(NST) -  Menteri Besar Tan Sri Abdul Khalid Ibrahim has been asked to justify the reappointment of PKR de facto leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim as Selangor economic adviser.

Kuang assemblyman Abdul Shukur Idrus said in the past five years Anwar had brought no apparent investment into Selangor.

Instead, the Selangor government had sold many of the state subsidiaries' assets, he claimed.

"Land owned by PKPS (Selangor Agriculture Development Corporation) was sold, a golf course in Templer and PKNS (Selangor State Development Corporation) land were sold to developers.

"What did the economic adviser do to improve Selangor's economy? What we can see happening is blatant stripping of the state's assets," he said.

Yesterday, Khalid tweeted that Anwar was expected to "continue playing an important role in the state administration" because of his experience.

Meanwhile, Permatang assemblyman Sulaiman Abdul Razak said Anwar should keep his word and retire from politics after Pakatan failed to take Putrajaya.

He said Anwar should not accept any position, including that of Selangor economic adviser.

Sulaiman said the position would enable Anwar to use state facilities to further his political interests.

Meena Lakshana, fz.com

Pakatan Rakyat's popular vote win in GE13 is limited to four states and Kuala Lumpur, according to an analysis by Sinar Harian.

READ MORE HERE

KTEMOC KONSIDERS

Is Khalid Ibrahim now turning around to bite DAP, an ally which together with PAS have supported him against an Azmin Ali power siege in Selangor?

READ MORE HERE

Student activist Adam Adli Abd Halim has been remanded for  five days  to allow police to question him over remarks he allegedly made at a post-GE13 forum.

Boo Su-Lyn, TMI

The Selangor DAP is questioning the state executive council composition announced by Selangor Mentri Besar Tan Sri Khalid Ibrahim yesterday, barely a week after a furore in PKR over the state’s top post was settled.

State DAP deputy chairman Tony Pua said the party was supposed to get four exco seats instead of the three announced by Khalid, adding that the pick for state Speaker was not as agreed.

“Last night, we found out a different set of names,” Pua told reporters in Subang Jaya here today.

“We want to know why; there was no problem on Thursday. It was a quick half-an-hour meet,” he added.

Pua pointed out that Khalid and Selangor Pakatan Rakyat ― represented by state DAP leaders Teresa Kok and Datuk Teng Chang Khim, as well as state PAS leaders Khalid Samad and Dr Rani Osman ― had agreed in a meeting last Thursday that the DAP would get four spots in the state executive council, while PAS would get three and choose the Selangor Speaker.

Khalid told reporters last night that four Selangor executive council posts would be given to PAS, while the DAP and PKR would get three each, apart from the state Speaker being a DAP lawmaker.

Pua said he only found out about the allocation of the exco seats through a tweet by Khalid last night.

“We’re surprised by Tan Sri (Khalid),” said the Petaling Jaya Utara MP.

“What’s the point of the meeting then?” he added.

Pua said that Teng and Kok have been trying to contact Khalid for clarification, but to no avail.

Last night, Khalid said that a list of names for the Selangor executive council, along with proposed alternatives, was submitted to the Sultan last Friday.

He said the state executive council will be sworn in within the next two weeks.

READ MORE HERE

Leven Woon, FMT

DAP has disputed Selangor Menteri Besar Khalid Ibrahim’s statement that the party will be given three exco and one speaker posts in the state administration.

Citing the meeting between Pakatan Rakyat component parties last Thursday, DAP national publicity secretary Tony Pua said the consensus arrived was for DAP to have four exco posts, PAS three and the speaker posts, while PKR will take three exco posts and the Menteri Besar post.

However, Khalid told reporters a different version at a function last night where he said DAP would have the speaker posts while PAS would have four exco spots.

He also said the name list had been submitted to the Selangor Sultan on Friday, and DAP would decide on its speaker candidate.

Pua said the party was surprised by Khalid’s statement because this is not what the coalition had agreed upon.

He said during the 30-minute meeting on Thursday, PAS had agreed to swap their quota with DAP, which would see the Islamic party taking up three exco and one speaker posts.

“If now he submitted a different set of names, then what is the point of the meeting?” he said.

He said DAP would question Khalid on the matter once the MB returns to Selangor on Friday.

“I hope he made a mistake and told the reporters wrongly,” he said.

DAP announced last Friday that the party had chosen incumbent Selangor assembly speaker Teng Chang Khim and incumbent exco for new village Ean Yong Hian Wah for the exco posts.

Pakatan retained power in Selangor with a greater majority in the recently concluded general election. DAP and PAS obtained 15 seats each out of the 56 seats, while PKR bagged 14.

Can you see that long before the 2008/2013 Tsunami, the Malays and Chinese of Kuala Terengganu already set aside their racial/political differences and supported the candidate rather than the race or party? The Chinese supported and worked/campaigned for an Islamist from PAS while the Malays supported and worked/campaigned for a ‘kafir’ from MCA.

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

I spoke (by telephone) to Tan Sri Wong Foon Meng a couple of months ago after more than 20 years of no contact. So, today, is my story about my good friend Wong who I was so pleased to have been able to contact after more than 20 years of ‘absence’.

From late-1978 to 1990, Wong was with the Ministry of Science, Technology and Environment in Kuala Terengganu. Now he is the Chairman of Bina Puri Holdings Berhad, a very successful construction and property development company that used to be aligned to Anwar Ibrahim and was regarded as one of Anwar’s many crony-companies in the days when Anwar was the Finance Minister and Deputy Prime Minister of Malaysia.

The ‘problem’ with Wong, if I may be permitted to call it that, is that his friends were mostly (if not all) Malays. And if you sat with your back to him when he spoke, you would swear on your mother’s grave that it was a Malay person who was talking.

Wong can speak fluent Bahasa Malaysia and he would use phrases like ‘ya-Allah’, ‘insha-Allah’, alhamdu-lillah’, ‘masha-Allah’, and so on. And no one, the Terengganu Religious Department included, would get upset that a ‘kafir’ was using the Allah word. That is only a problem in ‘developed’ places like Kuala Lumpur and Selangor. In ‘backward’ places like Terengganu this is not an issue at all.

Terengganu has eight parliamentary seats and 32 state assembly seats. Only one of them, the Bandar Kuala Terengganu state seat, is a MCA seat. The rest are all Umno seats.

Tok Teng Sai

Prior to 1990, Tok Teng Sai, the MCA chief for Terengganu, was the wakil rakyat (State Assemblyman) for Kuala Terengganu. After a long and illustrious career, MCA decided to replace Tok with Wong. MCA had always won that seat so it should not be a problem for Wong to win as well since he is a more likeable person and certainly more a ‘rakyat’s man’ compared to Tok.

Or so they thought.

In the 1990 general election, Wong lost to PAS’s Harun Jusoh who won 4,628 votes against Wong’s 3,958. And that was a real shocker for many of us.

Both candidates were my friends (still are). In fact, Harun was my neighbour and I was very close to him, as I was to Wong.

Now you know why sometimes I need to be ‘neutral’? This is not about not having a stand. What do you do when two very close friends contest on opposite sides of the political fence? I lived next door to Harun (in fact, Harun let me stay in his house almost rent-free for about a year when my house was being rebuilt) while I had breakfast with Wong almost every morning in Hamid Buyung’s coffee shop. 

Anyway, Harun won, surprisingly, while Wong lost. But what was more interesting is that the Chinese in Kampung Cina boycotted Wong and would slam the door in his face when he did his door-to-door campaign. And they did this for two reasons.

Wong Foon Meng

One was that Tok was still very popular amongst the Chinese compared to Wong (Tok had done a lot for the Kuala Terengganu Chinese while Wong had done nothing -- mainly because Tok was the wakil rakyat and not Wong). Secondly, Wong was more ‘Malay’ than Tok (Wong spoke Malay like a Muslim and all his friends were Malays).

Now, during the election campaign, the Chinese from Kuala Terengganu helped put up Harun’s flags, banners and posters. It was hilarious seeing the Chinese climbing the trees and lampposts to put up the PAS flags, banners and posters.

The Malays did the same for Wong -- they climbed the trees and lampposts to put up the Barisan Nasional flags, banners and posters.

Can you see that long before the 2008/2013 Tsunami, the Malays and Chinese of Kuala Terengganu already set aside their racial/political differences and supported the candidate rather than the race or party? The Chinese supported and worked/campaigned for an Islamist from PAS while the Malays supported and worked/campaigned for a ‘kafir’ from MCA.

Nevertheless, with the Chinese ‘united’ against Wong and the Malays split between Umno and PAS, Harun won and Wong lost. If the Malays had been ‘united’ as well (against PAS), then Wong would have won because there are more Malay than Chinese voters in Kuala Terengganu.

In 1995, though, the Chinese ‘forgave’ Wong and this time around he won the election against PAS’s Mustafa Hassan with 6,970 votes against PAS’s 5,562 votes.

In 1999, however, Wong, again, lost -- but with a very narrow 6,245 votes against Md Azmi Lop Yusof of PAS’s 6,756 votes. Azmi Lop was another very good friend of mine. So, yet again, I had two very close friends contesting against each other on opposite sides of the political fence.

By the way, Azmi Lop was ex-Umno who had joined PAS so I was very close to him when he was still in Umno and not just since he joined PAS. And Wong and Azmi, of course, knew each other very well -- hence this was a contest between friends and not between enemies.

So you see, when you live in a town like Kuala Terengganu, it does not matter what race you are and what your political inclinations are as well. We are all friends, very good friends, and we do not hate each other just because we happen to be of different races or of different political loyalties.

In fact, if you can remember, when at different times in our history we have seen race riots in Singapore, Johor, Penang, Selangor/Kuala Lumpur and so on (the biggest but not the only being May 13, 1969, of course) Terengganu and Kelantan were peaceful. There were no curfews there and people went about their business as usual without a single incident. 

So don’t be too fast in condemning the ‘backward’ and ‘stupid’ Malays of the Malay heartland. They are more civilised than you give them credit for. Ask any Chinese or Indian who has lived or worked there and they can testify to this.

Oh, and regarding Harun Jusoh, not too long ago his wife died and recently two of his sons and a grandson drowned. Sigh...I have never known a friend who has had to bear so many tragedies in such a short space of time.

                                   ********************************************

丹斯利王弗明

你看到了嗎？其實早在2008/2013海嘯很多年以前，瓜拉登嘉樓的華人和馬來人就學會了撇開他們的種族/政治包袱來選人而不選黨/種族。華人在那時候就會支持和為伊黨的回教主義分子競選而馬來人則會為馬華的‘異教徒’效力。

原文：Raja Petra Kamarudin

譯文：方宙

我在兩三個月前和已有20多年沒聯絡的丹斯利王弗明通了電話。我今天的故事主提就是我這位好友丹斯利王，而我真的很高興還能在20年以後跟他重逢。

1978年到1990年間，來自瓜拉登嘉樓的丹斯利是當時的科技與環境部長，他現在已在Bina Puri Holdings Berhad 這一家很成功的建築和房產管理公司儅公司主席了。這閒公司在安華還是副首相和財政部長時常被認爲是安華的‘裙帶公司’。

丹斯利的‘問題’（如果你容許我用這個形容詞的話）是他所有朋友幾乎都是馬來人。如果你背對著他聼他講話的話，你肯定會以爲他是個馬來人。

丹斯利的馬來文流利得很，而且他會用一些專有名詞如 ‘ya-Allah’, ‘insha-Allah’, alhamdu-lillah’, ‘masha-Allah’等等。從來沒有人，包括登州的宗教侷，會對一個‘異教徒’引用阿拉的詞句而感到生氣。這是一個在‘發展地區’如吉隆坡和雪蘭莪才有的問題，在一個‘落後封建’的地區如登嘉樓這根本就不是件事兒。

登嘉樓總共有8個囯席和32個州希，而當中只有瓜拉登嘉樓城這一個州席是馬華選區，其他的都是巫統的。

祝聖才先生

1990年以前，登州馬華主席祝聖才是瓜拉登嘉樓的州議員。多年以來他在那給出了顯著的成績，然而馬華過後決定讓丹斯利王上位替代祝聖才。馬華認爲他們都已經在那個席位贏了這麽多年了，所以讓王上位絕對是沒有問題的，再者，王相比起杜來講是個更容易親近且‘親民’的候選人。

他們當時的確是把事情編得很理想化。

1990年大選，丹斯利以3958票數給了伊斯蘭黨Harun Jusoh的4,628票，這令我們很多人都跌破了眼睛。 這兩個候選人都是我的朋友（現在還是），事實上，Harun他還是我的鄰居呢，我和他的交情不下於我和丹斯利的交情。

你現在明白了爲何有時我必須保持‘中立’了嗎？這不是有沒有立場的問題，儅你兩個好友因政治背景不同而必須對著幹時，請問你會怎麽做？我就住在Harun隔壁（事實上，Harun曾在我裝修房子時幾乎不收費地讓我在他傢住了將近一年），而我幾乎每天早上都會和丹斯利王在Hamid Buyung咖啡店吃早茶。

無論如何，Harun贏了而丹斯利輸了。但有趣的是，當時華人新村的華人都在杯葛著丹斯利王，他們在他上門拜票時都會狠狠地關上大門，而這背後有兩大理由。

丹斯利王弗明

理由一是當時杜先生還是比丹斯利王更受歡迎（杜為選區的華人作了很多貢獻而王則沒有----這可能是因爲杜是人民代議士而王不是）。而理由二則是王比杜還要‘馬來人’（王講起馬來話來跟真正的馬來人沒什麽兩樣，而且他的朋友多為馬來人）。

大選期間，華人們都幫Harun挂上他的黨旗，布條和海報。看到華人爬上樹木或街燈為伊黨結上黨旗，布條和海報其實是個很搞笑的場景。而馬來人也為丹斯利王做同樣的事情----他們爬上樹木或街燈為囯陣綁上黨旗，布條和海報等。

你看到了嗎？其實早在2008/2013海嘯很多年以前，瓜拉登嘉樓的華人和馬來人就學會撇開他們的種族/政治包袱來選人不選黨/種族。華人在那時候就會支持和為伊黨的回教主意分子競選而馬來人則為馬華的‘異教徒’效力。

無論如何，就是因爲當時華人都‘團結’起來對抗丹斯利王但馬來人則各自地支持伊黨和巫統，所以造就了丹斯利的敗選。如果當時馬來人能‘團結’起來（對抗伊黨）的話，那丹斯利老早就贏了，因爲瓜拉登嘉樓的馬來選民多過華裔選民。

1995大選華裔選民‘原諒’了丹斯利王，他因而以6970票打敗了伊黨的Mustafa Hassan；Mustafa Hassan 當時的票數為5562票。但他在1999年又輸了，伊黨派出的Md Azmi Lop Yusof以6756票險勝丹斯利的6235票。Azmi Lop也是我很好的一個朋友，所以我再次見證了我的兩個好友因政治立場不同而相互競爭。

對了，Azmi Lop是前巫統黨員，但我是在他還是巫統人的時候已經跟他很好了，而不是他加入了伊黨以後才開始跟他交朋友的。丹斯利王和Azmi Lop也是相互認識的好朋友，所以他們之間的是友誼的競爭而不是敵對的競爭。

所以你看，儅你生活在像瓜拉登嘉樓這種小城鎮時你並不會太看重你的種族或政治立場是什麽。我們所有人都是朋友，都是很好的朋友，我們不會因爲膚色和政治忠誠的不同而彼此憎恨對方。

事實上，如果你還記得的話，儅馬來西亞各個不同地區如柔佛，檳城，雪蘭莪/吉隆坡在不同的歷史時刻發生種族暴動時（最嚴重的當然數513事件）登嘉樓和吉蘭丹都是很平靜的。那邊當時根本就沒有所謂的戒嚴，人們都猶如往常一般地過他們的日子，也從沒聽説發生過什麽不愉快的事情。

所以別一下子就為生活在馬來中心地帶的馬來人灌上‘落後封建’和‘笨蛋’等形容詞，他們比你想象中文明多了。你可以去問問曾生活在那兒的華人和印度人，他們都是可以站出來做供的。

對了，談到Harun Jusoh，在不久前他的愛妻不幸逝世而他的兩個兒子和一個孫子也不幸溺水死亡。嗐。。。。我身邊的朋友從來沒有一個是像他一樣，必須在這麽短的時間内面對如此多的打擊的。

EMERGING TREND: Young Malaysians are voting across racial lines and this is a sign of unity, National Unity and Integration Department director-general Datuk Azman Amin Hassan tells Tan Choe Choe

In Malaysia, our politics is still race based, so there's still this demarcation by race when it comes to the election. But there's been a shift -- not just the Chinese shift to DAP. I've talked to the youths and the Malay Pas boys told me that they voted for DAP. They told me it's because they are Pakatan -- that there's an understanding between Pas and DAP.

Tan Choe Choe, NST

Question: What prompted you to call on politicians and the media to stop inciting racial tension on May 13?

Answer: After GE13 (the 13th General Election), some people were taken aback and started this blame game, even though Barisan Nasional won with a simple majority. There was unhappiness expressed against the Chinese and all that. This is bad for the nation. We've got to look at what really happened, what caused the shift in Chinese support -- and it isn't communal or racist. It was a breakdown of MCA's strength within BN because of a leadership tussle. From interacting with them, I found that they don't see anyone up there in MCA (that they recognise) as their leader. There is a vacuum in BN, so, there was a shift in the Chinese vote towards DAP because the latter was very strategic. The same goes for Gerakan. The Chinese feel none of these parties were aggressive enough in fighting for their rights. We should look at the issue from many perspectives, but there are people who just looked at it along racial lines.

Question: It's easier to talk about it along racial lines.

Answer: It's easier, yes. But what we should do now is move forward, to look at Malaysia first. The nation should come first, not political parties or our differences. If we want to look at our differences and condemn each other, there's no end to it. There's a new cabinet now and a new government -- let's see how we can reconcile with each other. We need to come together, to have this strength and move forward.

On May 28, our department is inviting some academicians, community leaders and politicians to give their comments on what actually happened at GE13 and after that, what's the next step for the country. This is what we should do when we look at reconciliation and there's still hope that we can resolve this issue amicably. Yes, as Malaysians we will face this kind of problem from time to time, this kind of flaring of tempers, but we will cool off soon after and be more sensible and less sensitive. But we need some intervention because if we let it (fester), it will be bad for Malaysia.

Question: Why is it always easier to fall back on race?

Answer: In Malaysia, our politics is still race based, so there's still this demarcation by race when it comes to the election. But there's been a shift -- not just the Chinese shift to DAP. I've talked to the youths and the Malay Pas boys told me that they voted for DAP. They told me it's because they are Pakatan -- that there's an understanding between Pas and DAP.

Ten years ago, you would never see an Indian boy or a Chinese boy voting for Pas and you would never see Pas supporters voting for DAP -- never. Yet today, we can see this happening, especially among young voters. They are different.

So, this is (a demonstration of) the democratic space that we have today. It is transparent, everyone has a chance to vote and this is a new emerging trend we can see among youths.

Question: Are you happy to see this? I mean it seems to show that the people are really coming together to vote across racial lines.

Answer: Yes, you're right. When they talk about the democracy, this is the real thing that's happening at the grassroots level.

In that sense it is good. But when people are not happy with the results, when they have lost or when they didn't win enough because they didn't get a two-thirds majority, they don't feel it (is a positive thing). To get a two-thirds majority in the world today is not easy any more, even a simple majority is good enough in the politics of today but these are the things that the old-timers are not willing to accept. This is the gap between the young and the old-timers like me. The way we think is different.

It's Gen Y -- they are all for the new media and they interact easily on it and you can see a lot of things are bridging the gaps (between the races). They interact with each other on issues. In that sense, they are more open.

Question: So, these youths are exposed and deliberating more on national issues than ever before?

Answer: Yes, they are more interactive. So we, the ones more used to the conventional ways, must adjust. These youngsters have a very different way of thinking. This has been expressed in 2008 and more so now in GE13. The new media is very influential because even if the information they get may not be correct, they tend to believe it because everyone else is talking abut it.

Question: Were you worried that there would be violence post-GE13?

Answer: Yes, I was so worried, especially on the night before polling day, so much so that I could not sleep. So I prayed a lot, asking for peace to prevail and thankfully it did. I have my operation rooms nationwide to monitor the situation and they regularly reported to me; we were on our toes and ready to intervene if anything went wrong.

Question: So, your department was monitoring it through the Rukun Tetangga?

Answer: Yes, through the Rukun Tetangga and our state level offices. We monitored even post-election because we wanted to make sure things go back to normal. This would usually take about a month.

It took even longer for things to settle down in 2008 because the opposition was not prepared to be the government in the states they won as they didn't expect to win. I think this time it will be faster.

Question: There were many inflammatory remarks posted online.

Answer: A small percentage may be a bit violent, but the majority are moderate people. It's just about five per cent in our community who really lost their minds and got emotional. Some may be educated or are public figures, but when they speak out, they become over emotional.

Question: Are these mostly the older generation?

Answer: Yes. Their mindset hasn't prepared them for this kind of situation, so, they were shocked.

Question: What about the media?

Answer: When I read some of the headlines, I felt it was too much. I was very alarmed and very concerned about it. Even though it was meant for Malay readers, the way the arguments went could incite the general public. It was worrisome and I think the Home Ministry should intervene and put a stop to it, not only to that paper, but any other paper that crosses that line. We need to give a balanced report. In a multicultural and multiracial society, we should be conscious about these things. But sometimes when I read the paper, (it feels like) they have also lost their minds; they became very emotional and hit (certain communities) hard. It's very bad for nation-building.

Question: In the build-up to the elections, there were already a lot of racial slurs being thrown around.

Answer: As in many past general elections, it is very hard to stop the issue of race being brought up. Every time, there will be some seditious or sensitive issue being brought up, even when we say, "Please don't raise all these things". I remember being in the United Kingdom in 1984 and attending the election campaigns of the Conservative and Labour parties. They were given 30 minutes each to talk about what they had to offer to the electorate, so, they spoke, then shook hands. There was no incitement, or ill feelings. Why can't we be like them?

Question: Can we move forward now?

Answer: When we have this one-day roundtable discussion, we will come up with resolutions on what's next: for example, do we need to advise the police or government? I will go through (the resolutions) with my new minister and see what we're going to do. Instead of making any more statements, we want to engage everybody and really look at what we can do, because sometimes the thing that we (feel we should) do, may not be that correct. So it's wise to get everyone's perspective first on what we should do next. Maybe we should invite the media editors, too.

Question: It's 14 days after GE13, how do you feel about national unity now?

Answer: I'm glad there's been no violence. I'm happy that there are also non-governmental organisations that are coming out to say that they want peace. We're ready to move forward.

Eric Loo, fz.com

A friend emailed a photo story on May 3 of "foreign workers" arriving at the Low-Cost Carrier Terminal, KLIA, in Sepang. It said the workers were being brought in to vote for Barisan Nasional (BN). Phantom voters!

READ MORE HERE

'But why should I retire? We won. Are Umno people stupid? We won and we will fight together with the people against this robbery, says Anwar at a Penang rally.

Athi Shankar, FMT

Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim will not retire from active politics any time soon, hinting that he would still be around come the next general election.

The Permatang Pauh MP defied calls for him to retire by claiming that Pakatan Rakyat had actually “won” the 13th general election, only to be robbed by electoral frauds.

He said Pakatan’s popular votes, which were more than Barisan Nasional’s, proved that majority Malaysians have voted for a change of federal government.

Strangely, he claimed that the popular choice of the people had become the opposition while minority choice had formed the government.

Hence, Anwar told a nightly rally here yesterday that he would not heed to quit calls made by his opponents.

Critics have called on Anwar to make good of his pre-election promise to retire and go into lecturing if BN won the polls and retained Putrajaya.

Many cyber commentators have called on Anwar to fulfill his promise for once this time. But Anwar is adamant he would not heed their call.

“Yes I said I would retire from politics if Pakatan loses. Some told me to retire as promised and to fight it out next time.

“But why should I retire? We won. Are Umno people stupid? We won and we will fight together with the people against this robbery.

“We can’t tolerate this rigging, robbery and fraud. We want answers now,” he thundered before a roaring and flag-waving mammoth crowd in Esplanade field.

A total 11,054,577 votes were recorded for federal contest in the just concluded polls on May 5. Pakatan garnered 50.9 or 5,623,984 popular votes against Barisan Nasional’s 47.4% or 5,237,699.

The three parties in Pakatan – Chinese-dominated DAP, Anwar’s PKR and Islamist PAS, collectively won 88 parliamentary seats against BN’s 133 seats.

Pakatan-friendly Malaysian Socialist Party (PSM) won a federal seat in Sungai Siput to make it 89 in the parliamentary opposition bench.

Soon after the polls, Pakatan led by Anwar has been organising rallies across the country to claim that their victory was robbed by electoral frauds and an incompetent Election Commission.

Pakatan leaders also claimed that they were rightful, legitimate winners due to higher popular votes, while hammering BN as a minority government.

READ MORE HERE

(The Star) - DAP national chairman Karpal Singh has warned former DAP vice-chairman Tunku Aziz Tunku Ibrahim to cease further attacks on the party or he would bring the latter to court.

"He is completely getting out of hand. I have been watching him very closely.

"The DAP leadership was guilty of serious misjudgement in having given Tunku Aziz membership for the party and immediately made a vice-chairman.

"He is not grateful but an opportunist," he told a press conference after a thanksgiving session with the public at a market in Jalan Gangsa in Green Lane on Sunday.

Tunku Aziz had quit the party in May last year.

Karpal Singh said that while Tunku Aziz has not made personal attacks on him, the latter has gone beyond the limit and must stop with the 'persistent attacks' on the party.

When asked on how Tunku Aziz would be charged if brought to court, Karpal Singh said it would depend on what the former said.

"Bringing him to court is the last thing we want to do," he said.

Karpal Singh added that Tunku Aziz should be a gentleman and not reveal whatever that had transpired during central executive committee meetings when he was still a member.

Boo Su-Lyn, TMI

The Selangor executive council will be sworn in within the next two weeks, Selangor Mentri Besar Tan Sri Khalid Ibrahim said yesterday.

He added that PAS will take four spots in the state executive council, while PKR and the DAP will get three seats each.

“The list of names that was given to the Sultan includes alternative names,” Khalid (picture) told reporters after a thanksgiving function at Pandamaran Jaya here last night.

“I gave alternative names so that Tuanku will have the chance to make his choice,” he added.

Khalid refused, however, to name the executive council line-up or to confirm if PKR deputy president Azmin Ali was included in the list.

Azmin was said to be eyeing the mentri besar post, leading to a protracted tussle over the top government position in Selangor until Khalid was sworn in last Tuesday, more than a week after the May 5 general election.

DAP secretary-general Lim Guan Eng said last Friday that party members Teng Chang Khim and Ean Yong Hian Wah will be joining the Selangor executive council.

Teng served as the Selangor Speaker in the last term, while Ean Yong, who is also the Seri Kembangan assemblyman, was previously a member of the state executive council.

Khalid said yesterday that the DAP will decide on who will take up the post of the Selangor Speaker.

Khalid was reappointed Selangor mentri besar for a second term after Pakatan Rakyat (PR) won a two-thirds majority in Election 2013 by sweeping 44 of the 56 state seats in the country’s most industrialised state.

PAS and the DAP snagged 15 state seats each, while PKR took 14 seats.

To join or not to join the Cabinet, either way is a dead end for MCA. All I can say is, why the brainless bet in the very first place? In the absence of support from the Chinese community and recognition from the government, MCA’s future is bleak.

Tay Tian Yan, Sin Chew

Up till this second I still do not have much idea why Dr Chua Soi Lek made the decision of not joining the Cabinet.

And why the presidential council, central committee and general assembly all rushed to echo the decision in unison.

What I was trying to say is that it was a very imprudent political gamble, one of inconsiderate “show-hand.”

It is a kind of gamble that puts your life at stake, one that is committed only under specific circumstances: You either have all the best cards to yourself and are sure the opponent is absolutely no match for you, or you are pretty sure your opponent is only feigning confidence to make believe he has the best cards whereby he does not.

But if you do not come close to the above requirements, your show-hand bet is purely suicidal.

Chua Soi Lek’s 2011 gamble with the Chinese voters of Malaysia, betting MCA’s withdrawal from the government if the party won fewer than 15 parliamentary seats, was of bad judgement.

What cards did MCA have in hand?

1. Back in 2011, things were not quite going in favour of MCA, and there were no signs the party would perform any better than in 2008.

2. “Pakatan Rakyat” was the trump card in the hands of Chinese Malaysians, so the “out of Cabinet” decision (read: threat?) would not work.

3. MCA had limited remnants of its influences and support base, and was in no position to place such a stake at all.

It wasn’t the right time when things didn’t go your way to put a bet, more so an all-or-none show-hand.

But, the big-time gambler in Chua Soi Lek cajoled him into making such a foolhardy bet without giving the slightest thoughts for the forte of the party nor the realistic intent of the Chinese community.

The bet that shunned the appraisal for possible consequences accelerated the demise of MCA.

I was wondering. Why on earth did the right-minded souls in MCA’s presidential council, central committee and central delegates just ingest the motion without digesting it?

Didn’t the idea flash past the mind of any what would befall MCA if the Chinese voters didn’t buy its idea?

It is easy for a defeated gambler to quit the table while conceiving a comeback plan later.

While Chua can just call it a day and bow out, what about the party he is leading? Does it have to wind up its business as well?

To stay out of the Cabinet means foregoing political power, leading to the obliteration of whatsoever residual influences the party might still have now. But if it changes its mind and joins the government, be prepared for a quicker death.

To join or not to join the Cabinet, either way is a dead end for MCA. All I can say is, why the brainless bet in the very first place?

In the absence of support from the Chinese community and recognition from the government, MCA’s future is bleak.

Politics is no gambling party. In deciding every single move, a political party must first and foremost take into consideration its feasibility, possible consequences and ways to tackle them. If Plan A fails, there is always a Plan B or Plan C to back up.

If the step would possibly lead to a disaster, it has to be avoided at all costs!

Boo Su-Lyn, TMI

The call by pro-Umno bloggers and Muslim groups for a boycott of Chinese businesses is racist and will harm the country’s economic growth, according to businessmen from the community.

Malaysia’s gross domestic product (GDP) expanded by 4.1 per cent in the first quarter of the year as a result of weaker exports and slower growth in public spending, compared to 4.7 per cent in the same quarter in 2012 and 6.4 per cent in the last quarter of 2012.

“How can you say boycott? Who loses? The government and Malaysia are the ones that will lose out,” Chen Kien Keong, chairman of the Tea Trade Association of Malaysia, told The Malaysian Insider yesterday.

“The priority now is the economy... so few people also pay income tax,” he added.

Only 10 per cent of the working population in the country pays income tax.

Khoo Kah Jin, president of the Kuala Lumpur and Selangor Car Dealers and Credit Companies Association, said the call for a boycott of consumer goods produced by Chinese companies was “racist”.

“If they boycott Chinese brands, (the) Chinese can boycott Malay brands ― where does it end?” he told The Malaysian Insider.

“Politics is politics. This is all consumer items. How can you boycott? Leave politics aside,” Khoo added.

Bank Negara Malaysia Governor Tan Sri Dr Zeti Akhtar Aziz was reported by national news agency Bernama last Wednesday as saying that the economy was forecast to grow between five and six per cent this year.

She added that resilient domestic demand would continue to be the “key driver of growth”, underpinned by sustained private sector expansion and backed by the public sector.

Domestic Trade, Co-operatives and Consumerism Minister Datuk Hasan Malek said yesterday that Putrajaya did not approve of the boycott, but said that he could not prevent those who wished to do so.

Several pro-Umno bloggers and the Muslim Consumers Association Malaysia (PPIM) recently called for consumers to boycott or at least buy goods sold by Chinese companies last, including products such as Massimo bread, Cap Sauh wheat flour and items from the Old Town White Coffee chain.

PPIM wrote on its website that such “DAP products” must be boycotted by Malaysians who love peace and harmony.

Pro-Umno blog theunspinners.blogspot.com called last Friday for a “Buy Malay first! Buy Chinese last!” campaign and listed several consumer products sold by Muslims and by “DAP allies”.

READ MORE HERE

Dr Mahathir, despite being the hard man that he was, would never abandon the component parties. He was always loyal to his allies even if he knew some of them to be corrupt or were no longer useful to the coalition. Friendships mattered to Dr Mahathir. He did not use people and then forget them later.

Zaid Ibrahim, TMI

We know that Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad had little say in the naming of the new Cabinet. This wasn’t because he didn’t try. Indeed, he was rebuffed by the prime minister who suddenly felt strong and energised by his so-called new mandate after the election.

Barisan Nasional (BN) likened Datuk Seri Najib Razak to a rock star, and put posters of him in all constituencies during the campaign period as if he were the most popular politician to ever grace this country. Now he is continuing on the same path with his list of new ministers.

It matters little what Umno or the Barisan Nasional (BN) think because it’s a list who will keep him at the helm for the next five years.

This is why I think Dr Mahathir has lost his influence, or at least the will to fight back. He must be disappointed with this turn of events, for, in his 22 years in power, he never once dispensed with Umno or BN during a general election as if they didn’t matter.

He never traded on his personal popularity or put up posters of himself as Najib has gleefully done. To Dr Mahathir, it was always about Umno and the Barisan, and not the personality of individual leaders.

Dr Mahathir, despite being the hard man that he was, would never abandon the component parties. He was always loyal to his allies even if he knew some of them to be corrupt or were no longer useful to the coalition. Friendships mattered to Dr Mahathir. He did not use people and then forget them later.

It must be painful for him to see Najib embracing people like Datuk Paul Low and P. Waythamoorthy, whom Najib met just three weeks before election, practically abandoning the MCA and MIC who have been steadfastly loyal for over 55 years. This is not the Alliance or the Barisan spirit. This is a massive ego trip on a temporary high.

So it’s up to Dr Mahathir’s son, Datuk Paduka Mukhriz Mahathir, and Deputy Prime Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin to redeem the glorious past and remove Najib at the forthcoming Umno general assembly (that is, if they still have the Umno-BN spirit in them).

Many Umno members think Najib is due for some payback at the November assembly, even though members are not normally very demanding. They are easily satisfied if the leaders take care of them, making them feel important and making sure their opinions count in the big decisions of the party. Najib, however, abandoned the counsel of the members during the election and chose instead to trust Datuk Seri Dr Jamaluddin Jarjis and the “war room operators”.

READ MORE HERE

Over a long period of 56 years, Umno has played havoc with the Malay mind through crippling political and religious propaganda. In this election, the educated, intelligent and well-informed Malay in the urban and semi-urban areas have toppled the proverbial coconut shell that Umno kept them trapped under and come out to realise that there is a wondrous political world outside!

FMT LETTER: From Tota, via e-mail

The general election is over. An allegedly fraudulent electoral system and a highly tainted electoral roll has once again ensured a BN victory, albeit a hollow one with less than 48% of the popular vote.

Over a long period of 56 years, Umno has played havoc with the Malay mind through crippling political and religious propaganda. In this election, the educated, intelligent and well-informed Malay in the urban and semi-urban areas have toppled the proverbial coconut shell that Umno kept them trapped under and come out to realise that there is a wondrous political world outside!

As predicted by well-known surgeon and writer Dr M Bakri Musa in his book ‘Liberating the Malay mind’, Umno needs a scapegoat. The “hantu” pendatang, the Chinese bogeyman, has been resurrected once again to serve their purpose. No one has analysed the Malay dilemma more clearly and expressed it more succinctly than Dr M Bakri Musa. I quote below a few excepts from his book about what Umno has done to the Malay mind:

1 Malays have been addicted to the comfort of life underneath the coconut shell for far too long. Now with the shell breached by globalisation and the digital waves, it is dawning upon us that our “comfort” is anything but. There is a far greater, more open, and definitely wondrous universe out there that we have been missing.

Life under the coconut shell is no longer sustainable; for many it is already intolerable. We can either topple this shell ourselves or risk having it done by external forces. With the former we would be in command of our destiny; we could purposely choose the timing, manner, and consequently the outcome. With the latter, we would be at the mercy of events and circumstances beyond our control; we would effectively become victims.

2 The metaphorical Malay coconut shell – our closed minds – cannot be destroyed physically. Besides, with the huge pores already created by globalisation and the digital revolution, many have already successfully emerged from underneath it, with only the mushrooms to sustain us.
This would be the fate that awaits those with a closed mind. Perhaps we could rationalise that by adopting a “leave us alone” philosophy. Such an option, however, is not for us to choose but for others to impose.

The colonials imposed upon the world and us their narrative of “the lazy native”. With our closed minds we readily accepted that and then lived up to it. Only centuries later did we manage to escape (though).

3 In an ironic twist, we have now substituted our own equally fictional narrative of ourselves. This one, not surprisingly, puts us at the opposite end of the scale, that of the privileged “son of the soil” (Bumiputra). With that we declare our inherent superiority, taking a leaf from the colonials. The latest incarnation of this new narrative is Ketuanan Melayu. Alas, while we may have changed our story, the reality remains the same; we are merely trading one mental coconut shell for another. That is no liberation.

4 In this capitalistic world we would not be far wrong if we were to, as the pundits put it, follow the money. Just as those divine novels and soap operas make tons of money for their publishers and producers, so too our narrative of Ketuanan Melayu for its perpetrators. Thus it is not a surprise that those who shouted the loudest and shrillest about it are also among the most privileged of Malays – the Umnoputras. They live in palatial bungalows, have children attend expensive English schools, acquire multiple trophy wives, and own fleets of luxury cars, all made possible through political patronage, “Approved Permits” and outright corruption.

5 The perpetrators of Ketuanan Melayu already sense this impending implosion; hence their preoccupation with creating new myths. We are now led to believe that our problems are the results of the conspiracies of various hantus (ghost or devils). First there is the hantu of globalisation with its associated hantu of capitalism and secularism, and then hantu pendatang (of immigrants). If those were not enough, there is also the added hantu of religious extremism. We are currently totally bewitched, if one is to believe this new narrative. Again, the majority with their trapped minds have willingly accepted this new version of reality.

6 There is another feature of the brain that rivals its ability to edit non-conforming information, and that is its tendency to see the whole instead of the parts. This gives rise to the dominance of “framing.”

7 Society too can be imprisoned by this framing effect. We Malays, or specically our leaders, have framed our dilemmas as one of Ketuanan Melayu instead of our lack of competitiveness, as it should be. All of our actions are thus “framed” by our mindset.

This preoccupation with Ketuanan Melayu and obsession with the various hantus distract us from recognising the real existential threats we face. We are all familiar with our laggardness in economics, education and other arenas, as our leaders never tire of reminding us. Those are bad enough, but there are other far greater and indeed more immediate threats we are oblivious to because of all these other distractions.

One immediate threat is the deepening polarisation and increasing inequities within our Malay community. This is a far greater threat than the more familiar inter-racial variety. I worry less about another interracial conflict ala May 1969 and fear more a Malay civil war.

8 The other threat is that we risk being left behind by emerging global trends.

9 Finally, our increasing obsession with religion puts us right in the target of its extremist elements. Once they get hold of our institutions and power structure, it would be very difficult to dislodge them. Iran and Afghanistan are ready examples, soon to be joined by Pakistan and, if we are not careful, Malaysia.

READ MORE HERE

(Vice.com) - We start off with restraint and a zero tolerance stance, but we won't keep up this position if the Malays in Malaysia are threatened. 

A couple of years ago, my friend moved out to Malaysia in search of a life where a winter wardrobe isn't a thing and you don't have to worry about stuff like moronic bro culture or seeing Kim K's face on television. What he found was a job as a bar manager in an establishment frequented by Malay punks covered in swastikas, wearing Combat 18 (a neo-Nazi terrorist organization) T-shirts and harping on about "Malay power."

Turns out they're a group of far-right nationalists who want to rid Malaysia of any non-ethnic Malays and stop immigration into the country. Which, although pretty backwards and reductive, isn't all that surprising in the current world climate. What was surprising, and kind of confusing, is that they identify themselves as neo-Nazis, are fond of sieg-heiling and listen to Nazi bands like Skrewdriver and Angry Aryan, yet definitely aren't Aryan themselves. And adopting a worldview that specifically discriminates against your race seems a very odd thing to do.     

I was told that one of the most popular Malay power bands is an act named Boot Axe, so I got in touch with band member Mr. Slay to find out why exactly a group of Malaysians are going through this bizarre, neo-Nazi identity crisis.  

VICE: Hi Slay. So what’s the deal with all this "Malay power" stuff then?

Slay: Malay power is important because we're concerned about keeping a pure Malay community all over the Malay Archipelago [the archipelago between Australia and Southeast Asia, believed by some to be the homeland of the Malay race]. I'm a second generation fighter for Malay power. The first generation, who founded the Malay power movement, have been less active recently. Malay power stems from a point in history—the 13th of May, 1969—where the Chinese and Malay communities fought each other. However, the punk and skinhead Malay power movement started in Kuala Lumpur in the early 90s.   

As far as I understand it, the idea that there's a "Malay race"—which is supposedly indigenous to the Malay Archipelago—was proposed by German scientist Johann Blumenbach. There's a lot of contention over whether or not such a race actually exists. For a start, Blumenbach’s theory hinged around the idea that there were only five different races in the world, which is clearly pretty flawed. I take it racism features pretty heavily in your ideology?
We're extremists in regards to the Malay race, but that doesn’t mean that we're extreme racists. It’s not about racism. It’s all about being Malay.

OK. How exactly is Nazism culturally relevant to Malaysians? Malaysia isn’t a country that most people would associate with Hitler and his Third Reich buddies.
Malaysia is home to people from China, India, and foreign immigrants from Bangladesh, Africa, Sri Lanka, Nepal, and Burma. The government can't control the entry of immigrants and we get so many of them. There are so many protests against the government about this issue, but they haven’t done anything tangible to improve the situation. Race has become a focus because of the inclusion of uncontrolled numbers of these people in our society.

How has immigration affected you? 
Malay people have been affected in socio-economic terms. Ethnic Malays also fall prey to criminals who come from abroad and sell drugs and commit murder, rape, robbery, and so on. The lesson that we can learn from Nazism is that we can take extreme racist action if the position of the Malays is affected by these factors. We won't practice overt racism if the Malay race isn't compromised, but, if threatened, we will take action.

So you aren’t openly hostile to minorities at the moment?

We don’t like minorities in Malaysia if they can’t co-exist with the Malay race. If they are good, then we are good.

Read more at: http://www.vice.com/read/the-malaysian-nazis-fighting-for-a-pure-race 

There are many good reasons for English-medium schools to be reintroduced, chief of which must surely be the language's neutral status whereby no one can claim ownership to it.

Wong Chun Wai, The Star 

It is unhealthy for race relations when the student population in Chinese schools is 99.9% Chinese, Tamil schools is 100% Indian and national schools, dubbed Malay schools, is 80% to 90% Malay.

SERIOUSLY, the government should allow the use of English as a medium of instruction in schools again. If there are Chinese and Tamil primary schools alongside national schools, there is no reason for Malaysians not to have other options.

At present, the other option for better English proficiency is in private schools, which allocate more time for the teaching of English despite following the national school syllabus. However, it is an expensive option that only a few can afford.

Why should the right of Malaysians to study in English-medium schools be enjoyed only by those who can afford to study at international schools?

There are many good reasons for English-medium schools to be reintroduced, chief of which must surely be the language's neutral status whereby no one can claim ownership to it.

Older Malaysians who went to English-medium schools can testify that it was in such an environment that they made many friends of all ethnic backgrounds.

The English schools, as they were popularly referred to, were neutral grounds and were real cultural melting pots.

Friendship cultivated at primary school level among Malaysians of different races and religions would always be strong and deep. Our current primary school system basically does not provide such opportunities for our young ones to mix.

We do get to mix with one another later on in life, but working relationships that are untested or superficial are not true friendships.

Older Malaysians can narrate long stories of how they used to sleep over at their friends' homes, eating with their friends' families and parents of their friends treating them like their own children. These friendships continued even after they went to university, entered working life, and got married.

These are the kinds of friends who would be part of the wedding entourage, either on the side of the bride or bridegroom.

I am now 52 years old. I believe I was among the last batch of Malaysians who had the privilege of being taught in English.

While some may dismiss what I have said as elitist or an attempt to glorify English at the expense of the national language, let me set the record straight. In Form 6, I opted to study Malay Literature and sat for the exam in Upper Six, which was then called Higher School Certificate and is the equivalent of the STPM today. It was also the entrance exam into local universities. I also studied Islamic History.

During my first year at Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, I also chose Malay Letters as one of my three majors. At UKM, it is also compulsory to pass the Islamic Civilisation course, which was a basic course on Islam. I have also amassed a huge collection of books on Islam in my private library, and the works of Malay artists like Yusuf Ghani and Ismail Latiff continue to inspire me.

I dare say many of our politicians and leaders of so-called non-governmental organisations, who loudly make statements with racial overtones, do not even have such credentials.

But the point I am making is that more and more Chinese parents are sending their children to Chinese primary schools because they believe the standard of teaching and discipline in these schools is better. For the same reason, the number of Malay students at such schools has also increased.

But most Malay parents send their children to national schools where they form the bulk of the student population. Over the years, the national schools have been seen by many Chinese as becoming more religious in nature.

It's a Catch 22 situation. If the Chinese are shunning national schools, then the students in these schools would be predominantly Malay.

The Federal Constitution guarantees the position of Chinese and Tamil schools. No politician, whether in Barisan Nasional or Pakatan Rakyat, would dare to make any statement against these vernacular schools.

But the reality is that it is unhealthy when the student population in Chinese schools is 99.9% Chinese, Tamil schools is 100% Indian and national schools, dubbed Malay schools, is 80% to 90% Malay!

It is meaningless to talk about 1Malaysia when our children have no friends of other races in their formative years! Many Malaysians in their 30s and 40s now are already in this situation.

Just ask Malaysians at random how many real friends of other races, not colleagues, customers or bosses, they have. Be honest.

Is it any wonder then that the Malays are incredulous when they see Chinese Malaysians who can't speak Bahasa Malaysia well or even refuse to speak Bahasa among themselves?

The Chinese, on the other hand, still wonder why some Malay quarters continue to ask what else the Chinese want when they find that some policies are working against them and make them feel discriminated.

This is happening because race relations have taken a beating. The various races are not talking or trying to understand one another. Each side only sees its own viewpoint without appreciating that in a complex and plural society like ours, no one group can have its way completely.

We have churned out bigots in our schools. It also doesn't help that the various races are only watching channels in their own languages on Astro. The only time they probably watch the same channel is when an English Premier League football match is on.

If we are serious about restoring the standard of English in schools and improving race relations in this country, bring back the English-medium schools. Let Malaysians choose.

(Cracked.com) - When we have a strong opinion on an issue and have researched and validated that opinion, it can be exceptionally difficult to see why anyone would have the opposite viewpoint. Here's the thing: The person who holds the opposite viewpoint is thinking the exact same thing. 

Political discourse in America has reached levels of douchebaggery previously only theorized about but never observed, like conversational dark matter. We're in a whole new world of hating people based solely on their opinions on a few key issues, and since this is unexplored territory, our conversations about politics are usually only a couple notches beyond the "hold your breath until the other person agrees with you and/or you die" technique.

But it's the 21st century. We have access to the entirety of collective human knowledge in our back pockets at all times. We have taken pictures of the deepest corners of space. We have three different goddamn TV shows about bidding on abandoned storage units. We as a society should have moved beyond figuratively (and literally, probably, knowing you assholes) shitting in our hands and throwing it at each other whenever someone brings up the deficit.

BERSIH 2.0 sedang mengumpul laporan, data dan bukti untuk Tribunal Rakyat yang bertujuan untuk menyiasat penyelewangan pilihan raya. Bagi PACABA yang telah menyaksikan penyelewangan atau penipuan, kami mengalukan anda untuk menghantar laporan anda secepat mungkin sebelum 22/5/2013.

Sila kongsi dan sebarkan maklumat ini dengan rakan-rakan!

http://pru13.info/2013/05/13/borang-aduan-pacaba-pru13-bersih-2-0/

Boo Su-Lyn, TMI

Student activist Adam Adli Abdul Halim was arrested this afternoon under the Sedition Act that his lawyer believes is due to his remarks at a forum on May 13.

Adam Adli, 24 (picture), had apparently told a forum at the Kuala Lumpur and Selangor Chinese Assembly Hall this week that Malaysians “cannot wait for five years to overthrow Umno and Barisan Nasional (BN)”.

“It looks like it’s a crackdown,” Adam Adli’s lawyer Latheefa Koya told The Malaysian Insider today.

She said that Adam Adli was being brought to IPD Jinjang, which is a remand centre, adding that she feared the police would detain him until tomorrow.

Home Minister Datuk Seri Ahmad Zahid Hamidi was reported by Umno-owned daily Utusan Malaysia today as saying that the government would take stern action against those who intended to foment chaos on the streets.

“As soon as he came out from the building, he was arrested immediately,” said Mandeep, 27.

At the May 13 forum, Adam Adli reportedly called for street demonstrations, saying: “Elections won’t overthrow the government; the people’s power will”.

Anything But Umno (ABU) movement leader Haris Ibrahim said at the same forum that the BN government would be toppled through a street rally.

Several authoritarian regimes in the Middle East have been overthrown through mass demonstrations in the Arab Spring revolution.

Pakatan Rakyat (PR), however, has distanced itself from calls for street protests to overturn the results of Election 2013 that was tainted with widespread reports of electoral fraud.

Opposition Leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim said last Wednesday that the federal opposition pact would stick to indoor rallies to “voice their disgust” at alleged vote-rigging in the May 5 general polls.

READ MORE HERE

(Borneo Insider) - SAPP president Datuk Yong Teck Lee has called on the Home Affairs Minister, Datuk Ahmad Zahid Hamidi to disclose the names of the three opposition leaders, one of whom is from Sabah, whom Zahid had alleged to have been involved in the Philippine Sulu incursion at Lahad Datu.

Yong stressed that this is only fair to all Malaysians and to anybody who has been cast in a negative light by the damaging “disclosures” of the defence minister in the midst of an election campaign.

“Instead of making even more irresponsible statements like asking Malaysians to leave the country if they do not like Malaysia’s political system, the new Home Affairs Minister, Datuk Ahmad Zahid Hamidi, should without any further delay fulfil his promise to disclose the names of the three opposition leaders, one of whom is in Sabah, whom Zahid had alleged to have been involved in the Philippine Sulu incursion at Lahad Datu,” he said.

Yong reminded that Zahid, who was the Defence Minister in the last cabinet before the May 5 elections, had on April 27 said that the defence ministry had identified the culprits behind the armed intrusion by Sulu terrorists in Lahad Datu. He claimed that two of the three suspects are from the opposition parties based in the Peninsula while the other one is in Sabah. Zahid has said that actions would be taken against the three opposition leaders after the general elections.

Yong who lost in the last elections, had at a ceramah at Foh Sang in Kota Kinabalu on May 1 challenged Zahid to name the “suspects” immediately as he (Yong) was actually hauled up by the police from Bukit Aman (Police Headquarters) for questioning in connection with allegations that Yong had met the leaders of the Sulu intrusion at a five-star hotel in Kota KInabalu last October.

Noting that the alleged involvement is a treason against the country and waging war against the Agong and is punishable by death, Yong said Zahid’s claim has cast a heavy psychological burden on all possible suspects, including him who was hauled up for question by the police.

Yong also recalled that Zahid’s startling “disclosures” coincidently came after he (Yong) had during the campaign, spoken extensively on the Philippine Sulu claim on Sabah and displayed Philippine maps with Sabah (North Borneo) being visible.

Yong had vehemently denied the allegation of his involvement and has called on the authorities to clear his name.

An overnight candlelight vigil will be held tonight in front of the Jinjang police remand centre, in protest against the arrest of student activist Adam Adli Abd Halim earlier today.

You can see the Malay swing in 1946. Then they swung back and took another swing in 1959. Then they swung back and took another swing in 1969. Then they swung back and took another swing in 1990. Then there was another swing in 1999 after swinging back in 1995 (and then swung back in 2004). In 2008, we saw another swing and a slight swing back this time around in 2013. Will the Malay ‘pattern’ prove true and will we see yet a bigger and maybe a ‘terminal swing’ (for Barisan Nasional, that is) in the 2018 general election?

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Basically, Malays live by the principles of rukun. And the fact that Malays, by definition as well as according to the law, also means Muslims, then the Islamic rukun plays a big part in shaping the mind of the Malay.

We must understand that Malay kids are sent for Qur’an recital classes and religious lectures (kitab/scripture classes) before they learn how to read and write (at least the Malays in the rural heartland are). Hence the ustaz shapes the mind of the Malay before the teacher in primary school does.

Hence, also, don’t be too fast in labelling Malays as stupid, as some of you love doing. Any society that has been subjected to indoctrination would turn out the same. It is not about whether the Malay mind is stupid or not. It is about how the Malay mind has been shaped.

Remember this: there is no such thing as a bad student -- or someone who is born ignorant or stupid. It is only because there are bad teachers that we have bad students. Hence, how the student turns out depends a lot on the teacher.

The first rukun the Malays have to follow is Rukun Islam. According to the ‘Jakarta Charter’, Rukun Islam is ‘the five pillars of Islam’, also called ‘Sharia Islam’ (or Shariat Islam in Bahasa Malaysia). This has nothing to do with the Islamic laws, also called Sharia laws.

The five pillars of Islam are:

1. Belief (that there is only one God (Allah) and that Muhammad is God's messenger).

2. Worship (the five daily prayers).

3. Giving charity (paying Zakat and Fitrah).

4. Fasting (during the month of Ramadan).

5. And embarking on the pilgrimage to Mecca (the hajj, to be done at least once in a lifetime).

Then we have ‘Rukun Iman’ or the commandments. Iman generally means faith.

The six pillars of faith are:

1. To believe in Allah, in His Existence, His right to be worshipped, His Oneness, His Attributes, and His right to legislate.

2. To believe in God's angels.

3. To believe in the Holy Qur'an and the other Holy Books, (the Torah, the Gospel of Jesus, and the Psalms of David).

4. To believe in God's Messengers (of whom Adam was the first and Prophet Muhammad the last).

5. To believe in the Resurrection and the Day of Judgment.

6. To believe in Divine Preordainment.

The above two rukun makes a person a Muslim and, by extension, a Malay. A Malay is not a Malay unless he or she subscribes to the above.

Finally, we have the Rukun Negara. And as follows is what the Rukun Negara is all about, basically the doctrine of what makes you a Malaysian.

A rejection of even one part of the Rukun Islam or Rukun Imam causes you to cease to be a Muslim. And a rejection of even one part of the Rukun Negara causes you to cease to be a loyal Malaysian. You may still be a Malaysian citizen by operation of law but you will be regarded as a treacherous or treasonous Malaysian and therefore can be tried for treason as far as the government is concerned.

And the Malay-in-the-street would not deviate too far from the thinking of the government regarding what makes a Malaysian a treacherous or treasonous Malaysian.

Remember the Al Maunah episode 13 years ago back in 2000 (photograph above)? These people were arrested and charged for the crime of waging war against the King and were subsequently found guilty of treason and then executed by hanging.

This may sound ridiculous (it did to me at least), but when the Rukun Negara says ‘loyalty to King and Country’, waging war against the King, therefore, would be considered treason and punishable by death.

Those hung (and jailed for life) were all Malays. But did the Malays express outrage? They did not, and neither did the non-Malays for that matter. Malaysians never questioned this charge and never protested the hanging of those alleged to have committed treason by waging war against the King.

Now study the rest of the Rukun Negara. When the government classifies someone as a traitor to the country, they are basically referring to the Rukun Negara as this yardstick. Of course this is mainly a political ploy. I do not need to tell you that nor do you need to tell me. However, to the ‘conditioned’ mind of the Malay, this may not sound too silly or preposterous. To demonstrate disloyalty to the King (Agong or the State Rulers) constitutes treason. And the same would apply if you dispute the Constitution, God, the rule of law, and so on.

We need to slowly and carefully un-indoctrinate the Malay mind. We need, as they would say in the IT world, to reformat the hard disk and reinstall the updated version of the operation system because the old operation system has been corrupted or is just outdated like hell.

But you do not do this by taking a hammer and by beating the computer. That will just damage the hardware and no amount of new software can make the machine run better.

Two weeks after I started Malaysia Today, I told BBC during the interview they did with me outside the Palace of Justice in Putrajaya on 2nd September 2004 that it was a long six-year battle to free Anwar Ibrahim from jail (referring to the Free Anwar Campaign, of course). Now that Anwar is free, I need to go into phase two of my job, the Free Malaysia Campaign.

BBC asked me what I meant by the Free Malaysia Campaign and I replied, “We need to free the minds of Malaysians. The minds of Malaysians, in particular the Malays, have been shackled due to indoctrination. We need to recondition the thinking of Malaysians and drag them screaming and kicking into the modern world.”

And you may have noticed that in the beginning (in the early stages of Malaysia Today) I targeted the Malays. I insulted them. I whacked them. I called them Melayu bodoh (stupid Malays). I criticised the Muslims and the ulama’ (religious scholars). And that, of course, resulted in me getting detained for the ‘crime’ of ‘insulting Islam’.

I admit that I lost many Malay-Muslim friends as well as Malaysia Today lost many Malay-Muslim readers. However, against that backdrop, many Malays also started thinking and started rationalising. Some Malays began opening their minds.

Then I eased up on the Malays. The seed had been planted. We must now allow the seed to germinate. In time the Malays would be able to see that just because DAP opposes the Islamic State or DAP leaders such as Karpal Singh says ‘over my dead body’ (in reference to the Islamic State), this does not make them the enemy of Islam.

Malays must begin to accept ‘modern’ values such as freedom of speech and allow others to disagree with Islam if they so wish based on the principle of freedom of speech, freedom of thought, freedom of choice, freedom of association, etc. Malays must accept the doctrine of agreeing to disagree and live and let live.

In the past, that would have been a resounding “no way!” Today, the Malays can accept this. For all intents and purposes, the Malays have come a long way. The Malays can now allow you to disagree with Islam or reject the Islamic State and still call you friend (when before they would have called you enemy).

I have always been telling you: leave the Malays to the Malays. Let us Malays slowly coax the Malays out of the old feudal era into a new era of tolerance and moderation. It is not easy for the Malays. This is a paradigm shift in doctrine. It took the Chinese 5,000 years to reach where the Chinese are today. It took the Europeans 2,000 years.

How long are you prepared to give the Malays? Just 56 years?

I know many of you are puzzled as to what I am trying to do, my Malay ex-friends in particular. However, as they say, there is a method in the madness however mad it may appear to you.

Do you think March 2008 could have happened had the Malays remained the Malays of 1957? More importantly, do you think 5th May 2013 could have happened had not the seed of change been planted in 1946, 1959, 1969, 1990, 1999, and finally in March 2008?

Some societies took thousands of years to change. Some took just a few hundred years. Nevertheless, whatever time it took, it still took time to see that change. And someone must always be the one to bell the cat.

We must also remember one thing. The non-Malays suddenly swung only in 2008. Before that the non-Malays were living in ignorance as well. The Malays have been swinging back and forth since before Merdeka. The Malays swung this way and then that way from time to time. However, each swing the Malays make, it is always larger than the last time.

You can see the Malay swing in 1946. Then they swung back and took another swing in 1959. Then they swung back and took another swing in 1969. Then they swung back and took another swing in 1990. Then there was another swing in 1999 after swinging back in 1995 (and then swung back in 2004). In 2008, we saw another swing and a slight swing back this time around in 2013. Will the Malay ‘pattern’ prove true and will we see yet a bigger and maybe a ‘terminal swing’ (for Barisan Nasional, that is) in the 2018 general election?

That is all up to you. If you know how to handle the Malays you are going to see that. But how do you handle the Malays? I think I have written about that so many times in the past I really do not need to repeat myself.

So you see, Malaysia Today is not just about exposing corruption. It is also not about kicking out Umno. And for sure it is not about campaigning for Pakatan Rakyat or helping Anwar Ibrahim to become Prime Minister. Malaysia Today has a much bigger fish to fry. This goes beyond just the general elections, which is merely a means to an end.

And if by this point of my article you are very confused, then this just means you are not the type of reader that I want and you are welcome to leave us and never come back.

Good-bye!

Aliran

Continuing our expose, we present compelling photographic evidence that the post-polls payouts in Penang were linked to state seats which the BN had won. 

Study the numbers in the pale yellow notice stuck on the shutter of a shoplot off Jalan Sungai Dua in Penang, where the payouts were being made over three days last weekend. How many numbers in the two columns of the notice? Ten, right.

The BN won ten state seats in Penang out of 40. Coincidence?

Now compare each number (N1, N2, N3, N4, N5, N6, N21, N38, N39 and N40) with the election results of the state seats bearing the same numbers, which can be found on the Election Commission website. Go on, check it out yourself. Select “Pulau Pinang” under “Sila Pilih DUN untuk negeri”. You will see that all 10 seats were won by Umno-BN! Still a coincidence?

Moreover, a few of those who had turned up hoping to collect their money confirmed that the payments were only meant for those in areas where the BN had won.

READ MORE HERE

The opposition leader tells a crowd of 20,000 at a Black 505 rally in Seremban that he may be branded a traitor

Zefry Dahalan, FMT

Opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim last night told of about 20,000 at a Black 505 rally in Seremban last night that he may be arrested soon and charged.

“I want to tell you…let (them) record this and hand it over to the Home Minister and the Prime Minister. Whatever your plan…to arrest me and to charge me because Anwar is a traitor to the…

“I’m not at all bothered. I don’t know what their plan is,” he told his audience, most of them youths who braved a heavy downpour to hear him.

“But I have one satisfaction that really touched me,” said Anwar. “I’m happy that the future of the country is guaranteed with youths.

“This is the spirit of the new Malaysia. Those present here tonight are the ones who have dignity, who love freedom and justice. They don’t bother about BR1M.

“We must throw the BN government out,” he told the cheering crowd.

Anwar has been on a nationwide tour holding rallies at major cities, wanting the BN government, to step down and allow Pakatan to assume power because of irregularities in the just concluded polls.

So what if the Chinese voted Pakatan?

Anwar also kept up his firing of salvos at Umno, the backbone of the ruling Barisan Nasional.

“Umno asked why I’m not stepping down…I have not stepped down because you cheated (in the elections).

READ MORE HERE

Sean Augustin, fz.com

Efforts by Indonesia to negotiate a political truce between Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak and Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim has been described as "futile" and a "waste of time".

(Asia News Network) - Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim has criticised the new Cabinet line-up, questioning the decision to pick Hindraf chairman P. Waythamoorthy as Deputy Minister in the Prime Minister's Department.

"Waythamoorthy has previously rejected some of the core points of the country's Constitution and his party is basically the Indian version of Perkasa," the Opposition Leader said, pointing out that both Perkasa and Hindraf were "extremist parties".

Anwar said that instead of Waythamoorthy, Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak should have appointed "a Bangladeshi deputy minister instead" in reference to claims by the Opposition that groups of Bangladeshis and other foreigners were brought in to vote for Barisan Nasional during the general election.

Anwar was speaking to a crowd who had gathered for the Blackout 505 rally at Puteri Wangsa here on Wednesday night.

At the rally, Anwar urged the Election Commission to declare that Pakatan Rakyat was the rightful winner of GE13.

"I have had a meeting with the Pakatan coalition leaders and we have decided to claim our rights and protest the elections results," he said, adding that the Opposition had evidence to prove there were discrepancies involved.

"We will not give Barisan five more years," he said.

DAP adviser Lim Kit Siang, who also spoke at the event, said he felt sorry for Umno Youth chief and Rembau MP Khairy Jamaluddin who was appointed Youth and Sports Minister.

"I am no friend of Khairy's but it is unfair to him that he is put in charge of one of the most minor posts in the Cabinet," he said, adding that Khairy was an Oxford University graduate and deserved better.

Lim also labelled the new Cabinet line-up as "the most unimpressive in history", expressing disappointment that some non-perfoming ministers were retained. He urged Najib and the Election Commission to provide answers to alleged irregularities during the polls and urged for a Royal Commission of Inquiry to be set up to address the concerns raised.

(The Star) - DAP national chairman Karpal Singh said the state’s ‘thanksgiving mega ceramah’ on Saturday night did not need a permit as it is a state function.

“It is a gathering to introduce the new exco lineup. That is the purpose of the assembly.

“I have had a word with chief minister Lim Guan Eng who wrote a letter this morning informing the police of the purpose of the gathering.

“I hope the police will not be trigger-happy and try to interfere with the gathering,” he told a press conference in Air Itam Saturday.

The Bukit Gelugor MP added that the state has every right, particularly now after the victory of Pakatan Rakyat in the state, to introduce everyone in the line-up to the public.

“The state government has the right to organise a rally like this at the Penang Esplanade which is under the jurisdiction of the Penang Municipal Council.

“It is a government function which does not require a permit,” he said.

(Bernama) - The DAP chairman, Karpal Singh today said the federal constitution should be amended to abolish the senate.

"There is no need for the senate. It is an unnecessary expense required to be borne by the people. It does not serve a useful purpose.

"It only encourages those who have been rejected by the people or others to be brought into Parliament through the back door via the senate as in law Parliament also includes the senate," he told a press conference, here.

He said a unicameral house with a single legislative chamber, as is the position in Singapore, would be best suited in the public interest.

Karpal, who is also the Bukit Gelugor Member of Parliament, said the inclusion of Datuk Seri Abdul Wahid Omar, Datuk Idris Jala, Datuk Paul Low Seng Kuan, Datuk Dr J. Loga Bala Mohan, Datuk Ahmad Bashar Md Hanipah and Watha Moorthy in the cabinet was a mockery.

He said such personalities, who do not hold a single seat either in the Dewan Rakyat or in any of the state assemblies, should be shown the door and not allowed entry through the back door via the senate.

(The Star) - GEORGE TOWN: The police and the state government are heading for a showdown as the state is planning to proceed with its “thanksgiving mega ceramah” in the Esplanade tonight although the police have not approved the permit application for the gathering.

Deputy Chief Minister I Mohd Rashid Hasnon said the state notified the police yesterday that the event was an official state function and was not being organised by Pakatan Rakyat.

Furthermore, he said the venue for the gathering was not at any of the places stipulated under the Peaceful Assembly Act 2012 as prohibited areas, such as the airport, dams, hospital or places used for religious ceremonies.

The police said the permit application was rejected because the organiser failed to comply with certain requirements, including giving a 10-day notice prior to the event.

George Town OCPD Asst Comm Gan Kong Meng said the proposed location for the gathering was also unsuitable due to concerns over public safety as the Esplanade was a popular spot for tourists especially on weekends.

Mohd Rashid told a press conference here yesterday that even if the police continued to refuse to issue a permit for the gathering, the state would proceed as planned.

State Tourism Development and Culture Committee chairman Danny Law Heng Kiang, who was also present at the press conference, cla­rified that he had on Wednesday applied for a police permit under the name of Pakatan.

He said police had approved the permit, provided it was moved to the City Stadium.

“We felt it was too small to ac­commodate the expected crowd of 60,000 and would cause a massive traffic jam.

“To make it easier, we felt that the event was best organised under the state.”

Boo Su-Lyn, TMI

Putrajaya will not compromise but will take stern action against Pakatan Rakyat (PR) if it foments chaos on the streets, says Home Minister Datuk Seri Ahmad Zahid Hamidi.

Umno-owned daily Utusan Malaysia reported Ahmad Zahid today as saying that prevention was better than cure, after tens of thousands of Malaysians thronged six PR rallies across the country to protest against alleged vote-rigging in Election 2013.

“I will not give warning, but just wait for stern action,” Ahmad Zahid (picture) was quoted as saying by the Malay-language daily.

The Malay broadsheet’s front page today was 

headlined “KDN: Tiada kompromi (KDN: No compromise)” and the newly-minted home minister was quoted as saying: “Prevention is better than cure, and the price of early prevention is cheaper than solving problems after.”

More than 100 people were arrested under the Internal Security Act (ISA) in 1987 in an operation dubbed Ops Lalang that was carried out amid rising political tensions, the second-largest ISA swoop in Malaysian history since the May 13, 1969 race riots.

But the ISA, which allows for detention without trial, was abolished in 2012 and replaced with the Security Offences (Special Measures) Act (SOSMA) that removes the government’s option to detain without trial.

Human rights activists, however, have criticised the new law for giving the government broad powers to deem any form of opposition a threat and to prosecute them.

Opposition Leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim has rallied against the legitimacy of the Barisan Nasional (BN) government, saying that the May 5 general election was tainted with electoral fraud.

BN won just 133 federal seats, ceding an additional seven seats to PR, and lost the popular vote for the first time since 1969 when it contested as the Alliance party then.

Ahmad Zahid wrote in Utusan Malaysia last Thursday that Malaysians who were unhappy with the country’s first-past-the-post voting system should migrate to other countries that had different voting systems.

READ MORE HERE

PRS and SPDP remind Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak that the rural vote bank is with them and if not taken care of, 'somebody will come by and withdraw it'.

Joseph Tawie, FMT

KUCHING: Bitter Parti Rakyat Sarawak (PRS) supreme council members today unanimously agreed to reject all ministerial posts in Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak’s cabinet.

This means that Joseph Entulu who was appointed Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department and Joseph Salang Gandum, a deputy minister, will not accept their posts.

A miffed Salang had in fact already earlier rejected the position.

Parti president James Masing said majority of the party’s supreme council members had agreed to reject Najib’s offer and felt that they were “sidelined” and “deserved to be treated better.”

PRS had delivered six parliamentary seats to Barisan Nasional’s 133 seat tally. They did better than some BN parties in peninsular who were suitably rewarded.

Without mincing his words Masing warned Najib not to toy with PRS and Sarawak Progressive Democratic Party (SPDP) which had been totally ignored despite delivering four parliamentary seats.

“Don’t try to sideline us because we have the support of the rural people. It is not a warning.

“It is a fact, in case they don’t understand that we have six seats and four from Sarawak Progressive Democratic Party (SPDP).

“PRS and SPDP which are rural-based parties are not properly treated by the present government.

“The rural areas in Sarawak are Barisan Nasional ‘fixed deposit’. If you don’t take care of it, somebody will come by and withdraw it,” warned Masing.

‘Give us appropriate portfolio’

Masing, who chaired the emergency supreme council meeting, said majority of the members felt that a ministerial post in the PM Department was inappropriate for PRS which was a rural based party.

“Joseph Entulu who was offered a post of Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department sought the advice of the meeting which agreed that the president would discuss with the Prime Minister where Entulu should be.

“All the members of the supreme council are not happy that Entulu is a mere Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department.

“We want the Prime Minister to give us an appropriate portfolio, the one that could be of assistance to the rural people, portfolios such as Infrastructure and Agriculture,” he said.

He said the council felt the same way about Salang’s new position which was deputy minister of tourism.

“Such post is not of any assistance to the rural people. We just want a portfolio that is of assistance to the rural people, and not just any position” said Masing.

Masing revealed that the party was initially offered two deputy ministers’ posts which they felt was an insult because the party had delivered on its pledge to BN.

But it wasn’t until Masing informed Najib that PRS felt they were being sidelined and would not attend the swearing in ceremony that the PM tweaked his list before announcing it on Wednesday. In the new list, he named Entulu a full minister.

But even this move by Najib has not appeased the party.

READ MORE HERE

Umno is up its tricks to ensure that future generations remain firmly in its grasp by keeping them intellectually challenged and incapable of thinking 

The DAP would not have won in many of its 38 seats had it not been for the support that it had from the Indians and the Malays as well. Many of the educated and the open minded Malays from the working class voted for the DAP but did not shout about it to their kampung kin. The figures would not have crossed the winning mark had it not been for the large number of Malaysians who returned home just to vote.

by P Dev Anand Pillai, FMT

I had always participated in the workings of general elections since the time I was a staff in the Suruhanjaya PilihanRaya Selangor in the early 90s. Being a Polling and Counting Agent (PACA) in 1999 and 2004 general elections gave me the insight as to how it all worked at the end of the day. But this time, it was different, what I witnessed was a coming together of the whole country with a motive to change the federal government for the first time in history, friends from overseas whom had almost given up on their country of birth had made time to return to try to make the change happen. It would have, had it not been for massive fraud by the custodians of the elections themselves, the Election Commission, who were in cahoots with the  police.

We had prepared ourselves after being alerted that there could be a high number of foreign voters trying their luck at our voting centres and true enough they came in buses, vans, jeeps and even police vans with police protection to vote in our elections. Most of these workers had dubious looking NRICs, some with very pale looking old versions of our identity card and they seemed so confident of knowing what to do. Some even had their “saluran” numbers ready at hand with them as they alighted from their vehicles. The police and the Election Commission officials welcomed them as though they were old friends knowing very well that this regime can only be saved by foreigners who will one day rule this country through the loophole in the constitution which will allow them to be Malays constitutionally. It is indeed a sad state of events for us the citizens of this beloved land of ours.

DAP’s victorious outing

The Democratic Action Party had sowed the fruits of labour which they had been diligently working on for the past five years since 2008. The Ubah and Ini Kalilah theme caught on with the people of both East and West Malaysia and made the people ready to see for the first time in 56 years a change of government at the Federal level and a change which many in their heart of hearts thought will bring about a more just and fairer Malaysia. Winning 38 parliamentary seats was indeed a record for the DAP which brings about the question of why was this called a “Chinese Tsunami” and why did the regime allow the Utusan Melayu headlines to read” Apa lagi Cina Mahu?”

It was more of a Urban political awakening by the masses who were exposed to the other side of the coin and whom had given up on the one sided state propaganda that the pay TV stations portray of the ruling BN regime. The DAP would not have won in many of its 38 seats had it not been for the support that it had from the Indians and the Malays as well. Many of the educated and the open minded Malays from the working class voted for the DAP but did not shout about it to their kampung kin. The figures would not have crossed the winning mark had it not been for the large number of Malaysians who returned home just to vote. Some of them were coming back to their old housing estates after nearly 20 years to just vote. There were a vast number of Malays who attended ceramahs by the DAP and were well aware of the facts when it came to the state of the national debt, the level of money siphoning from federal projects by cronies, the state of corruption and simply a show of arrogance and lavishness by the ruling elite. These were not lies and fairy tales it was there for all to see in the social media.

The Chinese had for decades hoped that they could level the playing field but had to always content with an openly biased system which appoints referees (civil servants at management level or also known as little napoleans) whom are always partial and openly biased towards the Malays. But then when they saw for the first time in 2008, the joined effort of the three main opposition parties of DAP, PAS and PKR which caused a huge dent on the armour of the BN, they realised that there is a new dawn if a two coalition system is firmly entrenched in our system. They witnessed how Lim Guan Eng turned a lacklustre performing economy in Penang to one that was worthy of praise by the many international bodies and institutions whom are watchdogs of economies. With a prudent way of management and a open tender system, the people found that the delivery system and the effective leadership of the Chief Executive of the State was admirable and most of all, he does not keep quite when Umno tries to bully him.

Candidate choice by the DAP

Though it still has the tag that it is a Chinese chauvinistic party, but in reality in many areas where the constituents were mostly Chinese, non-Chinese candidates were accepted and fared well for eg in constituencies like Klang, Kota Alam Shah, Raub, Labis, Ipoh Barat, Batu Gajah and Cameron Highlands, the people voted because of their believe in the party, hope that the PR coalition brought and a chance at unseating the federal government. Most of all, the people have now become very  conscious about who the candidate is and what is the candidate’s ability. Therefore a lot of effort must be put in to nurture the next generation in the respective constituencies that have been won. Care must be taken not to just appoint political secretaries and assistants but people of ability who have the positive draw of the people. If a candidate is to be parachuted in, then the parachuting must take place earlier and the candidate must be able to adjust themselves to the people and their aspirations.

PKR’s good showing

PKR is slowly but surely becoming a party that is being accepted by the masses and this is where new talent can be nurtured. New parliamentarians like N Surendran and G Manivanan, who will never be accepted in parties like the MIC have proven that in a multi-racial party like the PKR, if the right strategy is used and the right approach of reaching the people with issues of national concern, a difference can be made. If not for the rampant, open and blatant cheating that took place, there would have been more seats to PKR’s tally of 30. The people are ready and have already accepted a two party coalition and have given their trust to PR to administer states after seeing what the PR is capable of and the people, whilst being receptive to the governance of the PR, have also shown that they can boot out a PR government like what we saw in Kedah, signs of which we already being seen when a weak Chief Executive was appointed.

As the revered leader of the Malays had said, only the smart, highly educated Malays will vote for the DAP, which means that Umno accepts and acknowledges that its main voter and support base are made of the uneducated and the ill-informed masses who flock to the Sheppard when monetary handouts are given. It can be safely said that despite a vast number of Malays seen lining up to collect the BR1M handouts, not much turned into votes. It goes to show that the people have matured and this group is definitely not what Umno would like to see. The more educated the people get, the more Umno has to be worried. Thus by making the education system very inept to deal with current global demands, Umno is making sure that the future generations remain firmly in its grasp by keeping them intellectually challenged and incapable of thinking. But a vast number of Malays have seen how this destroys the younger generation and have learnt to reject this handout culture and are beginning to brave it out on their own, knowing that handouts keeps them eternally enslaved to Umno.

READ MORE HERE

I have since the first time I heard him speak found him to be a person who delivers grandiose entertaining lectures with little meaning. I found his speeches lack depth. 

Anas Zubedy 

Only when a business creates customers, do they add value to society. When a business creates a customer, it sets a chain reaction of interconnected, interrelated, and correlated businesses from raw materials to end products coupled with service needs like distribution and communications that is required for delivery and information. IN SHORT, BY CREATING CUSTOMERS, BUSINESSES CREATE JOBS. As such each time a business sells to one customer they touch the lives of thousands if not millions of people. 

Read more at: http://letusaddvalue.blogspot.com/2013/05/why-anwar-ibrahim-is-not-prime-minister.html 

Many young people are now charged up to do something to bring about change. Some of them have even expressed willingness to help in ways like educating others about pressing issues and going into the rural hinterland. Pakatan should harness their energies, their eagerness.

Kee Thuan Chye 

Now that the 13th general election (GE13) is over and Najib Razak has been sworn in as prime minister and his Cabinet has been formed, what happens to the Opposition Pakatan Rakyat and the massive numbers of people who wanted change, as reflected in the popular vote?

Opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim has done the right thing in not accepting the result of GE13 on grounds of fraud, and he has been going around rallying support for his cause, but where this will lead is highly uncertain.

Meanwhile, PKR strategist Rafizi Ramli has announced that Pakatan is investigating the results of 27 parliament seats which were won by the ruling Barisan Nasional (BN) narrowly. If he and his team are able to prove fraud or wrong tabulation of the votes, there might be a case made for them. But where? In the courts? Would they get the justice they seek?

The harsh reality is, the system we have now and the rules made for it are heavily in favour of BN. Since the time when Mahathir Mohamad was prime minister, many rules were changed to favour the incumbent government – including controlling the judiciary, the Attorney-General’s chambers, the media, the police, the higher echelons of the civil service, Felda, the universities and numerous other institutions – and they cannot be unchanged unless the present government is overthrown.

And to overthrow it is extremely difficult, as we have seen from the GE13 result. The fact that Pakatan garnered three per cent more of the popular vote and still lost the elections, and the fact that it managed to win only 89 seats from this while BN won 133 indicate clearly that gerrymandering has favoured BN beyond decent proportions.

If this continues to GE14, the Opposition may still not win at that one. Besides, in the interim, it may be further disadvantaged by an expected fresh exercise to redelineate the electoral constituencies. We can be sure it will be conducted to further benefit the incumbent. So, realistically speaking, Pakatan cannot possibly beat BN playing by the latter’s rules.

As it looks, nothing short of a revolution can bring BN down. But that would not be the way preferred by most Malaysians, especially the middle-ground ones who want peace and stability. And given that we have not reached our economic limits, there may not be enough impoverished people with little to lose to support such a drastic move.

Read more at: http://my.news.yahoo.com/blogs/bull-bashing/happens-now-opposition-change-153643530.html 

Was there an agreement before the general election? Did Chinese Malaysians actually promise the BN their votes ahead of time?

P Ramakrishnan.

Discredited politicians are trying to denigrate the Chinese by accusing them of betrayal. What betrayal are they talking about? Do they indeed know what they are talking about?

When you talk of betrayal, it means going back on one’s word. It means dishonouring a solemn pledge.

For this to take place there must have been a clear understanding and undertaking between two parties. In this case it would be the Barisan Nasional and the Chinese community reaching an understanding and pledging to vote in a mutually acceptable manner with regard to GE13.

Was there such an understanding and undertaking on the part of the Chinese community to vote for the BN? Who brokered this undertaking?

The entire Chinese community does not belong to any political party aligned to the BN to be beholden to it. Even if they were, they were not obliged to vote only for the BN. In the 2008 general election, even Umno members deserted the BN and voted for the opposition. Nobody then accused the Malay community of betrayal.

Why then are the Umno president and those in cahoots with him beating the war drum against the Chinese community and accusing them of betrayal?

As far as Malaysian voters are concerned, there was no report of any undertaking by Chinese Malaysians to vote for the BN. How then can the BN accuse the Chinese community of betrayal?

Half-baked politicians who know nothing about elections and democracy are talking nonsense when they accuse the Chinese community of betrayal. Why should anyone – especially the vast majority who had not taken up membership with MCA/Gerakan – even come to this arrangement when the elections are touted to be free and fair? They are in no way obliged to go the way of the BN.

When elections are conducted, the voters have the fundamental freedom of choice to elect whomever they choose to support. When that choice is denied, it is no more a democratic election. It becomes a farce which is mockingly peddled as free and fair elections.

Chinese Malaysians were even accused by Tun Dr Mahathir of rejecting the hand of friendship extended by the Malays to the Chinese. Mahathir is surely fishing in troubled waters!

Tun, when was this hand of friendship extended in exchange for voting BN? When was this conditional hand of friendship extended to the Chinese community before the GE13? Who was brokering for the Malays? And brokering for which Malays? You must surely realise that there are other Malays who do not belong to Umno and who are not whining!

What about the Malays in Pas and Keadilan? They are not complaining of any such betrayal!

It is only certain Umno members – in fact only a minority of them – who are making this scandalous claim to sour our peace and harmony. For selfish reasons and for self-preservation, these unscrupulous Umno members are making the ChineseMalaysians the scapegoat for Umno’s dismal performance in the GE13.

Umno, the writing is on the wall for you. The sooner you take note of this the better it will be for you – otherwise it will be bye-bye for you! 

Do you think Hindraf will be able to represent a segment of Malaysian society never before represented? You know and I know that it’s not possible dealing with the warlords in UMNO.

M. Gunasekar

Wednesday evening, the Indian in country were left speechless by the announcement made by PM Najib that P Waythamoorthy been appointed as deputy minister.

The appointment of the so called former Hindraf leader P Waythamoorthy as a Deputy Minister in the Prime Minister's Department has not gone down well with the Indian community, most of whom see it as a "betrayal to the Hindraf cause". 

Negative reactions from netizens flooded the cyberworld as they gave the thumbs down to Waythamoorthy's appointment as deputy minister.

Questions like: "What? Hindraf chief P Waythamoorthy is a deputy minister? PM Najib Abdul Razak, we Indians do not want him. He is a sellout. Waythamoorthy is a fraud who cares only for himself, not for the Indians."

One quoted: "Waythamoorthy, your fasting worked to your advantage. So this is what you wanted, now we know what others have been saying is true."

One pointed out: Waythamoorthy had pawned the self-respect and dignity of the Indians for his own interest.

One blasted: "The Indians in Malaysia will never forgive Waythamoorthy for betraying the trust of these marginalised and sidelined Indians."

One response: "I used to think he was courageous. I am not so sure of his objectives any more. After lambasting UMNO, why make overtures to Najib?"

One was puzzled: “The Malays are openly criticising race-based policies. Now, Waythamoorthy appears to incite Indians to back policies that champion only Indian causes.”

PKR political bureau member Dr Xavier Jayakumar said; "Congratulations, he has sold out the Indian community to get a deputy minister's post in the Prime Minister's Office. Now we know why he was campaigning for a two-thirds majority for BN," he said.

Who can forget what was narrated by Waythamoorthy in one of his writings before:

“They [Umno] hounded us, harassed us and went to extreme measures to kill us off. They jailed our activists, they linked us to the LTTE, they confiscated my passport and put me in effective exile, they banned us and they used the police to harass us at every turn, they refused to recognize us or have anything to do with us at all. Yet we did not buckle. We resisted, we fought back, we got better organized as a group of activists and we kept going.”

Suddenly you see a different Waythamoorthy defending Hindraf’s decision to ink the deal with BN after the opposition failed to deliver its promises to the Indian community.

He claimed that the movement had a series of 24 meetings with Pakatan Rakyat leaders to get an endorsement to implement its five-year comprehensive blueprint for the Indian community since September 2012.

He also alleged that for five years it was “played out” by the opposition which was only good at making promises to the Indian community, but never fulfilling them.

Waythamoorthy also mentioned in his open letter dated 04 May 2013 to all Indian Malaysians the following, “We spent the months from September 2012 till April 2013 with the Pakatan Coalition trying to negotiate a deal. On the other hand we started the dialog with BN in late March and found a completely different attitude.”

The fact is Waythamoorthy ignored the many MoU appeals that have been submitted to the BN government by various parties, including MIC and so far none have materialized.

My question to you Waythamoorthy is, is it so simple that within 2 months of negotiating a deal with BN you are able to gain for the Indians what should have been theirs rightfully and we will see the upliftment of the Indians in the country? Honestly speaking, it is not possible knowing that for 56 years the UMNO-led BN collation have ignored and marginalized the Indians in this country.

You claimed that MIC never stood up for the Indian poor - never. They just served Umno and themselves. Do you think Hindraf will be able to represent a segment of Malaysian society never before represented? You know and I know that it’s not possible dealing with the warlords in UMNO.

Waytha remember this: You REAP what You SOW: Life is like a boomerang. Our thoughts, deeds and words return to us sooner or later, with astounding accuracy. 

From the onset of it, Hindraf never promised that it will remain loyal to PR under all circumstances. Hindraf had always maintained that loyalty is issue-based, one that will be determined by mutual agreement and respect. As a result of PR’s ditching of Hindraf, Hindraf was left with no other choice but to collaborate with those that Hindraf had previously condemned. 

Suguman Narayanan Ph.D 

Since my arrival in Malaysia for a short summer assignment, I read many political articles and had many interesting political conversations with voters about Hindraf and Attorney Waytha Moorthy.

A fair share of them scorned at Hindraf’s collaboration with the Barisan Nasional (BN). Others disagreed with Waytha Moorthy’ s acceptance of his appointment as a Deputy Minister in the PM’s department. Some depicted him as a traitor or even worse, as someone who deserted his original ideals for position. Such disagreements and criticisms are understandable. I have great respect for freedom of speech. Such bold opinions are definitely welcome especially with Pakatan Rakyat (PR) and Bersih in recent days seeking the right to free speech.

While I admire these individuals for their courage and am sure they speak out of care for the country I must disagree with sophism. The failure to understand Waytha Moorthy and the Hindraf struggle resulted in specious arguments and nothing more than a series of allegations thrown at a noble individual.

Attorney Waytha Moorthy’s ideas are original, far ahead of our time. He is a sort of a maverick, with unconventional and nonconforming ideas. Therefore it is difficult for some to understand the steps he took and the decisions he made.

Some of the accusations against him were strongly influenced by ideology while others were loyalty-based. Yes, Hindraf was at one time fiercely against the BN. That is the reason the organization held numerous meetings with Pakatan Rakyat (PR), with one goal, among others, to oust the BN.

The crucial question to answer here is why did Hindraf plot with PR to oust the BN? Hindraf had a single goal—to install a government that will instantly implement the Hindraf blueprint because the BN failed to do its share for the Indian community for more than 55 years. Waytha Moorthy had that one goal in mind—the improvement of the socio-economic status of ethnic Indians through implementation of the blueprint. After numerous meetings however, PR refused to sign the blueprint dumping Hindraf into a completely unexpected dilemma.

From the onset of it, Hindraf never promised that it will remain loyal to PR under all circumstances. Hindraf had always maintained that loyalty is issue-based, one that will be determined by mutual agreement and respect. As a result of PR’s ditching of Hindraf, Hindraf was left with no other choice but to collaborate with those that Hindraf had previously condemned. Again this is issue-based, the original goal of improving the shattered lives of ethnic Indians.

The BN, unlike PR was willing to sign the blueprint. Hindraf agreed, and reluctantly threw its support behind the BN. Why didn’t Hindraf push for seats with the BN? Again it is because the organization adopted a wait-and-see attitude before forging a long-term alliance with the BN. If the issues stipulated in the blueprint are not fulfilled, I believe Hindraf will leave the BN.

I mentioned earlier that many allegations made against Hindraf and Waytha Moorthy were influenced by ideology and loyalty. For these accusers, bond and devotion to a party is sacred. They loved Hindraf when Hindraf was with PR. As soon as Hindraf made a 180-degree turn, they began to show disdain for Hindraf.

Others failed to appreciate Hindraf’s unique ideology-free stand. Both ideology and loyalty are important but there are things that are equally significant, such as issues. Some political issues deal with life and death matters including the survival of a community. In fact loyalty itself should be to the people we represent not the party.

PR promised to implement the blueprint but refused to sign it in writing. What do you expect Hindraf to tell the hundreds of thousands of struggling ethnic Indians if PR comes to power and not implement a verbal promise? These people waited patiently since 2008 for PR’s help with little delivered in states run by PR. Don’t you see that it will be the greatest disservice to the community if Hindraf relied on a verbal promise for the next 5 years?

Hindraf cannot take that chance. Sleeping with the enemy therefore naturally became the better option. Try telling a starving person to wait another 5 years because a strategic error occurred. Should any responsible organization end up in such a predicament?

Attorney Moorthy devoted the last 7 years of his life for the Indian cause. Therefore the cause is supreme, not loyalty to a party or ideology. This man sacrificed his livelihood. Additionally, he was prepared to sacrifice his life too as evidenced by his hunger strike that lasted 3 weeks. The cause took precedence. He is the best available choice for heading the unit within the PM’s department to solve ethnic Indian problems in Malaysia. I cannot think of a more suitable candidate. Moorthy’s perseverance, resilience, and altruism earned him the right to spearhead and steer the government’s renewed efforts to improve the Indian lot in this country.

For those who hold on to the false dogma that Attorney Moorthy accepted the Deputy Minister post for selfish reasons, I can say one thing—he could have secured that a long time back if he wished.

If you are still unconvinced about the person, at least support what he stands for. Let us leave bitter feelings behind and move on. There is so much he can do for you as Minister rather than as Hindraf Chair.

(TMI) - All is not well among Barisan Nasional (BN) parties over the distribution of Cabinet posts as Sarawak’s PRS has decided to reject its appointments while SPDP is also upset its four federal wins did not get the party anything.

Several senior Sabah Umno MPs are also grumbling that they were overlooked in the Cabinet appointments while other Umno lawmakers are disputing Hindraf’s P. Waythamoorthy’s selection despite him running down the government previously.

Media reports say Datuk Joseph Entulu Belaun will not take up his appointment as minister in the Prime Minister’s Department and Datuk Joseph Salang Gandum has openly rejected being a deputy minister again.

BN secretary-general Datuk Tengku Adnan Mansor told Utusan Malaysia today that the coalition has accepted Gandum's refusal of his deputy tourism minister post.

PRS president James Masing said the majority of the party’s supreme council members had agreed to reject Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s offer, saying they felt “sidelined” and “deserved to be treated better.”

PRS gained six federal seats and SPDP four to add to BN’s 133-seat haul, doing better than BN parties in Sabah, Sarawak and even the peninsula that were better rewarded.

MIC, which won four seats, got two ministerships and two deputy minister posts while SUPP and PBRS got full ministerships despite each winning only one federal seat.

“PRS and SPDP, which are rural-based parties, are not properly treated by the present government.

“The rural areas in Sarawak are Barisan Nasional ‘fixed deposit’. If you don’t take care of it, somebody will come by and withdraw it,” Masing warned in a report by Free Malaysia Today.

Read more at: http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/discontent-in-bn-parties-over-cabinet-posts/ 

(NST) - ‘MALAYSIAN SPRING’ PLANS: Former DAP senator reveals 2012 email between party HQ and its leaders

PETALING JAYA: A FORMER DAP vice-chairman yesterday revealed that the opposition had long intended to initiate a “Malaysian spring” to overthrow the government through street rallies. Tunku Abdul Aziz Tunku Ibrahim said the opposition had planned to create chaos since last year’s Bersih rally and was now building up to nationwide protests, which were being organised to condemn a democratically elected government over so-called electoral fraud in the 13th General Election.

The former senator said he had evidence to back his claim in the form of an email which was sent out by DAP’s chief of staff Foo Yueh Chuan to all central executive council members on April 26, 2012.

In the email, Foo informed the recipients that  she was coordinating the party members and leaders to participate in Bersih's sit-in rally at Stadium Merdeka on April 28 last year.

Tunku Aziz said he replied to the email making it clear that he was "in principle opposed to street demonstrations".

However, he said, DAP founding member Dr Chen Man Hin replied the email, saying that he was in support of the idea.

"Dr Chen said he would be 'delighted to participate in the sit-in (Bersih rally)'. He wrote that 'this may be the beginning of a Malaysia spring'," Tunku Aziz said reading out Dr Chen's response at a press conference held here yesterday.

Tunku Aziz said the email response itself was proof that the opposition backed illegal street protests for an "Arab Spring" kind of uprising to take place in Malaysia.

"Pakatan has been talking about Malaysian spring, they are not talking about flowers, but what the Syrians have been doing and the Egyptians or Libyans had done.

"This is very serious. This is about toppling an elected government...this is being done even when we operate under a democratic system. If you want to bring it (the government) down, bring it down through the ballot box. But they did not succeed and now they are forced to resort to street rallies."

Tunku Aziz, who was accompanied by former Selangor DAP publicity secretary Tan Tuan Tat, added that Anwar was quite open about his plan to organise and orchestrate large-scale, nationwide protests.

"Anwar is well aware that he is playing with fire but he is determined to create a dangerous environment of unease, fear and insecurity that could easily get out of control with predictable consequences."

Tunku Aziz urged the government to put a stop the rallies, as they posed a serious threat to national security and public order.

"The government must apply the full force of the law to stop the rot from setting in.

"Anwar's selfish act bordering on the criminal, has gone far enough..

Tunku Aziz was also not convinced when asked about Anwar's statement that the opposition would steer clear of any illegal street demonstrations to topple the government.

"Of course he would say that their demonstration is going to be peaceful...we are used to his lies.

"So whatever Anwar says, it has to be taken with a pinch of salt, for example his Sept 16 notion that didn't materialise."

(The Star) - “I am not being racist... I am just being practical in saying such groups should go to countries where they can translate their political beliefs into reality”

Home Minister Datuk Seri Dr Ahmad Zahid Hamidi has defended his statement which called for groups which did not accept the country's political system to migrate to countries with systems that suit them.

The Umno vice-president, who has been criticised for it, clarified that his statement was taken out of context by certain irresponsible parties.

“I actually said those who are not confident of our political system to berhijrah to countries with political systems that suited them.

“I am not being racist... I am just being practical in saying such groups should go to countries where they can translate their political beliefs into reality,” he said yesterday.

Dr Ahmad Zahid said people should not read the statement out of context, urging readers to read the full Utusan Malaysia article.

He explained that Malaysia inherited the Commonwealth system and those who think that the system in the United States or other countries were more suitable could migrate there.

Dr Ahmad Zahid also lambasted the Opposition for disputing the general election results but recognising the results for Selangor, Penang and Kelantan, where they won.

“They are disputing the results very selectively,” he said.

"The government intends to exit its role in business. But it can never be done in one day. There will still be businesses that the government has a role, due to the importance of it in the daily lives of Malaysians," Jala added. 

Race relations policy by the Javanese home minister Ahmad Zahid Hamidi PhD

uppercaise 

A Malaysian minister has announced new citizenship rules and a new housing policy for urban dwellers, in a sudden policy decision that is expected to make an immediate impact on race relations. It will also boost the minister’s popularity in his party and chances of re-election to the Umno Baru party leadership council.

Catching members of the government and the public by surprise, the new minister of home affairs announced he was expanding his portfolio and would also become the minister of foreign home affairs.

He said Malaysians who comprised the 51% who voted against his Barisan Nasional party should emigrate to countries with a proportion representation voting system, so that they could practise their political beliefs.

The 51% voting majority comprises Malaysians of various ethnic communities descended from immigrants from neighbouring parts of South-East Asia.

The new minister, Ahmad Zahid Hamidi PhD, who is of Javanese descent, was appointed to the cabinet by the prime minister, Najib Razak, who is of Bugis descent.

He made the announcement in a column in the Utusan Malaysia newspaper owned by Umno Baru, and which is read mainly by those in the 47% minority of voters, comprising ethnic Malaysian Malays working in government or living outside towns.

The 51% voting majority comprises a total of 5.6 million Malaysians of various ethnic backgrounds: many are descendants of immigrants from southern China, southern India and Ceylon in addition to the new urban burgeoisie comprising descendants of immigrants from the neighbouring regions of the archipelago and South-East Asian mainland.

Questions of land titles

As yet there has been no reaction from members of the Orang Asli aboriginal tribes as to whether they will now make a claim to ownership of lands vacated by the 5.6 million urban Malaysians told to emigrate.

The new policy announced by Ahmad Zahid Hamidi PhD, the Javanese, introduces a volatile element into the potent brew of Malaysian ethnic relations, and also on Malaysia’s relations with foreign countries, many of whom supply a steady flow of New Malaysians, and other countries who are traditional recipients of Rejected Malaysians.

There has been no reaction by the foreign minister, Anifah Aman, who is a Muslim native tribesman from Sabah. A diplomatic silence is also being observed by the exporting or importing countries affected by the ruling.

Republicans and Democrats

Ahmad Zahid Hamidi PhD, the Javanese, said the 51% majority Malaysians should preferably emigrate to republican countries.

The coloured Kenyan from Hawaii. Say, who you calling coloured? I’m black, man. Yes, brown, but black.

However, political observers noted that the leader of the Democratic Party had recently made a widely-publicised telephone call to the leader of the Barisan Nasional.

The Democratic leader, Barack Obama, is of Kenyan parentage suspected of being born in the offshore territory of Hawaii, and is classified as black, although mainly brown and sometimes purple.

A multi-coloured nationality

It is not known what he said to the leader of the Barisan Nasional, Najib Razak, who is of Bugis ancestry, and also mostly brown but who sees himself as rainbow-coloured. His rivals and challengers, however, see him as being mostly yellow and chicken.

The palace coup had brought about by the Ultras, among whom was another Bugis, Harun Idris, leader of a minority government in Selangor, and future government leaders Mahathir Mohamad, variously described to be of Malayalee descent bordering on Tamil, and Musa Hitam, of Johor Malay-Chinese descent married to a Bolivian.

Read more at: http://uppercaise.wordpress.com/2013/05/17/bugis-pm-javanese-minister-new-race-relations-policy/ 

Bishop Paul Tan explains that while he abstains from partisan politics, he supports electoral watchdog Bersih in its cause for free and fair polls.

RK Anand, FMT

An outspoken Catholic cleric has cast aspersion on the 13th general election with regard to the battle for Putrajaya being clean and fair.

Bishop Paul Tan said this in reference to the report of the Institute of Democracy and Economic Affairs (IDEAS) and Centre for Public Policy Studies (CPPS).

“IDEAS and CPPS have done an interim report. In it, there is this conclusion: ‘GE13 was only partially free and not fair’. I find it difficult to believe that the report could conclude this…

“But when it concluded ‘only partially free’ for the three reasons given that are fraught with irregularities as reported in the said report, the people involved are not objective,” he said.

“From the multiple examples of irregularities arrived in the report, permit me to use a stronger phrase than that of IDEAS and CPPS: GE13 is anything but transparently ‘free and fair’,” he added.

Tan, who heads the Malacca and Johor diocese, conceded that he could be wrong but stressed that he was morally obliged to speak out at this time because of the immorality practiced before and during GE13.

“If I didn’t speak up, I would have to answer to my God and my Church,” he said.

Tan said while he obeyed the Catholic Church’s teaching that clerics must not take sides in partisan politics, he noted that the church also taught that clerics must speak out against immoralities and against all that go against human rights.

“As a religious person in my role as bishop, I am in a dilemma vis-a-vis to what extent should I allow a certain degree of immorality or infringement against human rights to go on unpunished before denouncing them publicly,” he added.

For a long time, Tan said, there had not been sufficient action taken against immorality in its widest sense, especially corruption.

“Some attempts have been made by related government departments to deal with the matter. In ‘grosso modo’, it has not been effective. Only a few small fish have been caught, the big fish was left untouched.

“The consequence of this ‘laissez faire’ lifestyle is that it has produced massive corruption, cheating and immoral manipulation of the people to garner votes for one’s political party.

“Unfortunately, this cuts across the boundaries of all parties. The degree lies in the extent of corruption,” he added.

READ MORE HERE

Mat Shuhaimi Shafiei has also been implicated in the sand mining corruption scandal

(Bernama) - The sedition charge against Sri Muda state assemblyman Mat Shuhaimi Shafiei over alleged blog postings stands.

This follows a decision of the Court of Appeal here today to dismiss his appeal to have his sedition charge struck out.

Mat Shuhaimi wanted his sedition charge be struck out as he disputed the constitutionality of Section 4(1)© of the Sedition Act 1948, the provision in which he was being charged.

A three-member panel led by Justice Datuk Abdul Malik Ishak in their unanimous decision ruled that Section 4(1)© was constitutionally enacted by Parliament.

“The section remains a valid enforceable law until today,” said Abdul Malik who presided on the panel with Justices Datuk Azhar Mohamed and Datuk Mohd Zawawi Salleh.

Justice Abdul Malik ordered Mat Shuhaimi, 45, to appear before the Sessions Court in Shah Alam on June 5 which was set for mention of his sedition case.

The panel, however, allowed Mat Shuhaimi’s application to stay the trial at the Sessions Court pending his appeal to the Federal Court against today’s decision.

Justice Abdul Malik had granted the stay order applied by Mat Shuhaimi through his lawyer Edmund Bon and deputy public prosecutor Awang Armadajaya Awang Mahmud did not object to the application.

Mat Shuhaimi, the Parti Keadilan Rakyat assemblyman, was charged in 2011 with posting an allegedly seditious article in his blog, srimuda.blogspot.com on the appointment of Datuk Mohd Khusrin Munawi as the new Selangor State Secretary.

He was accused of committing the offence at Pusat Khidmat Rakyat, Jalan Anggerik Vanilla, Kota Kemuning, Shah Alam on Dec 30, 2010.

Mat Shuhaimi can be jailed up to three years or fined up to RM5,000 if found guilty.

On April 1, 2011, he filed a notice of motion at the High Court in Shah Alam seeking to have his sedition charge struck out on grounds that the Sedition Act was unconstitutional as it conflicted with Article 10 of the Federal Constitution which guaranteed freedom of speech.

On Aug 26, 2011, the High Court in Shah Alam dismissed Mat Shuhaimi’s application to strike out his sedition charge.

So, yes, we too in the UK were not happy with the system. And we ‘sold out’ the ruling party and ‘toppled’ the government because we were not happy with the system. But no one told us if we are not happy with the system then we can get out of Britain and go live in another country. If they had done that they would have been crucified. They would have been hung upside down from the nearest tree. We would have nailed their balls (or tits) to the wall.

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

The first thing that Home Minister Zahid Hamidi did on taking office was to tell Malaysians who are not happy with Malaysia’s political system to leave Malaysia and go live in another country.

If Zahid were a British Cabinet Minister, by now he would have been asked to resign. In the UK you are forced to resign for an even lesser offense than that. And he would have had to resign, no two ways about it. 

Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak should, at the very least, demand that Zahid publicly apologise to Malaysians. Forcing him to resign is the correct thing to do but at the very least he must be made to apologise.

Is Najib prepared to demonstrate to Malaysians that he is really serious about his transformation program by doing this? The ball is now in Najib’s court. I would suggest Najib walk the talk and do something about this rather than pretend that this never happened.

Look at the two graphics below. In 2010, 23% of us (yes, me included) voted for Liberal Democratic, an opposition party, because we wanted political reforms. However, because of gerrymandering, our 23% of the popular vote gave us only 57 of the 650 seats.

Now do you know why we wanted political reforms? Even though we won 23% of the popular votes we won only 8.8% of the seats. What a bloody unfair system!

The only silver lining in that dark cloud is that the ruling party, Labour, as well as the main opposition party, Conservative, both did not win enough seats to form the government either.

They needed at least 326 seats to form the government. Labour won only 258 seats while its challenger, Conservative, won 307 seats -- both less than the required 326 seats to form the government.

The insult to this injury is that Labour won 39.7% of the seats with 29% of the popular votes while Conservative won 47.2% of the seats with 36.1% of the popular votes. And this also meant that with just 65% of the popular votes (less than two-thirds majority) they could have won 87% of the seats in Parliament (way above two-thirds majority).

What the hell! Bloody unfair, is it not?

Well, we from Lib Dem, the 23% or almost a quarter of the voters, were bloody pissed about this. How can we win 23% of the votes and yet win only 8.8% of the seats while Labour (the government) and Conservative (the main challenger) win only 29% and 36% of the votes respectively and yet win 40% and 47% of the seats each respectively?

Before the election we already knew that we were going to see a hung parliament. We knew that no party was going to win enough seats to form the government. In fact, probably 90% of the British citizens knew this and the media was talking about it every day. Hence no one thought that anyone was going to be able to form the government.

Before the election, Lib Dem said that in the event of a hung parliament it would choose Labour as its partner in a coalition government. But that did not happen for two reasons.

One was that Labour’s 258 seats added to Lib Dem’s 57 would give the coalition only 315 seats, still short of the 326 it required to form the government. Hence Labour plus Lib Dem cannot form the government either. Only by teaming up with Conservative, where the total would now come to 364, could it happen.

Secondly, Labour promised us electoral reforms, which was not good enough, while Conservative promised us political reforms (which would include electoral reforms), which is a better deal.

Hence for two reasons Lib Dem ‘sold out’ Labour, as Malaysians would normally say, and went to bed with Conservative.

Hence also, the Labour government was ‘toppled’, as Umno loves to say, and 59% of the voters controlling 56% of the seats formed the new coalition government.

So, yes, we too in the UK were not happy with the system. And we ‘sold out’ the ruling party and ‘toppled’ the government because we were not happy with the system. But no one told us if we are not happy with the system then we can get out of Britain and go live in another country. If they had done that they would have been crucified. They would have been hung upside down from the nearest tree. We would have nailed their balls (or tits) to the wall.

And what was it that Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi said? Ah, yes, Malaysia is a country with a first world infrastructure but a third world mentality. How true!

Zahid Hamidi, apologise! Najib Razak, sack him if he refuses to apologise.

  ******************************************

再希·哈密迪有必要辭職

是的，我們這些在英國的也對這個系統深感不滿，我們還因此‘出賣’了執政黨和‘推翻’了政府。但從來沒有人敢告訴我們如果對系統感到不滿的話我們大可離開英國到其他國家居住。如果他們膽敢那麽做那他們會被活生生地給宰了。他們將會被倒吊在隨便一棵樹上面，我們也可以把他們的LP（或者是乳頭）切下來釘在牆壁上。

原文：Raja Petra Kamarudin

譯文：方宙

内政部部長再希·哈密迪Zahib Hamidi上位后所作的第一件事就是叫那些不滿馬來西亞選舉系統的人離開本國到其他地方去生活。

如果再希是個英國内閣成員的話，那現在他已被要求下臺了。在英國，他會因犯了比這還要小的錯誤而被要求下臺，而且他也必須辭職，這是沒有得談的。

首相納吉他最起碼也要要求再希向全馬人民公開道歉。強迫他辭職是件正確的事情，但最少最少他也必須得道歉。

請問納吉他準備好要通過要求再希辭職/道歉來向大馬人民宣示他改革政府的決心了嗎？現在行動權在納吉手裏。我會勸告納吉真正去做他曾答應會做的改革而不是對此事視而不見。

請看看以上的圖表，在2010年，我們有23%（是的，連我在内）都因要看到政治改革而投給了反對黨之一的自由民主黨。無論如何，因爲選民分佈不均（gerrymendering)的問題，我們23%的選票只換來了650個囯席中的57個。

你現在知道爲什麽我們要政治改革了沒？我們贏得了23%的選票，但是只掌控了8.8%的議席。真他媽個不公平的系統！

在這一片黑暗中的唯一曙光就是執政黨工黨和最大在野黨保守黨都沒有贏得足夠的議席來組織政府。他們需要至少326席，但工黨只贏得了258席而它的挑戰者保守黨則是307；他們雙雙都沒有達到最低所需的席位數。

最往傷口上撒鹽的就是，工黨以29%的選票贏得了39.7%的議席而保守黨以36.1%的選票贏得了47.2%的席位。這也表示，他們只需以65%的選票（少過2/3）就能夠奪得87%的國會議席（多過2/3）。

我靠！真他媽的不公平，對嗎？

我們這些23%的自由民主黨的支持者真的都給惹火了。我們怎麽有可能以23%的選票來換得8.8%的議席，而工黨（執政黨）和保守黨（最大反對黨）只是以29%和36%的選票就能分別奪得40%和47%的席位呢？

大選之前我們已知道我們將會看到一個懸吊的國會，我們知道沒有單獨一個政黨會贏得足夠的議席來組織政府。事實上，至少有90%的英國人民都知道這一點而媒體也天天在談論。所以根本就沒有人會相信會有異軍突起來獨食這個國會。

大選之前，自由民主黨也站出來開說了，如果懸吊國會真的發生了，那他們就會和工黨組織聯合政府。但這到最後因兩個原因而沒有發生。

第一，單凴工黨的258席和自由民主黨的57席，我們還是沒有326席來組織政府。只有和保守黨的307席聯合在一起，我們才能以364席來組織新政府。

第二，工黨只是答應我們會做出選舉改革，但這對我們來講是不夠的。另一方面，保守黨則是答應我們政治改革（這包括選舉改革），這明顯的是個更好的選擇。

自由民主黨以這兩個原因‘出賣’（馬來西亞人會經常用到這個詞）了工黨而同保守黨一同上床。所以說，工黨政府被‘推翻’（巫統很喜歡用這個詞）了，而59%的選民通過他們控制的56%議席組織新的聯合政府。

是的，我們這些在英國的也對這個系統深感不滿，我們還因此‘出賣’了執政黨和‘推翻’了政府。但從來沒有人敢告訴我們如果對系統感到不滿的話我們大可離開英國到其他國家居住。如果他們膽敢那麽做那他們會被活生生地給宰了。他們將會被倒吊在隨便一棵樹上面，我們也可以把他們的LP（或者是乳頭）釘在牆壁上。

前首相敦阿都拉講過了什麽來著？啊，對了，馬來西亞擁有先進囯的設備但只有落後囯的思想。真被他講中了！

再希哈密迪，道歉！納吉，如果他不道歉就把他給辭掉！ 

M Ravi claims that Kamarul won the Teluk Kemang seat because of the excellent service rendered by three assemblymen.

Zefry Dahalan, FMT

Port Dickson state assemblyman M Ravi has urged Telok Kemang MP Kamarul Baharin Abbas to step down as Negeri Sembilan PKR chairman.

He claimed that Kamarul is to be blamed for PKR’s defeat in several Negeri Sembilan seats in the just concluded 13th general election.

“Kamarul used his power to field candidates as per his wish without consulting with division and grassroots leaders. This is the reason we (PKR) lost many seats, which we should have won.

“He must be responsible and must step down as state PKR chairman voluntarily. If he loves the party, it’s better to do it now before the ‘disease’ becomes worse. He should step down from the state chairman post and concentrate on his job as MP for Telok Kemang,” he added.

Ravi said that Kamarul should make way for young leaders to spearhead the party in Negeri Sembilan.

According to Ravi, PKR could have won the state seats of Ampangan, Pilah and Linggi if the party had fielded candidates who worked through various activities including charities and assistance to poor at the respective constituency for the past four years.

“These candidates are PKR supreme council member and Seremban PKR deputy chief, Dr Mohamad Rafie Abdul Malek in Ampangan; PKR Kuala Pilah treasurer Kamarul Allaymmy Abdul Kadir in Pilah and Telok Kemang PKR deputy chief Rusli Abdullah in Linggi.

“However, Kamarul decided to field ‘parachute’ candidates including himself in Ampangan, Mohamad Nazaruddin Sabtu in Pilah and Rosman Jonet in Linggi,” he added.

Kamarul’s track record poor

Ravi said these three candidates went down to the ground only after the nomination day, and 15 days is not enough for parachute candidates to familiarise themselves with the ground.

READ MORE HERE

Now, what I do not understand is: why emphasise ‘on a Chinese woman’? The Chinese scream that they are not racists. Yet they send me this very racist e-mail. This woman was humiliated or treated badly. That is wrong. Period! But to play up this issue as a racial issue is more wrong. And this is what Malaysians like to do. They like to emphasise that so-and-so who is Chinese or Indian is a victim of such-and-such.

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

There are some who say I am being too idealistic by comparing Malaysia to the UK. You have been in the UK too long you are no longer realistic, some say. Malaysia can never be like the UK because Malaysians do not have a mature mind like those in the west, some others say.

Saying that Malaysia can never be like the UK because Malaysians do not have a mature mind like those in the west is as good as saying that YOU (those saying this) do not have a mature mind. ‘Malaysians’ here would mean the first party and not the third party. You might as well have said WE Malaysians, which means you included.

If you start off by believing that this or that cannot be done because WE Malaysians are backward then we will never move forward. This is just like the old folks of the pre-Merdeka days believing it is useless to send their children to school because they are better off planting padi. After all, sending them to Qur’an reading classes is good enough. What more do they need?

If the Malays had continued believing this then, until today, the Malays would still be in the padi fields. It took the British (more than 100 years ago) to convince four Malay Monarchs (Sultan Idris of Perak, Sultan Suleiman of Selangor, Yang di-Pertuan Besar Mohd Shah of Negeri Sembilan, and Sultan Ahmad of Pahang) to agree to the setting up of a school to educate the sons of the elite so that one day the Malays could take over the running of the country.

This school, the Malay College Kuala Kangsar (no longer a school for the elite), was the brainchild of R .J. Wilkinson, the Inspector of Schools for the Federated Malay States (F.M.S). In a letter to the Resident-General dated 24th February 1904, he wrote about “establishing at a suitable locality in the F.M.S., a special residential school for the education of Malays of good family and for the training of Malay boys for admission to certain branches of Government service.”

A 1910 report said, “From this school the Government have great hopes that the sons of Malays of the Raja and higher class will be educated and trained on the lines of an English Public School and be fitted to take a share in the Government of their Country.”

So, the Malays were dragged screaming and kicking into the 20th Century to receive an education in the British tradition -- in what was then known as ‘the Eton of the East’ -- so that they could one day become ‘Brown Englishmen’ in thinking and mentality but yet still retain their ‘old values’ regarding Malay customs and traditions and Islam as the religion of the Malays.

And that is why those of you who are in your 60s (like me), or in your 70s-80s, always lament that the Malays you knew back in the 1940s, 1950s or 1960s were very different people compared to the Malays of today. You admired and loved the Malays of the old days but find the Malays of today very obnoxious and lacking principles, ethics, honour, etc.

Yes, that is very true. Just ask the Chinese and Indians who are in their 60s or 70s and they will sigh and talk about the good old days. And that is why those Malays, Chinese and Indians of my age (or older) can agree with what I say and do, while the younger Internet/social media generation whack me. You in your 20s and 30s (or even you in your 40s) just do not possess the same values that we do. 

Hence I would blame what we used to call back in the 1960s ‘the generation gap’ as being the reason for this. You do not understand the meaning of principles, ethics, honour, etc. To you, the ends justify the means. However, those of our generation would regard this as ‘not cricket’. It is not winning that counts but how you play the game that was our code of conduct and ethics back in the old days.

But it would be useless to try to explain this to you post-Merdeka Malaysians. You have not received the type of breeding that we did back in the 1950s and 1960s. You have been corrupted by the education system that was ‘modified’ back in the 1980s. And that is sad because what we are seeing today is what I call ‘The Ugly Malaysian’ (after the 1958 book and 1963 movie ‘The Ugly American’).

Hmm…I wonder which Education Minister I should blame for this.

I received the e-mail below entitled ‘HUMILITATING TREATMENT BY BULLY COPS.....on a Chinese woman’. A number of Chinese friends from various parts of Malaysia sent me this e-mail.

Now, what I do not understand is: why emphasise ‘on a Chinese woman’? The Chinese scream that they are not racists. Yet they send me this very racist e-mail. This woman was humiliated or treated badly. That is wrong. Period! But to play up this issue as a racial issue is more wrong. And this is what Malaysians like to do. They like to emphasise that so-and-so who is Chinese or Indian is a victim of such-and-such.

And don’t try to pretend that this e-mail being circulated has nothing to do with race. It is all about race. You want us to know that it is a Chinese woman who was humiliated by Malay police officers.

Lim Kit Siang said he feels sorry for Umno Youth chief and Rembau MP, Khairy Jamaluddin, who was appointed Youth and Sports Minister. “I am no friend of Khairy’s but it is unfair to him that he is put in charge of one of the most minor posts in the Cabinet,” he said, adding that Khairy was an Oxford University graduate and deserved better.

Actually, exactly 30 years ago, back in 1983, Anwar Ibrahim too was appointed the Minister of Culture, Youth and Sports. But then Anwar is not an Oxford graduate like Khairy. Anwar went to Universiti Malaya. So maybe that is why Kit Siang did not feel sorry for Anwar back in 1983.

Ravinder Singh sent a letter to Free Malaysia Today (read the letter below) asking: “Is gerrymandering halal or haram?”

This is like asking is beer, which has only 5% alcohol, halal or haram?

Why do we even need to argue whether gerrymandering is halal or haram? If you really want to kira halus, the Westminster system of choosing the government itself is not halal. Malaysia’s system is already un-Islamic. So why bother about whether gerrymandering is halal or haram when the system itself is in a way haram?

Let me put it another way. Ask any Malay-Muslim what makes a Muslim and he/she will reply anyone who accepts Prophet Muhammad as the Last Prophet and follows the Qur’an, the Sunnah and the Hadith, plus precedence.

Okay, now quote me one verse of the Qur’an regarding the Westminster system of government. None? Okay, if the Qur’an is silent on this issue, then you need to look at the Sunnah and the Hadith plus by using precedence.

How was the successor (caliph) to Muhammad chosen? The successor to Muhammad, Abu Bakar, was chosen by a committee after a three-day ‘conference’. Umar, who was Abu Bakar’s deputy, took over because he was the deputy (but he did not appoint any deputy when he took over). Usman, the third successor, was appointed by a Committee. And Ali took over because he was the last of the four comrades of Muhammad still alive (but he was bitterly opposed by many).

So, was there any Westminster system in appointing Muhammad and his four successors to the leadership? Hence is Malaysia’s system Islamic? And hence, also, should we worry about whether gerrymandering is haram or halal when the system itself is not halal?

Beer is not haram. It is the alcohol in the beer that is haram. So alcohol-free beer would be halal. So I suppose you can argue that a Westminster system without gerrymandering is like alcohol-free beer. Why bother to drink beer then? You drink beer to get high. You play gerrymandering to make sure that the minority can rule over the majority.

And is this not what politics is all about? Even the committee that decided on Muhammad’s successors was a minority decision and the majority just had to accept what a handful of people decided.

Is that halal or haram, Ravinder Singh?

***************************************************

Is gerrymandering halal or haram?

FMT LETTER: From Ravinder Singh, via e-mail

Just days ago well known Malaysian cleric Mohd Asri Zainal Abidin stated that it was haram for Muslims to incite tensions between peoples of different races and religions. While his words are still ringing in the ears, more racist words have been spewed out. No one, not even the Chief Executive, seems to care about what Asri pointed out.

Asri was surely not giving his personal opinion, but stating a fact from the teachings of Islam. When racist words continue to be spewed out by people in high and privileged places, what is to be made of the “haramness” of their actions?

Now, one of the main complaints about our elections and not just the 13GE, is about gerrymandering. This is not something that was raised only after the elections but had been raised long before that.

Gerrymandering is clearly about cheating in the elections by giving undue advantage to a certain party over its opponent(s). It is cheating because the ruling party does not have any right, legal or moral, to change electoral boundaries to favour it. The Constitution does not give it any such right.

The cheating is done by manipulating the boundaries of the constituencies such that supporters of the ruling party are put into smaller groups (constituencies) and the non-supporters into very much bigger constituencies. This is how with about 47% of the popular vote the BN has about 60% of the Parliament seats.

How does the EC find out who supports whom? Very easy. Votes are now counted in the very same room they were cast. Voters are streamed into the different rooms based on their residential locality, which is only a short distance from the polling station. Thus based on the results from each room, i.e. a maximum of about 600 voters in a stream, the EC can draw maps showing the voting trend of each locality with great accuracy.

Each locality’s votes are therefore no more secret as the EC knows what percentage of a locality voted for whom. This information is then used to draw up new electoral boundaries. In fact our votes are no longer truly secret as the EC knows how voters in a small area voted.

The new electoral boundaries are drawn in such a way that the ruling party will have advantage over its rivals. In other words, it is like moving the goalposts.

So, could anyone please tell us whether gerrymandering, which is a cheating game, is halal or haram? This is very relevant as Malaysia is said to be an Islamic state. The non-Muslims, I’m sure, would like to know whether an Islamic State condones cheating in this way to remain in power?

Let it be remembered that the Constitution orders the EC to ensure that the number of voters in the different constituencies must be approximately equal. In Padang Rengas P61 there are only 28,518 voters but in Kapar P109 there are 144,159 voters.

Now, in the eyes of the EC, is it halal to say that the number of 28,518 voters in Padang Rengas is approximately equal to the 144,159 voters in Kapar?

*************************************************** 

啤酒合乎伊斯蘭教規嗎？

我很不明白的是：為什麼要注重在‘一個華裔婦女‘上面呢？華人們都大聲喊叫說他們不是種族主義者，但他們都給我發了很‘種族’的郵件。這個婦女被警方侮辱了，這是錯的，句號，還扯這麼多幹嘛！把這件事情粉飾為一件很‘種族’的做法是錯的，而這就是馬來西亞人很喜歡做的。他們很喜歡強調那某某人是個華人或那某某受害者是個印度人。

原文：Raja Petra Kamarudin

譯文：方宙

有人說我比照馬來西亞和英國的舉動很理想化：你在英國太久了，你已經變得很不現實了。也有些人會講因爲馬來西亞人沒有西方人那種成熟的思想所以馬來西亞不可能變得像英國般。

講說‘因爲馬來西亞人沒有西方人那種成熟的思想所以馬來西亞不可能變得像英國般’就好比講説你們（講出以上這段話的）沒有成熟的思想。‘馬來西亞人’在此應該是第一人稱而不是第三人稱，你更好直接就說‘我們馬來西亞人’，因爲這也包括了你。

如果你一開始就相信‘我們馬來西亞人’是落後而做不到某些事情的，那我們永遠都不可能會進步。這好比是獨立之前有一些老一輩的人相信把孩子送上學校是在浪費時間，他們更好跑去種田。把他們送去古蘭經學習課已經很足夠了，他們還需要其他的東西嗎？

如果馬來人到現在還是有這樣的思想的話，那他們將還只是生活在稻田而已。在100年前英國人得苦口婆心地説服4位馬來君主（霹靂的Sultan Idris，雪蘭莪的Sultan Suleiman，森美蘭的Yang di-Pertuan Besar Mohd Shah，還有彭亨的Sultan Ahmad）建立學校來給貴族子弟供書教學以便有朝一日馬來人能夠自行管理國家。

這閒學校就是瓜拉江沙馬來學院Malay College Kuala Kangsar（現在已經開放給非貴族），而它是當時聯邦馬來亞（Federated Malay States，F.M.S）學校監察員R .J. Wilkinson的智慧結晶。在他1904年2月24號寫給當時地方總督的信裏提到：“。。。坐落于F.M.S 一個適當的地點，一閒專門供給馬來名門望族教育的特別學校和訓練馬來男孩以便他們日後能考進特定的政府部門。”

一份1910年的報告裏也寫道：“政府給予這閒學校厚望，希望馬來君主和貴族的兒子們能夠接受到質素相等于英國公立學校的教育與訓練；也希望他們（日後）擁有足夠的資格來一同管理他們國家的政府。”

所以馬來子弟們一個個都在喊叫聲中被拖進20世紀的傳統英式教育系統裏----當時被稱爲‘東方的伊頓公校’------終而希望有一天他們能像‘棕色皮膚的英國人’般來思考問題但與此同時也保持著他們對於馬來傳統文化和伊斯蘭教的‘老舊價值觀’。

這也是爲什麽你們當中60（就像我），70或80嵗的讀者都會哀嘆四五十年代和現今馬來人的大不同。你們會喜歡且敬重那些日子的馬來人但你們都認爲今日今時的馬來人都是可惡且缺乏原則，操守，尊嚴。。。等等的。

是的，你可以問問那些六七十歲的華人和印度人，他們會嘆氣與緬懷過去的日子。這也是為什麼和我年級相當的華巫印都會贊同我所講的，而那些年輕的網絡一代則會干屌我。你們這群二三十歲的（甚至是40歲的）真的不俱有我們這群人的價值觀。

所以我在此會引用我們在1960年代的說法‘年代隔膜’來形容你和我的差別。你們都不懂原則，操守，尊嚴。。。等是什麼。對你來講，結果能合理化你的行為。無論如何，對我們這個年代的人來講這不是一場‘板球遊戲’。這不只是勝利而已，而是你玩那個遊戲的方法是符合體育精神和操守的，正如我們那個年代所注重的。

但這對你們這群獨立以後的大馬人來講都是對牛彈琴。你們不是猶如我們在50,60年代般給培養起來的，你們都是在1980年後那個‘被改革后’的教育系統裡成長的。這是很可悲的，我們近日所看到的是‘醜陋的大馬人’（這個名字源於1958年的書和1963年的電影‘醜陋的美國人’）。

哼，我在想我們應該怪罪哪個教育部長呢。

我收到了一封電郵，題為“一個華裔婦女受辱於一群霸權警察”。我的很多華人朋友都給我送了同樣的郵件。

我很不明白的是：為什麼要注重在‘一個華裔婦女‘上面呢？華人們都大聲喊叫說他們不是種族主義者，但他們都給我發了很‘種族’的郵件。這個婦女被警方侮辱了，這是錯的，句號，還扯這麼多幹嘛！把這件事情粉飾為一件很‘種族’的做法是錯的，而這就是馬來西亞人很喜歡做的。他們很喜歡強調那某某人是個華人或那某某受害者是個印度人。

還有，請別假裝這封郵件的背後不含任何種族主義，這完全是種族主義的寫照。你想要我們知道一個華裔婦女被馬來警官給侮辱了。

林吉祥講到他為巫統青年團長凱利被委任為青年與體育部長一事感到抱歉：“我不是凱利的朋友，但我認為他被委任為一個最不重要部門的部長是很不公平的。”他繼續談到凱利是個牛津畢業生和應該得到更好的。

其實在30年前安華曾被委任為文化，青年與體育部長，但可能安華他並不是牛津畢業生吧，他畢業于馬大，所以林吉祥在1983年時並不為安華感到可惜。

Ravinder Singh給 Free Malaysia Today寫了封信 (請讀以上原文) 問道：“不均選民分佈是違法halal還是合法的Is gerrymandering halal or haram?”

這好比你問到5％酒精濃度的啤酒到底是合法還是犯法？

為什麼我們要爭議那是合法犯法的呢？如果你真的要很嚴謹來講，那西敏寺系統都是犯法的，而馬來西亞的系統是很不符合回教教義的。所以當整個系統都是不符合教義時，你幹嘛還問選舉的選民分佈不均是否haram/halal呢？

讓我這樣來進一步講解，你去問任何的穆斯林／馬來人什麼是真正的穆斯林，他們都會回答你只要那個人接受默罕默德先知相信古蘭經,Sunnah經和Hadith經等等那他就是個穆斯林。

那好，現在請你給我來一段古蘭經中談及西敏寺系統的經文。沒有？那好，如果古蘭經沒有談及的話，那你就必須參考Sunnah經和Hadith經等等。

請問先知的後繼人（卡利法）是怎樣被挑選出來的呢？先知的繼承人阿布巴卡是由一個委員會經3天3夜的‘會議’後選出來的。而阿布巴卡的助手，Umar，于他之後掌權，因為他是阿布巴卡的副手（但Umar並沒有委任任何副手）。Usman，第三個繼承人，是由委員會委任的。Ali隨後出任，因為他是先知時代四大將軍儅中唯一一個還沒死掉的（但很多人都反對他）。

所以說當時有任何西敏寺系統來委任先知和他的四個繼承人來成為領導人嗎？再者，馬來西亞的系統合乎回教教法嗎？所以說當整個系統都是不符回教是，我們還有必要談論選舉的選民分佈不均是否haram/halal呢？

啤酒本身是不犯法的，啤酒裡的酒精才犯法，所以無酒精啤酒是合法的。所以我想你可以爭論沒有Gerrymandering的西敏寺系統是合法的，正如無酒精的啤酒一樣。如果是那樣，那為何你還要喝啤酒呢？你喝酒是為了要high，而你打出gerrymandering這張牌是為了確保少數人民可以統治多數人民。

這不是政治世界裡所追求的嗎？就連挑選先知繼承人的委員會也是個少數人的委員會，而多數人必須接受他們這群少數人所決定的東西。

這又是Halal或Haram呢，Ravinder Singh? 

Companies that invest in the Sarawak dams are still exposed to the risk of becoming embroiled in corruption scandals, human rights violations, and conflict. Unfortunately, for some investors, this is not a deterrent.  

Kirk Herbertson, Southeast Asia Policy Coordinator, International Rivers 

The Malaysian state of Sarawak is the new star of the global hydropower industry. Located on the island of Borneo in Southeast Asia, Sarawak is largely unknown around the world. Five years ago, Sarawak’s ruler Mr. Abdul Taib Mahmud announced that he will “transform Sarawak into a developed state” by building 12 large dams in the state’s remote, tropical forests. He argues that the dams will produce an abundance of cheap electricity, which will attract heavy industry and create jobs. Reuters has called Taib’s scheme “staggeringly ambitious,” especially since the dams will produce 450% more electricity than Sarawak currently needs.

Mr. Taib’s scheme has caught the attention of the world’s leading hydropower companies. Next week, on May 20-25, Sarawak will host the industry’s world congress, which is organized every few years by the International Hydropower Association (IHA). The IHA’s mission is to demonstrate that large dams—which are often a source of controversy—can be built in an environmentally and socially responsible way. The IHA is now promoting Sarawak as an example of responsible dam-building that brings profit as well as local development.

Sarawak has a dark history of dam building, having completed the disastrous Bakun Dam in 2011 after five decades of delays. The project is widely criticized for displacing 10,000 indigenous people and leaving them in impoverished conditions, while much of its electricity remains unused. However, Mr. Taib says his government has learned lessons from the Bakun Dam and is committed to do a better job on the next 12 dams. IHA is advising the Sarawak government and will showcase its efforts at next week’s congress. The Sarawak government will also use the opportunity to reach out to potential investors.

Doing business in Sarawak requires buying the favor of Mr. Taib, who has ruled Sarawak since 1981. Corruption is well documented. The government carefully controls the information that reaches the public, and journalists are forbidden from scrutinizing Mr. Taib. This creates serious risks for investors who want to steer clear of corruption and human rights abuses. 

The IHA has helped the Sarawak government to make modest improvements in its dams. Yet this has not been enough. To date, IHA’s efforts have been largely cosmetic and do not address the real challenges of investing in Mr. Taib’s dams.

Read more at: http://www.internationalrivers.org/blogs/267/malaysia-authoritarian-leader-lures-investors-with-promise-of-%E2%80%9Cresponsible%E2%80%9D-dams