Unlike the parties graciously accepting the results in the Philippines, the coin toss if used here could invite disastrous consequences.

By Syed Nadzri Syed Harun, FMT

Coming just after a blistering general election in this country, the story about how the toss of a coin settled a dead-heat vote in the Philippines was simply amusing.

We dread to think of what might happen if such a rule was adopted for the polls here because even with the elaborate process, the disputes seem to be endless…and mindless.

According to news reports late last week, election authorities in the Philippines applied a tie-break between two candidates in the contest for mayor in a farming town in the central part of the republic in a decidedly old-school way — by flipping a coin.

When all the ballots were counted after voting, the two men running for mayor in the town of San Teodoro — Marvic Feraren and Boyet Py — amazingly ended up with 3,236 votes each.

To break the impasse, a decision was taken for the coin toss and as the story went, the two rivals faced off inside a ring of desks in a bare-walled room, taking turns to flick the coin to the ground five times.

According to the rules, the candidate getting the most heads would be proclaimed the winner.

At the end of the contest, Feraren, a member of the ruling Liberal Party, the son of a previous mayor, was declared the victor, throwing two heads to his opponent’s one. And the most interesting part — both of them accepted the result without much rancour. They shook hands and embraced afterwards. That’s food for thought indeed.

Firstly, there are so many methods other than our own out there that countries use in their election process.

The use of the coin to settle a polls deadlock for better or worse is an accepted practice in the Philippines and the world must respect that.

Secondly, unlike the parties graciously accepting the results in the Philippines, the coin toss if used here could invite disastrous consequences.

From current experience, the losing side would inescapably cry foul, especially when the winner happens to be a “member of the ruling party and son of the previous mayor”. There would be loud claims that the coin or coins used were “phantoms” which would only turn on its head side when flipped accordingly.

On top of that, the sore point would extend to the outrageous charge that the coin or coins used were shipped in discreetly from Bangladesh and that they are unstable, thus the element of cheating.

Next, the accusation would fall on the mediator or the person officiating the process.

If the result does not come a particular way, he would be accused of either being biased or corrupt and a whole army of party followers would jeer the mediator to kingdom come.

There will also be claims that a blackout suspiciously ensued just as the coins were flipped to suggest foul play.

Even if it had been verified that there was no such sinister power outage, the attack would continue regardless on all fronts, so much so that many are simply taken in.

As an extension to the blackout tale, the loser and his supporters would summon the mob and organise protest rallies, asking people to turn up in black as a symbol of “blackout” (when no blackouts actually occurred).

READ MORE HERE

Of all the kernels of facts about the elections, we know that along with rural voters, a higher proportion of females also leaned heavily towards BN. 

Thus far, relatively large rallies - in the tens of thousands - not only in PR strongholds such as in Kuala Lumpur and Penang, but also in BN controlled states such as Johor and Negeri Sembilan - suggest that the opposition remains focused and agitated about making sure the issue of electoral fraud does not become a mere footnote.

Sunil Kukreja, Asia Sentinel 

The outlook isn't that good, an academic says

Never before have Malaysians ventured into such unchartered waters. The outcome of the May 5 general elections has revealed just how split and intensely divided the electorate in the country currently is, and it has set in motion a political and social scenario that is tantamount to having to confront new realities in this nation of some 27 million people. 

The fact that the two main political coalitions Barisan Nasional (BN) and Pakatan Rakyat (PR) - spearheaded by Najib Abdul Razak for the former and Anwar Ibrahim for the latter - were tangled in an intense campaign leading up to the elections was emblematic of the fact that Malaysians found themselves divided between two distinctly divergent paths. Recognizing the lack of widespread enthusiasm for the several BN aligned parties, campaign strategists for BN made a distinct choice during the campaign to play up Najib's relatively favorable public rating as a way to galvanize support. By contrast, Anwar's popularity and his dynamic public presence set the stage for the campaign to be one about a popularity contest between Najib and Anwar.

Yet, it was apparent from early on in the buildup to the elections, and since then, that the Malaysian divide is much more than one about two prominent political figures, it is indeed substantive and deep. The fact that Najib had to stem the political bleeding for the ruling coalition that first became most transparent after the 2008 general elections seemed obvious enough. The loss of their two-thirds control of parliament and several key states including Selangor, Penang and Kedah in 2008 was a significant enough blow to BN's seemingly invincible political machinery. Indeed, one of the main goals of BN this time around was not just to reassert their domination in parliament, but also to recapture the aforementioned state governments from the PR coalitions. 

Although BN managed to wrest Kedah from PR's control, the much coveted states of Selangor and Penang once again remained out of the former's grasp. Indeed, as is well-known by now, aside from suffering greater losses in these two significant states, Najib's coalition ceded more ground to the opposition since 2008 as its majority in parliament dropped from 140 to 133 seats while it also lost the popular vote (52 to 48 percent). Yet, having garnered enough seats in a gerrymandered, first-past-the post electoral system, BN has managed to continue its historic streak of uninterrupted control of the federal government. 

Most of the postmortems of this highly contentious and charged election have revealed some consistent findings. Of all the kernels of facts about the elections, we know that along with rural voters, a higher proportion of females also leaned heavily towards BN. On the other hand, the younger voters (particularly in those in their 20s and early 30s), for a significant number of whom this would have been their first foray into the electoral rolls, and non-rural voters were more enthusiastic and energized about the opposition. 

The significance of this mobilization of younger and more agitated voters is being played out in so-called 'Black 505' rallies in various parts of the country in the days since the elections. Notwithstanding the fact that these rallies are far from spontaneous and have come to represent PR's way of keeping the spotlight on their claims that BN's parliamentary wins are attributable to gross electoral fraud, the response of PR's supporters in coming out to these rallies is a telling barometer of the depth and intensity of the political divide. 

Read more at: http://asiasentinel.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=5430&Itemid=178 

PAS and Indonesia’s PKS ponder their political future in the wake of new challenges ahead. In the case of PAS, will it make up for its failure in Kedah and Kelantan? 

Karim Raslan, The Star 

PAS is at a crossroads. The loss of Kedah as well as the fact that it has two seats less in the Dewan Rakyat weighs heavily on its leaders.

It must surely now be pondering the party’s direction as well as its place in the Opposition i.e. Pakatan Rakyat.

But PAS is not the only South-East Asian Islamist party pondering its future. Look at the challenges facing Indonesia’s Prosperous Justice Party (PKS).

First founded in 1998 as the Justice Party (PK), it made a splash in 2004 when it won 45 seats in the House of Representatives and then 57 seats in 2009.

Like PAS, PKS is an ideologically-driven and disciplined party.

I can still remember the ease with which PKS could call its supporters out onto the streets and the extraordinary order with which it undertook its demonstrations, with men and women clad in white, striding separately yet determinedly.

After the turmoil and drift of the Reformasi years, the PKS embodied the discipline that Indonesia appeared to desperately need.

Indeed, the party was a revolutionary experiment in Islamist politics.

Its moderate approach to social issues and firm anti-corruption platform gave it a wider appeal than most of Indonesia’s previous Islamist parties.

When I’d meet staff in hotels or shops across Jakarta and ask which party they supported, PKS was almost inevitably the first mentioned.

The party won respect from the youth due to its crusade against corruption, loose living and its emphasis on dakwah.

People want to be free, but they also want lives of purpose. The PKS was able to tap into that.

The party’s success also held the promise that political Islam could function, indeed thrive, in a democracy.

It’s arguable that PAS’ “Erdogan” faction modelled the Malaysian party’s dramatic move to the centre based on PKS.

But how the mighty falls!

Former PKS president Luthfi Hasan Ishaaq was forced to resign earlier this year after an aide, Ahmad Fathanah, was accused of accepting a Rp1bil (RM301,000) bribe from a beef import firm.

Indonesia’s Corruption Eradication Comm­ission (KPK) last week attempted to seize cars at the PKS headquarters, claiming the vehicles were purchased with bribe money linked to Luthfi’s case.

The KPK has also investigated or questioned Luthfi’s successor, Anis Matta, as well as other party leaders like Agriculture Minister Suswono and PKS elder Hilmi Aminuddin.

The PKS responded by vowing to lodge a report against the anti-graft body with Indonesia’s National Police, who have no great love for the KPK.

One cannot help but feel that the party is fast becoming part of the discredited establishment.

One wonders whether the PKS’ problems are part of a wider trend of Islamist parties failing to perform once in office, as evidenced by the failure of Mohamed Morsi’s Freedom and Justice Party in Egypt or the descent of Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s Justice and Development Party (AKP) into authoritarianism in Turkey.

Ironically, all three of these Islamist parties have failed to deliver the “justice” promised in their names.

It seems the PKS is in for an electoral drubbing come the republic’s 2014 national elections.

An Indonesian Survey Circle (LSI) poll on March 17 found public support for PKS at a measly 3.7%.

On the other hand, Ahmad Heryawan and Gatot Pujo Nugroho’s victories in the recent West Java and North Sumatra gubernatorial elections suggest it remains a force in Indonesia’s provinces.

At the same time, it suggests that the PKS is losing the wider appeal it gained from outside the party’s hard-core supporters.

Now, I’m not at all suggesting that PAS’ leadership is guilty of the same moral or financial improprieties that PKS’ is.

But the two parties’ bold attempts to become broad, national parties have reached a crisis point – albeit for different reasons.

PAS should deserve credit for winning broad support from the Chinese-Malaysian community. It’s natural and logical for it to do so.

But its failures in Kedah and Kelantan robbed Pakatan of making further gains in the 2013 elections. It seems to be better at winning power than at governing.

How it makes up for these deficiencies will determine its future.

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

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!

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

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.

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