The Chinese has been happily adopting the Western wedding dress for many years now where black and white is the traditional Western colour for weddings but in traditional Chinese culture, black and white is the traditional colour for funerals. Why are people not objecting to this?

It's because the Chinese (and other races that has been colonised) have got an inferiority complex. The West is more fashionable because the West is developed. We have no confidence in what is comfortable. Wearing a T shirt in Malaysia is already warm enough and yet we spend tens of thousands of ringgit on a black and white wedding dress suitable for cold weather for use in that particular one day.

Ninety percent of Chinaman friends I grew up with has got an English name now. Can you believe McDonalds which is well known to be junk food in the West can be so expensive in Malaysia? Yes, West is the trend today, but today the West is facing possible bankruptcy and the possibility of destroying the planet with it's capitalist/consumerist lifestyle and yet we still want to follow them.

What is the real issue here?

The real issue of the day is the possibility of a change of government in the next general election for the first time in the history of Malaysia. The issue is not Ibrahim Ali handing out white envelopes. The UMNO regime would like us to react angrily over this. If we can easily get angry over simple issues like pig heads, cow heads and white angpows, then we are caught up with raw emotions and it will get us no where in the end but another May 13. Then we fall in the very trap that the UMNO regime is trying to set up.

Clown Ibrahim Ali and his team Perkasa has got no support. When they call for a "big rally", not many people will turn up. Therefore, we should ignore these clowns who are on the way out anyway. I don't know why the alternative media which is not controlled by the government should give the clown and his team Perkasa headline coverage. It virtually boils down to a clown Ibrahim Ali. If he dies, I don't think there are more qualified clowns in team Perkasa like Ibrahim Ali. If Perkasa calls for a rally and there are tens of thousands of people turning up, then I think the coverage of this clown Ibrahim Ali is well deserved in the headlines, but unfortunately this clown does not even turn up at the Bersih rally to confront the rally participants as he had warned.

So, next time the clown does something provocative, just treat it like the incident when the Taliban blew up the Buddha statues at Bamiyan, Afghanistan. Buddhists around the world did not rise up to do any Islam bashing. Stay focused.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7L0U5JNgJnY

The North Borneo Cession Order of 1946 laid the basis for the transfer of sovereignty and dominion from British North Borneo Company to the British Crown which stated that "with effect from the fifteenth day of July 1946, to the extend that the Crown should, as from that day full sovereign rights over, and title to, the territory of the State of North Borneo and that said territory should hereupon become part of her Majesty’s Dominions."

Mohd Jeffery Radius

Why did the Malaysian Government still hold back the series of proposals to set up a Philippines Consulate Office in Kota Kinabalu to look after the welfares of the Filipinos in Sabah since the dawn of independence?

The precise and simple answer : "Our government is still giving careful consideration to the proposal for certain reasons, which constitutes inter alia Manila continuing insistence to claim its right on Sabah is delaying the process of setting up a Philippine Consulate in the State".

With reference to a number of published literature and thesis compiled by several researchers, historians including Filipino scholars that the Philippines formally claimed Sabah based on the Sultanate of Sulu heirs’ historical sovereignty of the territory, which was granted as a token of appreciation by the Sultan of Brunei for helping the latter to fight against piracy infesting within the Northern Borneo territory.

The scholars have come up with a number of arguments, collectively gathered as a result of their research works conducted over the decades, documented and published as sources of academic and legal references and journals worldwide. The free encyclopedia from Wikipedia provides a detailed summary of the North Borneo dispute including the Philippines' Claim on Sabah.

By virtue of the research notes compiled by Erwin S Fernandez, Department of Filipino and Philippines Literature, University of the Philippines, Diliman, published by The Asia – Pacific Social Science Review : Volume 7 Number 1 , December 2007 with the topic “Philippine – Malaysia Dispute over Sabah : A Bibliographical Survey", descriptively elaborated lengthy details about the topics which include
a) Macapagal : Establishing the Philippines Claim, whereby President Diosdado Macapagal “was forced to initiate the filing of the claim of Sabah in 1962" because Sabah was being considered as a member of the proposed concept of Malaysia broached by Prime Minister Tengku Abdul Rahman on May 27, 1961 in Singapore.

After the London Talks, the United Kingdom agreed to relinquish its sovereignty and jurisdiction over Singapore, Sarawak and North Borneo in favour of the creation of the Federation of Malaysia.

After the conduct and results of the United Nations Malaysia Mission were known, The Federation of Malaysia was established on Sept 16, 1963 instead of the scheduled August 31, 1963. Macapagal expressed reservation on the results of UN Mission and refused to recognise the government of Malaysia in the belief that it would prejudice the Philippines' claim to North Borneo.

b) Marcos : Fomenting and Managing a crisis - When President Ferdinand Marcos assumed the reins of government; relations with Malaysia was still unstable and unsecure. It was only in June 1966 that both governments decided to raise their own consulates to embassies and issued a communiqué. In March 1968, the Marcos Administration faced a critical point of the Philippines' Claim and the possible breakdown of Philippines-Malaysia relations when the “Jabidah Massacre" controversy was exposed whereby Moros had been recruited for a plan to stage a rebellion and eventual occupation of Sabah under the code name Project Merdeka , which led to the Bangkok Talks from June 17 – July 15, 1968 between representatives of both countries in question.

However, the talks ended in failure and further worsened diplomatic relations between the two countries, when the Philippines Congress passed a law in Sept 1968 known as Republic Act No: 5446, which categorically stated that “this act is without prejudice to the delineation of the baselines of the territorial sea around the territory of Sabah, situated in North Borneo over which the Republic of the Philippines has acquired dominion and sovereignty (Noble, 1977 p.181). Diplomatic ties between the two countries were severed and only a year later in Dec 1969 did the Philippines and Malaysia resume diplomatic relations.

c) Contesting Legal Claims – Two non-Filipinos namely Malaysian Mohammed bin Dato Ariff, the author of "The Philippines Claim to Sabah, its Historical, Legal and Political Implications" (1970) discussed extensively the legal issues surrounding the claims whereby the author provided the basis for the integration of Sabah to Malaysia and cited the principle of self-determination. The Sabahans having already expressed their desire to remain in the Federation while S. Jayaratnam the vice dean of the Faculty of Law, University of Singapore, was of the opinion that the Philippines case “is weak and tenuous ...." (25 Nov 1969 : 10).

Following the study of Mohammed bin Dato Ariff, Jayakumar also invoked the idea of effective occupation on the part of Great Britain of Sabah since 1878 which granted the British North Borneo Company a charter of corporate character. The author contended that “the Philippines Claim is at most an abstract or inchoate one based on historically derivatives rights of the heirs of the Sultan of Sulu (Ibid). Neither the Philippines nor the heir of the Sultan have exercised sovereignty or been in effective occupation of Sabah since 1878.

The Philippine formally presented its claim only in 1962. United Kindom was the state which had effective occupation until 16 Sept 1963 when Sabah became part of Malaysia in accordance with the wishes of the people (as determined by the UN Secretary General) “Malaysia, for purposes of International Law, is now the State in effective occupation” and exercising sovereignty over Sabah (Ibid).

d) The Claim and its relation to foreign policy

e) Outsiders’ view (or mainly the British side of the question) - A bibliography and compilations and a series of reference etc. The foot note of this journal reads “The Deed of 1878 refers to the agreement dated January 22 between the Sultan of Sulu Jamalul Azam and Baron Gustavus Von Overbeck leasing the Sultan’s dominions in North Borneo in exchange of five thousand Malaysian Dollars as annual rent with William Treacher, British Governor of Labuan as witness. This was Cesar Adib Majul’s estimate in his book “Muslim in the Philippines (1999) in contrast to the 1704 date proposed by K.G Tregonning in his book “Under Chartered Company Rule (1958) later published in 1975 as “A History of Modern Sabah 1881 – 1946.

The North Borneo Cession Order of 1946 laid the basis for the transfer of sovereignty and dominion from British North Borneo Company to the British Crown which stated that "with effect from the fifteenth day of July 1946, to the extent that the Crown should, as from that day full sovereign rights over, and title to, the territory of the State of North Borneo and that said territory should hereupon become part of her Majesty’s Dominions."

The partial list of the documents` are as follows :
1 ) Letter of Earl of Derby to Lord Odo Russell denying Spanish claim of sovereignty over Sulu January 17, 1876.

2) Potocol of Sulu 1877

3) Letter of Acing Consul General Treacher to the Earl of Derby dated January 2, 1878

4) Contrato de Arrendo de Sandacan en Borneo con el Baron de Overbeck January 4, 1878

5) Interpretation of the Moro Language of Mindanao translation of the previous communication in Arabic Transcripts of the contract which His Eminence the Sultan of Jolo executed with Baron de Oberback January 1878

6) Translation by Professor Conklin of the Deed of 1878 in Arabic Characters found by Mr Quintero in Washington D.C January 22, 1878

7) Commission from the Sultan of Sulu appointing Baron de Overback Datu Bandahara and Rajah of Sandakan obtained by Mr Quintero in Washington, January 22, 1878

8) Report of Acting Consul General W.H. Treacher to the Earl of Derby January 12, 1878

9) Letter dated July 4, 1878 from the Sultan of Sulu to the Governor Caption General of the Philippines denying that Sandakan was ceded to Overbeck.

10) Letter dated July 22, 1878 from the Sultan of Sulu to the Governor of Sulu stating that he will cancel the lease of Sandakan and 23 more documents.

K.G. Tregonning, former Raffles Professor of History in the University of Singapore, the author of "A History of Modern Sabah 1881 – 1963" (1965) first published as Under Chartered Company Rule (1958). The position of the Author regarding the Philippines on Sabah can be summarised as follows :

1) The agreement between the Sulu Sultan and Dent and Overbeck was one of a cession and not a lease.

2) Several treaties and International Conventions had excluded North Borneo from the territory of the Philippines either during the Spanish or American period. “The question of whether it was a cession or perpetual lease (whatever that is) seemed a stupid word game (1965 : 245). The Manila Convention of 1885, The Treaty of Paris of 1998 and the US – UK Boundary Convention of 1930 and at the same time noted the acquiescence to these of the Philippines Constitution.

The full text of the conclusion reads “It may be that the Philippines has been flogging a dead horse and Malaysia has been hesitant to bury the carcass, while Sabah has had to bear the stench. Since the grant is one in perpetuity, it can either continue in force or as the real alternative, the annual payment of 5,300 could be compounded and paid in a lump sum.

A settlement of this nature should be done confidentially by diplomacy and mutual trust. Once the compounded sum is agreed upon by all parties concerned, a joint statement could be made, the Sulu Sultan‘s heirs duly compensated and the Philippines and Malaysia could move on to more natural political, social, economic and cultural cooperation“ 1972 : 25.

Another interesting Thesis written by Filipino Scholar Ruben G. Domingo, for his Master of Science in Resource Planning and Management for International Defence Degree at Philippine Military Academy entitled “The Muslim Secessionist Movement in The Philippines issues and prospects" (1995) reads "The Sultan of Brunei who originally ruled Sabah ceded it to the Sultan of Sulu in 1704 as a reward for helping suppress an uprising in his domain. In 1878, the Sultan's successor, Jamalul Azam, leased the territory to William Cowie and Baron von Overbeck for 5,000 Malaysian Dollars.

Overbeck was then the Austrian consul at Hong Kong and former local manager of the British opium firm of Dent and Company. Whether the terms of the deal were that Sabah was ceded or leased would become the bone of contention between Malaysia and the Philippines. Soon after the agreement, the British North Borneo was formed and awarded a royal charter.

A treaty signed in 1930 by the United States and the British Crown circumscribed the future territorial jurisdiction of the soon to be established Philippines Republic. This treaty DID NOT INCLUDE SABAH within the boundaries of Spanish, American or Philippines jurisdiction. Then, six days after the Philippines was granted independence, the British North Borneo Company turned all its rights and obligations to the British Government, which in turn asserted full sovereign rights over Sabah through the North Borneo Cession Order.

The first official Philippines act on Sabah issue was the adoption House Resolution No: 42 on April 28th, 1950. It states explicitly that North Borneo belong to the heirs of the Sultan of Sulu. It also authorised the President to conduct negotiations for the restoration of sovereignty jurisdiction over the territory.

In the negotiations, the British rejected the Philippines position in view of the overriding need to for the Federation of Malaysia. When the Philippines institutionalised its claim through the enactment of the Republic Act incorporating Sabah as part of the Philippines, the Malaysians suspended diplomatic ties, which was only restored on Dec 16, 1969 in time for the third ministerial conference of the Association of South Asian Nations.

In the forth coming East Asian Summit, to highlight a zone of friendship and freedom involving Asean countries and China, Russia and the United States of America, the Philippines Government plans to submit a proposal highlighting that the country would claim any asset or territory belonging to them and the disputed claim on Sabah be negotiated.

In addition, it is more likely that the Philippines would assert its sovereignty over specific maritime territories in line with the Republic Act 9522, signed three years ago by former President Gloria Arroyo Macapagal to reaffirm the republic‘s sovereignty over the more than 7,100 islands in its archipelago including part of Spratly Islands and Scarborough Shoal.

The Spratlys is believed to be rich in oil, gas and fish, comprising about 100 barren islets, reefs and atolls, sitting along important sea lanes in the South China Sea.

Vietnam, China, Taiwan, the Philippines, Malaysia and Brunei each claim all or part of the low-lying islands.

Foreign Affairs Minister Datuk Seri Anifah Aman, who was quoted as saying following his recent meeting in Manila that “the Sabah Claim issue is non negotiable. In fact, we are almost fed up with the Philippines problems in Sabah as they do not have a consulate here. I have clearly explained to the Philippines Government about our stand on their claim on Sabah, I said the issue is not our problem (but) actually their (Philippines) problem and believe that certain quarters among the Philippines officials are stoking the claim despite Malaysia’s firm stand on the issue”. (The Daily Express Sunday January 22, 2012)

We are proud to have an elected Sabah representative who is fully aware and understands his roles and responsibilities upon being appointed to lead the ministry in question comparable to his predecessors at the Federal level. This contribution is made specifically for the good of the State and Country especially as far as the Sabah Claim issue is concerned.

In summary, the final Green Light to set up the Philippines Consulate in the State would only be made feasibly once a bilateral understanding has been reached by the involving parties. The question now is how soon can we find the remedy or convincing solutions capable of burying the Sabah Claim issue once and for all?

How effective would the establishment of a Filipino diplomatic mission be in helping the Malaysian authorities solve the controversial long stand issue of illegal immigrants hailing from the Southern Philippines in particular, when a similar category of aliens are also found in massive numbers from other neighbouring country (Indonesia) despite the existence of its consulate in the State‘s capital?

A positive outcome has yet to be extensively gauged and justified when it comes to reality upon full scale implementation. If they cannot act as the catalyst to the current social stigma infesting the State but they help to soften the blow at the initial stage, it will suffice as an effective remedy that works in the long run.

Retrospectively, it is still fresh in the minds of every living Malaysian in Sabah to ponder upon the following significant occasions:

a) In Oct 1998, former Governor of the Autonomous Regions of Mindanao (ARMM) cum the Chairman of the Moro National Liberation Front (MNLF) Prof Nur Misuari visited Peninsular Malaysia and Sabah bringing the message on the status quo of the Southern Philippines, which according to Misuari “is more peaceful now”.

He planned to take back an estimated 300,000 Filipinos from Sabah as their resources would be required to rebuild the southern region. Paradoxically, Misuari’s noble intention did not materialise due to certain unknown reasons, otherwise his role would have helped to reduce our authorities’ burden 14 years ago, thus partly solving the alien problems growing in the State from accumulating to the present statistics estimated to be in the range of over a couple of millions.

b) Our Government’s previous effort to deport Filipinos illegal immigrants back to their country of origin was kept on hold to a stand still during the crux of President Gloria Arroyo Administration when she refused to accept them back with the excuse that they did not have documents to prove their national identities as Filipinos although it was very obvious that those illegal immigrants hailed from the Southern Philippines judging from the accent of their home native dialects, behaviours and characteristics etc.

The setting up of the Philippines Consulate in Sabah would therefore be necessary and would help a lot to solve cases of similar nature in the future. Hence, we leave it to the wisdom of our government and the relevant ministry in question to search and formulate a long term solution affecting the parties involved for the sake of Social, Economic and Political Cooperation within the Region of ASEAN member countries.

Full statement by Datuk Zaid Ibrahim

An extraordinary General Meeting will be held soon to dissolve (Kita). This is necessary to remove any and all doubts that we indeed do support the Opposition, especially in light of some of our members in Kedah and Penang being openly critical of the Pakatan Rakyat.

They have been doing this on a regular basis, making it clear that they are not interested in real issues affecting the country and merely want to embarrass and ridicule the Opposition.

My idea to set up a political party that supports moderate and progressive ideas and brings civility and decorum to the political discourse has failed.

I have not succeeded in bringing in enough members who are interested in democratic ideals, good governance and accountability amongst public officials.

I have also not been able to raise sufficient funds to manage the party’s activities, and friends who had promised to help have since decided otherwise.

The media’s deep interest in the petty issues that affect the party is also indicative of the difficulties that we will continue to face.

There are enough people out there who are just interested in criticising my leadership of Kita, and who manufacture stories to ridicule me.

The Malays have a proverb, jika sesat di penghujung jalan, kembalilah ka pangkal jalan.

Essentially, it translates to: if you get lost along the way, go back to the beginning.

I realise now that forming Kita was a mistake.

I had hoped to provide alternative ideas in politics and to bring a wider diversity of talent to the Opposition’s leadership.

That has not happened.

I have made many mistakes in my life but I am not disheartened.

I remain convinced that change will come for the betterment of this country and I will do my part, again and again, to help achieve that.

I will not waiver in my deep-seated belief that serving the public is good, and that we can carry out this service with honour and dignity.

To the genuine members of the party who are obviously unhappy with this decision, I seek your forgiveness. I appreciate your support and I hope you will accept this decision, for it is for the greater good of the Opposition.

The survival of democracy depends on the viability of the Opposition.

If it is destroyed — as the Barisan Nasional is bent on doing — then there can be no democracy, no freedom and no moderate policies ever again.

Dakwaan Alumni meleset kerana Yayasan Selangor (YS) tiada masaalah Aliran Kewangan, bahkan sebenarnya kedudukan kewangan YS semakin mantap berbanding pada tahun 2007 sebelum Pakatan Rakyat mengambilalih Kerajaan Negeri Selangor.

Simpanan tetap (fix deposit) YS sebenarnya telah meningkat daripada RM20 juta pada tahun 2007 kepada RM51 juta pada akhir tahun 2011. Seiring dengan itu juga, hasil daripada simpanan tetap juga telah meningkat daripada RM471,000.00 pada tahun 2007 kepada RM1.7 juta pada tahun 2011.

Ini adalah hasil daripada pendapatan sewaan bangunan yang juga jelas mengalami peningkatan daripada RM9.9 juta pada tahun 2007 kepada RM14.8 pada tahun 2011. Ini kerana pihak pengurusan YS telah mengkaji  dan menyelaraskan semula kadar sewaan yang terlalu rendah berbanding nilai pasaran semasa. Pendapatan JV terutama daripada tanah Pulau Carey juga meningkat daripada RM1 juta pada tahun 2007 kepada RM5 juta pada tahun 2011.

Dengan itu, YS telah berjaya meningkatkan pembiayaan pendidikan daripada RM11.9 juta pada tahun 2007 kepada RM15.3 juta pada tahun 2011. YS juga menambah sumbangan kepada NGO di Negeri Selangor yang menjalankan program pendidikan dan sekolah agama serta bantuan pelajar yatim-piatu daripada RM68,000.00 pada tahun 2007 kepada RM851,000.00 pada tahun 2011. Pembiayaan pinjaman pendidikan juga meningkat daripada RM2 juta (2007) kepada RM5 juta pada tahun 2011.

Dengan itu, YS mampu membiayai semua Asrama-asrama Pusat nya iaitu AYSSB, AYSK, AYSKL (ATDI & ATPN) selagi ada bulan dan matahari, Insya-Allah.

Tapak AYSKL (ATDI/ATPN) akan dimajukan kerana sebab-sebab berikut:

1.         Pelajar-pelajar di PJ menghabiskan banyak masa dalam perjalanan pergi/balik menaiki bas, pelajar keletihan dan tidak dapat memberikan tumpuan di sekolah mahupun semasa sesi ulangkaji di asrama.

2.         Pada kebanyakan masa, disebab kesesakan lalulintas di Kuala Lumpur, para pelajar hanya akan sampai semula ke asrama pada jam 8.30 malam dan terlepas solat maghrib.

3.         Bangunan keliling telah dan sedang diroboh dan akan dibangunkan sehingga menyebabkan keadaan persekitaran tidak lagi kondusif untuk di diami dan pembelajaran.

4.         Aset YS di Kg. Pandan akan dimajukan untuk menambah dana bagi membiaya lebih ramai pelajar yang layak dan memerlukan bantuan, selari dengan usaha YS membanyakkan Asrama Harian, Asrama Daerah dan mengecilkan Asrama Pusat.

5.         Kos bagi menampung seorang pelajar di Asrama Pusat boleh membiayai 10 orang di Asrama Harian/Daerah.

6.         Pelajar-pelajar yang berpindah adalah dengan persetujuan rasmi ibu bapa setelah dibuat penyelidikan yang teliti dan mengambilkira pandangan semua ibu bapa, di mana ibu bapa diberi pilihan sama ada hendak mengekalkan anak mereka di Asrama Yayasan Selangor Kuala Lumpur (AYSKL) atau berpindah ke Asrama Daerah atau berulang-alik dari rumah. Maklum-balas dan pandangan hasil soal-selidik tersebut dapat dirumuskan seperti berikut:

6.1     80 % bersetuju untuk sama ada berulang alik ke sekolah asal, bersekolah di    sekolah pilihan ataupun ditempatkan di sekolah/sekolah asrama harian/daerah terpilih.
 
6.2     20% bersetuju untuk kekal di Asrama Yayasan Selangor Kuala Lumpur.
 
Semua pelajar masih diberikan kemudahan yang sama dan termasuk dalam Rancangan Khas Pelajaran Kementerian Pelajaran Malaysia-Yayasan Selangor yang dinikmati sebelum ini.

Kesemua pelajar Tingkatan 3 dan Tingkatan 5 yang akan menduduki peperiksaan PMR dan SPM 2012 tidak dipindahkan. Pelajar-pelajar Tingkatan 2 dan Tingkatan 4 boleh tinggal di AYSKL sehingga akhir tahun 2012. Seramai 170 orang pelajar ditempatkan di ATDI sahaja, di mana pelajar lelaki dan perempuan ditempatkan di blok yang berasingan.

YS akan terus mengembangkan konsep asrama daerah dengan penempatan pelajar di asrama harian sekolah. Hasil pengalaman YS mutakhir ini, konsep ini didapati amat berpotensi untuk memberikan kecemerlangan kepada pelajar berdasarkan rekod-rekod pencapaian pelajar dari tahun ke tahun. Contohnya, pada tahun 2011, keputusan PMR paling cemerlang dicatatkan oleh Asrama Daerah iaitu SMK Jalan Tiga Bangi, diikuti oleh SMK Kuala Kubu Bharu dan AYSSB. Tambahan pula konsep ini lebih menjimatkan kos, berbanding konsep asrama pusat seperti AYSKL.

Hasil penyusunan semula ini, YS kini mampu membiayai seramai 1,733 pelajar Tingkatan 1 hingga ke peringkat pra-universiti, 133 orang pelajar vokasional/kemahiran, 1,164 pelajar di peringkat diploma dan ijazah. Ini adalah merupakan satu rekod. Kita bertekad melipat-gandakan jumlah pembiayaan sehingga 5,000 orang pelajar, sejajar dengan pertambahan hasil pendapatan  daripada usaha memajukan tanah/aset miliknya yang sedang dan akan terus dijalankan. Insya-Allah.

Hasrat YS untuk menjana pendapatan sehingga RM300 juta dari pembangunan tanah Kg. Pandan seluas 7.5 ekar yang kini bernilai sekitar RM50 juta sama sekali tidak ada kena-mengena dengan masalah aliran tunai YS atau Kerajaan Negeri Selangor. 

Hasil daripada pendapatan RM300 juta itu akan digunakan sepenuhnya untuk merakyat pendidikan di Negeri Selangor supaya lebih ramai anak Selangor yang dapat menikmati kemudahan pembiayaan pendidikan.

Adalah dimaklumkan bahawa YS tidak menerima sebarang geran daripada Kerajaan Negeri Selangor, sebaliknya menjana pendapatan sendiri dengan membangunkan hartanah milik YS. Hasil daripada pendapatan tersebutlah disalurkan kepada pendidikan.

Sayugia diingatkan bahawa di bawah pemerintahan Barisan Nasional-UMNO dahulu 1990-an), tapak Balai Dato’ Harun di Kg. Baru, Kuala Lumpur seluas 13 ekar yang ketika itu bernilai RM50 juta telah dibangunkan menjadi Selborn City yang bernilai RM1.8 billion (Gross Development Value) hanya memberikan pulangan sebuah bangunan setinggi 18 tingkat yang cuma bernilai RM54 juta, sedangkan sepatutnya nilai pulangan kepada YS ialah 30% daripada nilai projek. YS telah kehilangan sebanyak RM300 juta kerana kebodohan dan ketamakan pihak yang berkepentingan!

Di bawah Barisan Nasional, YS telah memberikan "sewa pajak" tanah seluas 1.5 ekar tanah Kg Pandan kepada SHELL untuk operasi pam minyak iaitu status komersial pada tahun 2007. Jelas YS telah melanggar syarat gunapakai tanah institusi pendidikan sejak tahun 2007. Jika alumni boleh membantu, sila keluarkan mereka dari tapak sekarang untuk mengekalkan tapak Institusi dan bersedialah untuk membayar gantirugi kepada pihak SHELL.

Kenyataan akhbar alumni tentang asrama YS hanya merupakan retorik politik murahan yang jelas didalangi oleh parti pembangkang di Selangor, iaitu Barisan Nasional-UMNO yang sengaja menjadikan hal ini sebagai isu. Kehadiran beberapa orang pemimpin UMNO dan bekas Pengurus Besar YS di bawah kerajaan BN-UMNO dahulu adalah bukti nyata perkara ini sudah dipolitikkan dan diputar-belit untuk tujuan mengampu bos-bos mereka.

Adalah lebih bijak dan berfaedah jika pihak Alumni berganding bahu bersama Yayasan Selangor untuk memohon  dari Jabatan Pendidikan Negeri Selangor dan Wilayah Persekutuan agar segera meluluskan permohonan membuka Asrama Harian di Petaling Jaya dan di SMK Victoria. Itu adalah  lebih baik dari menggigit tangan pihak yang pernah membantu anda dan membuat bising tanpa arah tujuan.

Seperti yang kita sedia maklum, pihak YS telah berulang-ulang kali memberikan penjelasan berkenaan perkara di atas kepada pelbagai pihak termasuk kepada Alumni dan ibu bapa, tetapi malangnya perkara ini umpama menjirus air ke daun keladi.

By Vivek

As the clock struck 12 on the stroke of midnight, fireworks erupted across Malaysia as her beloved children ushered in another year full of promise and hope. We were united in our gale and celebrated with much gusto for there was much to look forward to in 2012 and
Malaysia stood strong, ready once more to face the challenges strewn in its path.

However, 1 month into the New Year and the celebrations have somewhat been deflated and we have been forcibly splashed with the cold waters of reality. Beneath Malaysia’s beauty and dexterity, the country is fighting against a disease that has for so long ailed her.

The problems remained, if not grew in the last month and it didn’t take long for us to return to the norm of political bickering, economic scandals and negative publicity on the international stage as we began preparations for the 13th General Elections.

For all the efforts of the Najib Razak administration to sugar-coat our dire plight, there are simply too many holes to be plugged. The political landscape was altered slightly with Anwar Ibrahim’s acquittal of his sodomy charge and soon after, both the Government and Opposition began preparations for the upcoming elections by firing shots at each other.

Note that the bullets astray hit not either party and their members but we the Rakyat who once again find ourselves in the middle of a power struggle which continuously weighs down on our nation writhing to move forward. One might argue that the upcoming elections will be the most pivotal elections this country has faced since gaining independence from the British.

I concur for while there are many sub-plots and underlying issues that come with this election, the fate of Malaysia and the fate of the future generation is what is being played for.


Economy

In 1993, the World Bank produced a 400 page report on the Asian Economics and Malaysia was dubbed the Tiger of Asia with an annual growth of 9% in comparison with South Korea’s 6% and Singapore’s 7%. Our GDP per capita stood at US$350 in contrast to South Korea’s US$130. Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) was also at its highest of US$7.3 Billion whereas our market capitalisation was ranked 1st in Asia at 14.6% (excluding Japan).

Fast forward to the present, Malaysia has never recovered from the Asian Financial Crisis of 1997 and since then we have fallen behind Singapore, South Korea and Hong Kong and now sit at par with Indonesia and Philippines.

While both Singapore and Hong Kong built up their portfolios by providing lucrative incentives and a favourable environment for investors to do business, Malaysia’s stock exchange (BURSA Malaysia) recorded a drop in listings from 1025 companies to 976 in 2009.

The final blow came from the World Investment Report (WID) 2010 whereby stating that Malaysia suffered a staggering 81.1% drop in FDI compared to Thailand’s 30.4% and Indonesia’s 44.7%. This shocking indictment of the current economic state of our country should come as no surprise for it was revealed that as of 30 June 2011, the country’s debt stands at 53% wherein if it touches 55%, the Constitution will have to be altered to increase borrowings and we may face the similar disposition of Greece and opt for a bailout.

While Malaysia continues to be ploughed under debts, the Government continues to spend lavishly ignoring the economic climate to ensure that the ruling power remains in their hands. Most notably, petrol and sugar prices both respectively being subsidised have been kept in check although being distorted by market value.

The question that begs to be answered is why as petroleum producers, we currently face this deplorable position? The New Economic Model (NEM) proposed by the Prime Minister in the first year of his regime failed to curb our decline as he released Part 1 which effectively was rendered useless as we continued the implementation of the New Economic Policy (NEP) which advocates racial-policies instead of merit based policies albeit using the backdoor. The 30% quota for tenders and projects reserved exclusively for Bumiputeras continued and this further added to wounds of the economy.

One would only have to look at the states run by the Opposition to note that both the Malays and Non-Malays have benefited from open tenders based on merit as Penang and Selangor posted the highest number of investment and profits respectively. The poverty level of both these states also reduced.

Tun Dr Ismail in his memorable speech once stated that the special rights accorded to the Malays were a handicap and that as Malays moved up the economic ladder; they too will denounce the need for these rights.

What can be seen today is the middle class and poorer Malays continue to struggle within the NEP framework as only the cronies and politically connected benefit. Bumiputera trust funds have declined in the past 20 years while individual riches continue to soar and this further illustrates the divide and preferred allocation of the failing NEP policy.


Education

The teaching of Mathematics and Science in English was the result of a policy by the Education Ministry of 2003 under the guidance of former Prime Minister Tun Mahathir Mohammad with the rationale made based on the government’s concern on the nation’s human capital development towards achieving the standard of a developed country, as well as an early preparation to compete globally on a standardized platform. However, this policy was reverted by current Deputy Prime Minister and Education Minister, Datuk Seri Muhyiddin Yasin in the middle of 2011 in which he introduced the ‘Memartabatkan Bahasa Melayu, Memperkukuh Bahasa Inggeris' (MBMBI) with the intention of protecting the sovereignty of the national language while improving the teaching of the English language.

In the modern era of globalisation, countries such as Singapore and Hong Kong have even accepted the importance of a single unitary language in which business transactions can be carried out. Despite this, Malaysia under the BN government continues to baffle as we take a huge step backwards in achieving Vision 2020.

The number one complaint dished out by potential employers when asked about problems faced by our undergraduates intending to enter the work force is down to a poor command of the English language. It is to be noted that no Malaysian Public University made the QS University Top 100 rank while our neighbour Singapore (National University of Singapore #28) and South Korea (POSTECH #98) both made the listing.

Devoid of lucid reasoning, the Government’s insistence on reverting back their PPSMI policy can be derived from pressure from extremist right-wing groups within UMNO to ensure Malay votes and money received from tenders given to re-print the textbooks. The Education Ministry’s statement that our education system is parallel to that of world standards is almost laughable and more so doleful when most notable politicians send their children to private schools and foreign education institutes to pursue their tertiary education.


Politics

Even if the economy is allowed freedom to grow without hindrance and our education system matched to that of Singapore and China, Malaysia is still subjugated under the clutches of corruption being ranked at #60 in the Corruption Perception Index (CPI) 2011 below African countries such as Namibia, Kuwait and Rwanda with Singapore being ranked at number #5.

To put in a nutshell, how do you expect the country to prosper under a corrupt free regime when even those put in place to prevent the problem commits the crime. The credibility of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) is tangible with the case of Teoh Beng Hock and 3 of their own officers arrested for stealing hanging over their heads. Besides that, the recently exposed NFC scandal is another indication of how corruption has infiltrated and is now controlling Government transactions. The humour in this is that the individuals being exposed are merely the small fishes in the grand scheme of things.

After 5 decades of single party ruling, democracy has suffered severely under the hands of the Government with the independence of the judiciary almost non-existent. The tabled Peaceful Assembly Act 2011 has been a farce constricting basic human rights accorded to us in the Federal Constitution. Even the press and media are not to be spared as they are forcibly held under threat of licensing by Barisan Nasional culminating with Reporters Without Borders ranking Malaysia #124 in their annual Press Freedom Index (PFI) 2011, 3 spots below Zimbabwe.

As a resultant juxtaposition, the people are sowed with seeds of doubts while the Government continues to play the race card using the media as their tool. We are also no longer held credible by potential investors and stand to lose out in billions of dollars further constricting our economy.

The points illustrated above are merely the outward context of our ominous quandary and there are still many issues yet to be resolved. If this proves any inclination that the time has come for positive change, then we cannot afford to placate and console our fears or delegate the onus for action to someone else. Malaysia needs her children more than ever to stand up and be counted, to rid her of this malady and to restore her to her former glory. The path towards reformation will be long and arduous, revamping policies will take courage and commitment but if there was a time for it, this General Election could be a make or break situation for our country.

I refuse to be drawn into the Barisan Nasional versus Pakatan Rakyat debate for the game of politics can have several winners but the only consistent losers will be the public. Be it the Government or Opposition, our duty as citizens of Malaysia is to ensure that the incumbent regime and future leaders of this country remember who they serve.

A proper system of check and balance must be put in place to ensure that it is irrelevant as to who is in power, but that they are denied a two-third majority enabling them to run this country as Kings. In the words of Noam Chomsky, “to some degree, it matters who is in office but it matters more how much pressure they are under from the public”.

We cannot ill afford to let this General Elections go to waste less we forever remain in this abysmal position and continue on a spiral decline erasing all the hard work, sweat and blood of our forefathers. The 13th General Elections will not be about the colossal battle between Najib Razak and Anwar Ibrahim neither is it about which coalition conquers Putrajaya. The 13th General Election will be the fight to save Malaysia.

The writer is currently pursuing his LLB(Hons), passionate about all things Malaysian and passes his time interpreting the subtle nuances of the nation’s many voices while sipping his daily dose of teh tarik.

After Kedah Menteri Besar Azizan outrightly rejected the Buku Jingga using the excuse the Kolej Universiti Insaniah (KUIN) does not come under the purview of the Universities and University Colleges Act 1971 (UUCA), Opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim defended him with claims that "Azizan as chairman of KUIN is compelled to accept regulations under the UUCA, in order to be granted a licence to operate the state-owned university" (The Sun, 2 Feb ’12).

Contradictions emerge as on one hand, Azizan asserts that KUIN does not fall under UUCA as it is a private university although his initial response to criticisms against the usage of UUCA was to write off the Buku Jingga. But in defending the suspension of the five KUIN students, Anwar exhorts AUKU. So which is which? Which clause is now being used? The fact remains – the students’ suspension holds and Anwar defends Azizan and KUIN quoting UUCA, in direct contrast against the Buku Jingga empty promise to abolish UUCA.

PAS President Hadi Awang also accepts Azizan’s explanation. Given Kedah Menteri Azizan’s unequivocal rejection of the Buku Jingga, his further reasoning that "it could only be implemented if Pakatan took over the Federal Government and that not all its contents could be put into place" (The Sun, 2 Feb ’12) not only offers an excuse to uphold the suspension of the five KUIN students, it also enables PAS a loophole to use and dispose clauses in the Buku Jingga whenever or wherever the situation fits them.

With the perception given of abolishing UUCA, what is important is to keep to the spirit and to start practising that perception now. If Pakatan rakyat held any integrity, they would retain a consistent stand over UUCA, instead of resorting to convenient loopholes when a situation goes awry.

Voters have been misled by the Buku Jingga as Pakatan Rakyat gave the impression that the Opposition would abolish UUCA, although that is clearly not in their cards.

To avoid using and disposing clauses in the Buku Jingga as and when they please, Pakatan Rakyat should list out which clauses in the Buku Jingga are applicable and which clauses will be disposed off, so that voters will know exactly what the Opposition stands for, what to expect and will not be disappointed when their hopes come crashing down over promises made and broken.

By Ken

Truth is not what matters to Mahathir but perception, in particular what the Malays perceive him to be. This is why Mahathir has, as usual, twisted Anwar's recent logical statements on the need for co-existence of both Israel and Palestine as peaceful neighbors into pro-Israel and anti-Palestine arguments.

That is the real Mahathir who also denied that he had asked for loans from the World Bank (an institution he had labelled, together with the IMF, as being "Zionist, American Imperialists, etc."), even though it is apparent to all that Malaysia has received loans from the World Bank after Anwar's sacking in Sept. 1998.

If the majority of the Malays even suspect that Mahathir had approached the World Bank for any help, that would destroy the image that he had so craftily and cunningly built up over decades, as a brave and defiant "Malay" who dared to take on even the most powerful nation in the world, the US.

There is ample evidence to show that Mahathir, in reality, is anything but anti-Jew or anti-US. Mahathir, despite his open vitriol against the Jews, is in fact a close friend of the Jews.

Mahathir's reason for the open animosity for Jews is the same as that applicable to his diatribes of the US - the open animosity is a diversion so that Mahathir's close relationship with the Jews will not be apparent, and he can continue to deceive the Malays and the Islamic world.

Let us look at the facts. Mahathir was a close buddy of Soros (a Jew)  in hedge-fund deals and currency manipulation, later blamed Soros for the financial crisis of 1997/1998 and called him a "moron", and subsequently absolved Soros of any responsibility for Malaysia’s financial crisis when Soros visited him after his retirement (http://minaq-jinggo.fotopages.com/?entry=1017436 ) - Was Mahathir a hypocrite, lambasting first and later embracing and absolving Soros?

Mahathir had engaged Saatchi & Saatchi, Goldman Sachs and other Jewish firms for various projects and tasks during his tenure as PM. In fact, he engaged Salmon Smith Barney, a Jewish firm, to advise him on how to manage the financial crisis and implement currency control in 1998. 

Mokhzani, Mahathir’s son, worked for Lehman Brothers, a Jewish firm. Another of Mahathir's sons, Mirzan, worked for Salomon Brothers, another Jewish firm. Prof Jeffrey Sachs from Harvard, one of Mahathir's top economic advisors, is a Jew. Mahathir (ok, some unknown person) engaged Abramoff, a Jew, to arrange the meeting between Mahathir and George Bush mentioned above. 

Could Mahathir make an enemy of the Jews who (according to Mahathir himself) control the world and still survive, unless he had been granted the leeway? Could Mahathir make an enemy of the Jews who (according to Mahathir himself) control the US and still survive, unless they were his good friends who allowed him the leeway to make all those ridiculous statements because of a far more critical hidden agenda?

US was and is one of the biggest investors and trading partners of Malaysia. Mahathir launched the billion dollar MSC on the strength and support of major US companies such as Microsoft, Oracle, IBM, Cisco, Dell, AMD, DHL, etc.

Malaysia spent billions of dollars on military purchases from the US during Mahathir's tenure as PM. Mahathir engaged and consulted American economic advisors and writers such as Jeffrey Sachs and Naisbit.

Mahathir loves the Western life style - he stayed on a "Precinct" (that's as American as you can get) in Putrajaya when he was PM and now lives in a "Swiss" mansion in the Mines.

Mahathir secretly allowed the US military to conduct exercises on Malaysian soil when he was PM (see Barry Wain’s “Malaysian Maverick“).

Openly, however, Mahathir has been a vitriolic critic of the US. But secretly he has been not just a close ally but a lackey of the US. That is why Mahathir is still around because he remains a lackey of the US and is of use to the US in global Islamic matters and the super-power's interests in Malaysia and the region.

Just consider this. Who is Mahathir compared to the Marcos and Suhartos and other notable dictators of the world in terms of strength, control and influence? They fell or rather the US allowed them to fall when they were no longer of use to the US or their continued dictatorships were no longer tenable.

It would have been kid's play for the US to destroy Mahathir, the PM of a country which has marginal influence on the world stage in terms of military, political, strategic or economic power. The US's track record shows that they would have most certainly done so in response to Mahathir's regular and often ridiculous outbursts against the US, unless he served a greater purpose for the US and the open criticisms were merely distractions from the truth that he, Mahathir, was a US lackey.

In order to hide his close links with the US, Mahathir often diverted the people’s attention through his harsh and often illogical rhetoric against the US and would subsequently make up with the US when the rhetoric goes beyond the limits – e.g. Mahathir’s million dollar payment to the Heritage Foundation to meet George Bush in 2002 to “normalize” relationship  (http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x480020).

Mahathir's October 16, 2003 speech at the OIC meeting contained some of the most outrageous statements any leader of a country has made publicly against the US and the Jews. Mahathir explicitly labelled the US and Jews as the enemy of Muslims and said that Muslims need "guns and rockets, bombs and warplanes, tanks and warships for our defense." How is it that Mahathir is still alive and kicking and can even visit the US after having seriously offended the most powerful nation in the world (the US) and the most powerful people in the world (the Jews), not once but repeatedly?

Mahathir, of course, will deny that he had any link with Jews and will claim that the incriminating information in this article are all lies. He can easily prove that the assertions in this article and elsewhere are wrong and put this matter to rest once and for all by doing something which he truly believes in as a "devout" Muslim. He can swear on the Koran in a mosque that neither he nor his family members have had any link or dealing with Jews. After all, Mahathir has argued vehemently that swearing on the Koran is more than sufficient to prove one's innocence. Will Mahathir take up the challenge or will he continue to be the hypocrite coward that he has been all these decades?

It is certain that Mahathir will not take up the challenge or even face Anwar (or anyone else for that matter) in an open debate to clear himself of all the accusations of corruption and abuse of power. It is time that there is a campaign to demand that Mahathir swear on the Koran that he has never committed or facilitated or contributed to corruption in the country or had abused power.

Can some Muslim NGO (not a political party) organize this campaign? Or perhaps, Marina Mahathir could initiate this Mahathir-swearing-on-the-Koran event to prove to the world her father's "innocence" and "greatness".