apartheid political party. BN has gone down that drain but not oe joker in the pack of cards has ‘called a spade a spade’. Also try calling a term limitless undemocratic nepotist party, a term limitless undemocratic nepotist party. Pakatan is going down that drain, even though APARTHEID has not ended yet.

ARTICLE 4

Flawed but Umno still protects the Malays – by Syed Jaymal Zahiid – 13 Mar 2010

KUALA LUMPUR — Loud protests and vociferous demands from right-wing groups for the nation’s largest party to ensure Malay dominance through its policies is not an indication of Umno’s failure to do so, observers noted.

The Najib Administration’s proposed New Economic Model (NEM), aimed at healing and propelling the country’s ailing economy by opening it up and abolishing subsidies, has drawn flak from Malay nationalist groups like Perkasa and the umbrella grouping Malay Consultative Council (MPM).

Perkasa, a member of MPM, is worried that the NEM will increase the monopoly of the country’s economy by the Chinese community.

But despite the glaring discontent, Perkasa president and MPM ideologue Datuk Ibrahim Ali said Umno have done well in preserving Malay interest.

“What we have today is the product of the governance of Umno and the Alliance it led,” the independent Pasir Mas MP told The Malaysian Insider.

The former Umno strongman also said it was wrong to conclude that the demands made by his group and the MPM indicate Umno’s failure to safeguard the interest of the country’s majority race.

However, opposition leaders have come to question the purpose of Perkasa and MPM’s existence.

It is a contradiction that the groups feel the necessity to make such demands but back Umno’s ability to fulfill the demands said some Pakatan Rakyat leaders.

“Just like any other party, Umno has got its strength and weaknesses but I wouldn’t look at it from that angle. Perkasa has got nothing to do with Umno. We are an NGO and we have the right to express ourselves just like other race-based NGOs,” Ibrahim said.

Pulai MP Datuk Nur Jazlan, in defence of his party, said Umno have been doing nothing but protect Malay interest and dismissed accusations that the Malay-based party have been short on delivering the goods.

“In fact we have been over-protecting Malay interests for so long that what we do, the opposition are capitalising on the issue and use it against us,” he told The Malaysian Insider.

“You can see the overwhelming presence of Malays in the public and private sectors,” he said further, adding that all this can be attributed to Umno’s blood and sweat.

But Nur Jazlan stressed that the likes of Perkasa and its “extreme demands” should not be entertained by an Umno led by a leader, Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak, who is bidding for lost non-Malay support through merit and not race-based policies.

UKM-based political scientist, Professor Dr Mohammad Agus Yusoff, too believes that it was inaccurate to interpret the demands made by Perkasa and MPM as Umno’s failure to safeguard Malay interest.

“What these two have is a complementary relationship. Umno is still strong in its fight to uphold Malay interest. The sentiment is still very strong within the party,” he told The Malaysian Insider.

But the pressure coming from Perkasa said Mohammad Agus is not withstanding the intrinsic fact that it needs Umno to actualise their demands.

Hence, Umno, is now placed in a difficult spot of having manoeuvre between maintaining its core Malay base while avoiding alienating the much needed support of non-Malays.

The political scientist, however, questioned the motive and relevance of groups like Perkasa in the context of a multi-racial nation and the government’s own wish to appear moderate while being obstructed by the hawkish elements from within.

“These demands are only regressive which will only make it difficult for things to change,” he lamented.

[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]

“Flawed *but* Umno still protects the Malays”

But?!? An apologist stance if any. Protecting any group does not absolve a political party of it’s INTOLERABLE and INNUMEROUS flaws. Protecting any group is not the job of a an unbiased political party. Protecting any group instead of citizens in disregard of faith or ethnicity is the only acceptable type of political party in the First World.

Disenfranchisement is disunifying and causes rifts within society. Lapdoggery insults entire minority demographic. A FLAWED political party that is incapable of seeing it’s wrongs has no business in government at all. PR Coalition hence has arisen and will take over where IF term limitless nepotists within the party are dropped from candidacy . . . otherwise vote for 3rd Force.

ARTICLE 5

Dump the NEP – Suflan Shamsuddin – Dump the NEP – 13th March 2010

In 1970, Bumiputras held 1.5 per cent of the country’s wealth. Today they hold 19 per cent, out of which 16 per cent is held by trust institutions and funds.

This means that over the life of the NEP, despite everything, individual Bumiputra wealth has grown from 1.5 to 3 per cent.

Hardly anything to be proud of. And what has been the costs of this meagre achievement?

Well there is of course the actual cost of making all of these opportunities available in the first place, whether in relation to business and entrepreneurship, education and scholarships, concessions, discounts, pink-slips, property ownership, etc. But that is not all.

Think of the cost to the country for retaining a feudalistic patronage based system that enlarges the socio-economic divide between rich and poor, because the former are the ones who mostly profit from this arrangement.

Think of the sickening and crippling effect that Ketuanan Melayu has had on the mentality and attitudes of many Malays who are conditioned to be dependent on crutches and to embrace short-termism, and who now struggle with issues of self-confidence and self-reliance in a challenging global market place.

What about the cost of having countless businessmen (many of whom were Malays, I might add) who have been wiped out, not by non-Malay competition, but by other Malay businessmen who so happens to have the right ‘connections’ to those in power and pedigree. What about the costs associated with having hundreds of thousands of Malay graduates who have a degree but can’t get good jobs because their qualifications have no market or industry value.

All of these things have a cost to the Malays and everyone in Malaysia.

Let’s not forget the costs associated with the fact that millions of poor and needy non-Malay Malaysians have had no effective social welfare net to rely on so that they remain in squalor. Think also of the costs associated with how disunited we as are, by splitting society into those who are ‘princes of the soil’, and those who aren’t.

We would need to add to this, the costs of having weakened and ineffective institutions of government, across all of its branches, whether it is the legislature, the judiciary or the executive. That would of course include the costs of a bloated and inefficient government beauracracy which has had to absorb countless numbers of Malay graduates that might not find employment elsewhere.

We would also need to take account of the substandard education that our children are getting, and the cost that propaganda and brainwashing has had on making Malays inept to take on the challenges to survive in a meritocratic environment.

The total costs of the NEP would also need to include the very high cost of bailouts and fixing things that have gone wrong because of misused opportunities.

What about the cost of market distortions from lost productivity and competitiveness when competing for business, talent and foreign direct investment and the consequential cost (including for example, brain drain) that follows?

And what of the cost of corruption, that is a necessary bi-product of maintaining a system that lives off of patronage? All these costs must be computed and added to the total NEP bill.

If you try to monetize the aggregate cost of the NEP (or whatever its current incarnation is called), it must run into the hundreds of billions of ringgits, if not more. The NEP has cost the country a mountain of money, and its achievements are at best shoddy and patchy, especially for the Malays themselves.

On top of that, it has created a warped sense of values that are totally inconsistent with universal and Islamic values. With depleted financial resources not being replaced, the socio-economic landscape not changing in the way it was intended, and value systems remaining warped, it is only a matter of time before we become like Zimbabwe.

And there are those who have the audacity to ask that it remains in place?

It’s time to dump the NEP. But that’s not to say that we no longer need affirmative action programmes. We do. But we need these programmes to undergo a ‘game-changing’ re-design to become much more effective.

For the sake of the Malays and everyone else. And to do this we need to take some bold changes.

Firstly, affirmative action programmes must be designed to benefit those who need such support across all races. By definition this means that those who can now stand on their own two feet to realise the opportunity being offered, regardless of what race they are, must be excluded.

But determining who needs what support must however take account, not just of how smart, how financially needy, and how hard working the person seeking such support is, but his/her background and social circumstances. The more such a person is unaccustomed to the rigours of operating in a free market, the more deserving should he be of the programme.

The more that help offered to him is likely to have a major positive impact on him and those around him, the more deserving should he be of the program.

Secondly, the programme cannot be limited to giving opportunities alone. It needs to deliver a life-transforming behavioural change. It needs the beneficiary to come away from having being given this opportunity with the willingness to embrace the challenges of an open and competitive society. This is true whether it relates to opening or building a new business, furthering his education, or sharpening his professional skills.

Finally such programmes must be run professionally, independently and free from political interference. The programmes must not be run by those who are beholden to any set of political beliefs or party system. This is because that would create an irreconcilable conflict of interest as a result of which the program will suffer from the ill effects of poor governance, as has been the case with the NEP.

By developing colour-blind affirmative action programmes along this philosophy, you immediately remove the notion that opportunities are associated with the race to which you belong, even though the bulk of the beneficiaries, given the demographics and their social condition, are likely to still be Malays anyway. A beneficiary is given this break, not because it is his right, but because he is proven to have a need, and society desires to help him meet that need, both for his own sake and for the sake of society itself.

And because of this, the beneficiary is less likely to abuse this gift.

In addition, you remove from the potential list of beneficiaries, anyone that ought to be able to get on without any crutches. By having these programmes run independently and professionally, you also stop rewarding those who are linked to a party or a leader with opportunities.

It is this group that is the biggest strain on the system. It is this group’s greed that keeps elitism and cronyism alive and kicking. We need to stop letting this lot drain the system. By doing so, all the wonton wastage can be put to better use where it is really needed.

Focus on those that are disadvantaged, and leave those who have their own means to get on to compete on their own two feet. With such a shift in emphasis, we are more likely to sustain such effective social engineering programmes over a much longer time horizon, focus on alleviating the conditions of those who are in the most need for help (the bulk of whom, as I said, will remain the Malays), whilst creating a society that is built on the sharing of common universal values of integrity, hard work, respect, tolerance, and compassion.

The only thing that is preventing the above approach from being supported and succeeding is the middle-class Malay’s fear of failure, and the voices of the ultra-Malays.

To the latter I say, we must quell them for being criminally or recklessly irresponsible and ignorant. They are the ones who are causing the Malays to remain backward. To the former I can only quote FDR’s saying, ‘The only thing we have to fear is Fear itself’.

If we can overcome this fear, then God-willing, we can deliver our own salvation and turn this country around to fulfil all of its promises, for everyone.

If you wish to contribute your ideas on how we can help develop a Malay mindset that is built on universal and Islamic values, without having to rely on any concept of Malay supremacy or dominance, or Ketuanan Melayu, or you support this objective, please join and participate in the Facebook Group Tabung Idea Mengukuh Martabat Melayu.

[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]

Great article, and a potential 3rd Force or independent candidate implying a belief in :

1) Freedom from Apartheid/Fascism
2) Freedom from Religious-Persecution/Religious-Supremacy.
3) Equality for all ethnicities and faiths in all aspects of policy, Law and Constitution.

Just one thing though :

” . . . to those in power and *pedigree*.”

The selection of adjectives must not ally itself to confusion of intended usage, even inadvertently, or the writer’s intent becomes suspect. *Pedigree* is a word that does no justice describing what is largely base NEPOTISM and also to a lesser extent CRONYISM or at worst though the the title’s intent does speak against RACISM. This usage of the last 3 detailed adjectives is almost salutary and thus inappropriate! To reinforce this point about appropriateness of hand-me-down PMs, Ministers, MP-ships, assemblymen posts and even EXCO posts, please see the below link :

ARTICLE 6

Of Hujan and homophobia – by Hafidz Baharom – 17 Mar 2010

I’m pretty secure about my sexuality, and I hope most people by their 20s are the same.

Unfortunately, that’s never the case in Malaysia where guys can somehow get married and then find themselves a transsexual on the street, or even continue to frequent gay clubs.

Seriously, straight people, unless the gay fellow is hitting on you, who are you to judge? Just mind your own business and move on with your life. I say the same thing about adulterers, apostates, drug users and even women who have had an abortion.

But when an indie band like Hujan decides to come out at a concert stating that they don’t approve of alcohol, or allegedly telling people at a gig that they don’t like “lelaki lembut”, then we certainly have a problem.

Now I’m sure they were trying to make a statement more about themselves than about the 28 million populous, of which 10 per cent is theoretically LGBT, but honestly, take it off the record.

But then, in the 90s there was even a dikir barat telling of the dangers of AIDS and Aedes mosquitoes. I’m not even sure what the lyrics of the then music fad were. Did it contain homophobic insinuations?

It’s enough that the gay community of Malaysia gets lambasted by Utusan, Berita Harian and even the news agency Bernama passing off blogs as national news stating gay sex leads to swine flu; do we really need to have a successful indie band going around spewing homophobia?

Music shouldn’t be divisive, nor should it preach hatred for a certain race, religion or a person’s sex and sexual orientation. If such messages get into music, then perhaps we’re no longer the united people I thought we were as indie music lovers.

To all those singers, songwriters, and even indie bands in Malaysia, do you honestly think being exclusive by being homophobic, gender biased or even being spokespeople for anti-alcoholism is the way to go with your fan base?

Of course, then the argument would be whether or not I believe in the freedom of speech. I don’t. Not totally.

I don’t believe in the need for total freedom of speech in this nation until hate laws are revamped to include anti discrimination for all communities and the entirety of the Malaysian population, gay, straight, Muslim, Hindu, Malay, Chinese et cetera.

In the case of Hujan, the freedom of speech is definitely being abused not only by their Raingers that now have a license to be homophobic in support of Hujan, but their detractors and competition as well who can use it as a spin to take attention away from their talent, and instead focus on their social stances.

And Malaysians are not truly homophobic at all. I refuse to believe it.

Insofar, I honestly think Malaysians are merely apathetic about the issue. In fact, we react more to people making fun in Parliament about Fong Po Kuan’s menstruation than Ahmad Puad Zarkashi’s comment about how the Malaysian Football Team play like “pondans”.

In fact, even PKR, which is supposed to be liberal, labelled UMNO “pondans” in the Penanti by-election for not contesting.

Now if any Malaysian out there knows a homosexual, you will know that there’s only one fear most of them have and that is their family finding out about them being gay.

Other than that, they are perhaps the most confident courageous, open-minded, truthful people you will ever meet in this country. And trust me; you have never heard yourself being formally insulted until you’ve pissed off a queen.

I would like to actually see a rather camp, effeminate gay man in Parliament just to see how the MPs would address him as well as to get the ball rolling to note that the nation does in fact have a gay population.

Perhaps an elected Senator in the Dewan Negara.

I personally believe that such a day will come when it will be regarded as not so much a matter of state’s interest to persecute how people have sex, or even what people wear. And I do believe that this can only be achieved through politics.

On July 8, 2009, I actually posted a poll in The Star’s Citizen Blog just to test the waters. Would Malaysians accept a gay politician?

The results were mind boggling; 24 yes’, three no’s and two spoilt votes.

I honestly think those results speak for themselves, but since this is an English newspaper, I will not even consider it a post representing the thoughts of the masses but it’s truly a start.

However, it’s a start towards an open Malaysia that truly will represent what we are, a diverse nation where people can embrace what others truly are.

[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]

Non-partisanship is such a drag? But an openly LGBT Senator, especially a Malay one (watch out for Section 377 and Syariah Courts though) could help tremendously here. Freedom from Religious-Persecution/Religious-Supremacy.

Freedom of religion and freedom of sexuality for Malays at the moment is non-existent if you look at laws. How about running for candidacy on an equality basis under various 3rd Force political parties Hafidz?

ARTICLE 7

Article 153 on ‘special position’ of the Malays and other natives: The way forward – written by Art Harun – Wednesday, 17 March 2010 11:12

In my article, Visiting the Malay ‘Rights’ (the Bahasa Malaysia version can be read here), I had commented on article 153 of the Federal Constitution. I stated that under its provisions, the Malays in fact do not possess any special ‘rights’.

There is only the special ‘position’ of the Malays and the natives of Sabah and Sarawak. In general, this special position does not confer any right which is recognised by law to the Malays.

Specifically, what is contained in article 153 is the power vested in His Majesty the Yang di Pertuan Agong to ensure that places in the civil service and institutions of higher learning are reserved for the Malays and the natives of Sabah and Sarawak as His Majesty deems reasonable.

Additionally, His Majesty is also given the power to reserve a quota for the Malays and the natives of Sabah and Sarawak in the allocation of scholarships, and permits or licences required for business and trade. This power is similarly to be exercised by His Majesty as His Majesty deems reasonable.

A few fundamental premises should be examined and borne in mind regarding the provisions contained in article 153. They are:

* They do not confer any rights to the Malays and the natives of Sabah and Sarawak. For example, article 153 does not state that the Malays are entitled (as a matter of rights) to 30% or 50% of scholarships disbursed by the government every year;
* The special position is not only conferred to the  Malays but also the natives of Sabah and Sarawak;
* The power (enabling the quotas) belongs to His Majesty the Yang di Pertuan Agong;
*  His Majesty is to exercise the powers under article 153 as His majesty deems reasonable.  This means the power cannot be exercised arbitrarily.

The injection of  the element of ‘reasonableness’ in article 153 brings an element of dynamism in the  implementation of the powers under article 153.  This is because what was reasonable back in 1969, for instance, may no longer be fitting in 2010 and so forth.

A starting point towards dissipating the dissatisfaction currently felt by all parties (whether the Malays or non-Malays) over article 153 is, I believe, to commence a rational discussion to determine what is held to be ‘reasonable’ at this point.

Thereafter, I feel, the implementation of those facets of article 153 can then be carefully planned by incorporating whatever equitable formula guaranteeing the element of ‘reasonableness’  in time to come.

In this way, there will be no need for all of us to have shouting matches, wield the keris and to ready the arena for a silat fight here and there every time there is doubt that the economic balance between the races falls short of the ideal in our country.

Malaysia has our fair share of the intelligentsia and learned economists. Dr Jomo Sundram, for example, is a senior official the United Nations secretariat. We even have our very own astronaut. We have submarines in our naval fleet. Why don’t we just employ the wisdom and expertise which we possess to resolve this matter of article 153?

Lately, the issue has raised a lot of hackles and even been distorted by those who appear to be ignorant of its provisions. The trite rhetoric daily purveyed by the mass media is bereft of academic credentials and far from factual. The cheap politicking and parochialism emanating from this rhetoric is so pungent as to be nauseating.

One of the popular assertions is that article 153 cannot be amended. This claim is, in my humble opinion, very confusing and merely reflects ignorance of the Federal Constitution.

According to article 159 of the Federal Constitution, article 153 can in fact be amended on the condition that the amendment is supported by two-thirds of the members of the Lower and Upper Houses in its second and third reading. If this support is obtained, the amendment may only take effect after it is approved by the Council of Rulers.

Therefore, if there is anyone who insists article 153 cannot be amended,  I would be glad to be proven otherwise.
We as Malaysians should be more sensitive to any efforts made to gain a deeper understanding of various matters because it is only through knowledge can we arrive at the truth. Don’t simply swallow wholesale what people say. On the subject of article 153, there is a lot we can learn from history.

So let’s revisit history on it. It is common knowledge that a commission was established to draft our constitution. This commission is known as the Reid Commission (named after its head, a renowned English judge, Lord Reid).

In drawing up the Federal Constitution, the Reid Commission was assigned the task to ensure that the position of the Malays was safeguarded. Its report says:

    “Our terms of reference require that provision should be made in the Constitution for the ‘safeguarding of the special position of the Malays and the legitimate interests of other Communities’.”

Nonetheless, the commission found it difficult to give a special preference to any single race permanently because such a special preference is contrary to the principle of equality in the eyes of the law. The Reid Commission reported:

    “We found it difficult, therefore, to reconcile the terms of reference if the protection of the special position of the Malays signified the granting of special privileges, permanently, to one community only and not to the others.

The Alliance front led by Tunku Abdul Rahman had also wanted independent Malaya to confer equal rights, privileges, and equal opportunities to all its citizens regardless of race or religion. Additionally, the Council of Rulers had hoped too that the concept of communalism would be eventually eradicated from the country’s political and economic spheres. In relation to this, the Reid Commission reported:

    “The difficulty of giving one community a permanent advantage over the others was realised by the Alliance Party, representatives of which, led by the Chief Minister, submitted that in an independent Malaya all nationals should be accorded equal rights, privileges and opportunities and there must not be discrimination on grounds of race and creed …’ The same view was expressed by their Highnesses in their memorandum, in which they said that they ‘look forward to a time not too remote when it will become possible to eliminate Communalism as a force in the political and economic life of the country’.”

Such was the hope and good intentions of our forefathers in their common struggle to obtain independence from British colonialism. The Federal Constitution was formulated in cognizance of these intentions and aspirations.

This notwithstanding, the Reid Commission was presented with yet another difficulty. What was in actuality the special position of the Malays that was to be preserved? Where was the special position to be found? What guidelines should they have used to determine and establish this special position?

Their search ended when it was discovered that the Malays had always enjoyed a special position even from the start of British colonisation. This special position was already affirmed by the British in their earlier treaties with the Malay rulers. This culminated in the recognition of the said special position in clause 19(1) (d) of the Federation of Malaya Agreement 1948. It was explained as below:

    “When we came to determine what is ‘the special position of the Malays’ we found that as a result of the original treaties with the Malay States, reaffirmed from time to time, the special position of the Malays has always been recognised. This recognition was continued by the provisions of cl 19(1)(d) of the Federation Agreement, 1948, which made the High Commissioner responsible for safeguarding the special position of the Malays and the legitimate interests of other communities.”

They found that the Malays had always enjoyed a special position in four areas:

* Reserve land,
* Quota in the civil service,
* Quota in permits and trading licences, and
* Quota in scholarships and education.

When they visited Tanah Melayu to solicit the views of the various parties before proceeding to draft our constitution, the Reid Commission did not meet with any objections from any parties for this special position to remain although there were some quarters that objected to it being extended for a long period of time.

After studying the special position of the Malays and the circumstances of the Malays who at that time were lagging behind the other races in the economic and education sectors, the Reid Commission decided to retain the Malay special position in the constitution that they drafted. This is the background and rationale behind article 153 that we have with us today. The question now is whether it is true that the provisions of article 153 were meant to be maintained for perpetuity.

But what was said in the British Parliament about this? What was the wish of our Father of Independence, Tunku Abdul Rahman?

[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]

The article writer needs to read (probably has) and include the parts of the Reid Commission . . . perhaps intentionally? (. . . lets hope this is not crypto-racism . . . ) omitted. Important omitted portions of the Reid Commission left out by Art Harun below :

However, “in due course the present preferences should be reduced and should ultimately cease.” The Commission suggested that these provisions be revisited in 15 years, and that a report should be presented to the appropriate legislature (currently the Parliament of Malaysia) and that the “legislature should then determine either to retain or to reduce any quota or to discontinue it entirely.”

Originally there was no reference made to other indigenous peoples of Malaysia (then Malaya) such as the Orang Asli, but with the union of Malaya with Singapore, Sabah and Sarawak in 1963, the Constitution was amended so as to provide similar privileges for the indigenous peoples of East Malaysia (Sabah and Sarawak), grouping them with the Malays as Bumiputra. The scope of Article 153 is limited by Article 136, which requires that civil servants be treated impartially regardless of race. (this could well imply that civil servants and Orang Asli were supposed to have access to Special Malays Privileges in full entirety as well.)

After 15 years after 1948 and EVERY 15 years later, a review of ALL privileges was to be made. There should have been as many as 4 reviews by now, there have been none. Hence the Social Constract does not hold and as per the UNHCR Article 1 which Malaysia is a signatory of, there is no reason that Special Privileges can be continued after 4 missed reviews and 4 times the period beyond 15 years as per the Reid Commission. BN skimmed over the above facts (much like Art Harun omitted the same . . . ), and even kept the Emergency and ISA laws. Hence BN fails. BN’s minority political parties fail. That is why Pakatan (nepotism fail there), and 3rd Force are existent today.

1) Freedom from Apartheid/Fascism
2) Freedom from Religious-Persecution/Religious-Supremacy.
3) Equality for all ethnicities and faiths in all aspects of policy, Law and Constitution. . . . amongst other things.