ARTICLE 1
Free thosai outside DIG’s house – B Nantha Kumar – May 16, 2012
An Indian NGO claims that it wants to promote the heritage dish and denies that it has anything to do with the burger protest outside S Ambiga’s house.
KUALA LUMPUR: Fancy a free thosai breakfast this Sunday?
If you do, then head down to Ampang as a coalition of 20 Indian non-governmental organisations (NGOs) are planning to set up a thosai stall in front of the Deputy Inspector-General of Police Khalid Abu Bakar’s residence on May 20.
Urging the public to attend the event, the movement dubbed WargaAMAN, said the stall would provide free thosai to all this Sunday, starting 10am, at Jalan 2/7G, Taman Bukit Teratai, Ampang.
WargaAMAN secretary S Barathidasan claimed that the event had “no connection” with the burger stall set up by some traders in front of Bersih co-chairperson S Ambiga’s house last week.
Last Thursday, a group of burger sellers staged a protest in front of Ambiga’s house by distributing 200 burgers.
Organised by an NGO called Malaysia Small and Medium Entrepreneurs Alliance (Ikhlas), they set up the stall to show their displeasure over the April 28 Bersih rally, which Ikhlas claimed had disrupted their livelihood.
The NGO alleged that burger stall owners had suffered losses amounting to RM200,000 due to the rally, concentrated in certain parts of the federal capital.
Subsequently, Khalid, when asked why the police did not act against the burger stall owners, had replied that it was not wrong to sit in front of anyone’s house provided they did not disturb the occupants of the dwelling.
The DIG had said that there was nothing wrong with protesting outside a person’s house as long as the occupants are not disturbed.
“What offence? If you want to sit in front of her (Ambiga’s) house without disrupting other people, there is no offence.
“As long as they don’t commit any offence such as trespassing on private property, we will not take action,” Khalid had told a press conference in reference to the “burger protest.”
WargaAMAN, however, is firm that the event in front of Khalid’s house this Sunday would not be a protest but more of a thosai promotional event.
“We plan to promote thosai… Malaysians seems to have forgotten about the dish which had been classified as a heritage food by the Malaysian Heritage Department
“So, the event will be more of an awareness campaign… it is more to introduce the dish than a protest,” added Barathidasan.
Apart from a free thosai meal, the public would also be taught how to make good thosai.
“Since Khalid had said what he said, we chose his house. This is the assurance he gave. Moreover he is the number two cop in the country… it would be very safe outside his house,” he quipped.
‘Licence to grill’
In a related development, another NGO condemned the vulgar aerobic exercise staged outside Ambiga’s house.
Persatuan Kebajikan, Sosial Gemilang Puchong president V Rameshwaran said he was apalled that ex-servicemen could stoop so low.
“This is disgraceful, these men are supposed to be role models for the younger generation. It is a shame that they chose to behave in such a crude manner.
“It is acts like these that upset the public and turn Malaysia into a laughing stock. It will also make the people angrier with Barisan Nasional,” he told FMT.
Rameshwaran said Ambiga was defending the constitutional rights of Malaysians, including that of the ex-servicemen who staged the lewd protest.
As for the police’s justification for not acting against the “burger” protest, he suggested that stall owners whose premises were demolished by DBKL should set up stalls outside the houses of the mayor and Khalid.
“This is wonderful news. Now everyone has the ‘licence to grill’ outside anyone’s house, including that of the mayor, police chief, prime minister and ministers,” he said.
[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]
Retrogressively unchallengeable backlash w/o use of ISA type powers. BN (or is that PDRM) is using their brains after the fiasco at Bersih. Now, how about Ambiga file lawsuits against APARTHEID instead of carrying on with the Bersih farce?
ARTICLE 2
Land split: Ex-estate workers cry foul – B Nantha Kumar – May 15, 2012
They were given 15 acres by the BN Selangor government in 2007, but now they only have seven acres. The other eight acres have been allocated for a luxury housing project.
KLANG: In 2007, the Barisan Nasional-led Selangor government allocated 15 acres of land to build houses for the former Bukit Raja estate workers.
But now a former worker claims that the Pakatan Rakyat state government had allegedly diverted eight of the 15 acres for a luxury housing project.
“Piling work (for the luxury housing project) started last month despite no signboard being placed at the site,” said P Mathialagan, 55.
The tractor driver said he was shocked to learn that the Klang District Land Office had a new plan which showed that the 15-acre land had been divided into two plots.
“The district office was reluctant to provide a copy of the so-called new plan and only allowed us to take a photograph of it.
“Something strange is going on. The ground breaking ceremony was officiated by Dr Xavier Jayakumar, the state exco (for Indian affairs) in January this year.
“So how come the 15-acre land can be split into two plots in just four months?” he asked.
Also present at the ground breaking ceremony were PKR Subang MP R Sivarasa, who is the lawyer for the ex-plantation workers and PKR Kapar MP S Manikavasagam.
Commenting further, Mathialagan said he wanted Jayakumar and Sivarasa to explain the matter.
He said that Bukit Raja estate was one of the pioneer rubber plantations in the country, founded about 200 years ago.
“I was seven-years-old when I came to Bukit Raja estate with my parents who were rubber tappers,” he added.
Mahtialagan said that in 1988, Sime Darby closed the estate to pave the way for commercial development.
However, all the 144 families who had been working in the estate, took Sime Darby to court in 2004 for not meeting several demands.
“We hired Sivarasa as the lawyer to represent us in this dispute,” he said.
“In 2007, former MIC president S Samy Vellu managed to get us the 15 acres from Sime Darby while another five acres were allocated to the Bukit Raja Tamil school,” he added.
Sime Darby allocated the land and RM7,000 as compensation for each family with the agreement that they had to build the houses on their own.
Land size disputed
Mahthialagan said Samy Vellu then handed over the entire housing project to Putra Umno chief Abdul Azeez Abdul Rahim and the latter brought in SanuMurni Sdn Bhd, which was the current developer.
In 2007, the plantation workers signed an agreement with the housing developer. According to the agreement, each three-room house with two bathrooms would cost RM77,000.
“We were told to pay RM7,000 as deposit while the balance would be covered by bank loans,” said Mahthialagan, who added that the project which was to be completed in 2009 was abandoned.
After a long struggle, the Pakatan state government held the ground breaking ceremony on Jan 18 this year and the event was reported in all the Tamil dailies.
The PKR leaders, who attented the event, were reported as saying that the former estate workers would be given 15 acres.
“We were told that apart from houses, a temple and a public hall will be built as well,” said Mahtialagan.
“However, it seems like the Pakatan government broke its promise now that part of the land has given for a project to enrich their cronies,” he added.
Meanwhile, Jayakumar disputed the land size that was awarded to the ex- estate workers.
“Get your facts right. Go and ask Sime Darby about the land size. The 78 estate workers wanted landed property and the court ruled in their favour. They are getting it,” the exco told FMT.
However, Manikavasagam disagreed, saying that the allocation was indeed 15 acres.
“Bukit Raja estate comes under my constituency and I’m very sure that Sime Darby allocated 15 acres to the plantation workers,” added the Kapar MP.
Despite numerous attempts Sivarasa could not be contacted.
[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]
Can’t they use GPS to determine if the area is really 15 acres? This sort of nonsesne even about land size makes the Land Surveyors in Malaysia look like fools and the government feel complicit somehow. Is there no authority that can clearly speak, than this MP vs. big company ‘word against the other’ b.s.?
ARTICLE 3
PAS Agrees To Field Non-Muslim Candidates – Thursday, 17 May 2012 14:10
KUALA LUMPUR — PAS has agreed to field non-Muslim candidates to contest in the coming general election in Sarawak and Johor.
Non-Muslim PAS Supporters Congress (DHPP) chairman, Hu Pang Chaw said they would contest in the Tiram State constituency in Johor and a parliamentary constituency in Sarawak.
“The matter is already agreed upon by PAS headquarters. DHPP has also asked PAS to field a candidate from DHPP for one seat in every state, regardless whether they are state or parliamentary seats.
“However, it is still at the discussion stage. The final decision depends on the PAS headquarters,” he told Bernama here, today.
DHPP is a wing of PAS representing their non-Malay and non-Muslim supporters.
Hu said a list of candidates from DHPP would be submitted to the PAS headquarters.
To date, candidates for Kedah, Perak, Selangor, Johor and Sarawak had been identified.
In the 2008 general election, PAS fielded a candidate from the Indian community to contest the Tiram State seat in the Johor Baharu Parliamentary Constituency.
However, the candidate R. Kumutha lost to Maulizan Bujang from Barisan Nasional.
(Bernama)
[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]
Does the Non-Muslim PAS Supporters Congress have equal rights and votes and standing in PAS party yet? If not, then this is still a gimmick. Fielding non-Muslim candidates who do not have equality of standing in a poliytical party would mean PUPPETS are fielded. Is Non-Muslim PAS Supporters Congress a group of puppets which does not ask that they have equal rights and standing as all other PAS members?
Did Pang Chaw address the below issue yet?
Look, Hu’s at the forum – Bar Council Malaysia – 5th December 2011
ARTICLE 4
Bar Council Has Become A Political Party – Wednesday, 16 May 2012 16:15
PUTRAJAYA — As the Bar Council’s concern seems to border on the politics of the country, it appears to have become a political party, noted Dr Mahathir Mohamad.
Thus, the former prime minister said, it should let other organisations take over the professional side (of the Bar Council) to avoid confusion.
“I think a professional organisation should concentrate more on the profession, but it is quite obvious that the Bar Council has become a political party.
“Next, we’ll have the Malaysian Medical Association, the architects, all becoming political parties, and there’ll be a lot of confusion,” he told
reporters here at the Perdana Leadership Foundation today.
Dr Mahathir was commenting on a proposal to form a new organisation for lawyers to represent their profession, welfare and legal interests, as the existing Bar Council had failed to defend itself as a professional body with integrity.
Asked to comment on Tunku Abdul Aziz Tunku Ibrahim’s resignation from the DAP, he simply said: “I knew from the beginning that the DAP was not the party for him…I do not know why he joined (the DAP).”
Dr Mahathir, who is also Chancellor of Perdana University, earlier witnessed the signing of two memorandi of understanding (MoU) between the university with Malaysian Agricultural Research and Development Institute (Mardi) and Universiti Putra Malaysia (UPM).
The MoU with Mardi was to strengthen, facilitate, promote and develop cooperation and collaboration on agriculture research related to health, while the MoU with UPM was to strengthen, promote and develop sciences and academic cooperation between the two institutions.
Perdana University was launched last year, by Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak, with the objective of improving the quality of medical
education and healthcare in the country.
Currently, it has two medical schools. They are Perdana University Graduate School of Medicine, in collaboration with John Hopkins University School of Medicine which offers a four-year graduate entry programme based on the United States curriculum, and PU-RCSI School of Medicine which offers a five-year programme based on a conventional curriculum of the Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland (RCSI).
(Bernama)
[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]
Good idea. All those lawyers should just replace the uneducated nepotistic, term limitess and racist scum in Dewan.
ARTICLE 5
Slippery Slope To Lawlessness – Aliran Executive Committee – Thursday, 17 May 2012 15:59
Aliran is shocked by Deputy Inspector-General of Police Khalid Abu Bakar’s glib reaction to the 10 May protest by Malaysian Small and Medium Entrepreneurs Alliance (Iklas) members outside Ambiga Sreenevasan’s home.
“What offence? If you want to sit in front of her house without disrupting other people, there is no offence,” he states without a trace of human understanding.
“Which privacy? They didn’t enter her house, they were in public space,” he maintains without an inkling of the dangerous situation created by these trouble-makers intent on causing mischief outside Ambiga’s house.
Such comments coming from the No 2 man in the police force no less, encourages lawlessness and opens the flood gates to mischief-makers, hooligans and thugs to go on a rampage. His comments are unacceptable and unbecoming of a police officer of his rank who is entrusted with the peace and harmony of this country founded on the supremacy of the Federal Constitution.
Already, spurred on by his comments, another bigger rally involving 500 traders has been planned for 24 May.
On 14 May, a group of 15 men, believed to be army veterans, blatantly performed vulgar aerobics in front of Ambiga’s house. They even had the temerity to challenge her to sue them; otherwise they would return with a bigger crowd.
Like everyone else, Ambiga has every right to peace and safety where she resides. This peace and safety cannot be threatened with impunity in a civilised society.
She has every right to expect respect for her religion and culture just as others have a right to respect for their faith and way of life. But in a very callous manner of defiance, these people who put up stalls to distribute free beef burgers were completely oblivious to the fact that Ambiga is a Hindu and a vegetarian. They grilled beef patties outside her house in offensive disregard for her faith.
The harassment she is subjected to is as stark as daylight – but obviously not to the Deputy IGP who has, knowingly or otherwise, ignited a fuse that could take this country down the slippery path to lawlessness. We hold him responsible for this.
We are equally disturbed that the Prime Minister, the chief executive of this nation, has chosen to maintain a dangerous silence over such hooliganism and the danger the Deputy IGP is putting this nation into. If there is a breakdown of law and order, the PM and the Deputy IGP must be ultimately held responsible for this descent into what might turn out to be anarchy.
ALIRAN EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]
Those were the ‘Village People’, a well loved group of musicians! OUTSIDE Ambiga’s house. Not inside, whats the issue? Neighbours to the front, left right and behind also probably have cooked beef before, what is the issue?
ARTICLE 6
Provocative Actions Of Few Will Not Ruffle Najib – Friday, 18 May 2012 00:06
KUALA LUMPUR — The provocative actions of a few individuals during Najib Tun Razak’s meeting with Malaysians in London recently will not affect the confidence of the Prime Minister in continuing to interact with the people, said Muhyiddin Yassin.
The Deputy Prime Minister said as a statesman, Najib was an open-minded person and would not feel threatened by such circumstances.
“He (Najib) knows anything can happen (like what happened at the meeting), but the majority of those present welcomed him except for two or three malicious people who want to disrupt the function,” he told reporters after opening the annual general meeting of the Bumiputera Manunfacturers and Services Industry Association of Malaysia, here yesterday.
At the “An Evening with the Prime Minister” event in London on Tuesday during Najib’s two-day working visit to the United Kingdom, two or three out of the 1,500 people gathered there tried to disrupt the function by heckling Najib.
Muhyiddin, however, said although the act was rude and did not show respect for the nation’s number one leader, the government would not arbitrarily take action every time someone spoke out against the government.
On another matter, Muhyiddin said Tenaganita executive director Irene Fernandez was ill-informed about the actual situation in the country when she allegedly made wild allegations that Bangladeshis workers were poorly treated in Malaysia.
Questioning her motives for making such allegations, the Deputy Prime Minister said the government had never prevented foreign workers form returning to their own countries if they felt Malaysia was not safe and did not have laws to protect them, as claimed by Irene.
“However, I believe 99.9 per cent of them disagree with Irene Fernandez…so what is Irene Fernandez’s motive in denigrating Malaysia,” he said.
In fact, he said, at his meeting with Bangladesh’s minister in charge for the country’s citizens working overseas on Wednesday, the latter had asked the Malaysian government to lift its freeze on the intake of Bangladeshi workers.
“If Bangladeshi workers are poorly treated here, why would the Bangladesh government ask Malaysia to lift its freeze on hiring workers from the country,” he said.
Irene in a recent interview with Indonesia’s Jakarta Post newspaper is alleged to have claimed that Malaysia was an unsafe place for foreign workers and that it did not have a legal framework to protect them.
(Bernama)
[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]
BN has been provoking all Malaysians since the Constitution was written, PM Najib may not be ruffled but the rakyat are ALL ruffled by the 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)
Provocative action of BN by INACTION on the above 3 items ruffling the Rakyat will cause a ruffling of PM Najib by loss of votes. Can PM Najib PLEASE use that mandate to grant the above 3 items to unruffle everything for everyone before the ruffling reaches PM Najib?
ARTICLE 7
Restore Decency, Civility To Politics And Public Life – by Lim Kit Siang – Friday, 18 May 2012 00:11
When the Prime Minister, Najib Razak spoke about “uncivilized enemies” who will lead Malaysia to ruin at the UMNO anniversary gathering at the Bukit Jalil Stadium last Friday, Malaysians immediately thought of two”uncivilized” acts which occurred only the day before – the Perkasa “funeral rite” in front of Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng’s house in Penang and the setting up of a burger stall in front of the house of Bersih 2.0 co-chairperson Ambiga Sreenevasan’s house at Bukit Damansara, Kuala Lumpur.
Since then there had been a third “uncivilized” act which had never happened before in Malaysian politics and public life in the nation’s 54-year history – the utterly insensitive and deplorable “butt” dance by a group of armed forces veteran in front of Ambiga’s house two days ago, with the promise of more and bigger “uncivilized” actions to come!
What is most shocking is that these “uncivilized” actions had at first the approval and support of important personalities in government – especially the Deputy Inspector-General of Police Khalid Abu Bakar and some Ministers who asked what was wrong with setting up a beef burger stall in front of Ambiga’s house.
As a result of the tide of adverse public reaction in the past week, there appears to be a belated realisation in some official circles that such insensitive and deplorable “uncivilised conduct” have gone beyond the pale of the acceptable and permissible for ordinary decent Malaysians, regardless of race, religion, region, class, gender or age.
This explains for the condemnation of these “uncivilized” actions by those who had earlier held their silence.
This is however completely inadequate.
The time has come to restore decency and civility to politics and public life in Malaysia.
The Prime Minister, Najib Razak, the Deputy Prime Minister Muhyiddin Yassin and the Cabinet must come forward to speak loud and clear their condemnation of these three “uncivilized acts” in the past week and to set the tone and example for decency and civility in politics and public life in Malaysia enroute to a developed high-income nation in 2020.
LIM KIT SIANG
[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]
Limitless terms (beyond 2 terms) for MPs are the most uncivilised thing possible. PLACING your own son as CM in an act of nepotism without consulting the people is the most uncivilised thing possible. Asking for 750K in funeral funds from the Rakyat is the most uncivilised thing possible. Not being able to keep campaign promises is the most uncivilised thing possible. Threatening to tear down people’s awnings on prvate property instead of amending by-laws is the most uncivilised thing possible. Was Mubarak Lim talking about DAP?
ARTICLE 8
Bar Council shakes off ‘political party’ tag, says only defends law – By Clara Chooi – May 18, 2012
KUALA LUMPUR, May 18 — The Bar Council has refuted accusations calling it a political party, insisting that every statement it makes “is premised on legal principles or human rights”.
Its president Lim Chee Wee said the council has also been fair in its criticisms of both the government and opposition, dismissing claims that its views were biased.
The council came under heavy fire from Barisan Nasional (BN) politicians after it resolved during its extraordinary general meeting (EGM) last week to condemn what it alleged was excessive use of police force against Bersih 3.0 participants.
Umno minister Datuk Seri Mohamed Nazri Aziz and Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad even labelled the council a “political party” and voiced support for the formation of a second Malaysian Bar as an alternative for lawyers.
“Every statement of the Bar is premised on a legal principle or human right, in this instance, the right of a Malaysian to be protected by the police and not harmed,” Lim (picture) said in an emailed statement to The Malaysian Insider.
“Both Nazri and Dr Mahathir failed to address the message of the Bar, namely why has the police failed to implement the recommendations of the past four Suhakam (Malaysian Human Rights Commission) inquiries in dealing with assemblies?”
The recommendations from the commission included suggestions for law enforcement officers to be compelled to wear identification numbers; a five-stage crowd control process (verbal persuasion, use of non-lethal force, clear warning for dispersal, adequate time for dispersal and no arrests of dispersing crowd); and no assault on protesters.
Lim repeated that while proper restraint by the police was observed during Bersih 3.0’s simultaneous assemblies in Ipoh, Malacca, Johor Baru and Kuantan, the main rally in the capital was the complete opposite.
During the April 28 protest in KL, riot police had used tear gas canisters and water cannons to disperse protesters, many of whom have since alleged that the armed personnel had also assaulted them.
The council, as a part of its EGM resolution, had also demanded apologies from the police and home minister for the alleged use of indiscriminate force to disperse otherwise peaceful protesters.
But neither the government nor the police have since issued apologies and other than Nazri and Dr Mahathir, several anti-Bersih proponents had called the council biased towards the opposition.
Denying this, Lim pointed out that the council had also criticised the opposition in the past.
“The Malaysian Bar speaks up when the government does the right thing,” he added. “For example, the establishment of the National Legal Aid Foundation and better support of court infrastructure. Equally it will criticise when it makes a mistake, in this instance police brutality and wrongful use of force.”
[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]
Really? So International law says that racism is ILLEGAL. Will Bar Council speak up AGAINST Malaysia’s unjust 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)
ARTICLE 9
Guan Eng defends banning Utusan in Penang, calls it ‘party organ’ – By Anisah Shukry – May 18, 2012
KUALA LUMPUR, May 18 — Lim Guan Eng today defended Penang’s decision to ban Umno-owned Utusan Malaysia, calling it a “party organ” masquerading as a newspaper following criticism that the Pakatan Rakyat (PR) bloc does not guarantee media freedom.
On Wednesday, the Centre for Independent Journalism (CIJ) said in its report that a Pakatan Rakyat-led government was no guarantor of media freedom due to its banning of Utusan in Penang and Kelantan.
But the Penang chief minister insisted today that when it came to media freedom, newspapers must “walk the talk”.
“When you talk about newspapers, you have to be clear, are they newspapers or party organs? You cannot have party organs that masquerade as newspapers,” he told reporters at a press conference here.
“Utusan Malaysia is not a newspaper. It is a party organ because they don’t give you right of reply.”
He cited Utusan’s yearly reports that Penang had banned a march to commemorate Prophet Muhammad’s birthday as proof of the newspaper’s false reporting and reluctance to allow him to reply to its articles.
“Every year, Utusan says (the march) is banned, when actually it isn’t. Penang people know (that it is not banned). Penang Malays laugh because they themselves marched in it.”
Lim, who is also DAP secretary-general, said that despite refuting the newspaper’s articles on the matter, Utusan only stopped reporting it after he had sued them and won the case.
But he pointed out that as he could not sue Utusan “every day” for its “false reports”, he was left with no option but to bar its reporters from covering the state government proceedings in Penang.
“Even when I sue and won the case, they still continue. What can I do? It’s an act of self defence. I have no choice but to say ‘please don’t cover me and print my news’,” he said.
“It’s okay with me because I’m scared of you. I throw my hands up. Don’t cover me because you don’t give me the right of reply,” he said.
The Penang legislative assembly adopted a motion in May 2011 barring Utusan from covering its proceedings following unverified reports on the renovation costs of Lim’s rented residence, and an alleged plot by the DAP and Christian pastors to change the country’s official religion to Christianity.
[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]
a) But the Penang chief minister insisted today that when it came to media freedom, newspapers must “walk the talk”.
“When you talk about newspapers, you have to be clear, are they newspapers or party organs? You cannot have party organs that masquerade as newspapers,” he told reporters at a press conference here.
Freedom of speech means that Guan Eng now should be charged under some freedom of speech act in law. If Utusan is worth anything, Utusan will sue on the free speech issue. Conversely would Utusan allow Playboy or Penthouse, or Hustler to be sold and bought by non-Muslims at least? This is no better than banning Playboy or Penthouse, or Hustler! GTFO of Dewan undemocratic nepotist! If anyone does not like Utusan, don’t buy thats all. Guan Eng has abused the CM’s office to destroy free speech, even that of a hated racist papers’. Wrongful sections could be demanded for retraction or removal, blacked out, or sued against, but no bans can be fairly applied.
b) “Utusan Malaysia is not a newspaper. It is a party organ because they don’t give you right of reply.”
Some of us sent DAP whole manuscripts in hopes of writing a better exposition of Malaysia’s situation which DAP willigly used no end and no word of thanks. They tried to destroy the writers instead. DAP is as bad as PAP possibly. Did DAP reply? DAP precluded right of reply. DAP has proven DAP is worse than Utusan.
c) “It’s okay with me because I’m scared of you. I throw my hands up. Don’t cover me because you don’t give me the right of reply,” he (Lim Guan Eng) said.
I’d say after the lawsuit, just send this nepotistic moron another platter of sh1t cakes, to remind about 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)
;and if not so faux-white Xian racist), to act by sending a MLK-style (delegation to UN, NAM and BRICS to end APARTHEID rather than take on every role except that of a true minority race leader seeking equality via the 3 items above.
ARTICLE 10
Protesting landowners camp-out at state office – Joseph Tawie – May 16, 2012
Sixty-five native landowners are demanding that the government rescind provisional leases (PLs) issued against their lands, to private companies.
KUCHING: Native landowners from several longhouses in Balai Ringin continued with their protest for the third day running by camping at the Land and Survey headquarters carpark here in Kuching.
Spokesman for the native landowners Augustine Bagat said the community won’t budge until their problem is solved.
“We will continue to protest even until Gawai Dayak on June 1 as long as the Director of Lands and Surveys does not make any decision on our native customary rights (NCR) land which the department leased to three companies.
“We want to show we are very serious,” Bagat said.
Their protest by camping at the car park has attracted the attention of both the Opposition and the Barisan leaders.
A concerned Balai Ringin assemblyman Snowdan Lawan said the campers were his voters and he was “very concerned with their welfare.”
“I am prepared to mediate between the native landowners and the Land and Survey Department,” he said.
Meanwhile Kota Sentosa assemblyman Chong Chieng Jen who met with the protesters said that he would raise the matter in the current sitting of the Dewan Undangan Negeri.
“The delaying tactics by the Land and Survey is not helping the natives.
“This is the time when the people are standing up for their rights that the government has taken away their land. They are going to stay here until the problem is resolved.
“We call on all those who face similar problems to come and visit them in order to show solidarity with them,” said Chong, who is also Sarawak DAP secretary.
‘Policy change needed’
He said that this is not the only group that has suffered. Throughout Sarawak there are hundreds of thousands of natives whose lands have been taken away from them.
“This is very unfair on the part of the state government which only turns a blind eye to their problem.
“Actually the government is working in cohorts to take away NCR lands from the natives,’ he said, pointing out that the problems are created by the system.
Chong said only through a change of policy could the problem be resolved.
The natives first brought their case to the Director of Lands and Surveys in January this year asking him to cancel the provisional leases on their land.
On March 17, the same group again tried to meet the director. The director refused to talk to them. Instead he sent a junior officer to deal with them.
Earlier on May 14, the group had tried (for the third time) to see the director. Again the director refused to meet them. A junior officer was sent to talk to them saying that their problems are yet to be solved.
Unhappy and angry the 65 natives – men and women – refused to go home and made their camps in the car park in front of the Land and Survey headquarters to show their protest.
But in the evening, only 30 protesters camped at the car park while the rest went home.
They were, however, relieved by another group in the morning.
“While one group of 30 people goes home, another group of 30 comes in to replace them. We will eat and sleep in the camps.
“We will do it (the protest) for the next few days or even until Gawai Dayak on June 1. This is to show how serious we are,” said Bagat.
Lands bulldozed, farms destroyed
According to Bagat, three companies – Memaju Jaya, United team trade and Tetangga Arkab – were given the PLs to plant oil palm in their NCR land.
One of the companies is allegedly owned by the former Kedup assemblyman, Frederick Bayoi Manggie.
His company is said to have been awarded 5,500 acres of land, the bulk of it is NCR land. The native landowners alleged that their land was part of a deal for Manggie to step down as elected representative.
His place was taken over by Martin Ben.
“Our lands have been bulldozed and fruit trees, rubber gardens and farms destroyed,” said Bagat, adding that the government had refused to talk with them.
[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]
File lawsuits at the UN, NAM, BRICS for illegal land alienation. Don’t even bother talking to the racist or corruption beholden Judiciary and legal system.
ARTICLE 11
Guan Eng’s Dark Side Revealed – Tee Siew Kiong – Friday, 18 May 2012 00:09
The interview recently conducted with Tunku Abdul Aziz has uncovered the dark side of Lim Guan Eng. It has proven that Lim Guan Eng misuses his power to freeze out any dissidents within the party causing the party to be in a stir of mess. It really is a futile effort by Lim Guan Eng to try to conceal his autocratic, despotic leadership style in DAP anymore.
Tunku Abdul Aziz’s decision to quit the party has exposed the real façade of DAP. The true colors of Lim Guan Eng are now revealed, showing us that he not only hides skeletons in the closet, but he also cannot tolerate any conflicting opinions by its members.
According to the media, Tunku Abdul Aziz has previously raised to the DAP Central Committee Members several incidences where DAP leaders had knowingly broken the law. However, his words of caution were not heeded and were shunned upon, telling us that the party’s leadership turns a blind eye to the ill-discipline of its members, allowing law-breakers to roam free.
When Lim Guan Eng, the Secretary-General of DAP, said that time will tell when who is right, he is merely trying to escape criticisms aimed towards him by hoping that over time, the people will forget all the misdeeds he has done. It is all part of his usual ploy to divert the people’s attention and to let the issue subside.
Tunku Abdul Aziz has personally said that the decision to leave the party was one that relieves him as he is glad that he has escaped the despotism of DAP politicians. His departure has exemplified that there exists deep-rooted dissatisfaction and discord among DAP party members.
When Tunku Abdul Aziz first joined DAP, he supported the ideal of a multi-racial political party fighting for the interests and well-being of the people from multiple races. Now, his departure has proven that DAP is not as what they claimed. They are using the name ‘multi-racial party’ as a mockery, to disguise themselves as a Chinese-based party ruling the Chinese.
TEE SIEW KIONG is MCA National Organising Secretary
(The views expressed above belongs to the author in its entirety and does not represent the opinion of Malaysian Mirror in any way)
ARTICLE 12
Of ethics, principles and ideals – SPECIAL REPORTS – Wednesday, 16 May 2012 admin-s
(The Star) – There are many DAP leaders who go against the very laws they help draw up, even within the states where they form the government, said Tunku Abdul Aziz Tunku Ibrahim.
He said these leaders failed to see the “whole picture” on the need to maintain high ethics and integrity at all times and on all issues.
The former Transparency International country head said he had spoken out many times at the central executive committee (DAP’s highest ruling body) meetings about such unethical behaviour but it had always fallen on deaf ears.
He added that he was nave to think that the very political principles and ideals, like freedom of speech, that he held dear were also shared by the whole DAP.
“There was a key party member who set up the Rocket Caf in Petaling Jaya and this was done without the council approval.
“When other members raised this, it was pushed under the rug and no action was taken,” he said in an interview.
Tunku Aziz pointed out that this was happening in Selangor where the DAP was the leading member of the ruling coalition.
He claimed that many of the party leaders did not realise the importance of local councils although it was the main point of contact between the people and the government.
“In this case, the DAP is part of the government and if the people have a bad impression, then it is a reflection on themselves.”
Tunku Aziz also cited another case of abuse where another “key leader” prevented council enforcement officers from taking action against illegal hawkers.
“He protected the hawkers just because they are DAP supporters. That is wrong and unethical. I raised this case (in the CEC) but I could see that they were not comfortable with it. They must realise ethical issues are important. Integrity issues are important.”
He said the DAP and PKR had done a fairly decent job of running Selangor and Penang but he was worried about the consequences of their unethical transgressions.
He cited the letter by Damansara Utama DAP assemblyman Dr Cheah Wing Yin to the party complaining about a wide range of shortcomings in the Selangor administration as “the tip of the problems”.
“I agree that one or two of the DAP executive councillors need to be closely watched. Can these people be trusted with bigger responsibility if this is how the DAP and its Pakatan Rakyat allies behave?” he asked when questioned if they were ready to administer the country.
On Penang, Tunku Aziz said Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng spent too much time blaming the previous administration for everything but conceded that the state was well managed.
He also questioned Lim’s style of leadership, saying: “To be a good leader, one must be a good listener. Guan Eng needs to listen more.”
Here’s a full version of the Q&A with Tunku Aziz.
Q: So how was last night?
A: I thought it went very well, you know.
Well, of course my telephone didn’t stop ringing for two hours. I had to turn it off because I couldn’t cope with the number of calls coming in and the number of SMSes coming in from all over the place.
Do you know how many calls you had?
> I think quite a few dozen (calls) actually. I don’t know who they were because they were not people I know, because if they were then I would know. The name would appear on the screen. I believe people from the media, I would say. I took just one, someone I knew from Sin Chew. But even then I said, nothing really to say tonight after what I said on TV.
Were there any calls from the DAP party leaders?
> None. There were none. Messages came from party members. All saying that they respected my decision and they were sorry I’d decided to call it quits.
Did you inform the DAP leaders before the thing was broadcast that you’re going to quit?
Well, several days ago, I think soon after Bersih, I had mentioned in my email to the secretary-general that in view of what they said was the sentiment on the ground against me. I said I would resign from the CEC. And after a suitable, decent interval, I would resign from the party if it would restore the harmony within DAP. They did not respond to this, but Kit Siang made two visits to my house basically to say that he hoped very much that it wouldn’t come to that.
Was this a friendly visit? Not in official capacity?
> No! You see, Kit Siang and I get on extremely well together, We are friends. So the visit was a friendly visit, it was just between two friends. The last visit was somewhere last week. But they knew there was going to be this broadcast because I asked the Headquarters’ Chief of Staff to let all the CEC members know that I was going to be on this programme. I suppose they must have had some inkling.
No one called you saying Tunku, please don’t go on air?
> Kit Siang said that he would leave it to my wisdom, but he didn’t say not to go on air, but you know He knew that I would use my wisdom. Their main fear was that this might be exploited.
I wanted it to be a dignified exit, and to be fair. Because I am not against the party, I am not against the party at all. I am just against the attitude adopted by the secretary-general. Particularly when he first got in touch with me, it was to accuse me of going against the party position. Which was to support Bersih.
I at no time had withdrawn my support for Bersih. I have always supported Bersih for what Bersih stands for. I’ve spoken for free and fair elections on several occasions. Not as vice-chairman of DAP but in my other capacities. So to say that Tunku is opposed to Bersih is something that the party and Pakatan Rakyat had been working hard to promote, is a little disingenuous.
And somehow it smacks of a reluctance or inability to see the difference between supporting free and fair election activity, and not supporting these activities if they were illegal. There is that distinction which I think they purposely ignored, because Lim Guan Eng, in his rebuke, was rebuking me for something I hadn’t done.
Would you say that your relationship with Guan Eng was not very cordial even before this? You were invited in by the father, but do you think the son was ever really keen on you?
> My relationship with Guan Eng before this was cordial, but a bit ambivalent. Both (Kit Siang and Guan Eng) invited me, and because of my great respect for Kit Siang I did not hesitate in the least because if felt that this would give me an opportunity to be in a party without being a politician, and was an opportunity to continue with my work in promoting integrity, both in the government and corporate sector.
In other words, the opportunity to be engaged in fighting corruption, which was my main mission in life. Because no other party actually had come out openly to say, you know, we will fight corruption but DAP has maintained its position insistently. It was very attractive.
This was your maiden venture into politics?
> Absolutely.
Are you bitter about it, four years later having to resign from the party?
> I think I was a little naive in thinking that the ideals that I had would be in fact the ideals that DAP actually practised. I don’t know about the other political parties but I expect they would be much the same.
As a man who has always been fighting against things that are unethical, would you say DAP as a party was ethical after four years of being inside?
> I wouldn’t say so. Well, for example… one of the key party members set up the Rocket Caf in Petaling Jaya, and this was done without Council approval being obtained. And when other members of the party raised this, it was just pushed under the rug and no action was taken. To me, this is not on.
Because Pakatan Rakyat is the government of Selangor and DAP controls in terms of its numbers the local councils within Selangor, PJ, and what have you.
Although people say “oh, it is a small matter”, to me, it is an important fundamental issue because you have broken your own by-laws. And if you are cavalier in your attitude to the law that you have made then, to me, it shows very sad state of affairs and bad judgment.
Did you raise the issue?
> I raised the issue, but you could see that it was not something they were comfortable with. And if you see recently Dr Cheah’s reports in The Star (Damansara Utama assemblyman Dr Cheah Wing Yin), this is the same kind of issue.
There are good people within DAP who want to see that we do things in an ethical manner, but there are others who you know will just go ahead in breaking their own rules. If you do this, sooner or later people are going to ask, can these people really be trusted with a bigger job?
What other things worry you in the Selangor administration?
> I think that while on the whole they have managed the state well we have to give them credit for that one or two of their exco members probably need to be put under closer scrutiny. I think what Dr Cheah has highlighted is probably the tip of the problems.
And your pronouncement on Penang? Is it much better than Selangor?
> I think Penang is well-run. I’ll say it’s well-run, but there are things which need to be improved upon. You see, the thing that has worried a lot of people is the fact that several years into the administration of Penang, there is a great tendency to keep blaming the past administration. It is almost like a case of a bad workman blaming his tools.
You are very well-known as a man of integrity, so I have to ask this question. Bersih was not the only problem you had with party leadership, was it? Were there other things?
> No. I mean, you know, the open sort of disagreement subsequently was Bersih. But there are obviously, in any sort of organisation or party, things that you are not entirely happy with but they’re not terribly significant to upset you to the extent that you would even think of withdrawing yourself.
But for me, ethical issues are important. Integrity issues are important. That’s perhaps why I am naive, because I believe that integrity you either have it or you don’t. You can’t say, you know, yes, this is 70 percent …
There is no glass half-full for integrity.
> You either have it or you don’t have it. For example, when the council decides to take action against illegal hawkers, one of our key figures would intervene to say don’t touch these people; don’t take any action because they are party supporters. To me, this is an act that is tantamount to interfering, serious interference in the operating system and the administration of local government.
Many of our people forget that local government is where the public first experiences dealing with the government. Many of them will never have to deal with Putrajaya or any of the ministries, but for the average person like you or me living in particular district or area, it’s all local government.
Would Tunku Aziz a Malay have been received in the same manner if he were Malaysian-Chinese? Your invitation, the position in which you leave Was any of it a racial move?
> I don’t think so. Except, I’m dealing with someone who does not seem to be able to see the whole picture and assist it in giving his slant to what is essentially a very straightforward matter.
I support Bersih but I do not support breaking the law. As simple as that. But you check that rebuke of me and there’s no mention that I was not against Bersih but merely against sitting at Dataran Merdeka because the court had ordered the participants not to breach it and the owner of the land.
They argued, it’s not city council. But to me, whoever is in charge of that place, they have responsibility. If they say “sorry, not here” (then that’s that). It’s things like that which really upset me.
So what next?
> Well, I have given very careful consideration to the what’. The action I have taken was not something that was done in the heat of moment, I consulted my immediate family and close friends, and all have said the same thing.
The party is obviously not ready to accommodate someone like me. I’m known for my plain speaking and I cannot just suppress my comments or feelings when things are done in a way that, to me, aren’t ethical.
So, the future. You know when I joined the party, I had no ambition to be anything but a member, and try to see if I could bring to bear on the party as a whole some of the values grounded in integrity and ethics, good governance, the fight against corruption, et cetera.
I never asked to be made vice chairman, then when they said they were going to make me that, I said fine. I never begged to be appointed as senator because I have never been a supplicant. I have never asked the government for any help or assistance, although you know as a Bumi I could have done that.
But I thought that because I was and still continue to be against the new economic policy. Particularly when I saw that they were departing from the original purpose. So to me, I never asked, I would never ask,
I would consider that as below my dignity. But when my term was ending, the Dewan mentioned that my term would be up and they sent a letter to that effect to the Penang government.
At that point, I sent Guan Eng a little note from my iPhone that this was coming up and if you are thinking of extending my term, I am available to serve and that was all.
He said yes, okay, and then he very kindly said to me at one of our recent CEC meetings that he would certainly put my name up and in fact he was going to announce it at the CEC but was reminded that he couldn’t, shouldn’t do it, because the matter had to go back to DAP Penang and then to the state government.
Then after the statement on Bersih, Kit Siang saw me and said it was unfortunate with the senatorship coming up that this had come about.
He said it may be a bit difficult for them to nominate me again. And I said to him, if this is going to cause any problem for the party, please do not put my name up, because not having my term renewed is really no skin off my nose.
I never asked for it in the first place and I do not want my being re-nominated to be the cause of disharmony within the party. So they did exactly what I told them to do not put my name up.
Somehow I don’t think they would have put your name up anyway.
> Oh, absolutely. Am sure they welcomed it. But I wanted my position to be entirely clear. I am not pushing myself forward. The party, as I also said to them, no man is bigger than the party. If in your opinion I have transgressed, I would expect you to take action. I encourage that. Put me through the disciplinary procedure.
When did you tell them this? Immediately after getting the rebuke or before that?
> After getting the rebuke. He (Guan Eng) made the point that I had done this, that, and the other. If they’re saying that I’ve done something so serious that it requires disciplinary action, I said go ahead and do it because that’s what leadership is all about.
Leadership is about tackling unpleasant tasks and not evading them. I told Guan Eng, I would think a lot more of you if you took appropriate action. Going to be difficult but this is your duty in the interest of the party.
What did he say?
> Absolutely nothing, No reaction. No reaction to me suggesting that I want to resign from the CEC and after a decent interval, as I did not want the whole thing to be seen as a rushed job, I would leave the party.
Here’s a very unfair question. Is Guan Eng disappointment as a leader? You obviously have great admiration for his father.
> The son is a different kettle of fish. I don’t want to get personal. He is a good leader, apart from other qualities. Leaders must be good listeners, this is from my observation.
So is he a good listener?
> By my reckoning, he should learn to listen more and give everybody a chance to be heard.
You have to first learn to be, I think, a little modest because it’s not for you to say how well you’re doing or how well you’ve done for Penang. Let the people of Penang decide. That is really the true measure of your achievement. When people say “well done Guan Eng”. But for you to scream your head off about CAT (a DAP slogan standing for “competency, accountability, and transparency”)? What is CAT? Cat is a slogan. But to him no. But when it comes to 1Malaysia, 1Malaysia is just a slogan. But CAT is not.
If all this didn’t happen, would you contest as candidate if you were asked?
> Yes.
Did anyone speak to you about that?
> No.
No one spoke to you about this?
> No one, although I did say to Guan Eng, Kit Siang, if they needed, if they were short of any candidates and felt I could be of any use, I was ready. You know, even at my age, if the party felt they needed my services, I am ready to serve.
Is this your last venture into politics?
> Absolutely, no question there. But what really made me finally decide to leave although I was thinking very seriously about what I should do was last Sunday at about 8.43AM, I had a phone call from Guan Eng. I don’t know whether to describe it as an act of contrition or whether he felt that I needed to be compensated for the loss of the Senate seat.
He offered me – now this really staggered my imagination offered me a senior fellowship at the Penang Institute, dangling travel as one of the attractions… And I said I’d have to think about it. This was followed up yesterday, after I had made up my mind.
His aide rang me at lunchtime yesterday to repeat his boss’s offer, but added that this time there would be a stipend of RM50,000 a year, along with other things. I regard this offer as totally insulting.
Totally totally insulting, and I could only conclude that it had come from someone who had no sense and not even a modicum of respect. Did he think I was that kind of person? What an insult. You rebuked me for the wrong reason, you removed my senate position, and then you offered a fellowship at Penang Institute. This man has gone out of his senses.
This was the clincher as far as I was concerned. This man has no sense of decency, in other words.
He ignored your emails, he insulted you… And I guess as a man of ethics and integrity, this Penang Institute sounded like a bribe.
> It’s a bribe, it’s a salve for my hurt pride. To me, as a senior person… I’m trying to find an English word for this behaviour, and I cant. The only word is a Malay word, and it’s “biadap”. I mean, that’s what really made me decide I will not work with this man. I am prepared to be rebuked, but the reason for the rebuke must be made very clear, you know.
Do you think that he was under pressure from Anwar Ibrahim or someone else to do all this?
> I wouldn’t go so far as to say that, but Kit Siang did say that there’s a lot of pressure from Pakatan Rakyat. And at that point I said to him, I did not join Pakatan Rakyat. As far as I am concerned, I couldn’t care less. I joined DAP. I am a DAP man. I am a DAP member. The fact that we are part of the coalition is a different matter, but I’ve not sold my soul to the party, and certainly not to Pakatan Rakyat.
You seemed reluctant to talk about Anwar the other night. Any particular reason?
> I wanted to keep it on a dignified level. I made it very plain at the start that I’d have to be very careful about what I said. I want to be fair and Guan Eng isn’t here to defend the party or defend himself. But Anwar, I have never been an admirer of Anwar. I don’t even know him.
Which is why it is surprising. Following your appointment was the height of DAP PKR coalition.
> That’s right, they’d just won elections. The great honeymoon period.
Is Guan Eng under pressure from Anwar because they are close to winning Putrajaya?
> I can’t really be 100% certain, but one never knows. For them, it’s political expediency. It doesn’t matter because I don’t think they’d give two hoots about anything or anybody who stands in their way. Asking too questions, raising issues, and so on.
So were the coalition in support of Bersih? Had they made it known?
> I think they had, all the top boys. All the three parties, it was generally accepted that we were behind it. Sending out messages on Twitter and this and that, getting people to come.
I support Bersih objectives, as long as they don’t cross the police line. My instinct told me that this was not going to end peacefully, from experience, stories, reports you have read from other parts of the world. All demonstrations particularly street demos start off peacefully but the average rate of success where they end peacefully is very small.
So how do you feel?
> I feel liberated from the tyranny of demagogy. It’s a blessed relief, I received so many wonderful messages of encouragement from people like Koh Tsu Koon, the president of the Senate, many others.
Nine people came to see me, we sat down and had a drink together. These people they have tried to, well, transform DAP at their level. They find there is so much cronyism, so many cliques. You don’t belong to the leadership clique, you’re out, You make an unfavourable comment, you’re out. I suppose no party is free from all this.
Chow (Chow Kon Yeow), head of DAP Penang, sent message saying I respect your decision. He should have been Chief Minister yet they parachuted Guan Eng in. He’s CM, Sec-Gen, MP
So do you think the coalition can make it to Putrajaya?
> At the moment I think this is as close as they will ever get because the so-called coalition is very fragile as they have not been able to resolve some very fundamental questions before going to elections that need to be addressed.
For example, the Muslim state. I do not know how they are going to resolve this because PAS will not abandon it. It is the central pillar of their religious and political beliefs. It’s like asking someone to abandon their principles.
Is this what you observed?
> This is what I saw from the inside. DAP, for example, is not happy with the current ambivalent attitude from PAS. One day they say yes, we won’t be a Muslim state, the next day say they will be. For the sake of political expediency they need to show they are united but that unity is not grounded in any kind of deep foundation.
It doesn’t take a lot, you can see, for Karpal (Karpal Singh, DAP national chairman) to show his displeasure. How can you go into battle when your strategy is compromised by different ideologies?
What about the recent reforms made by the current government?
> I see the whole thing not as a product that you can pick up off the shelf of a supermarket. This whole thing is the government trying to respond to the needs of the people. I see this as series of processes.
This is why I said they may not be perfect, a lot of that is still a work in progress, but a process needs a little time. We have waited for so long. Under the previous administrations, we articulated these concerns of ours but they were totally ignored. So for the first time we have a government who for reasons of its own is listening. Again, maybe for political expediency.
But as far as the average person on the street is concerned, that is not his worry. His worry is that some of the things which he feels are not in place are not being looked at. So while I don’t agree with the government all the time, my disagreement has to do with policies, policy issues.
I have never made it a habit to condemn everything someone does, whether it’s government or opposition or individuals because I believe that it’s not all bad. By the same token, not everything is good. We want the government to take into account the feelings of the people, what it is the people want.
This is why I support Bersih for free and fair elections. They have raised awareness. But they have done enough now, the government is listening. Give the government a chance to put right what we see as inadequacies within the electoral system, for example.
I am naive and sometimes very stupid, but I believe I’m doing the right thing.
So what do you think of the rumours that you’ve been bought?
> Tunku Aziz has been paid? The moment I expressed my view on Bersih getting involved in breaking the law, people did not stop to think about what I was against. They seem to believe that I was opposed to Bersih. And it didn’t help when my own party’s rebuke attributed my opposition in the wrong manner. To me it was a little dishonest because I feel I was rebuked for the wrong reason. I would take any rebuke like a man but there must be fairness, justice and equity. Things I have always fought for and stood for.
Some have said I was bought over by Umno. Even yesterday I received a lot of messages asking me to confirm whether I was leaving DAP to join Umno because the rumour mill had started. Of course I denied it and explained that I am not a frog. In any case, I haven’t seen colour of their money. The rumour is just a rumour that I left to join Umno, was paid millions by MCA, I am a Trojan horse, I am a mole.
I have all along been undermining DAP as a Trojan horse, but the point is it’s not as if I asked to join to be a mole or Trojan horse. I was invited to join and I tell you that I do not know anyone in Umno. Not one Umno official. I do not know any one of them.
So what is next for you?
> Whatever I do, I want to serve our country, and I think I have had the benefit of a lot of exposure, both in business as well as international organisations like the United Nations, the Commonwealth Secretariat. If the government or anyone thinks I could be useful, I’m happy to do that for our country.
But absolutely no politics. As they say, once bitten twice shy. But in this case once bitten, forever shy. Sekali cukup la.
Commentator Comments :
…
written by crp, May 16, 2012 12:06:12
Everybody have their view and understanding of certain issues. But when in one family you dont have father and everyone plays a father role than its difficult to run the house hold. same goes here when Pakatan dont have understanding and agrrement on important issues how are they planning to run the goverment. Good leader must be a good listener and cares for everyone inrespect of race or relligion . . .
[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]
Tunku should lead 3rd Force. Or run as an independent candidate against Mr.Biadap parachute nepotist.
ARTICLE 13
Tunku Aziz says Penang Institute ‘utterly mad’ – By Shannon Teoh – May 18, 2012
Tunku Aziz insists he is “not going to be a part of it.”
KUALA LUMPUR, May 18 — Tunku Aziz Tunku Ibrahim has dismissed the Penang Institute’s continued offer of a senior fellowship, saying the think tank “must be utterly mad.”
The state-funded institute told a press conference earlier today the offer was still on the table for the former DAP vice-chairman despite his resignation from the party on Monday.
“They must be utterly mad. Do they really think they can tell people it is not a DAP think tank?” the 78-year-old told The Malaysian Insider.
Penang Institute executive director Datuk Woo Wing Thye was quoted by The Star as saying that he would be “very happy if he accepts it” and the offer was not tied to whether the founding president of Transparency International Malaysia was a party member. “We realised that we had the possibility of bringing to Penang Institute a well-respected public intellectual with an international reputation,” Woo said.
But Tunku Aziz said that “they can want anybody or anything but I’m not going to be a part of it.”
“They can forget it,” he said over the phone before hanging up.
Tunku Aziz, who was the party’s most senior Malay leader, quit DAP on national television after being publicly rebuked by secretary-general Lim Guan Eng for not supporting the April 28 Bersih rally, which the former called “an illegal street protest.”
He then openly criticised DAP, singling out Lim for being “biadap (uncouth)” and untrustworthy.
The ex-Bank Negara advisor told The Star that Lim had called him on Sunday offering him a senior fellowship in Penang Institute and “[dangled] travel as an attraction” after his tenure as senator was not renewed.
“Zairil Khir Johari (Lim’s political secretary) called and repeated the offer and stated there was a stipend of RM50,000 to go with it.
“Totally totally insulting, and I could only conclude that it had come from someone who had no sense and not even a modicum of respect,” he had said.
But DAP and the Penang Institute have insisted that the job offer was “genuine” and that it had nothing to do with Tunku Aziz leaving the party or to compensate the loss of his senatorship.
DAP has tried to reach out to Malays, who make up 60 per cent of the 12-million strong electorate, by recruiting leaders such as Tunku Aziz.
But he has conceded his failure to win over the community to the Chinese-dominated party that has been accused by Umno of being anti-Malay and anti-Islam.
ARTICLE 14
Justice For LGBTs, Justice For Malaysia – 26 April 2012 | Judging the Judges | Posted by Pang Khee Teik
Why is justice so far from those who really need it?
“Today I withhold this keris. But if one day I can’t tolerate anymore, I will use the keris against the enemy of this land!”
– Speaker at Anti-LGBT Rally, 12 Apr 2012
When the speaker at the Anti-LGBT rally talked about killing whoever he imagined is “the enemy of this land”, and by enemy he implied anyone who advocates for the human rights of LGBTs, the authorities looked the other way. But when Seksualiti Merdeka appealed for understanding, compassion and equality, it was deemed a threat to the national security and was banned by the police.
Have we gotten so used to threats that we are now threatened by compassion? Or could it be that we can no longer tell the difference between those making threats and those upholding the law? Look at what is happening at Dataran Merdeka this week. By brute force, the authorities have attempted to subdue those who dare to question their authority. If that fails, they will try to snuff out our hope for change by applying administrative terrorism.
It’s not just the police and the DBKL. I’m afraid the courts are no better. Seksualiti Merdeka’s judicial review of the ban was thrown out by a judge who insisted that the police’s power cannot be reviewed, effectively allowing the police a caveat to abuse its power unchallenged.
Last week, a teenager was charged for assaulting a Mak Nyah with a metal rod. He was fined a mere RM400. Meanwhile, when Mak Nyahs around the country are arrested under Syariah offences for expressing themselves and not hurting anybody, they are fined RM1000 each and sent for counselling. We try to rehabilitate these Mak Nyahs for being too gentle, but these men who are so insecure about their masculinity they need to prove it through violence, we let them out to play after a smack on the hand.
So, at the forum titled “Homosexuality: A right or a crime?” at International Islamic University Malaysia two weeks ago, when the question was posed by an audience, “Aren’t the laws we already have enough to protect the LGBTs? We have laws for murder, for physical assault, for wrongful termination at work, etc. Are they not enough?” I can say, the answer is no.
In this article, I am less interested in what JMM said than in how they get away with what they say. I am interested in how the government of the day, which is supposed to be neutral, takes the side of the bullies against the bullied.
With bullies running the country, many LGBTs find themselves hiding further and further beyond the margins of the legal, beyond the reach of the laws that deem them unfit for society. Making a person think he deserves no justice is NO different from denying him justice. And that is how many LGBTs are denied one of the most fundamental rights of being human: the right to justice.
THE BULLY’S CHARTER
Malaysians don’t seem to understand that a just system is one in which minorities are protected from the majority, not the other way round. The most important minority is the minority of one. And if the law protects this minority against the tyranny of the majority, then it protects everyone. All of us!
Unfortunately, that is not the case in Malaysia. Not only does Malaysian justice not care about inequality, it seems to thrive on it. Some laws in Malaysia are effectively a bully’s charter.
Case in point: there is no law against homosexuality in Malaysia yet many believe it is a crime to be gay and lesbian. People may cite penal code “377a” and “377b”. But according to the wording of the statute, the crime is committed when ANYONE introduces his penis into a mouth or anus. Yes, ANYONE. I’m sorry to break it to you heteros: it is a crime for a husband to receive blowjobs from a wife too. You like this law so much, how about we knock down all your bedroom doors now and check?
Clearly both heterosexual and homosexual oral and anal sex are illegal but where the public and the state are concerned, it is a law against homosexuality. This is because “377” only targets men who have sex with men. If that is not discriminatory, then I don’t know what is.
That’s why many LGBTs don’t bother to seek redress to injustice they suffered. They are simply too disempowered by the perceived illegality of their very existence. They are too busy hiding from an imaginary law.
“YOU ARE A DEVIL!”
I know of a girl in Sabah whose mom found out she was in love with another girl. Her mom hit her repeatedly till she was bleeding. She was then locked up in the house for four months. The only times she was let out of the house was when she was sent for counselling during which she was told, “You are a devil. You are a devil.” There are many other girls like her in Malaysia locked up by parents because they fell in love.
I know of a teenaged guy from Penang who was kicked out from the home when his parents cannot accept that he wants to be a man, not the girl he was born as. For being born that way, many transgender folks are kicked out from homes by the very people who gave birth to them that way. Where are the laws to protect children from their own parents? How will they even know what the laws are?
Even those old enough to know the laws can’t do anything about it. I know of a lecturer from Petaling Jaya whose friend threatened to expose his sexual orientation to the university unless the friend was rewarded to keep quiet. He paid up. He had been discreet about his sexuality because he feared such a situation. But his secret also made him vulnerable. Many gay employees and bosses, professionals and civil servants, go to work daily afraid of being exposed. After years of alienation, they may have found comfort in a relationship. Yet this relationship threatens to ruin them. So many give in to blackmailers. How can they seek justice without risking exposure?
I know of a Mak Nyah from Melaka who was arrested for “cross-dressing” and was kicked by the arresting officers until she fell into a coma. She was persuaded to charge them for assault, but in the end, she changed her mind. She wasn’t sure if anyone could guarantee her safety from further assaults by these officials. Many Mak Nyahs suffer physical, emotional, sexual abuse at the hands of religious officers and police officers. Where are the laws to protect them from being abused by law enforcers?
Many LGBTs are spat at, insulted and punished as if we are worse criminals than the corrupt politicians who rob whole countries dry. Why would we be foolish enough to dream that the country would help us?
Once you are betrayed by your own parents, by your bosses, by your friends, by your own country, you will find it hard to trust anyone again. Once you hear about how LGBTs are beaten senseless by law enforcers, as an LGBT you will find it hard to trust the laws again.
WHERE ARE THE LAWS?
The laws are there. But they’re out of reach.
Living in a country where justice exists – but not for you – is like growing up in a family where love exists – but not for you. For many LGBTs, such countries and such families are part of our reality.
Both conditions form a vicious circle out of which there seems to be no escape. In order to deserve love, we pretend to be someone else. In order to maintain the pretence, we keep quiet in the face of injustice. By pretending and keeping quiet, we find ourselves at the mercy of those who take advantage of us. Thus more pretending, more keeping quiet, more being taken advantage of.
When I mentioned at the Islamic University forum how the justice system have failed LGBTs, I was offered this reply by a panellist: “Do we not treat criminals different from non-criminals?”
Like many Malaysians, she accepts unquestioningly that being an LGBT is a crime. She called it an immorality but never explained how it is immoral. Throwing children out from homes, blackmailing and beating up mak nyahs are just different ways of treating these “criminals”. Never mind that nobody should be called a criminal until proven guilty. Never mind that throwing minors out of homes, blackmailing, and physical assault are crimes in themselves. Being an LGBT must be a crime so great that others are justified in perpetrating further crimes upon us.
No wonder some Malaysians think it is okay to make violent threats and get away with it. Because they can.
DIFFERENT LANGUAGES
At the end of that forum that night, it occurred to me that while both sides of the debate referred to the laws this and the laws that, we actually meant completely different things. When we referred to “the laws”, we were thinking of an instrument that protects people. When some people refer to “the laws”, they were thinking of an instrument that punishes people.
This disparity reveals the opposing philosophies: people as innocent until proven guilty vs people as inherently guilty, in need of control and guidance from the state. One’s justice is fairness, equality, protection of rights. Another’s justice is vengeance, a show of might, reminding the minorities to toe the line.
Our words sound the same but they mean such different things that we are practically speaking different languages from each other. We might as well be talking to ourselves. Perhaps we are, and that’s the problem.
We need to introduce Malaysians to a radical concept: There is more than one definition to a word. More than one side to a story. More than one way to run a country.
More radical still: The state’s job is to facilitate as neutral as possible a space in which all definitions, all sides and all the different ways can dialogue.
That is why we need to get rid of discriminatory laws. We also need to send a stronger message to those who use violence, who threaten with violence, who endorse violence, that it is never okay. Fines and prison time won’t change them. But education may. Too many Malaysians display shocking ignorance about the way the universe and the human body work. That they are in the parliament is even more depressing. They are walking proof that what we need is a revolution in education.
If we just clean one thing at a time, we are practically doing janitorial work. We also have to reform the very fundamental ways we understand governance, democracy, justice. Without a paradigm shift, we are just cleaning up this paradigm’s shit.
FIGHTING FOR THE SAME
Whether it is the indigenous peoples in their ancestral lands or the Occupy Dataran folks at Dataran Merdeka or the students at their universities, the increasing scuffles with the authorities reveal today that the struggle for justice is not peculiar just to LGBTs. They are reflections of how far justice is from those who truly need it.
We are stuck with pleading for justice from the very ones who have perverted justice. It is like the grass begging for mercy from the grass cutter. No thanks.
We need to believe that we are first the people, REGARDLESS of sexual orientation and gender identity. We need to take back the act of defining words that are important to us. We need to tell our stories. We need to stake claim to all the public spaces till they belong to everyone again.
I applaud everyday Malaysians who tirelessly champion for the changes we need in this country. Indigenous peoples, refugees, students, the poor, minorities, LGBTs, women, political dissidents, religion believers, voters, we are fighting for the same: to be seen as human first. What you believe makes you human and what I believe makes me human are just as important.
The real enemy of this land is inequality. There is no more important struggle today than the struggle for equality. It is by recognising we are all equal before the law that the democracy for which we fight becomes truly meaningful.
[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]
Again march, gather, complain, but no lawsuits against the people who refuse to amend laws. A single aye or nay from all 222 MPs will determine who is liable to be included in that lawsuit that can be filed at the UN, NAM, International Criminal Court or even applications for degrees of the MPs who went nay to changing of laws to legalise and protect LGBTs. If Pang is serious, he will carry out the above plan instead of floundering around marches. Remove the degrees, damn the anti-LGBT MPs. Targetting the private individuals threatening murder is the last step, the first only effective step is lawsuits against the anti-LGBT MPs and the removal of all degrees from such persons EVEN within the entire legal profession of 14,000+ lawyers and the ‘Law Minister’ of the day.
ARTICLE 15
Stop Homophobia and Demonisation of LGBTs – 17 May 2012 | Let’s Talk About Sex | Posted by Hafidz Baharom
May 17 is the International Day Against Homophobia, and as such I feel compelled to write something that is being viewed as most of Malaysia with a stigma that has reached truly frightening proportions. First and foremost, let us review some facts.
Homosexuality is not a mental disorder, as one Dr Marshitah, Deputy Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department, can so casually suggest without any reference from the Malaysian Psychiatric Association. Being gay or lesbian has not been seen as a mental disorder since 1979 and, in fact, her view point is not even recognised by the World Health Organization (WHO).
Similarly, there is no just cause, religious or civil, to suggest that transgender people should be beaten up, as what has happened in Kuantan in the months passed, with no further word from the police up till now on what actions will be taken against them.
Instead of providing education that homosexuality is a normal occurrence, having been recorded in hundreds of animal species of avian, mammalian and reptilian descent, we have a government education system, a non-government organization and even religious leaders who still come out and state that homosexuality is something that is unnatural. The evidence is of course to the contrary.
The simple truth is that homosexuality has now become the new boogeyman in Malaysia for purely selfish reasons. It does not affect the work of a doctor, nor does it make any civil servant less or more of a capable leader, as suggested by a certain Parliament member through his ludicrous call to screen future elected leaders for homosexuality. This, of course, is the same leader who decided to brand a certain party a group of pondans for not contesting in a by-election two years ago.
For those in school, homophobia becomes a constant cause of torment and bullying. While most Malaysian teens are capable of shrugging it off and do not bow down to the concept of teenage suicide as we see in America, it is imperative to know that such bullying will have long term scarring on a person’s psyche’.
A person’s sexual orientation nor gender has no effect whatsoever on the way they perform in their selected professions. Homophobia, however, will affect them to the point of a lacking in focus and a burden of shame caused by societal pressure that will result in a decrement to both the individual and those that surround him.
On this particular day, I just implore that we take a moment to read up on what we know about homosexuality before catering to prejudice. Malaysia has always been a land where we have learned to agree to disagree without having to resort to violence and hate speech in such a manner deemed life-threatening.
Malaysians may not agree with homosexuality. They may state so for religious reasons. However, the very same people who speak so loud against homosexuality should take note that somewhere in their family, nuclear or extended, there are gay and lesbian relatives hearing him shame them. It is a fact that you may have an uncle, an aunty, a cousin, a nephew, a niece, a son, a daughter or perhaps even your own grandchildren, who are gay. Would you cause them such emotional damage for something they have no control over?
What the LGBT community is asking for right now is a right to proper education, an acknowledgement of their existence and a right to be protected under the law, something that the transgenders have in the Federal Constitution, but not those of us with differing sexual orientations.
In other words, what we want for ourselves is the right to be recognised as human beings just like everyone else. Would you deny us even that?
[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]
Again harangue or complain, but no lawsuits against the people who refuse to amend laws. Is Hafidz (at least well connected enough to be featured regularly here on Loyar Burok), wealthy enough, and ready to take the below results yielding actions?
A single aye or nay from all 222 MPs will determine who is liable to be included in that lawsuit that can be filed at the UN, NAM, International Criminal Court or even applications for degrees of the MPs who went nay to changing of laws to legalise and protect LGBTs. If Hafidz is serious, he will carry out the above plan (maybe alongside Pang) instead of floundering around marches. Remove the anti-LGBT MP’s degrees, damn the anti-LGBT MPs into unvotability make a massive statement that educational recognition will be denied anti-LGBT racists. The first only effective step is lawsuits against the anti-LGBT MPs and the removal of all degrees from such persons EVEN within the entire legal profession of 14,000+ lawyers and even the ‘Law Minister’ of the day. The international community of billions can crush a petty handful in Malaysia.
ARTICLE 16
The IGP must fall on his sword – THE CORRIDORS OF POWER – Friday, 18 May 2012 Super Admin
As far as Malaysians are concerned, the order to act violently against the Bersih protestors came from Najib’s office. How many, other than those in the Prime Minister’s inner circle, know that Najib actually ordered that there should be no violence and no pre-rally arrests? How many outside Najib’s office know that the IGP admitted to the Prime Minister he had lost control of the police on that day and that it was the result of the rumour regarding three police officers being killed?
THE CORRIDORS OF POWER
Raja Petra Kamarudin
The alarm bells should have gone off in Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak’s office last year when the IGP, Tan Sri Ismail Omar, said that only 1% of the police officers are corrupted (READ BELOW).
30 years ago, Tan Sri Mohamed Amin Osman, the Deputy IGP, told me that if you want to clean up the police force then only 3% of the police would be left. What Tan Sri Amin meant was that 97% are corrupted. And you mean to tell me that things have improved so much since 30 years ago?
Anyway, that is not what I am saying. That is what the Deputy IGP — who later became the Acting IGP when the IGP, Tun Mohammed Hanif Omar, went to London for a year to do law — said 30 years ago.
The point is, no need to tell us how many percent of the police are corrupted. For 30 years we have been playing with percentages. Tell us how you plan to clean up the police force. No one is telling us that.
Put me in charge of the Police Force Commission (PFC) and I will do what China does. China puts a bullet in the heads of corrupt government officers and police personnel. Hudud is a walk in the park by comparison. I prefer China’s Hudud any time.
Now, read the latest Human Rights Watch report below regarding the Bersih 2.0 rally last year. That fiasco can also be ‘credited’ to the IGP. And the manner in how the police handled the Bersih 2.0 rally not only surfaced on the international radar screen and greatly embarrassed Najib’s government, but it was also the reason why many more protestors, especially the non-Malays, turned out for the Bersih 3.0 rally.
In other words, the more brutal the police act towards peaceful demonstrators, the more defiant the people would become and the more politically active they become as well.
When news broke that Bersih is, yet again, going to organise a rally in April, the IGP went running to the Prime Minister to ask him as to what to do. What the hell is going on? The IGP should be having his fingers on the pulse of the nation. He should be the one advising the Prime Minister as to what to do, not asking the Prime Minister what the police should do.
The IGP told the Prime Minister that the police could round up and detain the organisers. Najib almost flipped. “No arrests!” said Najib. “No arrests and no violence. Allow them to hold the rally.”
The IGP then briefed Najib about the secret meetings some of those Bersih ‘masterminds’ were having. According to the mole in Bersih (yes, there is a mole in Bersih) the plan was to ‘duduk bantah’. They planned to occupy Dataran Merdeka and camp there as long as it takes until the government is brought down.
The rally can be allowed, said Najib, but under no circumstances must the marchers be allowed to occupy Dataran Merdeka. Get a court order if necessary to make it illegal to occupy Dataran Merdeka. But avoid violence and no pre-rally arrests. Go by the book, Najib stressed, and avoid a repeat of the Bersih 2.0 fiasco.
Then, on 28th April 2012, all hell broke loose. The police violence in Bersih 3.0 was as bad or worse than in the Bersih 2.0 rally. What happened to the ‘go by the book’ and the ‘absolutely no violence’ instruction from the Prime Minister?
The IGP crawled back to Najib’s office with this tail between his legs and sheepishly told the Prime Minister that he had lost control of the police on that day.
What happened? What made the police go berserk?
It was because of the rumour, the IGP replied. There was a rumour circulating amongst the police that three police personnel had died, killed by the Bersih protestors. Hence the police were outraged and were out for revenge. They no longer could control the police personnel on the ground.
Three days ago, on 15th May, the IGP celebrated his 59th birthday. At 59, the IGP can be asked to retire. And for sure he should not be given an extension of service on contract, even if for just a year. The IGP should just be made to go. Ask him to go now and make him take a few months leave until retirement day.
As far as Malaysians are concerned, the order to act violently against the Bersih protestors came from Najib’s office. How many, other than those in the Prime Minister’s inner circle, know that Najib actually ordered that there should be no violence and no pre-rally arrests? How many outside Najib’s office know that the IGP admitted to the Prime Minister he had lost control of the police on that day and that it was the result of the rumour regarding three police officers being killed?
Even if three police officers had been killed as initially rumoured, that is still no excuse to lose control of the police force. Any IGP who loses control of the police force can no longer stay on as IGP. And if Najib wants to clear his name and show that the order to act violently against the Bersih 3.0 protestors did not come from him, then the IGP must be forced into retirement.
Najib must remember that back in 1998, when Anwar Ibrahim was beaten up by none other than the then IGP, Tan Sri Abdul Rahim Mohd Noor, everyone said it was done on the instructions of Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad. Even I, who did not like Anwar, became a staunch Anwar supporter because of the ‘black eye’ episode. I was so angry with what the police did, which I too believed was done on the instructions of the Prime Minister.
It was made worse when the IGP lied and announced that Anwar was safe when, in fact, he had been beaten up. Until today many people believe that Rahim Noor pleaded guilty and went to jail for two months to save Dr Mahathir. Dr Mahathir’s name has not been cleaned up entirely.
And the same goes with Bersih 3.0. This is going to be Najib’s ‘black eye’. Hence Najib must make the IGP pay for this. If the IGP stays, then most Malaysians will be convinced that the order to act violently against the Bersih 3.0 protestors came from the Prime Minister’s office.
If it did not, and if the IGP really lost control of his police, then he should be made to fall on his sword. There are no two ways about it. Either the IGP goes or Najib is guilty of violence on 28th April 2012. Which is it going to be?
***************************************
IGP: Malaysian police only 1% corrupt
(MSN NEWS) – Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Ismail Omar announced Wednesday that only one per cent of the 120,000-strong Royal Malaysian Police were ‘corrupt or involved in immoral activities’.
Although he said the number was small, Ismail was quoted by Bernama saying that the number could spread like cancer if left unchecked.
The Royal Malaysian Police also claimed that public confidence in the police regarding bribery has increased by around five per cent, according to a survey by the police and the National Key Result Area (NKRA).
Ismail has an ambition to achieve zero per cent corruption in the police force, something he considered as possible given the low numbers reported by the survey.
The police is frequently perceived by members of the Malaysian public as being susceptible to bribery. Users on social networking sites responded to the announcement with skepticism about the one per cent claim made by Ismail.
***************************************
Freedom of Expression, Assembly, and Association
(HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH) – Rights of expression, peaceful public assembly, and association —guaranteed in Malaysia’s Constitution—continued to be violated in 2011. On May 21 Bersih announced a July 9 “Walk for Democracy” to call for reform of the electoral system. In mid-June the police announced that no police permit, required by section 27 of the Police Act, would be issued for the march. Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Ismail Omar threatened that “stern action” would be taken against anyone involved in an “illegal rally.”
Throughout June police mounted repeated shows of force, arresting activists distributing leaflets, wearing yellow Bersih shirts, or coordinating gatherings to promote the rally. On June 29 a plainclothes police unit without a warrant raided Bersih’s secretariat, confiscating Bersih materials and detaining some of those present for questioning; on July 1 the Home Ministry declared Bersih an illegal organization under the Societies Act. On the day before the march police obtained a court order prohibiting 91 rally leaders from entering downtown Kuala Lumpur. Although the thousands who eluded police blockades were peaceful and well-disciplined, but police broke up the rally using baton charges, chemically infused water cannons, and teargas barrages. Nearly 1,700 people were arrested. Journalists and ordinary citizens released photographs and video documenting much of the abuse.
On June 25, police stopped a bus carrying PSM activists to a planned rally, detaining 30 on suspicion of “preparing to wage war against the king.” They were released from pre-trial detention on July 2, but police immediately re-detained six of their leaders under the EO. All 30 were charged under the Societies Act and a section of the ISA outlawing possession of subversive documents. On September 19 the attorney general released them and on October 10, a court affirmed the release as a “discharge not amounting to an acquittal,” which makes them subject to future prosecution. On October 28, six PSM leaders were granted the same discharge.
READ MORE HERE: http://www.hrw.org/world-report-2012/world-report-2012-malaysia
[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]
PM Najib, use that mandate for :
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)
Stop wasting time, or the International Criminal Court and PM Najib’s enemies will have a weapon to use. Grant the above 3 items, and the ‘goodness’ factor could cancel out so many people ready to ter PM Najib apart, well at least for 4 more years.
ARTICLE 17
“We will do something far worst than butt-flexing if Bersih 4.0 happens” – NEWS/COMMENTARIES – Friday, 18 May 2012 Super Admin
(Malaysia Digest) -The controversial group that carried out the butt-flexing exercise in front of Datuk S. Ambiga’s house has threatened to retaliate should the Bersih organizing committee reneged on its promise to not continue with the rally.
The president of Persatuan Veteran Tentera Malaysia (PVTM) Mohd Ali Bahrom pledged a “far worst demonstration should Bersih suddenly do a U-Turn and proceed with Bersih 4.0”.
“We will do something far worst than a butt-cracking exercise,” he told Malaysian Digest.
“We want to keep the peace and will do anything to retain it.”
Mohd Ali who was wearing yellow also urged Pakatan Rakyat to stop using Bersih as their tool in garnering support and momentum.
“PAS, DAP and PKR should not pressure Bersih into another rally, because their intention is not the same with Bersih which is for free and fair elections.”
Mohd Ali said the opposition coalition must accept and respect Ambiga’s decision to not organize Bersih 4.0.
“They wish for another Bersih to be staged, but they must now respect the Bersih top leadership’s decision,” he said.
“After all, what they want from another rally is just to get the momentum going for the general election.”
PAS’ Mohamad Sabu had said one million people would join the next Bersih rally in protest if Putrajaya did not implement immediate electoral reforms.
[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]
Reconsider INACTION to end apartheid Ambiga, or all the butts directed will be well deserved by Ambiga. Watching Ambiga refuse to 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)
;is already worse than butt flexes (at least butt flexing is HEALTHY unlike UNHEALTHY neglect of apartheid. They could graffitti spray artwork butts everywhere in Ambiga’s neighbourhood or turn that neighbourhood into a red light district replete with half naked people having sex on the sidewalks and alleys, AND STILL the above 3 items would eclipse Ambiga’s inaction to end apartheid with Bersih’s mandate. The 3 items are more important than Ambiga and her vegetarianism, and Ambiga does deserve whats happening for not using that Berasih mandate to push for the above 3 items even at this point. Make Ambiga the ‘Butt’ of Malaysia’s inaction, for not ending apartheid despite massive ‘Bersih’ mandates then, Ambiga doesn’t care about the above 3 items anyway but only thinks about her vegetarianism and self glorification and who knows being a straw-woman of the hegelian dialectic.
ARTICLE 18
Reconsider ‘thosai’ plan, says Ambiga – Friday, 18 May 2012 admin-s
(Free Malaysia Today) – The Bersih co-chairperson says such actions infringe on the privacy of an individual and Malaysians must be respectful of private spaces.
Bersih co-chairperson S Ambiga has asked a NGO planning to set up a thosai stall outside Deputy Inspector-General of Police Khalid Abu Bakar’s house to reconsider its decision.
Despite her residence being the target of such incidents, the former Bar Council president said these actions transgressed the law and amounted to being a public nuisance.
“I strongly urge all to refrain from these acts which infringe on the privacy of an individual. I urge those who are proposing to give the thosai to make them and distribute them to charity,” she told FMT.
“Everyone must work towards making Malaysia a better place for all and we must be respectful of private spaces,” she added.
Yesterday, NGO WargaAMAN announced that it would set up the stall outside Khalid’s house in Ampang on Sunday.
WargaAman said it would distribute the thosai for free to the public in an attempt to promote the dish, which had been declared a heritage food.
Khalid, who welcomed the plan, however, suggested that it be held at a nearby field since his house was not a suitable location.
Read more at: http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/category/nation/2012/05/18/reconsider-thosai-plan-says-ambiga/
[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]
The public road and public sidewalk are NOT PRIVATE SPACES. So nothing illegal was done. Shut up and address the below 3 items :
1) Freedom from Apartheid/Fascism (Article 1 Human Rights Charter)
2) Freedom from Religious-Persecution/Religious-Supremacy. (Article 18 Human Rights Charter)
3) Equality for all ethnicities and faiths in all aspects of policy, Law and Constitution. (Surah An Nisa 4:75)
;or hand over that Bersih Mandate to people who will actually address apartheid rather than indulge in limelight and steal energy directed at ending apartheid. Act now to end apartheid, ‘rightful Perak MB Nizar sellout’ Ambiga!
CONTACT UN, CONTACT NAM – END APARTHEID. Prepare that delegation to END APARTHEID. ‘Butt Woman’ or end apartheid!
malaysiandemocracy 