We need to sell Malaysia

by Alex Paul

FEB 8 — As you read this, 400,000 people are in danger of being made homeless by rising sea levels, but we haven’t taken much notice.

We haven’t done so because those people live in the Maldives, a small nation with no natural resources other than its (non-extractable) natural beauty. Thanks largely to global warming, the tiny collection of 26 atolls are being submerged by the rising levels of the Indian Ocean, but is struggling to get help.

In October last year, its Cabinet staged a publicity coup of sorts by holding a special meeting under water. It worked — and the Maldives got its fleeting moment of fame to highlight the impact of global warming. The gimmick is a stark demonstration of the challenges that smaller countries face in getting any meaningful international attention, even for the most pressing of issues.

Further East, another landscape change of sorts is affecting Malaysia. In the rapidly changing world map of international investment, the relatively small Malaysia is increasingly fading from prominence. This isn’t entirely its own doing — the world looks very different today than it did 10 or 15 years ago.

Gone is Malaysia’s position alongside the Asian “tigers” of East Asia, once the rising stars of the emerging markets.  In its place is an increasingly liberalised landscape dominated by the BRIC (Brazil, Russia, India and China) giants and populated by new investment destinations stretching from Turkey and Hungary in the West, to Vietnam and Indonesia in the Far East.

Malaysia’s prominence in this new environment matters because it is facing increasing competition for that all important ingredient for growth — foreign investment. Even the most avid “Malaysia Boleh” patriots amongst us should agree that its importance is vital in the development of the economy.

Malaysia, after all, serves as a testament to the positive role that foreign investment can play in the economic development of a young nation — foreign capital helped start whole new industries (from plantations to car plants) that created new jobs, imbued useful skills and transferred valuable know-how. Domestic investment and demand has yet to reach levels where they can independently sustain national growth.

The good news is that there is now more money than ever before looking for a home in the emerging markets. Investors ranging from hedge funds looking for a quick return to more traditional long-only equity funds are now allocating larger proportions of their portfolios to these markets as their clients demand a share in the economic expansion of the new world. Even the mighty Anthony Bolton, a highly respected former UK fund manager at Fidelity, has been persuaded to come out of retirement to invest the growing tide of international money looking to make a play on China’s growth.

The bad news is that despite this growth, Malaysia may not benefit if it remains passive.

The increase in quantity has not necessarily meant that there has been a corresponding growth in quality. So even as the pie has expanded, Malaysia must compete ever harder for a better slice. Some foreign capital is invested directly in actual businesses or projects and is known as Foreign Direct Investment (FDI). Other investments, categorised as Portfolio Investments, are less direct, and find a home in listed securities, whether debt or equity.

FDI is favoured because it is generally long-term in nature (what one financier I recently spoke to called “stickiness”) and often comes with non-financial benefits like a transfer of knowledge or technology. Portfolio Investments, whilst not always the case, are often short-term and is increasingly comprised of “hot money” looking to make a quick return from market imbalances or anomalies.

If Malaysia does not give itself a makeover to attract committed new capital, it will be left with short-term investments — the equivalent of speed dating in the international capital markets. International money will not invest in long-term projects in Malaysia if it perceives an opportunity to make greater returns with less risk in other markets.

In the borderless world of capital, foreign companies can still benefit from Malaysia’s markets by selling them goods made in newly-built plants in cheaper neighbouring countries whilst foreign investors can continue to cherry pick the best Malaysian companies or assets by buying listed securities.

Complicating this conundrum is Malaysia’s relatively small size.  With a population of just under 30 million (compared with the 85 million Vietnamese and 120 million Indonesians), Malaysia has a small domestic consumption market. Having benefited from a reputation of being a source of cheap, skilled labour, it is now also perceived to be a more costly investment choice than its more populous neighbours.

So how is Malaysia to compete in this new environment?

Firstly, by creating a new Malaysian story. Liberalisation for its own sake is no longer enough. Malaysia’s ability to attract new investment by opening up its economy is somewhat limited by its social priorities domestically. The new policy framework must focus on attracting quality investments by creating a set of new, attractive and sustainable economic fundamentals. A low-cost labour base is no longer relevant. Instead, the new Malaysian story must focus on its undersold and unique asset — a growing middle-class that is well educated, English speaking, and increasingly spendthrift.

Secondly, it must sell this new Malaysian story to the world. One-off gimmicks will not do the trick here. Climbing mountains or landing Proton Wiras on the North Pole to get attention isn’t just ineffective, it’s a distraction. Instead, policies must lead perception. Malaysia needs a clear, loud and constant voice on the world stage. The Ministry of International Trade and Industry currently performs that role in some guise, but it needs to increase its profile. The bureaucrats in Putrajaya could do worse than to get some help from the likes of AirAsia, Genting and YTL — all home-grown companies of international repute.

Thirdly, Malaysia must be part of the Asean story. Malaysia must push not just for regional co-operation, but for economic integration. Investors increasingly look at markets in the context of its region, both positively (as Ireland has benefited from being a member of the EU) and negatively (as some Gulf states have suffered as a result of bad news emanating from Dubai).

Individually, Asean nations are simply not large enough to attract sufficient international attention. But as an economic bloc representing some 600 million consumers, its place on the world map will grow in prominence. If Asean moves from being a diplomatic platform to a more open and integrated market, the region will go from being a “nice to have” to a “must have” for international investors.

These actions are nothing if not ambitious, but as the competitive landscape continuous to evolve, Malaysia must take immediate and bold steps or risk being submerged in the rising tide of globalisation.

* This article is the personal opinion of the writer or publication. The blog owner does not endorse the view unless specified.

MAHKAMAH SUDAH MEMUTUSKAN! BN MENANG 5-0 di PERAK !

* This article is the personal opinion of the writer or publication. The blog owner does not endorse the view unless specified.

Zambry is the lawful MB, Federal Court agrees

 

(The Malaysian Insider) - The Federal Court today found that the Court of Appeal was justified to reverse the High Court decision declaring Datuk Seri Mohammad Nizar Jamaluddin the rightful mentri besar of Perak.

This effectively means Pakatan Rakyat has lost in their appeal to reinstate Nizar as Perak MB.

The five-man panel of judges comprised Court of Appeal president Tan Sri Alauddin Mohd Sheriff, Chief Judge of Malaya Tan Sri Arifin Zakaria and Justices Datuk Zulkefli Ahmad Makinuddin, Datuk Mohd Ghazali Mohd Yusoff, and Datuk Abdull Hamid Embong.

The judgement is still being read out in court.

Nizar, 53, had challenged Zambry's appointment and won at the High Court, which noted that there was a loophole in the Perak Constitution to allow for another to be sworn in as mentri besar (MB) when the incumbent had not resigned.

In his decision on May 9 last year, High Court judge Abdul Aziz Rahim ruled that the Sultan was not constitutionally empowered to sack the MB, and that Nizar had always been the lawful head of the state government.

The judge added that the only way for the MB to be dismissed when he refused to resign was through a vote of no-confidence by his peers inside the state legislative assembly.

But the decision was overturned by the Court of Appeal later that month. The appeals court said the High Court judge's reading of the law was wrong and the latter had confused the issue of how the MB had lost the majority confidence with whether the ruler had the power to dismiss the head of government.

Nizar who is the PAS assemblyman for Pasir Panjang was chosen to head the state executive council (exco) after his Islamist party won the groundbreaking March 2008 general elections and formed an alliance with two other federal opposition groups, the secular DAP and popular pro-reform party PKR.

He was ousted 11 months later when four Pakatan Rakyat (PR) assemblymen left the fledgling alliance to swear loyalty to BN.

Bota assemblyman Datuk Nasharuddin Hashim who had earlier crossed from Umno to PKR, rejoined his old party. The assemblymen for Behrang, Jamaluddin Mohd. Radzi; Changkat Jering Osman Jailu; and Jelapang, Hee Yit Foong declared themselves as Independents friendly to the BN.

Their defections meant PR only had the support of 28 representatives in the 59-seat state assembly while the BN had 28 members plus the support of the three Independents.

The Election Commission refused to accept the three resignation letters forwarded by the pro-PR state assembly speaker which would have barred the votes of Jamaluddin, Osman and Hee from being counted.

Nizar was granted an audience with the Sultan of Perak but failed to convince the ruler to dissolve the assembly and pave the way for state-wide elections, ending what he saw as a political impasse.

Instead, the Perak sultan ordered him to resign and subsequently appointed Zambry as Nizar's replacement.

* This article is the personal opinion of the writer or publication. The blog owner does not endorse the view unless specified.

MB Zambry Kadir Retain... BN won in Perak

BN won 5-0..... appeal for DS Nizar dismissed


* This article is the personal opinion of the writer or publication. The blog owner does not endorse the view unless specified.

Ku Li blames Umno, Dr M for loss of democracy

KUALA LUMPUR: Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah (picture), Umno’s most vocal dissident,  yesterday fired some of his most devastating salvos in recent weeks, at one point using the word “deranged” to describe the country’s leadership.

Speaking at the launch of the Institute for Democracy and Economic Affairs (IDEAS), the member of parliament for Gua Musang declared that Malaysia was a democracy only in name.

According to the Malaysian Insider, he appeared to have singled out Umno and former prime minister Mahathir Mohamad for the loss of democracy in Malaysia and thus the betrayal of what Tunku Abdul Rahman Putra, Malaysia’s founding prime minister, stood for.

IDEAS is dedicated to the memory of the Tunku and its mission is to promote liberty and justice.

Razaleigh said Malaysia had been “left it to the deranged for too long.  To expect change from the incumbents is to expect, in the Malay saying, the mice to repair the gourd, bagai tikus baiki labu.”

Tunku Abdul Rahman, he said,  “brought together a Malaysia … ‘through our own free will and desire in the true spirit of brotherhood and love of freedom,’ in a union arrived at ‘by mutual consent by debate and discussion … through friendly argument and compromise,’ and ‘in the spirit of co-operation and concord.’

“That basis has been replaced by something alien to it. His memory has been suppressed, and our history revised.”

Razaleigh, popularly known as Ku Li, said Tunku Abdul Rahman would not recognise today’s Malaysia because it had been replaced with the “cult of the great leader.”  Many Malaysians would recognise that as a reference to Mahathir.

“Tunku built up a system of good civil service in which ordinary citizens did not need to see so-and-so to get things done,” he said. “This has been replaced by a domineering style of leadership in which what you get done depends on who you know.

“In place of the protection for ordinary citizens guaranteed by popular representation, rule of law and the checks and balances of independent institutions, we have the cult of the great leader.

“It is no accident that the erasure of his memory has gone hand in hand with the erosion of our institutions.”

Razaleigh noted that the Tunku was not alone in fighting for and winning Malaysian independence, but was with “an entire class of individuals schooled in the culture and practice of parliamentary democracy.”

Four concepts that drive IDEAS are rule of law, limited government, free markets and individual liberty. Its launching yesterday took place at Memorial Tunku Abdul Rahman Putra.

* This article is the personal opinion of the writer or publication. The blog owner does not endorse the view unless specified.

Ethnic dominance in the M’sian civil service

Commentary

Written by Dr Lim Teck Ghee & Ramon Navaratnam

This was written as a commentary in response to an article by Shagul Hamid Abdullah, Director-General of Biro Tatanegara that recently appeared in a national daily.

Since the paper has declined to publish it, we are making the commentary available to other media outlets in the hope that it will be widely read and the subject of the racial composition of the Malaysian civil service is given the serious analysis and policy attention that it deserves. We consider this issue of paramount importance to our future as a united country.

The article ‘Emphasis on raising standards’ by Shagul in The Star (Jan 30, 2010) seems to be aimed at ensuring that the situation of Malay dominance in the civil service should remain unchanged and unchallenged.

The Director-General’s analysis fails to point out some very important reasons why a representative and multi-racial civil service should remain a key national priority, especially in the context of building 1Malaysia.

One crucial reason is that the second prong of the New Economic Policy (from 1970) – the reduction in the identification of economic function with ethnicity – was intended to apply to both the private and public sectors. This second prong has been deemed to be so vital to the cause of national unity that the restructuring of the private sector continues until today (nearly 20 years after the NEP was supposed to have ended in 1990).

What has happened to the restructuring of the civil service that was part of the original NEP?

Although great strides have taken place towards a more multiracial private sector, the reverse has happened in the civil service.

According to available statistics for the year 2005, the proportion of Malays in the civil service had grown from 60% to 77% from 1970 to 2005 whilst the Perkhidmatan Tadbir dan Diplomatik (PTD) had 85% Malays in its staffing, or six Malays for one every non-Malay.

The situation of Malay dominance of the civil service, especially for the higher level service groups, is likely to have been enhanced since.

It is not simply the issue of Chinese under-representation mentioned by the DG that is of concern. Representation of other communities and the East Malaysia native communities in the civil service at all levels is of as much concern.

Data absent

Official statistics such as racial and regional breakdown of civil service staffing by ministries, agencies and departments and categorized according to top management group, management and professional group and support group and other key variables can provide us a better understanding of the representational issue. From it we can draw related racial, regional and other ramifications and implications.

Though easy to collate, analyze and make publicly available, these data are conspicuously unavailable.

Many government leaders have acknowledged that we need more transparency in government to raise public confidence. Should these data and the relevant analysis be made publicly available, we are confident that they will agree with the concerns of many Malaysians that current Malay over-dominance of the civil service is unhealthy and undesirable and that it adversely affects national unity, social cohesion and economic competitiveness.

Another important reason why the civil service in Malaysia needs to be made fully representative of the country’s racial make-up is that in all modern governments, civil servants are fully engaged in formulating and implementing public policies on behalf of, and in the interests of, all the communities.

Democratic norms call for a representative, impartial and neutral bureaucracy, not only to ensure that public policies are responsive to the legitimate needs of all citizens in a fair and equitable fashion but also to ensure that there is an absence of racial bias in the individual or collective manner that the civil servants formulate policies and conduct their work.

In February 2006, a study titled “Towards a representative and world class civil service” was presented to the Government as part of the Centre for Public Policy Studies (CPPS) proposals for the Ninth Malaysia Plan.^[1]

The study contained a full set of arguments as to why the civil service needs to pursue an appropriate and racially diverse representation policy in its staffing.

It also provided practical suggestions on how this policy could be implemented in the form of a quota system in recruitment and career advancement. The quota system would be similar to the quota systems long used by the government in sectors such as education and commerce to bring about Malay advancement.

The civil service quota system – in this case specifically used as a temporary affirmative action tool to increase non-Malay numbers and reduce marginalization – could be formulated in such a way as to meet with the constitutional provisions providing for the special position of the Malays and bumiputera groups of Sabah and Sarawak.

This 60-40 recruitment system would be relatively easy and painless to implement. It would ensure Malay dominance but not over-dominance by helping bring a gradual increase in the number and proportion of non-Malay civil servants in the country. Fuller details of the plan can be seen in the table and figure below. ^[2]

Table 1: Projections Showing the Effect of the ‘60-40’ Intake Proposal on Ethnic Balance in Graduate Employment in the Civil Service 

Since that study, the growing number of racial profiling allegations aimed at the police and various other ministries and agencies is a clear danger sign that changes in recruitment of new staffing and racial composition at the higher levels are urgently needed if these allegations are not to spiral out of control.

Sidelining non-Malays

The Director-General has emphasized that “there has never been any deliberate and conscious effort to discourage the non-Malays from entering and staying in public service”.

The veracity of this statement can be questioned.

If a full and open inquiry is held on the issue of whether or not bias exists in terms of recruitment and promotion in the civil service (and this includes staffing in the public universities and many strategic ministries and agencies), we are sure that many conflicting views – including those based on personal experience – are likely to dominate the proceedings.

Even if we accept as largely true the statement that there are no “deliberate and conscious” attempts to discourage non-Malay participation in the civil service, it does not absolve the government from its responsibility of ensuring a fully representative civil service – a national objective which it has long pledged to pursue but has cynically ignored instead.

In fact, if only a miniscule fraction of the public resources that has gone into the restructuring of the private sector had been allocated towards the restructuring of the civil service, we would have long ago achieved that goal and arrived at a higher stage of national unity, resilience and competitiveness.

Instead what we have had is a lot of rhetoric, foot dragging, attempts to ‘blame the other side’, and now another garbled attempt at explaining why the status quo in terms of the civil service composition has to remain the same.

That is why the contrasting statement by the Second Minister of Finance, Ahmad Husni Mohd Hanadzlah, that the civil service should be more multiracial is most welcome.

In order to fulfill this noble aspiration, we hope that Husni and his colleagues in the Barisan Nasional will support the introduction of a quota system reflective of the country’s racial composition and for the system to be introduced as soon as possible for all civil service recruitment and promotion.

It is important for the Government to change its mindset on the issue and not to view the issue of a representative civil service in zero-sum game terms. It is not simply the interests of the non-Malay communities presently under-represented that would be enhanced with more equitable representation. Malay interests would also benefit in many ways.

Implementation of reforms providing for the recruitment and career advancement of non-Malays in the civil service will help ensure that national unity and the goal of 1Malaysia will be more quickly realized.

Dr Lim Teck Ghee is Director, Center for Policy Initiatives and Ramon Navaratnam is former President, Transparency International Malaysia.

Footnotes:

[1] The full report is available at http://www.cpps.org.my/sub_page.aspx?catID=482&ddlID=98. Other studies in the report include ‘Corporate Equity Distribution: Past Trends and Future Policy’, ‘Achieving Higher Performance in Tertiary Education’. ‘Ensuring Effective Targeting of Ethnic Minorities: The Case of Low Income Indians’ and ‘Towards Equity for Bumiputera Minorities: The Case of the Penan’.

[2] Table extracted from “Towards a representative and world class civil service’ found in the Centre for Public Policy Studies report, Proposals for the Ninth Malaysia Plan, ASLI, Kuala Lumpur, February 2006.

* This article is the personal opinion of the writer or publication. The blog owner does not endorse the view unless specified.

Sodomy Trial II: People Be The Judge

post info

By Anwar Ibrahim

Categories: Analisis, Antarabangsa, Anwar, Asia Tenggara, Demokrasi, Islam, Isu Semasa, KeADILan, Mahkamah, Malaysia, Pakatan Rakyat, Pilihanraya, Politik, Propaganda, Umno and Video

0 Comments

---

Responses to “Sodomy Trial II: People Be The Judge”

Feed for this Entry Trackback Address View blog reactions

* This article is the personal opinion of the writer or publication. The blog owner does not endorse the view unless specified.

On how to avoid an acquital by default in Anwar's favor ..

Sakmongkol explains in Dealing with Anwar why he's not tempted by Anwar Ibrahim's invitation to treat and why we - bloggers and the media - should not, either.

Why should we kick a dead horse? Anwar is doomed. His Malay power base is slowly undermined. Look at his supporters out there at the courthouse. Hardly representing the Malay heartland. His flag bearer is Tian Chua.

Anwar remains a political asset if he remains free. To the west, Anwar is the emblem of democracy. The ignorant west insults us by treating Anwar as the representative of democracy. Can we treat Louis Farakhan or Father Jeremiah Wright as the definitive emblem of American democracy?

It insists that Malaysia must keep Anwar Ibrahim free if she is to qualify to be in the good books of the west. This unsolicited advice is similar to the insistence that we must bomb Iraq into democracy or that we must napalm Afghanistan to force it into democracy.

The blogger does have a point. Already, Anwar is using Utusan to try and win a big first round in the Sodomy 2 trial, which is to get the Judge disqualified.

General

February 08, 2010 15:07 PM

Anwar's Sodomy Case Postponed To Hear Application To Recuse Judge

KUALA LUMPUR, Feb 8 (Bernama) -- Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim's sodomy trial was postponed to tomorrow to hear the opposition leader's application for High Court judge Datuk Mohamad Zabidin Mohd Diah to recuse himself. Anwar's counsel, Karpal Singh, made the application based on the judge's decision relating to two articles published by Utusan Malaysian which he said "brings to surface an element of real danger of bias on the part of the learned trial judge". Justice Mohamad Zabidin asked counsel when the defence wanted the court to hear the application, this afternoon or tomorrow morning. Solicitor-General II Datuk Mohamed Yusof Zainal Abiden said the trial should proceed Monday pending the prosecution's filing of the affidavit-in-reply. The court then fixed tomorrow to hear the application to enable the prosecution to file the affidavit-in-reply. Karpal Singh, submitting that the court must hear the application before proceeding with the trial, said the defence had no intention of delaying the trial and was prepared to cross-examine the prosecution's first witness, Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan. He said Anwar had a right to a fair trial under Article 5 (1) of the Federal Constitution. On Monday the court was to hear Mohd Saiful's testimony under cross-examination by the defence. Anwar, 63, the Parti Keadilan Rakyat advisor and member of parliament for Permatang Pauh, is alleged to have sodomised Mohd Saiful, 25, his former aide, at Unit 11-5-1 Desa Damansara Condominium, Jalan Setiakasih, Bukit Damansara, between 3.01pm and 4.30pm on June 26, 2008. The charge under section 377B of the Penal Code carries a maximum 20 years jail and whipping on conviction. The high-profile trial, which had drawn coverage from both the local and foreign media, started last Wednesday, 18 months after Anwar was first charged on Aug 7, 2008. -- BERNAMA

* This article is the personal opinion of the writer or publication. The blog owner does not endorse the view unless specified.

Petua Kenali Waktu Bila Anwar Berbohong

* This article is the personal opinion of the writer or publication. The blog owner does not endorse the view unless specified.

MYSTERY: Portal PAS kata Karpal ada motif politik untuk jadi peguambela Anwar

 

by The Unspinners

 

PAS dan DAP pernah membongkar rahsia Anwar

Melayu08, Tranung Kite Online (Portal PAS)

Mungkin ramai yang tidak menyedari bahawa Karpal Singh dan Mat Sabu, Naib Presiden PAS sekarang adalah merupakan orang pertama yang mendedahkan salahlaku seks Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim pada 1998 semasa DAP mengadakan Konvensyen mereka di Kuala Lumpur. (Baca Hansard Parlimen 1997 yang ada ucapan Karpal Singh sini)

Karpal Singh telah menegaskan di hadapan ahli-ahli DAP di konvesyen itu dan mendakwa bahawa dia mempunyai bukti bahawa Timbalan Perdana Menteri pada masa itu melakukan salahlaku seks yang teruk. Dia turut mencabar Perdana Menteri pada masa itu, Tun Dr Mahathir mengambil tindakan ke atas Anwar kerana salahlaku seksnya dan membicarakan Anwar.

Pendedahan salahlaku Anwar oleh Karpal Singh berlaku 5 bulan sebelum salahlaku seks Anwar didedahkan kepada umum oleh Dr Mahathir.

Pelik tetapi benar, apabila dua orang pemimpin Pakatan Rakyat adalah orang pertama yang membuat tuduhan terhadap Anwar dan hari ini mereka amat menyanjungi Anwar. Tentu sukar untuk mempercayai bahawa orang yang sama membuat dakwaan pertama tentang salahlaku Anwar ialah orang yang sama turut menjadi sebahagian daripada pasukan peguambela Anwar dalam kes tersebut.

Tetapi kenapa Karpal Singh yang pernah menuduh Anwar dengan tuduhan tersebut, bertindak menjadi peguambela bagi kes yang sama? Tidakkah ini kelihatan seperti “ada udang di sebalik batu"?

Lebih menghairankan lagi apabila Anwar sendiri rela diwakili oleh Karpal Singh yang pernah menuduhnya melakukan salahlaku seks. Atau adakah disebabkan dendam Karpal Singh terhadap Tun Dr. Mahathir pada masa itu?

Penulis berpendapat Anwar bersetuju menerima Karpal sebagai sebahagian pasukan peguambelanya kerana beliau tidak perlu malu dan segan untuk dia meluahkan segala rahsia seksnya kerana yakin Karpal sendiri sudah mempunyai maklumat yang sama apabila membuat dakwaan sebelum ini. Jadi Anwar tidak perlu berselindung dengan Karpal dan memudahkan Karpal Singh mengatur strategi untuk membela Anwar dalam perbicaraan nanti.

Pada masa itu, Karpal Singh mengambil peluang ini untuk menawarkan khidmatnya sebagai peguambela Anwar. Karpal sedar bahawa Anwar akan terpaksa mendedah segala maklumat penting bagi membolehkannya membela Anwar. Jadi, boleh disimpulkan bahawa setiap sejarah hidup, perilaku dan tindakan yang pernah diambil oleh Anwar sudah berada di tangannya.

Karpal juga mengambil kesempatan untuk menjadi popular apabila membuat tuduhan bahawa ada konsipirasi untuk membunuh Anwar menggunakan asernik dan sebagainya. Hakikat sebenarnya tuduhan konspirasi ini tidak pernah wujud kerana apabila diperiksa oleh pihak doktor tiada sebarang sisa arsenik dalam tubuh badan Anwar.

Malah jika benar dakwaan Wan Azizah bahawa Anwar disuntik oleh virus HIV, penulis yakin Anwar sudahpun meninggal dunia hari ini kerana penyakit AIDS. Tidakkah Anwar sudah masuk ke perangkap Karpal Singh sehingga beliau bebas melakukan segala bentuk konspirasi selepas ini? Tidakkah Anwar telah dicucuk hidung dan bakal diheret kemana-mana oleh DAP.

Kenapakah sekarang DAP dan Karpal Singh setuju sebulat suara untuk melantik Anwar sebagai PM sekiranya Pakatan Rakyat berjaya menubuhkan Kerajaan Pusat.

Alasannya cukup mudah dan hebat!

Semasa menjadi peguambela Anwar, Karpal telah berjaya mengumpulkan banyak bukti hasil pengakuan Anwar sendiri dalam usaha untuk membebaskan dirinya daripada tuduhan salahlaku seks. Penulis yakin Karpal Singh dan DAP masih menyimpan bukti-bukti ini bagi mengawal tindakan Anwar apabila dia menjadi PM nanti. Kita tahu bahawa sememangnya terdapat peruntukan undang-undang yang mewajibkan peguam menyimpan rahsia anak guamnya.

DAP dan Karpal Singh mandapat faedah yang besar jika mereka berjaya memastikan Anwar Ibrahim mengikut telunjuk mereka dengan bukti-bukti yang ada pada Karpal. Anwar yang sememangnya gilakan populariti sudah pasti tidak berani untuk melawan kerana bimbang rahsia yang memalukan akan terdedah kepada umum terutama penyokongnya yang setia.

Jika ini berlaku, setiap tindakan dan keputusan Anwar tentunya akan memihak kepada Karpal Singh dan DAP. Pada masa itu nanti, orang Melayu hanya mampu melihat tanpa dapat melakukan apa-apa tindakan. Jadi siapa sebenarnya yang melakukan dan mengatur konspirasi, DAP dan Pas ataupun Barisan Nasional?

Nasihat kepada Anwar Ibrahim supaya jangan pandai membuat tuduhan melulu kepada kerajaan. Belajarlah dari pengalaman yang lepas siapa yang sebenarnya melakukan konspirasi terhadap anda. Ingat satu jari anda menuding kepada orang lain, empat jari menuding kepada anda kembali.

Tidak hairanlah kalau Karpal Singh menyokong kecaman Amerika terhadap Malaysia untuk menunjukkan sokongannya terhadap Anwar sebagai membalas sokongan Anwar mempertahankannya dalam kes biadapnya terhadap Sultan Perak. Anuar dan Karpal Singh ibarat lagu dan irama yang tak dapat dipisahkan. Jika kes liwat terbaru ini naik ke mahkamah, adakah Anuar akan melantik Karpal Singh sebagai peguambelanya.

Rakyat dari parti pembangkang harus berfikir secara mendalam dan tidak harus terlibat dalam percaturan politik Anwar yg kotor ini.

Jika sebelum kes 1998 iatu pada Julai 1998 dan sebelumnya Mat Sabu sendiri telah mengeluarkan sendiri kenyatan yang betapa bahayanya Anwar kepada negara kenapa sekarang PAS membuat u turn. Demi agama Islam yg diperjuangkan PAS seharusnya PAS adil dan bertindak mengikut lunas islam.

Jangan kerana untuk berkuasa PAS sanggup bersengkokol dgn seseutu yg terang-terang bertentang dgn ajaran islam. pengkhiatan terhadap jaran islm adalah satu dosa besar. dlm hal ini saya yakin yg PAS lebih arif kerana mereka dibarisi oleh ustaz-ustaz yg berwibawa.

Jika sebelum kes 1998 PAS percaya dan turut terpegun dlm ceramah Mat Sabu pabila Mat Sabu dengan lantangnya memanggil Anwar AL- Juburi kenapa apabila melihat rakyat tak percaya PAS pun turut menukar topik dan menyalahkna kerajaan?

Taib azamuddin sendiri pernah menerima pengakuan sumpah yg pernah dbuat oleh sesorg yang mendakwa pernah diliwat oleh anwa dan mereka merakam pengakuan tersebut. malahan akuan tersebut diedar kepada rakyat. kenapa masa 1998 PAS dan DAP percaya sebelum kes tersebut melatup tapi tiba2 PAS dan DAP membuat pusingan u?

Saya yakin dgn konsep keadilan media yg diperjuangkan oleh TKO ini dapat menyiarkan artikel saya ini supaya rakyat dpt mendengar dari kedua-pihak dan membuat penilaian. Dsini saya sertakan link utk sebagai bukti artikel saya ini. supaya saya bertanggungjawab atas artikel ini dan tidak membuat kenyataan tanpa memberi bukti

http://www.angelfire.com/emo/doaanwar/tamadun.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cId2bRE9c7I

* This article is the personal opinion of the writer or publication. The blog owner does not endorse the view unless specified.

GANAS! NGA OLDTOWN KOPITIAM UGUT UNTUK BUAT KECOH KALAU NIZAR KALAH ESOK!

by Parpukari

Ini satu berita baru aku terima pasal kes Perak esok di mahkamah! Pemilik Oldtown Kopitiam si Nga Kor Ming yang juga merupakan dua pupu kepada Nizar haramjadah kata esok kalau BN menang keputusan mahkamah maka dia dan konco-konco komunis dia akan buta kecoh di Perak! Baca di bawah ini:

DALAM akhbar Nanyang pada 29 Januari, Nga Kor Ming dengan sombong mengugut untuk menghuru-harakan sidang dewan undangan negeri yang akan datang jika keputusan Mahkamah Persekutuan esok menyebelahi Barisan Nasional.

Beliau dilaporkan berkata jika BN menang dan Dr Zambry tidak membubarkan DUN, sidang DUN akan lebih teruk dari yang lepas.

Ada dua perkara yang perlu diingat. Pertama Nga bertindak membelakangkan undang-undang dan mengugut akan melakukan kekecohan jika kehendaknya tidak diikuti. Dia bertindak ala pengganas KOMUNIS di era darurat.

Kedua beliau tidak menghormati sistem perundangan negara dan mencabar kedaulatan undang-undang. Beliau mahu bertindak bersultan di mata dan beraja di hati. Tidakkah dia tahu keputusan untuk membubarkan DUN terletak di tangan DYMM Sultan Perak?

Atau adakah dia sengaja mencabar kuasa dan kedaulatan raja serta institusi kesultanan Melayu. Dah perangai macam ini pun, Nizar Jamaludin masih taksub lagi pada Nga dan konco-konconya dalam DAP! Petikan dari Merentas Gelombang

Ada sedikit pesanan yang aku terima dari sahabat aku di Perak, katanya:

"Di Perak, kuasa untuk menentukan Ketua Kerajaan akan ditentukan oleh Mahkamah dan bukannya Ketua Negeri iaitu Sultan atau pun Raja Melayu. Kalau Niz berjaya besok maknanya, kaum bukan Melayu pun boleh jadi Ketua Kerajaan. Apa susah, pergi mahkamah je..? Biar mahkamah yg tentukan mcm kes kalimah ALLAH..! Jadilah mcm Singapore. Inilah sikap Melayu jahil, Melayu lain yg jadi mangsa...! Melayu oh Melayu.."

Kepada Menteri Amaran, ingin aku ingatkan sekali lagi, takkan nak biar je si Nga Oldtown Kopitiam ni sound macam tu je? Ini dah kira kes ugut dah ni, takkan nak tengok je kot Abe Hisham?

Update terbaru aku terima ialah sekiranya pagi ini NizarKKK serta sedara mara dia kalah dalam mahkamah rayuan maka mereka akan pergi bawa kes ini ke mahkamah antarabangsa Geneva pulak dah! Adeh memang dasar komunis kan? Nak baca lebih lanjut klik kat sini...

* This article is the personal opinion of the writer or publication. The blog owner does not endorse the view unless specified.

Malaysia has forgotten Tunku, and Tunku would not recognise Malaysia

By Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah

Tunku Abdul Rahman was the founder of Malaysia. That has been obscured by an intervening period in which his memory has been brushed out of our national consciousness.

He brought together a Malaysia that had come together “through our own free will and desire in the true spirit of brotherhood and love of freedom”, in a union arrived at “by mutual consent by debate and discussion…through friendly argument and compromise,” and “in the spirit of co-operation and concord.”

This was the basis for Malaysia he worked for and established, and that his life embodied. That basis has been replaced by something alien to it, his memory has been suppressed, and our history revised.

Part of the reason our collective memory of Tunku has faded, and that Tunku would not recognise today’s Malaysia, is that Tunku and his generation built institutions that empowered the people rather than cults of personality to concentrate power and wealth in themselves. They reached instinctively for democratic decision-making. The concepts and precepts of constitutional democracy were part of their natural vocabulary and instinctive reactions. They knew who the country belonged to, and that they lived to serve.

The day of Tunku’s funeral was not even declared a public holiday. It is no accident that the erasure of his memory has gone hand in hand with the erosion of our institutions. Tunku built up a system of good civil service in which ordinary citizens did not need to see so-and-so to get things done. This has been replaced by a domineering style of leadership in which what you get done depends on who you know. Of course the rich and powerful have better connections.

In place of the protection for ordinary citizens guaranteed by popular representation, rule of law and the checks and balances of independent institutions, we have the cult of the great leader.

In place of a system which designed to assure the rights of the ordinary citizen we have a system re-designed around the interests of corporate and political bosses.

Ordinary Malaysians are disenfranchised of their rights to health, education and security. They are then patronised by leaders whose idea of public service is to go around like Father Christmas doling out gifts of resources which are really the property of the people. This turns citizens into supplicants. Our properties are converted into gifts from the great leader. Our rights are converted into permissions. Our country has become his country.

There has been, over the years since his passing, a quite deliberate erasure of our memory of Tunku. This should come as no surprise. He saw the wrong turn we were taking and he opposed it. He and several other leaders were excluded from UMNO Baru. He led a movement called Semangat 46. His conception of our politics and system of government had no place for corrupt practices, arbitrary executive power and the manipulation of racial and religious identity for political gain.

Tunku Abdul Rahman did not help us achieve independence and then the merger, alone. He led and worked with an entire class of individuals schooled in the culture and practice of parliamentary democracy. In politics and the civil service they thrived in a time before the machine politics of patronage and lowbrow identity politics had sucked the life and talent out of the ruling party and left it filled with people who quite simply don’t have the ability to hold this country together anymore.

The average age of our first cabinet was under thirty. Tun Razak was 28. Tun Dr Ismail was barely 30 years old. Men of their calibre would not have made it up the ladder of the party that has succeeded theirs. They would have been too untainted, too young to do so.

The IDEAS project looks back, then, not just to an individual but to an era in Malaysia’s brief history. It will promote the values and principles on which we were formed.

Over the course of that history we have not trodden a continuous path to the present day. There have been two regimes, or political dispensations, in the life of this country, young as she is.

The first began in the fifties and ended in 1970. The dispensation that followed came to a mortal crisis in 1997 and limped on to 2008. Against the background of those changes, what has followed the elections of March 2008 is hard to describe as anything but the detritus of a once-functioning political system.

If any one of us was tempted to imagine that Malaysia had outgrown the sordid events of 1997, the government’s newspapers bring to our breakfast tables each day Sodomy 2, to remind us that after another decade of sloganeering, as Tunku Zain Al-‘Abidin pointed out, we have come full circle to find ourselves back at the doorstep of our debased institutions and a Constitution that is increasingly inoperative.

The progress of the trial of the leader of the Opposition, the government’s apparent ignorance of the sovereign rights of the states and the way in which we have allowed religious issues to be manipulated, point to that conclusion. The constitutional crisis in Perak, in which a government has been installed by illegal means, the failure to implement two royal commissions of inquiry findings, point to that conclusion.

The barbarous political culture promoted by the establishment media brings us full circle, and drives home the point: our system of government is still in 1997. We are still in the after-wash of a wave of bad taste, authoritarianism and arbitrary power that destroyed our practice of parliamentary democracy, compromised our judiciary and police, and disenfranchised our people.

To modify Tunku’s words, we now have a democracy “existing in name, but grievously compromised in substance, reality and fact.”

Our penchant for slogans is a reflection of our dislocation from the living reality of constitutional and parliamentary democracy. We don’t need slogans. We need our Constitution back.

This, then, is the context in which IDEAS has adopted its noble purpose. The efforts of idealistic young people, attuned to the principles of parliamentary democracy and to our real history, and equipped with a plan to effect that purpose, are exactly what we need at this time. We need this and other such efforts from the young. They should not let their repugnance at the ugliness of our political system turn them away from it. It is precisely because we have a broken political system that it is so ugly. It is precisely because our main political parties are bound to infantile ethnic politics that we are now stagnant and declining as a country. Instead, I hope they see the mindlessness and ugliness of our present politics as a call to service.

I urge young people to rise to the task of changing our political system. We have left it to “the deranged” for too long as Tunku Zain Al-‘Abidin calls them. To expect change from the incumbents is to expect, in the Malay saying, the mice to repair the gourd…“Bagai tikus baiki labu-labu.”

It is time for us to understand, discuss, organise and act together.

Tunku was a true Malaysian. As we have forgotten him, we have also forgotten how to be Malaysians. We must learn again how to be free and equal citizens of a constitutional democracy. In our national life we must learn again how to be a Federation of sovereign states governed by the rule of law.

We have been robbed of our memory, and have had it replaced with slogans, but we have also been robbed of our country. Let us come together to recover both.

* This article is the personal opinion of the writer or publication. The blog owner does not endorse the view unless specified.

Former PKR man predicts more defections

By Adib Zalkapli

 

 

KUALA LUMPUR, Feb 8 — Former Federal Territory PKR treasurer Norasidi Salim, who joined Umno tonight, predicted more defections soon if the Pakatan Rakyat party fails to address problems faced by their elected representatives.

“I know many PKR members who are not satisfied with the leadership. I am not sure if they are joining Barisan Nasional (BN) or are going to be independent, but if the problems persist, if they don’t take care of their elected representatives I don’t rule out the defection of lawmakers,” Norasidi told The Malaysian Insider.

Norasidi said that the party has failed to secure financial assistance for many of its assemblymen and MPs.

“How to serve the people without financial aid, they can’t just serve with speeches,” said Norasidi.

Some PKR MPs have raised the problems of getting financial assistance, most notably Nibong Tebal MP Tan Tee Beng who complained that the party’s MPs are being sidelined by the DAP-led Penang government in resource allocations.

Norasidi joined four other former Federal Territory PKR grassroots leaders in submitting their application forms to join Umno to Deputy Prime Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin before the start of the state Umno liaison meeting.

The defections come amid intensified infighting within PKR and the Pakatan Rakyat (PR) coalition which saw four of party MPs being referred to the disciplinary committee.

It is also a major blow to Anwar who is facing a career ending second sodomy accusation.

Norasidi, who is also the former Bandar Tun Razak Umno deputy chief, said he decided to rejoin the party that he quit in 2008 because of disappointment with Selangor Mentri Besar and Bandar Tun Razak MP Tan Sri Abdul Khalid Ibrahim.

“I have no problem with Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, and my decision has nothing to do with the ongoing trial,” said Norasidi, adding that Khalid has failed to serve the Bandar Tun Razak constituents.

He added that former PKR secretary-general Datuk Sallehuddin Hashim’s decision to quit the post last month had also encouraged him to rejoin Umno.

“I know Datuk Salleh’s credibility, he is no-nonsense man, so when he lost confidence with the leadership, I believe his judgment was right,” said Norasidi.

On allegations that he was an opportunist which triggered his decision to quit PKR, Norasidi said it will not affect him.

“They can call me whatever they want, it is not important to me, what is more important is now I have joined a party that can help me contribute to the nation,” he said.

* This article is the personal opinion of the writer or publication. The blog owner does not endorse the view unless specified.