marahfreedom

Archive for the ‘voting methods’ Category

6 Articles on Malaysian Politics : PM Najib asking for votes without using the mandate BN already has (whats the point of voting BN again when BN won’t use the mandate?!?) (a list of votables), RPK’s Article gets an Anwar damning commentator, Farish communicates through smoke and mirror (only good guys can condemn apartheid, the rest play games with words to sound smart), DAP gags – condemned by equally gagged MCA, Taib could have been more by mixed with the wrong crowd – reposted by A@AgreeToDisagree – 21st March 2012

In 1% tricks and traps, Apartheid, Bumiputera Apartheid, critical discourse, democratisation, Malaysia, Nepotism, non-Muslim rights, non-Muslim Rights in a Muslim country, political correctness, Political Fat Cats, politics, racism, social freedoms, voting methods, voting strategy on March 18, 2012 at 4:04 pm

ARTICLE 1

Don’t let me walk alone, Najib tells Indian community – UPDATED @ 07:57:53 PM 18-03-2012 – By Yow Hong Chieh – March 18, 2012

Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak attends the 30th anniversary of the Sri Murugan Centre (SMC) at Sekolah Rendah Jenis Kebangsaan Tamil (SJKT) Vivekananda, Petaling Jaya. — Picture by Choo Choy May

PETALING JAYA, March 18 — Datuk Seri Najib Razak asked the Indian community today to entrust their future to him for another term, citing the success of government programmes meant to improve their lot over the past three years.

This included RM440 million allocated to Tamil schools, RM80 million to houses of worship, more places for high-achieving students in matriculation courses as well as help given to thousands of “stateless” Indians to obtain citizenship since 2009.

The prime minister told a crowd of more than 3,000 at SJK(T) Vivekananda here this afternoon that this proved he had kept his promises to give Indians in Malaysia a “fair deal”, and pledged to keep building on this success in coming years.

“If I have delivered, and the government has delivered, just imagine if we have another five years what we can do for the Indian community and the nation,” he said on the first stop of his one-day tour of Selangor.

Najib said his efforts to help the Indians were sincere and had nothing to do with the coming election as the programmes aimed at uplifting the community began three years, after he took over from Tun Abdullah Badawi.

The government will not fool the Indian community with empty promises meant to gain votes, he added, in an apparent swipe at the Pakatan Rakyat (PR) pact.

“I am not a politician of that nature. I am committed to the future of Malaysia. I will not do anything to compromise the future of the nation,” he said.

Najib stressed, however, that he would only be able to serve the community and the country if they “walked with him”, as he could not continue to help Indians or Malaysians on his own.

“I cannot do this alone. I cannot walk this journey alone I must walk with all of you to achieve what we set out to do…,” he said.

“I can only succeed if you join hands with me. Let us build a better future for the Indian community and for all Malaysians.”

Since taking office, Najib has gone on a charm offensive to win over the Indian vote after the usually staunch Barisan Nasional (BN) supporters forsook the ruling coalition in Election 2008.  The community’s swing to the opposition followed a government crackdown on the November.

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

By not using that mandate BN already has to grant the below 3 items :

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

PM Najib is already making the Indians and minorities walk alone.

So Indian voters, (also Chinese and Orang Asli voters) if PM Najib makes everyone walk alone by disenfranchising them with continuance of Bumiputra Apartheid, all of us voters should return the same kind of disenfranchisement to PM Najib by putting their votes for BN in another party or independent.

It is not the voters that let PM Najib walk alone, it is PM Najib that has left the Indian voters and other minorities walking alone. PM Najib is in fact walking off with that mandate the Indians and minorities gave PM Najib.

Meanwhile Pakatan Rakyat is not much better a choice due to :

Nepotism
Plutocracy
Limitless Terms

750K funerals

The Gambier Threat – Mid 2010 (Amend those laws at once! Also address the APARTHEID.)
http://img825.imageshack.us/img825/1378/gambier1.jpg – unless those forms are filled in and months before through preferred vendors (cronies), DAP will tear down your awning / private staircase / business stall, take away your gas tank / sue your journalist / confiscate squatter traders’ fruits, cheapo sunglasses or crappy ‘cincin batu’ set in tin alloy, or bottled and canned drinks? . . . KOMTAR Lockdown, Beachboy harrassing, gas tank confiscating, Condominium staircase trashing . . .

Penang’s 300 out of 1.5 million EXCO Elections (instead of the promised Local Council Elections), failure to declare MP assets, while pretending to ask the undemocratically voted 0.02% quorum instead of 66.6% quorum EXCOs . . .

See Teo Beng Hock? Or the Chinatown MRT spat? ALL under Pakatan’s watch. Most people detest such behaviour by political parties, regardless of race, and with the nepotism and limitless term issue, with the eyeing of potential of Hudud (something that hopelessly apartheid/lapdog BN doesn’t even want), Pakatan Rakyat is as bad a group as PERKASA this day.

Pick the best :
BN        Apartheid, Nepotism and Corruption
PR        Some Nepotism and Corruption (Pakatan we only use you to punish BN with, Pakatan is equally useless and abusive . . . )
3rd Force    Corruption only? (Best)

Potential 3rd Force Parties are :

KITA, JATI, MCLM (whats left of it, but homophobes could find it a good party that has 20 candidates), PCM, Borneo Front, Konsensus Bebas, HRP/Hindraf and PSM maybe SUPP if SUPP wakes up (much like MCA/MIC and Gerakan will not) and perhaps SAPP and LDP . . .

And any independent candidates as in the list below who can CLEARLY take up the above 3 items (not like mealy mouthed Pakatan who looks preferring to keep the entire term limitless, apartheid system in place to benefit themselves) . . . independent candidates, if not potential wolves/turncoats in the making :

1) Maimun Yusuf http://www.worldbulletin.net/index.php?aType=haberArchive&ArticleID=19162 (Maimun is 89, not particularly educated and quite poor . . . )

2) Koon Yew Yin (the plutocrat Civil Engineer who cannot commit to candidacy though suitable),

3) Ummi Hafilda (PKR hater at odds with PKR VP Azmin who is said to be an UMNO pro-racist type . . . )

4) Auntie Bersih 2.0 the high profile one Ambiga Sreenevasan (who struck down rightful Perak MB Nizar while Bar Council President during BN’s 11th term)

5) Another Auntie Bersih 2.0 Annie Ooi Siew Lan (. . . basking in limelight for being old but not yet running for candidacy, is there a Malay and also Orang Asli Auntie Bersih as well who believes in the 3 items? Step forth and let the equality minded citizens of all races vote . . . )

6) Nobel Laureate Dr. Said Samad (who said he did not want to die useless but can’t find the inclination to run for candidacy at 76 . . . how much better off you are to not commit to offering the people a choice of independent candidate – educated, well loved, comfortably well off, lots of spare time . . . see candidate 1 Pak Samad and think . . .)

7) any plutocrats out there with a conscience ready to fund some 99%ters (especially Malays) to run on the above 3 items .

Of course PM Najib could make things easy for himself and everyone (PM Najib shouldn’t even say PM Najib is walking alone, the mandate is with BN at this very moment, PM Najib is PM! What does PM Najib mean walk alone!?! Does PM Najib think the voters are fools? Or maybe PM Najib doesn’t know BN has the mandate already! All who are second class citizens (more so the Indians who are the worst off among minorities in Malaysia this day) are walking alone because PM Najib will not grant the above 3 items . . .

By granting the above 3 items, in which case we’d be in a 2nd world scenario, no apartheid but with some nepotism and lots of corruption, PM Najib would be walking with all Malaysians instead in a 2nd term as PM for certain. Don’t make the minorities walk alone PM Najib, then accuse the minorities of the same. Podah!

ARTICLE 2

RE: ARE YOU A WEATHERCOCK, PETE?? – Tuesday, 13 March 2012 Super Admin

Dear Yang Mulia Raja Petra Kamarudin,

I know I do not have the right, neither the privilege to ask you to post this reply as the website belongs to you, and it is entirely at your own discretion whether you want to oblige, or just conveniently turn a deaf ear.

What I want to say now is, there appears to be a gross misunderstanding here between you me the gutless, choontoiless Jeffrey Ong.

I was not complaining about the RM20 registration fee, which as you said is no big deal. I can miss a meal or two to be among my fellow Malaysians and you, that is not the problem. The problem is FEAR, you are right. The Rakyat fear the long arms of the Government and the occasional warnings from the mouth of Rais Yatim that they would do this or that, and Hishamuddin Tun Hussein has yet to announce the contents of the Act to replace the ISA. What more, even the IGP could be involved with nefarious activities, as revealed by you. What is there to prevent him from sending some thugs to bash us up, or finish us altogether?

Yang Mulia, you are blessed with good fortune and hailed from Royalty, but not every Malaysian enjoys that status, so FEAR sticks in their mind that once put behind bars, they cannot, like you upon release, take flight with their family members in tow to join you in Manchester, UK, reside there till the tide turns. They are not “freedom fighters”, only mere wage-earners, and if they are imprisoned or in prison, who is going to feed those hungry mouths at home?

Having seen the amounts, hundreds of thousands you had to pay to set up this website, and some more to pay to switch blog from Joomla to WordPress, etc., etc., we are sure you do not depend on the registration fees to keep and maintain it, and operate it for that many years already.

May I venture to say that your past business sense and acumen should also tell you that the more popular your blog is, the more advertisements you will attract to augment your income and help defray administration costs. Therefore, in order to gain popularity and recognition of the reading public, more comments should be encouraged, though those frivolous and crude uncouth ones can be eliminated through screening process of your Admin. The Star newspaper would long have wound up had it not been for the heavy volumes of adverts to become the leading English daily.

Please do not take too hard on yourself and whack me like hell to kingdom come for asking you to just “open up the window and let the sunshine in”. You are at full liberty to deny me or anybody that request for the site belongs to you and only you. I am just suffering from a dearth of home news and only hoping get to feel the pulse of Malaysia by reading the numerous comments by Malaysians. If the comments become scarce, because of registration requirement, people like Jocelyn Tan (pro-Govt) and Jaswant Kaur (pro-Opposition) will not be challenged for their remarks and opinions by both sides of the political divide. So the reports will be lop-sided.

You were right in saying that fear factor has even prevented many voters to exercise their rights, thinking that “the government may find out whom you vote for”, but on the other hand, if you “open up your window” as I pleaded, the voters too could feel the changing groundswell and brave the challenge to vote according to their conscience with the clarion calls from those who comment over the last few days before the GE13. Then, let’s say, because of this move by MT, the Opposition wins the next GE, and who then will try to find out whom you vote for. If any, they will thank the brave voters for making their dream to Putrajaya come true.

The Malaysians have “choontois”, big ones too, I believe, but they cannot afford to risk losing the choontois when the odds are stacked steeply against them.

Finally, spare some thoughts for the senior citizens who possess vast experience and knowledge about our country, but they do not own credit cards to facilitate the payment of registration fee, or they find the registration process too tedious, so we leave them out in the cold, with their mouths full of things they want to share, but unable to do so.

Today, I am happy to note that the number of comments to your bashing me in this exchange have swelled to a respectable high of nearly 30. That’s the way, aha aha, I like it.

Since I got bashed by you and some who commented, I hope you will post this letter after which, I will shut my gap, and forever hold my peace!

“THOSE WHO BRING SUNSHINE INTO THE LIVES OF OTHERS CANNOT KEEP IT FROM THEMSELVES!”

Salam, Minta Ampun, Yang Mulia.

Jeffrey Ong

Commentator Comments :

written by syd, March 16, 2012 16:07:43
I dunno what more evidence we need to convince the voters that Anwar is no good.

a) He stole Sabah from Pairin Kitingan and then totally annihilate the kadazan dusun. This guy does not believe in democracy and he believes in bribing his way to power.
b) Totally useless education minister. he introduce bahasa baku, which is no longer used.
c) Nalla Karuppan stood his ground defending Anwar during sodomy 1, despite facing a death threat and torture under police interrogation. Today, this guy is kicked out by his buddy Anwar out of the window.
d) Based on many allegations, it seems Anwar is a sex addict. Nothing wrong with it if he admits it. But not honest if he don’t.

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

Pakatan might be good for 1 term at most, unless PM Najib grants :

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

ARTICLE 3

‘Youth’ as the middle class that never made it? — Farish A. Noor – March 20, 2012

MARCH 20 — They are rapacious, vicious, merciless, demanding, intolerant, arrogant, boisterous, spoilt and subversive. At the worst of times they bring chaos in their wake, disrupt the settled assumptions of our quotidian lives, block traffic, make noise, break things and are generally inhospitable, unsociable and uncivilised.

No, I am not referring to the Mongol hordes that burned their way across Central Asia in the Middle Ages and laid waste to Baghdad. And no, this is not some invasion of marauding aliens I am talking about. But practically everything that has been said above has been said about the younger generation of our time, an age when being young seems to be a sin and a burden to Youth and to those around them.

If we were to believe some of the alarmist reports and editorials we have read in recent months, one would be led to believe that the best thing to do with the young of the world is to send them to another planet. Worse still is the fact that much of this hysterical nonsense has found its way into the editorial columns of not only respectable newspapers, but also security journals, journals of international relations, policy papers and conference speeches. The DAVOS meeting concluded last year that Youth have become a global problem of sorts, akin to HIV, epidemics, natural disasters and wars. How? And why has this shift happened?

From North America to Western Europe, from North Africa to Southeast Asia, there seems to be a growing unease that so many young people today feel disenfranchised and out of touch with society. Plummeting figures of young voters point to apathy and neglect, which then gets re-interpreted as the symptoms of a younger generation that doesn’t feel or care about its place in society. But if one were unfortunate enough to fall into the category of “Youth” today, one might be able to understand why.

Let’s start with this premise: Youth has nothing to do with age, or being young; but is rather a subject-position and social-position that has more to do with one’s proximity (or distance) from power and the structures of power (both political and economic).

Let us remember that up to the inter-war years of the 20th century there was no such thing as Youth culture: Young people (that is, those in their childhood up to their teens and early 20s) dressed like their parents did and appeared as adults in micro format.

Youth culture was a by-product of the capital-driven mode of development that also led to the creation of the leisure industry and mass consumption, which democratised consumption as never before. Prior to the 20th century there was no such thing as a leisure culture for the working classes.

Theme parks, holiday parks, etc were the invention of modernity and the development of late capitalism which brought with it a culture of mass consumerism that also identified social actors and agents with their respective places in the chain of consumption. It was only from the 1930s that poor people began to go on cheap holidays, etc.

Youth, therefore, is a class construct and it conforms to the market rule that there has to be a constant human surplus of those whose economically-marginalised position makes them pliable to the market and a steady source of cheap labour when needed. Simply put, we all know that, from the age of Adam Smith, this is how the market has worked: It creates both demand and a surplus of workers who keep costs down.

Today, when we look at the state of the economies of countries like the United States, Europe, Japan, China, India, North Africa and Southeast Asia, we see the by-products of successful development at work — it cannot be denied that up to the 1980s at least the booming markets had created a new middle class that never existed in many of these societies; and with that new middle Class came new class values and aspirations too.

Two things, however, have happened that might account for the present state of affairs in the very same societies that now seem to be on the brink of crisis.

The first is that with the failure of the Soviet model and the triumph of capital, there developed the new prevailing wisdom that the market knows best and that the best form of governance was minimalist. This was most aptly demonstrated in the rolling back of the state (and the state’s responsibilities) in the United Kingdom during the time of Margaret Thatcher.

Free market economics began to decide and determine not only the market but also how society viewed itself and regulated itself, as the state began to relinquish its duties to the citizenry. In due course, things such as the health service, social security, law and order, public space and the environment, etc all came under market control and the management of corporations.

The second thing to happen was the modernisation of modes of production and services, with the technological revolution taking off where the industrial revolution stopped. The 1990s witnessed the rise of the internet and all things virtual: online banking, online sales, online consultancies, etc. Now this of course had an adverse impact on old jobs and professions that were labour intensive such as banking, the postal service, etc.

These two factors, however, were and remain irreconcilable: On the one hand, the market demands more space for it to work freely and where enterprise and innovation can bring about reform. But on the other hand, some forms of innovation have incurred a human cost in terms of unemployment in the service sector. But, today, the state is less able to cope with these new social inequalities due to its own relative weakness.

“Youth” happens to be that group of young adults who are caught in between two worlds: On the one hand childhood, without its attendant concerns and responsibilities; and on the other hand adulthood, with its social embeddedness in the political economy.

But what happens in ageing countries like Japan or Western Europe when the older generation demands to be employed longer and longer (for fear of the absence of a social security safety net) and when the young have fewer opportunities to enter the job market?

Perhaps this is what we are really seeing in some parts of the world like North Africa and Southeast Asia as well as Europe today: A growing number of young people who are being made to wait in line while the older generation hold on to their jobs and refuse to vacate the ever-shrinking pool of occupational spaces the state and the economy can provide.

Politicians bemoan the so-called “lazy youth” of today who “don’t want to work” and “have no sense of attachment”, but they forget that if the young do not work it is because many of them are not given the chance to work in the first place. And if they have less of a sense of social attachment, it may well be because there is little investment by and in them by society in the first place. If young people are not being given the chance to integrate and embed themselves in the political economies of their respective countries, how on earth can we expect them to feel a sense of responsibility or belonging?

The problem, it seems, has less to do with Youth “culture” or “identity” or “music” or whatever. As the crisis lingers on, and more and more young people find their social advancement halted, the category of “Youth” extends further.

Today it is apparent that there are millions of people in the 30s who remain unemployed and are at best plugged into an extended education system as they bide their time, hoping for an economic upturn. Being young has less to do with age now, and more to do with one’s relative distance from productive work and an economic stake in society.

This is less a cultural problem or even an age issue, but seems to be a problem related to the management of human resources, or rather the labour surplus that we see all over the world today. And this is why the state cannot continue to retreat from its responsibilities and leave things to the market alone: For if the market were to have its way, then more productivity and profit would be gained through more job cuts, more technological innovations, and less dependency on human labour and services.

So a word of advice to the politicians in the East and West who fear the Youth of today and wish they would simply disappear: The Youth are not your enemies, and if you listen to them long enough you may realise that they are the aspiring middle class that never made it.

Their aspirations are not revolutionary but actually middle class too. They do not wish to destroy the state, but rather want the state to work. It’s not their fault that it doesn’t.

* Dr Farish A. Noor is a Senior Fellow at the Nanyang Technological University in Singapore.

* This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication. The Malaysian Insider does not endorse the view unless specified.

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

Save for the part where copying and adopting of semi-essays in the form of responses, it’s pleasant to have address in such conciseness, but will ‘Fellow’ here PLEASE make clear that stand on and endorsement of :

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

Well there will always political mercenaries, but I will complain to highlight the issue anyway : Academia should not be marred by faux high mindedness and gently applied copying of the painfully earned perspectives of any who ‘never made it’. Some of us were way beyond middle class, but for the sheer stupidity and viciousness of the people around them, sometimes even their own families, as well as APARTHEID accepting society. Use that ‘Fellow’ ethos for some good or be branded a crypto-racist and hypocrite if not take on your ‘superiors’ (fellow propagandists higher up in the hierarchy). There is no engaging people who play all sides while being unable to commit to Articles 1 and 18 of the UNHCR. Don’t let them use you as a pro-apartheid hatchet-man Farish.

ARTICLE 4

Guan Eng Practises False Democracy by  Chai Kim Sen – Tuesday, 20 March 2012 15:43

DAP’s constant use of gag orders shows that DAP practises false democracy and dictatorship when DAP uses internal channels to rid party dissidents as well as to suppress the freedom of speech.

DAP Secretary General Lim Guan Eng always talks about transparency, fairness and justice. However, his instruction to DAP National Chairman Karpal Singh to stop airing his views and grouses is proof that Guan Eng practises autocracy instead as he does not hesitate to rebuke his own party’s chairman.

Guan Eng’s actions in ordering Karpal Singh to keep internal problems within the party are in direct contrast to his earlier promises. He has ignored the process of fairness and transparency, and even his own chairman was not spared from warnings and threats of disciplinary actions. Thus we can see that DAP is putting the cart before the horse when Guan Eng can impose a gag order on Karpal Singh but he himself is free to talk to the media.

Rome was not built in a day

The fact that Karpal Singh had decided to discuss this issue publicly shows that the problem has reached a breaking point. On the other hand, Guan Eng is trying to conceal the internal problems of the party and has turned a blind eye to the DAP Chairman, thus proving that Guan Eng is trying to deceive the people that the issue has been solved internally.

Although DAP has been in control of Penang for only four years, they still party interest above the rakyat. Their old method of resolving any topics and events of interest to the party internally and the selective processing of issues which are favourable to the party can no longer work to convince the people. DAP’s approach to quickly resolve the issue of Ramasamy’s allegations of corruption within the party is an example of selective processing.

The so-called harmony within DAP is non-existent and is only an attempt to deceive the public using political means, but what the rakyat want is an open and transparent way of handling disputes involving political parties and state governments. Thus, Karpal Singh’s allegations on the party’s infighting also involve the public’s right to know, and on this issue, Malaysians will not compromise.

CHAI KIM SEN is MCA Youth Secretary-General

(The views expressed above belongs to the author in its entirety and does not represent the opinion of Malaysian Mirror in any way)

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

I won’t say that MCA with a racial pedigree and history spanning 1000s of years, should not sell themselves short for a bunch of low minded peoples who thrive by threat of ‘race riots’ and corruption than the Articles of the UNHCR, but MCA’s cowardice is unbelievable.

MCA is also gagged PERMANTLY. It is clear that the political system as standing in laws and constitution are economic and social apartheid. Why has MCA not said anything??? One dictator DAP replacing another dictator UMNO, makes no difference, and MCA currently is dictated to (by proxy a vote for MCA is a vote for UMNO) and DAP of course is autocratic (and term limitless and nepotistic as well, don;t miss these terrible Mubarak, Gaddaffi type flaws) as Chai Kim Seng said. (Try watching Dalip Singh on Peter Segal’s Get Smart 2008 – vague resemblance to Chai Kim Seng . . . ). How about MCA throw their own ‘Siegfried’ out of the window to embrace and fight for :

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

Instead of tacit approval of Bumi-Apartheid. MCA people may have benefited off the wealth (which was illegal anyway by any first world standard) so how about the bouncer (MCA) taking over the mistreating boss’s seat (UMNO)? Equality is a given in Articles 1 and 18 of the UNHCR, Bumi-Apartheid is RUBBISH.
ARTICLE 5

Money politics and Taib’s deception – Hornbill Unleashed March 20, 2012 by Awang Abdillah @ 8:12 AM
To maintain his hold on power, Sarawak Chief Minister Taib Mahmud has fine-tuned his ability to control and utilise targeted people including Umno’s top brass.

As Chief Minister of a state within Malaysia, Taib Mahmud has limited powers at his disposal, unlike his counterparts at the federal level who control manifold power buttons.

However, the paradigm of political ignorance prevalent among the rural people in Sarawak, and the massive corruption among the national leaders with the exception of PAS and DAP party stalwarts in Malaysia , provide Taib with the right ingredients to pursue his craze for power.

The politics of deception and money politics thrives very well in such an environment.

Hence, Taib’s success in holding on to power all these years is his ability to control and utilise targeted people through the art of deception and the power of money politics.

That he has willing parties – the ignorant rural poor who live in poverty and are in dire need for hard cash, Bumiputera politicians and cronies who want to have a share of Taib’s riches and the Umno top brass who are mega spenders – makes his job easier.

Their desperation fuels his desire to be one of the most powerful and wealthiest men in Malaysia.

Taib will buy the voters during every election season with illicit cash and dispensing of business “crumbs” to Bumiputera political leaders, henchmen and cronies to ensure they toe the line.

He also buys loyalty when he acts as a banker to the personal needs of the Umno elite.

According to his game plan, over a period of time these people would become very dependent on him and invaribly will have to live with the Taib Dependence Syndrome (TDS) scourge.

This is the modus operandi that enables Taib to buy the hearts and minds of many Malay, Melanau and Dayak voters, leaders and supporters.

He corrupts and tackles Umno politicians with money, making them subservient to his lusts.

Taib’s power over federal leaders

Men who sell their souls, principles and values to a power-crazy man are men without dignity and morals, and are traitors to their own religion, people and country.

Through this successful twinning of deception tactics, Taib has been able, firstly, to ensure that the voters will support all his Pesaka Bumiputera Bersatu (PBB) candidates no matter who or what they are in every state or general election.

Secondly, he has managed to tackle and control the federal leaders and the heads of relevant federal agencies.

Thirdly, he has managed to break up the Dayak parties and lastly, he has gone on to build a pool of henchmen and cronies who will operate and support his power-abusing network system.

With these in place, Taib can now enjoy the wealth and riches of the state with ease. Taib has been on this despicable job for a long time and with limited resistance.

Like I said earlier, unlike a responsible government, power abusers do not care to tackle the real national and state challenges.

They choose to simply ignore them.

However, when these challenges turn against them in the form of major national and state issues, then they are forced to deal with these matters – not to solve them, but to defend their embattled personal position and power.

This is exactly what Umno and PBB leaders have been doing since coming to power in 1981.

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

If Taib had been truly ambitious, Taib’d would avoid sequestering such massive wealth, being modest of lifestyle so that declaration of assets would be possible, being a most humble, well loved CM ever, and even ensure as many Orang Asli were as happy as possible enough to vote him all the time – then on the basis of ‘Native Sovereignty’ demand secession via the UN much like East Timor did. Instead of ‘liberating’ East Malaysia, Taib chose to be UMNO’s stooge and destroy people’s livelihoods or steal land FROM Orang Asli. Instead of OWNING East Malaysia entirely, and who knows declaring self as Raja, Taib is now about to be ousted for being related to BN for apartheid, abusing poor Orang Asli folk, and criminal scorched earth style deforestation. In either case Taib was never a very ambitious type, very money minded though and at bargain prices where giving away Orang Asli land and citizenships is concerned.

To remind, voters in east Malaysia should stick to East Malaysian political parties ONLY and perhaps even vote for Orang Asli only.

2 Articles on China and the Inequitable Wealth-Political Power Distribution Issue : reposted by @AgreeToDisagree – 14th March 2012

In 3rd Force, checks and balances, China, conflict of interest, critical discourse, Democracy, democratisation, Equality, Equitable Distribution, equitable political power distribution, equitable wealth distribution, Ethics, gentrification, if not contrived, intent, lack of focus, Law, misplaced adoration, Nepotism, one level up, Plutocracy, political correctness, Political Fat Cats, politics, self policing, separation of powers, social class distinct programmes, social freedoms, Socialism, specialisation, spirit of the law, subsistence, term limits, vested interest, voting methods, voting strategy, Wealth distribution on March 13, 2012 at 6:35 pm

ARTICLE 1

Children of the Revolution – China’s ‘princelings,’ the offspring of the communist party elite, are embracing the trappings of wealth and privilege—raising uncomfortable questions for their elders. – By JEREMY PAGE

One evening early this year, a red Ferrari pulled up at the U.S. ambassador’s residence in Beijing, and the son of one of China’s top leaders stepped out, dressed in a tuxedo.

Bo Xilai, with his son, at a memorial ceremony held for his father in Beijing, in 2007.

Grandfather, Bo Yibo — Helped lead Mao’s forces to victory, only to be purged in the 1966-76 Cultural Revolution. Subsequently rehabilitated.

Son, Bo Guagua — Graduate student at Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government.

Father, Bo Xilai — Party secretary of Chongqing and Politburo member, likely to rise to the Politburo standing committee in 2012.

Bo Guagua, 23, was expected. He had a dinner appointment with a daughter of the then-ambassador, Jon Huntsman.

The car, though, was a surprise. The driver’s father, Bo Xilai, was in the midst of a controversial campaign to revive the spirit of Mao Zedong through mass renditions of old revolutionary anthems, known as “red singing.” He had ordered students and officials to work stints on farms to reconnect with the countryside. His son, meanwhile, was driving a car worth hundreds of thousands of dollars and as red as the Chinese flag, in a country where the average household income last year was about $3,300.

The episode, related by several people familiar with it, is symptomatic of a challenge facing the Chinese Communist Party as it tries to maintain its legitimacy in an increasingly diverse, well-informed and demanding society. The offspring of party leaders, often called “princelings,” are becoming more conspicuous, through both their expanding business interests and their evident appetite for luxury, at a time when public anger is rising over reports of official corruption and abuse of power.
A Family Affair

A look at China’s leaders, past and present, and their offspring, often known as ‘princelings.’

State-controlled media portray China’s leaders as living by the austere Communist values they publicly espouse. But as scions of the political aristocracy carve out lucrative roles in business and embrace the trappings of wealth, their increasingly high profile is raising uncomfortable questions for a party that justifies its monopoly on power by pointing to its origins as a movement of workers and peasants.

Their visibility has particular resonance as the country approaches a once-a-decade leadership change next year, when several older princelings are expected to take the Communist Party’s top positions. That prospect has led some in Chinese business and political circles to wonder whether the party will be dominated for the next decade by a group of elite families who already control large chunks of the world’s second-biggest economy and wield considerable influence in the military.

“There’s no ambiguity—the trend has become so clear,” said Cheng Li, an expert on Chinese elite politics at the Brookings Institution in Washington. “Princelings were never popular, but now they’ve become so politically powerful, there’s some serious concern about the legitimacy of the ‘Red Nobility.’ The Chinese public is particularly resentful about the princelings’ control of both political power and economic wealth.”

The current leadership includes some princelings, but they are counterbalanced by a rival nonhereditary group that includes President Hu Jintao, also the party chief, and Premier Wen Jiabao. Mr. Hu’s successor, however, is expected to be Xi Jinping, the current vice president, who is the son of a revolutionary hero and would be the first princeling to take the country’s top jobs. Many experts on Chinese politics believe that he has forged an informal alliance with several other princelings who are candidates for promotion.

Among them is the senior Mr. Bo, who is also the son of a revolutionary leader. He often speaks of his close ties to the Xi family, according to two people who regularly meet him. Mr. Xi’s daughter is currently an undergraduate at Harvard, where Mr. Bo’s son is a graduate student at the Kennedy School of Government.

“Princelings were never popular, but now … there’s some serious concern about the legitimacy of the ‘Red Nobility.’ ”

Already in the 25-member Politburo, Bo Xilai is a front-runner for promotion to its top decision-making body, the Standing Committee. He didn’t respond to a request for comment through his office, and his son didn’t respond to requests via email and friends.

The antics of some officials’ children have become a hot topic on the Internet in China, especially among users of Twitter-like micro-blogs, which are harder for Web censors to monitor and block because they move so fast. In September, Internet users revealed that the 15-year-old son of a general was one of two young men who crashed a BMW into another car in Beijing and then beat up its occupants, warning onlookers not to call police.

An uproar ensued, and the general’s son has now been sent to a police correctional facility for a year, state media report.

Top Chinese leaders aren’t supposed to have either inherited wealth or business careers to supplement their modest salaries, thought to be around 140,000 yuan ($22,000) a year for a minister. Their relatives are allowed to conduct business as long as they don’t profit from their political connections. In practice, the origins of the families’ riches are often impossible to trace.

Last year, Chinese learned via the Internet that the son of a former vice president of the country—and the grandson of a former Red Army commander—had purchased a $32.4 million harbor-front mansion in Australia. He applied for a permit to tear down the century-old mansion and to build a new villa, featuring two swimming pools connected by a waterfall. (See related article.)

BO XILAI waves a Chinese flag during a concert with revolutionary songs in Chongqing on June 29.

Many princelings engage in legitimate business, but there is a widespread perception in China that they have an unfair advantage in an economic system that, despite the country’s embrace of capitalism, is still dominated by the state and allows no meaningful public scrutiny of decision making.

The state owns all urban land and strategic industries, as well as banks, which dole out loans overwhelmingly to state-run companies. The big spoils thus go to political insiders who can leverage personal connections and family prestige to secure resources, and then mobilize the same networks to protect them.

The People’s Daily, the party mouthpiece, acknowledged the issue last year, with a poll showing that 91% of respondents believed all rich families in China had political backgrounds. A former Chinese auditor general, Li Jinhua, wrote in an online forum that the wealth of officials’ family members “is what the public is most dissatisfied about.”

One princeling disputes the notion that she and her peers benefit from their “red” backgrounds. “Being from a famous government family doesn’t get me cheaper rent or special bank financing or any government contracts,” Ye Mingzi, a 32-year-old fashion designer and granddaughter of a Red Army founder, said in an email. “In reality,” she said, “the children of major government families get very high scrutiny. Most are very careful to avoid even the appearance of improper favoritism.”

For the first few decades after Mao’s 1949 revolution, the children of Communist chieftains were largely out of sight, growing up in walled compounds and attending elite schools such as the Beijing No. 4 Boys’ High School, where the elder Mr. Bo and several other current leaders studied.

In the 1980s and ’90s, many princelings went abroad for postgraduate studies, then often joined Chinese state companies, government bodies or foreign investment banks. But they mostly maintained a very low profile.

Now, families of China’s leaders send their offspring overseas ever younger, often to top private schools in the U.S., Britain and Switzerland, to make sure they can later enter the best Western universities. Princelings in their 20s, 30s and 40s increasingly take prominent positions in commerce, especially in private equity, which allows them to maximize their profits and also brings them into regular contact with the Chinese and international business elite.

In 2008, Bo Guagua invited Jackie Chan to lecture at Oxford—and sang with him on stage at one point.

Younger princelings are often seen among the models, actors and sports stars who gather at a strip of nightclubs by the Workers’ Stadium in Beijing to show off Ferraris, Lamborghinis and Maseratis. Others have been spotted talking business over cigars and vintage Chinese liquor in exclusive venues such as the Maotai Club, in a historic house near the Forbidden City.

On a recent afternoon at a new polo club on Beijing’s outskirts, opened by a grandson of a former vice premier, Argentine players on imported ponies put on an exhibition match for prospective members.

“We’re bringing polo to the public. Well, not exactly the public,” said one staff member. “That man over there is the son of an army general. That one’s grandfather was mayor of Beijing.” (New anti-nepotism laws should prevent more recurances of this sort of thing . . . )

Princelings also are becoming increasingly visible abroad. Ms. Ye, a fashion designer, was featured in a recent edition of Vogue magazine alongside Wan Baobao, a jewelry designer who is the granddaughter of a former vice premier.

But it is Bo Guagua who stands out among the younger princelings. No other child of a serving Politburo member has ever had such a high profile, both at home and abroad.

His family’s status dates back to Bo Yibo, who helped lead Mao’s forces to victory, only to be purged in the 1966-76 Cultural Revolution. Bo Yibo was eventually rehabilitated, and his son, Bo Xilai, was a rising star in the party by 1987, when Bo Guagua was born.

The boy grew up in a rarefied environment—closeted in guarded compounds, ferried around in chauffeur-driven cars, schooled partly by tutors and partly at the prestigious Jingshan school in Beijing, according to friends.

In 2000, his father, by then mayor of the northeastern city of Dalian, sent his 12-year-old son to a British prep school called Papplewick, which according to its website currently charges £22,425 (about $35,000) a year.

About a year later, the boy became the first person from mainland China to attend Harrow, one of Britain’s most exclusive private schools, which according to its website currently charges £30,930 annually.

In 2006, by which time his father was China’s commerce minister, Mr. Bo went to Oxford University to study philosophy, politics and economics. The current cost of that is about £26,000 a year. His current studies at Harvard’s Kennedy School cost about $70,000 a year.

“’The children of major government families get very high scrutiny,’ says the granddaughter of a Red Army founder.”

A question raised by this prestigious overseas education, worth a total of almost $600,000 at today’s prices, is how it was paid for. Friends said that they didn’t know, though one suggested that Mr. Bo’s mother paid with the earnings of her legal career. Her law firm declined to comment.

Bo Guagua has been quoted in the Chinese media as saying that he won full scholarships from age 16 onward. Harrow, Oxford and the Kennedy School said that they couldn’t comment on an individual student.

The cost of education is a particularly hot topic among members of China’s middle class, many of whom are unhappy with the quality of schooling in China. But only the relatively rich can send their children abroad to study.

For others, it is Bo Guagua’s freewheeling lifestyle that is controversial. Photos of him at Oxford social events—in one case bare-chested, other times in a tuxedo or fancy dress—have been widely circulated online.

In 2008, Mr. Bo helped to organize something called the Silk Road Ball, which included a performance by martial-arts monks from China’s Shaolin temple, according to friends. He also invited Jackie Chan, the Chinese kung fu movie star, to lecture at Oxford, singing with him on stage at one point.

The following year, Mr. Bo was honored in London by a group called the British Chinese Youth Federation as one of “Ten Outstanding Young Chinese Persons.” He was also an adviser to Oxford Emerging Markets, a firm set up by Oxford undergraduates to explore “investment and career prospects in emerging markets,” according to its website.

This year, photos circulated online of Mr. Bo on a holiday in Tibet with another princeling, Chen Xiaodan, a young woman whose father heads the China Development Bank and whose grandfather was a renowned revolutionary. The result was a flurry of gossip, as well as criticism on the Internet of the two for evidently traveling with a police escort. Ms. Chen didn’t respond to requests for comment via email and Facebook.

A Home Fit for a Princeling : A $32.4 million harborside mansion in Sydney

Asked about his son’s apparent romance at a news conference during this year’s parliament meeting, Bo Xilai replied, enigmatically, “I think the business of the third generation—aren’t we talking about democracy now?”

Friends say that the younger Mr. Bo recently considered, but finally decided against, leaving Harvard to work on an Internet start-up called guagua.com. The domain is registered to an address in Beijing. Staff members there declined to reveal anything about the business. “It’s a secret,” said a young man who answered the door.

It is unclear what Mr. Bo will do after graduating and whether he will be able to maintain such a high profile if his father is promoted, according to friends. He said during a speech at Peking University in 2009 that he wanted to “serve the people” in culture and education, according to a Chinese newspaper, Southern Weekend.

He ruled out a political career but showed some of his father’s charisma and contradictions in answering students’ questions, according to the newspaper. Asked about the pictures of him partying at Oxford, he quoted Chairman Mao as saying “you should have a serious side and a lively side,” and went on to discuss what it meant to be one of China’s new nobility.

“Things like driving a sports car, I know British aristocrats are not that arrogant,” he said. “Real aristocrats absolutely don’t do that, but are relatively low-key.”
—Dinny McMahon contributed to this article.

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

The article went, : “About a year later, the boy became the first person from mainland China to attend Harrow, one of Britain’s most exclusive private schools, which according to its website currently charges £30,930 annually.

This is extreme WASTE. The ‘Chinese Commie Way’ would be to LEARN the skills needed to open such a private school then OPEN (perhaps an Imperial themed?) AND with Chinese architectural characteristics) the same in China offering the courses a £224.25 or £309.30 annually (this is still 10,000 to 12,000 Yuan, no small sum . . . ) – THEN be among the first crop of students attending even if 5-10 years LATE/too old for class. As for the $32.4 million dollar home, lets say that so long as ANY Chinese COMRADE citizen is homeless or lives in a hovel or shack, NOT A SINGLE APPARATCHIK HAS THE RIGHT to live in, or own a home ON FOREIGN LAND that is worth a few apartment blocks capable of housing THOUSANDS. Where is the intrepid spirit of the Long March? Marxist law China going soft, corrupt and wasteful? A corridor of development in the Eastern Coastal states makes for no more than 10% of China’s landmass, and does not prevent 90% of China’s population being looked down upon by the rest of the world from terrible lives (not starvation bad but coarse-bad)  and living conditions while other so-called comrades live in luxury AND worse still, in foreign countries.

ARTICLE 2

Should China’s capital be renamed ‘Bling-jing’? – CNN Asia Business Analyst, Ramy Inocencio – March 12th, 2012 03:04 PM GMT

Hong Kong, China (CNN) – If you look at China’s annual National People’s Congress, now in session, you might think this country is one of the richest in the world.

The NPC’s 75 richest legislators – from a total of 3,000 – had a net worth of more than $90 billion in 2011. To put that in perspective, that’s more than half of Greece’s latest bailout of some $170 billion.

Zong Qinghou is the NPC’s richest member and China’s second-richest man, with a net worth of nearly $10.8 billion in cash and assets. If you’ve been to China, you’ve likely eaten or drunk something his company, Wahaha Group, manufactures.

The firm’s red-and-white distilled water bottles are ubiquitous – sold on the grounds of the Forbidden City in Beijing to the altitudes of the Chinese Himalayas in Tibet.

Along with food and drink, the five richest NPC legislators have shown that China’s automobile and real estate industries are the sectors in which to make billions.

For more perspective on their wealth, compare NPC’s six dozen richest members to U.S. politicians. This group earned more than the net worth of the six hundred top politicians and lawmakers of the United States.

That includes President Barack Obama, his Cabinet, the 535 members of Congress, along with nine members of the Supreme Court. Their average declared net worth in 2010 was just $4.8 billion – a pittance compared to the NPC’s $90 billion.

Even the richest person in the U.S. Congress looks a modest earner compared with the NPC’s wealth. Representative Darrell Issa of California has a maximum net worth estimated at $700 million, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. If he were in China’s NPC, his ranking would fall forty notches.

The NPC is not the only major political meet-up happening in Beijing right now. The CPPCC – the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference – is also in full swing. The 70-odd richest legislators in this government advisory body, similar to the NPC, had a net worth of more than $100 billion in 2011.

And they’re apparently not afraid to flaunt the bling they can buy with those riches.

One legislator from an ethnic minority, often poorer than their Han Chinese counterparts, clutched an $800 Burberry handbag on the way to a CPPCC meeting this week. The Chairman of Evergrande, one of China’s biggest property companies, sported a $950 black Hermes belt – with a golden H. And another lady legislator cradled a Marc Jacobs bag on the way to this week’s work. Retail price? $10,000.

The annual per capita income for a Chinese citizen stands at about $2,400.

With images like those – which have gone viral on the web – many critics are wondering just how representative the “people’s” congress is of the people.

The answer? Perhaps not so much.

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

Retire all plutocrats whatever their ages, they already are rich and have no need for power (a dangerous combination). And institute a Capitalism with Socialist Caps system at USD$20 million.

Utopia – Capitalism with Socialist Caps on Personal Wealth – US$20 Millionhttp://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=36665503866

Nobility with whatever privileges or privileged access (but specifically not wealth) is fine for the endowment of values and the ethos in a sea of faceless, but when their wealth is at an extreme level, they are no longer leaders but glaring symbols of excess, especially in a country that is supposed to be RED, as in Marxist red. In Marxism, the extreme wealthy, even those worth 20 million would be unacceptable (much less 100s of millions or billions) and in the 1960s-1970s the entire crop of leaders worth as much as today or even those 20 million worth would be rounded up, their wealth confiscated and sent to be re-educated if not shot. I personally advocate confiscation to a limit of 20 million with no imprisonment and not any punishment, even letting them continue their businesses BUT any profit gained above 20 million in personal asset there on, should be directed to the various redistribution or aid schemes, or simply to fund any and ALL medical treatment/education/housing at a a quantum of anything more than 10% of yearly savings payable by the patient needing medical-treatment/education/housing, these plutocrat businesses. With owners and directors or stockholders etc.. still limited to 20 million per individual – the excess profits will pay for everything else in costs that everyone else who can’t save 10% of their salaries, 1 billion people maybe cannot afford . . .

A bureaucrat should not be worth more than SME level (2-10 million), the best form being that the Bureaucat’s job is the ONLY JOB they hold not with all kinds of businesses on the side that will occupy their time instead of them looking after the nations – thats what bureaucrats are for, not to look after their businesses.

Try the Capitalism with Socialist Caps system at USD$20 million, starting with the political structure in ENTIRETY and then later society again, though not by killings, but perhaps citizen option to redistribute wealth MARXISM style or self expulsions by giving up Chinese citizenship with 3 times the ceiling – as that wealth is China’s and not to be taken away to another country. Chairman Mao would approve.

Especially those who profit from monetised debt or other shadowy non-real-goods economic manipulations must be singled out. Real goods producers can be lower on the audit list, though Quality Control looks to be a serious problem in China for non-edible goods and for edible goods, potentially a disaster dependant on the producer’s sense of scruples (Chinese manufacturer’s agriculture industrialists’ scruples are not too bad, but as the ‘factory floor’ viability of China shifts to even poorer regions, cost cutting or short cuts could create VERY SERIOUS problems – try for 100% organic and stick to that, good thing that China has already prevented GMO rice, the Chinese could be the last ‘unmutated’ (from eating GMO rice or GMO foods, mutations are possible) human beings on the planet.

At the same time, consider the issue of soft power and perhaps even the formalisation of the Royal Institution which will further educate about wealth vs. civiliational and moral values. Just look at those other Royals traipsing around creating a buzz, Oman, England, Japan etc.. China needs this sort of pathos, much like the flesh (civilisational values) without poison (material wealth) of the Fugu Puffer fish via a state formalized Noble ethos (with privileged access or certain immunities to reasonable limits) as well once extreme plutocracy is disallowed, and by the above issues the poison of Capitalism has near destroyed Japan and now infects China and has subverted many of the leaders . . .

While China may have just introduced the toughest laws against nepotism worldwide, a new problem in the form of the plutocracy (specifically plutocracy that also is in politics and holding power to create loophole laws that can be taken advantage of – the regular plutocracy however, especially the type that produces REAL GOODS aren’t any major issue unless the Socialist Caps are refused, but the worst are the monetised debt or fiat/speculator types, as bad for China’s reputation as the plutocrat politicians, though not as dangerous . . . ) looks set to take over as the no.1. troublemaker and most ‘ethics subversive‘ danger for China’s internal political structure. The potential corruption that saw the China fall in the Opium Wars can occur again when a country with 1 billion below the poverty level, are headed by plutocrat politicians none can identify with (at least they are not nepotists as well thanks to new laws) and effectively out of touch with the reality away from the developed coastal areas.

This is already punctuated with occasional chengguan trouble or if the as West reports is true, dozens of unreported riots. If all thats needed is the dismantling of extreme wealth (leaving USD$20 million for any single family or extended family, is still an exceptional amount in China btw) to harmonise so many oppressed and impoverished in China, there will be no harm in going back to basics as in the Cultural Revolution Era (no prisons or beatings, just simple redistributions DIRECT to the worst off – I’m not talking about billionaires giving money to those upper middle class types very comfortable . . . so the outrage among billionaires themselves will not be as bad . . . ), the current state of affairs if as reported is disgraceful and Capitalist to a shameful level.

China needs to GET SERIOUS.

2 Articles on West and Middle East Compared (soft strategy for conquest), 2 Articles On Proactive albeit indirect actions by the Media establishment for the 99% – resposted by @AgreeToDisagree – 11th march 2012

In 99%, Abuse of Power, amendments to law needed, bad laws, best practices, better laws, emo subculture, England, Equitable Distribution, Freedom of Expression, freedom of speech, Iran, Iraq, Islam, Maximum Wage, Media Neutrality, oligarchy, Plutocracy, political correctness, preventing vested interest, social freedoms, Socialism, soul, soul binding, soul theft, subculture persecution, term limits, too damn high, voting methods, voting strategy on March 11, 2012 at 2:29 pm

ARTICLE 1

Number of European criminals in British jails DOUBLED in last ten years… with 12% of all prisoners now from outside the UK

By Daily Mail Reporter

PUBLISHED: 15:31 GMT, 10 March 2012 | UPDATED: 15:37 GMT, 10 March 2012

The last decade has seen the number of foreign offenders locked up every year in English prisons more than double, with only a few actually completing their full sentences.

With the majority of them guilty of serious crimes, receiving sentences of four years or more.

Official figures show the number of European offenders sent to jail for violent or sexual offences has tripled in recent years.

English prisons are seeing a large increase in criminals from EU countries, new official statistics have revealed

Despite there being a scheme in place to repatriate foreign offenders for some time, only 10 have been sent back in the last few months under existing arrangements.

The statistics were uncovered in parliament by Lib Dem MP Martin Horwood, who sits on his party’s international affairs committee.

Horwood said that Britain could save millions by returning offenders to their home countries under the new scheme. The cost of keeping one prisoner locked up for a year is more than £30,000.

Mr Horwood told the Daily Telegraph said: ‘This represents a staggering cost to the British taxpayer for looking after prisoners from other European Union countries who are in the UK.

‘I think the Government should certainly not be contemplating opting out of the one EU-wide scheme which gives us the possibility of sending these prisoners home to serve sentences in their own country.’

The prison population in England and Wales is at 98 per cent capacity, affecting jails like HMP Pentonville in London

Last month the prison population in England and Wales reached 98 per cent capacity – a figure of 57,583.

Offenders from the European Union make up more than four per cent of the total.

Foreign nationals make up 12 per cent of the total prison population, with most coming from Poland, Jamaica and Ireland.

The number of EU nationals in English jails is 2,696, 10 years ago that number was less than half that – 1,321.

The biggest increases were in violence against the person (196 to 610), sexual offences (75 to 348).

Drug offences have actually fallen slightly in the last 10 years, from 524 in 2002 to 441 in 2011.

Last year 949 EU nationals were sentenced to four years or more, with a further 772 given prison sentences of between one and four years.
Here’s what other readers have said. Why not add your thoughts, or debate this issue live on our message boards.

The comments below have not been moderated.

Walter in Germany, I do not know if you are German or not, but i am amazed by your comment about xenophobes, I believe that it was the Germans who believed themselves to be the master rate, and with the rise of the far right still do, even there bullying of Greece via the EU shows that things have not changed that much.

– Smudge RN Falklands Vet/ and RMR, Worcester, 10/3/2012 20:31
Rating   1

You might be interested to learn that 30 seconds research show that the proportions in other countries are:- France 20%, Germany 26%, Spain 35%, Italy 37%, Sweden 28%, Norway 32%, Austrailia 20%. So, perhaps the UK at 12% is not doing so bad after all!! The full picture usually gives a better perspective, but, hey ho, this is the DM.

– Gary, Glad to be free from the UK, 10/3/2012 20:19
Rating   2

And all our politicians are waiting for someone else to do something about it.

– Paul, Liverpool, 10/3/2012 20:00
Rating   21

That will be down to good’ole B.Liar, Plunkitt and co. Nobody wanted to hear it back in the early 2000’s…and apparently ‘nobody’ voted for these idiots -time and time again. Still fewer ‘nobody’s’ wanted our boy’s to be killed in a ‘toilet’ as one man said earlier…and ‘nobody’ wanted the banks to be allowed to destroy our economy… Its pretty not ironic that NOBODY wants to see, hear or listen to Milli-Bland nor Mr. Balls at the moment… One thing is for sure. The treaties that Labour signed us up to for before they were hauled out of office….NOBODY WILL BE ABLE TO REMOVE THESE CRIMINALS IN THE FORESEEABLE FUTURE…

– Dean, eermm…not me…, 10/3/2012 19:57
Rating   23

Well, aren’t we just amazed by this revelation – not

– lulu, Yorkshire, 10/3/2012 19:52
Rating   26

and we are not allowed to say what we think about them.

– Alan, Huddersfield, 10/3/2012 19:42
Rating   32

Bill their home countries !

– Robbie, Sidmouth UK, 10/3/2012 19:35
Rating   29

soon as there charged send them back to there home country to serve there sentence why should taxpayers have to keep them here.

– rick, lincoln, uk, 10/3/2012 19:34
Rating   30

return all of them to france as most will have come thru that country, let the eu masters sort it because our lunatic MPs cant

– jim rooney, leeds england, 10/3/2012 19:25
Rating   40

The Labour Legacy lives on, and on, and on, and on, and on, and on, and on, and on, and on, and on………………………………………………………………………………..

– Disillusioned, Middle England, 10/3/2012 19:25

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

Heres how Osama should have taken out England. Pay for as many tickets to England as possible for uneducated and impoverished, hopeless future-type 3rd world Muslims who are willing to shout about religion in the middle of the street or be rude and offensive to ‘underdressed’ Muslim women in England, pick random fights with unknown people, then get themselves locked up for a few years. Repeat when released before leaving – then before long a few million Muslims multiplied by 40+K a year (thats the cost of per prisoner yearly – how could that cost so much for a single cell and ‘gruel’, most poor 99% types survive on far less than 40+K a year .  . . ) should put England under.

ARTICLE 2

Stoned to death for being an emo: NINETY Iraqi students killed for having ‘strange hair and tight clothes’

Number of deaths could be even higher
Cleric calls the stonings ‘an act of terrorism’
Ministry of Interior ‘complicit’ in the killings

By Paul Milligan PUBLISHED: 10:55 GMT, 10 March 2012 | UPDATED: 18:59 GMT, 10 March 2012

More than 90 Iraqi students have been stoned to death for their Emo haircuts by religious extremists in Baghdad in the past month after Iraq’s  interior ministry dubbed it ‘devil worshipping’.

Iraq’s Moral Police released a statement on the interior ministry’s website condemning the ’emo phenomenon’ among Iraqi youth, declaring its intent to ‘eliminate’ the trend.

The move is part of a wider clampdown on young people taking on what government officials call ‘Western appearances’ in Iraq.
Iraqi activists said this unnamed teenager was brutally killed by religious police for having an ’emo’ hairstyle

Iraqi activists said this unnamed teenager was brutally killed by religious police for having an ’emo’ hairstyle

‘The Emo phenomenon or devil worshipping is being followed by the Moral Police who have the approval to eliminate (the phenomenon) as soon as possible since it’s detrimentally affecting the society and becoming a danger,’ the statement read.

‘They wear strange, tight clothes that have pictures on them such as skulls and use stationary that are shaped as skulls. They also wear rings on their noses and tongues, and do other strange activities.’

Since the statement was published religious extremists have been harassing and killing teenagers with ‘strange’ or ’emo’ appearances.

Religious extremists have been harassing and killing teenagers with ‘strange’ or ’emo’ appearances

A group of armed men dressed in civilian clothing led dozens of teenagers to secluded areas a few days ago, stoned them to death, and then disposed their bodies in garbage dumpsters across the capital, according to activists, activists told the Cairo-based al-Akhbar website.

The armed men are said to belong to ‘one of the most extremist religious groups’ in Iraq.

‘First they throw concrete blocks at the boy’s arms, then at his legs, then the final blow is to his head, and if he is not dead then, they start all over again,’ one person who managed to escape told Al-Akhbar.

Iraq’s moral police was granted approval by the Ministry of Education to enter Baghdad schools and pinpoint students with such appearances, according to the interior ministry’s statement.

The exact death toll remains unclear, but Hana al-Bayaty of Brussels Tribunal, an NGO dealing with Iraqi issues, said the current figure ranges ‘between 90 and 100.’

‘What’s most disturbing about this is that they’re so young,’ she said.
This ’emo’ youth was one of nearly 100 who were targeted for having a western hairstyle or wearing ‘American jeans’

This ’emo’ youth was one of nearly 100 who were targeted for having a western hairstyle or wearing ‘American jeans’

Al-Bayaty said the killings appear to have been carried out by extremist Shia militias in mostly poor Shia neighborhoods and said she suspected ‘there’s complicity of the Ministry of Interior in the killings.’

Photos of the victims were released on Facebook, causing panic and fear among Iraqi students.
WHAT IS EMO?

Described as both a cult and sect, it’s name derives from the word ‘emotional’

Its teen followers dress in black, favouring tight jeans, T-shirts, studded belts and sneakers or skater shoes.

Hair is often dyed black and straightened, and worn in a long fringe brushed to one side of the face.

Music also plays a critical role, Emos like guitar-based rock with emotional lyrics – bands such as My Chemical Romance, Jimmy Eat World, and Dashboard Confessional are particular favourites.

They regard themselves as a cool, young sub-set of the Goths.

With the trend comes accusations of self-harming and suicide – something its followers strongly deny.

A young man with long hair was among those fearful at the  government-ordained harassment of teenagers with Western appearances.

‘I have long hair but that doesn’t mean I’m an Emo. I’m not less of a man if I have long hair. Let’s not say that if I have long hair, I’m a homosexual, but I have long hair because this is my style, this is me,’ he told Iraq’s Al-Sharqiya television network.

Safiyyah al-Suhail, an MP, said on Thursday that ‘some students have been recently arrested because they were wearing American jeans or had Western haircuts.’

The interior ministry has not disclosed the number of teenage victims, but released a follow-up statement on Thursday warning extremists ‘not to step on public freedom of Iraqis.’

News of the gruesome deaths drew a stern reaction from Iraq’s prominent Shia cleric, Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, who criticised the stoning of the young men as ‘an act of terrorism.’

He added: ‘The Ministry of Interior took this situation very seriously and received an approval from the Ministry of Education to set a plan under my full supervision and to allow us to enter schools in the capital.’

‘There are some cases of the spread of this phenomenon specifically among schools in Baghdad, but we are facing great difficulty in the lack of women on the force who would allow us to carry the investigation more accurately since the phenomenon is more popular among girls between the ages of 14 and 18.’

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

I thought that was IRAN. Wow Iraq is worse than Iran now. And even after USA trashed then occupied Iraq as well! USA, can you see this? Meanwhile Iran has become more open!?!

ARTICLE 3

Clegg wants ‘tycoon tax’ to trap rich who pay less than 20% with fury raging over child benefit axe – By James Chapman – UPDATED: 11:44 GMT, 10 March 2012

Crackdown: Nick Clegg last night called for a ‘tycoon tax’ to address the problem of tax evasion by the nation’s highest earners

Nick Clegg last night called for a ‘tycoon tax’ that would force the rich to pay a minimum rate and tackle the problem of tax avoidance.

The Deputy Prime Minister said it was unfair that while ordinary Britons were paying 30 or 40 per cent, hundreds of millionaires were getting away with sacrificing less than 20 per cent of their income by using an ‘army of lawyers and accountants’.

He said he would be willing to support the scrapping of the 50p top rate of income tax – a key demand of senior Tories – as long as millionaires are ‘properly’ taxed in Britain.

Mr Clegg said the wealthy used a wide array of tax loopholes and reliefs, which are inaccessible to ordinary workers, to reduce their bills. It means they often pay lower rates on annual earnings than those on much lower wages.

The Lib Dem leader yesterday repeated to his party that ‘the wealthy have to pay more’, as Government plans to remove child benefit from the better-off came under fierce attack as a measure that would undermine marriage.

Mr Clegg, speaking on the opening day of his party’s spring conference, insisted austerity measures must be targeted at the wealthy – with tax relief on their pensions also in the Government’s sights.

But in an interview, he turned his attention to the issue of tax avoidance. He said thousands of millionaires pay tax at a rate of less than 30 per cent, depriving the Exchequer of hundreds of millions of pounds a year.

Mr Clegg said he was arguing in government for a specific minimum rate of tax to be written into law to ensure people are ‘paying their fair share’ and not ‘massaging’ the system.

He said he decided on the need for a tycoon tax after Mitt Romney, who is expected to be the U.S. Republican presidential candidate, disclosed he was paying just 13.9 per cent tax on his multi-million dollar earnings.

George Osborne insists it is ‘fair’ to ask high-income families to share the burden of cutting Britain’s debt by removing their child benefit

He said: ‘You hope that kind of thing doesn’t go on in this country. So I looked into it. There are hundreds of people earning millions per year who are barely paying 20 per cent tax, forget 40 per cent, forget 50 per cent, forget 30 per cent. They are not even paying 20 per cent.

‘Therefore, I think it’s time that we look at what I call a tycoon tax. If you’re earning millions per year, if you’re able to pay an army of lawyers and accountants to basically pick and choose what tax you are paying, if you are paying as low as 25, 20 per cent or even less in tax, there should be a minimum fair share that you should pay to society.’

He told the Daily Telegraph: ‘It makes people so incredibly angry when you are getting up early in the morning, working really hard to try and do the right thing for your family and for your community, you are paying your taxes and then you see people literally in a different galaxy who are paying extraordinarily low rates of tax.’

Mr Clegg said he was undecided on a figure for the minimum rate. However, it is understood it could be set between 20 and 30 per cent.

Supporter: David Cameron has backed same-sex marriages

A big increase in the tax-free allowance for 23million basic rate taxpayers will be the centrepiece of this month’s Budget, but there are rare signs of tension between Downing Street and the Treasury over how far ‘wealth taxes’, which would help pay for the move, should go.

However, Danny Alexander revealed that he was close to agreeing proposals with the Chancellor, George Osborne, to go ‘further and faster’ towards removing low earners from tax. In an interview in today’s Independent the Chief Secretary to the Treasury said that raising the tax threshold ‘is our priority’.

At the last budget, Mr Osborne said the personal tax allowance would rise by £630 to £8,105 this April. The coalition has pledged as a long-term goal raising the income tax threshold to £10,000, which would enable some 2.2 million people to stop paying tax.

And Mr Alexander told The Independent that the Lib Dems would pledge to further raise the allowance to £12,000 in their next election manifesto, meaning that no one working full-time on the minimum wage would pay tax.

Meanwhile pressure on the Chancellor increased as a thinktank set up by Work and Pensions Secretary Iain Duncan Smith shredded his proposal to remove child benefit from higher-rate taxpayers from next year.

Family stability will suffer a further blow if the Government presses ahead with its plans, the Centre for Social Justice (CSJ) warned in a report.

Couples will be deterred from marrying or cohabiting and there will be a greater risk of fraud in the benefits system, which already costs the country £1.8billion a year, it said.

Single mothers will be particularly hard hit because they will be worse off if they marry or move in with a high-earning man.

Treasury sources have insisted that the proposal to remove child benefit from families where one parent earns £42,745 a year or more is, in fact, ‘very popular’, though they are working on ways to soften its impact.

The Government says it will save £2.5billion a year by starting to means-test child benefit, traditionally paid to all families regardless of income.
BOOST FOR MIDDLE-CLASS FAMILIES

Middle Britain will benefit most from Government plans to increase the income tax allowance to £10,000, economists say.

Households with incomes of around £40,000 will be the biggest winners, since they tend to have two earners rather than one who will enjoy the maximum benefit of new tax breaks, according to the Institute for Fiscal Studies.

All 23million basic rate taxpayers will benefit from plans to increase the amount that can be earned tax-free. A big increase in the tax-free allowance, to around £8,400, is expected to be at the heart of the Budget this month.

However, if the move is paid for by holding down the higher rate tax allowance – currently just under £43,000 – more people will be pulled into the upper band as a result.

The Coalition says it wants to increase the allowance to £10,000 by the time of the 2015 election.

Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg said last night he wanted to see that ‘the largest amount of money by far, if you are delivering tax cuts, is spent on getting people on low pay out of paying income tax’.

Labour’s Treasury spokesman Rachel Reeves said: ‘An increase in the personal allowance is better than doing nothing.

‘But a temporary VAT cut would help pensioners and others on low incomes who don’t pay income tax.’

Here’s what other readers have said. Why not add your thoughts, or debate this issue live on our message boards.

The comments below have not been moderated.

Too right the rich should pay more, they earn more and exploit others! Also people shouldn’t be paid to have children if you can’t afford them, don’t have them simples and if you’re both earning £40000 you def don’t need them!

– Scarlett, Sheffield, 10/3/2012 22:47
Rating (0)

Dave, 20.41. Dave, I just don’t believe you are self employed. You would know a lot more about exactly what taxes have to be payed when you are a company director. You’ve exposed your ‘inexactitudes’ with your inaccurate post.

– ohdear, UK., 10/3/2012 22:39
Rating (0)

. How about this if you have kids – YOU pay for them? I’m sick and tired of going without and constantly struggling myself (working) and at the same time being forced by bleeding-heart liberals to bank roll others. – George Brown, Hornchurch, Essex, 10/3/2012 20:46<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< Does that apply to pensioners as well?

– Peter, Kent, 10/3/2012 22:39
Rating (0)

Envy is a terrible thing!!!

Stupid people with pathetic lives ALWAYS complaining how other smarter people should pay more tax – why?

Because they happen to be smarter than you and have made something of themselves through risk and hardwork rather than sit on their butts whining about their miserable lives

Don’t blame your failures and inadequacies on the successful – you may be able to learn something from them

– Toppers, London, 10/3/2012 22:27
Rating   4

Our MPs would be well advised to put as much effort into ensuring that tax revenue is spent wisely as they do in dreaming up new ways to tax us. Instead we hear constant stories of money being wasted left, right and centre. Millions spent on the development of computer systems that either fail to materialise or end up being scrapped. Millions spent on aid to countries that can easily support themselves. Millions spent on unions reps who do nothing. Millions spent on relocation bonuses to those MPs who can’t manage to get re-elected. It seems to me that the only way to put a stop to this wastage is to remove the temptation. If the wastage was dealt with then the need extract ever larger sums from the populous would abate and our leaders would find that lifting the tax thresholds would be a simpler matter. Attempting to generate a higher tax take without dealing with the underlying problems just means that the wastage increases, something of a vicious circle.

– Paul, Holbeach, UK, 10/3/2012 22:13
Rating   13

Here’s an original idea; EVERYONE pay 10% tax. No matter who they are. Across the board. Same for businesses. I guarantee it will bring more revenue for the coffers than anything Cloggy and scameroon can think up. No inheritance tax- we all already paid the taxes, no capital gains tax, just that 10% on what you earned from the capital invested as part of your annual income. It completely simplifies the tax system, doing away with the legions of taxmen we have at the moment and it would so encourage business, enterprise and the workforce that everyone would be quite happy to pay it. Probably the lowest tax system in the developed world. But I suppose it would never be implimented. Politicians like to think they are being generous with our money…..

– Nonpc, Toytown,UK, 10/3/2012 22:10
Rating   7

All very well prancing around and sounding off about a mansion tax. Who is going to value the properties and how often? How much are all the valuations going to cost? Will the effect be to drive wealthy people overseas so that then the government gets next to nothing? Clegg just wants to get points with his own back benchers for some class hatred. Will the valuations be reviewed and how often? And is any account to be taken of the age of the occupants, the purchase price when they first bought it? Otherwise there will be some real cases of injustice. A million quid barely buys a shoebox in some parts of London. And before there are exorbitant demands on home owners for tax every year are there going to be exceptions for those unable to pay – pensioners, people who had money once and now have very little due to bereavements or loss of employment? This all sounds like the Poll Tax all over again – a brilliant wheeze but no one has thought it through.

– Kathryn Bennett, Reading, UK, 10/3/2012 22:05
Rating   6

What a stupid man I will simply leave the country and stop creating wealth and employment. – Pip, Peterborough UK, 10/3/2012 21:05 Go on then and the property prices will fall giving the young dispossessed their first chance on the property ladder. And anyway currently there really isn’t anywhere to go, the whole world’s in crisis, so you can’t bully boy your way out of it this time this way.

– Clare Kingston, Swindon, United Kingdom, 10/3/2012 21:35
Rating   1

What a stupid man I will simply leave the country and stop creating wealth and employment.

– Pip, Peterborough UK, 10/3/2012 21:05
Rating   13

bolshevik clegg, lets hope he goes the same way trotsky did….. ice for my gin barman!

– simon, GB, 10/3/2012 20:58

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

The rich do not need any benefits. In fact class distinctions between middle and upper (lower and middle even) when uncertain (regardless of wealth – y’see wealth does not make class, it is a certain ethos adnd pathos that determines who is classed as what) will depend on who SHAMELESSLY takes benefits.

Example here – 2 people of same wealth (won’t say how much) both claiming to be upper or middle. REGARDLSS OF WEALTH – the real middle class society type will be typified by a sense of principles and pride that is expressed in refusing to take benefits, and the upper class even GIVE benefits (via philanthropy) rather than take benefits. Guess English principles stayed lost after the colonial era eh? Anyone who can push Opium or Colonize and subjugate the really quite alright Indians (they don’t try to convert people and generally are tolerant of general weirdness) can’t claim any ethical compass . . .

This is a very condiderate law (aslo demographically sound – 1 billionaire has 1 vote only, so who do you think Cameron would prefer to write policy for. 99% votes of the poor (well maybe 50%) or 1% of the votes?

ARTICLE 4

Channel 4 search for ‘fresh meat’ forced me off Countdown, reveals Carol Vorderman – PUBLISHED: 01:53 GMT, 11 March 2012 | UPDATED: 01:54 GMT, 11 March 2012

TV trauma: Carol Vorderman left Countdown after 26 years

Carol Vorderman has claimed  she was forced off Countdown after 26 years because Channel 4 bosses were looking for ‘fresh meat’.

The former co-host of one of TV’s longest-running quiz shows waded into the debate about older women on air in a candid interview with Piers Morgan for his Life Stories series. She revealed she has not watched the show since she left in 2008. Ms Vorderman, 51, also  said she was bitter that Channel 4 bosses have never invited her  back, even as a guest.

She said: ‘To me, it is like a bereavement as I was always terribly loyal to Countdown and I protected it. It was more than half my adult life.’ She recalled the last show that her co-host Richard Whiteley recorded, in which he inexplicably said: ‘Welcome to the final Countdown.’ In another eerie twist, the last conundrum of that episode spelt ‘lifefails’.

Mr Whiteley died in 2005 from septicaemia, which he contracted after emergency heart surgery.

Ms Vorderman said she ‘loved’ him and never argued with him in their 23-year TV partnership.

At the time of Ms Vorderman’s departure from Countdown, it was reported that the Cambridge maths graduate left because she refused  to take a 90 per cent cut in her £1.2 million annual salary.

But Miss Vorderman said: ‘I agreed for them to take a third  off my wages, or even halve them, but once new bosses came on to  the show they wanted fresh meat.’

Ms Vorderman’s interview is likely to be broadcast in the next few weeks.

Carol with her Countdown co-host Richard Whiteley

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

2.5 decades is Mubarak-esque/Gaddafi-esque/Abdullah Saleh-esque term limitless in feel. Vorderman should be happy they took her off before she looks like the female version of the ‘Evil Math-magician’. Also Vordermans’ fans would be happy to remember Vorderman in the prime of health rather than aged. It’s better for everyone and especially Vorderman who can retire and enjoy a probably many many times more than 401K retirement. Finally, how the hell is a Math programme host supposed to be allowed to earn 10s of millions anyway? Ridiculous! Blah to 1%ters! Good sense of democracy going on here! Vorderman has become a plutocrat, and in this day and age of even honourably serving military officers (some badly injured) becoming bankrupt and homeless on the street, this sort of citizen speaks very badly about USA’s priorities.

Nothing against Voderman but this extreme salary is just wrong. Once any person reaches 401K or depending on the social position lets say 10 times 401K, it’s time they stood aside for others to earn a living. Asset hogs are a blight on wealth distribution and at a 10 times 401K quantum, any ‘axings’ cannot be considered Marxism, especially when there are wars going on and trhe country is so heavily in debt that bankruptcy is already in effect but not formalized. What business does a Math Programme Hostess have in holding such wealth?!? Any hostesses should only retire at upper class, or ‘lower rich non-working class’ wealth levels at most. Kudos to ‘Channel 4’ and ‘Countdown’ .

Next, media establishments should consider a ‘give back’ paradigm that perhaps returns anything beyond a 300% profit reserved above the total overhead to the society (one can imagine how many 1000s of percent turn over can be for some media outfits, those mogul or star types should not sequester far too much either, say 50 times of 401K at most perhaps should be fair? Society is fractured when veteran soldiers beg on the street while porn stars drink 50K bottles of champagne every night . . . ). Sequestration of wealth by media owners and stockholders should not take away wealth from society as well. This should be optional of course, but considered a ‘best practice’  and ‘people friendly media’ status for countries with extreme debt especially.

5 Articles on Malaysian Politics : PPSMI vote Bloc Forms, Journo’s discussion on meme annihilation, Pakatan’s Failures, Civil Service, PAS and Wee – reposted by @AgreeToDisagree – 10th March 2012

In 1% tricks and traps, Abuse of Power, advice, amendments to law needed, Apartheid, bad laws, best practices, Bumiputera Apartheid, diversity, domestic terrorists in the political sphere, homelessness, Informed Consent, Invasive Laws, Malaysia, neo-colonialism, Nepotism, oligarch, oligarchy, political correctness, Political Fat Cats, politics, preventing vested interest, separation of powers, social freedoms, spirit of the law, term limits, vested interest, voting methods, voting strategy on March 10, 2012 at 9:39 am

ARTICLE 1

Pro-PPSMI groups to form coalition – UPDATED @ 03:10:21 PM 10-03-2012 – By Yow Hong Chieh – March 10, 2012

A section of the parents at the pro-PPSMI rally in Petaling Jaya on March 10, 2012. — Picture by Choo Choy May
PETALING JAYA, March 10 — Several parents’ groups said today they will band together in a coalition to push Putrajaya into reinstating the teaching of science and mathematics in English (PPSMI).

Concerned Parents of Selangor (CPS) head Shamsudin Hami said the new umbrella group, Association of Parents Groups for Reforming Education (ASPIRE), will allow for easier exchange of views between the government and pro-PPSMI parents.

“We cannot address matters in bits and pieces… To make the job easier, we are forming a coalition of parents’ groups,” he told reporters at a PPSMI rally at Padang Timur here that was attended by some 150 parents.

Shamsudin speaks to the press on the formation of a coalition of parents’ groups.

“With ASPIRE, there should be no more excuses. You don’t need to go state by state and waste time, waste taxpayers’ money. Just stick to ASPIRE, because ASPIRE consists of parents’ groups from Penang to Johor and Sabah.”

Also present were representatives from the Parent Action Group for Education (PAGE), Malacca Action Group of Parents in Education (MAGPIE), Herald of Penang Education (HOPE) and lawmakers Hannah Yeoh and Loh Gwo-Burne.

Shamsudin said ASPIRE will put together a “parents’ charter” on education which will encompass all the issues which have to be addressed in order to transform the education system, he said.

This included the removal of “culturally-biased, so-called knowledge” present in the national education syllabus, which is needed if confidence in national schools is to be restored, he said.

He reiterated that PPSMI must be made an option in schools, the implementation of which should be left to parents and not headmasters or even the Education Ministry.

Shamsudin added he remained hopeful that the government will listen to the demands of parents who favour PPSMI, noting that Putrajaya had promised to abolish the Internal Security Act (ISA) after receiving heavy criticism from the public and civil rights groups.

“Apart from whatever is written in the holy books, I don’t think that is chiselled in stone,” he said.

“PPSMI is only a policy. What about the ISA? It’s a law. It can be removed. So it’s all up to the people and the government. It needs political will.”

The government has come under fire from former Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad and pro-English lobby groups over its move in 2009 to revert to the teaching of science and mathematics in Bahasa Malaysia (MBMMBI).

Despite much criticism, Putrajaya has said it will not back down from the decision but would allow the final PPSMI batch to continue until they complete their secondary education.

MBMMBI, mooted in July 2009 as a replacement for PPSMI, came into effect in January last year for Year One students.

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

Good work. This voting bloc should enforce democracy with the Ministry of Education. The ‘optionals’, and opt out option should always be part of a democratic government method in all laws. Next focus on 66.6% quorums at a one-man one-vote law, for all registered or professional societies and all levels of government AND considered against the UNHCR as well. Have Hannah and Gwo-Burne had a chance to ask Bar Council about the other problems some of us have been asking about?

ARTICLE 2

Times have changed! — Lim Mun Fah – March 10, 2012

I always heard my grandfather said that when I was young, and my parents said that too when I was growing up. And now, as I am getting old, I always say that myself.

Times have indeed changed. Everyone knows the truth. The problem is, have you changed to adapt yourself to the new era?

If the Lynas rare earths refinery plant was built in Kuantan 30 years ago, perhaps no one would oppose to it. Even if there were opposing voices, it would be too weak to have an effect.

Similarly, if the Pengerang oil and gas complex in Johor was built 30 years ago, it would not trigger a controversy. Even if it caused discontentment, the residents would still helplessly accept it.

However, times have changed. Today, the people’s awareness of environmental protection, demand for human rights and the pursuit of the right to know are much stronger than 30 years ago.

As the mentality of many government officials are still stuck in the era 30 years ago, they think that the people nowadays are not much different from those 30 years ago. That is why they have always underestimated the rebound from the civil society, and are caught in a dilemma.

The cover story of the latest issue of Yazhou Zhoukan is worthy of our reference and reflection as it analyses the continuation of the entanglement of business and politics of the British colonial era in Hong Kong.

Like Hong Kong, our bureaucratic system originated from the British colonial government. Although our country has been independent for over half a century, the traces of such entanglement of business and policy can still be detected everywhere, it is sometimes even worse than the practice in the past.

However, times have really changed, so has the political environment. Members of the public are now having harsher expectations of politicians. Secretive governance can no longer meet the public’s right to know. In particular, the people have been expecting more after the 2008 political tsunami. They ask for a more transparent policy, as well as more reasonable and fair governance. They also demand for better governance ability and higher morality from politicians and government officials.

Therefore, “official secrets” can no longer be used as an excuse to cover major decision-making and governance. Government officials have to be responsible for every word they said and every decision they made. The people will use the rights of citizens to question improper policies, condemn unreasonable and unfair phenomena. Meanwhile, the media will continue to follow up and report the latest developments. The National Feedlot Centre (NFC) scandal serves as the best example here.

Times have changed and progressed. Those who fail to catch up with the changes are destined to be eliminated by the times! — mysinchew.com

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

The article write wrote : ‘Even if there were opposing voices, would be too weak to have an effect.’

There will always be an effect. Just that the spaces and numbers are smaller instead though no less if not more vobrant internally by measure of focus – as all memes are equal in value due to the diversity itself, none can be abolished. All views and methods are valid after all, so don’t worry about older generation subcultures (nepotism being the most decadant in anything but the smallest businesses) or the newest and least acceptable memes, there will be some who keep those alive like rarefied subcultures and such. The thing is to remember not to impose on others one’s views and to live and let live. Like Voltair said to fight for one’s right to think, fighting for the right to live as one will is the natural progression. To propagate whatever should be done only when consensual as per ethical considerations.

ARTICLE 3

Pakatan Must Forgo Power Struggle Within Their Parties – Yap Ee Wah – Saturday, 10 March 2012 14:40

Pakatan Rakyat deserves ridicule for neglecting the interests of the rakyat in exchange for their power struggle within their own coalition.

One latest example is the selection and appointment of new local councillors recently whereby DAP wrangled among themselves for power which thereby directly damages the image of Selangor. This has caused the loss of the tax-payers’ money besides affecting the system of governance within Selangor state.

Due to the infightings, the Selangor state administration is unable to reappoint the contractors for rubbish collection. Tonnes of rubbish have been dumped and accumulating everywhere in Selangor causing residents to air their grievances and complaints.

Pakatan internal power tussles in Kedah & Penang too besides Selangor

Another example of an internal battle for authority within a Pakatan-held state is Kedah whereby two of their state Exco members had a falling out with the Menteri Besar Azizan. Even with the intervention of the PAS Central Committee, their leadership was also unable to help resolve the problem there. Hence, the PAS top leadership had directly affected the functioning and administrative work of the state government as well.

I wish to reiterate that Pakatan having ruled Kedah and Penang for 4 years has caused so many problems. The biggest controversy at hand is that PAS has appointed a steering committee with veto powers headed by themselves to advise and oversee the administration of the state.

In addition, both the DAP Penang State Chairman Karpal Singh is also fighting with his Deputy Ramasamy just ahead of the upcoming General Elections. Supporters of both parties concerned are also fighting with one another. Ramasamy had even revealed that some grassroot leaders had asked “favours” from him.

Internal strife was also tense in DAP Selangor which witnessed the power scuffle arising from the abuse of Exco Ronnie Liu’s letterheads by his ex-political aide, Tee Boon Hock. Selangor State Speaker Teng Chang Kim was also called up by the DAP Disciplinary Board for his twitter statements issued recently.

Looking at the entire scenario, this is not a matter involving DAP alone, but a subject relating to both the state government and the rakyat.

YAP EE WAH is State Assemblyman for Sungai Pelek

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

The Rakyat also are aware that BN has not yet implemented with that mandate :

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

Don’t make announcements here that are meaningless here, use that mandate to grant the above or BN is FINISHED simply to be punished for non-use of that mandate. Also TERM limits and prevention of family blocs in BN as well. The nepotism issue is a glaringly obvious in BN as in PR.

ARTICLE 4

Develop System To Reward And Punish Civil Servants – Chai Kim Sen – Saturday, 10 March 2012 00:16

The government’s decision to withdraw the ‘exit policy’ for civil servants, which is meant to dismiss them for poor performance or lack of discipline, is a regretful decision as I believe that with the increase in salary for civil servants, the government should also not neglect to develop an administrative system of rewards and punishment in order to control the civil service’s attitude and efficiency.

The performance of the civil servants is the key to the success, or failure, of the government’s transformation programmes. They are also important to determine the nation’s competitiveness as well as represent the image of the Barisan Nasional government. However, in the past civil servants had adopted a ‘little Napoleon’ attitude which has backfired onto the BN government by making it scapegoats.

A notable example is when MCA President Dr Chua Soi Lek had sternly criticized officials of the Education Ministry for playing around with the date on SJKC teachers.

It is important for the government to set up a fair and transparent evaluation system for rewarding and punishing civil servants, even following the steps of the private sector which adopts the policy of dismissing employees, thus breaking down the bad perception that the civil service is unproductive.

Currently the civil service is besieged with bureaucracy, arrogance and inaction, along with the drawbacks of corruption and abuse of power. All these have created a negative impact on the government and the nation’s economy, and have caused the people to lose faith in the government.

For too long the Barisan Nasional has carried the burden of poor civil service and it is now time to implement a more effective system to clear the civil service or poor performers and ‘deadwood’.

The salary scheme must be based on meritocracy, with potential and experience being used to decide the increment of civil servant’s salaries, and bonuses and benefits being awarded based on work performance.

What the people want is a clean and fair public service mechanism which is more in touch with the people, and MCA believes that to enhance the quality and efficiency of public service administration, the system of rewarding and punishment is a necessary one.

CHAI KIM SEN is MCA Youth Secretary-General

(The views expressed above belongs to the author in its entirety and does not represent the opinion of Malaysian Mirror in any way)

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

End the APARTHEID in BN and a win could be possible. And BN’s civil service is 1500% too large which could rive Malaysia into a Greece type situation where the IMF takes over the country.

ARTICLE 5

Don’t be fooled by PAS ‘pluralism’, says Wee – by Yow Hong Chieh – March 10, 2012

KUALA LUMPUR, March 10 — The public must not be “hoodwinked” by PAS’s claim that it embraces pluralism, MCA Youth chief Datuk Wee Ka Siong said today.

This was because PAS’s interference in the administration of Kedah without consultation with its partners in Pakatan Rakyat (PR) showed the Islamist party was anything but pluralist, he said.

Wee (picture) pointed out that this included the setting up of a steering committee with veto powers by PAS to advise the Kedah mentri besar and executive councillors on state administration.

“Who is PAS president Datuk Seri Abdul Hadi Awang trying to kid when he extols PAS’s so-called but unproven and never-will-be-proven pluralism?” he said in a statement.

“Why should an external political party determine state policy when the state administration should be determined by the mentri besar in consultation with all PAS, DAP and PKR excos and elected representatives from their parties?”

The Ayer Itam MP said that PAS’s past actions showed that it did not have the interests of all Malaysians at heart.

This includes terminating liquor licences in Kulim, issuing a summons to a Chinese salon owner for her Muslim employee’s three-quarter sleeve blouse and tearing down the sole pig abattoir in Kedah, among others.

“We must recall that after the 2011 PAS Muktamar, Hadi Awang declared that the difference between the (PAS) proposed welfare state and an Islamic state was only a semantic one,” Wee said.

“Thus, I urge all Malaysians irrespective of religious creed or ethnicity not to be hoodwinked by Hadi Awang’s latest portrayal of PAS as all-embracing as they clearly are not.”

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

BN is no more plural than PAS and PAS appears to be more flexible and possibly more likely to end apartheid than BN at this point. Whats so great about BNs 50+ years of APARTHEID? PAS are you ready to grant :

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

If so, PAS is immediately more votable than BN. BN has the mandate but won’t grant the above 3 items, thats 1 down on BN automatically. WOuld PAS promise to grant the above 3 items if given the mandate? BN has the mandate and has not, so BN more rubbish than PAS where  pluralism is concerned. PAS can say, ‘But PAS has no madate to grant the 3 items’. BN actually has the mandate, but does not grant the 3 items what’s BN’s excuse? BN is abusing the mandate by not using the mandate to grant the above 3 items.

2 Articles on Preservation of Freedom of Life and Humanity – reposted by @AgreeToDisagree – 7th March 2012

In 1% tricks and traps, conflict of interest, critique, Democracy, democratisation, Equality, equitable political power distribution, Invasive Laws, Orwellian, political correctness, politics, preventing vested interest, separation of powers, social freedoms, Socialism, vested interest, voting methods, voting strategy on March 7, 2012 at 6:36 am

ARTICLE 1

Government Is Not Civilization, It Is Slavery – by JGVibes, posted on March 05, 2012

One of the most pervasive misconceptions in our culture is the idea that “government” has anything to do with the structure or organization that we see in our society. This is one of the primary reasons why people have such a difficult time considering the very real possibility of a world without the organization known as “government.” When someone suggests that we simply do away with this unjust and unnecessary organization, they are typically met with some very negative knee-jerk reactions from whoever they may be talking to. This kind of conversation typically ends very quickly because both sides have completely different ideas of what the word “government” actually means, making it very difficult to find common ground.

If we attempt to examine government from an outsider’s perspective, we would see a world where people are grouped into two different categories, those in government and those not. At face value, we can see that these two groups of people have completely different standards and expectations, even though they are the same species and have the same basic needs. Looking closer, we can see that these different standards and laws are not neutral, they are very much benefiting those in government at the expense of those who are not. The most important discrepancy to mention here is the fact that those in government have a license to kill anyone who happens to disobey them.

Pointing out this fact is vital in understanding the true relationship between those inside of government and those outside of government, and that is the relationship between slave and master. If someone has the right to initiate the use of force on you if you disobey them, you are essentially their property. If you don’t believe me, go on over to Google and type in “slave definition,” and the first definition you will find is the following: “A person who is the legal property of another and is forced to obey them.” Now, doesn’t that sound a whole lot like the relationship between people inside government and people outside government? If you can force people to do things against their will, then you are treating them as if they were your property.

However, if you ask any random person on the street to define “government” for you, they would probably give you the story that they were taught in government school. You know, the one about how government is the backbone of civilization, and the means by which people in the community come together for mutually beneficial projects. Well this may sound good, but it isn’t at all true, because the government is comprised by a miniscule fraction of the population, and they would not be able to provide anything at all if it wasn’t for the resources that they forcibly extracted from the rest of society. Therefore, it is safe to say that all functions that are currently being carried out by the organization known as “government” could actually be better served by individuals in the community working together for common goals. Voluntary trade, charity and other peaceful methods of interacting would create a far better society than the one that we see today, which is filled with violence and forced associations.

It is not a new thing for people to confuse government with culture and have the misconception that without a central planning structure, everything that makes a society great would vanish. This fact was recognized by some of the more radical “founding fathers” of America, including Thomas Paine. In his most famous literary effort “Common Sense,” there is a section called “Of the Origin and Design of Government in General, with Concise Remarks on the English Constitution.” In this piece, Paine discusses the difference between government and society.

Paine writes, “Some writers have so confounded society with government, as to leave little or no distinction between them; whereas they are not only different, but have different origins. Society is produced by our wants, and government by our wickedness; the former promotes our happiness positively by uniting our affections, the latter negatively by restraining our vices. The one encourages intercourse, the other creates distinctions. The first is a patron, the last a punisher. Society in every state is a blessing, but Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one: for when we suffer, or are exposed to the same miseries by a government, which we might expect in a country without a government, our calamity is heightened by reflecting that we furnish the means by which we suffer.” His statement is as true today as it was during the first American Revolution. Culture, society and security are absolutely capable of continuing in the absence of a central control system.

The most common argument against having an organized civilization without government is the notion that we are all somehow stupid, worthless savages who would not be able to figure out how to build a damn road if there wasn’t someone with a gun in our face every step of the way, telling us how, when and where to do it. But if people are stupid savages, and politicians are people, then isn’t the government made up of a bunch of stupid savages who can’t be trusted with a license to kill? Aren’t they just the same as us and even in many cases far worse than us?

There is nothing that the government can do that you and a large group of likeminded people can’t do better. The government doesn’t provide services, they simply take money from everyone (except their buddies, of course!) and use a very small portion of that money to pay people in the community to do things for their neighbors that they probably would have done anyway in the natural course of human interaction. Looked at in these terms, it becomes apparent that the government is nothing more than a violent middleman, who forces his way into nearly every interaction that takes place between each of its so-called “citizens.”

Everything that the government does is an attack on people who don’t belong to that organization. If you think about it, every single action that the government takes is some kind of punitive measure taken against people who don’t belong to that organization. Even when the government claims to be doing something nice, they are doing so with resources that they obtained by using threats and violence, which really doesn’t make much of a case for the virtuousness of government.

This organization is not here to protect our rights as it claims to. In fact, when the government steps in and gives itself the responsibility to “protect” your rights, it is simultaneously stripping you of your ability to actually defend your own rights. When you are dependent upon the whims and capabilities of another human being to protect your rights, you are literally handing your rights over to them and essentially submitting to slavery.

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

The best way to ensure peacefully such freedoms is thus to ONLY vote for people who fit into the below groups :

a) Non-plutocrats (for money is the root of all evil, the wealthiest are doubtless closest to evil for their sequestration of wealth, especially in foreign tax havens, takes money out of circulation in the financial system. A good cut of point for vote eligibility will be 50 times a 401K, at 20 million in value approximately, conflict of interest via business links will be limited.)

b) Non-nepotists (See Gaddafi and sons, see Mubarak and sons? Enough said. Anytime there are family blocs in your organisation or political party or government department, civilisation ends and communalism and familial favouritism – nepotism – begins.)

c) Non-oligarchs (This is trickier as one cannot identify these persons immediately and will have to research where they stood on various issues. Oligarchs tend to group think and again another form of authoritarianism occurs. Where authoritarianism occurs, natural progression will be towards Orwellianism and paternalism, and eventually feudalism and dictatorship.)

d) Non-racists (Apartheid speaks for itself and no civilisation can move forward if any group is disenfranchised)

e) Non-theocrats (This is the same as Apartheid except this is a religious based apartheid. The best administrators are agnostics IMHO, as they are least likely to disenfranchise any citizen with religious based special privileges or what not. Conversely faith systems should be left to their own devices, and zoning is the best way to keep non-compatible factions of populace apart.)

f) Non-GLC linked businessmen. (The problem of collusion and bad law writing with intent to collude, can be seen – for a glaring example – even in the Judiciary when the profit paradigm is based on prison contractors and prison suppliers.)

g) Non-Term Limitless Politicians (These fief formers are the basket-case bastions of feudal mentality. The most shameless even appoint their family members and children throughout their ‘political parties’ which are merely glorified ‘Clan Associations’ that cannot be allowed to hold political or law changing powers which can be used to siphon taxpayer funds for special privileges, near million dollar funeral funds, raise salaries far beyond yearly (GDP growth + Inflation) etc., BUT NEVER used to lower Candidacy Election Deposits, or close loopholes in law that allow GLCs to collude and profit off the people or grant 2 items listed in (h) below, or end APARTHEID.

h) Any politician who wishes to retain Eminent Domain laws and refuses to grant Allodial titles, assents to raises in public sector salaries beyond inflation rate + GDP growth or refuses to place limits on the private sector in raising public sector salaries (say no more than 10 times inflation rate + GDP growth). Inflation is a killer but must also be balanced by a 2.1 child policy (with the 3rd child subjecting the parents to a ‘Support An Orphan for Each Child More than 2 Bill’ – that makes it necessary to pay for the maintainence of an orphan for every child more than 2 that a family has – much like ‘match a dollar for every dollar donated’ kind of set up) so populations will not unbalance equilibrium of an already overstressed environment, unless technology and building paradigms are shifted to something more sustainable.

;in repressive regimes like the Arab Spring countries, bloody revolution by whoever who is not under constant watch, has to occur instead. Otherwise use the democratic method.

ARTICLE 2

Targeting Free Expression by Stephen Lendman – 3-3-12

Free expression in all forms is fundamental in democratic societies. Without it, all other freedoms are at risk.

Included are free speech, a free press, freedom of thought, culture, and intellectual inquiry. It also includes the right to challenge government authority peacefully, especially in times of war and cases of injustice, lawlessness, official incompetence, and abusive government behavior.

Denying it risks tyranny. Voltaire defended it, saying “I may disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.”

Howard Zinn called dissent “the highest form of patriotism.” It includes the right to speak and write freely, assemble, protest publicly, and associate with anyone for any reason lawfully.

Democracy depends on it. Bill of Rights freedoms affirm it. Nonetheless, US history is strewn with abusive laws. The 1798 Sedition Act criminalized publishing “false, scandalous and malicious writing” against President John Adams or Congress, but allowed it against Vice President Thomas Jefferson.

The 1917 Espionage Act imprisoned anyone convicted of “insubordination, disloyalty, mutiny, or (encouraging) refusal of duty in the military or naval forces of the United States.”

It targeted First Amendment speech against WW I and American’s participation in it. The 1918 Sedition Act went further. It criminalized “disloyal, scurrilous (or) abusive” anti-government speech.

The Supreme Court upheld the Espionage Act, notably in (Eugene) Debs v. United States. A five-time socialist presidential candidate, he served prison time for opposing militarism and America’s WW I entry.

In 1968, the Warren Court disallowed draft card burning on grounds it would disrupt the “smooth and efficient functioning” of American recruitment.

However, in 1969, the Court upheld student rights to wear black arm bands, protesting the Vietnam War. In Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969), it ruled government can’t punish inflammatory speech unless directed to incite lawless action.

In Texas v. Johnson (a 1989 flag burning case), Justice William Brennan wrote the majority opinion, saying:

“(I)f there is a bedrock principle underlying the First Amendment, it is that government may not prohibit the expression of an idea simply because society finds the idea offensive or disagreeable.”

America has no Brennans today. As a result, speech and all other liberties are threatened. Under either major party, the nation’s hurtling toward tyranny.

Forgotten is Jefferson’s warning, saying:

“What country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance.” He also said free speech “cannot be limited without being lost.”

Former US Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall added:

“Above all else, the First Amendment means that government has no power to restrict expression (regardless of its) ideas…subject matter (or) content….Our people are guaranteed the right to express any thought, free from government censorship.”

Suppressing Free Expression

Major media scoundrels are thought control gatekeepers. Instead of reporting vital information accurately, they suppress it. The free interchange of speech, ideas, and opinions suffers. Public opinion’s manipulated to support what people should oppose, denounce, and refuse to accept.

Police state laws pass largely below the radar. They erode and destroy fundamental freedoms. The USA Patriot Act alone wrecked key constitutional protections, including:
Fifth and Fourteen Amendment due process rights;
First Amendment freedom of association rights;
Fourth Amendment protections from unreasonable searches and seizures;
prohibitions against unchecked government surveillance powers to monitor virtually all our activities, and use secret “evidence” unavailable to counsel in prosecuting politically targeted defendants.
In addition, the Act created the federal crime of “domestic terrorism.” It applies to US citizens and aliens. It states criminal law violations are considered domestic terrorist acts if they aim to “influence (government policy) by intimidation or coercion (or) intimidate or coerce a civilian population.”

By this definition, anti-war and global justice demonstrations, environmental and animal rights activism, civil disobedience, and dissent of any kind may be called “domestic terrorism.”

As a result, Occupy Wall Street and other protesters may be arrested and so charged.

HR 347 increases the likelihood. The Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act of 2011:

“Amends the federal criminal code to revise the prohibition against entering restricted federal buildings or grounds to impose criminal penalties on anyone who knowingly enters any restricted building or grounds without lawful authority.”

“Defines ‘restricted buildings or grounds’ as a posted, cordoned off, or otherwise restricted area of: (1) the White House or its grounds or the Vice President’s official residence or its grounds, (2) a building or grounds where the President or other person protected by the Secret Service is or will be temporarily visiting, or (3) a building or grounds so restricted due to a special event of national significance.”

On February 6, a Senate amendment titled, “Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act of 2011” passed unanimously with no dissent.

On February 28, the House suspended the rules and passed HR 347 388 – 3. The bill awaits Obama’s signature.

Only the fullness of time will determine how much damage is done, but clear red flags are raised.

On February 29, Russia Today reported how First Amendment rights are risked, saying:

“Just when you thought the government couldn’t ruin the First Amendment any further,” this measure threatens legitimate protests near locations where US officials are present, even with no knowledge they’re there.

Participants may be criminally prosecuted for exercising their First Amendment rights.

Section (c) states:

“the term restricted buildings or grounds means any posted, cordoned off, or otherwise restricted area –

(A) of the White House or its grounds, or the Vice President’s official residence or its grounds;

(B) of a building or grounds where the President or other person protected by the Secret Service is or will be temporarily visiting; or

(C) of a building or grounds so restricted in conjunction with an event designated as a special event of national significance; and

(2) the term ‘other person protected by the Secret Service’ means any person whom the United States Secret Service is authorized to protect under section 3056 of this title when such person has not declined such protection.’ ”

In fact, they may be covered wherever they are any time for any purpose. Virtually any event may be designated “significant.”

Among others, they include congressional sessions, party conventions, G8, G20, IMF, World Bank, and NATO meetings/summits, public appearances for any reason, funerals of prominent officials, locations with visiting foreign dignitaries or despots, and other events unrelated to government business.

Vague language leaves it up for grabs how authorities will use this measure, and how courts will interpret it if challenged.

OWS protesters target government, corporate, and related locations for redress. Many hundreds already have been harassed, violently attacked, arrested and detained.

Expect worse if they’re criminalized for exercising their First Amendment rights. As a result, they may be subject to arrest, prosecution, imprisonment up to 10 years, and/or fines.

Whether it turns out this way isn’t clear. However, numerous police state laws currently target First Amendment and other freedoms. Activists are wrongfully imprisoned on bogus domestic terrorism charges.

A Final Comment

Will sweeping anti-OWS crackdowns follow under HR 347 and other measures entirely destroying inviolable constitutional rights cast aside to enforce tyranny? Only the fullness of time will tell, but don’t bet against it.

Remember Jefferson’s warning that “All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent.”

In today’s climate of permanent war, corporate predation, and state-sponsored fear, if ordinary people don’t defend their rights, who will?

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net.

Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening.

http://www.progressiveradionetwork.com/the-progressive-news-hour/

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

From : A Theory of Natural Hierarchy and Government; “All governments must have citizens in order to exist”.

What kind of citizen are you? A slave (unthinking followers of law are no different from slaves) or a freeman who decides that government will not be allowed to infringe on you? Will not apply GST or VST? Or forced military conscriptions, or subject any group to APARTHEID? Or allow any group to give themselves undeserved or inapplicable and disenfranchising special privileges? Vote by the above list of criteria in the response to article 1 to put a stop to the oppressive nonsense that is now society.

5 Articles on Malaysian Politics : Nepotist PAP fettes apartheid BN, Gomes Bodeks, All MPs Are Intended to be 2 term Tissue Paper – Jessie Ooi stand against Aparatheid and GTFO of the Dewan (no term limitless Oligarchs even with those with – in this case inconsequential – t1t5), Parrot Rehashes MY 2001 ’cause’, Danger and Warning signs all over Pakatan (a second BN arising) – reposted by @AgreeToDisagree – 1st March 2012

In 1% tricks and traps, advocacy, Apartheid, Democracy, democratisation, Malaysia, media traps, media tricks, neurolinguistics, NLP, non-Muslim rights, non-Muslim Rights in a Muslim country, Pakatan Rakyat Coalition, preventing vested interest, term limits, vested interest, voting methods, voting strategy on March 1, 2012 at 1:58 pm

ARTICLE 1

BN Is Not Racist Although It Comprises Race-based Parties – Tuesday, 28 February 2012 13:36

SINGAPORE, — The Barisan Nasional (BN) does not practise racism as claimed by the opposition parties although the coalition is made up of race-based parties.

Perak Menteri Besar Datuk Seri Dr Zambry Abdul Kadir said although there were parties within the BN that were set up based on race, this did not mean that the party was racial.

“All this while, the opposition had always portrayed the BN as a race-based party,” he told reporters after participating in the forum titled “Voices: Emerging Malaysian Leaders”, here last night.

Zambry was among the four panel members participating in the forum organised by the consultant firm, KRA Group.

The three other panelists were Deputy Higher Education Minister Datuk Saifuddin Abdullah, Deputy Youth and Sports Minister Gan Ping Siew and Senator V. Subramaniam.

At the forum attended by about 200 people comprising academicians and corporate figures, various political issues in Malaysia were discussed including the opposition claim that BN practised racialism.

Zambry said that the opposition parties such as the DAP were the ones practising racialism.

“Despite the opposition claim that we purportedly adopt racial politics, we notice that the DAP history shows the party (DAP) contests in areas where the Chinese form the majority,” he said.

He said that if the DAP was truly a party for all races, why did the party not field its candidates in Malay-majority constituencies in the general election.

Earlier, Zambry held a meeting with Singapore investors and they had expressed interest to invest in Perak particularly in real estate and mining.

— BERNAMA

Commentator comments :

Tuesday, 28 February 2012 16:57 posted by Mamakry

If Bn is not practising racialism why is government departments employ 90% Malay, why universities should have quota systems, why government scholarships are given to one race, why Mara is open to other races, why contracts are given to a particular race? And the list can go on. Zambry please make us stupid

Tuesday, 28 February 2012 16:11 posted by FAKE MUSLIMS

Oh what a pity.
You mean Singaporeans do not know about the UMNO/BN Gomen ? Just ask the Singaporeans why so many bright non-Malay students are studying in Singapore.
Furthermore daily how many non-Malays are travelling to Singapore to work.

Tuesday, 28 February 2012 16:03 posted by V

wait… IF DAP field a malay candidate the same BN will say it’s political gimmick… then IF DAP not putting malay candidate, they’ll say it race based since all nons r in the list but malay….
hantu pun dia, manusia pun dia…. piraah….
please PR, just field those ppl that really can serve the ppl instead of like the BN that think ppl owe-ing them a living…

WHO’S THE BOSS NOW??
please watch Vendeta if you haven’t… i like the quote
“ppl should NOT fear of the government, the government should fear the ppl”

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

Any coalition BN or PR which cannot claim the below 3 items are accurate :

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

;are racist parties. Any ’emerging’ leaders will be swept aside by Joe Public independents. This is the way colonial minded LKY and Mahathiru Kutty have been USED by the English colonials to parasite off the people of both nations – strawman equality while racist policy exists.

ARTICLE 2

The night Rosmah’s face melted and Palanivel became the Agriculture minister – by  Mathias Gomes, Malaysia Chronicle – Tuesday, 28 February 2012 20:59

A live telecast on Astro Beyond channel 222 and the belated Ponggal Festival in Kapar began without the the true essence of Ponggal in the air or in the hearts of those who attended.

Why this “kolaveri ” Ponggal celebration, and why did MIC make a fool out of the Prime Minister Najib Razak and his wife Dr Rosmah Mansor, ministers in dutiful attendance Koh Tsu Koon, Liow Tiong Laiand Rais Yatim. Well, the answer lies in the 13th general election or GE-13. Najib would have said to Palanivel ‘go ahead, make me a fool but make sure you get the numbers and wrest Kapar from Big Mike’ ( MP for Kapar, S Manickavasagam).

It was like watching the Tamil movie ‘SIVAKASI’ where protagonist brings on a famous movie star (Nayantara) to dance and captivate the people to vote for him, but the hero, Vijay whose sister is the opposition candidate, steals the show right under the protagonist’s nose. I was expecting Big Mike to do it, but he didn’t make an appearance.

Well, MIC and Astro went to all the trouble of bringing in the famous “Koothu” singers and film stars from Kollywood (Tamil Bollywood) to grace the event by singing “koothu” songs and dance to the tune of these. The Kapar Kilat Clup ground was fully covered for the event, I’m sure big ‘moolahs’ were spent for the artistes as well as the TV direct telecast. Well, perhaps it could have been free since Astro has a soft spot for the current government.

Rosmah’s face began to melt

For 3 solid hours Najib and Rosmah sat through the show looking bored and tired. During closeups of Rosmah, you could see that her face was melting. Why such an effect I don’t know, but it was weird.

The highlight of the show apart from all the “Koothu” was Najib’s speech and as usual he gave out money for a temple in Shah Alam and Tamil schools in the vicinity. This is his trade mark “lu tolong gua, gua tolong lu” (you scratch my back, I scratch yours). It was a speech that we all expected, so no surprises!

Palanivel too praised Najib and Rosmah and said that the hope of Indians laid in his hands. He then shamelessly asked for their support. But the kicker was when Palanivel, the MIC president, took on the role of Agriculture Minister and asked Indians to plant food items in front and at the back of their homes to supplement themselves. I was expecting him to provide land for agriculture to the Indians, but he chose to make them beggar farmers instead!

Treat Malaysian Tamils with more respect

So MIC thought that if they put a show and entertain the people with Tamil film stars, people will be captivated and come back in droves to vote for them. This cheap mentality of treating Malaysian Indians like uneducated and unprincipled bimbos is disgusting. The people here are more intelligent, hardworking and trustworthy.

All you need to win their hearts is to show them that you care and treat them as equals and tell them that you are Malaysian First and Malay, Indian, Chinese, or any other race Second. Then you win them lock, stock and barrel. Just treat them like Malaysians. As Najib said, “ORE MALAYSIA”

Malaysia Chronicle

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

Just treat them like Malaysians. As Najib said, “ORE MALAYSIA”??? WTF? Without :

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

;Najib or any MP can do a full bollywood production and dance along, and also speak Tamil/Hindi all year round, yet still, nothing changes.

ORE what ORE? Throw a local word at the 2nd (3rd?!?) class citizen and expect them to vote you all the way? Gotta be joking. EQUALITY or nothing. And no need to drop a single ORE. Who are these guys kidding?

As Najib said? Woah Matthias Gomes, you’re losing respect big time by bodeking like that (ignoring apartheid) and the bluffing of Indians as if the Indians were so easily taken in . . .

Note on Propaganda : Some writers Neurolinguistically Programme readers via the title of their article. Gomes NLPs via his closing statements. All are still NLPs. So readers, in this article’s case Indian readers, learn the PARTS of an article or essay, and read each PART independently as if it were a separate article. This is your ‘learning about propaganda articles’ note for the day. Joseph Goebbels would doubtless have noticed. Whats wrong with ending apartheid Gomes?

ARTICLE 3

What I think of Jessie Ooi – by  Iskandar Dzulkarnain, Malaysia Chronicle – Saturday, 25 February 2012 08:48

Coming across a post on Sin Chew Jit Poh (scroll below), urging the people especially the cyber-citizens to forgive Jessie Ooi caught me by surprise. Unable to follow the debate televised live on national TV as it was in Mandarin, I was wondering what was the fuss all was about?

Further reading of her open statements to the public and the ugly comments that followed had me stupefied. The Chinese, presumably the commentators are really Chinese, are really crucifying her without mercy.

How can the Chinese do this to one of their own kind? After all, she is only human and her only mistake was the series of silly questions she posed about tow trucks and the assessment rates! What’s the big deal?

And why are they calling her Ms Tow Truck? To me, she looks quite attractive actually. Kinda remind me of Angelina Jolie minus the mike she’s holding. Not in any way like a tow truck. She’s got flair, long flowing hair and sweet lips, perfect for a shampoo advertisement, if I may add. But then I admit I have always liked the Chinese lasses, but sad to say, till today have not summoned up the courage to ask one out for a date.

Explanations made the people even angrier

Anyway back to the subject matter of Jessie Ooi; my initial thought is that she looks quite innocent to be an inexperienced politician out to impress her boss Chua Soi Lek. In her statement after the incident, she had made a halfhearted attempt to apologize, hoping to raise public sympathy and understanding, while exhorting the public to leave her and her family alone.

Obviously horrified at the torrent of vulgar outrage pouring into her Facebook pages, she has made Police Reports and has threatened to sue for defamation.

However, her first statement only served to inflame the already sizzling anger, with enraged commentators mocking her unrepentant attitude and the way she tried to wriggle out of her predicament by lamely trying to lay the blame on the DAP. Kinda’ remind me of Hassan Ali when he was caught in a similar fix.

The wrong ‘brand’

Yes, we shouldn’t involve her family or children. It’s not her fault and neither is it her family’s. She has every right to ask questions at the debate. The crowd could have over-reacted and given her a rough time but that could be because of her political affiliation to the MCA.

No doubt, Jessie also benefits from the heightened profile and is now basking in fame that she would never otherwise have gained if not for the fact that she had also hit out at Lim Guan Eng and DAP. But this is actually an eye-opener for her and other young aspiring politicians.

Representing the right ‘brand’ is important. Choose the wrong one like the MCA and you get smeared and stereotyped into the same mold as Chua Soi Lek and believe me, no one wants to be like CSL!

Oh yes! The debate was in Mandarin. But if it was in English I think the Indians and Malays would join in the chorus to pick her off too. Again, for the same reasons. Sometimes public reaction on such scale is better than any so-called independent polls and popularity surveys. This is spontaneous, off-the-cuff, knee-jerk, Honest-Injun response.

You would do wise to take heed, my dear Jessie. Life is a long journey and there are up and downs along the way but keep savvy but don’t stay on the wrong path for too long or it will be tough to make a serious return – ask Dr M, whom people are now saying wants to become prime minister again.

‘Ah Ying’? [[[ *** Typical low browness of the local Chinese lapdogs, much like Ah-Niu was used to sabotage Ong Ka Ting . . . *** ]]]

Anyway, not to be outdone, Jessie issued a second statement to defend her innocence, which caused even more public uproar.

It’s not so much about the silly questions she posed, but the uncouth way she presented herself in public that left the audience shell-shocked, the commentators roared. What’s worse was the tone of her voice (near screaming) and the way she waggled her fingers while debating with a fellow politician on live television! That’s what they say anyway, my dear, so sorry to be so rude on your personal traits.

To be fair, after sifting through the comments, quite frankly, the people were genuinely taken aback at her impoliteness and her uncouth attitude. She portrayed herself as the the female Ah Beng – is it Ah Ying? – and that was part of the basis for the furious backlash.

Sad to say, she doesn’t seem to realize the combination of factors for her current infamy. At this point in time, she may even be congratulating herself – no publicity is bad publicity! But I am old-fashioned, I disagree. I rather do without this sort of fleeting notoriety and neither do I want to be called an ‘Ah Ying’ for that matter.

Don’t be used by others in the MCA

To recap, the topic of the debate was: ‘The Chinese at the Political Crossroad.’ Sincerely, what have tow trucks and assessment rates got to do with that topic? And the ‘half Penangite’ attempt was simply hilarious!! Half of the Penangites on Penang Island are still laughing away, or so I hear!

Sad to say, the episode is likely to cost BN a lot of votes for Selayang, where she is an MCA Beliawanis member. Someone has also retorted that she deserves an Oscar Award for her sterling ‘performance’.

MCA leaders were startled at the response and initially thought it was a good thing – much like a corpse given a new lease of life. But they are now feeling a bit embarrassed and avoiding the issue, reluctant to come to her defense.

Many believe that she should just tone down, be humble, apologize and put it behind her. Stop issuing a third statement – unless it is very well-thought-out and sincere –  and close her Facebook account until the coast is clear and hope it will blow over soon. Any more clumsy attempts to explain her actions will only fan the flames of disgruntlement and may permanently blight her still-young career.

Incidentally, Jessie must take care not to be used by others in the MCA – it is her name and career on the line here.

Arrogance in politics is always asking for trouble

This is indeed a lesson for her that arrogant actions – yes, she was arrogant – can trigger an ugly side in people who normally may be very polite. The herd instinct once roused is very powerful.  She should know by now that unlike the Malays, the Chinese are not so forgetful and she wouldn’t want to be in the bad books of the community if she values her political career.

Meanwhile, let’s forgive her and leave her alone for a while. Unless, of course, she stirs up another provocative statement. We believe she has a lot on her mind right now. If the response had been public adulation, she can bet her last dollar Chua Soi Lek and team would rush to garland her and claim the victory as theirs. But if the response is like it is now – terrible! – it looks like she may have to sit on the ‘cold bench’ for a while.

Also, in the meantime, can someone please ask that cowardly Chua Soi Lek to release the transcript of the debate and not sit on it for so long? I am seldom so blunt, but this is the outside of enough. If CSL doesn’t dare to release the transcripts, just announce he won’t but don’t get a minion to lodge police reports against the DAP for asking. Isn’t that simply crazy?

Finally, remember that tow trucks in the city are not just for clamping vehicles but they also play an important role when your car seizes up in high-traffic roads like Jalan Ampang or along the highway. Do give the operators some credit.

Malaysia Chronicle

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

What we should think about Jessie Ooi, is much like every other MP deserves in thought as well, is that AFTER 2 terms at most, we do not ant to see her as an MP anymore. What is Jessie Ooi’s stand on :

Section 8 of the Land Acquisition Act? Aye or Nay?
Ending APARTHEID in all aspects of law and constitution? Aye of Nay?

Other than that we don’t care, because term limits means democracy means Jessie Ooi is OUT in 2 terms.

ARTICLE 4

Putrajaya can afford RM50b to scrap highway tolls, says Guan Eng – March 01, 2012

KUALA LUMPUR, March 1 — DAP’s Lim Guan Eng today denounced the federal government for striking a lopsided deal that benefitted highway toll companies without public consultation, arguing that it could afford to pay RM50 billion to abolish the concessions.

The Penang chief minister accused Putrajaya of “victimising” Penangites when it decided to extend the length of toll charges for two highway companies for another 17 years in exchange for not raising the rates by only 10 per cent.

He argued that if Penangites were given a choice, they would have rather paid the 15 to 25 per cent hikes every five years until 2021, compared to forking over money until 2038 to use the Penang Bridge and the Butterworth-Kulim Expressway (BKE).

“Tan Sri Nor (Mohamed Yakcop) should also explain how the revision deal of extension of the Penang Bridge toll concession from 2021 to 2038 in exchange for no toll hikes of 10 per cent indeed benefits Penangites,” he said, referring to the minister in the Prime Minister’s Department who is also Umno MP for Tasek Gelugor.

He had previously dared Nor Mohamed to a public debate on whether terminating toll collections by profitable concessionaires would force the government into bankruptcy, after the minister reportedly said such a move would lead to government insolvency.

“BKE is even worse than the Penang Bridge as there will be toll hikes of five per cent for every three years after 2016 instead of every five years,” Lim added.

According to Lim, Putrajaya would only need to pay a maximum of RM50 billion to scrap the toll contracts for the North South Expressway (NSE) and the Penang Bridge, adding that the federal government could afford that much.

“RM50 billion will not bankrupt the nation. It is corruption, abuse of power and cronyism that will bankrupt the nation. After all the new MRT project costs more than RM50 billion,” the Bagan MP said, repeating a point he had made on several occasions.

Government-linked Projek Leburaya Usahasama (Plus) Bhd is the largest toll company in Southeast Asia and operates the 772km-long NSE and BKE, among others.

Citing from the Global Financial Integrity Report, Lim said that Malaysia’s outflows from illicit money had amounted to some RM1.077 trillion.

Lim urged the federal government to stop toll collection on the NSE “immediately”, adding that the operator had recouped three times over its original investment of RM6 billion.

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

Oh look, MP Parrot takes up a cause ‘Members of MARAH’, ‘tabled’ in 2001.

Make DAP a better party by ending limitless terms and oligarchy and not being too arrogant to the grassroots (i.e. respond when communicated with) otherwise Pakatan will still be a dinosaur coalition led by another handful of families. Pakatan is NOT the solution and the solution to Toll Concessions is in fact by ending nepotism, limitless terms, abuse of council laws and 750K funerals, with most important of all, the below 3 items :

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

Where are those Local Council Elections at 66.6% quorum? Pakatan Coalition has forgotten EVERYTHING.

Where are those MP Asset Declarations (not EXCO Asset Declarations – you are hiding behind you liars . . . )

See below Article for more FAILURES of Pakatan that makes 3rd Force Coalition the best way out, we do not need a second BN in the form of Pakatan :

ARTICLE 5

Nepotism and Cronyism in Pakatan : posted on January 10, 2012 by editor

It can go beyond being preposterous and a classic case of nepotism and cronyism rearing its ugly head in Pakatan.

The latest fiasco is that the Petaling Jaya City Council (MBPJ), which comes under the purview of the Selangor Pakatan government, had appointed legal firms connected to a few PKR leaders.

Blogger Raja Petra Kamaruddin had named PKR vice-president N. Surendran, Petaling Jaya councillor Derek Fernandex, PKR central committee member R. Sivarasa and MBPJ councillor Latheefa Koya as having enriched themselves by taking the lion share of the council’s legal work.

He had alleged that Sivarasa had now moved into a new posh office and that Surendran was now chauffeured around in an expensive car after being appointed legal representatives for the council.

The MBPJ had however claimed there were no legal firms linked to either Surendran and Derek Fernandez that were officially appointed by the council to deal with its legal matters.

That does not mean that the two PKR leaders were not engaged as individuals and paid direct for legal advice and work done.

Well the MBPJ statement could have been well drafted by the PKR leaders themselves so as to absolve any blame or wrong doing on the council.

Then the classic explanation by MBPJ was that it was alright and was not a conflict of interest for Sivarasa’s firm Daim & Gamany to be appointed as a panel firm for the council.

Their reasoning – Sivarasa is not a councillor and that Latheefa Koya who is a MBPJ councillor was only a legal assistant with the firm.

How absurd can it go. The very fact that Sivarasa is a PKR leader and that Latheefa is a councillor, partner or not a partner with the firm, does not matter.

Even a Form One student can tell you that it is a clear cut case of conflict of interest and clear elements of abuse of power in question.

Politicians should not be appointed to represent the council as far as legal matters are concerned as they are complex matters. This is to ensure neutrality and impartially.

The appointment of PKR politicians on the legal panel will breed miscarriage of action within the administration of the council. Important action might conveniently be overlooked as a result of partisan parties being on the legal panel.

The council’s argument was that the appointment was discussed at a full council meeting in August, 2009, and that Latheefa was absent at the time does not give MBPJ the passport to appoint Sivarasa’s firm to be on the council’s panel.

Worse still the MBPJ’s legal adviser said there was no conflict of interest. He should be sacked for not giving proper advice.

The conflict of interest bug seemed to be an “in thing” within the Pakatan administration.

Just recently, this portal reported that former Perak exco member Nga Kor Ming had a lot of explanation to do after it had been revealed that his wife’s company was previously awarded the tailoring contract to make lounge suits for Ipoh City councillors when Pakatan Rakyat was ruling Perak.

His wife’s company Ethan & Elton Sdn Bhd submitted the highest bid among five bidders but was eventually awarded the contract to make 24 lounge suits for the councillors.

Ethan & Elton Sdn Bhd which submitted a bid for RM650 per suit ended up being awarded the job in 2008, when four other bidders who submitted much lower bids did not win the contract.

I rest my case.

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

The above article says it all. Once again I remind all voters :

It is best that the voters run for candidacy as independents to remove such laws including apartheid laws or join 3rd Force political parties like :

KITA, JATI, MCLM (whats left of MCLM, but homophobes could find it a good party that has 20 candidates), PCM, Borneo Front, Konsensus Bebas, HRP/Hindraf and PSM.

BN                       Racist, Nepotistic, Corrupt
PR                       Nepotistic, Corrupt (also abusing Land Acquisition Act powers now . . .)
3rd Force        Corrupt only? Or potentially flawless.
Independent  Any single or combination of the above.

Chinatown is being taken apart by PAP style MRT companies under Pakatan Coalition, private property being threatened with destruction and invasive by-laws by Pakatan, 750K funerals from OUR taxpayer funds are being signed off in laws to YM Lim Jr types, and their term limitless oligarch families . . . petty traders (not the regular types who afford REAL shops which have rent assessments (that can also be reduced to zero with the right MPs en masse) and hire foreign workers, but those barely scrapping by in terrible conditions on the 5 footways or roadsides and even the loansharks would feel bad about taking away their gas tanks or cheapo goods damn those bad-by-law continuers who refuse to amend, vote them to hell) are being targeted and threatened and more . . . with the below 2 comments very much telling on the unvotability of BN and Pakatan, so it’s best to vote for 3rd Force :

@Zeki says: January 11, 2012 at 10:08 am

BN’s power hinges entirely on its control of the PDRM, the AG’s Chambers, MACC and Petronas. The presence of Umno-BN tentacles in all corners of the system is an open secret. If we look at the police, MACC, Attorney-General’s Chambers and the other government departments, they are all aligned to Umno-BN. A good example is Sarawak CM Abdul Taib Mahmud, who is untouchable. Similarly, Umno Wanita chief Shahrizat Abdul Jalil is another. The only way to stop the cancer from spreading further is to throw out Umno-BN in GE13.

However, the Umno old guards are very worried that their elaborate retirement plans will soon be scuttled. The whole Sodomy 2 fiasco was having the opposite of its intended effects, meaning that the opposition was gaining support as a result, and BN was bleeding because of it. They now wished they had never started it. This verdict was their least-worst option. It wasn’t a great option for them, but the other options would be far worse. Umno-BN has dug its own grave. It’s a matter of time they fall into it.

@PR Hipokrit says: February 6, 2012 at 1:00am

Please, everytime I see an allegation that BN is rotten and corrupt, I see a mirror image in Pakatan. Wake up, politicians and parties need funds, and you can bet your last taxpayer’s sen that money is being siphoned off from Selangor and Penang to fund PR’s campaign for GE-13. I feel it is fine for us to criticise BN, but don’t daydream PR is your knight in shining armour. What’s important is the rakyat and NGOs are granted basic freedoms to query and protest, and I think we are all enjoying that even as we write and complain on sites like these, not to mention so many times people been let off easy for street demos. I still put my trust in BN to manage the country in a time we face a terrible global recession, and I hope they finally wisened up and stop fooling around with rakyat’s money. Think things are changing, but putting PR into power ‘just-to-teach-BN-a-lesson’ will derail reforms and change taking place in the Government. We cannot afford to have the next 5 years of inexperienced, squabbling politicians. Surely you are not to blind to see PR will only fall apart once they takeover Putrajaya. Their uneasy coalition will start feuding over irreconciliable differences, especially between PAS and DAP. Everybody in PR is lying low, but when Putrajaya is in their hands, everyone will start fighting again as they have done in the past. PR will never match BN in terms of unity. We need unity of the Ruling Party. Wake up guys, ever heard the phrase ‘from the frying pan into the fire?’ BN is trying to clean itself up, and I think we can see for the first time in Malaysian history big names like Tun Ling, Khir Toyo (and hopefully soon Shahrizat) are turning up at court. In times of extreme global uncertainty, I’ll go with the proven managers. That’s conventional wisdom, be good if Malaysians heed it for its own sake. But then again, maybe it is the rakyat that needs to be taught a lesson, not BN. Maybe the rakyat needs to suffer under PR before they wisen up :)

@PR Hipokrit : The Rakyat HAVE suffered, it’s not too widely known yet. See Teo Beng Hock? Or the Gambier Threat? Or the Chinatown MRT spat? ALL under Pakatan’s watch. Some of us NEARLY were martyred for DAP’s selfish and people unfriendly, family-clique based cause and are still suffering. All who have suffered will fight the creeps, especially the new ones pretend to be saviours to the end. More of the same, but in different form . . . though I”d take out the family blocs and party cliques in Pakatan first and formost, the rest seem to be quite alright.

3rd Force being little associated with the GLC and Globalist (Zionist?!?) bunch world wide, is less likely to collude and will indeed amend laws rather than use the same laws to threaten the Rakyat. Choose the poorest, least known (less chance of international collusion), least educated, least family linked, most local, and most ordinary type of candidate (indie candidates), or 3rd Force political parties to avoid the arrogance and self serving bastardy of the above 2 coalitions. I have brough up many issues, and the only response by Pakatan was cynical and defensive gestures, and an absolute refusal to welcome people with independent views.

Overview of what value is left in Pakatan :

Stick with the non-family bloc or non-clique types, which is abut 50% of Pakatan. Ther rest are quite difficult and should be replaced by 3rd Forcers. Being heavily influenced by PAP and PAP’s nepotism and authoritarianism par excellence Mubarak and Gaddaffi (all family member types) does not help DAP. Being heavily influenced by ‘some’ factions in the USA (the Zionist lobby?!?) does not help PKR (See Note 1’s comment below). Being overly enamoured of the Hudud bunch does not help PAS (there are 2 clear factions in PAS, with a thread of ethics that none have matched, lets hope the less fundo-types in PAS temper their less all encompassing brethren. Save for the unambiguity of the PAS Supporter’s Congress in the context of membership and voting rights (why not absorb entirely as regular members???) PAS looks much less nepotistic than PKR or DAP where it’s all oligarchs and term limitless family blocs. I had much hope for Pakatan but now I know that 50% of the lot are UNVOTABLE do not like independent critical thinking members in Pakatan, and need to be replaced by 3rd FORCERS!

Note 1

@dugosays: January 11, 2012 at 10.39 pm

Immediately after spending 6 years in jail and jobless throughout, Anwar bought a rm7 millions mansion in Segambut. Can anyone beat that? the poorest and jobless with millions to spend? the one who appointed his father Ibrahim to be in the board of numerous public listed companies during his reign as finance minister and dpm? who established the so-called Class A Wibawa for government contracts worth billions of ringgit and single-handedly approved these projects to his cronies, Kam J being one of them? the one who flew everywhere in helicopters, even for hari raya open houses when he was dpm? wish I am the poorest finance minister too. well, tun tan siew sin poorer than this sudumisai(subject to appeal)? beats me!!!!

To recap : Vote for 3rd Force, non-nepotist, non-GLC linked, non-racists, non plutocrat, non-oligarch ONLY.

3 Articles on Malaysian Politics – Debates, Journo-relayed one-upmanship (sympathies to Ibrahim Ali here, but because of racism, Ali’s locus standi is not even valid to debate by) and PPP’s lapdoggery and irrelevance to REAL voters – reposted by @AgreeToDisagree – 21st February 2012

In Apartheid, Law, Malaysia, voting methods, voting strategy on February 20, 2012 at 8:12 pm

ARTICLE 1

No Benefit In Debate Between Races – Tuesday, 21 February 2012 00:12

PUTRAJAYA — Former prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad said debates between the races will not bring any benefit because each race will continue to hold on to their own stand.

“Even if we have it (debate between the races), there will not be any impact. It will make the situation worse, each race will hold on to their own stand,” he said.

He said this when approached after attending a closed-door meeting with the right-wing group, Perkasa, at the Perdana Leadership Foundation, here on Monday afternoon.

Mahathir said his meeting with Perkasa today was to discuss various issues pertaining to the Malay race, besides presenting various problems being faced by the community including factionalism.

Meanwhile, responding to a question, Mahathir said there was no need to hold a debate (involving the Prime Minister) with the opposition head, Anwar Ibrahim as Anwar’s stand on many issues was already known to all.

“He is everything to everybody, he is a chameleon, he changes colour everytime. When he is with the Indian he is Indian, when he is with Muslims he will give talks about Islam. All they are fighting for is to make him a Prime Minister that’s all,” he said.

Meanwhile, Perkasa president Ibrahim Ali said the party’s legal bureau was studying the possibility of suing Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng for defamation for his statements during his debate with MCA president Dr Chua Soi Lek.

“During the debate, he (Lim) had mentioned about Perkasa having a relationship with the MCA and that purportedly Perkasa would create chaos.

“So we are looking at his video (debate) many, many times and I instructed the Perkasa lawyers to study from the legal aspect to sue Lim Guan Eng because we cannot allow him to continue making the allegations,” he said.

He said Lim’s allegations were baseless because Perkasa had never held any illegal assembly.

Meanwhile, Ibrahim said he was now prepared to debate with Lim and the subject of the debate would be “Who is more racist, DAP or Perkasa” and “Who is more trouble maker Perkasa or DAP” and let the people judge.

(Bernama)

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

Dr.Mahathir does not want people to discuss because the final conclusion will be that they will find Mahathir was responsible for most of the problems of the day mainly from corruption and cronyism-patronage culture. What does a medical doctor know about running a country anyway? We need discipline appropriate people or Malaysia is finished. Debates are important but only if the subjects address systemic problems caused by specific issues. Apartheid, corruption, nominally nepotism are serious problems. But most MPs turn the debate into a shouting match on useless issues, debates are beneficial, the subject choice too often though is irrelevant due to MP’s self serving agendas. They view Dewan as a big gambling table for their family members, the Rakyat should identify these types of MPs and dump the lot of them by GE13, otherwise run for election as independents, the Coalition/Party paradigm is a failure.

ARTICLE 2

Debate with me, Ibrahim Ali dares Guan Eng – UPDATED @ 08:42:11 PM 20-02-2012 – by Yow Hong Chieh – February 20, 2012

Ibrahim said DAP has unfairly tarred his Perkasa as a chauvinistic group. — File pic
PUTRAJAYA, Feb 20 — Datuk Ibrahim Ali challenged DAP secretary-general Lim Guan Eng today to a debate over which was more racist, the opposition party or Perkasa.

The leader of the Malay rights group said the debate was necessary to dispel misconceptions about Perkasa, which he said had been unfairly vilified as a chauvinistic group by DAP.

The debate could be conducted in Malay and English and should be broadcast live on television, Ibrahim said, adding that it must feature an independent moderator but no audience.

“I will produce the facts and figures, all the paper clippings, all the resolutions to prove that DAP is racist and out to make trouble,” he told reporters at the Perdana Leadership Foundation here.

“With the record with I’ve kept since the May 13 tragedy in 1969, I can put across to the public so that they remember how DAP has consistently played the political game, which, to us, is purely chauvinist and racist.”

The Pasir Mas MP was speaking after a closed-door meeting with former prime minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad on Malay issues.

Ibrahim added that Perkasa will sue Lim for allegedly defaming the group during the latter’s debate with MCA president Datuk Seri Dr Chua Soi Lek on Saturday.

Lim had repeated unfounded allegations that Perkasa was a group out to cause chaos, he charged.

“I have instructed Perkasa’s lawyers to study the video (of the debate) and we will sue Lim Guan Eng,” he said.

“We can’t allow him to continue making such accusations… He just wants to hide DAP’s racism by hurling accusations at others.”

Ibrahim said Perkasa will subpoena the Inspector-General of Police (IGP) to clarify whether the group was indeed racist, as claimed by Lim.

He pointed out that Perkasa had never broken any laws and was only fighting to safeguard the constitutional rights of the Malays, Bumiputeras and Muslims.

“We would like to go to court and settle this with Lim Guan Eng once and for all,” he said.

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

Try this one you 2 old guys. How about ALL politicians who were present during 1969 be struck from the Dewan, and only politicians born AFTER 1970 be allowed to run for politics hereon? Our grandfathers whatever race who participated were violent and unreasonable then. This generation does not want to fight or believe in fundamentalism, how about letting the younger generation take over instead? Any born after 1969 did not participate in, nor provoke the riots, nor have any hand in the ‘social contract’ and hence has better credentials to run the country. As for Mahathir’s article, the OLDER generation who are inflexible and RACIST (believe APARTHEID laws and APARTHEID constitutional articles), will indeed hold on to their outdated and miserable pro-violence, inward-loking Asabiya communalism stands. The younger generation, at least those who have not committed to apartheid or benefited off apartheid, are uncorrupted and ready to press the reset button.

ARTICLE 3

PPP Gets ‘Green Light’ To Contest Seat In Melaka – Tuesday, 21 February 2012 00:14

KUALA LUMPUR – The People’s Progressive Party (PPP) has received ‘green light’ to contest a seat in Melaka for the first time at the general election.

Its president M.Kayveas said Chief Minister Mohd Ali Rustam and MCA president Dr Chua Soi Lek had agreed to hand Kota Laksamana state seat to PPP.

He said MCA’s decision to give up the seat showed Barisan Nasional (BN) unity where winnable candidates from other component parties are given the chance to contest.

“This is the Barisan Nasional strategy. Previously, seats alloted to a party were rarely given to others but things have changed,” he told reporters after chairing the PPP supreme council meeting here on Monday.

Betty Chew of DAP won Kota Laksamana with a majority of 3,642 votes at 2008 general election, beating Lim Eng Teck of BN.

Kayveas said the candidate for Kota Laksamana seat will be decided by Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak.

(Bernama)

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

Right to contest means nothing. A one man independent unknown candidate can run for ANY constituency without permission from anyone. If PPP believes in continuing apartheid, PPP will lose wherever PPP contests, if PPP needs permission to run for candidacy, then PPP has even less autonomy than a one man show independent candidate who will endorse with intention to grant :

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

6 Articles On Malaysia – featuring DAP-MCA debate, Chinese Mentri Besars, Spa Raid, PAS’s First Bureaucratic Interference and Najib’s Out of Touchedness – reposted by @AgreeToDisagree – 19th February 2012

In 1% tricks and traps, Bumiputera Apartheid, candidacy, checks and balances, conflict of interest, Eminent Domain, lack of focus, Malaysia, media tricks, misplaced adoration, politics, racism, Sexuality, vested interest, voting methods, voting strategy on February 19, 2012 at 10:21 am

ARTICLE 1

People the winner in Chinese debate, says Soi Lek – by Yow Hong Chieh – February 18, 2012

Lim (left) and Dr Chua greet each other warmly at the end of their debate. — Picture by Jack Ooi

KUALA LUMPUR, Feb 18 — Datuk Seri Dr Chua Soi Lek has called his debate with DAP secretary-general Lim Guan Eng this evening a victory for the public, who got to hear views from both sides of the political divide.

The MCA president, whose hour-long debate in Mandarin with Lim was shown live on Astro, stressed that the public should not see the event as a “school debate” with winners and losers but a chance to better understand the two parties.

“The winner is the people, and not Lim Guan Eng or Chua Soi Lek, because they are the ones who know the true position of the parties,” he told reporters after the debate at the “Malaysian Chinese at the Political Crossroads” conference here.

Dr Chua hoped the debate held at Berjaya Times Square Hotel here would serve as starting point for similar events between the MCA and DAP in future, but said that it would be up to individual politicians to decide if they wanted to do so.

Lim also said today’s debate on the two-party system in Malaysia had benefited the people as such exchanges were part and parcel of a healthy democracy.

This was because debates helped to air advice and dissent, which is crucial to building consensus through a process of public consultation, he explained.

He wished to see other leaders from Barisan Nasional (BN) and Pakatan Rakyat (PR) take part in such debates, singling out Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak.

“We hope this small step will be followed by a big one, that is (a debate) between Datuk Seri Najib and opposition leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim,” Lim said, joking that the public would get bored if only he and Dr Chua debated each other.

Najib has baulked at several offers from Anwar to debate on policy issues, which the PKR de facto leader has said would let voters decide for themselves if the opposition pact’s plans for the country had merit.

The Umno president had previously demurred by saying debates were not necessary as political parties were more important than individuals in Malaysia’s parliamentary democracy.

Both Dr Chua and Lim said they would debate each other again soon in Bahasa Malaysia and English on another topic.

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

If the below 3 items are not granted by either MCA or DAP, the people will not be the winner of everything no matter how many times DAP and MCA debate. We did not vote for MCA or DAP to debate, we voted for MCA or DAP to grant :

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

Debate among yourselves for what? 3rd Force Chinese parties, are you ready tp trounce these 2 hegelian dialectic parties? As long as APARTHEID persists, the people (especially minorities or persecuted Malays who are not ‘Muslim enough’ – it is actually true that Malays wishing to counter the fundo mentality here in some quarters are depending on the Orang Asli, Indians and Chinese to ensure UNHCR Article 1 and by extension UNHCR Article 18 will be assured in Malaysia) are the loser. So end the APARTHEID before saying anyone won, it is the MPs who won, since they get to keep the salaries that taxpayers pay for. End APARTHEID and stop debating! File lawsuits. refer to the Reid Commission or the UNHCR Article 1. Contact the UN about apartheid. Contact the homelands India and China to send a Commissar to help MCA and DAP think clearly, it’s just equality not destruction of the Malay race we ask for DAP and MCA to do!

 

 

ARTICLE 2

No point addressing lies, says Guan Eng – by Shannon Teoh – February 19, 2012

KUALA LUMPUR, Feb 19 — Lim Guan Eng dismissed today criticisms that he failed to reply to questions from the floor in yesterday’s debate with political rival Datuk Seri Dr Chua Soi Lek, saying he does not respond to lies.

The Penang chief minister told reporters in the island that he did not touch on whether the state government had increased local assessment fees; why DAP supported hudud; and if land was allocated to Chinese vernacular schools as the allegations made were untrue.

“Did we increase?” the DAP secretary general asked local Penang reporters. “Chua Soi Lek said we support hudud. We have already said many times we oppose hudud and that is why you don’t have it in Penang. You know and I know.”

“If you want to reply to lies, you will have no time to present your policies,” the Bagan MP said.

The highly anticipated debate saw Lim attacking Dr Chua’s MCA for being unable to stop graft within the Barisan Nasional (BN) coalition.

But the former health minister took DAP to task for being “a slave” to PAS, the Islamic party in the opposition Pakatan Rakyat (PR) pact.

The debate, themed “Chinese at a Crossroads. Is the 2 Party System Becoming a 2 Race System?” was also screened on Astro in Mandarin with Malay translation provided.

The floor largely backed a stern-looking Dr Chua whose opponent smiled throughout most of the debate despite enduring heavy fire from questions by the audience.

Lim added today that as the debate was organised by MCA, “eight or nine out of the 10 questions” were directed towards him instead of the MCA president.

“You get six minutes of questions but only three minutes to answer. Even Chua Soi Lek agreed there was no time. A debate should not be a forum to spew lies and personal attacks,” he said.

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

No point addressing lies? Heres a huge lie in the making by an inwrd looking slip in the language by LGE. Waddya mean *in Penang* LGE? We are interested in the assurance of protection of all minorities in the whole of Malaysia. If DAP’s reach is only *in Penang* then MCA or any 3rd Force party has already won. LGE said *in Penang* there are minorities ALL over Malaysia. Is this how far DAP aspires for equality *in Penang*. A satrapy under the Lim Clan? That is why the 3rd Force or indie candidates will form the backbone of Malaysia’s minorties’ future.

 

 

ARTICLE 3

And now for the truth about Tee Keat: It’s a red herring! Impossible for non-Malay to be MB Featured – written by  Jackson Ng (retired ?streetpounding? journalist), Malaysia Chronicle – Tuesday, 14 February 2012 03:33

And now for the truth about Tee Keat: It’s a red herring! Impossible for non-Malay to be MB

I READ with amusement the Malaysia Chronicle (MC) report titled “Tee Keat to be the first ever Chinese ‘Mentri Besar’ of Selangor?”

At the point of writing, the report attracted 275 comments from MC readers, testimony of the interest and excitement over such an appointment coming true.

Also, at the same time, I have also yet to come across any news report of a response from Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak, who is also Selangor Barisan Nasional (BN) chairman, or Pandan MP Ong Tee Keat.

I also note the maturity of the majority of MC readers in expressing their disbelief of such an appointment being realised.

Red herring

Why is it unbelievable? Section 51 of the Selangor Constitution is the reason:

…no person shall be appointed to be Menteri Besar unless he is of the Malay Race and professes the Muslim Religion. So, is it a wonder that both Najib and Ong have yet to respond or any follow-up from the mainstream media?

It is just too unbelievable and too stupid to respond. It is obvious the speculation was generated as a red herring to lure Tee Keat out of Pandan where he had served as MP since January 1989 or 23 years.

The work of Tee Keat’s enemies – MCA is certain

Speculation is swirling on both sides of the political divide that Tee Keat, a former MCA president, will be made the first Chinese Mentri Besar or chief minister of Selangor, if the Umno-BN coalition manages to retake the state in the coming 13th general election.

It is clear the speculation is the work of people who don’t want Tee Keat to defend Pandan but to go for a state assembly nomination. Who are they? MCA is certain or perhaps Umno or both?

One thing is almost certain. After 23 years in politics, Tee Keat cannot be that stupid to take such bait when Section 51 of the Selangor Constitution is so clear on the appointment of a Mentri Besar.

It looks and more and more like Tee Keat is in the wrong coalition!


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

We do not care who is the MB. It is more important to have :

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

If the WHOLE cabinet and dewan were Malay and the above 3 items with a few other freedoms assured, Malaysia would be more perfect than it is with a Chinese lapdog in every MB seat but without the above 3 items.

 

 

ARTICLE 4

Bukit Aman storms ‘stubborn’ spa – by Aizat Sharif – Wednesday, February 15, 2012 – 14:57

NABBED: Foreign masseuses were arrested during a raid at a massage centre yesterday. The centre is believed have been operating body-to-body massage as an extra service for its client

KUALA LUMPUR: A health centre in Desa Hartamas must have a “stubborn streak” in it for continuing to operate illegally as a massage parlour despite being raided by state and district police several times last year.

On Monday night, the Federal anti-vice police turned up at its doors on the first floor of a shoplot in Jalan 20/70A at 10.45pm.

The raiding party, led by Chief Inspector Wiryanti Abdul Wahid, nabbed a local man suspected to be the operator and four foreign women.

Three customers, who were also detained, were released after their statements were recorded.

“The place, believed to be operating for the past six months, had been raided several times by the state and district police last year,” said Wiryanti.

She said from now on, police and City Hall would monitor the premises to ensure it would not revert to its illicit business.

She said the foreigners, an Indonesian and three Thai nationals, aged 20 to 30, did not possess any identification documents.

“We also found out the premises to be operating illegally and a local operator, in his 30s, was also detained. The masseuses are also believed to provide extra services, like ‘body-to-body’ massage and sex, for clients.” she said.

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

This is getting tedious. Legalise the adult services outlet or districts and just make sure no Muslims are allowed to use the services. It is a human right for both the non-Muslim client and the sex worker. Malaysia cannot take away non-Muslim rights to a legalized adult industry without falling afoul of the UNHCR especially for outlets that stick strictly to non-Muslims.

 

 

ARTICLE 5

PAS Sacks Religious Teacher Who Joined PPP – 19 February 2012 00:19

KOTA BAHARU — The People’s Progressive Party (PPP) is disappointed over the Kelantan Government’s decision to sack a religious teacher after she and her husband joined the PPP in Pasir Puteh, four days ago.

PPP vice-president Nik Sapeia Nik Yusoff said the PAS action was unprofessional and was tantamount to practising political revenge, which did not reflect upon an Islamic-based party.

“I urge Kelantan Menteri Besar Nik Abdul Aziz Nik Mat to take this matter seriously.

“Barisan Nasional (BN) does not sack those who do not support the coalition. This is evidence of PAS despotism,” he told a media conference here on Saturday.

Eighty PAS members in Wakaf Village, Pasir Puteh, including the religious teacher, Siti Rokiah Mohd Zain, 53, quit the party and joined PPP.

Nik Sapeia said, after joining PPP, a PAS leader had informed Siti Rokiah that she was sacked from her position as religious teacher and not eligible to receive her monthly allowance of RM200.

The PAS’ high-handed decision has upset Siti Rokiah.

“I have been teaching Islam since 2004. I am not really concerned about the allowance, but this small amount was withdrawn because I joined the PPP,” she said.

Nevertheless, Nik Sapeia disclosed, PPP would help Siti Rokiah receive a similar allowance, beginning this month, and urged her to continue teaching the residents.

He also handed over RM1,200 to Siti Rokiah as six-month allowance.

(Bernama)

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

After the string of successes in ethics, a very bad and unethical move by PAS. Firings must not be politically motivated and citizen choice of political party cannot be used as a weapon or to sideline citizens by. This is a democracy, not the jaguh kampung’s backyard. Firings can be done on meritocracy but this firing smacks of Theocracvy and politicised Islam. Islam is not to be sullied by politics. Reinstate the religious teacher but make sure Siti does not talk politics in religion class either.

 

 

ARTICLE 6

Billionaires Became Rich Because Of Our Policy – Sunday, 19 February 2012 00:12

KUALA LUMPUR — Malaysian billionaires became rich bacause of the country’s policy and stability, said Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak.

“I looked at (Friday’s) newspapers… the list of Malaysian billionaires. I studied each one of them. Maybe some in this room today. Every one of them became rich because of our policy,” he said when opening the one-day “Malaysian Chinese at the Political Crossroads” conference jointly organised by the Asian Strategy and Leadership Institute and the MCA think-tank, Insap, here yesterday.

Najib said these billionaires either hold concessions or were in the right place and at the right time.

He said that the billionaires benefited from the stability of Malaysia and the government would continue to ensure growth and create more and more opportunities.

According to Najib, the Malaysian Chinese are more entrepreneurial compared to the Bumiputeras and the government would continue to make Malaysia a better place to do business.

“Even if they don’t get concessions, they have to be in the right place and at the right time. They benefited from our policy, they benefited from the fact that we give stability to this country.

“We will continue to ensure that the nation will grow and will create more and more opportunities,” he said.

Najib also said that the government would continue to listen to the problems of the Malaysian Chinese.

“We will make sure there are more opportunities for them to advance in this country,” he added.

(Bernama)

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

Najib said these billionaires either hold (were selectively given) concessions or were in the right place (political families) and at the right time (political alliances currently in power). Thats not meritocracy, but political cronyism . . . Najib shouldn’t hire speech writers then talk as if he believes in the material he’s reading, a sense of doom for the country darkens the political scene when articles about statments like these appear. Does the Royal Collective of Malay rulers know that the nation of Malaysia’s helm is on autopilot? What IS Najib doing??? Probably still thinks hes the Defence Minister during dr.Evil’s time . . . end the apartheid at least if you can’t focus Najib, the country could at least attribute something worthwhile to your Premiership, the next generation of BN leaders looks very uninspiring overall especially if apartheid still cannot end . . . PM shows the ‘out of touch’, ”pre-scripted’ side of himself here . . .

2 (circa 2010) Articles On Malaysian Politic – reposted by @AgreeToDisagree – 8th February 2012

In Malaysia, voting methods, voting strategy on February 8, 2012 at 4:00 pm

When party affiliations don’t matter, personal manifestos should – Zeffri Yusof – 30 Dec 2011

ARTICLE 1

MARCH 5 — Thanks to s**t stirring MPs like Zul Noordin and “newly independent minds” like Tan Tee Beng, Datuk Seri Zahrain Hashim and Fairus Khairuddin, one can hope that the majority of Malaysian voters have been taught a lesson they won’t soon forget.

For the next time we visit the ballot box, let’s demand some well-in-advance straight answers from our running candidates because it’s evident that we can’t rely on some of them to keep their story straight (hey, some might mistake it for integrity).

It may be naive of me for even suggesting it, but it seems that far too many of our MPs don’t share the basic principles of the political parties they represent.

How else can we explain the fact that BN only needs seven more MPs to cross over to regain its two-thirds majority?

But perhaps I ask too much. What has also been made abundantly clear again earlier this week is that the entire Pakatan Rakyat coalition filled up their candidacy roster in the last general election with whatever they could muster — quality … and in certain cases, ability and decency, be darned.

It’s obvious that for MPs like Zul Noordin, the official position and manifesto of the coalition he happens to represent do not even come into play. I can only imagine how he gleefully decided he was going to run for his own private reasons, rode the popular sentiments at the time, and duly got lucky.

I say lucky because unkind commentators have already said it: letak tunggul kayu pun boleh menang — such was the tsunami of opinion at the time of the 12th general election.

The injustice is compounded when the voting public — his voters — are screwed because we only gain insight into his position on pressing issues of the day much, much later; “after” he gets elected and decides to go all maverick on us (no, not like Tom Cruise in “Top Gun”; besides his B2 licence ride doesn’t qualify).

As disgruntled voters, we can hold out in hope that once all the s**t stirring, frog jumping and trimming of fat is done; the real lean muscle (can I call it the phat?) are the ones left over to continue for the next GE.

Moving forward from this daily unfolding debacle (soon, I hope), I believe it’s only fair that all right-minded MPs, ADUNs and would be candidates-for-office declare, in advance, their principles and personal manifestos to the voting public.

In the age of free blogging resources, Facebook and Twitter — and with 68 per cent of Malaysians using the Internet and over 90 per cent on cellular phones — this shouldn’t prove very hard. Because as voters we deserve to know, damnit.

We want to discern the wheat from the chaff, so that if and when our MPs decide to screw us later, we can turn around and call them out for the liars and chumps that they are.

So here’s a sample voter’s request for MPs and candidates: at the very least, put down clearly where you stand on the following core issues:

1. Secular separation between religion and state; or theocracy with syaria law?

2. Equality of all Malaysians regardless of ethnicity, sex and sexual orientation; or special positions for some?

3. Affirmative action for all underprivileged citizens; or selective affirmative action for a majority?

4. Opinion and stand on Bangsa Malaysia; opinion or stand on “Ketuanan Melayu”.

5. Freedom of religion, including freedom “from” religion, and what you understand by it.

6. View on detention without trial.

7. View on freedom of speech, including a free, independent media.

8. View on the Parliament, executive, judiciary and royalty.

I would argue that knowing a candidate’s stand on all of the above is infinitely more important than whether he or she is BN or PR because what is also equally evident by now is that we do not have clearly delineated teams in our political sphere.

A political coalition is only as good as its common ground and, guess what, denying BN its two-thirds majority is not a long-term common ground. Surprise, surprise — by now none of the component parties in both PR and BN has any more common ground left.

For how else can you explain Umno and PAS disagreeing on Ketuanan Melayu, yet pally pally for enacting firmer syaria laws? Or DAP, PAS and MCA sharing the same opinion on the Allah issue, or Umno in Perak forgetting its past history with the institution of royalty.

So yes, we are going to demand to know our candidate’s principles and their stance on all of those important issues — including their reasons — because, hey, voters also want to know if their candidates have actually put some modicum of thought into what they stand for (or perhaps I am asking for too novel a concept)?

Lest we forget: the people are the boss. We deserve to know whether our candidates are actually representing their party, or just there to party.

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

Hi Zeffri :

You mentioned all critical items but listed them as if they were normal options. You do know that these items are not optional. And if Malaysia ever is to be a First World nation or in line with the Human Rights Charter, the MP is question must be able to endorse with intent to grant as an election promise :

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

With the 13 point plan as well to gain the support of Singaporean Indians and Chinese, Singapore would revert to the 14th state again. As for Syariah, it can be applicable upon voluntary submission by Muslims. But that can be applied as an option for adults and not imposed summarily on Muslims, if Singaporean Malays are ever to vote for re-assimilation with Malaysia via plebiscite.

Yes a checklist for MPs and assemblymen would be a good way to introduce who we are voting for. Who’s a racist and unvotable? Who is corrupt and unvotable? Who is nepotistic and unvotable? Who believes in limitless terms and is unvitable? NGO’s or indie bloggers lets get those details to the Rakyat soon ! Would Zeffri like to announce candidacy on the above 3 item ticket? It’s just equality and also in linewith the prevention of the Sin of Asabiya.

ARTICLE 2

AG’s acumen for asinine answers — Martin Jalleh

MARCH 5 — Attorney General (AG) Abdul Gani Patail want us to believe that he is committed to ensuring that the rule of law is upheld in Bolehland. In his address to members of the Judiciary and the Bar entitled “Opening of the Legal Year 2010”, on 16 Jan., he declared:

“(I)t [[[ *** Take a leaf from the real MJ many times superior MJ , appetite for death is endless the millionth MJ would not be enough for It and (I) . . . *** ]]] cannot be over emphasised that the concept of justice is grounded on the basic principles of equality, fairness, and rule of law. The AGC (AG’s Chambers) is committed to promoting the rule of law and ensuring justice be given to all people whatever their race, religion or class.

“AGC in carrying out its duties is well aware of the maxim ‘justice should not only be done, but should manifestly and undoubtedly be seen to be done’, and hence the explanations issued by AGC from time to time on cases handled by it so that the public would not have misconceptions of biasness.”

Such purported profound and passionate zeal for the rule of law by the AG turns into mere political BN propaganda when one applies it to his pathetic excuses for not pressing charges against the two reporters of the Al-Islam magazine who had committed a most sacrilegious act against the Catholic community.

Gani’s Gall

Under guise of being Catholics, they participated in a Mass (church service) at the Church of St Anthony in Puduraya to “investigate” what was going on in Catholic Churches and to verify reports that “Muslim teenagers were being converted to Christianity in Kuala Lumpur’s churches every Sunday”.

They even partook of the Holy Communion strictly meant only for Catholics, which adherents of the faith treat with utmost reverence. They spat out the remnants, photographed it and published the picture in an article entitled “Tinjaun Al Islam Dalam Gereja: Mencari Kesahihan Remaja Murtad” in the May 2009 issue of the magazine.

Their act shocked not only Christians but also Muslims in the country. Even Umno Youth chief Khairy Jamaluddin found their action “appalling” and “offensive”. He added that the “Islamic virtues of empathy, respect and tolerance were obviously absent in both the journalists and the magazine’s editorial team”.

Catholics K Sudhagaran Stanley and Joachim Xavier had lodged a police report in July last year against the two reporters. On Aug 27 the Catholic Lawyers Society handed a memorandum to the Home Ministry urging it to take action. There was no response. They must have hoped it would eventually be forgotten.

Finally on Feb 24 this year, about six months after the police report was made, and due to what the Dang Wangi police district headquarters called “overwhelming pressure from the general public”, the police revealed that charges against the two have been dropped.

They were investigated under Section 298A (1) of the Penal Code for causing disharmony, disunity or feelings of enmity, hatred or ill will, or prejudicing the maintenance of harmony or unity, on grounds of religion.

Senior investigating officer ASP Ananthan Rajoo, in a letter to the complainants, stated that the police had received orders from the deputy public prosecutor (DPP), to whom the case was referred, to take no further action (NFA).

Gani’s Hype and Hypocrisy

The overwhelming public reaction not only from Catholics but from countless of other Malaysians and even Muslims is that the AG has failed to uphold the rule of law and that what he had pronounced, proclaimed and preached so piously about was mere pretence!

The AG is at fault for the public perception that there are two sets of laws in this country. Reputed lawyer/blogger Art Harun articulated well his disgust over the decision and called it what it really was: “The blatant double standard. The plain hypocrisy of it all. The stupidity.”

Alas, it would be very easy to imagine the speed with which the police and the AG would have sprung into action if two non-Muslim reporters were to enter a mosque disguised as Muslims, partook of the rituals and desecrated something which the congregation considered very sacred.

Surely Gani would apply the full force of the law without any doubt, delay or deliberation. The penalty would be severe. The all-too-familiar mob would be braying for their blood. Lock them up, lash them or even lynch them?  Non-Muslims would be threatened with a looming May 13 or Feb 13!

The Malaysian Insider (TMI) captured well the contempt for the AG’s decision: “In the eyes of the Catholic Church, the desecration of the communion is an act even worse than the recent firebombing of places of worship.”

“Never before has the exhibition of double standards been so obvious … The irony is this message of hypocrisy comes at a time when the Najib administration is asking for support from non-Muslims.”

In a press conference yesterday Kuala Lumpur Archbishop Murphy Pakiam asked the AG for the rationale behind his decision: “I appeal to the Attorney General to explain the decision not to take further action on the Al-Islam journalists’ case.”

Pakiam pointed out his fear that “the decision not to prosecute appears to legitimise the actions of the Al-Islam journalists”. He added he believed that the Catholic community will be “satisfied” if the journalists and publisher apologise.

Gani’s Gobbledegook

In a faxed response to the press, Gani had the gall to say: “The actions of the two reporters may have hurt the feelings of the people but I was satisfied that they did not intend to offend anyone. It was an act of sheer ignorance… the two journalists did not cause any disturbance when they went undercover…”

The Attorney General of Malaysia who turned psychologist and mind-reader has offered all future potential violators of religious harmony and unity the excuses needed to escape from and evade the rule of law. Just appear real stupid and do all the harm you want undercover so that it won’t disturb anybody, and leave the rest to me!

(Whatever their intentions, they had violated Section 298A (1) of the Penal Code for causing disharmony, disunity or feelings of enmity, hatred or ill will, or prejudicing the maintenance of harmony or unity, on grounds of religion.)

Gani went on probably hoping that the public would be as gullible as he expects of them: “Therefore, in view of the circumstances at that particular time and in the interest of justice, peace and harmony, I decided not to press any charges against them.”

Whose “interest”? Whose “justice”? Umno’s brand of justice? How would peace and harmony be disturbed if charges were pressed against the reporters? It appears there is really no rule of law in this country but the mob rules – even in the discerning and decision making process of the Attorney General!

Gani tried very hard to convince himself: “I have previously decided similarly in other cases where the circumstances were quite similar involving other religions, under those circumstances taking serious action would not be in the interest of justice at that particular time.”

TMI again “hit the nail on the AG’s head” when it commented: “Simply put, this man by his statement has shown himself to be incapable of protecting the interest of Christians and non-Muslims in the country.”

“One can only wonder what justice is for the AG, for his actions in the Al-Islam case show he is ‘not in the interest of justice’ in any time or situation.”

TMI also described Gani’s statement as “outrageous at the very least as he was offering protection to a group of people who have not had the decency to apologise for their actions” and that the AG was “condoning vigilantism”.

God is watching, Gani!

Khairy accepted and defended the AG’s decision, for “the decision may have been reached to ‘balance out’ the tensions caused by the issue revolving the use of the word ‘Allah’”.  Six months ago, he had called the act “unacceptable”! The poor Umno Youth leader must be suffering from an unbalanced mind.

Only politicians feel they have to resort to playing the balancing act. The AG is not a politician and he should not play politics. All he should be concerned about is that the scales of justice are balanced and that there should be fairness to all.

The sheer ignorance “plea” concocted by the AG on behalf of the two reporters is really an insult to the intelligence of the public. This is reinforced by the fact that the magazine which they are working for, Al-Islam, is a monthly magazine published by Utusan Karya Sdn Bhd, a subsidiary of Utusan Group (which is owned by Umno) and which publishes the Utusan Malaysia (UM).

In recent years, the UM has been allowed to go on a spree of spinning falsehood, spouting lies, spewing seditious articles and spreading Umno’s unprecedented racist and religious propaganda with impunity – and immunity granted by the Umno Home Minister. It is very obvious where the reporters of Al-Islam got their audacity from in committing their sacrilegious act!

Khairy was wrong when he said last year that the two journalists failed to consider “the gravity of their own actions”. Gani was wrong when he said they were “sheer “ignorant”. The reporters were right when they knew full well what they were doing and that they could do what they liked, for there would be no consequences – and the AG has confirmed it!

In his maiden speech unveiling 1 Malaysia, People First Performance Now, the Prime Minister said: “We must reach out to the many who may have been disaffected and left confused by political games, deceit and showmanship”.

It is time you stop your games, Gani!  God is watching, Gani!

It is wishful thinking (and I hope I will be proven wrong) to expect Al-Islam to apologise, after all, the people behind it come from a superior race, have a religion they believe is superior to all else and are protected by Executive Supremacy! May Allah (oops, I can’t use this word), may God have mercy on our beloved country!

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

Martin Jalleh :

Khairy this, Khairy that . . . what are you, some kind of Nepotist/Embedded-Political-Family supporter? NO RELATIVES, no PARALLEL POST HOLDERS to form BLOCS with. Remember, if every PM’s son, is an MP by the 222nd election or far less, if entire families hold MP posts, democracy would have ended. So don’t support them.

ARTICLE 3

My poor Malaysia — Karim Raslan

MARCH 6 – 2010 — Manila is an exhausting and ugly city. After a week of meetings and far too many encounters with politicians (strange how they never listen to us?), I was itching to get away from the capital.

On the recommendation of some friends, I headed south to the island of Bohol, which is located in the Visayas, the belt of islands anchored by Cebu and sandwiched between Luzon — to the north — and Mindanao — to the south.

I’d been told that Bohol, more than Boracay, (the country’s party-island) was a Bali-in-the-making. Bohol, according to my sources, had Boracay-like sandy beaches. However, at the same time, it also had culture, history and a beautiful countryside.

So, tired of being stuck in endless traffic jams along EDSA, Manila’s equivalent of Jalan Tun Razak and the Federal Highway rolled into one, I headed off.

However, modern technology means that we never really leave our “world” behind and with my Blackberry blinking perpetually; updates from Kuala Lumpur and Jakarta followed me across Bohol’s gorgeous landscape.

Of the two, the news from Malaysia where three women were caned for illicit sex was by far the most disturbing.

The canings have serious implications for Malaysia. We have crossed an invisible line. We no longer belong with Turkey and Indonesia as progressive Muslim nations. For better or for worse, we have chosen to join the more conservative spectrum.

Indeed, Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad has long argued that we are an Islamic state. The recent canings strengthen this position — though I disagree with such a definition.

Moreover, we have chosen to dramatically insert the state — with all its inadequacies and prejudices — into the world of private morality. In doing so, the boundary between the public and personal has been erased forever.

So, what is happening? Well, the Malay/Muslim community is once again being consolidated and united around Umno. Inevitably, this will have tremendous long-term repercussions for the community and indeed the country.

Why? Well, because the very real diversity and differences within the Malay community will no longer be tolerated. We are to be homogenous, loyal and unquestioning subjects.

Independence of thought and action is dangerous and unwise. Anyone who chooses not conform had better be prepared for the consequences.

This is ironic given the fact that we’re simultaneously being exhorted to be innovative and creative in order to take Malaysia to a higher economic level.

The push to control the community absolutely will leave the Malays as the ultimate losers. The best and the brightest will flee for higher paying jobs elsewhere. Meanwhile, everyone else will readjust (or rather, stagnate) to the new reality — namely that obtaining power and money depends on your closeness to Umno, thereby heightening the lobbying and the politicking.

At the same time it’s worth bearing in mind that morality laws are a double-edged sword. Today’s accuser could end up tomorrow’s victim. It’s arguable that justice without mercy is merely revenge. The second trial of Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim is a powerful reminder to people of the dangers of challenging established authority.

Needless to say, the news was pretty depressing. Still, since I was in Bohol, I tried enjoying myself while doing my best to forget the bigotry and narrowness that has been making life in Kuala Lumpur more difficult.

Whilst Bohol’s charms couldn’t entirely shake off the gloom, the island and its history reminded me of the arbitrariness of life in Southeast Asia.

As one of the first points of contact between the Spanish and the locals back in 1565, Bohol was probably a Muslim enclave. The Spanish, however, were thorough conquerors, also spreading Catholicism in their wake.

Interestingly though, the conquistadors quickly realised that they would only be able to convert the local people if they learnt the local languages. This they promptly did, spreading Christianity through a mixture of Tagalog or Bisayan, depending on the locality.

What this did in turn was not dissimilar to the acculturation process that took place in Java in the 15th and 16th-Centuries when Islam was spread by the famous Wali Songo. These nine famous Muslim preachers used Javanese in their sermons, adapting their message to local customs and practices.

Bohol was so strange and yet so familiar. I was constantly being reminded of places elsewhere in Southeast Asia that I’ve visited over the past decades. There were parts that had echoes of Terengganu, Sabah, Ambon, Bangka and even Pagan in Myanmar.

As I drove across Bohol, stopping off at beaches and the rolling chocolate-coloured hills in the centre of the island (a set of bizarre and uniformly dome-shaped formations that rolled on for miles and miles), I found myself forgetting the dispiriting news from Kuala Lumpur.

Indeed, I became quite intrigued by the island’s churches instead. They were large, daunting stone structures, laid out by Jesuits in the 1600’s and 1700’s. The buildings had impressive thick walls, baroque altar-pieces and lavish painted ceilings.

They had survived earthquakes and fires, standing tall among the humble atap homes of their parishioners, a stern and forbidding symbol of Catholicism’s might, not to mention the power of the Spanish monarchs.

Indeed, as I watched the local Bohol people go about their religious practices I was reminded of similar crowds I’d seen years before in Kelantan, in Padang, Quiapo and

Penampang. Indeed, I was most struck by the similarity in terms of intensity and passion that I’d seen at the historic Sultan Ampel mosque in Surabaya, or the Shwedagon pagoda in Yangon.

We were all Southeast Asians — history’s pawns. Here, in a land little different from my own — a land studded with coconut palms, bamboo groves, mango trees and watered by frequent rainstorms, another faith — almost by accident — had taken hold and become dominant, whereas on the Malay Peninsula we had become Muslims.

Once converted, we have now become the most assiduous of believers. Tragically, we are in danger of losing our openness. Instead, we are all-too eager to condemn and attack. Somehow, somewhere along the way, we forgot our rich, syncretic, and much more accepting, tolerant past. Malaysia, my poor Malaysia. — mysinchew

written by AgreeToDisagree

(Note : these were the glory days of open commentary on Malaysian Insider, when the writers would participate with the commentators instead of being all proud and distant or not allowing comments at all! One can identify the kindred spitrit from the authoritarianists by the way the deal with the ‘rabble’ and hidden behind the internet, distance is simply inexcusable  . . . ) This is not an Islamic (circa 1511 AD onwards) or Hindu (circa 300s BC–1279AD) region. This is a region of Nusantaran Animism (circa 300 BC and earlier, possibly far back as 20,0000 BC) when the first Negrito or Khmer Malays arrived from larger land masses of Australia or the sub-continent of Indo-China to begin the first proto-Malay societies. Nusantaran Animism nominally covers Southern Thailand, Malay archipelago, Sumatra, Java, Sarawak, Sabah, Borneo, Celebes, Phillipines Archipelago and nominally all the way up to aboriginal areas of Taiwan. The Keris and the Bomoh are a testament to the presence and stand for the height of Nusantaran Cultures, the traditional and true culture of the Animist peoples of this region.


written by Dayak Sarawak, March 06, 2010
I quite agree. The “Arabization” of Malaysia, oh My Malaysia.

It is unfortunate that some Malaysians have imported the Middle Eastern religious conflict into Malaysia. I often wonder why should we have to adopt the belief and culture of a region so alien to most of us and like the Taliban in Afghanistan would rather destroy our own very rich cultures and traditions. Over the centuries, trade brought a colorful mix of Chinese, Hindu, European, Thai, Burmese and other influence to our land. Our two closest neighbors and close relatives, Philippines and Indonesia too experienced the same though the period of Dutch rule is a dark period of Indonesian history. The region is culturally rich as epitomized by the biggest Buddhist monument in the world, the Borobudur and the Angkor Wat one of the largest Hindu complexes in the world. Surely the culture and civilization of our forefathers (and mothers) must be sophisticated enough to build these monuments. Personally, I don’t want to be an Arab. It is not that I don’t like them but I rather build on the values and traditions of my ancestors (could have come from Yunan for all I care) and live peacefully in my South East Asia. When I visit Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia or Thailand, I will respect their places of worship. (Note : Dayaks are the proto-Malays alongside others ‘Orang Asli’ groups – they however are not 1st Class citizens like the Indians and Chinese face apartheid policy in Malaysia – even though the Orang Asli have been here since 20,000BC or even earlier  . . . )

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

Vote only for non-racists who believe in FULL EQUALITY.

High toll charges for new highway earns the public’s wrath – By Nelson Benjamin and Tresa Gasper – nelson@thestar.com.my, desiree@thestar.com.my – 6th February 2012

In 1% tricks and traps, Abuse of Power, Bad By-Laws, bad laws, checks and balances, collusion, media collusion, Media Neutrality, media sabotage, media traps, media tricks, neurolinguistics, out of context, political correctness, separation of powers, spirit of the law, term limits, vested interest, voting methods, voting strategy, Wealth distribution on February 6, 2012 at 8:25 pm

Easing congestion: The 8.5km Eastern Dispersal Link is being criticised for its proposed toll rates.

JOHOR BARU: Public outcry over the proposed toll rates for the Eastern Dispersal Link (EDL) seems to be gaining momentum, especially since it is expected to open to motorists anytime soon.

The unfair toll fee issue has been raised by Johor Baru MP Datuk Shahrir Samad and Stulang assemblyman Mok Chek Hou.

Mok raised the issue twice at the Johor state assembly, pointing out that the project would help ease traffic congestion along Jalan Tebrau and Jalan Tun Razak but the toll levied on all road users might hurt the Government’s image.

There is even a Facebook page on the matter to gain support against the high toll rates proposed, for the project.

Now, Johor PKR chief Datuk Chua Jui Meng joins the bandwagon saying PKR would stage a demonstration if the Government insists on implementing the high toll fees for the EDL scheduled to open this month.

Chua said although the Government has not officially announced the rates, many blogs and online media have speculated that it would five times higher than what motorists are currently paying.

Presently, motorists travelling into Singapore via the Johor Causeway only are only required to pay RM2.90 to Plus Bhd, for a return journey, which works out to RM1.45 per way.

Under the new toll scheme proposed, motorists have to pay RM6.20 for the EDL and RM1.45 to Plus Berhad.

This means, the total toll charge is RM7.65 one way which works out to RM15.30 to enter Singapore and return to Malaysia, irrespective of whether the motorist has used the EDL.

“We have also have written to Malaysian Resources Corporation Berhad (MRCB), which is constructing the link demanding an explanation as to why the toll booth was built within the Customs, Immigration and Quarantine (CIQ) complex and not at the end of the link,” he said during a press conference at the Chinese Press Club recently.

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

Use approximate monthly fuel costs of various cc of car.

Based on the fuel usage monthly, and a 5 day week, toll fees should be no more than 10% of the fuel expenditure. So if a typical 1800 cc car uses RM1000 monthly in fuel toll fees should be no more than RM100 divided by 20 days which means RM5 ONLY.

Actuallyy if the voters are smart, they would vote specifically for a MP and Assemblyman who would end the toll entirely like PAS bulldozes their tolls.

In fact why not vote for an MP or Assemblyman that will REMOVE the worst laws and abuse of society, lower income taxes and drop rent seekers laws, remove cronies and have clean governance?

This would mean having a fresh unknown candidate who will promise to vote aye or nay in critical issues like removal of tolls. If 66.6% of the 222 MPs decide that there will be no more concessionaires, there will be no toll problem as in the above article on high prices. So determine if your MP will be votable by getting them to pass a bill, or make your MP candidate sign a contract on penalty of resignation, that if they do not grant to endorse after passing a bill for :

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

;you the voter should know that the MP or candidate is unvotable. If your MP or candidate cannot and will not promise to pass a bill and later vote aye or nay as necessary to end toll booth concessionaires and grant the above 3 items, they are unvotable.

Now let me tell you that BOTH Barisan and Pakatan have been very dodgy about the 3 items above. UMNO is too racist so Barisan cannot be votable. PAS intends to have a very strict Hudud society and DAP keeps mum on the above 3 items so  Pakatan too cannot be votable. This leaves 3rd Force parties like : KITA, JATI, MCLM (whats left of it, but homophobes could find it a good party that has 20 candidates), PCM, Borneo Front, Konsensus Bebas, HRP and PSM to grant the above 3 items. Look at the below form as well and choose your canidates who will end all toll concessions and make all citizens equal.


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

If the 66.6% of MPs decides to endorse with intention to grant whatever the voters want, the voters will get what they want in this case removal of toll booths and toll concessionaires. Note that there are also bad voters who will benefit from certain policies so they are in fact going to sabotage everyone else or talk down or talk around (suddenly talk about movies or even begin an argument or pretend to get angry abut religion etc. – ALL false flag, so don’t fall for it and ignore them and talk to REAL people instead.) or waste time and confuse the toll hating 99% with all sorts of strawmen and even personal insults and attacks.

Anyone who is not a in the receiving company, is a relative (think nepotism in DAP) who does not have access to VIP so and so, or already have applied for certain licenses etc., will likely do their best to confuse or run ‘scrimmage’ to ensure that the toll concessionaire gets the highest toll fees and the longest time to steal all the Rakyat’s money for themselves. Making money should be honest, nopt stealing from other citizens who do not have the network and contacts in this unethical and shameless manner. So voters, choose your candidates and get them to sign contracts, otherwise run for election yourself!