<< Previous Topic | Next Topic >>Return to Forum  

SAMBUTAN KEPULANGAN TUN DR MAHATHIR

July 11 2006 at 2:49 AM
No score for this post
Generasi Tun Dr.Mahathir  (no login)
from IP address 60.51.180.113

 
SAMBUTAN KEPULANGAN TUN DR MAHATHIR
Semua penyokong dan pendokong perjuangan Tun Dr Mahathir di jemput hadir untuk menyatakan sokongan kita kepada Tun Dr Mahathir dalam program sambutan kepulangan beliau .Maklumat program adalah seperti berikut



Tarikh : 20 Julai 2006

tempat : Kompleks Bunga Raya Lapangan Terbang Subang

Jam : 8.00 malam
MALAYSIA

MILIK

KITA
Anda di jemput hadir beramai ramai untuk menyatakan sokongan kita kepada TDM. Pohon sebarkan maklumat program ini kepada rakan-rakan dan seluruh rakyat Malaysia
Hubungi kami melalui Email atau Hubungi No Tel 016 -3679003 Website - http://www.tdm2020.homestead.com/

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
AuthorReply
Google
(no login)
60.51.180.113

Results 1 - 10 of about 3,000,000 for mahathir. (0.06 seconds)

No score for this post
July 11 2006, 2:51 AM 

Web Results 1 - 10 of about 3,000,000 for mahathir. (0.06 seconds)

Mahathir bin Mohamad - Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaFormally known as "Tun Dr. Mahathir bin Mohamad", Mahathir is fondly called ... Mahathir became the Prime Minister of Malaysia on 10 July, 1981 when Tun ...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahathir_bin_Mohamad - 99k - Cached - Similar pages


BBC NEWS | Asia-Pacific | Profile: Mahathir MohamadMahathir Mohamad of Malaysia cracked down on dissent and defied the West during his long reign as prime minister.
news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/2059518.stm - 37k - Cached - Similar pages


TUN DR. MAHATHIR MOHAMADBorn on 20 December 1925 in Alor Setar, the capital of the State of Kedah, Tun Dr. Mahathir did his early and secondary education in his home town. ...
www.pmo.gov.my/website/webdb.nsf/ vALLDOC/3E14C55E7713B01648256BD600149965 - 17k - Cached - Similar pages


CNN.com - Mahathir attack on Jews condemned - Oct. 16, 2003Malaysia's prime minister has urged Muslims to unite against Jews who, he says, rule the world by proxy -- comments criticized by Jewish leaders as an ...
www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/asiapcf/ southeast/10/16/oic.mahathir/ - 44k - Cached - Similar pages


Speech by Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad of Malaysia to the Tenth ...Speech by Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad of Malaysia to the Tenth Islamic Summit Conference.
www.adl.org/Anti_semitism/malaysian.asp - 38k - Cached - Similar pages


MMalaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad: On JewsMalaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad: On Jews.
www.adl.org/Anti_semitism/Malaysian_1.asp - 31k - Cached - Similar pages


Dr Mahathir MohamadDr. Mahathir Mohamad is an international icon in the Islamic world respected ... Dr. Mahathir Mohamad¡¦s policies at home have won him much popular support ...
www.aljazeera.com/cgi-bin/review/ people_full_story.asp?service_id=3066 - 65k - Cached - Similar pages


TIMEasia Magazine: Malaysia - Regime ChangeAfter 22 years in power, Mahathir Mohamad is stepping down. ... Malaysia slips into recession as Mahathir blames everyone¡Xexcept himself June 15, 1998 ...
www.time.com/time/asia/2003/mahathir/story.html - 59k - Cached - Similar pages


Telegraph | NewsThe Malaysian prime minister Mahathir Mohamad has been condemned by Israel for "anti-Semitic" remarks made at a summit of the Organization of the Islamic ...
www.telegraph.co.uk/.../news/2003/10/ 17/umal.xml&sSheet=/portal/2003/10/17/ixportaltop.html - 30k - 9 Jul 2006 - Cached - Similar pages


The Star Online: Dr MahathirCentral to Dr Mahathir¡¦s work as Prime Minister is the task of ... He no longer treated the health of individuals but Dr Mahathir very much had his finger ...
thestar.com.my/mahathir/ - 26k - Cached - Similar pages


Try your search again on Google Book Search



Result Page:

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Next


Website - http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rls=GGLG,GGLG:2006-04,GGLG:en&q=mahathir

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Google
(no login)
60.51.180.113

Results 1 - 10 of about 272,000 for mahathir anwar. (0.12 seconds)

No score for this post
July 11 2006, 2:56 AM 

Web Results 1 - 10 of about 272,000 for mahathir anwar. (0.12 seconds)
Tip: Save time by hitting the return key instead of clicking on "search"

News results for mahathir anwar - View today's top stories
Mahathir is now just an outsider looking in - Taipei Times - 9 Jul 2006
Anwar Says Malaysian Premier Abdullah Should Answer Criticism - Bloomberg - 6 Jul 2006





Anwar Ibrahim - Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaIn the early 1990s, Anwar was being groomed to succeed Mahathir bin Mohamad as ... This was one of several occasions in which Mahathir declared Anwar guilty ...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anwar_Ibrahim - 45k - Cached - Similar pages


Asiaweek.comBut the real question is whether the assembly will call for Mahathir, Anwar and other top party officials to run unopposed in the party's Supreme Council ...
www.pathfinder.com/asiaweek/98/0619/nat5.html - 29k - Cached - Similar pages


Asiaweek.comAs a once-soaring economy careers toward recession, Mahathir, Anwar, and Daim seem stuck in ... Anwar has been Mahathir's heir apparent for five years. ...
www.pathfinder.com/asiaweek/98/0828/cs_1_malaysia.html - 36k - Cached - Similar pages


Aljazeera.Net - Anwar threatens to sue MahathirMahathir, who fired his then-deputy Anwar in September 1998, earlier this ... Anwar plans to sue if Mahathir fails to respond after two weeks, Nair added. ...
english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/ DC822A17-5D4E-4033-ADCA-164E01FDDC60.htm - 54k - Cached - Similar pages


Hateful PM Explains Anwar's IllnessSaying that the nation was "fed-up" with Anwar's lies, Mahathir told the ... According to Mahathir, Anwar's brain-implanted chip acted as a powerful ...
www.geocities.com/seachange_2000/chips.htm - 7k - Cached - Similar pages


Mahathir vs AnwarAnwar is guilty of corruption or sodomy. It is: MAHATHIR vs ANWAR: Who is ... September 1998 when Mahathir dropped the bombshell. He sacked Anwar as the ...
www.geocities.com/seachange_2000/kq_trial.htm - 13k - Cached - Similar pages


Mahathir and Anwar: PM keeps a tight grip on reins of powerMahathir and Anwar: PM keeps a tight grip on reins of power.
www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/54/096.html - 12k - Cached - Similar pages


BBC News | Asia-Pacific | Anwar sues MahathirDuring a pause in his trial, former Malaysian Deputy Prime Minister Anwar is suing the prime minister over his sacking.
news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/213711.stm - 21k - Cached - Similar pages


link.archive.9810: Internet Freedoms in Malaysia During the ...Internet Freedoms in Malaysia During the Mahathir/Anwar Tension. Roger Clarke (Roger.Clarke@anu.edu.au) Tue, 27 Oct 1998 09:43:03 +1100 ...
www.anu.edu.au/mail-archives/link/link9810/0434.html - 6k - Cached - Similar pages


Chronology of Malaysian political turbulenceMay-June 1998 - Tension mounts between Anwar and Prime Minister Mahathir ... September 4 - UMNO party expels Anwar. Mahathir says Anwar was sacked from the ...
www.cnn.com/WORLD/asiapcf/ 9901/16/anwar.chronology/index.html - 26k - Cached - Similar pages


Try your search again on Google Book Search



Result Page:

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Next


Website - http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&rls=GGLG%2CGGLG%3A2006-04%2CGGLG%3Aen&q=mahathir+anwar&btnG=Search

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Google
(no login)
60.50.200.150

Results 1 - 10 of about 189,000 for anwar mahathir. (0.06 seconds)

No score for this post
July 11 2006, 6:01 PM 

Web Results 1 - 10 of about 189,000 for anwar mahathir. (0.06 seconds)
Tip: Save time by hitting the return key instead of clicking on "search"

News results for anwar mahathir - View today's top stories
Miffed Mahathir starts to retaliate - The Age - 10 hours ago





BBC News | Asia-Pacific | Anwar sues MahathirDuring a pause in his trial, former Malaysian Deputy Prime Minister Anwar is suing the prime minister over his sacking.
news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/213711.stm - 21k - Cached - Similar pages


Anwar Ibrahim - Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaIn the early 1990s, Anwar was being groomed to succeed Mahathir bin Mohamad ... However, that year, matters between Anwar and Mahathir came to a head around ...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anwar_Ibrahim - 45k - Cached - Similar pages


Asiaweek.comIn recent weeks, Anwar and Mahathir have sent conflicting signals on the financial rescue of Malaysian tycoons, on market reform, on the proper level of ...
www.pathfinder.com/asiaweek/98/0619/nat5.html - 29k - Cached - Similar pages


Asiaweek.comIn an attempt to boost the government's position against Anwar, Mahathir sought to clarify matters in a meeting with UMNO grassroots leaders on Sept. 8. ...
www.pathfinder.com/asiaweek/98/0918/nat1-2.html - 25k - Cached - Similar pages


Anwar: Mahathir felt threatened by meDatuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, who is suing Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad for defamation, claimed that the former prime minister felt threatened by his (Anwar's) ...
thestar.com.my/services/printerfriendly.asp?file=/ 2006/6/15/nation/14548681.asp&sec=nation - 28k - Cached - Similar pages


Mahathir and Anwar: PM keeps a tight grip on reins of powerMahathir and Anwar: PM keeps a tight grip on reins of power.
www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/54/096.html - 12k - Cached - Similar pages


World Court News - Anwar: Mahathir felt threatened by meWorld Court News provides latest Law World News from the most comprehensive global news network on the internet. News and analysis on court, law, lawyers, ...
archive.wn.com/2006/06/15/1400/p/9f/0c7afb894c01fa.html - 59k - Cached - Similar pages


Chronology of Malaysian political turbulenceMay-June 1998 - Tension mounts between Anwar and Prime Minister Mahathir ... September 4 - UMNO party expels Anwar. Mahathir says Anwar was sacked from the ...
www.cnn.com/WORLD/asiapcf/ 9901/16/anwar.chronology/index.html - 26k - Cached - Similar pages


DJ` Novin DoT CoM - Anwar: Mahathir felt threatened by me - Latest ...Dj`Novin DoT CoM` | Malaysian One Stop News Portal | - NavinS.
www.djnovin.com/html/modules/ news/article.php?storyid=166 - 15k - Cached - Similar pages


FAC NewsHowever, later, for reasons best known to him, Mahathir decided to smear Anwar as an IMF stooge who had ~{!.~}sold out~{!/~} the nation and was allegedly leading the ...
www.freeanwar.net/July2003/anwar_mahathir_imf.htm - 11k - Cached - Similar pages


Try your search again on Google Book Search



Result Page:

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Next


Website - http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=anwar+mahathir&btnG=Google+Search

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
A Kadir Jasin
(no login)
60.50.200.150

THE THIRD -PARTY POSER

No score for this post
July 11 2006, 5:56 PM 

THE THIRD -PARTY POSER





The rumour mill is in overdrive that a third party is trying to exert control over the government, causing a rift between our present and past premiers in the process. An Umno minister now says it is true. This does not augur well for the country.





By A Kadir Jasin





WAS THERE an attempt to sack Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad from Umno, or, at the very least, to censure him as has been widely talked about?



That speculation became the staple of the Internet news sites, the weblogs and the coffee-shop pundits following Dr Mahathir~{!/~}s June 7 criticism of his successor, Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi.



He went as far as saying that Abdullah was not his first choice and thought he had made a mistake.



The Opposition parties, in particular the Pan-Malaysian Islamic Party (Pas), were pretty much convinced that the Umno Supreme Council would give Dr Mahathir the boot.



Its Vice-President Husam Musa was widely quoted by the alternative Press and the Internet news sites as saying that he had received reliable information to that effect.



Thus, when the Umno Supreme Council, at its meeting on June 19 in Kuala Lumpur, made no such decision, Husam was quick to claim that his preemption had saved Dr Mahathir.



For such a claim to come from a Pas stalwart is not surprising. His concern for Dr Mahathir might not have been altruistic. Pas stands to benefit hugely from any split in Umno, as the 1998 sacking of Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim has shown.



The sacking of Dr Mahathir by Abdullah, if it happens, would be a bonanza for the Opposition, in particular Pas, and, to a limited degree, Parti Keadilan Rakyat Malaysia and the Democratic Action Party.



Thus, the denial by several Umno personalities that there wasn~{!/~}t such a move did not help quash the rumours completely.



On the contrary, it strengthened the skeptics~{!/~} view that the sword of Damocles may yet fall on Dr Mahathir~{!/~}s neck.




Accepting responsibility



FOR now, it would appear that the Supreme Council is satisfied with ignoring Dr Mahathir and pledging its support for Abdullah.



The Prime Minister did what successive Umno Presidents had done when challenged – he reverted to the Supreme Council for support. It was not clear whether in this most recent case, it also included a pledge of loyalty.



In their attempts to portray an open-minded stance and dignity in the face of crisis, some Supreme Council members, including ministers, spoke of their deep respect for Dr Mahathir and his right to express his views.



But among Dr Mahathir~{!/~}s staunchest supporters, the denial served to reinforce their conviction that the danger was not over yet and that the ~{!.~}deconstruction~{!/~} of the former Prime Minister, especially by the government- and Umno-controlled media, would continue.



There are still people, in and outside Umno, who hold the view that the removal of Dr Mahathir at some point of time in the future is not a complete improbability.



Dr Mahathir~{!/~}s criticism of the government has been, even by the most liberal of yardsticks, stinging. To reveal publicly that Abdullah was not his first choice was harsh, to say the least.



But the very same argument, read in reverse, is Dr Mahathir~{!/~}s admission that he has made a mistake; firstly, in his assessment of who should have succeeded him, and secondly, for ignoring the fact that Datuk Seri Mohd Najib Abdul Razak was more senior than Abdullah, based on the results of the 1996 party election, the latest that the two men were involved in.



So, if a mistake has indeed been made, then Dr Mahathir must accept part of the blame, if not all. If he thinks that his policies and programmes are being progressively dismantled, he has himself to blame.




Consistent answers please



IN the eyes of Dr Mahathir~{!/~}s supporters and those who share his views, the government has not been effective in ~{!.~}handling~{!/~} his queries and criticism.



Abdullah~{!/~}s ~{!.~}elegant silence~{!/~} has not helped convince Dr Mahathir, his supporters and sympathisers that he is serious, or, worse, capable of answering the former Prime Minister~{!/~}s charges.



And on the rare occasion that he has tried to, he has appeared unsure. A typical example was when he was confronted by reporters from the Internet news sites recently. He was unsure which was more costly – cancelling the causeway project or proceeding with it.



The prevailing wisdom suggests that it would cost more to cancel the project than to proceed with it.



Herein lies another fundamental issue ~{!*~} the apparent inability of the government to come up with consistent and convincing arguments to put to rest Dr Mahathir~{!/~}s criticism once and for all.



After Dr Mahathir came out in the open with his criticism, Abdullah told the Press that he had instructed the relevant ministries to answer Dr Mahathir~{!/~}s charges.



He mentioned queries concerning the continued issuance of approved permits (APs), the cancellation of the causeway project, the sale of MV Agusta by Proton and the termination of the employment contract of Tengku Tan Sri Mahaleel Tengku Ariff, also by Proton.



The understanding is that either the ministers or the ministries concerned will respond. In the case of Proton, it should be the Minister of Finance or the ministry. This is because the Finance Ministry is the ultimate controlling shareholder of the national carmaker.



Instead, a strongly worded explanation was given by Proton~{!/~}s Chairman Datuk Mohd Azlan Hashim. This immediately contradicted the Prime Minister~{!/~}s statement that the relevant ministries would answer.




Of elegant silence and costly mistakes



WILL there still be an answer from the Finance Ministry? Or will other ministers and ministries too relegate and delegate the Prime Minister~{!/~}s order to their civil service subordinates?



Are we splitting hairs here?



When the Prime Minister said the relevant ministries would answer, did he mean the ministers responsible for these ministries, or written statements from these ministries would suffice?



Or as the Proton case has shown, does it mean that any Tom, Dick and Harry could answer on behalf of the ministers and ministries concerned?



Some see this as yet another example of Abdullah~{!/~}s inability to ensure that his instructions are carried out, which, in the wider context, is affecting the government~{!/~}s delivery system, while there are still others who say this could be a deliberate effort to de-politicise and hence shield him and his Cabinet from Dr Mahathir~{!/~}s attacks.



I think Dr Mahathir should acknowledge (maybe he has) the futility of trying to coax, encourage and provoke his ~{!.~}elegantly silent~{!/~} successor to respond to his queries and criticism. (Tun Musa Hitam, thank you for the refreshing creativity).



Here, I can~{!/~}t but be critical of Dr Mahathir~{!/~}s own stance in running Umno and managing the country. When he decided, as he did, to anoint Abdullah his successor instead of Najib, there surely must have been things about Abdullah that had attracted his attention.



He has known Abdullah for too long and too intimately to make a mistake, which he now thinks he has. Except for a brief period in the post-1987/88 political turmoil, Abdullah had been a member of his Cabinet all along.



As Foreign Minister for a good decade, he followed Dr Mahathir around the globe. He ran errands for Dr Mahathir on many issues and with many countries, including Singapore on the causeway and other key issues.




Misplaced faith?



FOR Dr Mahathir to say now that he has made a mistake is atypical of him and unthinkable. Dr Mahathir is one man who thinks not in terms of days or months. He thinks in terms of years and decades.



Surely, in making that heart-wrenching decision to opt for Abdullah as his successor, which in effect relegated Najib to the uncertain post of Deputy Prime Minister, Dr Mahathir must have had great confidence and faith in Abdullah.



The futuristic Mahathir Mohamad would not have gambled on anybody whom he thought would jeopardise his long-term plans, like Vision 2020, and his strategic projects like Proton and the construction of the half-bridge to replace the Malaysian side of the Causeway.



He must have been totally and unequivocally convinced that Abdullah was that man. And as an elder statesman and the man who had changed the economic and political landscape of the country, he must have thought that he would be accorded a level of respect befitting his stature.



With his massive power and influence, and the goodwill that he enjoyed, he could have ~{!.~}installed~{!/~} himself in one kind of advisory capacity or another. But he did not. Instead, he left it to his successor and his prot~{(&~}g~{(&~}s.



They did. They made him advisor to Proton and Petronas. Then, almost immediately, in the case of Proton, they started to deconstruct his legacy and, to add insult to injury, he was reduced to dealing with the chairman of the company.



His position at Petronas looks more respectable largely because the national oil company is doing extremely well both at home and abroad, and is run by executives of unquestionable calibre, professionalism and dignity.




When a third party wants in ~{!-~}



I would like to ask Najib – partly because I am told that he enjoys the Prime Minister~{!/~}s confidence and is at the helm of 22 Cabinet committees – why can~{!/~}t he intercede and suggest a solution to the standoff?



Since that exclusive interview I did with him for the now-defunct Business Times in 1977, I have always thought of Najib as a well-brought up, courteous and knowledgeable person.



Why can~{!/~}t he show greater deference to the old man who has always treated him like a son?



I don~{!/~}t think Dr Mahathir is demanding love and affection from anybody. This is a man who can live without love, except the love for his country. Damn him for all his shortcomings, but please show him respect where respect is due.



So, if Dr Mahathir was convinced that he was making the right decision in anointing Abdullah his successor and keeping his word by transferring the baton to him on Oct 31, 2003, what has then gone wrong?



In the Malay wayang kulit (shadow play) and silat pulut (the ceremonial rendition of the Malay art of self-defence) tradition, nobody really dares to speak up although the coffee shops, the grapevine and the corridors of power are replete with hushed talk of the real power behind the Prime Minister.



But that code of silence may be breaking down. A key Abdullah ally who goes back to their youth movement days, Rural and Regional Development Minister Datuk Seri Abdul Aziz Shamsuddin, has spoken about attempts by a third party to control the present government.



In a report tucked away in the bottom corner of page six of the Bahasa Malaysia daily Berita Harian on June 21, Abdul Aziz, who was a long-time political secretary to Dr Mahathir, was quoted as saying that there was no animosity between Dr Mahathir and Abdullah. Instead, he claimed that the problem arose kerana ada pihak ketiga cuba mengawal kerajaan sekarang (because there is a third party that is trying to control the present government).



Abdul Aziz, according to the report, praised Abdullah ~{!.~}for not being easily influenced by (this) third party but instead continues to carry out the task entrusted to him.~{!/~}



Berita Harian took pains to note that this was the first time that Abdul Aziz, as one of the people who had served Dr Mahathir for a very long time, had commented on the issue.



Now that an ally of the Prime Minister and former aide to Dr Mahathir has acknowledged the presence of a third party who is trying to influence the government, would he go a step further to identify the group?



Somebody of stature and authority like Abdul Aziz should come out with the identity of the group, failing which, public suspicion – rightly or wrongly ~{!*~} will continue to be focused on Deputy Umno Youth Chief Khairy Jamaluddin and his group of Oxbridge colleagues and media operators.



Dr Mahathir has avoided speaking about the Prime Minister~{!/~}s son-in-law but has, in a sarcastic manner, referred to Abdullah~{!/~}s associates who are now controlling and running the news media.



On a personal level, all this reminds me of the days and months following the death of Tun Abdul Razak Hussein in 1976 when the Umno old guards, led by the likes of the late Tan Sri Syed Jaafar Albar, aka the ~{!.~}Lion of Umno~{!/~}, flushed out members of the so-called Razak~{!/~}s ~{!.~}kitchen Cabinet~{!/~}.







E-mail: akadirjasin@beritapub.com.my.

Besides Malaysian Business, Kadir also contributes to local Bahasa Malaysia and English publications. He can also be read at akadirjasin.com







Website - http://www.agendadaily.com/cmspreview/content.jsp?id=com.tms.cms.article.Article_5cf5cf54-3132372e-fe30af00-527876ba

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Jeff Ooi
(no login)
210.187.118.238

De-classified: The Singapore way

No score for this post
July 16 2006, 8:26 PM 

De-classified: The Singapore way
Again, Singapore beats us in the way de-classified documents are displayed for public scrutiny.

As an illustration of how transparency is handled across the Causeway, here's a composite sample of Goh Chok Tong's correspondence to Dr Mahathir -- both are now former prime ministers -- way back in April 2002, in which initial consensus over the replacement of Causeway was achieved.


The original PDF, which is 3-page long, is available on Channel NewsAsia archive.

And this is Dr Mahathir's reply to Goh, dated May 11, 2002, that was published at liberty by the Singaporean government. Did the Singaporeans also believe that there are two sides to the coin?


SOURCE: Channel NewsAsia archive
Put in plain contrast, however much The NST tried to posture on behalf of transparency in Malaysia -- here and here -- we still pale to shame.

Thus far, after much hype about the OSA-declassified documents purportedly to put the record straight, we are merely given interpretation crafted by text draftmen's who, some say, include privileged people out-of-the-government.

In short, we don't get to see the real thing.

As it is, there are a lot more inter-governmental PDFs of such critical nature that, once de-classified, Singapore bares them all for public consumption -- no if, no but.

Just go to this Index page on Channel NewsAsia archive.

Too bad, there's no more revelation in Singapore after October 12, 2002 -- the date of the last published Malaysia-Singapore correspondence, where the water supply issue became a stalemate -- right through to October 31, 2003, the day Mahathir retired, and beyond.


Posted by Jeff Ooi at 08:31 AM | Permalink | Conversations (5) | TrackBacks (0)
Welcome home, Mr Prime Minister
Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi returned home last night to a rousing welcome at Subang airbase after a two-week holiday with his family in Perth, Australia.

According to Bernama, Abdullah said he was happy that the Cabinet functioned well under the able leadership of Deputy Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak during his absence.

Thank you for making a loud statement likethis, Mr Prime Minister. We will ponder over it.

Posted by Jeff Ooi at 08:10 AM | Permalink | Conversations (14) | TrackBacks (0)
Shareem Amry
Nowadays, even Shareem Amry -- a gem find in The NST during the A Kadir Jasin and DKL eras -- is writing for The Star.


Posted by Jeff Ooi at 08:06 AM | Permalink | Conversations (0) | TrackBacks (0)
Internet: Syed Hamid 'vindicated'
Just two days ago, FA Minister Syed Hamid Albar asked people not to believe in Internet but to rely on the mainstream media forinformation. He was vidicated.

Apparently, Bernama has made a big mess of the PMO's latest rebuttal of Dr Mahathir on the crooked bridge issue, by publishing "Inaccurate, Incomplete and Duplicated" statement on its official website.

The evidence is in Screenshots regular commenter multidimid/mwt's blog: Present Point Power, complete with screenshots.

Should NST editors be seconded to Bernama so that the national news agency gets some of that 'infamous intimacy' with Putrajaya?

Luckily, Bernama has made the neccessary amends to the earlier boo-boo. Or else, Syed Hamid can claim later..."Mana mahu (per)caya itu Internet? Tengok, Bernama punya website pun tak boleh pakai!"


Posted by Jeff Ooi at 08:00 AM | Permalink | Conversations (1) | TrackBacks (0)
Website - http://www.jeffooi.com/

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Gen-M
(no login)
60.50.195.81

Gen M moves to new domain

No score for this post
July 17 2006, 5:44 PM 

July 18, 2006
Gen M moves to new domain
The official website of Dr Mahathir's 'fan-club', Gen-M, is moving to a new domain at www.generasi-m.com. It will be fully functional from July 25. 2006.

The email contact at tdm_2020@hotmail.com has also been replaced from today, July 18. The new addy is: GenerasiM@gmail.com.

Dr Mahathir is scheduled to return home on July 22, ETA at 10.00pm (20:00hr) at the Petronas Hangar, Sultan Abdul Aziz Shah Airport, Subang.

For details, call Gen-M line at 016 -3679003.
Website - http://www.jeffooi.com/

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Matthias Chang Wen Chieh
(no login)
210.187.3.42

Mathias Chang's Affidavit (English)

No score for this post
July 26 2006, 3:25 AM 

Wednesday, July 26, 2006
Mathias Chang's Affidavit (English)

SPECIAL REPORTS ARCHIVES

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MALAYA AT KUALA LUMPUR
(CIVIL DIVISION)

CIVIL SUIT NO S1-23-68 2006

BETWEEN

Dato Kalimullah Bin Masheerul Hassan
(NO K/P: 580315-07-5319) … Plaintiff

AND

Matthias Chang Wen Chieh
(NO K/P: 500222-10-5571) … Defendant

DEFENDAN’T AFFIDAVIT

I, MATTHIAS CHANG WEN CHIEH (I/C No: 500222-10-5571) a Malaysian citizen of full age and residing at No. 159, Jalan Athinahapan 2, Taman Tun Dr. Ismail, 60000 Kuala Lumpur sincerely affirm as follows:-

1. I am an Advocate & Solicitor of the High Court of Malaya.

2. I am the Defendant in this action. All facts deposed herein are in my personal knowledge and or base on documents which I have access to unless stated otherwise.

3. I make this Affidavit in reply to the Affidavit affirmed by the Plaintiff on the 29.6.2006 (Plaintiff’s Affidavit) and in support of my application to set aside the Order of 4.7.2006 obtained by way of ex parte and for striking out paragraphs 3, 5 and 6 of the Statement of Claim as stated in the Summons-In-Chambers filed herein.

4. I verily state that the Plaintiff had deliberately and wilfully concealed and suppressed material facts from this Honourable Court which if made known would have a negative and or an adverse impact on the prayers sought for by the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff has further failed to come to court with clean hands.

5. I verily deny I uttered the words as pleaded in paragraph 3 of the Statement of Claim and paragraph 7 and 8 of the Plaintiff’s Affidavit. The Plaintiff’s pleading is prejudicial, embarrassing or an abuse of process of the court. In any case the alleged defamatory words pleaded in paragraphs 3 of the Statement of Claim and averred in paragraph 8 of the Plaintiff’s Affidavit cannot in law and in fact be actionable taking the entire press conference into consideration, the particulars are in the following paragraphs.

a) I verily state that Exhibit “KMH-1” contains distortions, misrepresentations and sensationalism of the statements made by me during the press conference held on the 13.6.2006.

b) I further aver that the Singapore Straits Times failed, neglected and or refused to publish the entire press conference and other issues raised thereto which are critical to arriving at an objective and balanced view of the press conference and in determining whether or not the words spoken by me are in fact and in law defamatory of the Plaintiff. Therefore I verily deny paragraph 14 of the Plaintiff’s Affidavit.

6. I deny having spoken the words as pleaded by the Plaintiff in paragraph 5 of the Statement of Claim and I certainly cannot be liable and or responsible for the distortions, misrepresentations, sensationalism, omissions, and statements and or words published inaccurately and or out of context by the Singapore Straits Times and the headline crafted by the Singapore Straits Times in paragraph 5 of the Statement of Claim and repeated in paragraph 7 of the Plaintiff’s Affidavit.

7. I verily state that the STAR newspaper on the 15.6.2006, reported fairly the intention and content of my press conference notwithstanding that the actual words spoken by me were not reported verbatim. The Star published inter-alia as follows:

“Dr. M’s former aide challenges critics”

“Matthias Chang, former aide to Tun Dr. Mahathir, has challenged Khairy Jamaluddin, the Premier’s son-in-law, and New Straits Times deputy group Chairman Datuk Kalimullah Hassan to openly debate the controversial issues.

“Major Chinese dailies quoted Chang, Dr. Mahathir’s former political secretary, as giving a week to the two to take up his challenge. “Accept my challenge; if not, shut up and stop criticising Dr. Mahathir.”

“Chang who called a press conference at his legal firm on Wednesday also swore on five holy books that if he were lying, he would face God’s punishment. He said that when he worked as political secretary for Dr. Mahathir, he was not involved in any business directly or indirectly, either in the country or abroad, and had only one bank account, the dailies said.

“Chang dared both Khairy and Kalimullah to declare their assets. Describing Dr. Mahathir as a Malay hero, Chang rapped those who had criticised the former premier.”

8. I verily state that the Star newspaper differs in material particular not only to my intention in calling for the press conference but the context in which statements were made thereto as compared to the publication by the Singapore Straits Times.

9. In any event, I verily state that the alleged defamatory words as pleaded by the Plaintiff in paragraphs 3 of the Statement of Claim and averred in paragraph 8 of the Plaintiff’s Affidavit, cannot be understood to bear or were capable of bearing the meanings pleaded in paragraph 6 of the Statement of Claim or any meaning defamatory of the Plaintiff. Hence I deny paragraph 11 of the Plaintiff’s Affidavit. Additionally, I verily believe and state that the Plaintiff has deliberately suppressed and or avoided pleading other statements by me particulars are pleaded in the Defence and Counterclaim. Hence the Plaintiff has not come to court “with clean hands.”

Concealment or Suppression of Material Facts

10. The Plaintiff failed to plead that he is also the Editorial Adviser to NSTP. I verily state that being an Editorial Adviser the Plaintiff plays a pivotal role in authorising and condoning publication of article / column / interview. He has the legal and moral duty to ensure fair and accurate reporting and not left the public with any misconceived ideas and facts. I verily state this is relevant to matters and issues raised in any action for defamation.

11. The Plaintiff also failed to allude to the fact that the press conference by me on the 13.6.2006 was in response to the Plaintiff’s public invitation to debate on “And who, really is demonising whom?” published in the New Sunday Times on the 11.6.2006.

12. As a member of the Malaysian Bar, a citizen and a former political secretary of the former prime minister, I have under the Common Law a public and moral duty and was entitled to call for a press conference to refute and rebut the accusations, misrepresentations, falsehoods written by the Plaintiff of Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad and issues concerning the economy, security and sovereignty of Malaysia and the deliberate omissions of facts by the Plaintiff relating to the issues raised.

13. Additionally I verily state that the conduct of the Plaintiff and government ministers and their press statements in response to statements made by Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad with regard to the economy, security and sovereignty of Malaysia, and the news reported in the mass media, prior and subsequent to my press conferences on 17.4.2006 and 13.6.2006 indicate that the issues raised in the said press conferences were matters of public interest. These articles are shown to me and collectively marked as Exhibit “MC-7”.

14. At the said press conference, I challenged the Plaintiff to a public debate on the various issues that the Plaintiff had written in the New Straits Times and the New Sunday Times, in particular his attacks, misrepresentations and fabrications about the former Prime Minister, Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad and the misrepresentations with regard to the economy, security and sovereignty of Malaysia. I further state that since the former Prime Minister had complained that his replies were not published, I and the public were entitled to know and understand the issues in the debate between the Plaintiff and Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad.

15. The New Straits Times on 2.5.2006 reported as follows:

“Asked why he had not given his recent open letter to Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi instead of distributing it to Umno members, Dr. Mahathri said: ‘I did not write the letter to him. What for? Even if I talk to you (the media), it won’t see the light of day in the papers. Even if I were to give to you to publish, you will not do it. Even if you do, Kalimullah will chop it,’ he said, referring to New Straits Times Press deputy chairman and editorial adviser Datuk Kalimullah Hassan.”

The said report is shown to me and marked Exhibit “MC-1”.

16. In the circumstances, I verily state that it would only be fair and proper that the public be accorded an opportunity to hear both sides of the debate, especially the rationale for the Plaintiff’s criticisms of Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad on the issues raised by him in his column.

17. It was in this context I commented that if the Plaintiff has the courage of his convictions, he should accept the challenge of a public debate, in the presence of foreign and local media, failing which he ought to be considered a “political coward” and a man who uses the freedom of the press to criticise others, misrepresents facts but unwilling to meet head-on counter-criticisms. Therefore my challenge was also in response to the Plaintiff’s public invitation to join issue with him on the matters raised in his article in the New Sunday Times on 11.6.2006 as stated above.

18. The Plaintiff, as the Deputy Chairman and Editorial Adviser of the New Straits Times, owes a public duty of care to ensure that his articles and that of fellow journalists on issues raised by the former prime minister, Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad are reported fairly and accurately. This he failed to do but on the contrary condoned and participated actively in a systematic campaign to vilify the former prime minister, sensationalism and bias reporting as the particulars in paragraph 8 of the Defence and Counterclaim and the Plaintiff’s column on the 11.6.2006 show.

Plaintiff’s Tainted Hands

19. The Plaintiff has in his column dated 11.6.2006 in the New Sunday Times acknowledged that there was a demand for rational answers to Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad’s criticisms. The said column dated 11.6.2006 is shown to me and marked as Exhibit “MC-2”.

20. On the 11.6.2006 in the Sunday Column, the Plaintiff wrote an article criticising in the most extreme language Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad, in which a particular paragraph was a sheer fabrication and or misrepresentation. The said paragraph read as follows:-

“The Prime Minister was in Japan shortly after the Malaysiakini article appeared and was told that Dr. Mahathir wanted to come and see him. Abdullah, in the midst of breakfast with aides and officials immediately put on his tie and told the Ambassador that he would go and see his ex-boss rather than let Dr. Mahathir come down and see him. Yet, less than two weeks later, Dr. Mahathir invited the foreign press to his office and lambasted Abdullah and his administration.”

21. In a letter dated 12.6.2006 to the New Straits Times from an aide of Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad, Encik Sufi Yusoff pointed out that the above paragraph contained several errors in that:-

a. “Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad did not seek an appointment with Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi while both leaders were in Tokyo attending the Nikkei Conference.”

b. “In fact, it was the opposite. Dr. Mahathir was only informed by a third party that the Prime Minister was on the way to call on him 20 minutes before he was due to leave the hotel on May 26. To this, Dr. Mahathir agreed and the two leaders met for about 10 minutes before Dr. Mahathir had to take his leave.”

c. “Dr. Mahathir did not invite the foreign press to, in your words, ‘lambast Abdullah and his administration.’ The press conference on June 7 was called to announce the Perdana Leadership Foundation’s Global Peace Forum to be held from June 20-22. The foreign press was there for the purpose.”

The said letter is shown to me and marked Exhibit “MC-3”,

22. However, the Plaintiff did not deem it fit to acknowledge his fabrication / misrepresentation and to proffer an apology to Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad. In the circumstances I verily state I was more than justified in construing the conduct and manner in which the Plaintiff wrote of Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad as being cowardly. Further and in the alternative, the comments were fair comments in response to the Plaintiff’s article.

23. The Plaintiff in the same article of 11.6.2006 (Exhibit “MC-2”) entitled “And who, really is demonising whom?” also wrote:

“Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad says his criticisms of the current administration and his successor Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi are ‘not personal.’ His son, Umno Youth executive council member Datuk Mukhriz Mahathir, is upset that ministers and others have criticised Dr. Mahathir and says that what his father raised ‘was rational, so answer rationally.’ And Mahathir, ever the master strategist, has made his pre-emptive strike, predicting that ‘for the next ten days, there will be lots of stories in the papers trying to demonise me, make me appear bad …’ Therefore, if anybody criticises Dr. Mahathir, then his prediction will come true – they are trying to demonise him.”

24. This article and specifically the above paragraph was an attempt by the Plaintiff to refute the accusation by Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad that he was being demonised by the Plaintiff and the New Straits Times and New Sunday Times. The Plaintiff by his column has invited the public to the debate - “And who, really is demonising whom?” The Plaintiff cannot therefore now complain that I as a member of the public who has taken a contrary view, which I am entitled to, that it was the Plaintiff who is in fact guilty and responsible for demonising Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad.

25. I verily state that I have a moral and public duty to express a contrary opinion. I further aver that my statements are justified and in the alternative, fair comments in the public debate initiated by the Plaintiff.

26. Plaintiff having accused Tun Mahathir Mohamad of demonising others cannot now come to this Honourable Court to seek damages and equitable reliefs and to prevent me and members of the public to respond in kind.

27. Furthermore in the said press conference, I have further alluded to the fact that the campaign to demonise Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad began even before he retired in 2003. I informed the media that in 2003 the Plaintiff and one Khairy Jamaluddin were responsible for the publication of the defamatory article of the then prime minister and deputy prime minister of Malaysia in the Economist magazine. The said Article is shown to me and marked Exhibit “MC-4”. This insidious role of the Plaintiff and Khairy Jamaluddin was confirmed to me by the present Deputy Minister for Internal Security and who at the material time was my colleague, as senior Political Secretary to the then prime minister.

28. I further aver that as the Political Secretary to the then Prime Minister I was under a duty to mount a rigorous rebuttal against the insidious attack on Malaysia and the Prime Minister as well as the Deputy Prime Minister. However, and notwithstanding that I had taken an oath to defend the integrity of the country in the discharge of my duties as Political Secretary to the Prime Minister, I was summoned by the then Deputy Prime Minister to his office and cautioned. I verily affirm that the following took place:-

1. The then Deputy Prime Minister said, “My boys are not happy with you and your actions.”

2. I was utterly shocked by the statement and replied, “I have not worked with your boys at all material times. I have not worked with Kalimullah and or any other person associated with you or your office. So why should they be angry with me? I was defending the integrity of the nation, the office of the prime minister and your office.”

3. I then enquired, “Do you know that the article in the Economist magazine has belittled you as well?”

4. To that, the Deputy Prime Minister replied, “My boys told me that the criticisms against me are not as bad as that against the Prime Minister.”

5. To that I replied to the effect that what was important was that the office of the prime minister and that of the deputy prime minister office was brought into disrepute and there was a need for a rebuttal.

29. Following the said meeting, I reported the matter to the then Prime Minister and informed my other colleagues in the Prime Minister’s office during our regular staff meeting on every Wednesday, as well as privately. In alluding to this event in 2003 at the said press conference, I was substantiating the fact that the Plaintiff had by prior conduct “demonised” Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad.

30. The Plaintiff in the article of 11.6.2006 (Exhibit “MC-2”) made another fabrication / misrepresentation as follows:-

“His adviser, former politician Tan Sri Abdullah Ahmad …”

31. When this misrepresentation / fabrication was again pointed out to the Plaintiff by the aide to Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad, Encik Sufi Yusoff in a letter of 12.6.2006 (Exhibit “MC-3”) that Tan Sri Abdullah Ahmad is not an adviser to Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad, the Plaintiff made no efforts to retract the fabrication and offer an apology to the former prime minister or to inform the readers of the New Straits Times and New Sunday Times and the public at large of the said misrepresentation / fabrication.

32. I verily state that the abovementioned misrepresentations and fabrications by the Plaintiff affords a defence of justification and or alternatively the defence of fair comment as the Plaintiff’s conduct was and is unbecoming of the Deputy Chairman of the New Straits Times Press (Malaysia) Bhd and Editorial Adviser of the New Straits Times.

33. The Defendant therefore avers that the Plaintiff is estopped from asserting that he is righteous, honest and credible. To the contrary he is capable of distortions, misrepresentations and fabrications to demonise his perceived opponents as in the case of the former Prime Minister. Further and in the alternative, the Plaintiff is also estopped from denying that his conduct is cowardly when the Plaintiff does not afford Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad and myself the opportunity to rebut adequately his malicious criticisms, misrepresentations and fabrications, more so after having invited the public to debate on the issues raised by him in his article of 11.6.2006.

34. The Plaintiff has by his own misconduct invited the public to question his conduct, integrity and credibility as the Deputy Chairman of the New Straits Times Press (Malaysia) Berhad as well as the Chairman and Co-Chief Executive Officer of ECM Libra Berhad.

35. Another example of the Plaintiff’s capability to distort and misrepresent facts are in paragraph 18 of the Plaintiff’s Affidavit where the Plaintiff alleged that I have not responded to his letter dated 20.6.2006 when in actual fact it is within the Plaintiff’s knowledge that I did not receive the alleged said letter at the material time, this was made known to the Plaintiff’s solicitor vide my solicitor’s letter dated 27.6.2006 in Exhibit “KMH-5”. I have promptly instructed my solicitor to respond to the Plaintiff’s letter dated 20.6.2006 when a copy was extended by his solicitor on the 27.6.2006. My prompt reply is in Exhibit “KMH-8” dated 28.6.2006. Yet with all these facts before him the Plaintiff dare to allege that I have not replied to his solicitor’s letter of 20.6.2006 and on that ground seek an ex parte order against me.

36. Further to the column by the Plaintiff in Exhibit “MC-2” and on the same day the Plaintiff as the Deputy Chairman and Editorial Adviser authorised and or condoned the publication of an interview conducted by Santha Oorjitham with the former High Court Judge, Datuk Syed Ahmad Idid, disregarding the baseless and unsubstantiated allegations of corruption within the judiciary. The said publication is shown to me and marked as Exhibit “MC-5”.

37. Even if the Plaintiff did not at the material time authorised and or condoned its publication, the subsequent conduct of the Plaintiff, up to the date of filing of the Defence and Counter-claim, shows clearly that he has not deem it fit to disassociate himself from this insidious and baseless accusation of corruption against the entire judiciary and or offered an apology and retraction of the said seditious and defamatory article. The Plaintiff has failed in his public duty of care to ensure fair and accurate reporting. I repeat paragraph 33 of the Defence and Counterclaim.

38. Following the publication of this interview, I was approached by members of the public as to why the newspaper was allowed to publish such seditious and defamatory statements of the judiciary. They were appalled that this seditious and defamatory article has caused good, upright and innocent judges to come unfairly under suspicion and ridicule and perceived as being corrupt.

39. I verily state that the said interview and the publication thereof conveyed the impression that during the tenure of the former prime minister, the entire judiciary was corrupt. The publication of such interview set a dangerous precedent that the judiciary can be defamed with impunity.

40. As a senior member of the Malaysian Bar, I was charged with the responsibility under section 42 (1) (a) of the Legal Profession Act “to uphold the cause of justice without regard to its own interests or that of its members, uninfluenced by fear or favour” and as a concerned citizen, I was under a statutory and public duty to raise this issue in the press conference on 13.6.2006 and to bring to the attention of the public that the Plaintiff and the said the Newspaper and its officials have committed an injustice to the judiciary.

41. At the press conference I posed the question, “Why Now this publication?” to the journalists, and explained to the journalists the cowardice of the former judge as well as the cowardice of the officials of the newspaper, including the Plaintiff in shielding behind the former judge when they accused the judiciary of corruption without evidence. I therefore verily state that the Plaintiff as Deputy Chairman and Editorial Adviser of the said newspaper cannot evade responsibility for this cowardly act.

42. I verily state that I was more than justified and or commented fairly that the publication was dishonest, opportunistic and a scurrilous attempt to undermine the integrity of the judiciary. I had in the past defended the judiciary whenever the judiciary was criticised unfairly. This is on record in the Minutes of the Annual General Meetings and Extraordinary General Meetings of the Malaysian Bar.

43. I further state that the said publication constitutes an abuse of authority and power by the newspaper and its officials, in particular the Plaintiff pursuant to the provisions of the Printing Presses and Publication Act 1984. I am justified and or commented fairly that this abuse of authority to publish is corruption in the natural and ordinary meaning of the word – for power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

44. I further aver that the Plaintiff and the said newspaper have breached their statutory duty of care in particular the Plaintiff has contravened the provisions under the Printing Presses and Publication Act 1984, specifically sections 4 (1) (b) and the Sedition Act 1948, specifically section 3 (1) (c) read in conjunction with section 4 thereof.

45. In the circumstances of the matters aforesaid, I am more than justified and in the alternative, entitled to make the fair comment that when the Plaintiff was exercising his authority to permit and or condoned the said publication, he was abusing his authority and power as the Deputy Chairman and Editorial Adviser and has brought the judiciary into disrepute. The matter was and is also a matter of public interest.

46. Further and in the alternative, I verily state that by the said publication, the said newspaper and the Plaintiff have opened themselves to the right of the public and myself to challenge their motives and conduct. I further state that the Plaintiff’s behaviour ought to be scrutinised and adjudicated by the court of public opinion as well by this Honourable Court and that the Plaintiff and the said newspaper be judged by the same standards as they would judge others, and that what I did was in furtherance of my public duty as an Advocate and Solicitor to defend the integrity of the administration of justice.

47. I verily state that when the Plaintiff came to this Honourable Court it cannot be said that he came with unblemished hands and or conduct more so when he is a party directly and or indirectly responsible to the insidious defamation of the judiciary. I verily state that the Plaintiff in his pleadings and affidavit in support of his application for injunctive relief has suppressed all these facts and as such has misled the court, and has in fact abused the process of court.

48. I verily state that since the Plaintiff as Editorial Adviser has condoned the aforesaid publication and raised the issue of corruption, and by implication asserts that the said newspaper and the Plaintiff are against corruption, supports good governance and transparency and demands a high standard of integrity, I was entitled in my press conference to raise the issue with the Plaintiff - “to walk the talk.”

49. It was in those circumstances that I accepted the Plaintiff’s invitation to a public debate and challenged the Plaintiff to establish his credibility as not being a corrupt person, as he has by his conduct directly and indirectly alleged corruption within the judiciary.

50. I verily believe and say that I was more than justified and commented fairly when I said that it is easy to accuse, insinuate and or defame through third parties and that if the Plaintiff is a man of principle, he should not hesitate to establish his integrity and to accept the my challenge, failing which he ought to be considered a “political coward” and that the public should and ought to draw the inference that he is corrupt and or a man who lacks the courage of his conviction.

51. Additionally, I verily state that I was more than justified in making the challenge on the ground that since the New Sunday Times and the Plaintiff have imposed an unbearable burden on the judiciary to refute and rebut the allegations of corruption by Datuk Syed Ahmad Idid, the Plaintiff and the said newspaper ought to be exposed to the glare of public opinion as to whether they could or could not discharge the same burden of innocence and their motives for the said publication.

52. Should the injunctive relief be allowed to stand in favour of the Plaintiff, the last line of defence of the judiciary provided by law abiding citizens and the Malaysian Bar would be demolished and a dangerous precedent set for future insidious assaults on the judiciary by the mass media and people in position and authority like the Plaintiff.

53. In the circumstances, I verily deny paragraph 12 and 13 of the Plaintiff’s Affidavit. I verily state that the statements made by me in the press conference are justified, are fair comments relating to issues of public interest, and additionally are fair comments made in response to an invitation to the public at large by the said Plaintiff to enter into a debate with him as stated in the foregoing paragraphs. The non disclosure by the Plaintiff of the preceding facts in particular Exhibit “MC-2” constitute material non disclosure.

54. In response to paragraph 15 of the Plaintiff’s Affidavit I verily state that the Plaintiff as Chairman and Co-Chief Executive Officer of ECM Libra Berhad has committed financial irregularities in the management of the said company. In the sale of ECM Libra Bhd’s operating subsidiaries to the government controlled company Avenue Capital Resources Berhad, the Plaintiff aided and abetted corrupt practices committed in the course of the said transaction. The particulars are given in paragraph 54 of the Defence and Counterclaim and I repeat the same here:-

Background Facts – Financial Year Ending 31. 3. 2004

1) The Plaintiff was appointed to the Board of ECM Libra Bhd on 2. 4. 2004.

2) The company was previously known as South Peninsular Industries Berhad and on 31. 3. 2004, the name was changed to ECM Libra Bhd.

3) For the financial year ending 31. 3. 2004, its Annual Report stated that the said ECM Libra Bhd group’s revenue deteriorated to RM39.8 million from RM57.7 million the previous year. It recorded a loss before taxation of RM9.8 million against a profit before taxation of RM9.4 million in the previous year. The Group’s loss attributable to shareholders in the reporting year stood at RM10,602,959 million compared with a profit of RM8,625,100 million in the previous financial year.

4) ECM Libra Bhd on 30. 4. 2004 completed the purchase of the following companies, namely ECM Libra Partners Sdn Bhd, ECM Libra Capital Sdn Bhd, ECM Libra Holdings Ltd (collectively referred to as the “ECM Purchase”) and ECM Libra Securities Sdn Bhd, which was formerly known as BBMB Securities Sdn Bhd (referred to as the “BBMB Purchase”). Hence the change of name and the appointment of the current directors of the said company.

5) The consideration for the “ECM Purchase” was RM330,000,000 and was satisfied by the issuance of 270,000,000 new ordinary shares of RM1.00 each at an issue price of RM1.00 each and an issue of RM60,000,000, five (5) year redeemable convertible unsecured loan stocks at 100% of the nominal value with a coupon rate of 3% per annum.

6) The “BBMB Purchase” was satisfied by cash consideration of RM172,811,479 via a private placement of 100,000,000 new ordinary shares of RM1 each at an issue price of RM2.10 per ordinary share of RM1.00 each.

7) The value of the Goodwill attributed to the companies [i.e. “ECM Purchase” and “BBMB Purchase”] acquired by ECM Libra Bhd was RM360,699,492 million as reported in the Annual Report.

8) Therefore the total consideration for the purchase is RM502,811,479 (being the total of RM330,000,000 and RM172,811,479 and RM60,000,000 RCULS).

9) The nature of the acquired companies are as follows:

i) ECM Libra Partners Sdn Bhd (formerly known as “Libra Partners Sdn Bhd) – nature of business: Licensed Money Lender. The Plaintiff is a director and substantial shareholder;

ii) ECM Libra Capital Sdn Bhd (formerly known as “ECM Capital Sdn Bhd) – nature of business: Management, Advisory & Investment Consulting Services. The Plaintiff is a director and substantial shareholder;

iii) ECM Libra Securities Sdn Bhd (formerly known as “BBMB Securities Sdn Bhd) – nature of business: Stockbroking;

iv) ECM Libra Holdings Ltd (formerly known as “ECM Holdings Ltd”) nature of business: Investment holding & Advisory Services.

10) The authorised share capital of the company was increased from RM50,000,000 ordinary shares of RM1.00 each to RM1,000,000,000 comprising 1,000,000,000 ordinary shares of RM1.00 each by the creation of an additional 950,000,000 ordinary shares of RM1.00 each.

11) During the said financial year, the said company increased its issued and fully paid up ordinary capital from RM42,000,000 to RM433,000,000 by way of the issuance of shares in relation to the “BBMB Purchase” and “ECM Purchase”, Private Placement as stated above and bonus issues.

12) During the said financial year, the company disposed off nearly all existing business of the company and after 1. 4. 2004 the core business of the company as reported in the Chairman’s statement was to be “an integrated boutique investment banking group focusing on advisory services and securities brokering.”

13) In the said Annual Report, revenue from “financial services” as a segment contributing to the group’s income was declared to be only RM2,875,062.00.

14) Loss attributed to the financial services segment was RM3,274,511.00.

15) The Plaintiff has a substantial interest in the said company. He is registered as having 60,000,000 ordinary shares and 18,000,000 redeemable convertible unsecured loan stock (RCULS) representing 13.86% and 30% respectively of his interest in the said company.

16) Datuk Abdullah Ahmad Badawi was appointed the Prime Minister on the 31. 10. 2003.

17) The Plaintiff was appointed a director and the Group Editor-in-Chief of the New Straits Times Press (Malaysia) Bhd on 1. 1. 2004 by the Prime Minister.

Background Facts – Financial Year Ending 31. 3. 2005

18) In the Annual Report of the company for the financial year ending 31. 3. 2005, it was reported that revenue increased by 84.1% to RM73.2 million from RM39.8 million in the preceding year.

19) The company acquired ECM Libra Capital Markets Sdn Bhd (formerly known as Libra Capital Markets Sdn Bhd), a fund management company.

20) Revenue from the financial services segment accounted for 43% and earnings per share improved to 9.32 sen from a loss of 15.6 sen in the preceding year.

21) Group profits for the year was RM40,399,310 as compared to a loss of RM10,602,959 in the preceding year. The Plaintiff, as Chairman stated “the ECM Libra Group posted its maiden profits, achieving a robust turnaround.”

22) On 27. 12. 2005, Khairy Jamaluddin, the son-in-law of the prime minister acquired 13 million ECM Libra Bhd shares equivalent to a 3% stake in the said company valued at RM9 million, based on the purchase price of 71 sen a share. The shares were acquired from the Plaintiff, Lim Kian Onn and Chua Ming Huat who are respectively the Chairman, the CEO and COO of the company.

Background Facts – Year 2006

23) On 19. 1. 2006, the Bernama news agency announced that the government controlled Avenue Capital Resources Bhd and Avenue International Capital Bhd (hereinafter referred to as “Avenue”) signed a conditional share sale agreement with ECM Libra Bhd (for which the Plaintiff is the Chairman and Co-CEO) to fully acquire all the latter’s operating subsidiaries by issuing 442,000,000 fully paid up new ordinary shares of RM1.00 each in Avenue International Capital Bhd, with a proforma market valuation of RM293 million.

24) ECM Libra Bhd’s operating subsidiaries are:

a) ECM Libra Securities Sdn Bhd and its subsidiaries;
b) ECM Libra Partners Sdn Bhd;
c) ECM Libra Capital Sdn Bhd;
d) ECM Libra Capital Markets Sdn Bhd
e) ECM Libra Holdings Ltd and its subsidiaries.

However, the agreed total net tangible assets of the ECM Libra companies were stated to be RM210 million as at the unconditional date of the Share Sale Agreement.

25) Bernama reported that the ECM Libra Bhd /Avenue share sale agreement paved the way for a proposed merger which will enable the merged entity to meet the requirements under new guidelines issued by Bank Negara of having a minimum unimpaired share capital of RM500 million.

26) Prior to the said merger, Malaysia’s Minister of Finance Inc and another government linked company controlled approximately 29.5% stake in the Avenue.

27) Following the merger, the founding partners of ECM Libra Bhd would own and control a combined 20% stake in the merged entity, for which the Plaintiff would own a 6% interest.

28) The share capital of the merged entity would be boosted to approximately RM840 million allowing it to become a full investment bank able to take deposits. Shareholders of ECM Libra Bhd, if they wanted to apply for an investment banking license on its own merit would need inter-alia to inject additional funds as mandated by Bank Negara’s investment banking guidelines which require investment banks to increase their share capital to RM500 million within three years.

29) The Plaintiff in a press statement, as reported by Bernama on the 19. 1. 2006 admitted that, and on being asked what would happened if ECM Libra Bhd was not able to have the merger approved by the authorities said:

“We would have been seriously disadvantaged against the other new investment banks which had the required capital funds and could carry out the full range of investment banking services. At the end of three years, when we would be required to ensure that our capital funds was at least RM500 million, it would have necessitated huge cash injection from our shareholders. By pursuing the merger route, we will emerge a much bigger and stronger entity and not require cash injection from shareholders.”

30) Additionally, if there was no merger, ECM Libra Bhd’s shareholders will have to inject a minimum of RM100 million to satisfy the financial requirements for “discount house” license, over and above the RM500 million unimpaired share capital requirement.

31) Approvals and or license from the Minister of Finance would need to be obtained. The Minister of Finance did grant such approvals, notwithstanding the conflict of interest as Khairy Jamaluddin, is a director and shareholder of ECM Libra and is also the son-in-law of the Prime Minister who is also the Minister for Finance. The Plaintiff as Chairman of ECM Libra Bhd, knew of the aforesaid circumstances and has therefore aided and abetted in the corrupt scheme. The Plaintiff has also benefited substantially from the said scheme.

32) Other relevant approval agencies are directly and or indirectly beholden to the Ministry of Finance.

33) The merger has created so much controversy that on the 13. 4. 2006, the matter was tabled before Parliament, but the Government has to date failed to give any or any adequate explanation for this glaring act of impropriety.

34) On 28.6. 2006, the merged entity, ECM Libra Avenue Bhd (713570-K) was listed in the main board of the Kuala Lumpur Stock Exchange (Stock Number 2143) with a paid up share capital of RM830,901,953 comprising of 830,901,953 ordinary shares of RM1.00 each.

35) Taking into account paragraph 5 to 8, and paragraph 23 and 24 above, the sale of the ECM Libra operating subsidiaries and the then “BBMB Securities Sdn Bhd” in 31.3.2004 to South Peninsular Industries Bhd (which was renamed to ECM Libra Bhd after the said acquisition) was valued at RM502,811,479, yet within two years, the same operating subsidiaries were in turn sold pursuant to the aforesaid merger with Avenue Capital Resources Bhd for RM442,000,000 with a total net tangible asset value at RM210,000,000.

36) Therefore, the value of the earlier sale and purchase in 2004 of the said companies was grossly over-valued by attributing to “goodwill” an incredible RM360,000,000, which cannot be justified in any circumstances. Being a public listed company that corporate exercise amounts to a fraud on the public.

37) The Plaintiff, as Chairman in his Annual Report as at 31.3.2005 reported that the said company had obtained its maiden profits of RM40.3 million as compared to a loss of RM10.6 million in the previous year. Yet in the said merger exercise, the very same companies, and an additional company (ECM Libra Capital Markets Sdn Bhd) were sold for lesser value as compared to the original purchase price in 2004 which the company paid for.

Therefore I verily state that my comments are justified and or in the alternative, my comments in the circumstances are fair comments on an issue of public interest.

55. Again I verily state that the Plaintiff had suppressed these material facts and had not come to court with clean hands. Therefore I verily deny paragraph 26 of the Plaintiff’s Affidavit.

56. Furthermore the Plaintiff had suppressed the fact that instead of accepting my invitation to a public debate he chose to reply to the issues raised by me at the said press conference on the 13.6.2006 by writing an article in the New Sunday Times on the 25.6.2006 entitled “Sometimes you’ve got to fight when you’re a man”. On that day and days following the publication, I was ridiculed by the public as the Plaintiff had called me inter-alia, a “bully,” a “gangster” “a man beyond redemption” and a “rapist”, notwithstanding that I was not named in the said article. Any member of the public following the chronology of events and having read the several news reports cited in paragraph 8 of the Defence and Counterclaim would have known the facts and understood the words and the article were defamatory of me and none other.

The said article is shown to me and marked Exhibit “MC-6”.

57. I will refer to the Defence and Counterclaim where appropriate.

58. In the circumstances I verily deny paragraph 19 and 25 of the Plaintiff’s Affidavit. I verily state that the affirmation by the Plaintiff that I have no defence is a gross misrepresentation to this Honourable Court.

59. I further state that the Plaintiff has failed to provide undertaking to pay damages and as such the ex parte order dated 4.7.2006 ought to be set aside as of right.

60. I further state that the Plaintiff’s averment in paragraph 20 of the Plaintiff’s Affidavit that I intended to call a press conference on the 29.6.2006 is untrue and a sheer fabrication by the Plaintiff. Given this gross misrepresentation and fabrication, paragraph 26 of the Plaintiff’s Affidavit cannot be true.

61. I verily state that on a balance convenience, an interim injunction ought not to be granted:-

a) The issues raised in various articles in paragraph 8 of the Defence and Counterclaim and my press conference on the 13.6.2006 in response to the Plaintiff’s column on the 11.6.2006 are matters of public interest.

b) The Defendant ought not to be muzzled in exercise of his right pursuant his legal (statutory), social and moral duty to inform the public of matters and issues which were of public interest.

These matters of public interest cannot be measured by monetary award.

62. In reply to paragraph 23 and 24 of the Plaintiff’s Affidavit I verily state that the Plaintiff who accuse, insinuate and or defame others should not hesitate to have others question, challenge or scrutinize his own conduct and or conviction more so when the response came as a result of a public invitation from the Plaintiff.

63. I verily believe and state that the Plaintiff had failed to comply with Rules of the High Court, 1980 and the provisions of the Defamation Act, 1957 in that relevant particulars which are required to be pleaded had not been pleaded.

64. The alleged defamatory words as pleaded in the Statement of Claim is inconsistent with and or defer and in the alternative contradicts the Plaintiff’s own exhibits annexed to his Affidavit in support of the ex parte application for injunction. The Plaintiff’s case as pleaded is prejudicial and embarrassing.

65. For reasons stated above I pray that:-

a) the ex parte order of 4.7.2006 be set aside with costs;
b) paragraph 3, 5, and 6 of the Statement of Claim be struck off with costs;
c) the Plaintiff’s application for interim injunction be dismissed with costs;
d) that the said costs be taxed on a solicitor-client basis. Website - http://malaysia-today.net/reports/2006/07/mathias-changs-affidavit-english.htm

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
MATTHIAS CHANG WEN CHIEH
(no login)
210.187.3.42

Mathias Chang's Affidavit (Bahasa Malaysia)

No score for this post
July 26 2006, 3:27 AM 

Wednesday, July 26, 2006
Mathias Chang's Affidavit (Bahasa Malaysia)

SPECIAL REPORTS ARCHIVES

DALAM MAHKAMAH TINGGI MALAYA DI KUALA LUMPUR

(BAHAGIAN SIVIL)

GUAMAN NO. S1-23-68-2006

ANTARA

DATO KALIMULLAH BIN MASHEERUL HASSAN
(NO K/P: 580315-07-5319) PLAINTIF

DAN

MATTHIAS CHANG WEN CHIEH
(NO K/P: 500222-10-5571) DEFENDAN

AFIDAVIT DEFENDAN

Saya, MATTHIAS CHANG WEN CHIEH (No KP: 500222-10-5571) seorang warganegara Malaysia yang cukup umur dan beralamat di No. 159, Jalan Athinahapan 2, Taman Tun Dr. Ismail, 60000 Kuala Lumpur dengan sesungguhnya berikrar seperti berikut:-

1. Saya adalah peguambela dan peguamcara Mahkamah Tinggi Malaya.

2. Saya adalah Defendan dalam tindakan ini. Semua fakta-fakta yang dideposkan di sini adalah dalam pengetahuan peribadi saya dan atau berdasarkan dokumen-dokumen di mana saya mempunyai akses kecuali dinyatakan di sebaliknya.

3. Saya mengikrarkan Afidavit ini untuk menjawab Afidavit yang diikrarkan oleh Plaintif pada 29.6.2006 (Afidavit Plaintif) dan juga untuk menyokong permohonan saya untuk mengetepikan perintah ex parte Mahkamah bertarikh 4.7.2006 dan membatalkan perenggan 3, 5 dan 6 dalam Pernyataan Tuntutan seperti yang didapati dalam Saman Dalam Kamar yang difailkan.

4. Saya sesungguhnya menyatakan bahawa Plaintif telah dengan sengaja dan dengan niat jahat menyembunyikan fakta-fakta material dari Mahkamah Yang Mulia ini yang mana jika fakta-fakta itu didedahkan akan mempunyai kesan yang negatif dan atau yang bertentangan dengan perintah yang dipohon oleh Plaintif. Plaintif telah gagal datang ke Mahkamah dengan tangan yang suci.

5. Saya sesungguhnya menafikan bahawa saya telah mengucapkan perkataan-perkataan yang diplidkan di dalam perenggan 3 Pernyataan Tuntutan dan perenggan 7 dan 8 Afidavit Plaintif. Pliding Plaintif adalah menjejaskan, menghalang atau satu penyalahan proses mahkamah. Dalam apa kes pun perkataan-perkataan yang didakwa yang diplidkan dalam perenggan-perenggan 3 dan 5 Pernyataan Tuntutan dan yang dinyatakan dalam perenggan 8 Afidavit Plaintif tidak memberi asas dari segi fakta dan undang-undang untuk Plaintif membawa tindakan ini jika keseluruhan sidang akbar dipertimbangkan, butir-butir adalah dalam perenggan-perenggan berikutan.

a) Saya sesungguhnya menyatakan bahawa Ekshibit “KMH-1” mengandungi pemesongan, salah nyata-salah nyata dan perbuatan sensasi pernyataan-pernyataan yang dibuat oleh saya dalam sidang akbar pada 13.6.2006.

b) Saya sesungguhnya menyatakan bahawa Singapore Straits Times gagal, abai dan atau enggan untuk menyiarkan keseluruhan persidangan akhbar dan isu-isu lain yang mana adalah kritikal dalam mencapai satu pandangan yang objektif dan seimbang persidangan akhbar tersebut dan dalam memutuskan sama ada perkataan-perkataan yang diucapkan oleh saya adalah dalam fakta dan dalam undang-undang satu fitnah mengenai Plaintif. Oleh itu saya sesungguhnya menafikan perenggan 14 Afidavit Plaintif.

6. Saya sesungguhnya menafikan bahawa saya telah mengucapkan perkataan-perkataan yang diplidkan oleh Plaintif dalam perenggan 5 Pernyataan Tuntutan dan saya tidak boleh dipertanggungjawabkan untuk pemesongan, salah nyata-salah nyata, penggunaan sensasi, peninggalan, dan pernyataan-pernyataan dan atau perkataan-perkataan yang diterbitkan secara tidak tepat dan atau di luar konteks oleh Singapore Straits Times dan tajuk utama yang dicipta oleh Singapore Straits Times seperti diplidkan dalam perenggan 5 Pernyataan Tuntutan dan diulangi dalam perenggan 7 Afidavit Plaintif.

7. Saya sesungguhnya menyatakan bahawa surat khabar STAR pada 15.06.2006, telah melaporkan dengan adil niat dan kandungan persidangan akbar saya meskipun bahawa perkataan-perkataan sebenarnya yang diucapkan oleh saya tidak dilaporkan secara verbatim. Star telah menerbitkan inter-alia seperti berikut:

“Dr. M’s former aide challenges critics”

“Matthias Chang, former aide to Tun Dr. Mahathir, has challenged Khairy Jamaluddin, the Premier’s son-in-law, and New Straits Times deputy group Chairman Datuk Kalimullah Hassan to openly debate the controversial issues.

“Major Chinese dailies quoted Chang, Dr. Mahathir’s former political secretary, as giving a week to the two to take up his challenge. “Accept my challenge; if not, shut up and stop criticising Dr. Mahathir.”

“Chang who called a press conference at his legal firm on Wednesday also swore on five holy books that if he were lying, he would face God’s punishment. He said that when he worked as political secretary for Dr. Mahathir, he was not involved in any business directly or indirectly, either in the country or abroad, and had only one bank account, the dailies said.

“Chang dared both Khairy and Kalimullah to declare their assets. Describing Dr. Mahathir as a Malay hero, Chang rapped those who had criticised the former premier.”

8. Saya sesungguhnya menyatakan bahawa laporan dalam surat khabar Star adalah berlainan dari segi material khususnya bukan sahaja kepada niat saya dalam memanggil persidangan akhbar tetapi dalam konteks di mana pernyataan-pernyataan itu dibuat berbanding dengan penerbitan oleh Singapore Straits Times.

9. Dalam apa keadaan jua, saya sesungguhnya menyatakan bahawa perkataan-perkataan fitnah yang diplidkan oleh Plaintif dalam perenggan 3 Pernyataan Tuntutan dan dinyatakan dalam perenggan 8 Afidavit Plaintif, tidak boleh difahami untuk menghasilkan atau berkebolehan menghasilkan maksud-maksud yang diplidkan dalam perenggan 6 Pernyataan Tuntutan atau apa-apa maksud fitnah mengenai Plaintif. Oleh itu saya menafikan perenggan 11 Afidavit Plaintif. Tambahan lagi saya sesungguhnya mempercayai dan menyatakan bahawa telah dengan sengaja menyembunyikan dan atau mengelakkan dari pliding pernyataan-pernyataan lain oleh saya, butir-butir yang mana diplidkan dalam Pembelaan dan Tuntutan Balas. Oleh itu Plaintif tidak datang ke mahkamah dengan “tangan yang suci”.

Merahsiakan atau Menyembunyikan Fakta-fakta Material

10. Plaintif gagal memplidkan bahawa beliau juga adalah Penasihat Editorial kepada NSTP. Saya sesungguhnya menyatakan bahawa sebagai seorang Penasihat Editorial Plaintif memainkan peranan yang penting dalam membenarkan dan meluluskan penerbitan artikel / kolum / temu duga. Beliau mempunyai tanggungjawab undang-undang dan moral untuk memastikan satu penerbitan yang adil dan tepat dan tidak menyebabkan orang awam mempunyai pendapat dan fakta-fakta yang salah. Saya sesungguhnya menyatakan bahawa ini adalah relevan kepada perkara dan isu-isu yang dibangkitkan dalam apa-apa tindakan fitnah.

11. Plaintif juga gagal menyatakan fakta bahawa sidang akhbar oleh saya pada 13.6.2006 adalah kerana menjawab satu jemputan awam oleh Plaintif untuk mendebatkan “And who, really is demonising whom?” yang diterbitkan dalam New Sunday Times pada 11.6.2006.

12. Sebagai seorang ahli “Malaysian Bar”, warganegara dan bekas setiausaha politik kepada bekas perdana menteri, saya mempunyai tugas awam dan moral di bawah undang-undang lazim dan berhak untuk memanggil satu persidangan akbar untuk menyangkal dan mematahkan dakwaan-dakwaan, salah nyata-salah nyata, kepalsuan yang ditulis oleh Plaintif mengenai Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad dan isu-isu mengenai ekonomi, sekuriti dan kedaulatan Malaysia dan peninggalan fakta-fakta dengan sengaja oleh Plaintif berkenaan isu-isu yang dibangkitkan.

13. Lebih-lebih lagi, saya sesungguhnya menyatakan bahawa kelakuan Plaintif dan menteri-menteri kerajaan dan pernyataan-pernyataan akbar sebagai balasan kepada pernyataan-pernyataan oleh Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad berkenaan ekonomi, sekuriti dan kedaulatan Malaysia, dan berita-berita yang disiarkan di dalam media besar-besaran, sebelum dan sejurus selepas persidangan-persidangan akhbar saya pada 17.04.2006 dan 13.06.2006 memberi indikasi bahawa isu-isu yang dibangkitkan di dalam persidangan-persidangan akhbar adalah perkara-perkara kepentingan awam. Artikel-artikel ini ditunjukkan kepada saya dan ditandakan secara kolektif sebagai Ekshibit “MC-7”.

14. Pada persidangan akhbar tersebut, saya mencabar Plaintif untuk satu debat awam mengenai pelbagai isu bahawa Plaintif telah menulis dalam New Straits Times dan New Sunday Times, khususnya bidasan-bidasan, salah nyata-salah nyata dan pemalsuan-pemalsuan mengenai bekas Perdana Menteri, Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad dan salah nyata berkenaan ekonomi, sekuriti dan kedaulatan Malaysia. Saya juga menyatakan bahawa setelah bekas perdana menteri merungut bahawa jawapan-jawapannya tidak disiarkan, saya dan orang-orang awam berhak untuk mengetahui dan memahami isu-isu di dalam debat antara Plaintif dan Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad.

15. New Straits Times pada 2.5.2006 telah melaporkan seperti berikut:

“Asked why he had not given his recent open letter to Prime Minister Dato’ Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi instead of distributing it to Umno members, Dr. Mahathir said: ‘I did not write the letter to him. What for? Even if I talk to you (the media), it won’t see the light of day in the papers. Even if I were to give to you to publish, you will not do it. Even if you do, Kalimullah will chop it,’ he said, referring to New Straits Times Press deputy chairman and editorial adviser Dato Kalimullah Hassan.”
Laporan tersebut ditunjukkan kepada saya dan ditandakan Ekshibit “MC-1”.

16. Dalam keadaan sebegini, saya sesungguhnya menyatakan bahawa ia hanya akan menjadi adil dan sesuai bahawa orang-orang awam diberikan peluang untuk mendengar debat daripada kedua-dua pihak, khususnya rasional untuk kritikan Plaintif mengenai Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad mengenai isu-isu yang disebut dalam kolum beliau.

17. Ia dalam konteks ini bahawa saya membuat komen bahawa jika Plaintif teguh dengan pendiriannya, beliau patut menerima cabaran untuk satu debat awam, dalam kehadiran media nasional dan luar negara, kegagalan berbuat demikian bermakna beliau patut ditimbangkan sebagai “political coward” dan seorang lelaki yang menggunakan kebebasan akhbar untuk mengkritik orang-orang lain, menyalah nyata fakta-fakta tetapi tidak mahu bersua depan sama depan kritikan-balas. Oleh itu cabaran saya adalah juga balasan kepada jemputan awam Plaintif untuk mencantumkan isu dengan beliau atas perkara-perkara yang dibangkitkan di dalam artikel di dalam New Sunday Times pada 11.06.2006 seperti yang dinyatakan di atas.

18. Plaintif, sebagai Naib Pengerusi dan Penasihat Penyunting New Straits Times, mempunyai kewajipan berhati-hati yang awam untuk memastikan bahawa artikel-artikel dan ahli-ahli wartawannya mengenai isu-isu yang dibangkitkan oleh bekas Perdana Menteri dilaporkan dengan adil dan tepat. Ini beliau gagal berbuat tetapi sebaliknya membiarkan berlaku dan menyertai secara aktif dalam kempen sistematik untuk mencerca bekas perdana menteri, perbuatan sensasi dan laporan berat sebelah seperti butir-butir yang dinyatakan dalam perenggan 8 Pembelaan dan Tuntutan Balas dan kolum Plaintif pada 11.6.2006.

Tangan Kotor Plaintif

19. Plaintif telah dalam kolumnya bertarikh 11.06.2006 dalam New Sunday Times mengaku bahawa terdapat tuntutan untuk jawapan-jawapan rasional kepada kritikan-kritikan Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad. Kolum bertarikh 11.6.2006 tersebut ditunjukkan kepada saya dan ditandakan sebagai Ekshibit “MC-2”.

20. Pada 11.06.2006 dalam kolum Ahad, Plaintif menulis satu artikel mengkritik Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad dalam bahasa yang paling ekstrem, yang mana salah satu perenggan adalah satu rekaan dan atau salah nyata. Perenggan tersebut adalah seperti berikut:-

“The Prime Minister was in Japan shortly after the Malaysiakini article appeared and was told that Dr. Mahathir wanted to come and see him. Abdullah, in the midst of breakfast with aides and officials immediately put on his tie and told the Ambassador that he would go and see his ex-boss rather than let Dr. Mahathir come down and see him. Yet, less than two weeks later, Dr. Mahathir invited the foreign press to his office and lambasted Abdullah and his administration.”

21. Dalam surat bertarikh 12.06.2006 kepada New Straits Times daripada pembantu Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad, Encik Sufi Yusoff telah menunjukkan bahawa perenggan di atas mempunyai beberapa kesalahan, butir-butir yang mana adalah seperti berikut:

a. “Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad did not seek an appointment with Prime Minister Dato Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi while both leaders were in Tokyo attending the Nikkei Conference.”

b. “In fact, it was the opposite. Dr. Mahathir was only informed by a third party that the Prime Minister was on the way to call on him 20 minutes before he was due to leave the hotel on May 26. To this, Dr. Mahathir agreed and the two leaders met for about 10 minutes before Dr. Mahathir had to take his leave.”

c. “Dr. Mahathir did not invite the foreign press to, in your words, ‘lambast Abdullah and his administration.’ The press conference on June 7 was called to announce the Perdana Leadership Foundation’s Global Peace Forum to be held from June 20-22. The foreign press was there for the purpose.”

Surat tersebut ditunjukkan kepada saya dan ditandakan sebagai Ekshibit “MC-3”.

22. Akan tetapi, Plaintif tidak menganggap ianya sesuai untuk memberi pengakuan perbuatan rekaannya /salah nyata dan untuk memohon maaf kepada Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad. Dalam keadaan sebegini saya sesungguhnya menyatakan bahawa saya mempunyai justifikasi secukupnya dalam mentafsirkan perbuatan dan cara Plaintif menulis mengenai Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad sebagai pengecut. Selanjutnya dan secara alternatif komen-komen adalah ulasan saksama dalam jawapan kepada artikel Plaintif.

23. Plaintif dalam artikel yang sama 11.06.2006 (Ekshibit “MC-2”) bertajuk “ An who, really, is demonising whom?” menulis:

“Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad says his criticisms of the current administration and his successor Dato Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi are ‘not personal.’ His son, Umno Youth executive council member Datuk Mukhriz Mahathir, is upset that ministers and others have criticised Dr. Mahathir and says that what his father raised ‘was rational, so answer rationally.’ And Mahathir, ever the master strategist, has made his pre-emptive strike, predicting that ‘for the next ten days, there will be lots of stories in the papers trying to demonise me, make me appear bad …’ Therefore, if anybody criticises Dr. Mahathir, then his prediction will come true – they are trying to demonise him.”

24. Artikel ini dan khususnya perenggan di atas adalah satu cubaan oleh Plaintif untuk menyangkal dakwaan oleh Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad bahawa beliau sedang “being demonised” oleh Plaintif dan New Straits Times dan New Sunday Times. Plaintif melalui kolumnya telah menjemput orang-orang awam untuk berdebat - “And who, really is demonising whom?”. Oleh itu Plaintif tidak boleh merungut sekarang bahawa saya sebagai seorang orang awam yang telah mengambil pandangan bertentangan, yang mana saya berhak berbuat demikian, bahawa ia adalah Plaintif yang betul-betul bersalah dan bertanggungjawab untuk “demonising” Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad.

25. Saya sesungguhnya menyatakan bahawa saya mempunyai tugas moral dan awam untuk memberi buah fikiran yang bertentangan. Saya selanjutnya menyatakan bahawa pernyataan-pernyataannya mempunyai justifikasi dan di dalam alternatif ulasan-ulasan saksama di dalam debat awam yang Plaintif mulakan.

26. Plaintif setelah mendakwa Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad dengan perbuatan “demonising” orang-orang lain tidak boleh sekarang tampil ke Mahkamah Mulia ini untuk memohon ganti rugi dan relif-relif ekuiti dan menghalang saya dan ahli-ahli awam untuk menjawab sedemikian juga.

27. Lebih-lebih lagi dalam persidangan akhbar tersebut, saya juga telah menyebut ke takat bahawa kempen untuk “demonise” Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad telah bermula seawalnya sebelum beliau bersara pada 2003. Saya telah memaklumkan media dalam tahun 2003 bahawa Plaintif dan satu Khairy Jamaluddin adalah bertanggungjawab untuk penerbitan artikel fitnah mengenai perdana menteri pada masa itu dan timbalan perdana menteri Malaysia di dalam majalah Economist. Artikel tersebut ditunjukkan kepada saya dan ditandakan Ekshibit “MC-4”. Peranan tersembunyi dan berbahaya Plaintif dan Khairy Jamaluddin ini telah ditentu sahkan kepada saya oleh Timbalan Menteri sekarang kepada Sekuriti Dalaman yang pada masa material itu adalah rakan sekerja saya, sebagai setiausaha politik senior kepada perdana menteri pada masa itu.

28. Saya juga sesungguhnya menyatakan bahawa sebagai Setiausaha Politik kepada Perdana Menteri pada masa itu, saya di bawah tugas untuk menyediakan satu sangkalan yang azab terhadap bidasan tersembunyi dan berbahaya ke atas Malaysia dan Perdana Menteri serta Timbalan Perdana Menteri. Akan tetapi, dan meskipun saya telah mengambil sumpah untuk membela keutuhan tanah air dalam melaksanakan semua tugas saya sebagai Setiausaha Politik Perdana Menteri kepada pada masa itu, saya telah di saman oleh Timbalan Perdana Menteri pada masa itu ke pejabatnya dan diberi amaran. Saya sesungguhnya menyatakan bahawa peristiwa berikut berlaku:-

1. The then Deputy Prime Minister said, “My boys are not happy with you and your actions.”

2. The Defendant was utterly shocked by the statement and replied, “I have not worked with your boys at all material times. I have not worked with Kalimullah and or any other person associated with you or your office. So why should they be angry with me? I was defending the integrity of the nation, the office of the prime minister and your office.”

3. The Defendant then enquired, “Do you know that the article in the Economist magazine has belittled you as well?”

4. To that, the Deputy Prime Minister replied, “My boys told me that the criticisms against me are not as bad as that against the prime minister.”

5. The Defendant replied to the effect that what was important was that the office of the prime minister and that of the deputy prime minister office was brought into disrepute and there was a need for a rebuttal.

29. Berikutan dari mesyuarat tersebut, saya telah melaporkan perkara ini kepada Perdana Menteri pada masa itu dan memaklumkan rakan-rakan sekerja saya yang lain di dalam Pejabat Perdana Menteri semasa mesyuarat-mesyuarat kakitangan tetap pada setiap hari Rabu, serta secara persendirian. Dalam sebutan kepada acara ini pada 2003 dalam persidangan akhbar tersebut, saya telah mengesahkan fakta bahawa Plaintif telah dengan tingkah laku sebelum ini “demonised” Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad.

30. Plaintif di dalam artikel bertarikh 11.6.2006 (Ekshibit “MC-2”) telah membuat satu pemalsuan/salah nyata seperti berikut:-

“His adviser, former politician Tan Sri Abdullah Ahmad …”

31. Apabila salah nyata/ pemalsuan tersebut ditunjukkan kepada Plaintif oleh pembantu Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad, Encik Sufi Yusoff dalam surat bertarikh 12.06.2005 (Ekshibit “MC-3”) bahawa Tan Sri Abdullah Ahmad bukan seorang penasihat kepada Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad, Plaintif tidak mengambil langkah untuk menarik balik pemalsuan, atau memohon maaf kepada bekas Perdana Menteri atau memaklumkan pembaca-pembaca New Straits Times dan New Sunday Times dan orang-orang awam sekalian mengenai salah nyata/pemalsuan tersebut.

32. Saya sesungguhnya menyatakan bahawa salah nyata-salah nyata di atas dan pemalsuan-pemalsuan oleh Plaintif memberikan pembelaan justifikasi dan atau secara alternatif pembelaan ulasan saksama kerana tingkah laku Plaintif adalah dan berkelakuan tidak wajar sebagai Naib Pengerusi New Straits Times Press (Malaysia) Bhd dan Penasihat Editorial New Straits Times Press.

33. Oleh itu, saya menyatakan bahawa Plaintif adalah diestop daripada menafikan bahawa beliau adalah adil, jujur dan boleh dipercayai. Sebaliknya beliau berkebolehan melalukan perbuatan memutarbelit, salah nyata-salah nyata dan rekaan-rekaan untuk “demonise” penentang-penentangnya yang dalam kes ini adalah bekas Perdana Menteri. Selanjutnya dan secara alternatif, Plaintif juga diestop dari menafikan bahawa tingkah lakunya adalah pengecut memandangkan Plaintif tidak memberi Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad dan saya peluang untuk menyangkal secukup-cukupnya kritikan-kritikan niat jahatnya, salah nyata-salah nyata dan rekaan-rekaan, lebih-lebih lagi selepas menjemput orang-orang awam untuk berdebat di atas isu-isu yang dibangkitkan olehnya dalam artikelnya bertarikh 11.06.2006.

34. Plaintif telah dengan tingkah laku salahnya sendiri menjemput orang awam untuk menyoal tingkah laku, ketulusan dan boleh kepercayaannya sebagai Timbalan Pengerusi New Straits Times Press (Malaysia) Berhad dan juga Pengerusi dan Co-Chief Pegawai Eksekutif ECM Libra Berhad.

35. Satu lagi contoh kebolehan Plaintif untuk memesongkan dan salah nyatakan fakta-fakta adalah dalam perenggan 18 Afidavit Plaintif di mana Plaintif mendakwa bahawa saya tidak menjawab kepada surat beliau yang bertarikh 20.6.2006 apabila hakikatnya ialah dalam pengetahuan Plaintif saya tidak menerima surat yang didakwa tersebut pada masa tersebut, ini telah diberitahu kepada peguam cara Plaintif melalui surat peguam cara saya bertarikh 27.6.2006 dalam Ekshibit “KMH-5”. Saya telah dengan segera mengarahkan peguamcara saya untuk menjawab kepada surat peguamcara Plaintif bertarikh 20.6.2006 apabila sesalinannya dilanjutkan oleh peguamcara Plaintif pada 27.6.2006. Jawapan segera saya adalah dalam Ekshibit “KMH-8” bertarikh 28.6.2006. Dengan semua fakta-fakta ini di hadapan Plaintif, Plaintif berani mendakwa bahawa saya tidak menjawab kepada surat peguamcaranya bertarikh 20.6.2006 dan atas dasar tersebut memohon untuk satu perintah ex parte terhadap saya.

36. Selanjut kepada kolum oleh Plaintif dalam Ekshibit “MC-2” dan pada hari yang sama, Plaintif sebagai Naib Pengerusi dan Penasihat Penyunting membenarkan dan atau meluluskan penerbitan satu temu duga oleh Santha Oorjitham dengan bekas Hakim Mahkamah Tinggi, Datuk Syed Ahmad Idid, tidak menghiraukan bahawa dakwaan-dakwaan itu tidak berasas dan tidak disahkan mengenai rasuah di dalam badan kehakiman. Penerbitan tersebut ditunjukkan dan ditandakan sebagai “Ekshibit “MC-5”.

37. Sekira pun Plaintif tidak pada masa material tersebut meluluskan atau membenarkan penerbitan, tingkah laku Plaintif seterusnya, hingga tarikh memfailkan Pembelaan dan Tuntutan Balas ini, menunjukkan dengan jelasnya bahawa beliau tidak anggap sesuai untuk menjauhi diri dari dakwaan-dakwaan tersembunyi dan tidak berasas mengenai rasuah terhadap keseluruhan badan kehakiman dan atau memohon maaf dan menarik balik artikel yang hasut dan fitnah. Oleh itu, Plaintif telah gagal dalam kewajipan berhati-bati awamnya untuk memastikan penerbitan yang adil dan tepat. Saya mengulangi perenggan 33 Pembelaan dan Tuntutan Balas.

38. Berikutan kepada penerbitan temu duga, ahli-ahli orang awam telah mendekati saya untuk mengetahui sebab-sebab surat khabar dibenarkan menerbitkan pernyataan-pernyataan yang menghasut dan fitnah berkenaan badan kehakiman. Mereka amat peranjat bahawa artikel yang menghasut dan memfitnah telah menyebabkan hakim yang baik, lurus dan tidak bersalah untuk dicurigai dan dicemuh dengan tidak adil dan dianggap sebagai korup.

39. Saya sesungguhnya menyatakan bahawa temu duga tersebut dan penerbitannya memberikan erti tanggapan bahawa dalam tempoh kerajaan bekas perdana menteri, keseluruhan badan kehakiman adalah korup. Penerbitan temu duga sedemikian memberi satu contoh yang membahayakan bahawa badan kehakiman boleh difitnah dengan bebas dari hukuman

40. Sebagai seorang “Senior Counsel of the Malaysian Bar”, saya mempunyai tanggungjawab di bawah Seksyen 42(1)(a) Akta Profesion Undang-undang “untuk mendukung kausa keadilan tanpa merujuk kepada kepentingan diri atau demi ahli-ahlinya, tanpa dipengaruhi oleh ketakutan atau sokongan” dan sebagai warganegara yang bertimbang berat, saya mempunyai tugas berkanun dan awam untuk membangkitkan isu ini di dalam persidangan akhbar pada 13.06.2006 dan untuk membawa ke perhatian orang-orang awam bahawa Plaintif dan surat khabar tersebut dan pegawai-pegawainya telah melakukan ketidakadilan kepada badan kehakiman.

41. Dalam persidangan akhbar saya mengutarakan soalan, “Why Now this publication?” kepada wartawan-wartawan, dan menjelaskan kepada wartawan-wartawan mengenai perbuatan pengecut bekas hakim serta perbuatan pengecut pegawai-pegawai surat khabar, termasuk Plaintif dalam melindungi di belakang bekas hakim semasa mereka mendakwa badan kehakiman mengenai rasuah tanpa bukti. Oleh itu, saya sesungguhnya menyatakan bahawa Plaintif sebagai Naib Pengerusi dan Penasihat Penyunting surat khabar tersebut tidak boleh mengelakkan tanggungjawab untuk perbuatan pengecut ini.

42. Saya sesungguhnya menyatakan bahawa saya mempunyai justifikasi yang secukupnya dan atau membuat ulasan yang saksama bahawa penerbitan itu adalah tidak jujur, mengambil peluang dan cubaan yang cabul untuk menjejaskan keutuhan badan kehakiman. Saya telah pada masa lampau pernah mempertahankan badan kehakiman apabila badan kehakiman dikritik secara tidak adil. Ini adalah dalam rekod minit-minit Mesyuarat Agung Tahunan dan Mesyuarat Agung Luar Biasa Majlis Peguam.

43. Saya selanjutnya menyatakan bahawa penerbitan tersebut merupakan satu penyalahgunaan autoriti dan kuasa oleh surat khabar dan pegawai-pegawainya, khususnya Plaintif menurut peruntukan-peruntukan Akta Mesin Cetak dan Penerbitan 1984. Saya mempunyai justifikasi dan atau mengulas dengan saksama bahawa penyalahgunaan autoriti untuk menerbitkan ini adalah dalam perkataan satu perbuatan rasuah dalam makna semula jadi dan biasa – bahawa kuasa boleh merasuah dan kuasa mutlak merasuah dengan mutlaknya.

44. Saya selanjutnya menyatakan bahawa Plaintif dan surat khabar tersebut telah memungkiri kewajipan berhati-hati yang berkanun dengan khususnya Plaintif telah melanggar peruntukan di bawah Akta Mesin Cetak dan Penerbitan 1984, khususnya seksyen 4(1)(b) dan Akta Hasutan 1948, khususnya seksyen 3(1) (c) yang dibaca bersama dengan seksyen 4 itu.

45. Dalam keadaan sebegini mengenai perkara-perkara yang telah dinyatakan sebelum ini, saya mempunyai justifikasi yang secukupnya dan di dalam alternatif, berhak untuk membuat ulasan saksama bahawa apabila Plaintif menggunakan autoritinya untuk membenarkan dan atau membiarkan penerbitan tersebut, beliau telah menyalahgunakan autoriti dan kuasanya sebagai Naib Presiden dan Penasihat Penyunting dan telah membawa nama buruk kepada badan kehakiman. Perkara ini adalah dan ialah satu perkara kepentingan awam.

46. Selanjutnya dan di dalam alternatif, saya sesungguhnya menyatakan bahawa dengan penerbitan tersebut, surat khabar tersebut dan Plaintif telah mendedahkan diri mereka kepada hak orang-orang awam dan saya untuk mencabar motif-motif dan tingkah laku mereka. Selanjutnya, saya menyatakan bahawa kelakuan Plaintif sepatutnya diteliti dengan rapi dan dihakimi oleh buah fikiran orang-orang awam serta Mahkamah Mulia ini dan bahawa Plaintif dan surat khabar tersebut dihakimi mengikuti tahap yang sama seperti mereka menghakimi orang lain, dan bahawa apa yang dibuat oleh saya adalah berikutan dengan tugas awamnya sebagai seorang peguam cara dan peguam bela untuk membela keutuhan pentadbiran keadilan.

47. Saya sesungguhnya menyatakan bahawa apabila Plaintif tampil ke Mahkamah Mulia ini tidak boleh dikatakan bahawa beliau datang dengan tangan dan tingkah laku yang bersih lebih-lebih lagi apabila beliau adalah satu pihak secara langsung dan atau tidak langsung bertanggungjawab kepada fitnah yang tersembunyi dan berbahaya ke atas badan kehakiman. Saya sesungguhnya menyatakan bahawa Plaintif di dalam plidingnya dan afidavit sokongan kepada permohonannya untuk relif injunksi telah menyekat fakta-fakta material ini dan dengan itu telah memperdayakan Mahkamah, dan telah betul-betulnya menyalahgunakan proses Mahkamah ini.

48. Saya sesungguhnya menyatakan bahawa oleh kerana Plaintif sebagai Penasihat Penyunting telah membiarkan penerbitan yang disebut di atas dan membangkitkan isu rasuah, dan melalui implikasi menegaskan bahawa surat khabar tersebut dan Plaintif menentang rasuah, menyokong pentadbiran yang baik dan transparensi dan menuntut ketulusan pada tahap yang tinggi, saya memang berhak di dalam persidangan akhbar untuk membangkitkan isu dengan Plaintif – “to walk the talk”.

49. Ia adalah dalam keadaan sedemikian bahawa saya menerima jemputan Plaintif untuk mengadakan satu debat awam dan mencabar Plaintif untuk membuktikan kredibilitinya sebagai seorang yang bukan korup, setelah beliau melalui tingkah lakunya secara langsung dan tidak langsung mendakwa sogokan dalam badan kehakiman.

50. Saya sesungguhnya mempercayai dan menyatakan bahawa saya mempunyai lebih dari justifikasi yang secukupnya dan mengulas dengan saksama bahawa ia adalah lebih senang untuk mendakwa dan atau memfitnah melalui pihak-pihak ketiga dan bahawa jika Plaintif adalah orang lelaki yang berprinsip, beliau tidak patut teragak-agak untuk membuktikan keutuhannya dan untuk menerima cabaran saya, jika gagal beliau patut dianggap sebagai seorang “political coward” dan bahawa orang-orang awam harus dan patut membuat inferens bahawa beliau adalah korup dan atau seorang lelaki yang kekurangan keberanian keyakinannya.

51. Lebih-lebih lagi, saya sesungguhnya menyatakan bahawa saya mempunyai lebih dari justifikasi yang secukupnya dalam membuat cabaran atas dasar bahawa oleh kerana New Sunday Times dan Plaintif telah mendedahkan beban yang tidak tertahan ke atas badan kehakiman untuk menyangkal dan mematahkan dakwaan-dakwaan sogokkan oleh Datuk Syed Ahmad Idid, Plaintif dan surat khabar tersebut patut didedahkan kepada penelitian buah fikiran orang-orang awam sama ada mereka boleh atau tidak boleh mendiscajkan beban tidak berdosa yang sama dan motif-motif mereka untuk penerbitan tersebut.

52. Jika relif injunksi dibenarkan memihak kepada Plaintif, pembelaan terakhir untuk badan kehakiman yang dibekalkan oleh warganegara yang mengikut undang-undang dan Majlis Peguam akan diruntuhkan dan satu contoh bahaya ditetapkan untuk serangan tersembunyi dan berbahaya pada masa hadapan ke atas badan kehakiman oleh media secara besar-besaran dan orang dalam kedudukan berautoriti seperti Plaintif.

53. Dalam keadaan sebegini, saya sesungguhnya menafikan perenggan 12 dan 13 Afidavit Plaintif. Saya sesungguhnya menyatakan bahawa pernyataan-pernyataan yang dibuat oleh saya dalam sidang akbar mempunyai justifikasi, adalah ulasan-ulasan saksama berkenaan isu-isu kepentingan awam dan lebih-lebih lagi adalah ulasan-ulasan saksama dibuat sebagai jawapan kepada jemputan kepada orang awam secara besar-besaran oleh Plaintif untuk melibatkan diri dalam debat dengan beliau seperti dinyatakan di dalam perenggan-perenggan di atas. Penyembunyian fakta-fakta di atas oleh Plaintif khususnya Ekshibit “MC-2” adalah satu “material non disclosure”.

54. Sebagai menjawab kepada perenggan 15 Afidavit Plaintif, saya sesungguhnya menyatakan bahawa Plaintif sebagai Pengerusi dan Ketua Pegawai Eksekutif bersamaan (Co-Chief Executive Officer) untuk ECM Libra Berhad telah melakukan kegiatan kewangan luar aturan di dalam pentadbiran syarikat tersebut. Dalam jualan syarikat-syarikat operasi kecil ECM Libra Berhad kepada Avenue Capital Resources Berhad, di bawah kawalan kerajaan, Plaintif telah membantu dan bersubahat dalam latihan-latihan sogokan yang dilakukan dalam proses transaksi tersebut. Butir-butir diberikan dalam perenggan 54 Pembelaan dan Tuntutan Balas dan saya mengulanginya di sini.

Fakta Latar Belakang – Tahun Kewangan berakhir 31.3.2004

1) Plaintif telah dilantik kepada lembaga ECM Libra Bhd pada 02.04.2004.

2) Syarikat dahulunya dikenali sebagai South Peninsular Industries Berhad dan pada 31.03.2004, namanya telah ditukarkan kepada ECM Libra Bhd.

3) Untuk tahun kewangan berakhir pada 31.03.2004, Laporan Tahunan menyatakan bahawa sumber-sumber hasil kumpulan ECM Libra Bhd tersebut telah merosot kepada RM 39.8 juta dari RM 57.7 juta dari tahun dulu. Ia telah direkodkan satu kehilangan sebelum taksiran sebanyak RM9.8 juta terhadap keuntungan sebelum taksiran sebanyak RM 9.4 juta tahun dulu. Punca kehilangan kumpulan kepada pemegang saham dalam tahun laporan itu adalah sebanyak RM10,602,959.00 berbanding kepada keuntungan sebanyak RM 8,625,100.00 dalam tahun kewangan yang lepas.

4) ECM Libra Bhd pada 30.04.2004 telah menyempurnakan pembelian untuk syarikat-syarikat berikut, iaitu ECM Libra Partners Sdn Bhd, ECM Libra Capital Sdn Bhd, ECM Libra Holdings Ltd (secara kolektif dirujuk sebagai “ECM Purchase”) dan ECM Libra Securities Sdn Bhd, yang dulunya dikenali sebagai BBMB Securities Sdn Bhd (dirujuk sebagai “BBMB Purchase”). Justeru, penukaran nama dan pelantikan pengarah-pengarah terkini di dalam syarikat tersebut.

5) Pertimbangan untuk “ECM Purchase” adalah RM330,000,000.00 dan telah melalui mengisukan memenuhi 270,000,000 syer biasa baru pada RM1.00 setiap satu atas harga isu sebanyak RM1.00 setiap satu dan isu sebanyak RM60,000,000.00 lima (5) tahun boleh tebus boleh tukar pinjaman stok tanpa sekuriti pada 100% dari nilai nominal dengan kadar kupon 3% setiap tahun.

6) “BBMB Purchase” telah memenuhi melalui pertimbangan tunai sebanyak RM172,811,479.00 melalui penempatan swasta sebanyak 100,000,000 syer biasa baru sebanyak RM1 setiap satu pada harga isu sebanyak RM2.10 setiap syer biasa sebanyak RM1.00 setiap satu.

7) Nilai “Goodwill” yang diberikan kepada syarikat-syarikat [iaitu “ECM Purchase” and “BBMB Purchase”] yang diambil alih oleh ECM Libra Bhd adalah RM360,699,492.00 seperti dilaporkan di dalam Laporan Tahunan.

8) Oleh itu, jumlah pertimbangan untuk belian adalah RM 502,811,479.00 (iaitu jumlah RM 330,000,000.00 dan RM 172,811,479.00 dan RM60,000,000.00 (RCULS).

9) Jenis syarikat-syarikat adalah seperti berikut:

i) ECM Libra Partners Sdn Bhd (dahulunya dikenali sebagai “Libra Partners Sdn Bhd) – jenis perniagaan: Peminjam Wang Berlesen. Plaintif adalah seorang pengarah dan pemegang syer substantif;

ii) ECM Libra Capital Sdn Bhd (dahulunya dikenali sebagai “ECM Capital Sdn Bhd) – jenis perniagaan: servis perundingan Pentadbiran, Penasihat dan Pelaburan. Plaintif adalah seorang pengarah dan pemegang syer substantif;

iii) ECM Libra Securities Sdn Bhd (dahulunya dikenali sebagai “BBMB Securities Sdn Bhd) – jenis perniagaan: broker saham;

iv) ECM Libra Holdings Ltd (dahulunya dikenali sebagai “ECM Holdings Ltd”) jenis perniagaan: Servis Pemegang Pelaburan dan Penasihat.

10) Kapital syer yang diberi autoriti untuk syarikat telah ditingkatkan dari RM50,000,000.00 syer biasa sebanyak RM1.00 setiap satu hingga RM1,000,000,000.00 merangkumi 1,000,000,000 syer biasa sebanyak RM1.00 setiap satu melalui ciptaan tambahan 950,000,000 syer biasa sebanyak RM1.00 setiap satu.

11) Semasa tahun kewangan, syarikat tersebut telah meningkatkan mengisukan dan kapital yang dibayar sepenuhnya dari RM42,000,000.00 kepada RM433,000,000.00 melalui mengisukan syer berkenaan kepada “BBMB Purchase” dan “ECM Purchase”, Private Placement seperti dinyatakan di atas dan isu-isu bonus.

12) Semasa tahun kewangan tersebut, syarikat telah melupuskan hampir semua perniagaan yang wujud oleh syarikat itu dan selepas 01.04.2004 perniagaan utama syarikat adalah dilaporkan di dalam penyata Pengerusi adalah sepatutnya “an integrated boutique investment banking group focusing on advisory services and securities brokering.”

13) Di dalam Laporan Tahunan, sumber-sumber hasil dari segmen “servis kewangan” yang memberikan sumber kepada pendapatan kumpulan telah diberi deklarasi sebagai RM2,875,062.00 sahaja. Kehilangan yang berpunca kepada segmen servis kewangan adalah RM3,274,511.00.

14) Defendan akan merujuk kepada (kehilangan) Bersih keuntungan yang berpunca kepada pemegang-pemegang syer biasa pada perbicaraan penuh untuk terma-terma penuh dan efek-efeknya.

15) Plaintif mempunyai kepentingan substantif di dalam syarikat tersebut. Beliau didaftarkan sebagai mempunyai 60,000,000 syer biasa dan 18,000,000 boleh tebus boleh ubah stok pinjaman tanpa sekuriti (RCULS) yang mewakili 13.86% dan 30% masing-masing mengenai kepentingan beliau di dalam syarikat tersebut.

16) Dato Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi telah dilantik sebagai Perdana Menteri pada 31.10.2003.

17) Plaintif telah dilantik sebagai Pengarah dan Ketua Penyunting Kumpulan New Straits Times Press (Malaysia) Bhd pada 01.01.2004 oleh Perdana Menteri.

Latar belakang fakta-fakta– Tahun Kewangan berakhir 31. 3. 2005

18) Di dalam Lampiran Tahunan syarikat untuk tahun kewangan berakhir pada 31.03.2005, ia dilaporkan bahawa sumber-sumber hasil telah meningkat dari 84.1% kepada RM73.2 juta dari RM39.8 juta di dalam tahun dulu.

19) Syarikat telah ambil alih ECM Libra Capital Markets Sdn Bhd (dahulunya dikenali sebagai Libra Capital Markets Sdn Bhd), syarikat yang mentadbirkan dana.

20) Sumber-sumber hasil dari segmen servis kewangan adalah 43% dan perolehan untuk setiap syer meningkat kepada 9.32 sen dari kehilangan sebanyak 15.6 sen dalam tahun dulu.

21) Keuntungan kumpulan untuk tahun adalah RM40,399,310.00 berbanding kepada kehilangan sebanyak RM10,602,959.00 dalam tahun dulu. Plaintif, sebagai Pengerusi menyatakan “the ECM Libra Group posted its maiden profits, achieving a robust turnaround.”

22) Pada 27.12.2005, Khairy Jamaluddin, anak lelaki ipar perdana menteri memperoleh 13 juta syer ECM Libra Bhd bersamaan lebih kurang 3% pegangan di dalam syarikat yang mempunyai nilai RM9 juta, berdasarkan harga belian sebanyak 71 sen setiap syer. Syer-syer telah diperoleh dari Plaintif, Lim Kian Onn dan Chua Ming Huat yang masing-masing adalah Pengerusi, CEO dan COO syarikat tersebut.

Latar Belakang Fakta-fakta – Tahun 2006

23) Pada 19.01.2006, agensi berita Bernama mengumumkan bahawa kerajaan menguasai Avenue Capital Resources Bhd dan Avenue International Capital Bhd (selepas ini dikenali sebagai “Avenue”) menandatangani perjanjian jualan syer bersyarat dengan ECM Libra Bhd (di mana Plaintif adalah Pengerusi dan Co-CEO) untuk memperoleh sepenuhnya semua subsidiari-subsidiari dalam operasi terkemudian dengan mengisukan 442,000,000 syer biasa baru yang dibayar sepenuhnya pada RM1.00 setiap satu di dalam Avenue International Capital Bhd, dengan pasaran proforma yang mempunyai nilaian sebanyak RM293 juta.

24) Subsidiari-subsidiari operasi ECM Libra Bhd adalah:

a) ECM Libra Securities Sdn Bhd dan subsidiari-subsidiarinya;
b) ECM Libra Partners Sdn Bhd;
c) ECM Libra Capital Sdn Bhd;
d) ECM Libra Capital Markets Sdn Bhd;
e) ECM Libra Holdings Ltd dan subsidiari-subsidiarinya.

Akan tetapi, Jumlah bersih aset ketara dipersetujui syarikat-syarikat ECM Libra telah dinyatakan sebagai RM210 juta pada masa tarikh tanpa syarat Perjanjian Jualan Syer itu.

25) Bernama telah melaporkan bahawa perjanjian jualan syer ECM Libra Bhd /Avenue membuka jalan untuk cadangan penyatuan yang akan membolehkan penyatuan entiti untuk memenuhi keperluan di bawah garis panduan baru yang diisukan oleh Bank Negara yang mempunyai kapital syer minimum yang tidak terjejas sebanyak RM500 juta.

26) Sebelum penyatuan tersebut, Menteri Kewangan Malaysia Inc dan satu lagi syarikat penghubung kerajaan mempunyai gabungan kuasa syarikat kira-kira 29.5% pegangan di dalam Avenue.

27) Berikutan penyatuan itu, rakan-rakan kongsi penubuhan ECM Libra Bhd akan memilik dan menguasai satu gabungan 20% pegangan dalam penyatuan entiti, yang mana Plaintif akan memiliki 6% kepentingan.

28) Kapital syer penyatuan entiti akan ditambahkan kira-kira RM840 juta membenarkan ia menjadi satu pelaburan bank sepenuhnya yang boleh mengambil deposit. Pemegang-pemegang syer ECM Libra Bhd, jika mereka mahu untuk membuat permohonan untuk lesen bank pelaburan atas merit sendiri akan memerlukan inter-alia memasukkan dana-dana berlebihan seperti diwajibkan oleh garis panduan pelaburan Bank Negara yang menetapkan bank-bank pelaburan untuk meningkatkan kapital syer mereka kepada RM500 juta dalam tiga tahun.

29) Plaintif dalam persidangan akhbar, yang telah dilaporkan oleh Bernama pada 19.01.2006 mengakui bahawa, dan apabila ditanya apa akan terjadi kepada ECM Libra Bhd jika ia tidak mampu untuk mendapatkan penyatuan diluluskan oleh autoriti-autoriti menyatakan:

“We would have been seriously disadvantaged against the other new investment banks which had the required capital funds and could carry out the full range of investment banking services. At the end of three years, when we would be required to ensure that our capital funds was at least RM500 million, it would have necessitated huge cash injection from our shareholders. By pursuing the merger route, we will emerge a much bigger and stronger entity and not require cash injection from shareholders.”

30) Tambahan pula, jika tidak ada penyatuan, pemegang-pemegang syer ECM Libra Bhd akan perlu memasukkan secara minimum RM100 juta untuk memenuhi keperluan kewangan untuk lesen “discount house”, di samping RM500 juta kapital syer yang tidak terjejas.

31) Kelulusan-kelulusan dan atau lesen daripada Menteri Kewangan perlu diperoleh. Menteri Kewangan pernah memberikan kelulusan-kelulusan sebegini, meskipun ada kepentingan konflik sedangkan Khairy Jamaluddin, ialah pengurus dan pemegang syer ECM Libra dan juga adalah anak lelaki ipar kepada Perdana Menteri yang juga adalah Menteri Kewangan. Plaintif sebagai Pengerusi ECM Libra Bhd, tahu mengenai situasi di atas dan oleh itu telah bantu dan bersuhabat dalam skim korup ini. Plaintif juga telah memanfaatkan secara substantif daripada skim tersebut.

32) Agensi-agensi kelulusan relevan yang lain adalah secara langsung dan atau tidak langsung tidak terhutang budi kepada Kementerian Kewangan.

33) Penyatuan telah menghasilkan begitu banyak kontroversi bahawa pada 13.04.2006, perkara telah dikemukakan di hadapan Parlimen, tetapi kerajaan telah hingga tarikh ini gagal untuk memberi sebarang atau sebarang penjelasan mencukupi untuk persembahan sogokan ketara ini.

34) Pada 28.06.2006, penyatuan entiti, ECM Libra Avenue Bhd (713570-K) telah disenaraikan dalam papan utama Bursa Saham Kuala Lumpur (Nombor Stok 2143) dengan kapital syer sudah bayar sebanyak RM830,901,953.00 merangkumi 830,901,953 syer biasa RM1.00 setiap satu.

35) Mengambil kira perenggan 5 hingga 8, dan perenggan 23 dan 24 di atas, jualan ECM Libra subsidiari-subsidiari operasinya dan “BBMB Securities Sdn Bhd” pada masa itu pada 31.03.2004 kepada South Peninsular Industries Bhd (yang mana dinamakan kepada ECM Libra Bhd selepas pengambil alih tersebut) adalah dinilai pada RM502,811,479.00, masih lagi dalam dua tahun, subsidiari-subsidiari operasi yang sama telah dijual menurut penyatuan yang disebut di atas dengan Avenue Capital Resources Bhd untuk RM442,000,000.00 dengan jumlah bersih aset ketara pada nilai dipersetujui sebanyak RM210,000,000.00

36) Oleh itu, nilai jualan lebih awal dan belian dalam 2004 syarikat-syarikat tersebut telah terlampau dinilai secara berlebihan dengan memberikan “goodwill” yang menakjubkan sebanyak RM360,000,000.00, yang mana tidak boleh diberi justifikasi dalam apa keadaan jua. Sedangkan ia adalah syarikat disenaraikan secara awam latihan korporat adalah satu frod kepada orang-orang awam.

37) Plaintif, sebagai Pengerusi di dalam Laporan Tahunannya pada 31.03.2005 melaporkan bahawa syarikat tersebut telah memperoleh keuntungan-keuntungan sulung sebanyak RM 40.3 juta berbanding dengan kehilangan RM 10.6 juta pada tahun lalu. Masih lagi dalam latihan penyatuan tersebut, syarikat-syarikat yang sama, dan dengan syarikat tambahan (ECM Libra Capital Markets Sdn Bhd) telah dijual untuk nilai yang lebih kurang berbanding dengan harga asal dalam 2004 yang mana syarikat telah dibayar untuknya.

Oleh itu, saya menyatakan bahawa komen-komen saya mempunyai justifikasi dan atau di dalam alternatif, komen-komen saya, dalam keadaan sebegini, adalah ulasan-ulasan saksama mengenai isu kepentingan awam.

55. Sekali lagi saya sesungguhnya menyatakan bahawa Plaintif telah menyembunyikan fakta-fakta material ini dan tidak datang ke mahkamah dengan tangan yang bersih. Oleh itu saya sesungguhnya menafikan perenggan 26 Afidavit Plaintif.

56. Selanjutnya Plaintif telah menyembunyikan fakta bahawa sebalik kepada menerima cabaran saya untuk mengadakan satu debat awam beliau memilih untuk menjawab isu-isu yang dibangkitkan oleh saya dalam sidang akbar pada 13.6.2006 tersebut dengan menulis satu artikel dalam New Sunday Times pada 25.6.2006 bertajuk “Sometimes you’ve got to fight when you’re a man” Pada hari yang sama dan hari-hari seterusnya setelah penerbitan tersebut, saya telah diejek oleh orang awam kerana Plaintif telah memanggil saya inter alia seorang , “bully,” “gangster” “a man beyond redemption” dan “rapist”, meskipun saya tidak dinamakan di dalam artikel tersebut. Sesiapa orang awam yang telah mengikuti kronologi keadaan dan telah membaca beberapa laporan berita yang disebut dalam perenggan 8 Pembelaan dan Tuntutan Balas akan mengetahui fakta-fakta dan memahami perkataan-perkataan dan artikel tersebut sebagai memfitnah saya dan bukan sesiapa lain kecuali saya.

Artikel tersebut ditunjukkan kepada saya dan ditandakan sebagai Ekshibit “MC-6”.

57. Saya akan merujuk kepada Pembelaan dan Tuntutan Balas bila-bila sesuai.

58. Oleh yang demikian saya sesungguhnya menafikan perenggan 19 dan 25 Afidavit Plaintif. Saya sesungguhnya menyatakan bahawa pengikraran oleh Plaintif bahawa saya tidak mempunyai pembelaan adalah satu salah nyata yang serius kepada Mahkamah Yang Mulia ini.

59. Saya selanjutnya menyatakan bahawa Plaintif telah gagal memberi akujanji untuk membayar gantirugi dan oleh itu perintah ex parte bertarikh 4.7.2006 patut diketepikan terus.

60. Saya selanjutnya menyatakan bahawa pengataan Plaintif dalam perenggan 20 Afidavit Plaintif bahawa saya bercadang untuk mengadakan satu sidang akbar pada 29.6.2006 adalah tidak benar dan satu pemalsuan oleh Plaintif. Oleh kerana salah nyata dan rekaan palsu yang begitu serius, perenggan 26 Afidavit Plaintif adalah tidak benar.

61. Saya sesungguhnya menyatakan bahawa pada imbangan kesenangan, injunksi interim tidak patut diberikan :-

a) Isu-isu yang dibangkitkan dalam beberapa artikel dalam perenggan 8 Pembelaan dan Tuntutan Balas dan dalam sidang akhbar saya pada 13.6.2006 yang menjawab kepada kolum Plaintif pada 11.6.2006 adalah perkara-perkara dalam kepentingan awam.

b) Defendan tidak patut ditahan dari menggunakan haknya selaras dengan hak undang-undang (statutori), sosial dan moral untuk memaklumkan kepada orang awam mengenai perkara-perkara dan isu-isu yang mempunyai kepentingan awam.

Perkara-perkara kepentingan awam tidak boleh diukur dengan pampasan wang.

62. Menjawab kepada perenggan 23 dan 24 Afidavit Plaintif saya sesungguhnya menyatakan bahawa Plaintif yang mendakwa, menyindir dan memfitnah orang lain tidak patut segan untuk dipersoal, dicabar atau diteliti tingkah laku dan atau kesungguhannya oleh orang lain lebih-lebih lagi apabila jawapan tersebut adalah akibat dari satu jemputan awam dari Plaintif sendiri.

63. Saya sesungguhnya mempercayai dan menyatakan bahawa Plaintif telah gagal mematuhi Kaedah-kaedah Mahkamah Tinggi, 1980 dan peruntukan-peruntukan Akta Fitnah, 1957 dan bahawa butir-butir yang relevan yang diwajibkan untuk diplidkan tidak diplidkan.

64. Kata-kata fitnah yang didakwa seperti yang diplidkan dalam Pernyataan Tuntutan adalah tidak konsisten dengan dan atau berlainan dan dalam alternatif bercanggahan dengan ekshibit-ekshibit Plaintif sendiri yang diekshibitkan dalam Afidavit yang menyokong permohonan ex parte untuk injunksi. Kes Plaintif seperti yang diplidkan adalah sangat memudaratkan dan menghalangkan.

65. Atas alasan-alasan di atas saya memohon:-

a) perintah ex parte bertarikh 4.7.2006 diketepikan dengan kos;
b) perenggan 3, 5 dan 6 Pernyataan Tuntutan dibatalkan dengan kos;
c) permohonan Plaintif untuk injunksi interim ditolak dengan kos;
d) kos-kos di atas ditaksirkan atas dasar peguam cara klien.

posted 3:05 PM

Website - http://malaysia-today.net/reports/2006/07/mathias-changs-affidavit-bahasa.htm

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Hanif Nasir
(no login)
60.50.205.117

Antara Pak Lah dan Donald Trump

No score for this post
July 26 2006, 8:30 PM 

Antara Pak Lah dan Donald Trump
Mon | Jul 17, 06 | 11:40:27 AM
Oleh Hanif Nasir aya amat meminati rancangan realiti TV mengenai bisnes dan kepimpinan, The Apprentice yang diterbitkan secara eksklusif oleh Donald Trump.

Kepada yang menonton rancangan tersebut, kita dapat melihat bagaimana Donald Trump menilai peserta-peserta rancangan itu dari segi kepimpinan, perancangan projek, keputusan yang dibuat dan pelbagai aspek lain yang penting dalam perniagaan. Ketua pasukan yang kalah perlu membawa dua orang yang dianggap menyumbang kepada kekalahan pasukan tersebut, untuk dikeluarkan.

Terdetik di fikiran saya bagaimana sekiranya Pak Lah menyertai program realiti The Apprentice itu, dan bagaimana ahli pasukannya yang terdiri daripada Samy Vellu, Khairy dan Najib berhadapan dengan Donald Trump.

Donald Trump: Lah, kenapa kamu kalah?

Pak Lah: Saya pun kurang pasti, semua yang kami rancangkan berjalan lancar. Mungkin pasukan lain mempunyai kelebihan dari segi idea dan buah fikiran.

Donald Trump: Siapa yang bertanggungjawab membuat keputusan dalam kumpulan ini?

Pak Lah: Saya. Tetapi yang mencadangkan perkara tersebut ialah Samy Vellu.

Samy Vellu: Memang saya yang mencadangkannya tetapi saya pun tidak tahu perkara akan jadi seperti ini.

Donald Trump: Tapi kamu telah membuat kesilapan yang besar. Siapa yang bertanggungjawab dalam promosi? Saya melihat promosi kumpulan kamu sangat teruk, sedangkan kumpulan lain menyasarkan kepada pelanggan internet. Kamu hanya mempromosi di kaki lima.

Khairy: Saya yang menguruskan promosi.

Donald Trump: Apa pula tugas Najib? Najib: Saya menguruskan jualan. Bagi saya jualan kami tidak menyumbang kepada kekalahan tapi strategi pemasaran.

Donald Trump: Saya sangat kecewa dengan prestasi kerja kamu, terutamanya kamu Samy Vellu. Tetapi sebagai pengurus projek, semua tanggungjawab terletak di bahu kamu Lah. Apa pendapat kamu?

Pak Lah: Saya akuinya dan saya akan mempertingkatkan usaha saya dalam tugasan akan datang. Saya akan membuktikan yang saya akan menjadi perantis kamu.

Donald Trump: Baiklah, saya ingin kamu memilih 2 orang untuk dibawa ke bilik persidangan. Siapa yang kamu pilih?

Pak Lah: Najib dan Samy Vellu.

Donald Trump: Kamu pasti? Kenapa kamu tak memilih Khairy? Bukankah Khairy juga melakukan kesalahan dengan pelan promosi yang kurang memberangsangkan?

Pak Lah: Khairy lebih berusaha melakukan tugasannya dengan baik berbanding Najib walaupun gagal.

Najib: Ye kenapa kamu memilih saya? Apa yang telah saya lakukan?

Pak Lah: Jualan sedikit disebabkan oleh kamu. Itu tidak dapat dinafikan.

Najib: Jualan sedikit kerana promosi oleh Khairy yang tidak sesuai dan tidak dapat menarik ramai pelanggan.

Donald Trump: Sudah, cukup! Lah, kamu tahu yang Khairy dan Samy Vellu lebih banyak melakukan kesalahan berbanding Najib. Tetapi kamu tidak memilih Samy Vellu. Terlalu banyak kesalahan kumpulan kamu minggu ni. Kamu tidak dapat memimpin dengan baik.

Pak Lah: Tapi..

Donald Trump: Lah, terlalu banyak kesilapan minggu ni.

Pak Lah: Tapi Tuan Donald... saya...

Donald Trump: Lah... You're fired! Go!

Itu dah kira kesudahan yang agak baik. Kalau angin Donald Trump tak baik, "kamu semua saya pecat!!". Renungkanlah. Hehe...


Surat/Emel Pembaca
Sekiranya terdapat sebarang komen, aduan, cadangan, pendapat, rencana atau sebagainya, sila emelkan ke harakahdaily@gmail.com. Sertakan bersama nama, nama pena, alamat, no. kad pengenalan, dan no. telefon (maklumat anda adalah rahsia dan tidak akan disiarkan). Artikel yang diterima dan dikemaskini akan disiarkan di ruangan Surat Pembaca atau bersesuaian.

Website - http://harakahdaily.net/v06/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=3256&Itemid=48

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Tun Dr.M
(no login)
60.49.218.61

Generasi Tun Dr.M

No score for this post
August 6 2006, 9:39 PM 

The Chancellor of Universiti Teknologi PETRONAS, Y.A.Bhg. Tun Dr Mahathir Bin Mohamad will be giving a Public Lecture entitled ¡¥Cabaran-cabaran Mentadbir Sesebuah Negara¡¦ at 10.00 am on Monday, 7 August 2006.

CLICK HERE to read on details


As such, you are cordially invited to attend the above at the Chancellor Hall, Universiti Teknologi PETRONAS, Bandar Seri Iskandar.

For more information, kindly contact

Puan Aslinda Jamaludin at 05-368 8243 / aslinda_j@petronas.com.my Website - http://www.generasi-m.com

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
BBC News
(no login)
60.49.210.137

Mahathir fights to protect legacy

No score for this post
August 15 2006, 7:52 PM 

Mahathir fights to protect legacy

Mahathir Mohamad has mounted a string of attacks against Mr Badawi
A long-brewing row between Malaysia's former Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad and his chosen successor, Abdullah Badawi, appears to be coming to a head, the BBC's Jonathan Kent writes.
The joke doing the rounds in Malaysia at the moment is that Mahathir Mohamad is suffering from PPMS - Post Prime Ministerial Syndrome.

The symptoms, say the wags, include irritability, emotional outbursts and a tendency to criticise everything and everyone.

When he retired in October 2003 he promised not to interfere in government. But in the last year Dr Mahathir has trained his famously acerbic tongue on his former colleagues, including the man he chose to be his successor, Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi.

"There must be issues that really provoke him," says A. Kadir Jasin, former editor of the New Straits Times newspaper group.

"Those four issues are the sudden rise in the number of import permits for cars which he claimed affected the national car project, Proton; the sale of a motorcycle company by Proton, the removal of Proton's chief executive and the cancellation of the bridge to Singapore," Mr Kadir believes.

'The limit'

The common thread between all these issues is that of Mahathir's legacy.

For more than two decades he single-mindedly drove Malaysia towards industrial development through a combination of large scale state intervention (such as launching pet projects like Proton) and by building a coterie of favoured businessmen to whom were handed government projects and lucrative monopolies. In the process he won a legion of admirers around the developing world.

I have helped many people up only for them to stab me in the back... I'm in the habit of choosing the wrong people

Mahathir Mohamad

Abdullah Badawi broke with Dr Mahathir's penchant for mega-projects to concentrate on problems like rural poverty and education while rebuilding institutions debased during his predecessor's tenure - the police, the judiciary and the civil service.

Matters started to come to a head in May after the government abandoned plans for a new bridge to Singapore - a project Dr Mahathir had championed when he was in office - on the grounds that it might contravene international law.

"This is the limit," Dr Mahathir declared then. "To surrender your sovereignty to Singapore as if you are scared of them... This is a 'half past six country' with no guts."

By June he had ratcheted up the rhetoric, announcing publicly that he regretted appointing Mr Abdullah as his successor.

"I have helped many people up only for them to stab me in the back," Dr Mahathir said. "I'm in the habit of choosing the wrong people."

TV response

By the beginning of August a whispering campaign against members of Abdullah Badawi's immediate family had gathered momentum. Dr Mahathir, telling reporters he was in fear of being arrested, alleged that Mr Abdullah's son-in-law, Khairy Jamaluddin, was handing out government contracts and determining policy.


Mr Badawi has defended his family and his administration

After months of resolutely refusing to be drawn, Mr Abdullah went on national television to confront his detractors. "I chose to keep quiet because I didn't want to quarrel with [Dr Mahathir] in the newspaper," he said, and defended his family.

His son, Kamaluddin Abdullah, whose company Scomi was caught up in the nuclear technology for Libya scandal, has made a fortune in the oil industry.

"Kamal has never used his relationship with me to advance in business," said his father.

As for his son-in-law, Khairy Jamaluddin, Mr Abdullah countered: "People say I do the things as Khairy says. There is no such thing."

That did not silence Dr Mahathir. "There are several... things which I will come out with, one at a time, [including] evidence of corruption," he told a news conference last week, as he dismissed Mr Abdullah's response.

"All he was saying was that 'I'm a good man... I'm a religious man, I wouldn't do this'. But specific answers, there were none," Dr Mahathir said.

'Not protected'

The expression often used to describe the smoke and mirrors of Malaysian politics is wayang kulit, shadow puppetry.

The root of the dispute is about Mahathir needing to act to prevent too much of his past unravelling, leaving him possibly open to prosecution

R. Sivarasa

"It's the politics of patronage and power - it's about the control of money and the control of power, that is the root of the problem," said P. Gunasegaram, of The Edge, an independent and outspoken business weekly.

R. Sivarasa, a prominent human rights lawyer and vice-president of the opposition National Justice Party, agrees that it is about legacy in the widest sense.

Because although Dr Mahathir is casting aspersions about his successor, of the two men he is the far more ready target - not least over the issue of state funds being used to bail out one of his sons' companies during the August 1997 financial crisis.

"The root of the dispute is about Mahathir needing to act to prevent too much of his past unravelling, leaving him possibly open to prosecution," Mr Sivarasa said. "He needed to see the system absolutely under control, even after his departure. He's now realised that Abdullah is not protecting him and he's now moving for a solution."

Come November, Abdullah Badawi will face the only people who can unseat him; the 2,500 delegates to the annual general assembly of his United Malays National Organisation (UMNO).

There are many in the party frustrated that Mr Abdullah has reduced the flow of government contracts that oil its political wheels. But in Mr Abdullah's favour is the party's feudal loyalty to its leader - which may count for even more than money when the time comes to vote.

"He's got the power of incumbency and if you look at the history of UMNO politics, no-one has managed to unseat an incumbent," Mr Gunasegaran said.

If Mr Abdullah survives November's party assembly, Dr Mahathir might indeed find his world unravelling. For he may be judged to have made his move and failed. And as the old adage has it, if you move to strike the king strike well, for if he lives he will have your head.



E-mail this to a friend Printable version


Website - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/4790223.stm

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Malaysia Today
(no login)
60.49.210.66

Writ Saman Anwar Ibrahim terhadap Dr Mahathir

No score for this post
September 12 2006, 8:19 PM 

Friday, January 27, 2006
Writ Saman Anwar Ibrahim terhadap Dr Mahathir

DI DALAM MAHKAMAH TINGGI MALAYA DI KUALA LUMPUR
DALAM WILAYAH PERSEKUTUAN, MALAYSIA
(BAHAGIAN SIVIL)
GUAMAN SIVIL NO:

ANTARA

DATO’ SERI ANWAR BIN IBRAHIM (PLAINTIF)

DAN

TUN DR MAHATHIR BIN MOHAMAD (DEFENDAN)

WRIT SAMAN

“YANG AMAT ARIF TAN SRI DATO’ SITI NORMA BINTI YAAKOB,
P.S.M., D.S.N.S., J.S.M., HAKIM BESAR MALAYA ATAS NAMA
DAN BAGI PIHAK SERI PADUKA BAGINDA YANG DI-PERTUAN AGONG”

Kepada :

TUN DR MAHATHIR BIN MOHAMAD
PERDANA LEADERSHIP FOUNDATION
NO. 1, JALAN P8H, PRECINT 8
62250 PUTRAJAYA

KAMI PERINTAHKAN KAMU bahawa dalam tempoh lapan (8) hari selepas penyampaian Writ ini ke atas kamu, termasuklah hari penyampaian itu, kamu hendaklah menyebabkan kehadiran dimasukkan untuk diri kamu dalam kausa atau guaman dan ambil perhatian bahawa jika kamu ingkar berbuat demikian, Plaintif boleh meneruskan untuk mendapatkan penghakiman dan pelaksanaan.

DISAKSIKAN OLEH ……………………………………………….., Timbalan Pendaftar di Mahkamah Tinggi Malaya pada 27 haribulan Januari 2006

…………………… ..……………………………..
Peguamcara Plaintif Timbalan Pendaftar
Mahkamah Tinggi Malaya
Kuala Lumpur

MEMORANDUM YANG HENDAK DITURUNKAN PADA WRIT

Writ ini tidak boleh disampaikan lebih daripada enam (6) bulan kalendar selepas tarikh di atas melainkan jika diperbaharui melalui perintah Mahkamah.

Defendan (atau Defendan-Defendan) boleh hadir bersama dengan memasukkan kehadiran (atau kehadiran-kehadiran) sama ada sendiri atau melalui peguamcara di Pejabat Pendaftaran, Mahkamah Tinggi Malaya di Kuala Lumpur, Wilayah Persekutuan Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

Defendan yang hadir sendiri boleh dikehendakinya mamasukkan kehadirannya malalui pos dan borang-borang tertentu bolehlah didapati dengan menghantar Kiriman Pos berharga RM 10.00 berserta sampul surat beralamat sendiri kepada Pendaftar, Mahkamah Tinggi Malaya di Kuala Lumpur, Wilayah Persekutuan, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.

PENGINDORSAN TUNTUTAN

Seperti di dalam Pernyataan Tuntutan dan melebihi RM250,000.00 dan berserta dengan faedah pada kadar 8% setahun dari tarikh pemfailan saman sehingga penyelesaian penuh dan kos dalam tindakan ini. (Seperti di dalam Pernyataan Tuntutan yang difailkan bersama-sama ini).

Plaintif menuntut daripada Defendan,

(a) Compensatory Damages;
(b) Aggravated Damages;
(c) Gantirugi Teladan;
(d) Injunksi untuk menahan Defendan sama ada menerusi Defendan sendiri, agen dan/atau pekerja dan/atau sesiapapun daripada melafazkan, bercakap atau menerbitkan kata-kata menyinggung tersebut atau kata-kata yang mempunyai kesan terhadap Plaintif atau perkataan yang sama memfitnah Plaintif;
(e) Faedah ke atas jumlah penghakiman untuk jangkamasa dan kadar tertentu yang mana Mahkamah anggap perlu dan sesuai;
(f) Kos;
(g) Apa-apa relif yang Mahkamah anggap perlu dan suaimanfaat.

Dan RM………………………… (atau sekian banyak wang sebagaimana yang dibenarkan setelah ditetapkan) untuk kos dan juga, jika Plaintif mendapat perintah untuk penyampaian ganti, jumlah wang selanjutnya sebanyak RM…………….. ( atau sekian banyak wang sebagaimana yang dibenarkan setelah ditetapkan. Jika amaun yang dituntut dan kos dibayar kepada Plaintif atau peguamcaranya dalam tempoh lapan (8) hari selepas penyampaian Writ ini (termasuklah hari penyampaian), prosiding seterusnya akan ditangguhkan, tetapi jika ternyata daripada pengindorsan pada Writ itu bahawa Plaintif adalah bermastautin di luar wilayah terjadual, sebagaimana yang ditakrifkan dalam Akta Pertukaran Kawalan, 1953, atau adalah bertindak mengikut perintah atau bagi pihak seseorang yang bermastautin sedemikian, prosiding akan hanya ditangguhkan jika amaun yang dituntut dan kos dibayar ke dalam Mahkamah dalam masa yang tersebut itu dan notis pembayaran itu diberi kepada Plaintif atau peguamcaranya.

WRIT SAMAN ini telah difailkan oleh Tetuan S.N. Nair & Partners, Peguamcara Plaintif yang mempunyai alamat penyampaian di Suite 5C, Level 5, Wisma Kosas, Jalan Melayu 50100 Kuala Lumpur. Tel: 03 26976686; Fax: 03 26976685 (Ref: SNN/DSAI/TUN M/05)

DI DALAM MAHKAMAH TINGGI MALAYA DI KUALA LUMPUR
DALAM WILAYAH PERSEKUTUAN, MALAYSIA
(BAHAGIAN SIVIL)
GUAMAN SIVIL NO:

ANTARA

DATO’ SERI ANWAR BIN IBRAHIM (PLAINTIFF)

DAN

TUN DR MAHATHIR BIN MOHAMAD (DEFENDANT)

PERNYATAAN TUNTUTAN

1. Plaintif ialah seorang Distinguished Visiting Professor of Southeast Asian Islam di School of Foreign Service di Georgetown University, Washington D.C, Amerika Syarikat dan seorang Senior Associate Member di St. Anthony’s College di Oxford University, United Kingdom. Plaintif juga antara lain, merupakan Visiting Diplomat di Council of Foreign Relation, New York.

2. Plaintif merupakan seorang ahli politik kebangsaan dan antarabangsa, memegang jawatan dan portfolio-portfolio di dalam Kabinet Malaysia sejak awal tahun 1980, antaranya, Timbalan Menteri di Pejabat Perdana Menteri pada tahun 1982; Menteri di Kementerian Belia, Sukan dan Budaya pada tahun 1983; Kementerian Pertanian pada tahun 1986, Kementerian Pelajaran, Kementerian Kewangan pada tahun 1991; dan Timbalan Perdana Menteri dari tahun 1993 sehingga 2.9.1998. Di pertengahan tahun 1997 Plaintif ialah pemangku Perdana Menteri selama 2 ½ bulan. Plaintif juga memegang jawatan di pertubuhan antarabangsa termasuk UNESCO and IMF. Plaintif juga merupakan Timbalan Presiden UMNO, antara lain-lain jawatan yang dipegang oleh Plaintif di dalam UMNO sejak Plaintif menyertai UMNO dan juga merupakan Ahli Parlimen Permatang Pauh.

3. Defendan merupakan Perdana Menteri Malaysia sehingga perletakan jawatan pada bulan Oktober 2003.

4. Pada 9 September 2005, di satu sidang akhbar di premis SURUHANJAYA HAK ASASI MANUSIA MALAYSIA (“SUHAKAM”) di Kuala Lumpur, yang dihadiri oleh beberapa jurnalis dan perwakilan akhbar dan media, tempatan dan antarabangsa, termasuk media elektronik, (yang mana Plaintif tidak dapat mengenal pasti kecuali Roshan Jason, seorang jurnalis dari MALAYSIA KINI (selepas ini disebut sebagai “Malaysiakini”), Defendan, apabila bercakap mengenai Plaintif dan kelakuannya sebagai Timbalan Perdana Menteri, antara lain, secara salah dan secara niat jahat bercakap dan menerbitkan kepada jurnalis-jurnalis perkataan berikut berkenaan dan ditujukan kepada Plaintif:-

“I cannot have a sodomiser in my cabinet”.

“Imagine a gay PM………..nobody will be safe” (selepas ini disebut sebagai “kata-kata menyinggung”)

Terjemahan Bahasa Malaysia adalah,

“Saya tidak boleh menerima seorang peliwat di dalam Kabinet saya”

“Bayangkan seorang Perdana Menteri homoseksual …… tiada siapa yang akan selamat” (selepas ini disebut sebagai “kata-kata menyinggung tersebut”)

5. Kata-kata menyinggung tersebut adalah fitnah terhadap Plaintif. Kata-kata menyinggung tersebut di dalam maksud semula jadi dan biasa (natural and ordinary), di dalam konteks percakapan, dimaksudkan dan difahami, antara lain, bermaksud:

i) Plaintif ialah seorang homoseksual;

ii) Plaintif telah mengadakan persetubuhan dengan lelaki berlawanan dengan peraturan alam semulajadi yang merupakan kesalahan di bawah seksyen 377A dan 377D Kanun Keseksaan yang boleh dihukum dengan penjara dan sebatan.

iii) Plaintif telah terlibat dengan aktiviti-aktiviti berlawanan dengan Islam dan seterusnya telah bersalah di bawah kesalahan liwat di bawah seksyen 25 Akta Kesalahan Jenayah Syariah (Wilayah Persekutuan) 1997 yang boleh dihukum dengan penjara dan sebatan.

Plaintif akan merujuk kepada semua undang-undang berkenaan di prosiding interlokutori dan perbicaraan penuh nanti.

iv) Plaintif merupakan seorang yang terpesong (pervert) dan tidak mempunyai akhlak mulia;

v) Plaintif merupakan seorang yang tidak sesuai untuk memegang jawatan politik, atau mana-mana jawatan;

vi) Plaintif merupakan seorang yang cenderung kepada jenayah.

vii) Plaintif merupakan seorang yang berbahaya kepada masyarakat Malaysia.

6. Defendan telah melafazkan kata-kata menyinggung tersebut dengan niat untuk merendah-rendahkan Plaintif di dalam kapasiti peribadi dan rasmi, termasuk kapasiti Plaintif sebagai mantan Menteri Kewangan dan mantan Timbalan Perdana Menteri Malaysia.

7. Defendan telah bercakap mengenai kata-kata menyinggung tersebut di dalam pengetahuan bahawa kata-kata menyinggung tersebut atau intipatinya akan diterbitkan di media tempatan dan antarabangsa, termasuk media elektronik dan akhbar, termasuk Malaysiakini di bawah tajuk “Nobody will be safe from ‘gay’ PM says Dr. M” pada 9-9-2005 dan Agence France-Presse (selepas ini disebut sebagai “AFP”) pada 10-9-2005, dan diterbitkan semula pada tarikh yang sama atau lain di dalam Singapore Business Times; Straits Times Singapore; The Associated Press (selepas ini disebut sebagai “AP”), suratkhabar The Age di Melbourne dan di tempat lain dan/atau pengulangan dibenarkan. Selanjutnya dan/atau secara alternatif, penerbitan semula adalah kesan semula jadi dan kesan kemungkinan dari penerbitan asal oleh Defendan.

8. Plaintif memplid bahawa kata-kata menyinggung tersebut juga telah disiarkan di televisyen secara meluas oleh ANN Singapore dan beberapa media Jepun dan lain-lain televisyen dan stesen radio seluruh dunia sehingga menyebabkan kerosakan yang tidak boleh dibaikpulih terhadap reputasi Plaintif.

9. Plaintif memplid bahawa AP dan AFP adalah ‘wire service’ dengan pelanggan seluruh dunia dan antarabangsa dengan pengedaran yang meluas dan berpengaruh termasuk Malaysia.

10. Dengan sebab penerbitan kata-kata menyinggung tersebut oleh Defendan dan penerbitan semula kemudiannya yang telah diplid di atas, peribadi, kedudukan dan reputasi kebangsaan dan antarabangsa telah dirosakkan dengan serius dan telah dibawa ke dalam skandal awam, kebencian dan kehinaan dan Plaintif telah mengalami penderitaan yang besar, kebimbangan dan perasaan malu, yang mana memberhakkan Plaintif kepada gantirugi ‘aggravated’ dan teladan.

11. Plaintiff akan bergantung kepada fakta-fakta berikut sebagai memburukkan lagi fitnah tersebut:

BUTIR-BUTIR

i) Takat penerbitan kata-kata menyinggung tersebut atau intipatinya terdapat di, antara lain: The Singapore Business Times, Straits Times Singapore, The Age Newspaper in Melbourne, AP, AFP, ANN dan di tempat lain, termasuk di dalam internet, antara lain: Malaysiakini; Harakah Online dan lain-lain.

ii) Defendan mengetahui dan/atau seharusnya mengetahui dan/atau berniat bahawa kata-kata menyinggung atau intipatinya akan diterbitkan di berbagai-bagai ‘wire services’, agensi berita, suratkhabar, dan diterbitkan semula di peringkat kebangsaan dan antarabangsa di dalam lain-lain suratkhabar, majalah-majalah dan media, termasuk media elektronik, dan/atau pengulangan dibenarkan.

iii) Defendan telah enggan dan ingkar berterusan untuk memohon maaf.

12. Plaintif akan bergantung kepada fakta-fakta berikut bagi menyokong permohonan untuk gantirugi teladan: -

BUTIR-BUTIR

(a) kata-kata menyinggung tersebut secara jelas adalah sesuatu yang terlalu serius dan merosakkan dan secara terburu-buru dibuat oleh Defendan;

(b) Defendan telah bercakap dan menyebabkan kata-kata menyinggung tersebut diterbitkan dan diterbitkan semula seperti yang telah diplidkan di atas walaupun dengan pengetahuan yang khusus bahawa Plaintif telah menafikan sekeras-kerasnya kata-kata menyinggung tersebut atau kata-kata yang sama terhadap Plaintif pada masa lalu yang mana penafian tersebut telah diterima oleh Defendan dengan kenyataan umum pada bulan Ogos 1997 yang telah membersihkan Plaintif daripada tuduhan tersebut. Selanjutnya, Defendan mempunyai pengetahuan yang khusus bahawa pada masa tuduhan tersebut dibuat terhadap Plaintif, ianya adalah perkara subjek siasatan jenayah dan seterusnya Defendan telah membebaskan Plaintif secara terang-terangan;

(c) Defendan secara terang-terangan menyebut kata-kata menyinggung dengan pengetahuan tersuratnya bahawa Plaintif telah dibebaskan dan dilepaskan oleh Mahkamah Persekutuan pada 2 September 2004 terhadap tuduhan liwat dan juga selepas Mahkamah Tinggi Kuala Lumpur pada 18 Ogos 2005 memutuskan memihak kepada Plaintif di dalam tindakan guaman fitnah dimulakan terhadap penulis dan penerbit buku “50 Dalil mengapa Anwar tidak boleh jadi PM” Plaintif.

(d) Defendan telah bercakap dan menyebabkan kata-kata menyinggung tersebut diterbitkan dan diterbitkan semula dengan niat tersurat untuk merosakkan reputasi dan pegangan politik Plaintif, untuk memelihara kepentingan politik dan jawatan Defendan sebagai perdana menteri Malaysia tanpa terlebih dahulu membuat pertanyaan yang efektif dan benar mengenai kebenaran dan ketepatan kata-kata menyinggung tersebut; dan

(e) Defendan telah bercakap dan menerbit kata-kata menyinggung tersebut setelah mengira bahawa Defendan akan mendapat lebih dengan penerbitan dan penerbitan semula kata-kata menyinggung tersebut daripada Defendan akan kalah sekiranya Plaintif berjaya di dalam tindakan guaman fitnah.

13. Kecuali dihalang oleh Mahkamah yang mulia ini, Defendan berniat untuk meneruskan dan akan selanjutnya menerbitkan kata-kata menyinggung tersebut atau perkataan fitnah yang sama terhadap Plaintif.

14. OLEH YANG DEMIKIAN, Plaintif memohon relif-relif berikut terhadap Defendan;
(a) Compensatory Damages;
(b) Aggravated Damages;
(c) Gantirugi Teladan;
(d) Injunksi untuk menahan Defendan sama ada menerusi Defendan sendiri, agen dan/atau pekerja dan/atau sesiapapun daripada melafazkan, bercakap atau menerbitkan kata-kata menyinggung tersebut atau kata-kata yang mempunyai kesan terhadap Plaintif atau perkataan yang sama memfitnah Plaintif;
(e) Faedah ke atas jumlah penghakiman untuk jangkamasa dan kadar tertentu yang mana Mahkamah anggap perlu dan sesuai;
(f) Kos; dan
(g) Apa-apa relif yang Mahkamah anggap perlu dan suaimanfaat.


Bertarikh pada 27 haribulan Januari 2006

------------------------------------
Peguamcara Plaintif

PERNYATAAN TUNTUTAN ini difailkan oleh Tetuan S.N. Nair & Partners, Peguamcara Plaintif yang mempunyai alamat penyampaian di Suite 5C, Level 5, Wisma Kosas, Jalan Melayu 50100 Kuala Lumpur. Tel: 03 26976686; Fax: 03 26976685 (Ref: SNN/DSAI/TUN M/05)

posted 6:20 PM | < Previous | Home |
Send this page to a friend.

14 comments

Anwar Ibrahim's Statement of Claim against Dr Mahathir

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MALAYA AT KUALA LUMPUR
(CIVIL DIVISION)
CIVIL SUIT NO._____________________

BETWEEN

DATO’ SERI ANWAR BIN IBRAHIM (PLAINTIFF)

AND

TUN DR MAHATHIR BIN MOHAMAD (DEFENDANT)

STATEMENT OF CLAIM

1. The Plaintiff is currently a Distinguished Visiting Professor at the School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University, Washington D.C in the United States of America and a Senior Associate Member at St. Anthony’s College at Oxford University in the United Kingdom. He is also, inter alia, Visiting Diplomat at the Council of Foreign Relations, New York.

2. The Plaintiff is a politician of national and international reputation, having held high public office and various portfolios in the Malaysian Cabinet since the early 1980’s, amongst others, Deputy Minister in the Prime Minister Department in 1982; Youth, Sport and Culture Minister in 1983; Agriculture Minister in 1986, Education Minister, Minister of Finance in 1991; and Deputy Prime Minister from 1993 until 2.9.1998. In the middle of 1997 he was acting Prime Minister for 2 ½ months. The Plaintiff also held various positions of standing in international organizations including UNESCO and IMF. The Plaintiff has also been UMNO Deputy President, among other posts held by him in UMNO since he joined the party and was Member of Parliament for Permatang Pauh.

3. The Defendant was the Prime Minister of Malaysia until his retirement from office in October 2003.

4. On 9th September 2005, at a press conference at the premises of SURUHANJAYA HAK ASASI MANUSIA MALAYSIA (“SUHAKAM”) in Kuala Lumpur, attended by numerous journalists and representatives of the press and media, both local and international, including the electronic media, (whom the Plaintiff cannot identify save that they included one Roshan Jason, a journalist from MALAYSIA KINI (hereinafter referred to as “Malaysiakini”), the Defendant, when speaking about the Plaintiff and his conduct as Deputy Prime Minister, amongst other things, falsely and maliciously spoke and published to the journalists the following words of and concerning the Plaintiff:-

“I cannot have a sodomiser in my cabinet”.’

“Imagine a gay PM………..nobody will be safe” (hereafter, referred to as the “offending words”)

Translation whereof in Bahasa Malaysia is,

“Saya tidak boleh menerima seorang peliwat di dalam Kabinet saya”

“Bayangkan seorang Perdana Menteri homoseksual …… tiada siapa yang akan selamat”

5. The offending words, were and are defamatory of the Plaintiff. The offending words, in their natural and ordinary meaning, in the context in which they were spoken, meant and were understood to, inter alia, mean that:

i) the Plaintiff was a homosexual;

ii) the Plaintiff had engaged in carnal intercourse with a male partner or partners against the order of nature which is an offence unders section 377A and 377D of the Penal Code punishable with imprisonment and whipping.

iii) that the Plaintiff was engaged in activities contrary to Islam and was further guilty of an offence of liwat under section 25 of the Syariah Criminal Offence (Federal Territories) Act, 1997 which is punishable by imprisonment and whipping.

The Plaintiff will refer to all relevant statutes at all interlocutory proceedings and at the trial.

iv) that the Plaintiff was a pervert and/or of no morals;

v) that the Plaintiff was unfit to hold political, or any office;

vi) the Plaintiff was a person of criminal tendencies; and

vii) that the Plaintiff was dangerous to Malaysian society.

6. The Defendant uttered the offending words with the intention calculated to disparage the Plaintiff in both his private and official capacities, including his capacities as former Minister of Finance and former Deputy Prime Minister of Malaysia.

7. The Defendant spoke the offending words in the knowledge and/or with the intention that the offending words or their gist would be published in the local and international media, both electronic and the press, including Malaysiakini under the heading “Nobody will be safe from ‘gay’ PM says Dr. M” on 9-9-2005 and Agence France-Presse (hereinafter referred to as “AFP”) on 10-9-2005, and republished in the Singapore Business Times; Straits Times Singapore; The Associated Press (hereinafter referred to as “AP”), the Age newspaper in Melbourne and elsewhere and/or authorized their repetition. Further and/or alternatively, the republication was a natural and probable consequence of the original publication by the Defendant.

8. The Plaintiff pleads the offending words were also televised widely by ANN Singapore and several Japanese Media and other television and radio stations worldwide thereby causing irreparable damage to the Plaintiff’s reputation.

9. The Plaintiff pleads that AP and AFP are wire service with worldwide and international clients with extensive and influential distribution including Malaysia.

10. By reason of the publication of the offending words by the Defendant and its subsequent republication as set forth hereinbefore, the Plaintiff has been gravely injured in his character, credit and reputation both nationally and internationally and has been brought into public scandal, odium and contempt and the Plaintiff has suffered considerable distress, anxiety and embarassment, entitling him to aggravated and exemplary damages.

11. The Plaintiff will rely on the following facts and matters as aggravating the defamation:

PARTICULARS

i) The extent of the publication of the offending words or their gist appeared in, inter alia: The Singapore Business Times, Straits Times Singapore, The Age Newspaper in Melbourne, AP, AFP, ANN and elsewhere, including on the internet, inter alia: Malaysiakini; Harakah Online and etc.

ii) The Defendant knew and/or ought to have known and/or intended that the offending words or their gist would be published in various wire services, news agencies, newspapers, and republished nationally and internationally in other newspapers and magazines and media, including the electronic media, and/or authorised their repetition.

iii) The Defendant has refused to apologise and continues to be defiant.

12. The Plaintiff will rely upon the following facts and matters in support of his claim for exemplary damages: -

PARTICULARS

(a) the offending words were self-evidently of the most serious and damaging nature and recklessly made by the Defendant;

(b) the Defendant spoke and caused the said words to be published and republished as adverted to hereinbefore despite specific knowledge that the Plaintiff had vehemently denied the said words and other similar allegations against him in the past which denial the Defendant had accepted with a public statement in August, 1997 clearing the Plaintiff of the allegations. Further, the Defendant had specific knowledge at that point of time that the allegations against the Plaintiff were subject matter of criminal investigation and that subsequently the Defendant himself exculpated the Plaintiff publicly;

(c) the Defendant had publicly spoken the offending words with the express knowledge that the Plaintiff was acquitted and discharged by the Federal Court on 2nd September 2004 on charges of sodomy and also after the Kuala Lumpur High Court on 18 August 2005 found in favour of the Plaintiff in a defamation suit brought against the author and publisher of the book “50 Dalil mengapa Anwar tidak boleh jadi PM” by the Plaintiff.

(d) the Defendant spoke and caused to be published and republished the offending words with the express intention of damaging the Plaintiff’s reputation and standing politically, in order to safeguard the Defendant’s own past political interest and past position as Prime Minister of Malaysia, without first making effective and proper inquery into the truth and veracity of the offending words; and

(e) the Defendant spoke and published the offending words having calculated that he stood to gain more by the publication and republication of the offending words than he would lose if successfully sued by the Plaintiff for defamation.

13. Unless restrained by this Honourable Court, the Defendant intends to continue and will further publish the offending or similar words defamatory of the Plaintiff.

14. WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff prays for the following reliefs against the Defendant.

(a) Compensatory Damages;
(b) Aggravated Damages;
(c) Exemplary Damages;
(d) An injunction to restrain the Defendant whether by himself, his agents and/or servants or otherwise howsoever from further uttering, speaking or publishing the offending words or words to the like effect of or concerning the Plaintiff or similar words defamatory of the Plaintiff;
(e) Interest on the adjudged sum for such periods and at such rates deemed fit and proper by this Honourable Court;
(f) Costs; and
(g) Any further or other relief deemed fit and proper by this Honourable Court.

Dated this 27 day of January 2006

------------------------------------
Solicitors for the
Plaintiff abovenamed

This STATEMENT OF CLAIM is filed on behalf of the Plaintiff abovenamed by his solicitors Messrs S.N. Nair & Partners, whose address for service is at Suite 5C, Level 5, Wisma Kosas, Jalan Melayu 50100 Kuala Lumpur. Tel: 03 26976686; Fax: 03 26976685 (Ref: SNN/DSAI/TUN M/05)

posted 6:18 PM | < Previous | Home |
Send this page to a friend.

31 comments

Crooked Half-Bridge, another national folly!

Media statement by Ronnie Liu Tian Khiew

Malaysia must not proceed with plans to build the crooked bridge to replace its half of a causeway linking the country to Singapore. Such a bridge serves nobody but the ego of the former PM Mahathir Mohamad.

We are very disappointed with the announcement made by the deputy PM Najib Tun Razak. The crooked bridge could strain bilateral relations, which have warmed since the exit of Mahathir Mohamad in 2003.

In a Reuters report, Najib was quoted of saying "Yes, the bridge will proceed," Deputy Prime Minister Najib Razak told reporters. "At the same time, the negotiations with Singapore are on-going too."

"In the event we can successfully conclude negotiations with Singapore, the bridge can be a full bridge," he said.

Mahathir had unveiled the unusual plan to build a crooked bridge to replace half of the 500-metre causeway spanning the Johor strait in 2003 after the island state rejected his original plan to jointly build a bridge to replace the entire causeway.

Singapore opposes the original plan on grounds of cost and has also raised environmental concerns over bridge.

As talks on the issue have dragged on, Malaysia made a serious mistake by going ahead with a key part of its 1.1 billion ringgit ($293 million) project, a customs, immigration and quarantine centre at Johor Baru, the main gateway to Malaysia from Singapore.

There is an ongoing process in place, agreed to by Singapore and Malaysia to discuss the bridge and other bilateral issues. We should not go ahead with the crooked bridge to risk another round of disputes between the two neighboring nations.

Calling it a "scenic bridge" does not really help to resolve the matter. We should work through more discussions before hurrying into a big and irreversible mistake.

We urge PM Abdullah Ahmad Badawi stick to his earlier decision ( he aborted the plan after much protest from DAP and the UMNO MP Sharir Samad) and not to proceed with the crooked half-bridge under political pressure mounted within his party, UMNO. He should know that such a bridge is not a bridge. It will certainly become the eighth "wonders" of the modern day history if built.

Ronnie Liu Tian Khiew

posted 5:51 PM | < Previous | Home |
Send this page to a friend.

10 comments
Website - http://www.malaysia-today.net/Blog-s/2006_01_27_MT_surat_archive.htm

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Utusan Malaysia Online
(no login)
60.49.210.137

DI DALAM MAHKAMAH TINGGI MALAYA DI KUALA LUMPUR

No score for this post
September 13 2006, 6:15 PM 

DALAM MAHKAMAH PERSEKUTUAN MALAYSIA
(BIDANG KUASA RAYUAN)
RAYUAN JENAYAH NO. 05-4-2000 (W)

ANTARA
DATUK SERI ANWAR BIN IBRAHIM (PERAYU)
DAN
PENDAKWA RAYA (PENENTANG)

(Dalam perkara Mahkamah Rayuan Malaysia
(Bidang Kuasa Rayuan)
Mahkamah Rayuan (Bidangkuasa Rayuan) Rayuan Jenayah No. W-05-26-99 &
W-05-27-99)

Antara
Datuk Seri Anwar Bin Ibrahim (Perayu)
Dan
Pendakwa Raya (Penentang)

[Dalam perkara Mahkamah Tinggi Malaya di Kuala Lumpur
(Wilayah Persekutuan Perbicaraan Jenayah Bil. 45-48-98 & 45-49-98)

Antara
Pendakwa Raya
Dan
Datuk Seri Anwar Bin Ibrahim]

CORAM
Mohamed Dzaiddin - KHN
Steve Shim Lip Kiong - HBSS
Haidar Mohd Noor - HMP

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

The appellant, after he was dismissed as the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance, was subsequently charged before the High Court on 5 October 1998 with five counts of sodomy under section 377B of the Penal Code and five counts of corrupt practice under section 2(1) of the Emergency (Essential Powers) Ordinance No. 22 of 1970 ("the Ordinance"). He claimed trial to all ten charges. The prosecution elected to proceed with four charges under section 2(1) of the Ordinance and applied to the High Court for the four charges to be tried together pursuant to section 165 of the Criminal Procedure Code (FMS Cap. 6) ("CPC"). The defence did not object and it was accordingly allowed.

The appellant was found guilty on all the four charges, as amended at the close of the prosecution case, by the High Court. The appellant was convicted and sentenced to six years' imprisonment on each of the amended charge, the sentences to run concurrently. The learned judge, however, ordered the sentences to take effect from the date of conviction instead of from date of arrest of the appellant.

On appeal to the Court of Appeal, the appellant's appeal against the conviction and sentence was dismissed by the Court of Appeal (see (2000)2 MLJ 486). Hence his appeal against the judgment of the Court of Appeal affirming his conviction and sentence to this court.

After hearing counsel for both parties we reserved our judgment as we intimated that we needed time to consider the many issues raised by the appellant's counsel. We now proceed to give our judgment.
All references to pages in this judgment with respect to the judgments of the High Court and the Court of Appeal are references to pages in (1999)2 MLJ 1 and (2000)2 MLJ 486 respectively.

In attempting to overturn the judgment of the Court of Appeal, the appellant in his petition of appeal filed on 5 June 2000 in this court set out thirty three (33) grounds and put them broadly under the following heads -

(a) abuse of process.
(b) amendment of charges.
(c) expunging of evidence.
(d) amended charges.
(e) judge's findings that offences committed.
(f) evidence and witnesses.
(g) evaluation of evidence.
(h) burden of proof.
(i) contempt of court.
(j) sentence.

We need not consider the grounds on head to head basis as the grounds under certain heads seem to overlap and can conveniently be dealt with together.

We do not propose also to set out the facts of the case in detail save as and when necessary we will refer to the facts that may be relevant to the issues under consideration.

Abuse of process

We will consider the issue of abuse of process first because if the appellant succeeds on this ground, he will obviously succeed in his appeal before us. This is on the premise that the Dewan Rakyat by way of motion introduced by the Deputy Minister in the Prime Minister's Department, Y.B. Datuk Haji Mohamed Nazri bin Abdul Aziz on 22 October 1988 passed a resolution to annul the Ordinance in view of the coming into force of the Anti-Corruption Act 1997 on 8 January 1998 consolidating three pieces of legislation relating to corruption which had been in force earlier on, namely -

(i) Prevention of Corruption Act 1961;
(ii) Anti-Corruption Agency Act 1982; and
(iii) Emergency (Essential Powers) Ordinance No. 22 of 1970.

In matters of (iii) it can only cease to have effect if resolutions are passed by both Houses of Parliament annulling the Ordinance pursuant to Article 150 (3) of the Federal Constitution ("Constitution"), which reads -

"(3) A Proclamation of Emergency and any ordinance promulgated under Clause (2B) shall be laid before both Houses of Parliament and, if not sooner revoked, shall cease to have effect if resolutions are passed by both Houses annulling such Proclamation or ordinance, but without prejudice to anything previously done by virtue thereof or to the power of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong to issue a new Proclamation under Clause (1) or promulgate any ordinance under Clause (2B)."

It is not disputed that the Dewan Negara (Upper House) is yet to pass a resolution to annul the Ordinance in accordance with Article 150(3) of the Constitution so that the Ordinance shall cease to have effect. It is also not disputed that the Government in moving the motion by way of a resolution in the Dewan Rakyat indicated its intention to annul the Ordinance in line with Article 150(3) of the Constitution. Y.M. Raja Aziz Addruse, leading counsel for the appellant submitted that he is not challenging the validity of the Ordinance as seemed to be the approach of the Court of Appeal. He submitted that it would only be a matter of course for a second resolution to be laid before and pass by the Dewan Negara. He said that it would be invidious and oppressive to subject the appellant to prosecution under a law that has ceased to have effect. This is what the Court of Appeal said at page 498 of (2000)2 MLJ -

"He asked this court to stop this abuse. In effect, he was asking this court to set the appellant free from all the four charges for which he has been convicted and sentenced."

We would in answer say that until a resolution is passed by Dewan Negara pursuant to Article 150(3) of the Constitution, the Ordinance shall continue in force. While Raja Aziz submitted that he is not questioning the validity of the Ordinance, and rightly so, in view of sub-clause (b) (iii) of clause (8) of Article 150, he is, in the next breath, questioning the continuation in force of the Ordinance by his submission that as a matter of course or to put it in another way, as a matter of time, the resolution will be passed by Dewan Negara. In other words, he is in effect questioning the validity of the continuation in force of the Ordinance. With respect, this would clearly be offending the clear constitutional provision by way of clause (8) of Article 150 in particular sub-clause (b) (iv) which reads -

(b) no court shall have jurisdiction to entertain or determine
any application, question or proceeding, in whatever form, on any ground, regarding the validity of -

(i) ....
(ii) ....
(iii) ....
(iv) the continuation in force of any such ordinance."

To that extent we agree with the Court of Appeal when it said at page 499 -

"Now that no resolution has been laid and passed by the Dewan Negara, Ordinance 22 must be taken to continue to have the full force of law."

It is not, in our respectful view, for this court to speculate whether a resolution would be passed in the Dewan Negara as a matter of course as Raja Aziz seemed to be urging us to do so. In view of our decision that the Ordinance continues in force the question of oppression or vexatiousness on the part of the Attorney-General by mounting a prosecution against the appellant for offences under the Ordinance does not arise. This is a matter entirely within the discretion of the Attorney-General under Article 145(3) of the Constitution to prefer any charges for offences under any law he deems fit depending on the facts of the case and taking into account the public interest element into consideration (Karpal Singh & Anor v PP (1991)2 MLJ 544). In view of our finding that the Ordinance remains or continues in force there is therefore no need for us to consider the issue of the meaning of the words "by virtue thereof" submitted by Raja Aziz. In the circumstances we cannot accept as correct the submission of Raja Aziz that it would be invidious and oppressive to subject the appellant to prosecution under a law that has ceased to have effect when it continues to have the full force of law.

While we agree that the court should not be impotent when it comes to abuse of its process and should intervene, if need be, we say that it depends on the circumstances of a particular case. The learned counsel cited the case of Hoi-Chin-Ming v R (1991)3 AIIER 897 (PC) to support his submission on the abuse of process. We agree with the doctrine of abuse of process as did the Court of Appeal but we have to reiterate here that the application of the doctrine will depend on the facts of a particular case and the laws applicable. Here we are dealing with the law that was promulgated under special provisions of Part XI of the Constitution, which is, Article 150 (the proclamation of emergency). It should be noted that there is the overriding provision in clause (8) (b) of Article 150 itself that "notwithstanding anything in this Constitution" the court shall have no jurisdiction to entertain or determine any application in whatever form, on any ground, regarding the validity of, inter alia, the continuation in force of the Ordinance. It may be argued such constitutional provision would amount to "closing the doors of the court" and is therefore harsh and unjust. Our answer is that this issue should be addressed to the legislature and not the courts by those who disagreed with such a provision and they have their remedy at the ballot box (Lok Kooi Choon v Government of Malaysia (1977)2 MLJ 187 at page 188).
Therefore the question of abuse of process in this case is, with respect, quite misplaced.

The charges

We will consider issues (b) to (i) under this heading as they can conveniently be dealt with together and are inter-related in some way or another.

As a preliminary issue, Raja Aziz submitted that while he conceded that the court has the discretionary power to amend the charges under section 158 of the CPC, he questioned whether the learned judge has correctly exercised his discretion in this case. He said it is because the prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant committed sexual misconduct and sodomy that prompted the prosecution to amend the charges at the close of the prosecution case and thereby the appellant was prejudiced by the amendments. In exercising his discretion to allow the amendment of the original charges at the close of the prosecution case, this is what the learned judge said at pages 28/29 -

"It must be observed that the original charges relate to abuse of power under s. 2(1) of Ordinance No. 22. The references in the charges to sexual misconduct and sodomy 'committed' by the accused relate to another offence. This does not accord with s. 163 of the Criminal Procedure Code which provides that for every distinct offence of which any person is accused there shall be a separate charge. In order to avoid duplicity in the charges, I allowed the application to amend them."

The learned judge reproduced the four amended charges as well as the original four charges in his judgment. Having examined them, we are of the view that the learned judge had correctly exercised his discretion on the ground of duplicity in the charges.

The appellant claimed trial to the amended charges and did not wish to recall any of the prosecution witnesses. After listening to the submissions of both parties and before calling upon the appellant to enter his defence, the learned judge made a formal amendment to the English version of the second and fourth charges and the addition of words to the first and third charges to specify that written statements were obtained as directed. The appellant was given the opportunity to plead to the two latter charges to which he claimed trial.

Looking at the original four charges one cannot help but have the impression that the prosecution will have to prove that the appellant committed sexual misconduct and sodomy. It is on this premise that the defence attempted to show by cross-examination of relevant witnesses that the appellant did not commit sexual misconduct and sodomy. This is more so with the production of the relevant exhibits (P14A, B and C) showing the allegations in detail. They were reproduced in full in the judgment of the learned judge. In our view, the contents naturally triggered the defence to rebut that the appellant did commit sexual misconduct and sodomy.

However, in the opening address of the prosecution, it seems clear that the prosecution did not at all state that it intended to prove that sexual misconduct and sodomy were committed by the appellant. This is borne out by what is stated in the opening address of the prosecution, exhibit P13 in Appeal Record, volume 3.

In view of Raja Aziz's complaint about the prejudicial effect of the amendment, it is best that we reproduce P13 in full so as to clear any doubts whatsoever :

"Pendakwa Raya
Lawan
Datuk Seri Anwar bin Ibrahim

Pernyataan Pembukaan

Pendakwa Raya telah mengemukakan 4 pertuduhan terhadap tertuduh, Datuk Seri Anwar bin Ibrahim, kerana melakukan kesalahan-kesalahan di bawah seksyen 2(1), Ordinan No. 22 (Kuasa-kuasa Perlu) Dharurat, 1970. Semasa melakukan kesalahan-kesalahan tersebut tertuduh menjawat jawatan Timbalan Perdana Menteri dan Menteri Kewangan Malaysia.

Perkara yang membawa kepada kesalahan-kesalahan yang dilakukan oleh tertuduh berpunca daripada surat bertarikh 5 Ogos 1997 daripada Ummi Hafilda bt Ali kepada YAB Perdana Menteri berkaitan Perihal Salahlaku Timbalan Perdana Menteri (tertuduh) dan Pengakuan Bersumpah Azizan bin Abu Bakar, dan satu surat bertajuk "Talqin Terbuka Untuk Anwar Ibrahim".

Seterusnya apabila surat daripada Ummi Hafilda bt Ali dan Pengakuan Bersumpah Azizan bin Abu Bakar serta surat Talqin tersebut diketahui oleh tertuduh, dia telah mengambil berbagai tindakan bagi menafikan kandungan surat-surat dan Pengakuan Bersumpah berkenaan. Segala tindakan tertuduh itu telah diambil dengan menggunakan Cawangan Khas Polis Diraja Malaysia. Tertuduh, sebagai Timbalan Perdana Menteri dan Menteri Kewangan, telah mengarahkan Pengarah Cawangan Khas, Datuk Mohd. Said bin Awang dan Timbalan Pengarah Cawangan Khas II, Datuk Amir bin Junus berjumpa dengannya di kediaman rasminya dan di dalam perjumpaan-perjumpaan tersebut tertuduh, antara lain, telah memberi arahan-arahan tertentu berkaitan surat-surat dan Pengakuan Bersumpah berkenaan. Hasil daripada arahan tertuduh, pihak Cawangan Khas telah memperolehi surat-surat penafian daripada Ummi Hafilda bt Ali dan Azizan bin Abu Bakar masing-masing bertarikh 18 Ogos 1997 dan 29 Ogos 1997 telah diperolehi. Surat-surat ini telah kononnya menjelaskan dan menafikan kandungan surat pertama dari Ummi Hafilda bt Ali bertarikh 5 Ogos 1997 serta Pengakuan Bersumpah Azizan.

Saksi-saksi dan dokumen-dokumen yang akan dikemukakan oleh Pendakwa Raya akan membuktikan melampaui sebarang keraguan yang munasabah bahawa tertuduh telah menggunakan kedudukannya sebagai Timbalan Perdana Menteri dan Menteri Kewangan untuk kepentingannya sendiri.

Timbalan Kanan Pendakwa Raya
Jabatan Peguam Negara Malaysia"

The prosecution should to a certain extent be faulted for framing the original charges not in accordance with what it intended to prove as stated in its opening address. We are of the view that besides the ground of duplicity in the charges as found by the learned judge, the contents of P13 as stated by us earlier, fortified our view that the learned judge has exercised his discretion correctly in amending the charges. The learned judge only ordered the amendment of the charges after hearing counsel for both parties and there is therefore no substantial miscarriage of justice caused to the defence. In the circumstances, there are no grounds for this court to interfere with the exercise of his judicial discretion.

Resulting from the exercise of his discretion in allowing the amendment of the charges, the learned judge took upon himself to expunge the evidence relating to the commission of sexual misconduct and sodomy. He did so in order that such evidence would not have prejudicial effect on the defence. Raja Aziz submitted that the learned judge did not hear the parties before expunging the evidence relating to sexual misconduct and sodomy committed by the appellant to the detriment of the defence. This is because the defence would show that the prosecution could not succeed in proving the sexual misconduct and sodomy allegedly committed by the appellant. It was further contended by Raja Aziz that the defence was left in the dark as to what evidence that was really expunged since the learned judge failed to state clearly in his judgment which led to the detriment of the defence.

The primary issue here is whether the failure of the learned judge to allow the defence to address the court before his decision to expunge and the evidence that was expunged has occasioned an injustice to the defence.
After considering the entire record of proceedings our answer is that it has not caused an injustice to the appellant as the prejudicial effect far outweighed its probative value. We say so because if the evidence relating to the sexual misconduct and sodomy allegadly committed by the appellant is allowed to remain it will have prejudicial effect on the defence because what the prosecution need prove on the amended charges is only allegations of sexual misconduct and sodomy and not their commission. The learned judge, in our view, in allowing the amendment rightly held that the offence of sodomy is a distinct offence and in fact it is on record that charges of sodomy were preferred against the appellant and they were stood down.

We agree with counsel's submission that the learned judge failed to enumerate what evidence was expunged. However, the inference could only be that the evidence as to the truth or falsity of the allegations of sexual misconduct and sodomy is no longer the issue. Hence, any evidence touching on the truth or otherwise of the sexual misconduct and commission of sodomy by the appellant should not be allowed. The ruling of the learned judge on expunction can be gathered from what is stated by him at page 33 -

"I find it necessary and desirable to say a few words to guide the conduct of the case hereafter in view of fact that counsel on both sides had touched upon the truth of the allegations in the four amended charges. It is to be noted that the amended charges merely refer to allegations of sodomy and sexual misconduct and not to the actual commission of sodomy or sexual misconduct by the accused. The truth or falsity of the allegations are therefore not in issue in this trial. Any evidence or argument that has to or is to be directed upon that matter is therefore irrelevant and inadmissible. Accordingly, the evidence that is proposed to be elicited to meet the prima facie case established by the prosecution must be confined only to the issues raised in the amended charges."
It appears therefore that the parties were sufficiently put to notice by the learned judge of what was expected of the prosecution and the defence in the trial. We do not see how it can be said by the defence that they were in the dark regarding what evidence was expunged by the learned trial judge.

The appellant questioned the power of the learned judge to expunge the prejudicial evidence. We agree with the Court of Appeal that the learned judge has the inherent power to do so in order to prevent the prejudicial effect on the defence case. Such order is necessary for the purpose of securing the ends of justice. If no order is made it would then be a good ground of appeal where the conviction would in all probability be quashed by the appellate court. The case of Mohamad Kassan bin Hassan v PP (1950)MLJ 295 cited on behalf of the appellant provides a good guide. There the High Court quashed the conviction of the accused by the Sessions Court on the ground that the improper admission of the evidence had caused a failure of justice. It happened in this way. The Sessions Court held that the charges were bad for duplicity and the charges were amended. But the inadmissible evidence to prove the amended charges still remained in the record of the proceedings.
For the above reasons, we do not agree with the submissions on behalf of the appellant on the amendment of the charges, the expunction of the evidence and the power to do so by the learned judge.

Raja Aziz further submitted that in spite of the amendment to the charges, there was still no case for the appellant to answer.

We now need to consider whether the prosecution against the appellant had proved the ingredients under section 2(1) of the Ordinance before the High Court. According to the learned judge , in order to prove the charges against the appellant, the prosecution has to establish two ingredients, that is to say, that he is a Member of the administration at the material time and that while being such Member he committed a corrupt practice.

Under section 2(2) of the Ordinance " corrupt practice" means any act done by any Member or officer referred to in subsection (1) in his capacity as such Member or officer, whereby he has used his public position or office for his pecuniary or other advantage; ......

The ingredient to be proved by the prosecution that is common to all the charges is that the appellant is a Member of the administration within the meaning assigned to it in Article 160 (2) of the Constitution. The appellant did not dispute this ingredient. However, Raja Aziz submitted that the prosecution has not proved the ingredient within the meaning of 'corrupt practice', that is, "whereby the appellant has used his public position or office for his pecuniary or other advantage".

This ingredient involves proof of two elements by the prosecution. They are:

(i) the manner in which the appellant used his public position; and
(ii) the advantage that he obtained.

The learned judge proceeded to consider the two elements separately from pages 103 to 143. In our view, he has considered in detail in respect of the law relating to the meaning of the phrase "corrupt practice" by the reference to PP v Dato Haji Mohamed Muslim Bin Haji Othman [1983] MLJ 245 and cases in respect of other jurisdictions as well. He concluded at page 110 thuswise :

"I must point out that there is no qualification in the definition of the expression 'corrupt practice' in s 2(2) of Ordinance No 22 as in the Indian and Queensland legislation that I have referred to. It does not require that the act must be in relation to the discharge of duties of the officer concerned. It merely refers to any act done by any Member or officer in his capacity as such Member or officer whereby he has used his public position or office for his pecuniary or other advantage. That the act done must have been done in the capacity of the Member as such Member is similar to the language employed in s4(2) of the Prevention of Bribery Ordinance 1974 of Hong Kong. The judgment of the Privy Council in Attorney General of Hong Kong v Ip Chiu & Anor [1980] 2 WLR 332 is therefore a good guide in interpreting the relevant part of the expression 'corrupt practice' in s 2(2) of Ordinance No 22. Thus the word 'capacity' in the definition must not be equated with 'duty'. The true test would therefore be whether the act done would have done or could have been effectively done if the person in question were not the kind of Member that in fact he was. If the answer to the question is in the negative, then the act of the Member is one that was done in his capacity as such Member whereby he has used his public office for his advantage, provided that it could not equally easily have been done by any person not holding that office. It applies to any advantage obtained by the Member or officer concerned by the use of his influence"

We agree with the learned judge on the definition of 'corrupt practice' in section 2(2) of the Ordinance and its application to the facts of this case. The directions must be in the context of the public position i.e., as the Deputy Prime Minister and the Minister of Finance and not in his personal capacity. The learned judge went on to consider the evidence and this is what he said the prosecution must prove. (page 111) -

"The prosecution must prove that the accused directed Dato Mohd Said and Dato Amir Junus to obtain from Ummi and Azizan the written statement dated 18 August 1997 addressed to YAB Prime Minister with regard to the first and third charges to deny the allegations. The evidence relating to the manner in which the accused used his position in relation to the first and the third charges and in relation to the second and fourth charges are inter-related. As this ingredient forms a continuous series of acts in respect of both sets of charges, I shall deal with them together. In proof of this ingredient the prosecution must establish that:

(1) Azizan made an allegation of sodomy as contained in his 'Pengakuan Besumpah' dated 5 August 1997 against the accused and Ummi made an allegation of sexual misconduct and sodomy as contained in her confidential report entitled 'Perihal Salah Laku Timbalan Perdana Menteri' dated 5 August 1997 against the accused; and

(2) the accused directed Datuk Mohd Said and Datuk Amir Junus to obtain from Ummi and Azizan written statements addressed to YAB Prime Minister and public statements denying the allegations and that they obtained the statements as directed."

In respect of (1), after an evaluation of the evidence, the learned judge ruled there is evidence to show that Ummi and Azizan had made the allegations. In fact, in our view, the defence did not seriously dispute that the allegations were made but contended that they were false and fabricated. However, in view of the amendment to the charges, the truth or falsity of the allegations was no longer in issue. There are no reasons for us to disagree with the learned judge when he said at page 114 that -

'there is evidence to show that Ummi and Azizan had made the allegations against the accused.'
In respect of (2), the learned judge after extensively discussing the evidence of the relevant witnesses especially PW1 and PW11 in respect of directions given by the appellant, concluded at page 134 -

"Thus there is evidence that the accused directed Dato Mohd Said and Dato Amir Junus to obtain from Ummi and Azizan written statements addressed to YAB Prime Minister during the period 12 August 1997 to 17 August 1997 in respect of the first and third charges and public statement on or about 27 August 1997 in respect of the second and fourth charges denying his allegations that they had made against him and that the statements were obtained as directed."

We agree with Raja Aziz's submission that a lot depends on PW1's evidence especially in the face of his report, exhibit D25 produced by the defence. It turns on his credibility. PW 11's credibility was also attacked.

The first question that we have to satisfy ourselves is whether the learned judge has erred in considering the issue of credibility of witnesses in this case. Before considering the credibility of witnesses, that is Dato Mohd Said, Dato Amir Junus, ACP Mazlan, DSP Aziz, SAC Musa, Azizan and Ummi, all of whom were attacked by the defence, he sets out the tests to be followed at page 79 -

"The Privy Council has stated that the real tests for either accepting or rejecting the evidence of a witness are how consistent the story is with itself, how it stands the test of cross-examination, and how far it fits in with the rest of the evidence and the circumstances of the case (see Bhojraj v Sitaram AIR 1936 PC 60). It must, however, be observed that being unshaken in cross-examination is not per se an all-sufficient acid test of credibility. The inherent probability of a fact in issue must be the prime consideration (see Muniandy & Ors v PP [1966] 1 MLJ 257). It has been held that if a witness demonstrably tells lies, his evidence must be looked upon with suspicion and treated with caution, but to say that it should be entirely rejected would be to go too far (see Khoon Chye Hin v PP [1961] MLJ 105). It has also been held that discrepancies and contradictions there will always be in a case. In considering them, what the court has to decide is whether they are of such a nature as to discredit the witness entirely and render the whole of his evidence worthless and untrustworthy (see De Silva v PP [1964] MLJ 81). The Indian Supreme Court has pointed out that one hardly comes across a witness whose evidence does not contain a grain of untruth or at any rate exaggerations, embroideries or embellishments (see Ugar v State of Bihar AIR 1965 SC 277). It is useful to refer to PP v Datuk Haji Harun bin Haji Idris (no 2) [1977] 1 MLJ 15 where Raja Azlan Shah FJ (as His Highness then was) said at p 19:

"... In my opinion, the discrepancies there will always be, because in the circumstances in which the events happened, every witness does not remember the same thing and he does not remember accurately every single thing that happened. The question is whether the existence of certain discrepancies is sufficient to destroy their credibility. There is no rule of law that the testimony of a witness must either be believed in its entirety or not at all. A court is fully competent, for good and cogent reasons, to accept one part of the testimony of a witness and to reject the other."

In the absence of any contradiction, however, and in the absence of any element of inherent improbability, the evidence of any witness, whether a police witness or not, who gives evidence on affirmation, should normally be accepted (see PP v Mohamed Ali [1962] MLJ 257)."

Armed with the tests set out above, he then proceeded to consider the credibility of the relevant witnesses. He considered the evidence given by them in considerable detail with his reasons for his finding quite apart from his own observation of their demeanour. It is an established principle that an appellate court should be slow to disturb the finding of facts of the lower court especially here where there are concurrent findings of facts by two courts namely the High Court and the Court of Appeal. Unless it can be shown that the finding of facts are not supported by the evidence or it is against the weight of evidence or that it is a perverse finding it is not for us to disagree.

Further, we should be slow to disturb the learned judge's assessment and finding on the demeanour of the witnesses. This is for the simple reason that he is the best person to observe their demeanour. We are handicapped as we have to go by the cold print of their evidence in the notes of proceedings.

We have examined his finding in relation to the evidence before him and his reasons for the finding. We do not find any flaw so as to warrant our interference when he concluded that PW1 and PW11 are credible witnesses at pages 82 and 86 respectively.

However, there is the complaint of Raja Aziz that the learned judge did not consider exhibit D25, produced by the defence vis--vis PW1's credibility. There is the further complaint by Raja Aziz on the explanation by PW1 in relation to his use of the word 'sukarela' (meaning in English 'voluntary') in exhibit D25. This is relevant in considering the credibility of PW1. He cited Grace Shipping Inc. & Anor v CF Sharp & Co. (Malaya) Pte. Ltd. (1987) 1 MLJ 257 to show that PW1's evidence on this aspect must be tested against the objective facts which were in the form of documents.

It is true that the learned judge did not make a specific finding in respect of exhibit D25 vis-vis the credibility of PW1. However, at page 35, he did touch on the evidence of PW1 in respect of exhibit D25 -

"Dato Mohd Said said that YAB Prime Minister had not asked for the report. He said that when exhibit D25 was prepared by him, his investigation had not been completed yet and no investigation had been conducted by the Special Branch to ascertain the truth of the allegations as contained in exhibit P14 A, B and C. He prepared exhibit D25 for the purpose of sending exhibits P17 and P18 to YAB Prime Minister. He said that he suggested in exhibit D25 that the investigation be stopped in view of exhibits P17 and P18. The information from the other sources referred to in exhibit D25 was not verified. Exhibit P17 and P18 formed the primary basis of exhibit D25. The investigation was then stopped by the Special Branch suddenly."

(emphasis is ours)

We are of the view that exhibit D25 should not be considered in isolation for the purpose of attacking the credibility of PW 1 just because in exhibit D25 he used the word 'sukarela' in it. We have to bear in mind how exhibits P17 and P18 were obtained. In fact there is evidence of the reluctance of Ummi and Azizan to retract their allegations that resulted in the 'turning over' process. Quite clearly, it was after taking into account the other relevant evidence that the learned judge ruled that PW1 is a credible witness. This is what he said at page 82 -
"His version of the sequence of the events is consistent with
itself and fits in with the rest of the evidence adduced."

(emphasis is ours)

In addition, PW1's explanation for the use of 'sukarela' therein must be taken in the context of the object of the appellant directing PW1 to get the retractions from PW12 and PW17.

Grace Shipping Inc. & Anor as relied by Raja Aziz was considered by the Court of Appeal (see page 509). After taking note of the observations of Lord Golf of Chiereley, the Court of Appeal was of the view that the documents in this case cannot be placed on the same footing as those commercial documents in the Grace Shipping case. The Court of Appeal went on to state that some of the documents in this case were obtained from a 'turning-over' process and hence cannot serve as 'objective facts' and therefore the observations in the Grace Shipping case cannot be applied to this case as suggested by Raja Aziz. The Court of Appeal went on to give its reason why exhibit D25 as suggested by Raja Aziz could not be such a document serving as 'objective facts'. We agree.

We would add that exhibit D25 is merely a report and the oral explanation of the word 'sukarela' therein has no legal significance as it is not a commercial document. For that matter it is for the learned judge to consider whether to accept the explanation or not. We are of the view there are sufficient evidence before him to support the explanation of PW1 on the use of the word 'sukarela'. If he has stated otherwise, as we said earlier, it would have been unlikely for YAB Prime Minister to say in his press statement that the allegations were baseless.

We are of the view that the learned judge did not commit errors here.

He has also considered the law and the facts on accomplices, when he ruled that PW1 and PW11 are accomplices. This is what he said on page 78 -

"I shall now consider whether their evidence, subject to a finding on their credibility, requires corroboration. This depend on the degree of their complicity in the offences committed by the accused. Dato Mohd Said said that he had to follow the instructions given by the accused as he was the Deputy Prime Minister and not any ordinary person. He felt compelled to carry out the instructions and could not have refused them. Thus he had no choice in the matter. Dato Amir Junus was in a similar position, In addition, he was also subjected to instructions from Dato Mohd Said, his superior officer, to carry out what the accused wanted. ACP Mazlan and DSP Aziz were subordinate police officers who carried out the orders of their superiors. They said that they felt compelled to carry out the instructions. It is therefore clear that all the police officers were not willing participants in the offences but victims of them. They acted under a form of pressure which would have required some firmness to resist. In fact, they had no choice but to comply with the orders. In the circumstances, reliance can be placed on their uncorroborated evidence subject of, course to, it being found to be credible."

We agree that for the reasons stated by him the evidence of PW1 and PW11 need not be corroborated on the ground that he found them to be credible.

We now proceed to consider the interpretation of 'other advantage' in section 2(2), as contemplated in the four charges, that is, 'for the purpose of saving himself from embarrassment' and 'for the purpose of protecting himself against any criminal action.' Firstly, Raja Aziz contended that the words 'other advantage' must be read ejusdem generis, that is, the form of advantage must be capable of having some monetary value. Our task is made easier in dealing with this issue as the meaning of 'other' appearing in the definition of 'corrupt practice' had been considered by the then Federal Court in Haji Abdul Ghani bin Ishak & Anor v. Public Prosecutor (1981)2 MLJ 243 where Raja Azlan Shah, CJ (as His Highness then was) stated at pages 246/247:

"It is therefore no longer in dispute that the object of Ordinance is wide so as to bring to book corrupt politicians and public officer who abuse their public positions or office for their pecuniary or other advantage. The use in the Ordinance of the words "pecuniary or other advantage" is significant. The word "other' appearing in the context of the definition is not caught by the ejusdem generis rule."

(emphasis is ours)

As the words 'other advantage' need not be read ejusdem generis, it follows 'that other advantage need not necessarily be pecuniary in nature' (per Abdul Hamid, FJ (as he then was) in Nunis v PP (1982)2 MLJ 114 at page 117 following Public Prosecutor v Datuk Cheng Swee & Ors (1979) 1 MLJ 166 and Haji Abdul Ghani bin Ishak, supra). In fact in the case of Nunis, the application for leave to refer the construction of the words 'other advantage' in the context of 'corrupt practice' under the Ordinance was dismissed by the then Federal Court. We see no grounds to reconsider the construction of the words 'other advantage' in the context of the facts of the present case.

What we have to consider next is whether the phrases 'to save yourself from embarrassment' and ' for the purpose of protecting yourself from any criminal action' in the context of the facts related to the first and third charges and the second and fourth charges respectively come within the wide meaning of 'other advantage', that is, non-pecuniary.

After discussing the evidence in detail relating to the issue on embarrassment (at pages 137 to 138), this is what the learned judge said at page 139 -

"The advancement of the submission on the basis of a distinction between the truth and the falsity of the allegations is faulty as that is not in issue in the case. Be that as it may, I agree with the argument that it is proper for a person to have defamatory matter against him retracted in order to avoid the embarrassment of going to court so as to save himself from the attendant adverse publicity. But this is subject to an important injunction. Such a person must not take the law into his own hands to resolve the problem as, for example, by beating up the person concerned to retract the defamatory matter. He could approach the person himself in a recognized manner to resolve the problem or appoint an advocate and solicitor to do so. I would also agree that if a person lodges a police report on the matter and requests the police to investigate thoroughly, he does no wrong. The evidence shows that the accused went beyond the permissible limits of the law. The charges in this case relate to a Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance using the police against certain individuals in a purely personal matter. The directions that he gave to Dato Mohd Said and Dato Amir Junus to have the allegations retracted show that he had abused his position. The manner in which he wanted the allegations to be retracted is not a lawful way of doing so. I am therefore of the view that the argument cannot be sustained."

On the issue of 'for the purpose of protecting yourself from prosecution' this has been dealt with at length by the learned judge at pages 139 to 143. Suffice for us to quote a part of it at pages 142 to 143 -

"It must be observed that the investigation concerned serious allegations against the accused. Despite the denial of the allegations by the accused in his police statement to SAC Musa on 19 August 1997, the investigation did not come to an end as SAC Musa wanted to record further statements. It was SAC Musa's intention to record these statements that prompted the accused to make use of the denial letters to stop the investigations from proceeding any further. He succeeded in doing so. I say this because the denial letters that the accused gave to SAC Musa caused the investigation to end abruptly. This is made evident by the fact that the letters influenced SAC Musa to recommend that no further action be taken in the case even though the investigation was not complete. It is superfluous to state that an investigation into the allegations clearly involves the accused directly as the allegations were against him. As the investigation was brought to an abrupt end, there will be no further inquiry into the allegations. The pre-mature termination of the investigation is an advantage to the accused as it thereby prevents the relevant authorities from making a decision on a possible prosecution. The accused has therefore saved himself from any criminal action by using exhs P20 and P22 which had been unlawfully obtained. This brings into sharp focus the contention of the defence that the accused could not have been prosecuted if the allegations are not true with the result that he would have obtained no benefit when the investigation was stopped. The submission requires a consideration of whether the accused would have obtained an advantage if no criminal action is ultimately taken against him by virtue of the allegations being found to be false at the proper conclusion of the investigation. To my mind, this does not alter the advantage obtained by the accused in any way. It must be reiterated that the advantage obtained is only one of the elements involved in the charges. Thus, it must not be read in isolation. It must be read together with the manner in which the public statements were obtained. Viewed in that light, it will be seen that the investigation came to an end as a result of the use of the denial letters obtained unlawfully on the direction of the accused. The investigation was therefore stopped by unlawful means. One cannot adopt an illegal course of action to obtain a benefit in the belief that he is entitled to it. He has to allow law and order to take its normal course. Be that as it may, the argument advanced had in fact been considered in PP v Dato Haji Mohamed bin Haji Othman [1983] 1 MLJ 245 where the accused was charged for having been present at a meeting in respect of a matter in which he had an interest. It was argued that his presence at the meeting would have made no difference to the approval of his application. In reply to this, Hashim Yeop A Sani J (as he then was) said at pp 248-249:

"A number of witnesses both prosecution and defence said that they took no objection to the presence of the accused. In my view, the fact that no one took objection to the presence of the accused at the meeting does not alter the position in law. Nor the fact that according to some witnesses his presence would have made no difference whatsoever and that the application would have been approved anyway."

I was therefore unable to agree with the argument advanced by the defence."

We have carefully examined the evidence and the grounds of the learned judge and we see no reason to disagree with his decision at page 143 -

"Thus there is evidence to show that the accused had obtained an advantage in respect of the four charges as contemplated by them."

We say that the evidence is clear that the advantage obtained by the appellant is in respect of the use of his public position as Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance and not in his personal capacity. We could not also possibly see how the allegations are aimed at the appellant as a private person other than his public position as Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance and more so as Deputy Prime Minister as he would in all probability be the next Prime Minister. If the allegations were not retracted soonest possible, they would in our view, by the nature of the allegations, have serious damaging effect on his reputation and more importantly whether he would be a fit and proper person to hold the office of Deputy Prime Minister and eventually his chances of becoming the next Prime Minister.

From the notes of proceedings, after defence was called on the amended charges, the appellant called a total of 22 witnesses. He himself gave evidence on oath for over a period of seven days.

We will proceed to examine whether the learned judge applied the correct approach and had erred in law in coming to his conclusion that the defence has failed to raise any reasonable doubt as to the truth of the prosecution case or as to the appellant's guilt on the amended charges.

At the outset, we agree with the submission of Encik Christopher Fernando, that as a matter of principle if the defence can show that there was substantial injustice caused to the appellant, the appellant is entitled to be freed of the charges. In this regard, we would like to reiterate here that the thrust of the appellant's case before us is a complete lack of fairness on the part of the trial judge towards the defence.

We observe that the learned judge had considered the defence in detail citing excerpts of the relevant and material evidence of the witnesses in his judgment. See pages 143 to 228.

In fairness to the appellant, although in his defence he denied giving directions as claimed by PW1 and PW11 and the evidence of his active participation in getting the retractions from Ummi and Azizan, he did however give his reasons for the denial. It is then a matter for the learned judge to consider his reasons by applying the settled principle of law placed on an accused person in a criminal trial that it is not for the accused, like the appellant in this case, to prove his innocence but for the prosecution to prove his guilt beyond reasonable doubt and that the onus on the defence is merely to cast a reasonable doubt on the prosecution case.

After considering at length the evidence the learned judge proceeded to explain why he rejected the following categories of evidence: (pages 160 to 181) -

(1) Evidence relating to political conspiracy;
(2) Evidence relating to credit;
(3) Evidence relating to the taped conversation;
(4) Hearsay evidence
(5) Evidence relating to other instances of alleged fabrication
(6) Evidence relating to legal professional privilege.

We do not propose to go into detail in respect of the above categories considered by the learned judge. We will consider later as part of the criticism submitted by the learned counsel before us. Quite apart from the considerations of the categories set out above, he did consider anxiously some of the arguments raised in the submission that there was no case for the appellant to answer. (see pages 181 to 192). Again, we do not propose to set out all the arguments and reasoning as they will amount to a repetition.

Having examined the above arguments and given them our anxious consideration it is our finding that he came to the right conclusion in calling the appellant to answer on the amended charges when he stated at page 221:-

"It is therefore, my finding that the defence has not raised any reasonable doubt, on the whole of the evidence adduced, that the accused directed Dato Mohd. Said and Dato Amir Junus in his capacity as a Member of administration to obtain from Ummi and Azizan written statement addressed to YAB Prime Minister and public statements denying the allegations on the dates prescribed in the charges and that they obtained the statements as directed."

Next, the learned judge considered the evidence on the advantage obtained by the appellant and concluded at page 228 as follows:

"It is therefore my finding that the defence has not raised any reasonable doubt on the whole of the evidence adduced, on the issue of the advantage obtained by the accused."

We do not with respect, agree with Tuan Haji Sulaiman's contention that the learned judge shifted the burden of proof to the defence by keep on changing 'the goal posts', perhaps to prevent the appellant from 'scoring goals'. The evidence adduced for the prosecution and for the defence, in our view, should not be considered in isolation but to be considered in totality. This is what the learned judge states in his verdict on page 229 -

"Having considered the whole of the evidence adduced, I am satisfied that in view of the numerous contradictions and inconsistencies in the defence evidence, not only in that of the accused himself but also in that of his own witnesses, the defence is unworthy of any credence. Further, the defence has failed to raise any reasonable doubt as to the truth of the prosecution case or as the accused's guilt for the reasons that I have considered earlier. I therefore find that the prosecution has proved its case against the accused beyond reasonable doubt on all four charges and, in the upshot, I find him guilty as charged."

Considering the totality of the evidence, with respect, we cannot say that the learned judge erred in his appraisal of the evidence and in the upshot, he is correct to find the appellant guilty as charged.

Finally, we shall now consider the complaints mounted against the learned judge for his unfair conduct throughout the entire trial.

We would categorise the complaints broadly under the following heads :-

(1) the invocation of his powers under the Evidence Act 1950;
(2) frequent interruptions by the learned judge; and
(3) threats of contempt and contempt against Zainur Zakaria, one of the counsel for the appellant, showed tendency towards the prosecution side.

(1) We must state at the outset that it is the statutory duty of a judge in conducting a trial to see that irrelevant evidence and inadmissible evidence are not allowed to be admitted. His powers in this respect are amply provided by the various provisions of the Evidence Act 1950 as well as the CPC.
We have examined the judgment of the learned judge on the invocation of his powers under the Evidence Act and the complaints that merits our consideration is in relation to the requirement for the defence to show the relevance of the witnesses to be called by the defence. The relevant section is section 136 (1) of the Evidence Act which reads -

"When either party proposes to give evidence of any fact, court may ask the party proposing to give evidence in what manner
the alleged fact, if proved, would be relevantand the court shall admit the evidence if it thinks that the fact, if proved, would be relevant, and not otherwise."

(emphasis is ours)

The wordings above are wide for the learned judge to exercise his discretion. It even extends to the power to set aside a subpoena issued against a witness. Raja Azlan Shah, J, (as His Highness then was) speaking for the Federal Court, in Ismail Hasnul; Abdul Ghafar v Hasnul (1968) 1 MLJ 108 said at pages 110 to 111 -

"The court possesses inherent jurisdiction to see that this privilege is properly exercised and in a proper case can restrain its abuse."

We have examined the record, we cannot say that the learned judge wrongly exercised his power or for that matter abused his power.

(2) We accept that from the record there were frequent interruptions by the learned judge. Counsel relied on Teng Boon How v PP (1993)3 MLJ 553, a drug trafficking case under section 39 B(1) (a) of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 where the Federal Court set aside the conviction on this ground alone.

We need to examine the various interruptions by the learned judge in this case as compared to the conduct of the learned judicial commissioner in Teng Boon How. We observe, without having to particularise them, that the learned judge in this case was concerned more about the issues of relevancy and admissibility. We have quoted his concern on these issues in the early part of this judgment when he made a ruling in respect of expunction of evidence.

In the course of the trial there would be occasions where he need to enforce his ruling. In this case, in view of the publicity generated in the trial, not only nationally but internationally, there is the more reason for the learned judge to be extremely cautious or perhaps he was being overzealous as things at times appeared to get a bit out of hand.

In respect of Teng Boon How, the cross-examination of the appellant by the learned judicial commissioner took place after he had been examined, cross-examined by the Deputy Public Prosecutor and re-examined by the defence counsel and more particularly it was upon recall by the trial judge after the appellant's re-examination was concluded (see page 559). In other words, there were excessive interferences or interruptions in the drug trafficking case by the learned judicial commissioner so much so that he fell into error in descending 'into the arena of disputes' and as a result allowed his judgment to be clouded.

We agree what the Court of Appeal in this case said at page 522-

"In the present appeal, after looking through the notes of proceedings page by page, we certainly did not find the trial

judge falling into error in the same manner as found in Teng Boon How, not even anywhere close to it. We are therefore unable to accede to the learned counsel's submission with the result that there is no room to apply Teng Boon How."

(3) Raja Aziz submitted that there was lack of objectivity on the part of the learned judge. He referred to the conduct of the learned judge in dealing with the contempt proceeding against one of the counsel for the appellant, Zainur Zakaria, by referring to the Federal Court decision of Zainur Zakaria v PP (2001) 3 MLJ 604 where at page 628 it confirmed the trial judge's attitude was confrontational towards the defence and more prosecution prone.

We are of the view that the facts and circumstances of Zainur Zakaria cannot be equated to the facts of this case. There it was more towards the conduct of Zainur Zakaria that the learned judge was more concerned with. From what we can gather from the record, it was the learned judge's belief that Zainur Zakaria's action was to delay the proceedings and to sensationalize the trial by alleging on the conduct of the two prosecutors to fabricate evidence against the appellant. The conduct of the learned judge in Zainur's case is not really relevant to the amended charges faced by the appellant. In addition thereto, there was the allegation of lack of time given for Zainur Zakaria to prepare his defence. The learned judge might well appear to lean towards the prosecution as indicated by the Federal Court but it cannot be said to be showing the same inclination on the evidence, in the trial against the appellant. A good illustration is where as we stated earlier, he considered the appellant's case at length.

Encik Christopher Fernando submitted that there were threats of contempt against counsel including himself by the learned judge. We have examined Encik Christopher Fernando's complaint but regret to say that the learned judge, being human himself and as stated earlier because of the wide publicity given to this case, he had to exercise a lot of restraints in controlling the proceedings and in doing so he may have uttered harsh words or even threaten counsel with contempt and all these must be taken in that spirit. It is not so much of the learned judge leaning towards the prosecution or being prejudiced towards the defence. He has the statutory duty to see that irrelevant and inadmissible evidence are not allowed to creep in or for that matter stop counsel from challenging his rulings as otherwise the proceedings will go haywire.

To round up and in support of the claim of unfair conduct of the learned judge in this case, we were furnished by the appellant's counsel with the latest judgment of the Privy Council in Barry Victor Randall v The Queen (Privy Council Appeal No. 22 of 2001) delivered on 16 April 2001 by Lord Bingham of Cornhill.

This was an appeal against conviction and sentence passed by the Court of Appeal of the Cayman Islands. The primary ground of appeal against conviction was that the trial was conducted in a manner which was grossly and fundamentally unfair. The source of the unfairness was the conduct of the prosecuting counsel which was said to have undermined the integrity of the trial process. But complain was also made that the trial judge wrongly failed to restrain the conduct of the prosecuting counsel and on occasion endorsed it.

The Board laid down some rules in order to safeguard the fairness of a trial under an adversarial system so as to ensure that the proceedings, however closely contested and however highly charged, are conducted in a manner which is orderly and fair. It went on to state some of these rules. For the purpose of the appeal before us, the following rule is instructive:-

"(3) It is the responsibility of the judge to ensure that the proceedings are conducted in an orderly manner which is fair to both prosecution and defence. He must neither be nor appear to be partisan. If counsel begin to misbehave he must at once exert his authority to require observance of accepted standards of conduct."

The Board further reminded itself that in a criminal trial the observance of certain basic rules has been shown to be the most effective safeguard against unfairness, error and abuse.

Based on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Board came to the following conclusion (paragraph 29 of the Report):-

"29. The crucial issue in the present appeal is whether there were such departures from good practice in the course of the appellant's trial as to deny him the substance of a fair trial. The Board reluctantly concludes that there were. Prosecuting counsel conducted himself as no minister of justice should conduct himself. The trial judge failed to exert the authority vested in him to control the proceedings and enforce proper standards of behaviour. Regrettably, he allowed himself to be overborne and allowed his antipathy to both the appellant and his counsel to be only too manifest. While none of the appellant's complaints taken on its own would support a successful appeal, taken together they leave the Board with no choice but to quash the appellant's convictions. It cannot be sure that the matters of which complaint is made, taken together, did not inhibit the presentation of the defence case and distract the attention of the jury from the crucial issues they had to decide."

In allowing the appeal, the Board held that it disagreed with the view taken by the Court of Appeal on the principal issue in the appeal as it did not give full considerations to a large number of the appellant's complaints.

In the case before us, as we stated earlier, the learned judge was clear in his mind when he told the parties to confine to relevancy and admissibility of the evidence to be presented. It is obvious to us that he has to exert his authority to see to the proper conduct of the trial. Hence, perhaps by the use of the phrase 'flex his judicial muscle' by him. We observe that there were occasions when the defence team challenged his ruling which they should not do as it amounts to challenging his authority. There is always avenue to challenge them on appeal which they did before us.

We are not persuaded that the conduct of the learned judge as alleged by the defence amount to a miscarriage of justice for us to interfere. The facts in Randall's case relied on by the defence are distinguishable from the facts of this case and therefore has no application to this case. We would however endorse the statement of principles with regard to what should be the standard of fairness and the responsibility of a trial judge to ensure that proceedings, are conducted in an orderly manner in a trial under an adversarial system such as ours.
Tuan Haji Sulaiman also complained that their submission on the conduct of the learned judge in the Court of Appeal was brushed aside by them. We have examined the judgment of the Court of Appeal and agree there was an omission on their part to consider this issue. Nonetheless, we have considered this point.

Finally, the paramount question here is whether the conduct of the trial judge which the appellant said was grossly unfair towards him has occasioned any miscarriage of justice which entitled him to an acquittal.
On this issue we are guided by section 92(1) of the Court of Judicature Act, 1964 in particular the proviso to section 92 (1) which reads-

"(1) At the hearing of an appeal the Federal Court shall hear the appellant or his advocate, if he appears, and, if it thinks fit, the respondent or the advocate, if he appears, and may hear the appellant or his advocate in reply, and the Federal Court may thereupon confirm, reverse or vary the decision of the [Court of Appeal], or may order a retrial or may remit the matter with the opinion of the Federal Court thereon to the [High Court], or may make such other order in the matter as to it may seem just, and may by that order exercise any power which the [Court of Appeal or the High Court] might have exercised:

Provided that the Federal Court may, notwithstanding that it is of opinion that the point raised in the appeal might be decided in favour of the appellant, dismiss the appeal if it considers that no substantial miscarriage of justice has occurred."

In addition to the above we have section 167 of the Evidence Act 1950 that works in tandem with the proviso to section 92(1) of the Courts of Judicature Act, 1964. It reads -

"167. The improper admission or rejection of evidence shall not be ground of itself for a new trial or reversal of any decision in any case if it appears to the court before which the objection is raised that, independently of the evidence objected to and admitted, there was sufficient evidence to justify the decision, or that, if the rejected evidence had been received, it ought not to have varied the decision."

The two provisions set out above had recently been considered by the Court of Appeal in the famous case of Juraimi bin Husin v Public Prosecutor and Mohd. Affandi bin Abdul Rahman & Anor v Public Prosecutor (1998) 1 MLJ 537.

In Juraimi, the Court of Appeal respectfully adopted and applied what was said by Barwick CJ in the Australian case of Ratten v R (1974) 131 CLR 510 on the approach it took to the proviso at page 516 and also considered two authorities namely Wong Kok Keong v R (1955) MLJ 13 and Woodroffe & Ameer Ali's The Law of Evidence (16th Edition) Vol. 4.

This is what Barwick CJ said at page 516 -

"Miscarriage is not defined in the legislation but its significance is fairly worked out in the decided cases. There is a miscarriage if on the material before the Court of Criminal Appeal, which where no new evidence is produced will consist of the evidence given at the trial, the appellant is shown to be innocent, or if the court is of the opinion that there exists such a doubt as to his guilt that the verdict of guilty should not be allowed to stand. It is the reasonable doubt in the mind of the court which is the operative factor. It is of no practical consequence whether this is expressed as a doubt entertained by the court itself, or as a doubt which the court decides that any reasonable jury ought to entertain. If the court has a doubt, a reasonable jury should be of like mind. But I see no need for any circumlocution; as I have said it is the doubt in the court's mind upon its review and assessment of the evidence which is the operative consideration."

(Emphasis added)

In Wong Kok Keong, Spencer Wilkinson, J, dealt with section 167 of the Evidence Ordinance at page 15 thus -

"... in order to discover whether there has been a failure of justice one must be guided by s 167. I know of no criterion as to what 'justice' or 'a failure of justice' is except what is laid down by the law. One cannot in my opinion be guided by any such theoretical conception as natural justice. I agree, with respect, with the remark made by Finnemore J in Semtex Ltd v Gladstone [1954] 2 All ER 206 at p 212 :

'... I hope the law of this country and natural justice will approximate always as closely as possible, but all claims and legal defences have to be grounded in law, and not according to somebody's idea of natural justice, not even that of the judge who may hear the case,.'

In my opinion, therefore the sole test as to whether or not the judgment of the court below should be reversed or altered on account of the wrongful admission of this certificate is whether or not without that evidence there was sufficient evidence to justify the conviction."

Woodroffe & Ameer Ali deals with section 176 at page 3805 thus -

"Section 167 applies to both criminal as well as civil proceedings, and it is but one of the many applications of that principle which is at the root of modern legislation respecting judicial procedure, namely, that if legal technicalities cannot be wholly excluded, they shall at least be prevented from materially impeding the course of judicial proceedings and the attainment of that substantial justice which should be their only aim."

The Court of Appeal thereafter concluded at page 587 thus -

"To summarize the authorities cited, if in a criminal appeal an appellant has demonstrated errors in point of evidence or procedure, it is the duty of this court to determine whether, despite the error or errors in question, there exists a reasonable doubt in its mind as to the guilt of the accused, based upon the admissible evidence on the record. If the error or errors complained of do not have this effect, then it is our duty to plainly say so and maintain the conviction."

The judgment of the Court of Appeal was affirmed by the Federal Court though no written grounds were made.
We have examined the record of the proceedings and the grounds of judgment of the learned judge as closely as we can and the grounds of judgment of the Court of Appeal in subsequently affirming the conviction of the appellant by the learned judge. We are satisfied that the errors complained of have not occasioned a substantial miscarriage of justice and we have to plainly say so and to uphold the conviction.
The appeal against the conviction is accordingly dismissed.

My learned Chief Justice will deal with the appeal against the sentence.

Dated: 10 July 2002

(HAIDAR BIN MOHD NOOR)
Judge
Federal Court
Kuala Lumpur

For the Appellant

Counsel: Y.M. Raja Aziz Addruse (Hj. Sulaiman Abdullah with him), Encik Christopher Fernando, Pawancheek Merican, Zulkifli Noordin, Sankara Narayanan Nair, Gurcharan Singh, Kamar Ainiah and Merisa Regina.

Solicitor: Messrs. S.N. Nair & Partners
Advocates & Solicitors
Suite 5C, Level 5,
Wisma Kosas, Jalan Melayu
50100 Kuala Lumpur.

For the Respondent

Counsel: Datuk Gani Patail, Attorney General (Datuk Azahar Mohamed and Mohd. Yusof Zainal Abidin, Senior Federal Counsel with him).

Also present Tun Abdul Majid Tun Hamzah, Nordin Hassan and Shamsul Sulaiman, Deputy Public Prosecutor.
Solicitor: Jabatan Peguam Negara

Ibu Pejabat Pendakwaan
Aras 7, Blok C3
Pusat Pentadbiran Kerajaan Persekutuan
62502 Putrajaya.






--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
© UTUSAN MELAYU (M) BHD., 46M, Jalan Lima Off Jalan Chan Sow Lin, 55200 Kuala Lumpur.
E-mail: online@utusan.com.my
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| Terms of Use |
Website - http://www.utusan.com.my/utusan/content.asp?pg=specialcoverage/anwar/keputusan_rayuan.htm

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Jeff Ooi
(no login)
60.51.181.209

Thinking Allowed. Thinking Aloud.

No score for this post
September 18 2006, 11:57 PM 

take-action4justice
| Peace Member`s |


Joined: 19 Sep 2006
Posts: 1
Location: Tokyo , Japan

Thinking Allowed. Thinking Aloud.
May the powers that be take action against giant corporations who think they are above the law therefore they trample & bully the weak & the defenceless! Website - http://www.corporatescandals.cjb.net/

Posted by: Corporate.Scandals | June 19, 2006 08:59 AM

You have most likely found this website because you are suffering from an adverse drug reaction ("ADR") to a fluoroquinolone ("FQ") antibiotic. The fluoroquinolones include the brand names, Cipro, Levaquin, Tequin, Maxaquin, Avelox, Factive, Floxin, Noroxin, Penetrex, Zagam, as well as any other antibiotic that contains the words "flox" or "ox" in the generic name, such as ciprofloxacin, levafloxacin and gatifloxacin.

Some ophthalmic and otic (ear) drops solutions contain FQ's such as: Chibroxin(norfloxacin), Ocuflox(ofloxacin), Quixin(levofloxacin), Zymar(gatifloxacin), Ciloxan(ciprofloxacin), Floxin Otic (ofloxacin), Cipro Otic (ciprofloxacin), Vigamox(moxifloxacin), CiproHC.

IF YOU ARE CURRENTLY TAKING A FLUOROQUINOLONE ANTIBIOTIC AND ARE SUFFERING FROM ONE OR MORE OF THE ADR'S LISTED BELOW, PLEASE STOP TAKING IT IMMEDIATELY, REPORT YOUR ADR'S TO YOUR DOCTOR AND DEMAND THAT HE/SHE PRESCRIBE A NON-FLUOROQUINOLONE ALTERNATIVE.

If you have finished your course of FQ'S and you are suffering from one or more of the ADR's listed below, YOU MUST NEVER TAKE ANOTHER FQ ANTIBIOTIC AGAIN.
Website - http://fqvictims.org/fqvictims/index.htm

Posted by: Corporate.Scandals | June 19, 2006 09:00 AM

The foundation is a non profit organization consisting of those who have suffered irreversible and non-abating injury as a direct result of fluoroquinolone therapy. The foundation is dedicated to presenting the research regarding these issues in the hope of preventing such injury to others and to make such research readily available to those who have shown a prior interest. We strive to present accurate and up to date information to the victims of such scripting abuse so that they may be in a position to receive the medical care such rampant ignorance has denied them. Such documentation is readily available via the forum or the homepage www.fqresearch.org

Contact Information
Director
The Fluoroquinolone Toxicity Research Foundation
fqresearch@aol.com

http://www.fqresearch.org


Posted by: Corporate.Scandals | June 19, 2006 09:02 AM

The 100 corporate criminals fell into 14 categories of crime: Environmental (3, antitrust (20), fraud (13), campaign finance (7), food and drug (6), financial crimes (4), false statements (3), illegal exports (3), illegal boycott (1), worker death (1), bribery (1), obstruction of justice (1) public corruption (1), and tax evasion (1).

*(30)(tie) Kyowa Hakko Kogyo Co. Ltd.
Type of Crime: Antitrust
Criminal Fine: $10 million
10 Corporate Crime Reporter 40(1), October 21, 1996 Website - http://www.commongroundcommonsense.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=26178

Posted by: Corporate.Scandals | June 19, 2006 09:07 AM

Raja Petra Kamarudin
Age: 55
Gender: male
Astrological Sign: Libra
Zodiac Year: Tiger
Industry: Communications / Media
Occupation: Editor
Location: Kuala Lumpur : Selangor : Malaysia Website - http://www.blogger.com/profile/2933506

Posted by: Corporate.Scandals | June 21, 2006 10:35 AM

We, the Undersigned, endorse the following petition:
What Responsible Corporate Citizen Are You?
Target: Corporate Scandals, CEO , Chaiman , Directors , Managers , Executives ,, Take Action Against Daiichi & Kyowa Hakko's Illega
Sponsor: Corporate Scandals, Take Action Against Daiichi & Kyowa Hakko's Illegal Wrongdoings , money-laundering , human & drug trafficking , etc., Website - http://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/697238292?ltl=1150965253
http://www.jeffooi.com/2006/05/umnos_60th_annivesary_dr_ms_dv.php Email Jeff Ooi: jeffooi.screenshots@gmail.com
Mobile: +6019-3761397

_________________
Established July 1, 1949
Capital ¥26.745 million
Number of employees 5,800 (Parent company: 3,717)
President Dr. Yuzuru Matsuda
Head office 1-6-1 Otemachi, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo 100-8185, Japan
TEL : 81-3-3282-0007
FAX : 81-3-3284-1968
Website - http://www.generasi-m.com/today/board/viewtopic.php?p=1223&sid=9081e1d6d0f54d1b8175ba72b69ed005#1223

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Raja Petra Kamarudin
(no login)
60.49.210.137

Again, money talks, bullshit walks

No score for this post
September 19 2006, 5:51 PM 










Hello....brader....
Public property
Yes Prime Minister
You made your bed, so go lie in it
What me worry?
Opinions are like arse holes
When east meets west
Dear Walter 2
Please don’t spread rumours
It is glorious to be rich




Sunday, September 17, 2006
Again, money talks, bullshit walks

Raja Petra Kamarudin

It has been alleged that the Islamic Party of Malaysia (PAS) got defeated in Terengganu in the last general election in March 2004 -- in fact it got massacred because it was almost wiped out save for four out of 32 state seats -- and almost lost Kelantan State because Umno used money to buy off the voters. It has been alleged that Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad got defeated in Kubang Pasu on Saturday, 9 September 2006, because Umno paid RM200 per voter to not vote for him.

When we say ‘buy’ the voters, this means many things. First, of course, would be the direct method where voters are paid RM50 (sometimes with a piece of cloth or kain pelekat thrown in) for general elections, RM200 to RM500 for divisional elections, and RM500 to RM1,000 for the main party elections at the Annual General Assembly. Secondly would be the indirect buying of votes. This would be in the form of promises of development plus eleventh-hour road improvements and other minor upgrading of the constituency, in particular for the general elections. Next would be threats of losing your government job, not getting a promotion, or getting transferred to a remote location whereby you would lose all the perks and comfort that you have been enjoying all these years.

Notice one thing here. The Umno elections are an all-Malay affair while 97% of the voters in Terengganu and Kelantan are also Malays. What does all this say about the Malays? Basically I suppose it would say that Malays can be bought, and bought cheaply on top of that. You can either pay them is cash, build or resurface the roads in front of their homes, or threaten to take away their comfort. Any one will do the trick and prompt Malays to vote for you.

Some would argue that ‘Malays’ here do not necessarily mean Muslims. No doubt, according to the Federal Constitution of Malaysia, Malays are defined as Muslims. You must be Muslim to be Malay -- though we have many of Chinese, Arab, Indian and Indonesian descent who are considered Malays as well. After all, where does one find ‘pure’ Malays unless one goes to an Orang Asli (original people) settlement? But then these people would not be called Malays but Orang Asli. So, if they are the ‘original people’, do I take it that the Malays are not the original people of this land?

Anyway, that is another topic of discussion for another time. Today, let us talk about Muslim Malays, not those jahil, fasik, murtad or munafik Malays -- as ‘true’ Muslims are always fond of labelling those who do not agree with their interpretation of Islam. Yes, that’s right. If you agree with their views then you are a true Muslim. If you do not, then you are jahil, fasik, murtad or munafik. It’s as simple as that. Either you are with us or you are the enemy. Does this sound familiar? Where do you think President Bush learnt this? Why, from ‘true’ Muslims of course.

They say that the Malaysian police are corrupted. And is not the Malaysian police force almost all Malay? One retired IGP said that if you want to clean up the police force then you would need to sack more than 90% of the police. Who would be left then? Can the nation’s security be guaranteed if more than 90% of its police force is sacked and replaced with freshies? If it is of any consolation, the Special Branch is said to be the cleanest wing of the Malaysian police force and this is because it does not come into direct contact with the public but works behind the scenes. There is hardly any opportunity for the Special Branch to take bribes.

We have all heard that the Malaysian civil service is steeped in corruption. Have you been to any government department or ministry? What is the ratio of Malay to non-Malay civil servants? The voters in Putrajaya are almost 100% Malay. The voters in Putrajaya are also almost 100% civil servants. More than 95% of the voters in Putrajaya vote for Barisan Nasional while the only opposition candidate not only lost but lost his deposit as well.

Why do the voters in Putrajaya vote for the government candidate? Is it because the government candidate is better than the opposition candidate? Is it because Putrajaya is undeveloped and it needs more development? Or is it because the Putrajaya voters, the almost 100% Malays, the almost 100% civil servants, want to protect their jobs and ensure that they would continue enjoying the comfort that comes with their job at the expense of the Malaysian taxpayer?

Yes, bribery comes in many forms. It comes in the form of direct cash. It comes in the form of development. It comes in the form of cushy government jobs. It comes in the form of threats of losing your cushy jobs or government contracts and the money that comes with it.

Money talks, bullshit walks. That is the adage of the Malays. Is this being too cruel to the Malays? After all, it is not only Malays but non-Malays as well who take bribes. And while Malays bribe Malays with RM50 or RM200, the non-Malays bribe Malays in the thousands and millions of Ringgit. So why are Malays being singled out for criticism? Simple! Because the Malays are also Muslims.

We can ‘forgive’ the non-Malays who are not Muslims from indulging in bribes, either taking or receiving. The non-Malays do not go about talking about their religion every day of their life. They do not say that their religion is pure and the only true religion of God. They do not utter statements saying that all other religions are fakes and followers of these religions are misguided and destined for Hell. They live and let live. Malays on the other hand condemn others and judge others harshly. Malays expect nothing short of purity and only Islam is pure. But their acts do not match their words. They are only pure at their lips, not in their hearts.

Islam says that riba’ or usury is a sin. There are 80 levels of usury and the sin for the lowest level tantamount to the sin of intercourse with one’s own mother or father. This is what Islam says. But the level of corruption amongst the Malays is highest. The Malays can be bought for RM50 to RM200. Is that all it takes to buy the Malays, RM50 to RM200? Is the sin of intercourse with one’s own mother or father worth the RM50 to RM200? This appears to be what the Malays are saying.

Many are ashamed about what happened in Kubang Pasu on 9 September. The shame is not so much that Malaysia’s Prime Minister of 22 years was defeated when he contested the lowest rung of the Umno ladder, a mere perwakilan to the Annual General Assembly. They are ashamed that the Malays can be bought that cheaply.

The defeat of Mahathir at Kubang Pasu was not a shame for Mahathir. It was a shame for the entire Malay race. It showed the world the values and ethics of the Malays. It showed the world how cheap the Malays are. It showed the world that Malays can be bought and sold for pittance.

For years Mahathir has been trying to change the Malay mindset. He insulted the Malays. He provoked the Malays. He cried at the Umno General Assembly when he spoke about the Malays. In his interview soon after he retired, he said that his biggest regret is that even after 22 years as Malaysia’s Prime Minister he had failed to change the Malays. The Malays are no better now than when he first took over as Prime Minister 25 years ago. This, to Mahathir, was his greatest failure.

Today, Mahathir has proven what he tried telling the Malays all those many years. And he used Kubang Pasu to prove his point. Mahathir was not defeated at Kubang Pasu. He actually won. He wanted what happened to happen. He knew that they were buying off the voters with a mere RM200. And he allowed it to happen though he could have pulled the plug and stopped it. He wanted his message to finally get through. He wanted to shame the Malays. He wanted to be able to say, “I told you so, the Malays have no morals and can be bought cheaply.”

When he wrote his book ‘The Malay Dilemma’ more than 30 years ago it was not a Chinese-bashing book. The Chinese were not Mahathir’s target for attack. His target was the Malays. He was not trying to insult the Chinese. He was trying to insult the Malays. When he says that the Chinese exploit the Malays, he does not mean this as an anti-Chinese statement. He means this as an anti-Malay statement. After all, someone cannot exploit you unless you want to be exploited.

When Mahathir launched his Look East Policy it was not aimed at giving all the government contracts to Japanese or Korean companies. It was aimed at instilling Japanese and Korean work ethics into Malaysians in general and Malays in particular. He wanted Malaysians to be proud, inventive, competitive, and able to engage the western and developed nations and beat them at their own game.

When Mahathir went against the rulers in the 1980s it was not to remove the institution of the monarchy and convert Malaysia into a republic. It was to remove the feudalistic attitude of the Malays and to show the Malays that they do not need to hide behind the Raja-Raja Melayu for security. Malays can make it in the modern world by adopting new values like pride in personal achievements and a spirit of competitiveness.

Mahathir was proud when a Malay sailed solo around the world, or climbed Mount Everest, or swam the English Channel, or walked across the North Pole, or whatever. He would honour them. What is one man or woman doing what Westerners have done many times and hundreds of years before this? How great an achievement is that? To Mahathir, if just one Malay can do this, then there is hope yet for all Malays. Of course, one swallow does not make a summer. But then, a journey of a thousand miles must always start with the first step.

Mahathir is through insulting, goading, provoking and crying. He is no longer Prime Minister and does not have the luxury of time. He now has to move fast with whatever little time he may have left. And he is doing this the way he did it at Kubang Pasu. He is allowing the Malays to make fools of themselves and hopes that they will be so ashamed of their actions that change would come. But then I do not share Mahathir’s confidence in the Malays or believe that shock treatment might bring its desired result. But then again, that is probably because I am not ‘pure’ Malay like all those other Malays of Indonesian, Indian, Chinese and Arabic stock.

posted 1:15 PM

102 Comments:
monsterball said...
RPK.....Firstly, I want to apologise openly for using harsh words against you in my previous posting. I hope you will let bygones be bugones and understand my frustrations.Thanks and may you and your family be well and good.

Sunday, September 17, 2006 2:29:32 PM
Stephen Bennit said...
"Today, Mahathir has proven what he tried telling the Malays all those many years. And he used Kubang Pasu to prove his point. Mahathir was not defeated at Kubang Pasu. He actually won. He wanted what happened to happen. He knew that they were buying off the voters with a mere RM200. And he allowed it to happen though he could have pulled the plug and stopped it. He wanted his message to finally get through. He wanted to shame the Malays. He wanted to be able to say, “I told you so, the Malays have no morals and can be bought cheaply.”


Pretty far fetched Raja...Mahathir's policies were actually what that brought down the Malays .....I dont think Malays needed shock treatment, just look at Singapore. Malays there can walk with their head high. On the contrary, it is Mahathir's policies that brought down the Malays.

Sunday, September 17, 2006 2:30:07 PM
3rd generation malaysian said...
covertly provacative article which I like. Time to redefine 'malay' in the constitution.
As it stands, any 'professing' muslim can be a 'malay'- just learn a few words.

Sunday, September 17, 2006 2:36:39 PM
monsterball said...
Corruptions are worldwide political affairs....even in S'pore. But the shocking very high level of Malaysia's coruptions under Mahathir 22 years as PM showed clearly the leader who encourage corruptions is Mahathir!!
The characteristics of Mahathir...not one muslim can match him in Malaysia or for that matter..around the world.....for he can twist and turn anything and everything to his favours for he knew the muslims were hero worshipping him for being daring and special.
No one will dispute how much he has done for Malaysia....but he was a dictator and also amassed God forbidden RM billions by also being the most corrupteded PM in SEA .
His reputation sank when he kept criticising others ........even his reputation was obviously exposed as corrupted cunning and devilsh....as predicted by our beloved Tunku.
On daily corruptions.....it is all over Malaysia...starting from the police to the municipality councils. Yes Police are mostly muslms....so who corrupt them? So are the influncial politicians.....who corrupt them? AND WHY??? Many Chinese business people cannot continue to do business WITHOUT giving "table money"
It was a period.....not what you know......but who you know to do business.
All these point ONLY TO MAHATHIR.....AS THE PM .He totally ignored complaints and even put Lim Kit Siang INTO JAIL FOR EXPOSING CORRUPTIONS....to show to the public who is the boss. Of course he uses his very typical double talk language to justify everything he did wrong.
Can any new PM erased all these in 3 years? To do so...it will be total disaster for Pak Lah...so he concentrate on exposing Mathahir the leader. To me....that is the smartest move that caught Mahathir by surprise...for he is so used to "yes" man... HE WAS TOTALLY INSULTED. The stragety played by Mahathir is well known...to avoid being convicted as a criminal.....he creates trouble and confusions.
Had he left Pak Lah to concentrate doing his job...I think we can see very significant reductions on corruptions.
To blame all the malays being corrupted is totally unfair...just like blaming all chinese as bribers. The group is so small that make Pak Lah's job to stamp down corruptions is actually quite simple.....but in Malaysia...Pak Lah's job is made more difficult by inheriting cans of worms and thick layers of dust in evry government department....he has to clean up first.
We can vote him out in next general elections...if he purposely delay doing anything...but for now...one must be supportive and understanding towards his difficulties.....not criticise him all the time.

Sunday, September 17, 2006 3:08:33 PM
Mohd Kamal Abdullah said...
Everybody knows that especially the malays could be bought by cash or favours. That's how Barisan Nasional had been surviving so far. You just need to give a 'kenduri' and promise them some money or do something for them, they will vote for you.

The next questions is, can the malays change? It all depends on the malays themselves. Everyone can change, it is whether they want to change. Most of the younger generation malays have received totally free tertiary education at home and abroad which should guide them easily.

Kubang Pasu clearly showed the other Malaysians and the world that a mere RM200 was enough to bribe them to make them listen to them. How lowly have these people been?

Its time for the malays to wake-up and face reality.

BUT ONCE THE MALAYS HAVE COME TO THEIR SENSES, BARISAN NASIONAL IS GOING TO BE THE VICTIM. Can they(BN) afford it.

Only time will tell. The next general elections will be the indicator. Wait for it and see.

Sunday, September 17, 2006 3:11:01 PM
Tomcat said...
Dear Raja Petra Kamarudin,

It is an internationally & globally known undisputable fact that the Malays can be bought & sold for pittance plus the 30% Bumi equity requirement which more often than not must be FREE plus the Malay Privileges!

You don’t have to publish this article, let sleeping dog lies. But to help you get it off your chest, you can always e-mail it to me.

“You are always generous?”

I fully agreed without the slightest doubt pertaining to Stephen Bennit’s comment. But please keep it to yourself otherwise, they will learn from us & compete with us & our descendants later on.

Sunday, September 17, 2006 3:16:38 PM
monsterball said...
Yes...If the Malays do not change...then it is time to vote any opposition to replace UMNO.
They have played politics like as if they own Malaysia and get MCA and MIC as puppets on their strings.
But like I said...we should give Pak Lah a chance....till next election and stop insulting him.......especially when he is doing the right thing. Those insulting him are the die hard oppositions....which I am very sure are nothing significant as voters but seems quite alot in MT? Nothing to be concern about.

Sunday, September 17, 2006 3:21:39 PM
melindubuda said...
A Malay in the States of Malaysia is by default a Muslim, and there is wisdom in this conferrment.

Please take a moment and reflect upon what happened some 1500 years ago. There were a couple of tribes, including the Quraysh in the Valley of Makkah. They spoke Jahilliyyah Arabic.

Muhammad came and thus begun a "process" of the Islamization of the language of Arabic into the Quran Arabic accompanied by a worldview far removed from the jahilliyah days. They became Muslim Arabs.

Some 1000 years ago Arab Muslims [remembering the reported hadith of the Prophet saying about the land in Samudera shall have many awliyyah] began the same "process" of Islamization of the Achenese, Bugis, Bataks, Minangs, Melayu,Jambis, and Javanese, Kalimantanese, Pattanis, Bruneis, Sulus, Suluwesians, Filipinos and .......

What wisdom did they brought and accomplished? It is the Islamization of the lingua franca of the Islands of SEA and Malaya.

They have to choose a language that is NOT too too much tinted by Hindu-Buddha influences and by the God's Grace, they chosed Bahasa Jawi [Melayu] and introduced the Arabic script called Jawi.

The Arabs called us "orang Jawi" my cousins in Saudia still called us "orang Jawi" [Melayu}.

It is the greatest blessings from God to have Islamize the ethnic races of Sumatra, Java, Celebes, Pattanic, Kalimantan, Sulu, perhaps, Champa.

Those who leave Islam for one reason or another should retain their ethnic race --Java, Bugis, Batak, Minang BUT not Melayu.

Melayu is synonymous with being a Muslim.

Being fasik, munafiq, kufr etc is another story.

[well, the process of Islamization is somewhat "interrupted" by the coming of the Protuguese, Dutch, and English and now, Western-Christianity]

{A good example of Western-Christianity is the Pope who has an infantile belief about God being absent during Holocaust, or Bush, Blair, Howard etc wanting to subjugate the world with the mixture of Greek-Roman-Judaic-Christian-Pagan-modernism-Science beliefs]

Sunday, September 17, 2006 3:29:46 PM
Jackie said...
I believed human being going through different stages of learning and development just like the kids. They will play with fire thinking it is fun until they get burn, and learnt.

Different countries and different races are at different level of this learning and development stages. The European has gone through the dark age where religion is everything to them. But now they understand what is more important in life! So it is not surprising the muslim's living today are like the present one.

For bribery, sometime back the Chinese also can be easily bought. When they just begin to learn and if there is people giving them sweet, just take lah. Anyway slowly they understand there is a price to pay, sooner or later, and this bad habit can disappeared.

So Malays may be at certain development stages that all these practice is still taken as nothing wrong. But they will change! Anyway if they are not ready yet in their mindset, there is no way, or very difficult to change them. No one can bypass the process. That is why Mahathir had failed with his "Malay Dilemma".

It is not to worry, and not to harsh. Given time, things will change.

Of course there may be some effective means to speed up the process if the right strategies are implemented. In Singapore, their government ensure that the smartest and those who really ahead of time will lead the society. Then this group of people shall set the good example and shorten the learning curve.

In Malaysia, our leaders somehow throw away this strategy and opt for to go with the crowd. So the process certainly is slow.

What to do, it is the choice!

Sunday, September 17, 2006 3:38:43 PM
orangpahang said...
Yes! Money talks, Bullshit walks.

Sunday, September 17, 2006 3:39:53 PM
PURE Malaysian said...
SO do our country really have 'malay' ? or just mamak malay; indonesian malay; philiphino malay; Thai malay; chinese malay; Arab malay......and so on.

Then who is getting the 30% from the NEP policy. The above smart malay or the kampung malay....

these are the "malays" that I know who are bumiputra ststus and can have the privillege to buy bumi land,ASM shares,MARA scholarship and......... lot lot more.and I had been told to covert to muslim and enjoy the same cakes that they enjoy now.

Do a pure malaysian must convert to muslim to enjoy the "malay"sian" status and get our share of economy cake

well we have to start thiking are we pure malaysian of the same ststus. or we still have to help our true malay brothers or keeping on letting the "malay"sian" to rob and rotten our economy?

Sunday, September 17, 2006 4:08:21 PM
TheWrathOfGrapes said...
/// For years Mahathir has been trying to change the Malay mindset. He insulted the Malays. He provoked the Malays. He cried at the Umno General Assembly when he spoke about the Malays. In his interview soon after he retired, he said that his biggest regret is that even after 22 years as Malaysia’s Prime Minister he had failed to change the Malays. The Malays are no better now than when he first took over as Prime Minister 25 years ago. This, to Mahathir, was his greatest failure. ///

RPK - why don't you analyze the reasons why Mhathir failed in stamping out corruption? Simple answer is that he has no moral high ground to do so. If the top leadership is crooked, how can you expect the followers to be straight? You can cajole all you want, you can threaten all you want and you can insult all you want. But at the end of the day, if you yourself are crooked, what you say and do will all be hogwash. Your tears all really crocodile tears.

There is a Chinese saying which goes like this; "If the top beam is not straight, the bottom bean will be crooked."

Sunday, September 17, 2006 4:53:57 PM
mat saman kati said...
Macam mana Melayu yang sebenar?

Melayu sebenar mesti sokong Umno, kalau tak sokong, itu melayu murtad, pengkhianat bangsa. Kalau sokong, Cina pun boleh jadi Melayu. India pun boleh jadi melayu.

Macam mana Muslim yang sebenar?

Muslim sebenar mesti sokong Pas. Kalau tak sokong, itu murtad, munafik, pengkhianat ugama. Kalau sokong, jadi ahli Kelab Penyokong Pas, jadi calon pun boleh. Tak timbul soal munafik, kafir dsb.

Sunday, September 17, 2006 4:58:25 PM
Mufti Murtad said...
RPK SAID : Islam says that riba’ or usury is a sin. There are 80 levels of usury and the sin for the lowest level tantamount to the sin of intercourse with one’s own mother or father. This is what Islam says.

ERR BRO...THIS IS NEWS TO ME. RIBA IS A SIN. RIBA MEANS 'TO MULTIPLY MANYFOLD'. IT REFERS TO EXCESS PROFITEERING. NOT BANK INTEREST. OF COURSE EXCESSIVE AH LONG INTEREST IS ALSO PROFITEERING AND HENCE RIBA. SUBTLE BUT MAJOR DIFFERENCE.

THE PART ABOUT 80 LAYERS, INTERCOURSE ETC IS CERITA ULAMAK SAJA. U KNOW LAH THE ULAMAK LIKE TO TEMBERANG ALSO.

Sunday, September 17, 2006 5:01:59 PM
d_BigFoot said...
Dear Peter,
There should be more clones like you in Malaysia, esp the Malays.

However, you've given Mahathir too much credit where it's not due.

He had 22 years, and wow, suddenly he came to realized he screwed up!

While Singapore quietly went ahead to instill the right mindset in all its people, regardless of race & religion. Work hard. No hand-outs, meritocratic rules, no free lunches. But, best education for all, good housing, no ghettos, good healthcare, security, and future for the youngs. Why Mahathir didn't march down this road?

No one is to blame but himself.
As a leader, leadership is expected.
And on this, he screwed up. Big Time.

Let's not paint too over-powdered a picture of his greatness.

Sunday, September 17, 2006 5:28:51 PM
kelmarin said...
yeah rite...
we all should just blame the past and happily forget about the future....
mind you though, the past is no more and the future is still uncertain...

Sunday, September 17, 2006 5:49:46 PM
razramus said...
As far as corruption in Malaysia is concerned, the following statement holds true:

Mahathir is corruption; And Corruption is Mahathir.

Mahathir brought corruption to a new level amongst the malays. He corrupted the malays; he appointed corrupt UMNO members as Ministers, Chief Ministers/ MBs and States EXCOs. Government's Contracts and Tenders were awarded to lazy and corrupted UMNO malays including Mahathir's children who hived off those lucrative contracts to non-malays.

To make sure corruption is here to stay and these people remain corrupted, Mahathir corrupted the Civil institutions like the judiciary, Ag Chambers, ACA and Police. He appointed corrupted malays who were servile to him to head those institutions.

That is why corruption has degenerated to such a low level no thanks to Mahathir. Those who indulged in corruption whether as giver or receiver are followers of Satan or Iblis; so ordained God in His Holy Book.

What happened in Kubang Pasu are the result of Mahathir's corrupted ways. We hardly hear all these during Tunku and Hussein Onn's days. During Mhathirs time, the more corrupt you are, the better is your chance to become Minister/MB/ CM.

JJ was finally appointed a full Minister by Mahathir because he was finally found to be corrupt during his TNB days by Mahahtir.

If you are clean and honest, you won't survive in the Mahathir era. Dolah Hadhari just continues his master's corrupted ways.

There's hope for the malays. Only about 50-53% of the malays can be bought. If you look at their profile, you can find their link or linkages one way or another to/with the corrupt UMNO party. These group of malays would forever remain corrupt come what may until they sever their ties with the corrupt UMNO. But they got all the worldly goodies. To them these worldly goodies are bestowed on the good grace of UMNO.

And finally talking about the Special Branch officers. They all became overnight millionaires when they were appointed as CPOs. Rahim Noor, an SB officer lost his pension because of his conviction for assaulting Anwar. Believe me; to Rahim that pension is small change to him.

Sunday, September 17, 2006 5:56:25 PM
GuardianObserver said...
Wow! You dare write this piece in Malaysia.
Be careful though.
In Malaysia there is GEK "Government Encouraged Killings"
GuardianObserver

Sunday, September 17, 2006 6:01:45 PM
monsterball said...
One of the ways to erase corruption....I beleive....is to increase the salaries of the Ministers and duputies and make them sign an undated resignation letter to be kept by the a third party that is not afraid of the PM.
ANOTHER LETTER IS TO SAY THEY ARE WILLING TO HOLD RESPONSIBLITIES FOR ANY WRONG DOINGS UNDER THEIR MINISTRY..AND RESIGN IF PM SO WISHES,
The IGP and Mentri Besar salaries should be increase.
In commercial firms....people who are paid well are loyal and satisfied workers.
However...if this does not work....then the Malay politicians in UMNO are trully hypocrites and full of shit and should be voted out.
I sincerely hope there are more true sincere politicians in UMNO than crooked ones.
The ministers must go back to basic to realise they are the SERVANTS of the public...not do as they like. People's power must be given sincerly....as frustrated people will mean trouble for the country. Learn from Indonesia and the Phillippines. DO THEY WANT THIS TO HAPPEN IN MALAYSIA??
Right now people are suffering again because of TDM nonsense plus obvious reccession period creeping in. How fast can Pak Lah do anything to stop this....God only knows.
The people are racialistics in MALAYSIA....Who is to be blame??
Unless all are loving to be called "Malaysians" ...not as Chinese.....Malays or Indians as their identities....but proud of their roots is okay. That I am afraid also...that the malays will feel inferior as their roots is only 500 year old. They must feel proud to live with Chinese and indians richer roots.....as God has bless Malaysia with so many rich cultures.
Mindsets must change to get the right attitudes and characteristics to wipe out corruptions. OTHERWISE IT IS VERY DIFFICULT UNLESS PAK LAH IS BRAVE ENOUGH TO SACK FEW OF THE CORRUPTED MINISTERS OR FORCED THEM TO RESIGN TO SHOW HE IS TRULLY OUT TO FIGHT CORRUPTIONS....STARTING FROM HIS CABINETS...RIGHT NOW!!!

Sunday, September 17, 2006 6:26:49 PM
Sapatchai said...
Money talks, bullshit walks is the correct term for TDM. To change the Malay mindset is just another of his theme song to woes the Malays.
His heart is actually for:
1. Position
2. Money
3. Power
4. Money
5. Power
6. Money
7. Power
8. Money
9. Power
10.Little Money Left
11.Retire (Money stop totally)
12.Mengamok
Why blame the Malays, why blame AAB, why blame everybody except himself? He is the Father of What Malaysia is Today, what the Malays is Today, what the Leaders is Today and what He the Pariah is Today. RPK, HE IS SU..RAT KHABAR LAMA, Forget bout him lah.

Sunday, September 17, 2006 6:34:51 PM
Liberal said...
RPK,

In your last paragraph you sounded very "takbur" and you think that you come from a better kind of Malay pedigree ... is that true?!

I suggest we start issuing MKA certs to authenticate all Malaysians pedigree and linage ... hahaha ... btw, MKA certs are certs that is issued by the Malaysian Kennel Association to verify you pets (dogs & cats) pedigree ... lol -joking

Sunday, September 17, 2006 6:50:58 PM
Old Fart said...
Now tht there is final acceptance that Malays come cheap, it is about time something is done fast to rectify this. The Mamaks through Kimma have asked teh government to regard them as Malays. I think the governmetn should. Then at least teh statistics might improve a little about the Malays coming cheap!!!

Sunday, September 17, 2006 7:37:41 PM
silent moslem said...
From what I see this is happening everywhere ler in the world.Especially in the Government sector(most malay work with the government?). They give less salary to accomodate the benefits thus making the ppl tempted to take something extra. Due away with this and give good salary see how things change. Just my observation.Peace out.

Sunday, September 17, 2006 8:27:10 PM
daverics said...
RPK, have to question your article this time around.... Why make it into a race argument?

One who is determined to win, no matter the cost, could go to the extend of threatening death to one's family member to obtain obedience...

Anyone can be bought, at the right price. e.g: If someone out there, is able to bring you,RPK, to your knees, you'll agree to a price, in order to get back on your feet.

So don't use race as the arguments.

And Mahathir, no matter how well you put him in this article, is acting like a desperate man, with motives only known to him. I may not know him at all personally, but I know that if someone messes with your PERIUK NASI, it can really get one out of control to save his own life.

I sign off with this comment, to those in power, "TAKE WHAT YOU NEED, BUT LEAVE ENOUGH TO DEVELOP, SO THAT YOU CAN IN FUTURE, TAKE A LITTLE BIT MORE".... OR MAYBE THERE'S NO FUTURE TO THESE PEOPLE ON THE TAKE....

Sunday, September 17, 2006 8:37:37 PM
as a rakyat said...
Dear RPK,

Good one..
---------------
Saya mengikuti perkembangan RPK mengenai isu DSAI sehingga tertubuhnya Malaysiatoday dan ditahan dibawah ISA.

Walaupun pahit getir yg saudara lalui dizaman TDM dalam krisis DSAI namun tulisan saudara terhadap TDM saya anggap sebagai berpijak dibumi yg nyata. dan amat mengkagumkan.

Saya lihat saudara memfokuskan isu & bukan individu. Betulkan saya jika tanggapan saya ini berbeza dari pandangan saudara.

Saya kira bukan mudah untuk saudara memberikan a fair comment
dalam hal isu-isu semasa. Lebih-lebih lagi jika ianya mengaitkan orang yg pernah menyusahkan saudara satu ketika dulu.

Diatas sifat fair comments saudara itu saya terdorong, untuk mendapatkan komen saudara menyentuh beberapa isu seperti berikut;

1. Apa pandangan saudara mengenai rasuah di zaman TDM menjadi PM. Adakah TDM punca segala rasuah?

2. Cara TDM menangani krisis spekulasi matawang. Apa sebenarnya berlaku diantara DSAI & TDM.

3. Jika tidak berlaku krisis spekulasi matawang. Adakah timbul krisis DSAI, Bailout & kroni.

Sunday, September 17, 2006 8:41:12 PM
daverics said...
One thing is obvious, we keep making the same insane mistakes.....

thing big, grand, boast, big talk..... and then fail to carry out basic actions that doesn't take seconds to decide....

Government wants to crack down on corruption.....

Here's an idea. Get official and no official addresses of all the ministers, and the middle representatives, and the monkeys who serves their pockets......

If their official salary can't even pay for the loan repayment, what the hell are they living in that address in the first place..

I am sure a few of us bloggers or the mat rempit would be willing to bring these people forward...

Simple, and effective, but yet NOT DONE.

Sunday, September 17, 2006 8:42:52 PM
Raja Petra Kamarudin said...
Dear Liberal, pleeeeeezzzzz, I am not Malay, I am Bugis. We are the race that conquered this land and saved the Malays. If not for the Bugis the Portuguese and Dutch would not have been 'locked' in Melaka but would have spread throughout the land like in Indonesia.

Sunday, September 17, 2006 8:47:37 PM
Raja Petra Kamarudin said...
Dear daverics, because Malays go around screaming HALAL and HARAM every day, the whole day long. But they will not hesitate to mengentekedarah yang haram. Baik lagi orang who you label as KAFIR who don't scream and shout yet whack the very thing that they condemn. Porahlah Melayu. Bikin tak serupa cakap.

Sunday, September 17, 2006 8:51:35 PM
Raja Petra Kamarudin said...
Dear d_BigFoot, Mahathir DID NOT suddently realise he failed to change the Malays. He used to grumble all the while when he was PM that Melayu susahlah. He even wanted to end the NEP but there was a revolt from the ground.

Sunday, September 17, 2006 8:54:34 PM
JUSTICE said...
Welcome back Montersball...your english has improved a lot. Did you do a fast english course while you were missing?

Sunday, September 17, 2006 8:57:26 PM
cockroach said...
money talks - orait no problem sir.

but i beg to differ on your use of the word corruption.

i believe it is more appropriate to use the word culture - my dictionary defines culture as ideas, beliefs and customs that are shared or accepted by people in a society.

since majority of the people practise (and do not complain) about giving and receiving money - it must be interpreted as culture.

Sunday, September 17, 2006 9:19:16 PM
riau said...
Mahathir had 22 years to change the Malay mindset - that is at least one generation, no?

He failed, why? In economics, giving incentive is usually a panacea for many underdevelopment problems. Yes, Mahathir gave lots of incentives but these were not thought out carefully,it was not flexible enough and no monitoring (maintenance) was provided.

You want to give incentives, don't pick and choose. Why select only people you know? This is a moral hazard. Let everybody - all bumiputra and their "baba" - compete and the best win by merit.

Now if you don't perform and you have been given chances to rectify and still don't perform why still mollycoddle such non performers. Sack them, black list them lah!. This is strong disincentive but why didn't Mahathir not put this in place?

RPK, did you read what LKY said at a good governance conference about Malaysia at the sidelines of the WB/IMF summit in Singapore? Malu seh!

Sunday, September 17, 2006 9:23:27 PM
chanmalichan said...
Unless the corrective actions are taken to correct all the wrongs for the past twenty over years, this is all talk. We can talk until the cow come home and Malaysia will still be the same.

Just look at our leaders, even graduated from oxford also cannot see the bigger picture. Only want to live for the day and have the glory for the moment. Don't they know they are making their own children suffer in the future? With no competitive edge how are we surviving. Don't blame anyone when they have to be maids or labourers in the richer countries later.

Sunday, September 17, 2006 10:30:48 PM
Liberal said...
RPK, good to know that you come from a fearless and brave tribe known as the Bugis or the vikings of south east asia. No wonder you're so brave and fearless even when faced with ISA charges ... truly a viking/bugis at heart!

Sunday, September 17, 2006 10:52:23 PM
monsterball said...
Thanks "Justice" writer. Yip.....I try to type slowly with my one finger typing and double checking...hahaha
I still have some difficulties in good spellings....doing all these as a hobby at home.
Thanks again for welcoming me back.
All the best!

Sunday, September 17, 2006 11:21:10 PM
cognisant said...
I was informed that the Malay who sailed round the world has become a Christian and now lives overseas. His records are bing obliterated. Can anyone confirm this?

Sunday, September 17, 2006 11:38:04 PM
Vindica said...
Dear RPK

Yours is fair comment and because we are discussing Malaysia and not other countries, therefore Malay/Muslims is the subject in this commentary. In a sense, all races (human beings) are corruptible and Malays are not the only race easily corrupted. That Malays are easily corrupted for a few dollars are the general perception of most Malaysians and foreigners because of the exceptions and not bbecause all Malays are corrupted.

The whole Government machinery i.e. those that are in position to be bribed like the police, government officials, purchasing officers, etc., are the ones. Ordinary Malays are one of the nicest people around but once they are out of their kampungs and into the city they are exposed to the ills of society and may be badly tempted and led astray.

I believe we the leaders should get to the root of the problem and stamp out corruption once and for all. A strong leader (maybe himself corrupted) can flush out all the corrupted government officials and get rid of them. Do as I say but do not do as I do should be the theme. China itself has a long way to go to stamp out corruption and several officials have been executed. It is not necessary to get all minor and major corrupt officials but a few examples will be enough to show you mean business. One colleague taken away for such crimes will be enough to frighten away theose who are guilty of the same crime.

TDM is a failure in that he failed miserably in many areas as he was too short-sighted. He did not root out corruption and failed to train good leaders to ensure the prosperity of his legacy. Blaming oneself does not take away the responsibilty of one's personal failures. It just shows certain qualities of good leadership and governance was lacking. The blame game has always been used as an excuse for failure, either blame oneself or others but in running a country there is no excuse as all will eventually suffer one way or the other. The important issue here is that the past leadership and perhaps the present one do not focus in investing and developing their citizens. They do not invest in uniting the different races and containing the explosive religious differences. Instead they are spending more efforts in winning votes to ensure their future but not that of the country. Malays practises their religion like they wear a mask. You can see the mask but not the face behind it. Other races tend to look beyond that when dealing with the Malays and because you are not of the same race and religion, you can take off the mask and expose your face. The corrupt ones will let the other race know they can be bought. Once exposed, other races will think all Malays are the same i.e. they are hypocrites. Because being a Malay is synonynous as being a Muslim, other races cannot separate the two. So if a police officer ask for a bribe because Hari Raya is around the corner, what else can another race think about what a Malay is?

TDM's grandiose projects can be compared what being a Malay is.....all show but can Malays and Malaysia stand as tall as the Twin Towers for the whole world to see?

Sunday, September 17, 2006 11:43:37 PM
sledwig84 said...
rpk says:
"The defeat of Mahathir at Kubang Pasu was not a shame for Mahathir. It was a shame for the entire Malay race. It showed the world the values and ethics of the Malays. It showed the world how cheap the Malays are. It showed the world that Malays can be bought and sold for pittance."

sledwig84 replies back:
WTF!!! The malays can be bought for peanuts? might as well jadi bangsa monyet!!! monyet got more pride, honour & dignity than malays!!!

even the creed of both 'anjing & khinzir' is not THAT low compare to these low-class uneducated pariahs!!!

no wonder most of my malay frens prefer to address themselves as "MALAYSIAN MUSLIMS" & not malays to the whole world...

oh, and by the way, TDM should have given these pariahs one hell of a shock treatment by not just abolishing NEP but also getting rid of these so-called SPECIAL RIGHTS & PRIVILEGES!!!

Sunday, September 17, 2006 11:48:03 PM
cognisant said...
Wait a moment, RPK. You are very smart. You got everyone to accept that the Malays at Kubang Pasu were bribed. I thought you were more objective than that. It has not been proven there is bribery yet. Suppose that, instead Mahathir tried to bribe the Malays at Kubang Pasu and failed. This would prove the Malays are not as lowdown as that. Give this some thought.

Sunday, September 17, 2006 11:51:06 PM
cerpela' said...
gueyRPK

Malacca under the patronage of Malay king was defeated by the Portugeuse, then the Dutch drove them out.The descendant of Malaccan king dispersed into Pahang, Kelang (Selangor), Perak and Johor., with the Sultanate of Johore under kerajaan Johor-Riau taking the mantle of the former Malaccan Kingdom to fight the Dutch.

The Johor Kingdom was later taken by a Bugis Menteri Perdana after the Sultan then, Sultan Mahmud Mangkat dijulang (mangkat diusungan ditikam laksmananya sendiri) kerana ketiadaan keturunan gahara.

Then one after another these Malay small kingdoms fall into the hand of of the Bugis like tenpins thru intimidatons and intermarriages.

At about the same time there was another Malay sphere of power in Acheh. One of the prince who later become Sultan, Raja Haji is believed to have some Malaccan blood. He lead a flottila of malay warships and surrounded Mallaca for almost 6 months. The Dutch was almost defeated but was saved by Pahang who attack the Raja Haji's flottila during that crucial time.
Guess who ruled Pahang during this time - another Bugis Prince.

And much later who gave Singapore to the British, who gave Pulau Pinang to the British ... the Bugis blood malay kings. Is this the history links and blood lineage that you are proud of!

Hold on i am not finish.

And much earlier there was a malay prince/ulamak from Acheh who went to Pattani then not islamised yet. He married the local princess and later managed to convert Sultan and the people of Pattani. Islam flourished there until Pattani was defeated by Chakri Kingdom. The king and his followers went for refuge to Sulawesi island in Makasar region. They manage to convert this Makasarese to Islam.
it was their descendants who died as shahids defending Gowa, Makasar, Ternate and Bone from the Dutch. Pakaian rasmi Kesultanan Patani ada di Muzium Bone.
So who are the Bugis ..Achenese+Pattani+Makasarese, are they not malay.

Siapa ini yg malu mengaku susur galur bangsanya kerana sedikit diperli akibat kelancangan mulutnya sendiri.

Bangsa melayu bukan bangsa yg lemah kerana seorang Mahathir yg inferiority complex.

Hapuskan rasuah, melayu akan bangkit kembali seperti Jentayu dan Cenderawasih.

Sunday, September 17, 2006 11:51:47 PM
zique said...
RPK

Kalau Mahathir kalah kerana rasuah, takkanlah semua melayu nak diperlekeh.Salahkan Melayu yg ada dalam UMNO cukuplah. Mahathir yg buat mereka jadi macam itu.

Memang rakyat kebanyakan mahu lihat Mahathir kalah kat kubang pasu.

Soal keinginan hang nak tengok Mahathir kat perhimpunan UMNO tu perkara lain.Takkan sampai nak tuduh semua melayu rasuah. hang ni gila ke apa.

Monday, September 18, 2006 12:29:58 AM
Cinama said...
TDM is an asshole.

Be a Sport - Be a good loser. Dont find excuses and say malay can be bought for a mere RM200.00. Who do you think put you there as PM?

You think you are GOD - I think what you think should be spell backward. You make so many mistakes and make so many people miserable. Now you realise your mistake and try to blame it on others.... Come on TDM - you are an asshole

TDM, your first three years as PM is impressive but mere slogan. What Bersih Cekap and Amanah (BCA)? Bullshit!

BCA should be BODOH Cipek Arrogant!
You really think the Indon wanna you - go la to Jakarta and be the President! I for one dont want you. If the Filipino want you - go to Manila and be their President!
Malaysia can do without you! Melayu can do without a Mamak who think he is more melayu than melayu -go fly kite.

Monday, September 18, 2006 1:13:19 AM
Tungsten said...
Dont any one dare blame the chinese for giving bribes.I am a chinese business man and I have to give bribe to the civil servants not because I want to but because I have to.Who in his right mind would want to give his hard earn money away?The local councils, the land office, the Pentadbir Talian and Galian are all corrupt to the core.They will frustrate and reject your application if you dont pay them.I applied for a quarry licence on my own land and after four years and four times my application was rejected without a reason.I was advised to pay and after the fifth attempt was approved. What was I to do? Wait for another 10 years and be a bankrupt.I had no choice. It was like a gun pointed at your head . Either you pay or die.This is the same with all govt depts. Ask any chinaman. Who in his right mind would want to pay for something which the govt should provide for free.?No it will not change unless we sack 90% of the civil servants and the police.It is easier to strike a lottery than to hope for this to happen.

Monday, September 18, 2006 1:25:37 AM
anotheroneofyou said...
WHO SAYS ALL MALAYS ARE MUSLIMS FIRST AND ISLAM AFTER - FOR THOSE LOW LIFES WHO MANIPULATE THE ORIGINAL LOVELY MALAYS. MALAYS ARE BEAUTIFUL AND SINCERE PEOPLE - MALAYSIA HAS CORRUPTED THEIR INNOCENSE AND GENUINE NICENESS---A Malaysian Indian who grew up amongst Malays all my life

Malays (Dutch, Malayo, ultimately from Malay: Melayu) are a diverse group of Austronesian peoples inhabiting the Malay archipelago and Malay peninsula in Southeast Asia.
They constitute the dominant ethnic group in Malaysia, Indonesia, Brunei, the Philippines, the southern most part of Thailand and East Timor, which together with Singapore make up what is called the Malay archipelago. Outside this area, Malay people inhabit Palau, Guam and the Northern Marianas, most of Madagascar, and the Cham areas of Vietnam and Cambodia (the remnants of the Champa kingdom which covered central and southern Vietnam).
In Singapore, Malays comprise a minority, as much of its current population is composed of recent Chinese and South Asian immigrants and their descendants. Also, while not technically a part of the Malay archipelago, the southernmost part of Thailand — the Pattani region — is also primarily inhabited by Malays. These are the descendants of migrations from the neighbouring Malay archipelago which later founded the Pattani kingdom, one of the many Islamic sultanates established during the period of Islamic expansionism in Southeast Asia.
Malays are linguistically related to the Polynesian and Micronesian groups of the mid-Pacific, as members of the Austronesian family of languages. Evidence also suggests that Polynesians and Micronesians may be descended - at least in part - from seafaring ancestors that originated in and around the Malay racial stock stronghold along with Melanesians. Malay peoples have black hair and their skin color ranges from light tan to dark brown complexions.
Origin of the word Malay
According to the History of Jambi, the word Melayu originated from a river with name Melayu River near to Batang Hari River of today's Muara Jambi, Jambi province of Sumatra, Indonesia. The founder of Malacca, Parameswara was a prince of Palembang which was once owned by a nation called "Malayu" back in the 7th century. Yi Jing (635-713) clearly recorded in his journal book a nation of name 'Ma-La-Yu' existed. According to archaeological research of Jambi, large numbers of ancient artifacts and ancient architectures of Melayu have been found with photo evidence.
The word "Malay" was adopted into English via the Dutch word "Malayo", itself from Portuguese "Malaio", which originates from the Malay word "Melayu". According to one popular theory, the word Melayu means "migrating" or "fleeing", which might refer to the high mobility of these people across the region.
In his 1775 doctoral dissertation titled De generi humani varietate nativa (On the Natural Varieties of Mankind), anthropologist Johann Friedrich Blumenbach outlined four main human races by skin color, namely Caucasian (white), Ethiopian (black), American (red), and Mongolian (yellow).
By 1795, Blumenbach added another race called Malay which he considered to be a subcategory of both the Mongoloid race. The Malay race were those of a "brown color, from a clear mahogany to the darkest clove or chestnut brown." Blumenbach expanded the term "Malay" to include the inhabitants of the Marianas, the Philippines, the Malukus, Sundas, as well as Pacific Islands such as Tahitians. He considered a Tahitian skull he had received to be the missing link; showing the transition between the "primary" race, the Caucasians, and the "degenerate" race, the Negroids.
Since Blumenbach, many anthropologists have rejected his theory of five races, citing the enormous complexity of classifying races.
The term is used as a form of ethnic self-identification. It is both generic and specific.
For example, in the Philippines, many Filipinos consider the term "Malay" to refer to the indigenous population of the country as well as the population of neighboring countries like Indonesia and Malaysia. This misconception is due in part to American anthropologists H. Otley Beyer who proposed that the Filipinos were actually Malays who migrated from Malaysia and Indonesia. This idea was in turn propagated by Filipino historians and is still taught in schools. However, the prevalent consensus among contemporary anthropologists, archaeologists, and linguists actually proposes the reverse; namely that the Malays of Malaysia and Indonesia originally migrated south from the Philippines during the prehistoric period. Among these are scholars in the field of Austronesian studies such as Peter Bellwood, Robert Blust, Malcolm Ross, Andrew Pawley, and Lawrence Reid.
Malay domain
Generically, the name "Malay" is used to describe all the numerous related groups inhabiting the Malay Archipelago, and which are not of older aboriginal stock. These include the Aceh, Minangkabaus, Bataks and Mandailings who live in Sumatra ; Java and Sunda in Java ; Banjars, Ibans, Kadazans and Melanaus in Borneo ; Bugis and Torajas in Sulawesi ; the various dominant ethnic groups in the Philippines such as the Tagalogs, Ilocanos and Ifugao of Luzon island, the Bisaya of the central Philippines, the Maguindanao, Tausug and Bajau of Mindanao and the Sulu Archipelago ; and the people of East Timor (again, excluding those of older Papuan stock).
Specifically, this name is also proper to the subgroup which is native to the eastern part of Sumatra but migrated to the Malay Peninsula and the Riau Archipelago over the past thousand years or so. Sometimes, but very rarely, this subgroup is called "Riau Malays" to distinguish it as a specific group.
The term Melayu (Malay Person in Malay Language), in the Federal Constitution of Malaysia, refers to a person who practices Islam and Malay Cultures, speaks Malay Language, and whose ancestors are Malays.
Other groups classified as Malays which live outside what is called the Malay archipelago include the Cham who live in Cambodia and Vietnam and the Utsuls who live on the island of Hainan. Descendants of the Malays could be found today in Sri Lanka, South Africa (the "Cape Malays"), Australia and Madagascar. In the latter, they are known as the Merina and constitute one of the dominant ethnic groups in that country.
Situated in the north-eastern coast of South America, the small Caribbean nation of Surinam also harbours a large Malay population, descendants of fairly recent ethnic Javanese immigrant workers.
Ethnic group vs. cultural sphere
The term Malay can refer to the ethnic group who live in the Malay peninsula (which include the southernmost part of Thailand call Patani and Satun) and east Sumatra as well as the cultural sphere that encompass a large part of the archipelago. The Malay ethnic group is the majority in Malaysia and Brunei and a sizable minority in Singapore and Indonesia. This people speak various dialects of Malay language. The peninsular dialect is the standard speech among Malays in Malaysia and Singapore. Meanwhile, the Riau dialect of eastern Sumatra is adopted as a national tongue, Indonesian (Bahasa Indonesia), for the whole Indonesian population. The ethnic Malay are predominantly Muslim in Brunei, Singapore, southern Thailand, Indonesia and Malaysia, while those of the Philippines and East Timor are mostly Christian. In Malaysia , the vast majority of the population is made up of ethnic Malays while the minorities consist of southern Chinese (e.g. Hokkien and Cantonese), southern Indians (mainly Tamils and Malayalis) as well as Eurasians.
Malay cultural influences filtered out throughout the archipelago, such as the monarchical state, religion (Hinduism/Buddhism in the first millennium AD, Islam in the second millennium), and the Malay language. The influential Srivijaya kingdom had unified the various ethnic groups in southeast Asia into a convergent cultural sphere for almost a millennium. It was during that time that vast borrowing of Sanskrit words and concepts facilitated the advanced linguistic development of Malay as a language. Malay was the regional lingua franca, and Malay-based creole languages existed in most trading ports in Indonesia.
In a broader sense, the term Malay also includes most ethnic groups in the Philippines and Indonesia west of Papua. It is best understood as a cultural, not racial grouping. For example, people of the Maluku and Nusa Tenggara islands up to Timor have darker skin but are more readily described as Malays than the Dayaks of inner Borneo.
Languages
The languages spoken by Malays are classified as members of the Malayo-Polynesian family of languages, which is a one of the many branches belonging to the Austronesian language family. This large family of languages includes all the native languages spoken by Malays across the Malay Archipelago, including Indonesian, Bahasa Melayu, Tagalog and all the other native languages of the Philippines, Tetum (East Timorese), and the Malagasy language of Madagascar.
Far-flung members of this large family of languages, on the Polynesian branch, are the languages spoken by Polynesians; such as Samoan, Hawaiian, Rapanui and Maori in New Zealand.
Religion
In terms of religion, most Malays had converted from Hinduism, Buddhism and animism to Islam in the early 15th century; influenced by Arab, Chinese and Indian Muslim seafarers during the Islamic Golden Age. Today, Muslims form the dominant religious group among Malays of Indonesia, Malaysia, Brunei and Singapore. Their conversion to Islam from Hinduism and Theravada Buddhism began in the 1400s, largely influenced by the decision of the royal court of Malacca. Most Malays in Thailand, South Africa, Sri Lanka and Surinam — being descendants of those who had already been Islamised in Malaysia, Indonesia, etc — are also Muslims.
Golden images of Garuda, the phoenix who is the mount of Vishnu have been found in the Philippine island of Palawan. A 4 lb., 1 foot-high, gold Hindu-Malayan cult figure of a goddess, now resting in the Field Museum, was discovered in the Philippine island of Mindanao, in 1917. However Islam forbids images and idols, which indicates clearly that this idol existed in Mindanao before the arrival of Islam. Many Malays in Mindanao were also Muslim, but are recounted to have been the 23rd and last group in the waves of migration, to have arrived in the Philippines from the south.
In the Philippines, as a result of Spanish colonization spanning just over three centuries, Islam is not predominant, and most contemporary Filipinos (regardless of which Malay sub-group they belong to) are Christians, primarily Roman Catholics. However, a significant number of Filipinos in the southern island of Mindanao and the Sulu chain - that had resisted Spanish colonial encroachment, and still continue struggle against assimilation and Christianization - are to this day Muslim.
Like most Malays of the Philippines, those of East Timor are also Christian, though this time as a result of Portuguese colonial rule. These two countries represent the only Christian-majority nations in Far East Asia.
Hinduism is the dominant religion in the island of Bali. Smaller groups scattered throughout the entire Malay archipelago, who managed to avoid first the spread of Islam then the rise of Christianity through European colonization, practice animism. Buddhism is also present.

Monday, September 18, 2006 1:41:34 AM
GuitarKapok said...
Im not Lazy, Im not Stupid, I tak Mudah Lupa.....

am i a Malay? My gradma Bugis, grandpa Jawa, my father have indian blood....

some one please tell me...

Monday, September 18, 2006 2:16:37 AM
laugh said...
chit! porah orang atas..apa punya komen itu.

Monday, September 18, 2006 3:23:23 AM
Daeng Sulu said...
WHAT LA, AGAIN - INI CERITA CHINESE DILEMMA, FOREVER ONE :
- “SAPA BANGSA MALAYU?”
- “MANA SATU TANAH MALAYU?”
------

WA LAU, AMCAM SUMA LUPA
OK ONE MORE TIME :

LEPAS WORLD WAR 2 HAH, MANA SATU KOLONI AKSURELELY HAH MERDEKA DULU

> INDIA, INDON ATAU MALAYA?

SAPA PANDAI : JAWAB MALAYA LA – 1946 MAH - ITU MALAYAN UNION APA BENDA?!


INDIA 1947; ONI LEPAS MATI BERAPA RATUS RIBU WEI
TELOR BRITISH MANYAK MASAK WORR; GANDHI PON DIA BERANI SEMBAH
INDIA DIA SUDAH KASI GASAK SAMPAI PAPA, ASAL DULU PON MANA BRITISH ADA MENANG CARA CONQUER MAH?
JALAN HAWTAR JUGAK; MACAM BRITISH TIPU BANGALI DAPAT DIAMOND BIKIN CROWN, ITU BANGALI TETAP JUGAK SUMA SUKA JADI ‘JAGA TIDUR’ LAGI


INDON 1946; BELANDA MANYAK BLUNDER!
BEFORE HAMAS, BEFORE HISBOLAH, BEFORE PLO – SELUROH INDONESIA INDON SUDAH JIHAD!
BUMI PLASTIN IS STILL ARABLAND; ISRAEL MANA ADA LAGI?

BANI JAWI AT THAT TIME WAS 1OO MILLION

OLEH SEBAB JAWI POWER IS SO STRONG LAH KRISTIAN PAKAT SAMA JEW BETTER TO GIVE INDONESIA MERDEKA TO SECULAR MELAYU BEFORE ISLAM OR KOMINIS TAKE OVER!


IN MALAYA BRITISH INGAT DIA BOLEH MAIN WAYANG HAWTAR ATUK MALAYU
DIA INGAT MANYAK SINANG DIA MAU KASI AKONG LU CITIZENSHIP

YOU THINK BRITISH SO KIND TO GIVE YOUR KIND CITIZENSHIP FREE FREE MEH?

ITS ONLY THEIR PLOY TO KEEP THEIR ILL-GOTTEN COLONIAL WEALTH MAH!

MA HAI, YOU THINK AKONG LU NAIK JEW SHIP GOT FREE KAH?
SO HOW CAN YOU EXPECT TO GET MALAYA CITIZENSHIP FREE FREE?

THAT TIME, MANA 1 CINA ADA MALAYAN CITIZEN PAPER?

PERANAKAN BABA CINA 500 YEARS AGO OSO : MANA SULTAN MANSOR ADA BAGI CITIZEN PAPER? KASI TENGOK?
DIA CUMA BAGI BUKIT UNTUK BIKIN JIRAT JUGAK

BY THEIR 2ND GENERATION, ANAK SUDAH PALING TADAH SOKONG POTUGIS

SELANG 3 GENERASI LAGI, CICIT PIUT SUMA TUKAR IKUT BELANDA; BEFORE EVENTUALLY THEIR GREAT GREAT GRANSON GOT THINK THAT BRITISH IS BETTER – FROM MELAKA FOLLOW TO PENANG AND SINGAHPOR; TERBUKTI DERHAKANYA MAH

LEPAS CINA BABA JADI MIDDLEMAN DAPAT MERASUAH PENJAJAH BTITISH UNTUK KEKALKAN MONOPOLY NIAGA BARULAH DIA KAYA RAYA HASIL RAIH KERINGAT MELAYU JUA

CINA TONGSAN BARU TURUN TONGKANG APA KERJA PON SANGGOP BIKIN; APA YANG MERANGKAK PON SANGGOP TELAN

CUMA YANG PANDAI MENANG JUDI DAPAT MODAL SELONGGOK BUKAN HASIL MENGGUMPUL BERDAYA MELANGKAU JURANG BANGSATNYA

YANG CERDIK JADI KOMINIS ONI TO AVOID BACK BREAKING LIKE YOUR AKONG; LAGI SENANG DIA KELUAR HUTAN COLLECT CHICKEN AND EGG

LUCKY FOR CINA BANGSAT:
1)1930S GREAT DEPRESSION HARGA GETAH JATUH; BABA TAMAK BANYAK HUTANG BUKAK LADANG AND TRADING COMPANY PON BANYAK JATUH BENGKRAP
2)1940 JEPUN SAMUN HARTA BABA KAYA – ITU GOLD YAMASHITA LU INGAT SAPA PUNYA LEI?
3)BILA JEPON BALIK – ANAK BABA NYONYA SUDAH BIASA HIDUP MANJA TAK TAU BIKIN KERJA/ HATI SUKA JOLI FAMILI KUAT KELAHI
4)BABA HILANG KUASA POLITIK - BILANGAN DEPA BERAPA KERAT? BRITISH SUDAH KASI HANGKUT MASUK 3 MILLION CINA BANGSAT MACAM MACAM KEPANDAIAN, AMCAM GENG PERANAKAN CHENG LOCK MAU MINANG?
5)CINA BABA SERUPA SIEW SIN DALAM TAK PANDAI TIPU, DIAM DIAM SOGOK SAPA TAU? CINA MANA YANG PECAH DIMULUT? THATS WHY AFTER THAT CINA IMPORTAN PUAK LIOR LELEH KUAT NYEMBOR TUMBOH TANDOK BERCABANG LAAA

TELL ME, BILA MALAYU BANGUN AMOK 1946 - MANA ADA 1 CINA HIDUP TEPI PINGGIR KAMPONG MELAYU BERANI BANGUN SOKONG BRITISH TUNJUK SAMA KITA PUAK LU SUKA MALAYAN UNION?

WEI, MALAYAN UNION BRITISH OREDI GIVE YOU PEOPLE CITIZENSHIP RIGHT LOR > NO N-E- BLARDY-P MAH!
NO ISLAM!
NO KETUANAN OSO!

STILL NO LANCHAU DARE STAND UP!

ADA KA 1 CINA LAUNG : “MERDEKA MALAISIA” “MERDEKA MALAISIA” ITU TIME – KEPALA B LA KALU ADA!

SO BILA BRITISH TAKUT NANTI MELAYU JIHAD JOIN WITH INDON FIGHT FOR NUSANTARA MELAYU RAYA BRITISH CEPAT CEPAT BUBAR MALAYAN UNION

SO 1957 SAPA MERDEKA?

P-E-R-S-E-K-U-T-U-A-N T-A-N-A-H M-E-L-A-Y-U!

FEDERATION OF MALAY STATES = COMPRISING STRAITS SETTLEMENT, FEDERATED MALAY STATES & UNFEDERATED MALAY STATES
= AN ALLIANCE OF INDEPENDENT MALAY STATES WITH OWN RULERS AND CONSTITUTION FORMING A FEDERATION


SO WHO IS A MALAY?

ATUK AKU BILANG NEVER FORGET - Malaysia, Indonesia, Brunei, Kemboja / Champa, Pattani and Mindanao make up NUSANTARA MELAYU RAYA MALAY ARCHIPELAGO.

Though physically separated by the sea, NUSANTARA The Malay Archipelago is united : ONE LAND ONE PEOPLE irrespective suku-bangsa Amboynese, Boyan, Banjar, Batak, Bugis, Bintan, Deli, Jowo, Madura, Mendeleng, Minang,Kerinci, Kelantanese, Patani, Kemboja, Mindanao, Sulu, Riau, Rawao, Flores = ONE RACE, SAME RELIGION, sharing culture, diplomatic and family ties;

..soo unlike Mainland China -which is a massive landmass yet inhabited by restless rowdy nomadic roaming divided clannish Tong San Kwan Tong, Swatao, Kueh Chow, Kuang Chow, Lan Chaow,Foo Chow, FuZian,HakKa, Hok Kien, Hok Chiew, Teng Chiu, Tiu Chew, Cantonese, Hainanese, Hailamese, Si Chuanese, Yunanese, Cheng King Seng Kek, Batang-Lancang < apart from Northern First Class Manchu Ching Mandrins > who only 1 generation ago won’t even inter-marry and even kill off each other

– THE MALAY PEOPLE, LIVING IN MARITIME STATES THAT OWE ALLEGIENCE TO OR FORM PART OF EITHER ONE EMPIRE OR THE OTHER, HAVE SINCE TIME IMMEMORIAL ALWAYS BEEN SUCH GREAT SEAFARING TRADERS WHO FREELY TRAVEL AND SETTLE AMONG HOSPITABLE KINS

NO PROBLEM WITH THAT

Sastera Melaya Lama has many Hikayats of Many MALAY Kingdoms since the 1st century - Langkasuka, Kedah, Patani, Kemboja, Champa, Gangga Negara, Gelanggi, Sriwijaya, Majapahit, Inderagiri, Singhasari, Bengkulu, Palembang, Pasai, Perlak, Jambi, Johor – Riau, Acheh, Bintan, Mindanao, Sulu, Suluweisi, Kalimantan, Brunei, Melaka and many many more small Empires –some rulers still reign till this day!

THOUGH POLITICALLY THE EMPIRES HAVE FOUGHT EACH OTHER FOR POWER AND CONTROL, NEVER DID ANY OF SAID CIVILISED KERAJAAN MELAYU ZAMAN BERZAMAN DRIVEN OFF ANY GROUPS OF ORANG ASLI AWAY FROM THEIR DWELLINGS OR NATIVE CUSTOMARY LANDS THE WAY THE CINAS AND ANGLO-SAXONS HAVE EFFICIENTLY EXECUTED THEIR ETHNIC CLEANSING ACROSS LANDS THAT WERE NEVER THEIRS

ADA KA?

Monday, September 18, 2006 3:30:47 AM
Daeng Sulu said...
Tak kan bodoh sangat melayu bila CINA TERANG TERANG PRO JEW & AMERIKA, ke mana harusnya MELAYU SOLIDARITY kalau tak sesama SEBANGSA INDON & sesama SEAGAMA ARABS ?

ULANGAN SEJARAH YANG PASTINYA PABILA THE CLASH OF CIVILIZATIONS DITAYANG ERA AL DAJJAL NANTI

Monday, September 18, 2006 3:40:23 AM
§ΩΩαЙЫӘЪҐỠþ said...
Tungsten... I agree with u 100%. Couple of years ago, my 16 years old son was travelling by bus back from Singapore to Kuala lumpur. I bot some pots and pans to be brought home.., costs me not more than $200.. and u know what... he was bullied into paying $80 bribe. My son insisted in getting a receipt for the tax, but wastold he has to wait until the custom officer is back from his tea break.... which means the bus cant wait for him. Sometimes .. this is like daylight robbery! The bus driver tried to help my son,... but was told to get lost by the customs guy! This is Malaysia Boleh!

Monday, September 18, 2006 6:38:44 AM
bumi-non-malay said...
So the Racism in Islam UMNO/PAS CULT really Exist...the have it both ways religion of Racism.....no big news to me.

so I can keep singing Melayu UMNO/PAS tak malu curi hak dan status istimewah Orang Asli!!

Now we need to Boycott all UMNO Racist related Goods and Bring the economy to its knees.....when ALL Rakyat is almost same status, hungry and Angry....I sure hate to be an UMNO racist Franchaise......Rich Today....Gone Tomorrow...

By the way when Will Muslim Leaders, Social Workers and Moderate Iman...APOLOGISE to Lina Joy for those years of Racist acts towards her....who gave mere HUMANS the right to deny one OWN BASIC INDIVIDUAL FREEDOM OF Choice.......there lies the divide of the religion of Peace and the Real Religion of PEACE!!...the actions and fact speaks for itself!!

Monday, September 18, 2006 8:29:32 AM
Abu Abdillah said...
Why are we all so concerned about race? Don't we remember that we are all descendents of Adam (a.s) and his wife Hawa, who are the perfect creations of Allah Who created us from earth?

After they came to this world, they had children who later migrated all over the world. We all carry their chromosomes and genes which undergo minor changes as determined by ALlah.

When we die and face ALlah, He won't classify us by race. He will group us as Muslims, non-Muslims and munafiq.

Allah created man to be his vicegrants on earth, ruling it according to His guidance so that there will be peace for everybody in this world and the next.

ALlah gives everyone a brain. With this brain we are given the freedom to choose our way of life. And there are only two choices: Islam, as a complete way of life, or non-Islamic way of life.

When we face ALlah in the next world, we will be asked to account for our choices and will be treated by ALlah accordingly.

In Allah's assessment of man, He considers one who has iman, who is most fearful of Him, who obeys his commands, doing good and preventing
evils, as the best of mankind.

Anyone who does not follow Allah's command will face difficulties in this world and the next. An example of this failure in this world is Mahathir.

In his book 'The Malay Delimma', he wrote that Islam is a plus factor for the Malays. Yet he not only didn't implement Islam as ALlah wants, but prevents others from doing so.

He said he wanted to change the mind-set of the Malays, yet he did not know how. He admitted he has failed.

Changing mind-set can only be successful if we follow ALlah's way as shown by Nabi Muhammad saw.

Beginning with himself, and being called all sorts of name including madman, just within 23 years, this so called 'madman', Nabi MUhammad saw was able to tranform the jahilliyah poor and colonised Arab, colonised by the Romans and the Persians, into the finest generation of man in human history, creating an Islamic Empire that last longer than any empire in history. He did not copy the powerful and rich Romans or Persians, he just followed Allah's guidance.

When the Muslims deviated from ALlah,s guidance, they face ruin. ALlah has promised:

"So, when they forgot ( the warning) with which they had been reminded, We opened for them the gates of every (pleasant) thing, until in the midst of their enjoyment in that which they were given, all of a sudden, We took them (in punishment)and Lo! They were plunged into destruction with deep regrets and sorrows. And so the root of the people who did wrong was cut off." ( Al Quran 6:44-45)

Salam (Peace) to all bloggers.

Monday, September 18, 2006 9:09:24 AM
laugh said...
Raja Petra Kamaruddin wrote:
"Dear Liberal, pleeeeeezzzzz, I am not Malay, I am Bugis."

Ayoyo...
Saya juga Bugis. tapi itu dalam IC, Melayu juga ada tulis.
"Malay" college juga ada itu pergi.
Saya tarak tau la kalu itu Bugis dalam IC, cina juga ada tulis, english jugak ada tulis. tapi Malay college juga ngaku ada pergi.

Tapi saya rasa itu Uncle Raja, lain-lain bangsa tarak kutok itu bangsa sendiri depan-depan bangsa lain jugak. Depan blog juga ada tulis. Orang lain jugak boleh baca...

Itu pepatah Bugis juga ada tulis....
"Sendiri Ludah Ka-Langit kalu...
Air Liur Basi jatuh ka-muka sendiri"
Orang lain juga banyak ketawa... sendiri malu jugak dapat..

Itu bangsa lain sudah ada cakap:
"chit...chit..chit...porah...itu manyak bodoh punya orang. Itu orang pedang pandai main, Diri sendiri jugak mau tikam..."

kah..kah..kah..

Monday, September 18, 2006 9:38:21 AM
tea lady said...
ek eleh.... my dad bugis, my mum javanest. so, whats the BIG deal. both also human lor. unless my family tree ada "darwin", then something to be dealt with. hahahaha.....bugis konon!!!!!

Monday, September 18, 2006 9:59:12 AM
butoh said...
I was going to say something but have refrained, as I am not rather poor at History..

Having said that, I agree that based on what has allegedly happened in Malaysian politics, Malays are very cheap.....

I have a dileama though...what shall I call myself..
my mother is a Sunni Malay, my father is a Shia Iranian...boy oh boy...what a predicament..

Monday, September 18, 2006 11:02:06 AM
The Unladen Swallow said...
As you said, money talks and bullshit walks, would you think the people involved would actually care after they've been shamed? So long as somebody gets his duit kopi, he'd be content with nothing else but that.

Monday, September 18, 2006 11:16:02 AM
alancheong7 said...
Mmmmmm? Foreigner as royalty? So too, Parameswara.

Nothing new about it, Peter. WE know the majority of malays are in: the civil service, the police, government agencies, universities, local councils, corporate heads (rarely on merit), and any pie that remotely hints of profit. WE know. All a result of racist, discriminatory, and in its own way, fascistic, policies drawn up and implemented by bigoted government servants and all connected to them.

You FAILED to mention that the very same malays are the ones who invariably ASK, quite often quite openly, for the bribe. Non-malays give more because the asking amount is higher.
The times non-malays ask for an 'avenue' is due again to bigoted policies and practices, even when relatively more equitable distribution has been announced.

WE know. What's new? Especially during the last two and a half decades. Still with the mahathir boot-licking, Peter?

As for the current set, we can make a diff in another 2 years. Unfortunately, again, as you have mentioned, the malay majority would most probably be THE ones who are unwilling to change or move from their comfort zone.

Monday, September 18, 2006 11:38:55 AM
alrawa said...
Who was the one said that power corrupts. Surely not a Malay.
It stinks when reading an attempt by 'someone' to run down the Malays so that he be praised by the non-malays.
Corruption is a universal scourge.It does not confine to the Malays only.
And to infer that other religions can tolerate corruption is an insult to their religions.

Monday, September 18, 2006 11:39:18 AM
alancheong7 said...
butoh,
The Sunni Shia dichotomy, please share some more. Are they merely sects, or is there more to it?

What are and why the differences? How does this compare or measure against the various schools of thought or understanding e.g. Wahabi etc?

thanks.

Monday, September 18, 2006 11:43:43 AM
borneo_indian said...
RPK said...

"The non-Malays do not go about talking about their religion every day of their life. They do not say that their religion is pure and the only true religion of God. They do not utter statements saying that all other religions are fakes and followers of these religions are misguided and destined for Hell. They live and let live. Malays on the other hand condemn others and judge others harshly. Malays expect nothing short of purity and only Islam is pure. But their acts do not match their words. They are only pure at their lips, not in their hearts.."

Rightly nipped in the butt !! Need not say anything more.. because everyone knows that this is how muslims views us "kafirs" !! They simply refuse to view it any other way..

Monday, September 18, 2006 11:47:12 AM
AJIP said...
the first 12 paragraph are very good.

13 to 21...not so sure

i hope mahathir really regret the bad things he had done during the 22 year in power.

Monday, September 18, 2006 11:50:59 AM
confuse_us said...
RPK wrote “After all, someone cannot exploit you unless you want to be exploited. ……
He now has to move fast with whatever little time he may have left” How true and it precisely echoed what I have posted earlier.

confuse_us said...
These further proved on what I have written earlier that majority of these politicians “ do not seems to be doing the right things and evidently, do not know the right things to do. ”
The country needs leaders who SOLVE PROBLEMS others fear and not the so called leaders who like RPK said only enjoyed kicking deflated balls.

These politicians have resorted to REACTIVE politics, only react (or shall I say bicker) when the damages had been done just to be Champions. We need true leaders who practice PROACTIVE politics, who act and react FAST before any damages are done.
Don’t fret people, we do have true leaders and they are contributing in their own ways like what RPK is doing to further enlighten us. Like I mentioned before, the current situation are 5 % of us are true leaders, 5% are the corrupted ones who had misled the other 90% who can easily be deceived to perceive. So people, please wake up and study the jigsaw puzzle and we can reduce the 90% majority. (Democracy, my foot)

Confuse_us’s ART OF WAR says “If your enemy is competent, you better be prepared but if your enemies are ignoramuses, you have won half the battle”
Saturday, September 16, 2006 9:38:22 AM

Dearest professional bloggers, why are we still kicking deflated balls … the issue here is the CURRENT decision makers today (they do not deserved to be called leaders) are raping our country and they condone each other at Public expense…..even nonsense got limit.

The time has come for us, the professionals, who care about the country, regardless of race and creed
to form an OFFICIAL pressure group to look into the FOUR perspectives that are unique to Malaysia namely POLITICAL, CORPORATE, SPIRITUAL AND SOVEREIGN. I would like to nominate RPK as our first President.
When the time is right, I also would like to share many sensitive documents on Corporate Malaysia to demonstrate how competent they are in solving simple problems.

Nevertheless, RPK, I have to disagree with some of your comments on the Malays…. Granted, our ancestors may have made mistakes (who doesn’t) but just like any human, living things or races, everybody and everything’s have to go thru a sinusoidal cycle or phases…we are the new Malays but I believe the biggest hindrance is that TRUE MALAYS(no, no, not by Blood) are only 5 % and we have yet to RISE and the time has come, the clues are everywhere, it is just a matter of piecing them together.. please refer to the Jigsaw Puzzle.

Confuse_us says “Defer no time, delays have dangerous ends”

Monday, September 18, 2006 11:55:30 AM
minuses said...
`my father is a Shia Iranian`
________________________________________

That`s a deviationist cult as far as the ulamaks are concerned.
Hopefully once the Hizbi converts the m`sian contingent, things will change.

Monday, September 18, 2006 11:57:44 AM
headache06 said...
Brother Pete,

I 100% totally agree with this articles about Malays and not entirely agree with TDM actions at times though.

However, for those Malays who need bashing like this, this article may have to be on Harakah, BHarian, Utsuan, Kosmo, etc so that majority of Malays can read this.

On you blog site alone cannot make any difference because not so many people especially the elderly and rural folks have the access to online services..
By the way, I am 100 % malay and proud being a Muslim. I have been doing my engineering business for the past 10 years after my 5 years stint with various emplyers upon my return from a university in UK.

I am a UK-educated Malay and Muslim. And studying in UK did't change my upbringings as a truly Malay and Muslim like many other truly Malay and Muslim before and after me.

Moral of the story is the ones that usually can be bought is Malays who depend their on plitics for their survival and also Malays in government that should be ashamed of themselves for being part of corrupted Malays/Muslims though....

Anyway, it is indeed a fantastic article though....

Monday, September 18, 2006 12:20:00 PM
smoke detector said...
aiyoyo, memang betul la...dia pegi itu melayu punya kolej kan ...sama semua orang dia cerita...ada itu bugis college ka?

Monday, September 18, 2006 12:21:25 PM
hairulallias said...
don't vote pak lah!!!

Monday, September 18, 2006 1:42:58 PM
butoh said...
Dear Alencheong7,

I do not really know where to start except that, my parents met at uni when they were younger, and somehow made it a point not to bring the issues beteween Shia and Sunni into a debate..

I wish I could say more but I would most probably be branded as some sort of a kafir..

Monday, September 18, 2006 2:00:19 PM
rakyatcina said...
It was Kubang Pasu’s malays that put tun mamak to Parliament and later with their solid support tun mamak became PM. Kubang Pasu’s Malays had supported tun mamak all this while.
But when he just lost slightly in one minor election at kubang pasu, he condemned those Kubang Pasu’s Malays like shit and accused them to be corrupted, contemptible and useless. Just because of one minor election that he lost slightly, he accused those Kubang Pasu’s Malays and all malays in general to be cheap and can be bought by RM200.
Wake up Malays, especially Kubang Pasu’s Malays, hope you people can see the true colour of tun mamak the liar.

Monday, September 18, 2006 2:58:35 PM
MiszEzie said...
hermmm...
interesting article, but much to many interesting comments.
most i notice condemn malay leaders for being 'crooked' and that is the major cause of corruption amongst the malay followers.. think for a moment (but not to long)
doesns't that sound weird in a way? why follow if a majority of u already know that u'll end up in corruption?

the biggest mistake Tun Dr. Mahathir has made through out his PM career towards malays were focusing to much on giving malays SUBSIDI KERAJAAN. because of that, malays become dependent and desprate. when they want something (wealth, health and other personal items)and meets a road block.. it's time for a demonstration and blame the government.

dear malays (yang masih tak sedar diri),
why must you depent too much on others? take a look at your indian and chinesse counterparts. they have survive independently. remember, we won't be living in this state of comfort for ever. so please be prepared and don't blame others. for once, do something for yourself, by yourself!

Monday, September 18, 2006 3:55:06 PM
MiszEzie said...
p/s : malays in singapore doesn't walk with their heads high.. whom ever think so probably met malay-singaporeans whom are to proud (SOMBONG) to admit that their lifes are pretty stinkkin' there. i speak honestly and truthfully here. i have met a lot (and i mean a lot) of singaporeans whom fled to australia for a better life. go to melbourne and you'll know what i mean...

Monday, September 18, 2006 4:00:26 PM
Don'tPlayGod said...
Of all the things, TDM regretted that the Malays could not change their mindset? How to change their mindset when UMNO's policy is to give freebies to the Malays on a silver platter? 80%+ of scholarships given to them, projects and contracts given to them from the lowest class of contractors to the highest, higher education almost guaranteed, licences for transportation, AP's, petrol stations, and many others given to them. So how to change mindset? What is this TDM yakking about?

Would any bumiputera want their freebies taken away from them? Let's face it guys, the NEP is here for good. In fact, come 2020, it will be incorporated into the constitution, so no one will query it anymore. Change minset? Don't make my us laugh. Come 2020, the NEP percentage will be 60% and above.

Monday, September 18, 2006 5:19:02 PM
Mufti Murtad said...
alancheong7 said...
butoh, The Sunni Shia dichotomy, please share some more. Are they merely sects, or is there more to it? What are and why the differences? How does this compare or measure against the various schools of thought or understanding e.g. Wahabi etc?
thanks.

ALANCHEONG7 THE DIFF. TWEEN THE 2 IS ONE IS SPELT S.U.N.N.I WHEREAS THE OTHER IS SPELT S.H.I.A OTHER THAN THIS THEY ARE BOTH 'CHUNNIS'. CHUNNI AS U MAY KNOW IS AN INDIAN WORD FOR 'HOLEY MAN OR WOMAN'. AS FOR THE WAHHABI THEY ARE BUTOHS.

I HOPE U HAVE BEEN ENLIGHTENED.

Monday, September 18, 2006 6:31:17 PM
Fred36 said...
Dear RPK,

I am a big fan of Malaysia Today and most times agree with your views on matters relating to this blessed country.

But about your spluttering response:

“……….., pleeeeeezzzzz, I am not Malay, I am Bugis. We are the race
that conquered this land and saved the Malays. ……”

You sounded as if you took great offence to being “lumped” as a Malay. Perhaps your clarification here was just to show your true blood rather than your colour.

Funnily enough, this kind of disclaimer reminds me of a particular “Penang mamak” who claims to be a Malay/Bumiputra when it comes to receiving NEP privileges but was quick to clarify that he is an Indian-Muslim when the Malay/Bumiputra is being cursed by all and sundry including himself.

On another issue I totally agree with zique : Kalau Mahathir kalah kerana rasuah, takkanlah semua melayu nak diperlekeh.Salahkan Melayu yg ada dalam UMNO cukuplah……..Takkan sampai nak tuduh semua Melayu rasuah………. To be fair, the UMNO Kubang Pasu affair does not justify the charge and generalisation that all Malays are cheap and ungrateful. The UMNO Malays and the UMNO culture maybe that; but just as you objected to being lumped as a Malay, the rest of us non-UMNO Malays can also object to being indiscriminately lumped with them.

Cheers.

Monday, September 18, 2006 7:56:47 PM
MahrajaSanjaya said...
Apalaa rpk

Melayu UMNO Kubang Pasu kena beli (itu pun kalau betul), semua orang Melayu atas muka bumi ini boleh dibeli.

Bila pulak tok nenek Bugis ngajar logik macam ni?

Kalau semua Melayu boleh dibeli, pasal apa di Kelantan, PAS tidak kalah?

Apakah orang Kelantan bukan orang Melayu, atau orang Kelantan keturunan Bugis kesemuanya?

Nak marah kpd umno, habis Melayu lain kena kutuk..

Orang macam ni kita panggil HABIS CERDIK. Well, kalau cerdik sudah habis, kira orang tu tolol la....

Monday, September 18, 2006 9:54:58 PM
razramus said...
Not only Penang mamak claimed publicly they are malay/bumi, so is Kedah Mamak.

In private, I'm sure Mahathir would claim he is not malay since his father is of thick Indian stock from Kerala India. But publicly he would die defending that he is a malay so that he could become the President of UMNO and ultimately PM. Now you cannot say a non-malay can't become a PM.

Najib is also of Bugis stock. But he will die brandishing a kris with Hisham if you brand him a non-malay.

But in the final analysis, what is there in a race. In malaysia, if you are a malay and don't associate yourself with the corrupt UMNO and its corrupt leaders, then you would be okay.

Al-Arqam was a malay-muslim based society. They don't depend on gov't help and gov't subsidy, yet through their effort they mananged to set up billion RM economic conglomerate that spans the whole country and the Muslim countries of southern Thai and Indonesia.

The corrupt UMNO led melayus got jealous and banned Arqam and with it goes bust their economic activity.

Try building a grand mosque with monies collected from malay-muslims. You sure will get the corrupt UMNo melayus govt proclaiming the mosque to be illegal and deviationist and would demolish the mosque even if it cost millions of RM.

Corruption persist with those corrupt UMNO melayus and those associated with them either as supporters, sympathizers or associates. Other non-umno malays, why get offended when people called malays cheap and easily bribed. Most important refraind and abstain from following the path of these satan. What is important is not to gain recognition or acceptance from another human beings but from God Almightly. It is to him one finally goes to. So get his blessing and recognition.

Monday, September 18, 2006 10:05:21 PM
butoh said...
dear mufti murtad,

have you got a problem?????

You appear obsseded and sound like someone who has just licked the arse of a female Gorilla.....

Listen, buddy,put your chuni..or what ever you call that 2 inch thing away and do not make a fool of your self....

Monday, September 18, 2006 11:24:48 PM
sayusayme said...
RPK...
Bugis were PIRATES. Pirates are now robbing the country,s treasures.
Your comments therefore walks....!!

Tuesday, September 19, 2006 12:12:26 AM
highjen said...
Dear cinama,cockroach,razramus, chanmalichan, vindica, tungsten,

3 cheers to all of you!!!

for the sins committed, TDM deserves to be punished!!!! he should be held responsible for the present extent of corruption...... come on RPK, don't blame the malays....it is TDM who in the fisrt place did not show good example...."kalau no. 1 tamak makan, kita pun kena curi makan"

all his kubang pasu delegates should F him upside down for his disloyalty.....who in the first place elected him to power?? how can he now accused his supporters of a mere RM200 corruption?

take a good look at what TDM had done to the country.....

he downgraded the standard of english merely for his political advancement and to increase his popularity and as a result, our future generation had to carry this liability. isn't it right that the recent issue of disparity among the races in penang has a strong relation to his 22 years of selfishness that leads to the problem of incompetency and incompetitiveness???

one more thing....
dear RPK and fellow bloggers....think about this.....

Can we sleep well with someone who is extremely close to us, who had been diagnosed with cancer, who is in deep pain and one who is dying soon? I believe most of us would not be able to do so.

as such, please stop accusing pak lah of sleeping through meetings or waking up late for meetings....give him a chance.

Tuesday, September 19, 2006 1:11:55 AM
Rhan said...
AJIP,
“13 to 21...not so sure”
If I write Mahathir is so wealthy because he wants to prove to the Malay that if you are willing to work hard, you may able to join the multi billionaire club too. Would your answer be “not so sure”?
Hahaha, you are not an honest man.

Tuesday, September 19, 2006 1:27:52 AM
AJIP said...
rhan

mahathir is still talking about someone who would like to kiss his hand in his speech at putrajaya. Thats why i still "not so sure" he wants to prove to the malay bla bla bla....

http://www.malaysia-today.net/videos/2006/09/tun-dr-mahathir-mohamad-press.htm

Tuesday, September 19, 2006 9:21:22 AM
razramus said...
Sayusayme said: " Bugis were PIRATES. Pirates are now robbing the country's treasures".

You just cannot make allegations without evidence or reference to some established literature. Here would help you.

According to the great historian Joginder Singh Jessy in his great book, 'History of Malaya' ( 1400-1959)-1961 at page 62 under the heading " Bugis in Malaya'; he wrote, ' they were expert seamen, good fighters and very brave. These qualities also make them successful pirates.

The Bugis in Malaya descended from the Celebes island/Maccasar and their ancestors can be traced to one Bugis called Daeng Rilaka( 1681). Daeng Rilaka has five sons namely, Daeng Merewah, Daeng Parani, Daeng Menambun, Daeng Chelak and Daeng Kamasi.

If you read Joginder singh book, there would seem to be hardly any malay now in the year 2006 in Selangor, Kedah, Perak, Johor or NS and most of the States. All have Bugis blood in them through intermarriages with the local malays.

The Daengs married local malays and later today become or assume the title of Sultan this and Raja that.

From Joginder Singh's book it is obvious that most of the Sultans and Rajas now are descendents of Daeng Rilaka.

At least if one's name is now called Daeng this or Daeng that, then we can differentiate whether he is a malay or a bugis.

Tuesday, September 19, 2006 9:43:17 AM
AJIP said...
Raja Petra Kamarudin said...
Dear Liberal, pleeeeeezzzzz, I am not Malay, I am Bugis. We are the race that conquered this land and saved the Malays.

so RPK, do sufism teach you to become assabiyah?

Tuesday, September 19, 2006 10:02:13 AM
Stephen Bennit said...
Butoh.......you can call yourself a Wahabbi or a mongrel, there is actually no predicament here. It wont matter anyway, because you are actually a chuni mongrel, but a wannabe Iranian Shia.

Iranians got culture, whereas you got just a permanent limp chuni.

Tuesday, September 19, 2006 10:40:54 AM
Raja Petra Kamarudin said...
Dear razramus, exactly. And The First Sultan of Selangor (Sultan Ibrahim Shah, 1765-1778) is the son of Daeng Chelak ibni Daeng Rilaka. Selangor, then, belonged to Perak and the Sultan of Perak tabal (crowned) Sultan Ibrahim as Sultan.

The Bugis were 'pirates' who plundered British, Dutch and Portuguese ships sailing through the Straits of Melaka (the only 'locals' who were able to do so). They were pirates in the western interpretation of things. To the locals they were warriors who fought against western imperialism. I suppose to the Meccans in the time of Prophet Muhammad the Medinans were also pirates, so it is a matter of interpretation.

Anyway, piracy was a noble profession then and pirates such as Walter Raleigh, Francis Drake, etc, were all knighted by the Queen of England. The Dutch plundered British ships as well. In fact, Spain, England, Portugal and Holland plundered each other's ships. That was the order of the day.

The Dutch found the Bugis too much to handle and they almost brought Melaka down. So the Dutch signed a treaty with the Bugis that everything plundered from the British would be shared 50:50. So the Bugis became the Dutch's 'Ali Baba' partner. The Dutch plundered the British ships and gave half to the Bugis.

That was the Dutch 'New Economic Policy' and the Bugis 'invented' the 'Ali Baba' system.

Tuesday, September 19, 2006 11:04:27 AM
MelayuSoWhat? said...
I don't know why anyone must be ashamed to be a Malay. I am proud to be a Malay.

Tuesday, September 19, 2006 1:09:32 PM
flex tan said...
I don't see any different between TDM's jihad for the Malays/Islam than what the Pope (in his own jihad for the muslim brothers)says in his speach.

Both have the same religious connotations hoping for the return in faith/dignity for god and discarding the politics of Islam/ Malays.

Tuesday, September 19, 2006 1:37:37 PM
MiszEzie said...
wow...
this sure has turn into a 'fight'..
so i guess now the bugis claim they're not malaysian malays.. so does that make u guys bumiputra? guess not huh? get what i mean...? that makes u guys not legible (how ever u spell it)for bumiputra benefits.. ha ha ha
anyway, i'm proud to be malaysian.. further more, i'm proud to be a malay.. and i'm proud of other malays whom doesn't make the malay race and language an issue.. because it shouldn't be!
this article isn't racist.. it's about how malays should stand up together and help each other move forward.
why the hell are u guys dividing the malays into smaller groups of ethnic? shame on you...(sesiape yang terasa lah!)

Tuesday, September 19, 2006 1:59:14 PM
flex tan said...
Just a curious question;

If the Muslims do discard the "FORM" of Muhamad (without discarding him as prophet of islam)won't the koran be more Jewish in its context and believes?? as much of the text comes from the Torah.

So why the Malaysian, Iranian, etc foreign policy do not recognise or even for that matter want to wipe their own kind (Jews) off the earth.

I only can conclude THIS IS a family feud and POLITICS for inheritance. Exactly as comfirmed by TDM view(political) about the Palestinians' cause for Land and property (god's Covenant).

Nor wonder the Buddist, hindus, etc do not interject although they do think it's "wrong to commit violent".

Buts gods covenant is a only a "form/ things" and not the "spritual essence/ oneself" with principle and definately would not directly/automatically represent the purity of god in human.

Tuesday, September 19, 2006 2:11:55 PM
MelayuSoWhat? said...
What's the problem with Malays for asking something in return for something. Things are not as what they are used to be. There is no more free lunch.
Further the problem is not specific to Malay.
To claim that you are not a pure Malay but Bugis is such a lame tactic. So what, I am banjar and does that mean I am not pure Malay?

Tuesday, September 19, 2006 2:53:36 PM
Raja Petra Kamarudin said...
For those who are concerned about the future of the Malays, you can attend the following Congress (http://www.malaysia-today.net/kuli_events.html). Malaysia Today will also be giving it live coverage.

And by the way, Rumpun Melayu is the 'greater Malay' of Nusantara and not the Melayu as narrowly defined in the Federal Constitution of Malaysia. This therefore does not mean you must be Muslim. If you want to be a 'proper' Malay, are you prepared to accept this fundamental requirement?

Argue about who is more Melayu by all means. But first understand the meaning of Melayu. And tell me if you are prepared to accept the true definition of Melayu, which has nothing to do with Islam.

(Just thought I would open up this Pandora's Box).

Tuesday, September 19, 2006 4:45:35 PM
Raja Petra Kamarudin said...
Hello....MelayuSoWhat?, AJIP, sayusayme, MahrajaSanjaya, Smoke detector, alrawa, laugh, Daeng Sulu and all, why so quiet? Okay, I admit it, I was just being naughty in making that "I am not Malay but Bugis" remark. Just wanted to jolok and see what happens. Hey, it is my article, so I have every right to provoke you guys and gals and see how you react. And provoke IS my middle name is it not?

Okay, here goes: Malays, according to the Federal Constitution of Malaysia, are those who speak the Malay language, profess Islam and practice Malay culture at home. If I don't do one or more of the above then I am not Malay. But that does not mean I am not Bumiputera as this is the broader grouping that includes Mamaks, Portuguese, Ibans, Dayaks, Bugis, Bajau, and many more.

Okay, what about Melayu then? Melayu is an even broader grouping of people from South East Asia plus some other parts of the world. But they need not be Muslims. There are more Thai Melayu than Malaysian Melayu and not all are Muslims. Some are Buddhists. Melayu from the Indonesian islands can be Hindus or Christians or even 'pagans'.

Malays have to change their thinking as to what constitutes Melayu and Bumiputera. I may not be Malay in the Malaysian context but I could be Bumiputera and Melayu Bugis and my non-Muslim Bugis ancestors are also Melayu.

Let me put it another way. I speak English at home. I eat with a spoon and fork and not with my hands. I eat fish and chips for dinner and not rice. I go to the mosque wearing jeans and not a Baju Melayu. I listen to Latino music, not Malay music. I NEVER watch Malay movies. I maried a non-Malay. Hell, I don't even look Malay. According to the Federal Constitution of Malaysia, I am NOT Malay, though I am still Bumiputera and of Melayu Bugis descent.

Get it?

Tuesday, September 19, 2006 6:35:12 PM
bumi-non-malay said...
...heresy.... heresy....

So we have come now to the point of Definition of Malay.....All I know is that there is a Bigger Group called the Melayu UMNO/PAS tak malu lagi tak bermaruah curi hak dan status istimewah orang Asli and are believers of Racism in Islam UMNO/PAS cult.......

continually using the illusion of fiction to improve their stay in power via Racism.....When will muslim with spine start condemn Racism within Islam....so it seems that leaders of Islam are either afraid to raise this Racist problem or silently condoning these Racist acts in M'sia.....

Lina Joy have opened many eyes again on how deep this Racism is in M'sia...9 years & waiting to change status.....perhaps the inevitable of civil war or separation of M'sia again can rectify this problems.....we must consider all options in life...we cannot leave it till the options expires.....it will be worthless then!!.....Life ...we have one but to see it tolerate Racism is a Wasted life!!

Tuesday, September 19, 2006 7:37:18 PM
Daeng Sulu said...
Petra.. Re :Middle name - Kita pon gitu, tapi jolok lagi sedap

Anyway, I drafted this earlier

------------\\


“The Dutch found the Bugis too much to handle and they almost brought Melaka down. So the Dutch signed a treaty with the Bugis that everything plundered from the British would be shared 50:50.

So the Bugis became the Dutch's 'Ali Baba' partner. The Dutch plundered the British ships and gave half to the Bugis.

That was the Dutch 'New Economic Policy' and the Bugis 'invented' the 'Ali Baba' system.”
------

Masaalah Melayu ni, kita sering berpecah – walau sepusat sepusing – sejak Parameswara Putera Palembang yang kawin anak Raja Jawa Majapahit.


Sebermula kisahnya, diceritakan setengah bangsawan, asalnya Raja Melayu Palembang ni beristerikan Anak Raja Cina jua.

Si Sister Puteri Cina tu pula, dikawinkan juga pada Cucu Ninggrat Majapahit.

Anak-anak cucu keturunan depa lah asal usul Raja-raja Pagar Ruyung turun temurun.

Parameswara ni jenis yang bikin hal aja sejak di Palembang lagi – hingga mencicit larinya dihambat Father In Law King Jawa Majapahit!

Dah dok menumpang di Temasik pon, hal sama berulang balik – dah tu dibunuhnya pula kerabat Raja berdarah Siam yang memerintah negeri Singa Pura tu ….

SIAM … Siam Budis, dulunya Buruh Handal, yang upaya titik bekas Boss sejatinya, Penghuni Angkor / Jiran Orang Melayu Champa, sampai Padang Jarak Padang Terkukor akhir ke kini jadinya!

Pelarian lagi lah terusan anak Raja Palembang ni sehingga ditakdirkan membuka negeri Melaka.

Namun tetap tak luput cuak gentarnya pada ancaman Father In Law Emperor Majapahit, Paman anak Raja Siam Moyang Mongkut tu dan pada Kuasa Besar Kerajaan Islam di Pasai / Aceh.

PANDAINYA MELAYU NI > SEJAK DULU LAGI MENGUTIP CUKAI JUA KEPINTARANNYA MAHIR GAMAKNYA

Takluk jajahan Kerajaannya, menjangkau hingga ke separuh Malaya dan separuh Tanah Seberang Sumatera bawak ke sempadan Tanah Jawa.

Kata Sahibul Hikayat, tersebutlah perkataan Portugis sampai ke darat Melaka di zaman piutnya yang kelaku tetap semacam handal moyangnya jua.

Angkara Mamak Hindia dan Baba Cina, maka pelarian lah lagi Raja Melayu meninggalkan ibukota takutkan hilang daulat berulang kisah atuk saudaranya yang dulukala pernah dikerah menggembala ayam.

Namun perlu diingat, yang jatuh ke tangan Portugis cuma Ibukota, tempat bertahta singgahsana Melaka.

Empayar Jajahan masih diperintah.

Tapi biasalah adat, lepas mangkatnya Sultan, difaraidlah berpecah tiga tanah pesaka jadinya :

- 1) Kedah Kelantan habis jatuh ke Siam juga,
- 2) Perak (yang asal sebenarnya merangkumi Selangor sebelum datangnya Daeng Celak keturunan Bugis) dan
- 3) Johor – Riau / Palembang

Akibat berpecahnya Melayu, jawabnya lemah lah ia.

Di zaman Belanda, kuasa Melayu tegak berdiri berpaksi di :

- Johor
- Aceh dan
- Kepulauan Bugis

Tapi, kerana Sultan mangkat dijulang lah, Bendahara pula yang dijulang mewarisi Johor.

Bendahara diiktiraf ke taraf Sultan bagai ditabal British lepas Singapura diserahkan saja ke Tuan Raffles.

Bugis bertapak di Selangor pon putiknya angkara British jua yang mengapikan Ghee Hin memangkah Hai San untuk menggugat waris Raja di Perak - akhirnya, bukan ke juga British, The King Maker yang menobatkan Kerajaan di Perak yang terpecah dua.

Pendik cerita, ingat lah Pesan Atuk [“Bagaikan Belanda diberi tanah”] tentang Janji Lidah Belanda yang jauh lebih licik dari British dan Feringhi Bangang.

Di Tanah Indon lah, Belanda dapat bertapak luas - lepas dibaginya sejengkal dia kaut sedepa!

Kaitkan le juga dengan bangsa yang menyenggih tu bila dia kerja mengayut aje asal mulanya dulu … tak kan tak pahamm…

Tuesday, September 19, 2006 8:05:29 PM
butoh said...
hey stephen bennit,

it appears you know quite a bit about limp chunis...you have one haven't you...poor bastard..

you realise there is help for people such as you....please see a doctor soon before your chuni gets too limp and falls off....

Tuesday, September 19, 2006 9:45:05 PM
kingyakin said...
Dear Friends,
IT"S THE FREE ECONOMY THAT WORK!
NEP is never an effective way to help the Needed nor it the only option, we have plenty more alternative and machanism from Free Economy which can be used to give assistances to the Needed.
I belief everyone is aggreable to the idea of creating a fair and caring society, even in the most extreme capitalist society of American, you see the biggest and most promising charity of all time being created (by Gate and Warrent)!
WHAT IS THE LESSON LEARN FROM BILL GATE AND WARRENT BUFFER IS:
1) Not only that you must EARN (hardly) what you wanted, by merit;
2) Charity can never be vested in the hand of the Government, because the money was not "hardly earned" by the Government Officers. For what ever Earn by you on the principle of meritrocacy, you will spend it meaningfully and honously!
Who say we need to help every single poor man in this country to create a caring society? Just let a minority to earn their wealth under fair, just and free economy, they will come back to help those in need!Belief me, merely 25% of our population is sufficient to support the whole nation (must practice in JUST, FAIR AND FREE SOCIETY).

Tuesday, September 19, 2006 10:35:34 PM
Sabdapalon_Revivals said...
Well, I do agree with Pak Ungku, There is Bugis, Java etc but NEVER such a group ethnic group called MALAY or MELAYU. MELAYU is a Javanese collective word for "THOSE WHOM FLED". In fact all of you whom dispute should checkout whether you are from the DRAVIDIAN stock to claim right over this land. To be brief, the Chinese and the Indians has all right over this land when the "KUMARI KANDAM rises again.

Checkout this site that shall provide some evidence of rightful ownership.

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/atlantida_mu/esp_atlantida_2.htm#note

NOW, IT WELL CLEAR WHY MOST OF THEM WANTS TO TURN MALAYSIA INTO AN ARABIC NATION. IDENTITY PROBLEM LAH TUUUU.

Wednesday, September 20, 2006 1:59:26 AM
Daeng Sulu said...
"Just let a minority to earn their wealth under fair, just and free economy, they will come back to help those in need!

Belief me, merely 25% of our population is sufficient to support the whole nation (must practice in JUST, FAIR AND FREE SOCIETY)."
-------


Pesan Bugis tang Pertimbangan Cina :

Ada kada malabihi, kada ada kada mangurangi
Inya mambari kada bawadah
Inya maambil kada bapadah
Kada ada nang dikutil-kutil

.. Baluluas lubang burit Kantutnya gin sumbang ..

.. Kunun basuluh mancari lampu - Burung datang buah dilibas

Kabanyakan guring
Awak kurus karing

Wednesday, September 20, 2006 2:00:07 AM
Daeng Sulu said...
This post has been removed by the author.

Wednesday, September 20, 2006 2:25:04 AM
Daeng Sulu said...
TO ALL LOVERS OF THE MADURAI TAMIL SANGAM GLORIFYING EPICS OF DAYS LONG GONE THAT WILL NEVER COME BACK

PLEASE CHECKOUT ALL HADITH OF ISA A.S SECOND COMING AND RELATE THAT TO THE HISTORY AND ORIGIN OF GOG AND MAGOG, &c. AND CHARACTER OF HUMBUG THE GIANT.

- HOW HUMBUG THE GIANT FELL IN LOVE
WITH THE BEAUTIFUL PRINCESS LONDONA.

- HOW GOG AND MAGOG, THE CHAMPIONS OF LONDON, RESOLVED TO AVENGE THE WRONGS OF THE PRINCESS LONDONA.

http://www2.arts.gla.ac.uk/SESLL/STELLA/ STARN/prose/GALT/GOG/main.htm

NEED I SAY MORE ABOUT WHO THESE ANGLO-SAXONS TRULY ARE? JUST LOOK AT THE FEATURES OF GOG & MAGOG AS THEY THEMSELVES HAVE DEPICTED IN THEIR OWN IMAGE

Wednesday, September 20, 2006 2:28:52 AM
Sabdapalon_Revivals said...
Ok, anyone puzzling over KUMARI KANDAM?

Check this out :http://indiaculture.net/talk/messages/766/13696.html?1143227930

Wednesday, September 20, 2006 2:29:54 AM
Daeng Sulu said...
I guess rhe last to arrive would be the ultraman cinas who knew not that they are aliens, hehehe

wait la for my pdf with preeety colourful pictures

Wednesday, September 20, 2006 2:44:42 AM
pureMelayu said...
Pleeeezzzz, if you are not a pure Melayu pls do not comment about Melayu. Mixed breed are not worthy to discuss about this "Malay" issue.

Afterall, put race aside....who is not interested in MONEY? Malays are not the race exclusive to corruptions. It takes two hands to clap! Why blame the Malays?

Hello kawan, orang Melayu tak salah ok?....yang salah itu "sistem"!

Jadi kena tukar 'sistem" ok?

Wednesday, September 20, 2006 6:30:25 AM
Stephen Bennit said...
While on the subject of Malays…..Reading from the text below which I’ve taken from “Classic Encyclopedia” It seems the word amok actually originated from Kerala. Something perhaps for discussions, which might interest persons attending the upcoming Malay Congress, (or Mahathir himself)………
__________________________________

RUNNING AMUCK (or more properly Amok), the native term for the homicidal mania which attacks Malays. A Malay will suddenly and apparently without reason rush into the street armed with a kris or other weapon, and slash and cut at everybody he meets till he is killed. These frenzies were formerly regarded as due to sudden insanity. It is now, however, certain that the typical amok is the result of circumstances, such as domestic jealousy or gambling losses, which render a Malay desperate and weary of his life. It is, in fact, the Malay equivalent of suicide. "The act of running amuck is probably due to causes over which the culprit has some amount of control, as the custom has now died out in the British possessions in the peninsula, the offenders probably objecting to being caught and tried in cold blood" (W. W. Skeat).

Though so intimately associated with the Malay there is some ground for believing the word to have an Indian origin, and the act is certainly far from unknown in Indian history. Some notable cases have occurred among the Rajputs. Thus, in 1634, the eldest son of the raja of Jodhpur ran amuck at the court of Shah Jahan, failing in his attack on the emperor, but killing five of his officials. During the r 8th century, again, at Hyderabad (Sind), two envoys, sent by the Jodhpur chief in regard to a quarrel between the two states, stabbed the prince and twentysix of his suite before they themselves fell.

In Malabar there were certain professional assassins known to old travellers as Amouchi or Amuco. The nearest modern equivalent to these words would seem to be the Malayalim Amarkhan, " a warrior" (from amar," fight"). The Malayalim term shaver applied to these ruffians meant literally those "who devote themselves to death." In Malabar was a custom by which the zamorin or king of Calicut had to cut his throat in public when he had reigned twelve years. In the r7th century a variation in his fate was made. He had to take his seat, after a great feast lasting twelve days, at a national assembly, surrounded by his armed suite, and it was lawful for anyone to attack him, and if he succeeded in killing him the murderer himself became zamorin (see Alex. Hamilton, "A new Account of the East Indies," in Pinkerton's Voyages and Travels, viii. 374). In 1600 thirty would-be assassins were killed in their attempts. These men were called Amar-khan, and it has been suggested that their action was "running amuck" in the true Malay sense. Another proposed derivation for amouchi is Sanskrit amokshya, " that cannot be loosed," suggesting that the murderer was bound by a vow, an explanation more than once advanced for the Malay amuck; but amokshya in such a sense is unknown in Malayalim.
__________________________________

Wednesday, September 20, 2006 7:02:26 AM
Post a Comment

< Previous | Home | | Send this page to a friend.
Copyright © 2004 Malaysia Today | www.malaysia-today.net
Website - http://www.malaysia-today.net/Raja_Petra/2006/09/again-money-talks-bullshit-walks.html

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Raja Petra Kamarudin
(no login)
60.49.210.137

A web of deceit

No score for this post
September 19 2006, 6:03 PM 









Of perception and reality
Najib almost did not make it
Digging a hole to cover a hole
Read my lips! Kamal DID NOT get any Malaysian government jobs
Doesn’t Mahathir read what I write?
Lim Kit Siang’s version of the RM30 billion Forex loss
The RM30 billion Forex loss debate revisited
Who is really running Malaysia anyway?
Tun dear, more questions for you please
Mahathir, who is this Chinese businessman?




Thursday, September 14, 2006
A web of deceit

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Ibnu Hakeem, one of Malaysia Today’s new columnists, sent me this e-mail a couple of days ago.


On 12 September 2006, Utusan Malaysia and Berita Harian blacked out any mention of Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad’s accusation of money politics and bribery at Kubang Pasu. Dr Mahathir had said that apart from RM200 placed inside a brown envelope, there was also a suggested list of ‘preferred candidates’ to be voted for. This list did not include his candidate number.

Today (13 September 2006), after a cue from the Prime Minister who is in Helsinki, the mainstream media have decided to highlight the matter. This includes a statement made by the Kubang Pasu Division Head, Johari Baharum, carried in the New Straits Times and Berita Harian, which is surprising and also confirms Dr Mahathir’s accusation.

Referring to Dr Mahathir’s claim that a ‘preferred list’ was circulated among delegates, Johari said such lists were normal during party elections. “In fact, such lists are not only confined within Umno, but were common at other (Barisan Nasional) parties,” he said.

Here is the same report in Berita Harian:

“Mengenai senarai calon pilihan itu, Johari yang juga Timbalan Menteri Keselamatan Dalam Negeri berkata, perkara itu berlaku di mana-mana pertandingan termasuk pada peringkat Majlis Tertinggi (MT) Umno.”

“Pada saya biasalah bila ada pertandingan, ada orang keluar senarai seperti itu, itu perkara biasa,” katanya.

But this ‘preferred list’ which the Division Head has openly acknowledged was the only one prepared and distributed to the delegates at Kubang Pasu. The question that begs to be asked now is what were the criteria for recommending those candidates in the preferred list to the exclusion of Dr Mahathir?

This frank slip-of-the-tongue by Johari also raises doubts over his denial that “the supreme council had instructed that Dr Mahathir be prevented from contesting.” If the Supreme Council had not given such instructions, then Johari Baharom must explain who gave instructions to prepare the preferred list and put it in an envelope to be given to the delegates.

It is also a fact that on 8th September, that is the night before the Kubang Pasu Division election, Johari assembled all the delegates at the Kelab Golf Darul Aman for a meeting with Division leaders. The meeting was chaired by Osman Aroff who was once Deputy Division Head of Kubang Pasu. Others present at the meeting were Saad Man, one time Youth Chief of the Division, and Hanafi Ramli also previously a Naib Ketua Bahagian. It was at this meeting that the ‘preferred list’ was handed out to the delegates. Since Johari acknowledges that the list was given to the Kubang Pasu delegates inside an envelope, how do we know if there wasn’t anything else in the envelope, such as RM200 cash?

UMNO leaders, including Najib Tun Razak, are particularly upset with Johari for being so careless with his statement. Johari seems to have shot UMNO in the foot.

At a press conference on Monday, 11 September 2006, Mahathir was asked whether he intends to lodge a complaint to Umno’s disciplinary board. Various Umno leaders have also suggested that Mahathir do this so that the allegation that the Kubang Pasu delegates were paid RM200 to not vote for Mahathir could be investigated. Mahathir replied that there was not point doing so because those who were in the clandestine meeting on the eve of the Kubang Pasu meeting also sit in the disciplinary board. How could the disciplinary board rule impartially when its own members are guilty of vote buying? Hmm, it looks like the disciplinary board has to now face charges of breach of party discipline.

The ironical thing about this whole episode is that those who conspired to buy off the delegates and ensure that Mahathir lost were at one time his ‘own people’. These are people who Mahathir nurtured and they would not be where they are today if not for the fact that Mahathir put them there. These are personalities whom Mahathir ‘fed’ and who have now turned around and bitten the hand that fed them. Doesn’t Mahathir know that Hantu Raya serve their master only as long as you continue feeding them? They would rapidly change masters when you no longer have the capacity to service them.

Is this the normal trait of politicians or is Mahathir just a bad judge of character? In his 22 years at the helm of Umno and the country, he seems to have been let down by those he trusted and helped. Many would not be where they are if not for Mahathir. But no loyalty or gratitude is being demonstrated. They are amongst the first to rush to the frontline and take Mahathir down with one swing of their sword. These people are the proverbial Brutus, but less noble than the Brutus of Julius Caesar.

One thing many must learn from this episode, Abdullah Ahmad Badawi and Najib Tun Razak included, is that there is no such thing as loyalty and gratitude. Real politics does not work that way. Politics is about survival and about changing sides when the situation demands. The many that plunged their daggers into Mahathir’s back would do the same to their present master with no hesitation and in a wink of an eyelid when it is prudent to do so. That is real politics. Only fools stand by their mentor and go down with the ship. Sensible politicians would take to the nearest lifeboat and allow the captain to go down with the ship. It is better to be a live coward than a dead hero. The thin line between heroes and fools is invisible. Why would one want to sacrifice one’s life just so that praises can be sung after one is gone? Are not the dead after all unable to hear? What pleasure would one get from hearing noble things said about one when one cannot hear it?

Johari Baharum, the present head of the Umno Kubang Pasu division, was told to deny Mahathir his win at all costs. By hook or by crook Mahathir must lose. Do what it takes to ensure that this happens. And the order came from the very top. This was not an instruction from underlings and minions. This came from the pinnacle of those who walk through the corridors of power.

Johari used to work for Mahathir. He is what he is because of Mahathir. He is where he is because of Mahathir. But Mahathir is no longer the one who walks through the corridors of power. Abdullah is. So what Abdullah says goes. And Mahathir has to go. There are no two ways about it. This and only this is all that matters.

Johari has a lucrative business with Proton. He is one of the Proton contractors licensed to buy scrap metal from this government-owned company. He does not do the business himself of course. He is in partnership with Chinese businessmen and it is they who run the business. But this is the nature of the Malaysian corporate scene, especially amongst those who depend on the government for a living. The corrupted Umno politicians open the doors. The Chinese walk in and wheel and deal. Chinese businessmen are attracted to corrupted Umno politicians like flies to shit -- and the smellier the shit the more the flies.

Would someone in Johari’s position dare defy Abdullah? Mahathir can no longer grant him any favours, be it position or business opportunities. Johari’s future lies in the hands of Abdullah. So what Abdullah wants prevails.

Osman Aroff was Mahathir’s number two in the division and one-time Kedah Menteri Besar while Saad Man was his youth leader and one-time political secretary. But that was the time when Mahathir was their division chief. Now, Johari rules the division. So they now serve Johari, not Mahathir. And what Mahathir did for them over the decades that he was the Kubang Pasu division chief no longer cuts any ice. Mahathir can no longer serve them. Johari can, so they owe loyalty to Johari, not to Mahathir.

You mean Mahathir did not know all this? You mean with all that political acumen and decades of experience under his belt all this did not come to Mahathir’s realisation? Mahathir is no novice. Of course it did. He even knew about the meeting the night of 8 September. And he knew who were in the meeting and what transpired. He could have nipped it in the bud or blown the whistle prior to the 9 September meeting but he did not. He did what the Malays would say, ulur tali. He gave them all the rope they wanted so that they could hang themselves. Mahathir wanted them to ‘assassinate’ him the way they did, with a mere RM200 per delegate, so that he could demonstrate to the world the real Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, just another Umno slime-ball and scumbag and not the religious scholar that he portrays himself to be.

The battle-lines have been drawn. War has been declared and it will only end with the death of one. Only one can remain standing. Either Mahathir or Abdullah will walk away the victor while the vanquished will be buried into the history books of Malaysian politics. And who will this victor be? It will only be one but both are confident it will be him. Time will of course tell. Everyone is an expert on hindsight. It is foresight that separates the men from the boys. So which one will it be? I stake my entire reputation on the prediction that the victor will be Mahathir and that Abdullah is a dead man walking.

A man who can pretend to be stupid and fool the other into believing he is so is actually cleverer than he who he fooled. Mahathir appears defeated. This is the impression given on 9 September 2006 in Kubang Pasu. Is it that easy to defeat Mahathir? Do you mean to say that a mere RM200 per person is all it takes to bring down the giant of Malaysian politics? We are talking about RM200 per person and less than 500 people. That is a paltry sum for the likes of Mahathir. His monthly pension alone can easily cover that amount. David brought the invincible Goliath down with a mere slingshot. Was Johari the David and Mahathir the Goliath? And was the RM200 the proverbial slingshot? Even Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah does not believe this.

But this is what Abdullah would like to believe. This is what Mahathir would like Abdullah to believe. But the obvious is sometimes not that obvious. The eye sees what we want it to see. But the hand is faster than the eye. And a sleight of hand can fool the eye. Mahathir allowed matters to run its course. He saw the direction the flow was going. Why resist the flow? Go with the flow. Allow nature to run its course. But just make sure eventually it ends up where you want it to. It can meander and twist and turn. But it must stop where you want it to stop. And if you think that Mahathir never at all times had things under control and that things were not progressing the way he wanted it to, then you really don’t know this political animal named Mahathir Mohamad.

Mahathir is devious. Mahathir is a strategist. Mahathir is a schemer. Mahathir is brutal. Mahathir is an antagonist. Mahathir is a realist. You can throw Mahathir off a tall building and he will always land on his feet. Am I singing Mahathir’s praises? Hey, this is no flattery. A man like this lives by the adage that the ends justify the means. And this is a dangerous kind of man. This kind of man leaves no stone unturned in the pursuit of his objective. You do not need to like him. You can hate him. But never cross him for if you do you will wish you have never been born.

Is this the end of the Mahathir era? Maybe, if he has exhausted all avenues of attack. But there are still many more tricks up his sleeve. Do you really believe that the Crooked Bridge means so much to him? Not in the least. That is just foreplay. All the other issues are foreplay as well. Abdullah has exhausted all avenues of attack. Mahathir has not even started yet.

Mahathir is yet to expose the Oil for Food document that clearly lists Abdullah’s name as a beneficiary of millions of barrels of Iraqi oil. Have we seen the document yet? Yes, we have heard it mentioned. But have we seen the document yet? Wait till Mahathir throws the document onto the table which also includes the names of various family members of Abdullah.

Mahathir is yet to expose Abdullah’s family home in Perth. It costs 25 million. Is that Australian Dollars or Malaysian Ringgit? I don’t know. So we will have to wait for Mahathir to reveal this. And what is Abdullah going to say? That he did not know about it and that he will ask Scomi to submit a report? How can he not know when there are photographs of him and his family living in the home in his trips to Australia?

Mahathir is yet to expose Abdullah’s family cars in London. This stable or cars comes to 15 million. Is that Pounds Stirling or Malaysian Ringgit? I don’t know. So we will have to wait for Mahathir to reveal this. And what is Abdullah going to say? That he did not know about it and that he will ask Scomi to submit a report? They had better sell off the cars pretty quick before the photographs make their way through the Malaysian media.

Why are they killing Proton? Are they killing Proton to embarrass Mahathir and show the world that it was a stupid idea that only stupid Prime Ministers would moot? No, it is more than that. They don’t think Proton is a stupid idea or that the man behind the idea is stupid. They in fact think it is a good idea and they want Proton for themselves. Proton sits on a massive and valuable land bank and they want to get their hands on this land. And to do this they must kill Proton so that they can strip Proton of its assets.

The man waiting eagerly beneath the wings to pick at Proton’s carcass is the man who runs Terengganu and decides how its RM1 billion a year wang ehsan is spent. This man is Partick Lim, Kamaluddin Abdullah’s business partner. And Kamaluddin is Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi’s son, the man who has already procured more than RM1.5 billion worth of Malaysian government contracts and who owns the house in Perth and all the cars in London.

Yes, there are many more tricks up Mahathir’s sleeve. Mahathir has not even started exposing them all yet. And he will in time, one by one. And Abdullah who was first touted as the best Prime Minister Malaysia has ever seen will be shown for what he is, a munafik in ulamak’s clothing.

Will Umno still stand behind Abdullah when all this come to the surface? Will Umno still give Abdullah its undivided support when realisation sets in that Abdullah is not what he appears to be? Will Abdullah be able to retain power when Umno turns away from him in disgust? Or will Umno move a vote of no confidence against Abdullah and demand that he vacates his seat as President of the party and Prime Minister of Malaysia?

Something is going to break. And it will not be over two years. It will be over two months. November will be the telling time. Abdullah will either continue as Umno President and Prime Minister for as long as he wishes, or he will have to crawl away with his tail between his legs. By November, Abdullah will either be confirmed the undisputed paramount leader of Malaysia who walks through the corridors of power or he will be listed as the previous and Fifth Prime Minister of Malaysia. And the man who will decide this is Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad.

posted 1:10 PM

78 Comments:
X11Daemons said...
satu pandangan yang sangat bagus dari RPK. Satu pandangan yang memerlukan ketelitian serta ruang lingkup luas daya fikir kita. Daya pemikiran seperti ini sepatutnya ada pada AAB, namun sehingga kini, meskipun sebagai bukan seorang intelektual saya tidak dapat merasakan kualiti sebagai pemimpin dalam diri AAB. Malaysia seakan-akan kehilangan taringnya dan sering diperlekehkan. Selama ini saya berpegang kepada prinsip tunggu dan lihat sahaja, tapi dalam keadaan sekarang adalah lebih baik AAB berundur. Jangan sampai keamanan dan nasib rakyat diperjudikan. Sejarah telah membuktikan apabila seseorang pemimipin gagal untuk dihormati, keruntuhan tamadun akan terjadi.

Thursday, September 14, 2006 1:40:41 PM
AJIP said...
tak sabar nak tunggu bulan november ni.... yang menang jadi arang yang kalah jadi abu

terima kasih petra....

Thursday, September 14, 2006 1:48:51 PM
scout72 said...
The other scenario is that both men are dead men walking. They are too busy beating each other to bits that both seem to fail us all. It has become personal; one trying to build up his own legacy and another trying to protect his.
The fractures are also showing by those who are not loyal to either. I think Zaid Ibrahim's comments were aimed a both parties.
Wake up and reform the entire system before the system that one built and the other perpetuates wipes you both out.

It is a sad sight indeed when so many real issues lie unresolved and the nation suffers from an acute lack of leadership.

My hope is that Zaid and others like him can rise above all this petty lacerny and actually move our country forward.
However such is the cynicism of polticians in this country - maybe Zaid as his own agenda. Any enlightenment from yoru side - RPK?

Thursday, September 14, 2006 1:53:31 PM
parigiparis said...
come clean Malaysiaku!

Go for the change and chance it now!

Thursday, September 14, 2006 1:59:04 PM
scout72 said...
Just to add some more info that RPK made about this Patrick Lim of Equine Capital who is one of Pak Lah's cronies: I always wondered why the 2nd link in Penang was taking the longest route across the water to land in Batu Kawan? Then I noted that the developer who has the monopoly on future developement of the new Batu Kawan Township is Patrick Lim; and that I heard that land there has also been set aside for a possible new International Airport in Batu Kawan to replace Bayan Lepas. And no prizes for guessing who will get the Bayan Lepas airport land as quid pro quo for building the new airport? Now in my estimation that land at Bayan Lepas airport must be the most valuable piece of property in the North of Malaysia and worth gazillions to develop and sell....
Ahhh - might be time to invest some money in Equine Capital shares...!
You have to hand it to Pak Lah - he certainly learnt the art of fostering cronyism from the master.

Thursday, September 14, 2006 2:12:08 PM
alancheong7 said...
scout,

Hear! Hear!

Thursday, September 14, 2006 2:15:53 PM
Mohd Kamal Abdullah said...
A good description of current events. You have said it right about politics. Its a dirty game to play.Whoever is going to make it, will not benefit the rakyat, only their CRONIES.

The rakyat need to remove the BARISAN NASIONAL government from power. Then situation may change. Malaysia needs a constant change of government every election or two, so that the government of the day is not taking things for granted where corruption and cronism creeps in.

Time for change is here.....its up to the rakyat to do it.

Thursday, September 14, 2006 2:21:59 PM
Ibn Abd Halim said...
Dear Pete,

"Mahathir is devious. Mahathir is a strategist. Mahathir is a schemer. Mahathir is brutal. Mahathir is an antagonist. Mahathir is a realist. You can throw Mahathir off a tall building and he will always land on his feet. Am I singing Mahathir’s praises? Hey, this is no flattery. A man like this lives by the adage that the ends justify the means. And this is a dangerous kind of man. This kind of man leaves no stone unturned in the pursuit of his objective. You do not need to like him. You can hate him. But never cross him for if you do you will wish you have never been born."

You perfectly described him. Wait till this gnome strikes back. ABB is in hot soup. I like neither but I love to see the next episodes.

Thursday, September 14, 2006 2:31:01 PM
headache06 said...
Well done RPK,

I always suspect this Patrick Lim and he is always very suspicous in my eyes.

For him to claim he is very devoted christian, I doubt it. God had sent a message to him in a tragic manner, the death of his close friend killed by helicoter rotor blades...

So, moral of the story dont;t trust people who claim to be religious. Like you said munafik in ulamak's clothing...

Khairy = Patrick = Kali = Kamal = Bodowi = zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

God save Malaysia....

Thursday, September 14, 2006 2:34:14 PM
sayusayme said...
Mahadev is devious. Mahadev is a strategist. Mahadev is a schemer. Mahadev is brutal. Mahadev is an antagonist. Mahadev is a realist...........dangerous kind of man....

You are being too kind RPK!

Mahadev is corrupt.
Mahadev is tyrannical.
Mahadev is a SOB.....

Let these two skin each other alive for the whole world to see what UMNO presidents or Bolehland PMs are made of. For all intend and purpose, this is probably what we need. At the end of the day, both of them and those who hold their coat-tails will perish from the establishment. A new era then begins.

Thursday, September 14, 2006 2:36:36 PM
takapalah said...
Next time TDM and the rest better read the script 10X before calling for press conference. RM200 for a vote....too cheap....maybe they better ask me to rewrite the script...I put RM2000 to RM20000 per vote sound more realistic.

Thursday, September 14, 2006 2:46:30 PM
smeagroo said...
SO if what TDM said is true and Aku Aje Bodoh loses, will he go to jail ah? If no jail just stepping down then justice wont be serve. Afterall, if allegations are true, then he would hv made his millions and can retire already. Where is justice?

Thursday, September 14, 2006 2:52:30 PM
d_BigFoot said...
Mahathir replied that there was not point doing so because those who were in the clandestine meeting on the eve of the Kubang Pasu meeting also sit in the disciplinary board. How could the disciplinary board rule impartially when its own members are guilty of vote buying? Hmm, it looks like the disciplinary board has to now face charges of breach of party discipline.
Ah, this is just a microcosm of the macrocosm that is Malaysia! A tiny shit hole replica of the bigger ShiT Hole architectured by Mahathir himself!
So, what's the surprise?????
Shit.
Shit.
Shit.

Thursday, September 14, 2006 2:53:24 PM
d_BigFoot said...
Suppose RPK were right,
that AAB was a deadman walking,
Who will take his place?
Najis?
And that's a better choice?
If so, Shit can be placed inside HagenDaaz cups man!

Goodness... there aren't any talents in Malaysia... and No honest monkeys either!
Shit.
Shit.
Shit in HaagenDaaz cups!

Thursday, September 14, 2006 2:57:29 PM
jaguhkampung said...
Mohd Kamal Abdullah,

Couldn't agree more with you.

Thursday, September 14, 2006 3:07:59 PM
XIII Ghosts said...
syusayme said...>>> A new era then begins...

Be careful what you wish for...do you think BN, or more to the point UMNO, would ever cede power peacefully!! Unthinkable if it were a non-Malay led Opposition, maybe if it were Malay led, but unlikely!

After all wasn't that what May 13th, 1969 was all about!!

I just hope that Anwar is really committed to Malaysia & not romancing about the UN Sec Gen's post!

If he has still got the ambition to lead this country, the mutually assured destruction of Pak Tidur & Mahazalim under the present scenario, may represent his sole slim chance for a shot at that job; leading an opposition that has yet to attract more than a glimmer of the man in the street's attention.

Thursday, September 14, 2006 3:12:00 PM
bumi-non-malay said...
How about Mahathir Billions under Daim or in his sons name or daughter name........that is why Obliterate UMNO racist is best....lives or money.....at least once Obliterated we can start afresh like a new building....now this Renovation Looks Hedious and Pure Evil.......at least we can draw a conclusion Hedious M'sia is UMNO racist Job....no question about it......stop blaming the bumi non malay for taking all Malay jobs...we have to survive and malays UMNO racist wants the easy money......keep selling all asset...the terrible time will be coming ...each will be worst than the last....don't say i did not warn you...move money to carry trade!!

Thursday, September 14, 2006 3:19:36 PM
ratm said...
RPK,

This is all very, very exciting but i don't get this. I've read every single article on MT with regards to the Dr.M vs AAB but I still do get it. Why does Dr.M want AAB out of the picture so badly? Did he not put AAB there in the 1st place? Surely, after more than 22 years of corruption and nepotism, Dr.m is not having a change of heart now? Surely this is not in the interest of the nation?

Would appreciate it if you could give me some in sight, though you probably wouldn't. Thanks anyway!

Love,
RATM

Thursday, September 14, 2006 3:38:30 PM
oxfordgraduate said...
sometimes i wonder why go so far as to perth to find a home that is built at the cost of 25 million dollars, when you have all the politicians here living to the hilt?

go to bukit tunku or duta and see for yourselves...you're telling me this houses that was once there for many years ...you guys don't notice who stays in which Mansions? come on...why not throw the books on those people too?

talk cock sing song...no.1

if you want to be a REAL TRUE person that wants a clean MALAYSIA...book all of them...don't pick and choose...what's dirty just flush them out....stop pointing fingers and all that crap...

Thursday, September 14, 2006 3:40:20 PM
rakyatmalaysia said...
RPK,

whatever also, even if AAB steps down, we will have Najib to rule... aiyo... if not KJ..kalu itu pun tidak, then Hi-shame-mudin..

all 2 x 5 je..

Thursday, September 14, 2006 3:47:42 PM
JUSTICE said...
Among Tun Mahathir Major Achievements for Malaysia.

Manage to exclude Malaysia to borrrow from IMF during 1997 Asian financial crisis
Launched vision 2020 in order for Malaysia to be developed country in year 2020
Brought Malaysia to the world level in political arena
Built Malaysia new administration centre at Putrajaya
Changed Malaysia from agriculture based country to industrial and services oriented country
Less depending on neighbouring country port by contructed our own major ports like Tanjung Pelepas and West Port. This help Malaysia to reduce foreign currency outflow.

Thursday, September 14, 2006 3:58:59 PM
JUSTICE said...
Tun Mahathir was fully back by most of Asian and Middle East countries in international political arena but a lot of western leaders disagree with his opinion and leadership due to the following reasons:-

He managed to open other leader's eyes that each country should be able to talk freely like other developed countries.
He always critics western and developed countries which look down on developing countries.
He highly respected leader by other middle east leaders.
He has taken out Malaysia from depending on certain countries only for any support like defence, technology, trading partners, political support and other significant matters which reflect country's pride.
He brought Malaysia to be an example of succesful Islamic country to the west and the whole world without jeopardizing the islamic teaching.
He manage to convinced some world important leaders such as Prime Minister of France, President of Russia and Counselor of Germany to listen to Malaysian views in certain political matters like war on Iraq.
He not listening to western leaders without any solid justification on why Malaysia should listen to them. For Tun, Malaysia interest and pride are the most important. He don't want Malaysia to be in control in term of political like other countries.

Thursday, September 14, 2006 4:03:01 PM
JUSTICE said...
Ketokohan dan kelantangan beliau selama 22 tahun memerintah negara telah mengangkat Ekonomi Malaysia ke satu tahap yang boleh dibanggakan dan hasil daripada aspirasi beliau dapat dinikmati melalui kesempurnaan kehidupan rakyat Malaysia sekarang.

Thursday, September 14, 2006 4:04:57 PM
rakyatmalaysia said...
Among Tun Mahathir Major Evils for Malaysia.

Manage to silence the law itself in 1988.
Launched UMNO Baru in order for TDM to control tight on UMNO members.
Causes BNM to loose billions of ringgit in 1992.
Re-introduce NEP to Benefit the Bumis
Changed Malay from independent to dependent.
Black out media from publishing the truth.
Introduce wide corruption among ministers that now worsen to state level.

Thursday, September 14, 2006 4:05:21 PM
Ramlan Ugau said...
Membaca atikel RPK di atas membuat ingatan saya kembali kepada persoalan dan pertanyaan yang selalu dan selama ini bermain difikiran.

Mengapakah dalam setiap PM atau MB/CM ( Melayu ) di Malaysia pasti ada seorang Cina yang jadi tulang belakang, rakan kongsi atau orang kepercayaan mereka. Contoh di atas ialah Patrick Lim untuk PM AAB.

Agaknya Koh Tsu Koon sekarang sebagai CM Penang, adakah dia akan menyimpan seorang Melayu sebagai orang kepercayaan dan partner dalam hal ehwal urusan perniagaannya ? Rasanya tentu tidak. Habis kenapa bila orang Melayu jadi PM atau CM/MB, maka cina juga yang kaya raya jadi billioner.

Dimana sebenarnya sikap patriotik nak bantu orang sendiri ?

Esok atau lusa seorang Cina Malaysia jadi PM maka mimpi lah orang Melayu untuk merasa nak jadi millioner.

Thursday, September 14, 2006 4:06:22 PM
cerpela' said...
He has sit where Musa, Razaleigh, Ghafar and Anwar has failed to warm let alone to sit. Ghazali Shaffei too.

Looks may be deceiving.Of course he is not a WYSWYG TYPE.
Luck you think. Much more than that. If somebody can deceive Mahathir, he must have something. Lets see his game.

So far he has managed to sidestep thousands of landmines supplanted by Mahathir before he retired. Anybody facing the same situation will be very careful.If the masses understand this they will be less stringent on him.

He is surrounded by people who has been castrated by 22 yrs of Mahathirs rule. Was he castrated too. if he is, hope he can do a Zheng He.Sida Zheng He.

Thursday, September 14, 2006 4:08:43 PM
myview said...
Agaknya Koh Tsu Koon sekarang sebagai CM Penang, adakah dia akan menyimpan seorang Melayu sebagai orang kepercayaan dan partner dalam hal ehwal urusan perniagaannya ? Rasanya tentu tidak.

Koh Tsu Koon tak perlu front man. Hanya orang yang corrupt sahaja perlukan front man to cover up. If this country continues to be run by keris hunus parti, habis kaput kekayaan negara. Look at Singapore. They are resource scare without oil, gas, oil palm, rubber, tin, timber and don't even have water and sand. But their per capita income is 6 to 7 times higher than us. If only Penang can be administered separately, Penang would have been a rich haven. If Penang Chief Minister post is rotated to the privileged people, they will habis sapu all the state land before their term is expired.

Thursday, September 14, 2006 4:50:01 PM
Mufti Murtad said...
SDRA RPK,

WHEN YOUR PREDICTION COMES THRU & THE DOC WINS I HOPE YOU ARE MADE A TAN SRI. THERE MUST BE SOME RECOGNITION FOR YOUR EFFORTS.

ALSO ONE DAY I HOPE UMMI HAFILDA WILL BE GIVEN A DATUKSHIP FOR WRITING THAT LETTER AND SUFFERING GETTING 'TURNED AROUND' BY THE POLICE FOR SIGNING HER NAME AND IC NUMBER TO IT.

YOUR EXPOSE IS AN EYE OPENER. WE MUST ALSO BE GRATEFUL TO scout72 FOR ADDING TO THE USEFUL INFO ABOUT PATRICK LIM AND THE BATU KAWAN DEVELOPMENT.

I NOTICE THAT LATELY KALIMULLAH AND BRENDAN PEREIRA HAVE GONE INTO HIDING. MAYBE THEY KNOW AHEAD OF TIME THAT PAK LAH WILL NOT BE AROUND MUCH LONGER. IF MAHATHIR IS SUCCESFUL KALIMULLAH AND BRENDAN BETTER FIND THE DEEPEST BLACK HOLE IN CALCUTTA TO HIDE IN. KHAIRY IS ALSO LESS VISIBLE. THEY ARE ALL COUNTING THEIR DAYS.

BUT WHAT IF MAHATHIR IS NOT SUCCESFUL BY NOVEMBER 06 ? MY GUESS IS MAHATHIR WILL BE A THORN IN PAK LAH'S SIDE THRU 12 MONTHS IN 2007 UNTIL THE GENERAL ELECTIONS IN 2008. THEN BN WILL SUFFER ITS WORST DEFEAT SINCE 1969. WHO KNOWS THE BN MAY EVEN LOSE. THEY WILL DEFINITELY LOSE THEIR 2/3 MAJORITY. WHEN THAT HAPPENS THE UMNO FOLKS WILL UNCEREMONIOUSLY THROW OUT ABDULLAH.

ANOTHER SCENARIO IS THAT ABDULLAH'S HEALTH GIVES UP. ONE OBSERVER SAYS ABDULLAH IS VISIBLY TENSED UP. HE LOOKS WEARY AND WORN OUT. THIS MAN JUST WILL NOT LAST.

Thursday, September 14, 2006 5:19:06 PM
6ixer said...
Another prove of how brilliant TDM is.

Thursday, September 14, 2006 5:26:07 PM
Itsmylife said...
Mahathir will be there....and the rakyat will be watching. Come November....we will know where we are heading too.

LONG LIVE MAHATHIR.

Thursday, September 14, 2006 5:27:23 PM
Ihavejust said...
I am also willing to bet that Dr. Mahathir will emerged the winner. Not because they love Dr. Mahathir more
but because they love Abdullah Badawi less.

There are basically 4 reasons for this:
a. Abdullah Badawi is abit dumb like Forrest Gump. He is just very lucky to
be at the right at the right time. Since Abdullah Badawi is abit dumb,
Dr. M has mistaken that being dumb is the same as being kind. Dr. M probably
reason this after the Anwar Saga. However after becoming the PM, Abdullah Badawi
became Big Liar. Since he is abit dumb, he wont be able to defend himself, unless
others do it for him.

b. Abdullah Badawi became the PM, at the time Bloggers became the driving force of
alternative information dissemination. Meaning that more people will check the
internet for information, and see the big picture by comparing the traditional
media and the internet. Most political Bloggers are poking fun at Abdullah Badawi.
It is also 100% obvious that the more educated ones do not support Abdullah Badawi.

c. The Malay and Muslim psyche. Abdullah Badawi makes the Malay look stupid. The Malay
is well known for wanting "face", sometimes more then the Chinese. After Hang Tuah
and Hang Jebat were rumoured to be Chinese, the Malays need other hero. That is why
they bring back Ngah Ibrahim. Majority of Malaysians Muslims look at the Iran president
as their New Hero, of course there are some who secretly admire Osama. Not only the
Malays needs a PM but a HERO too. At this moment, they know Abdullah Badawi is kaki lembik,
kaki lena and kaki tak tahu . Try to do this: Put Saladin and Abdullah Badawi side by side,
and then put Dr. Mahathir and Saladin side by side.

d. While the more intellectual Malay will look for Pride and Dignity, which Abdullah Badawi
has flush down into the toilet bowl, the normal Malaysians look for other simple indicators
like cost of living. 2 things which bother the proletariats - fuel increment followed by
inflation, and increased crime rate.

If UMNO do not remove Abdullah Badawi, then UMNO will be removed in the next election.

Thursday, September 14, 2006 5:29:07 PM
tokio_rain said...
RPK said, "A man like this lives by the adage that the ends justify the means."

I believe Mahathir is also a man who lives by the feud. The deeper the better. If we go along with RPK's thinking that Mahathir will have Badawi by the short and curlies, than may God have mercy on Badawi's soul. He will be drawn and quartered.

Other revelations like the multimillion-dollar house in Australia and multimillion-dollar car collection in London just goes to show the level of deceit that is inherent in Badawi.

Like other readers have commented, who's next in line to take over -- Najib? Cmon, you got to be kidding. The whole Umno-BN machinery must be brought down. Easier said than done, eh?

Thursday, September 14, 2006 6:32:16 PM
scout72 said...
RPK,
I can see the damage that Tun is doing to Pak Lah & UMNO. I can see Pak Lah leadership being questioned and I can see those around him, including Najis, being damaged as well.
If all goes according to plan they will be knocked out next year.
However I don't see Tun taking over.
So who does? Ku Li? Anwar? The list is not long nor comforting....

Since Tony Blair is leaving his office next year - maybe we can import him as an expatriate PM?

Thursday, September 14, 2006 7:02:07 PM
Sabri Mahmut Sungai Jatuh said...
Aptly said, that the rakyat will be watching.

Yup, that IS ALL the rakyat can do. Just watching.

.., oh and SUFFER whatever the consequences of this war of those who walks the corridor of power.

RPK, tell us something else.

Something that will affect us all as the rakyat.

Can you name ONE PERSON whom we as rakyat can rely upon comes what can be possibly termed as our beloved nation darkest days this coming November?

Or just like the rest of us, the rakyat, you'll only be watching too.

You've provided us the food to swallow - do not deny us the water to drink.

I am sure you have that ONE NAME.

Then we continue to deliberate our fate.

Thank You.

Thursday, September 14, 2006 7:42:20 PM
ymygeram said...
Hentaman RPK terhadap Pak Lah memang dahsyat. Pak Lah terus tak ada kebaikan dalam perhatian RPK. Bila dah benci memanglah begitu.

Sebaliknya, RPK lebih berbaik sangka pada Mahathir. Keburukan Mahathir seakan tiada. Mahathir boleh semuanya. Apakah benar Mahathir begitu ?

Apa pun RPK seakan terlupa takdir tuhan. Kemungkinan Pak Lah tersungkur di kaki Mahathir memang jadi harapan ramai peminat Mahathir. Namun, apakah tak mungkin Mahathir juga boleh melutut memegang kaki Pak Lah bila dia tahu seluruh keluarganya juga tidaklah sebersih seperti apa yang dia diberitahu.

Ingatlah Pak Lah dan Mahathir tu manusia biasa. Kedua-duanya bukan maksum. Janganlah terlalu berperangsangka terhadap sesaorang !

Thursday, September 14, 2006 8:39:49 PM
Alaskan Waves said...
I'm no politics whiz but with reference to Justice's comments, his list of TDM's achievements, whilst this was precisely not Justice's intention, merely served to indicated succinctly that enormous effort had been spent in making the country look good to the rest of the world.

It deflected (and probably continues to deflect) any attention from the seething domestic conflicts whilst we 'helpless' people watch from the stands.

The truth of the matter is, those who are in the position to do something about this are probably living comfortably, would prefer to mind their own business and enjoy mindless social activities. But when shit hits the fan (did someone predict November?), they'd all wish they hadn't been watching from their comfy seats in their hospitality boxes.

And as for:

"He managed to open other leader's eyes that each country should be able to talk freely like other developed countries."

--- where have you been for the past two decades??

Thursday, September 14, 2006 9:06:22 PM
cerpela' said...
Since Mahathir is a more dangerous, meaner,more treacherous,and maybe a threat to well being of the nation the rakyat, especially those in UMNO who can make changes, those who will decide come November...we call upon your conscious soul to help Mahathir slowly proceed to his political grave to be buried alive.

As for AAB, since he since can pose no immediate danger, you can just let him read the talqin.You can deal with him when the economic climate is better.

Thursday, September 14, 2006 9:16:27 PM
stepdownLah said...
bodolah shud know he has no credibility as a PM. just step down and help your son to operate his restaurant in Perth. so who's going to replace bodolah? najib? we will never let another pondan to rule our country. no more please.. for me, i bet for KuLi as he is by far 100x better than any other opportunies in UMNO right now.

Thursday, September 14, 2006 10:05:32 PM
confuse_us said...
The Star dated 14 September 2006 wrote that Ku Li was shocked that Dr Mahathir lost in the recent Kubang Pasu delegates election. He said that there must be unseen forces as otherwise how could TDM suffer a loss when he was a leader in Kubang Pasu for more than 30 years and had brought more development there than an other constituency in the country. I don’t think the Malays are that ungrateful.”

Hee, hee, hee…. Ku Li, Ku Li … you are not as smart as we all thought. The unseen forces are very much visible and they, being not smart as well took the bait and were booby trapped set by the master strategist himself.
TDM, go ahead, make an official report so that they can form another independent inquiry panel … it is okay, the public are very generous and as the saying goes, the more panel the merrier.
By the way, AAB really not involved in this since he got better things to do.

Thursday, September 14, 2006 10:08:02 PM
Frank said...
scout72, i like the idea to import expat PM, ie mr. blair!

Thursday, September 14, 2006 10:15:02 PM
kamri said...
Raja Pete Sir

Thank you for opening my eyes.

Keep it up...seven virgins waiting for you in Heaven.

Thanks!!

Thursday, September 14, 2006 10:21:28 PM
another_malaysian said...
confuse_us

you are so naive on politics and what is mentioned in the press. anyone can see ku li is fanning the fire and he has bought himself a frontrow seat on the fence watching both sides destroying each other.

Thursday, September 14, 2006 11:02:52 PM
sledwig84 said...
CLICK
november is d-day? HO HO HO!!! this AAB-TDM soap opera is skyrocketing new heights day by day...and this is just only a trailer, NOT EVEN PILOT EPISODE!!! gosh, i wonder what will happen when all hell breaks loose!
CLICK
yep, this entertainment is even way better than WWE, prison break or EPL!!!
CLICK
yes, i'm saying all this while i'm slouching on my sofa with popcorn on my left hand & a cup of tongkat ali teh tarik on my right hand...
CLICK

Thursday, September 14, 2006 11:08:05 PM
riau said...
"Chinese businessmen are attracted to corrupted Umno politicians like flies to shit -- and the smellier the shit the more the flies."

There are honest business people and there are those who cut corners regardless of race. Are you not stereotyping? Malay and Indian businessmen are some how not attracted to corrupted UMNO politicians?
Suddenly flies too have a "racial" make-up.
Please be careful with your descriptions. Cheers

Thursday, September 14, 2006 11:33:33 PM
cynical cynic said...
Despite all the predictions that Pak Lah is going kaput at Mahathir's behest. I am actually going to put my money on Pak Lah. Not because Pak Lah is brilliant or a good leader, it is simply because Pak Lah has the advantage of incumbency.

UMNO's culture is such a way that the incumbent leader always has an enormous power over the party. He owns both carrot and stick. Pak Lah owns the biggest war chest/carrot, namely the ministry of finance. Also he also holds the biggest stick in Malaysia - the ministry of internal security.

This point had been demonstrated during the Anwar crisis. Anwar was a far more popular leader than Mahathir in term of grassroots support, and yet the dent on UMNO was hardly noticeable. My point is, even if you put the leader of teapot kingdom religious cult as the president of UMNO, to unseat him will be a very difficult task.

Yes Mahathir is respected, Mahathir is smart and he is more brilliant. But mahathir does not have levers of power anymore. Even if he exposes all the scandals in Pak Lah's family (which people already know anyway) it is not going to make any difference.

So what do we do? I suggest - nothing. Lets just watch and enjoy the spectacle. My bet is RM100 on Pak Lah. Sapa mau raise? Mari mari!

Friday, September 15, 2006 12:09:44 AM
Head_Hunter said...
anyone reading MT on a daily basis wud hv noticed d sudden surge of articles about mahathir both in d english as well as d malay sections.

i was overcome by a slight sense of disappointment bcoz i had thought d "ghoulish" face on d pinang tree in kepala batas wud hv made a good thread on d blog. thus, with much childish eagerness, i waited for it to appear. n waited n waited n waited. did RPK forget to buy d papers? i asked. alas, it was not to b. instead d focus is on mahathir mahathir mahathir. so....... let's talk anwar.

anwar? why anwar? his name didn't even appear once in RPK's article.

it didn't hv to. bcoz it was written all over. u will need a trained eye though and a bit of imagination on how all this is going to run its course.

given d political realities in this country, d only body capable of dethroning AAB is d umno supreme council. mahathir knows this. he learnt it by watching tun razak n later used it himself to unseat hussein onn. but how does one go about building up an alliance against AAB in d council?

deals. political deals, that is, on how to split d spoils, who gets to be what, once AAB is gone. this is something our sleepy friend will find hard to stop bcoz it's all cladestine right up to the moment before d shit hits d fan.

in any hierachy, n d supreme council is no different, there will always b those who r higher up n those who r lower down n those who r favoured n those who r not. n then there r those who r not satified with all that they already hv n wants more. it snowballs, small at first then gets larger n larger n larger. beyond d critical mass, d rest will fall like dominos n then it's "game over" for AAB.

forget about d groundswell of negative opinion that mahathir is trying to cook up among d grassroots. mahathir knows they count for nothing when it come to d real power play. d killing blow can only be delivered by d supreme council.

does AAB know this? quite probably so. mahathir's plan now is to push him into a corner by a non-stop barrage of attacks. like a good chess player, he knows how to set up his pieces. his job right now is to keep AAB busy defending himself against issues like patrick lim (another chinese patsy, poor soul), KJ n others that RPK has mentioned. why? it is a diversionary tactic to distract him while the perpetrators go to work on individual members of d council. d attacks will not stop until the coup-de-grace is delivered.

then, how does anwar figure in all this?

there will come a time when AAB will not be able to tell who's behind him and who's not. apart from a few trusted ones he knows d rest are "hantu raya" as RPK so eloquently said. he will need to resort to someone outside his circle. someone d alliance will not care to share the good bits with. DPM? minister of finance perhaps? sorryla positions all taken.

anyways, i think anwar will not b that stoopid bcoz he knows a minister only stays in office at d pleasure of d PM. u want to stay on, u better be "useful" to him.

so, how is all this going to pan out? well, just read d papers. d moment u start to see anwar appearing more often, u know d rumble has begun.

so when is this all going to happen? i really don't know. perhaps, i should best leave it to RPK to tell us. game? RPK.

Friday, September 15, 2006 1:31:41 AM
docomo00 said...
so...what lies beyond? It seems to me either TDM or AAB wins, the next dude's gonna be Najib.

Doomsday all over again, yer peasants!

Friday, September 15, 2006 3:34:33 AM
siri49 said...
You really need to question the "intelligence" of some of UMNO's divisional heads. However stupid they are, they have input into how the country is run. A country with such massive potential that is being run into the ground by thieves, liars and scoundrels. God help Malaysia and Malaysians!!

Friday, September 15, 2006 4:13:41 AM
Mr. Smith said...
To me Mahathir is a university professor and Abdullah, a kindergarten student!

At present Abdullah is a sitting duck, using sheets of paper to shield himself again Mahathir's onslaught. It is a matter of time before he goes down.
Abdullah just cannot provide answers to these attacks.

Friday, September 15, 2006 7:32:05 AM
Bigjoe99 said...
Although I view Dr. M as a criminal and mediocre leader, I believe that the recent systematic marginalization of Dr. M in Kubang Pasu is a very negative.

The Badawi administration have every right to shut Dr. M out of the party if they chose. However what has happened and may further get worst is the further institutionalization of self-interest or special interest in UMNO.

It was not the PM that shut out Dr. M but rather traitorous leaders who is out to protect their own self-interest at the expense of someone they owe their success in life to.

This is not about UMNO. Its about UMNOputras in fact, its gross greed and cowardice of UMNOputras. These people will in the end block reform of UMNO and the Badawi promised reformed. These are the same people that are against anti-corruption drive, that don't want the IPCMC, that forcing the government to spend unjustifiable. These are the people who had urged on the 'Scenic bridge' and later turn against it when its clear it was not feasable.

As much as I don't think Dr. M deserve any attention, he has earned the right to speak his mind. UMNO can choose the right not to listen (i.e., they can always not go to his speeches), but to not even let him speak is a measure of UMNO weakness.

Friday, September 15, 2006 8:42:33 AM
Alexander the Great said...
aab is a 'munafik in ulamak’s clothing'.

how true. and the truth of this is starting to unfold.

rpk has mentioned about the house in perth and cars in london. but closer to home, look at this :

as carried in the newspapers today on 'the government is pending rm20 mil to upgrade the security features of pm's datuk seri abdullah ahmad badawi's official residence, seri perdana :

rm1.32 mil for initial works which include mobilisation, workmen, compensation, insurance, clearing of rubbish and coordination;

rm4.29 mil for an anti-terrorist ramp;

rm3.46 mil for cctv cameras and additional security lightings at south fencing;

rm3.88 mil for a perimeter intrusion detection system Ipids);

rm1.06 mil for control room;

rm900.9k for south fencing with pids system;

rm800k for feeding pillars and armour fibre cables and trenching;

rm820.7k for power cables feeder pillars and trenching;

rm1.3 mil forlightning, earthing, and surge protection systems for feeder pillars and camera poles; and

rm500k for the visitor management system.

goodness, and this is only for the security of seri perdana ! it sounds more like security system for the whole of wilayah putrajaya !

i am sure this project was not tendered out. it must have been a negotiated job.

with this kind of money for the outlined job, someone must be pocketing clean rm10 mil ! (possibly to be shared by a few)

i have asked around from people who are dealing in security job and they are willing to do the job for less than half of this rm20 mil budget !

aaargh ... there goes my tax money !

Friday, September 15, 2006 9:16:39 AM
drseuss said...
Frank & scout72,

Tony Blair tu jauh, kalau orang Kubang Pasu setuju kita ambil yg dekat2 aje. emm like Gus Dur? Amacam? Lagi bagus. tada baca, tada tanya main sign aje.

Jangan Mare!

Friday, September 15, 2006 10:41:20 AM
NSTPravda said...
The corrupted Umno politicians open the doors. The Chinese walk in and wheel and deal. Chinese businessmen are attracted to corrupted Umno politicians like flies to shit -- and the smellier the shit the more the flies.


We are flabbergasted by these revelations about flies. One guaranteed way to reduce flies is to reduce the amount of shit shed, smelly or otherwise.

Anus R UMNO polticians in high orifice. Semua-nya OK!

Friday, September 15, 2006 11:00:52 AM
Stephen Bennit said...
“Mahathir is yet to expose Abdullah’s family home in Perth. It costs 25 million. Is that Australian Dollars or Malaysian Ringgit? I don’t know. “

This I can find out pretty easily I think. I’ve got contacts in some of the local Council’s in Perth….. if its under Abdullah’s name, easy…… they have programme where one just need to type the name……. it then shows all the properties linked to the name….

…I told one of my contacts to type Quo Vadis…….it indicated an individual living in Serangoon Road, Singapore….. and working in Seagate, Yio Chiew Kang, Singapore as a contract cleaner……information is being verified.

Friday, September 15, 2006 11:16:42 AM
twotablet said...
Jeng, jeng, jeng...so ala MGG Pillai/Pulp Fiction...jeng, jeng, jeng...to be continued

Friday, September 15, 2006 12:01:53 PM
pionnakal said...
drseuss said...

Frank & scout72,

Tony Blair tu jauh, kalau orang Kubang Pasu setuju kita ambil yg dekat2 aje. emm like Gus Dur? Amacam? Lagi bagus. tada baca, tada tanya main sign aje.

Jangan Mare!

- Gus Dur tak boleh main golop (golf).....LOL. Hes definitely OUT..! If you cant play golop, you cant get a 'shoulder rubbing'....naaaah...! but another rubbing..YES. Try ask the woman who sat on his lap...!?

*****

NSTPravda said...

The corrupted Umno politicians open the doors. The Chinese walk in and wheel and deal. Chinese businessmen are attracted to corrupted Umno politicians like flies to shit -- and the smellier the shit the more the flies.


We are flabbergasted by these revelations about flies. One guaranteed way to reduce flies is to reduce the amount of shit shed, smelly or otherwise.

Anus R UMNO polticians in high orifice. Semua-nya OK!

- Try to refersh your mind......
a) Maika shares (MIC)
b) All Chinese's Co-operative's monies once (MCA)
c) Yayasan Sabah (PBS)
d) need to mention more....?

oh....common NSTPravda...!? you sure need a pion to be a 'Raja '

bumi-non-malay said...

How about Mahathir Billions under Daim or in his sons name or daughter name........that is why Obliterate UMNO racist is best....lives or money.....at least once Obliterated we can start afresh like a new building....now this Renovation Looks Hedious and Pure Evil.......at least we can draw a conclusion Hedious M'sia is UMNO racist Job....no question about it......stop blaming the bumi non malay for taking all Malay jobs...we have to survive and malays UMNO racist wants the easy money......keep selling all asset...the terrible time will be coming ...each will be worst than the last....don't say i did not warn you...move money to carry trade!!

- i'm sure you have all evidenence to proving so...? No i guess NOT. You cant even state your accusations in a proper manner, let alone make a stand to all your claims and nuisances.

- i bet you look like an old kung fu warrior still in phampers.....n tak pernah cebok...!

Friday, September 15, 2006 12:30:26 PM
pionnakal said...
oxfordgraduate said...

sometimes i wonder why go so far as to perth to find a home that is built at the cost of 25 million dollars, when you have all the politicians here living to the hilt?

go to bukit tunku or duta and see for yourselves...you're telling me this houses that was once there for many years ...you guys don't notice who stays in which Mansions? come on...why not throw the books on those people too?

talk cock sing song...no.1

if you want to be a REAL TRUE person that wants a clean MALAYSIA...book all of them...don't pick and choose...what's dirty just flush them out....stop pointing fingers and all that crap...

- you paint yourself like an outstanding fresh graduate of oxpot, yeah and may we ask how are you going to do just that?

- heard of NATO(No Action Talk Only)? you are in the semua BOLEH world. Be real and practical.

- if TDM never stood and did what hes doing right now, you think we can get all these "first class " info on corruptions? Think out of your pot for once will yer? Dont talk cock-la.

- tell us just one opinion of yours, how are you going to clean those whom are backed by the underground syndicates involved in prostitutes, illegal gambling and along to name a few? Remember Ong Tee Keat issues? Tell us here then?

Friday, September 15, 2006 12:47:07 PM
TakAdaSistem said...
Dear RPK,

For once I could not agree with you. You sounded like living under the influence of the dictatorial regime of TDM for too long that you believed you need a dictator to bring progress and development to a nation!

Remember Clinton, the past US President? During his time many commentator had opioned that he done nothing for the country, except his pursuit for self-enjoyment.

But it turned out that, and this is with the benefit of hintsight and therefore proven, that his government was one of the best for America!

The government need not meddle with all hte matters, the government shall allow the institutions to function on its own, the government needs to promote independency of the people. All these could be more beneficial and effective.

So the important thing a government need to do is not to interfere with all matters and impose the will of the power that be into it, something that TDM had done to his will i.e. changing the role of the monarch, the role of judiciary, unlimited power for the executive etc. Now many can see the damages casued by his rule and when we are complaining about the present, how much is due to the deferred effect of his policies?

Of course, I can not tell for sure and "I don't know" but I certainly suspect that there are significant effect from the old regime including the mindset of many people!

Friday, September 15, 2006 1:49:08 PM
Mr Maggoo said...
A well known Malysian Feng Shui Master had predicted in Dec 2005 that AAB will be embroiled in serious political crisis for most of 2006 until the Chinese 11th. lunar month when he will overcome his enemies and establish his full authority.So Cynical Cynic, seems like you had better up your RM100 wager on AAB.

Friday, September 15, 2006 2:45:25 PM
Dan John said...
Dear All,

Snatch thieves, snatch thieves cum killers, rapists, rapists cum killers, murderers, you name it.

Why are all this so rampant lately? The economy sucks. Even during '97, crimes were at least controlled & everybody at least got a piece of roti to feed on. Now only the ruling Party is fully fed. Annual increments and fat bonuses for govt sector employees.

How about the private sector? Open your eyes a bit wider to see the suffering. Daily neccesities are skyrocketing beyond ones means. And yet they are pocketing millions. Corruption in the govt sector is worse than usual. If not, at the very worst.

"A fish rots start with the head." Sounds familiar? Go figure.

In other words, AAB is not doing is job taking care of the rakyat !!! "Don't work for me, work with me." (??!!). That remark only goes for his cronies.

I'm getting ready my popdorn & soft drink to watch the show.

Hope TDM can catch AAB getting his cock sucked by his ministers. That will be the day !

Friday, September 15, 2006 2:56:58 PM
AsIseeIt said...
RPK made Mahathir sounds like he is Cassious Clay of the 1960s when he is actually Mohamad Ali of the 2000s.

Friday, September 15, 2006 3:33:41 PM
sorryjoe said...
We have a problem here with bumi-non-malay who plays the same record with a broken needle resulting in us hearing the same song on Mat Kilau, di-nepalkan, UMNO/PAS racist acts, take out your money to somewhere else.
I think he suffers from virtual hibernation as a result of eating too much honey bears, tupai, badak sumbu, babi toyok and green monkeys infected by the AID virus. So he utters the same phrase whenever he wakes up momentarily before going back to sleep again. No wonder the Malays stole the country right underneath his tikar akar kayu!
Sweet dream ma.

Friday, September 15, 2006 4:16:01 PM
cynical cynic said...
Mr Magoo

Feng Shui master? or do you mean master astrologer? Forgive my ignorance but I though Feng Shui is mostly about where you put the doors and mirrors in the house..
Anyway never argue with a master astrologer - clearly the sun and the stars are put there for a reason.

Just to make my case further, it is likely that Mahathir will lose this battle because of his rapidly diminishing stamina due to old age. Already there are rumours of his questionable state of health. The odds are simply stacked up against Mahathir.

Also apart from a good analysis from our fellow blogger Head_hunter I fail to see any other comments in this blog that explains how Mahathir would win. Bear in mind that those barrage of 'tak tahu', although embarassing to UMNO is not really going to make any difference to Pak Lah's grip on power. It is just the way the UMNO power structure is designed.

Anyway, just like in any speculation I may be wrong. However I am not afraid to up the ante to RM200! Sapa mau raise?

Friday, September 15, 2006 4:58:33 PM
Mogan Sivas said...
Dear RPK,

With reference to your comment,

'Johari has a lucrative business with Proton..... He does not do the business himself of course. He is in partnership with Chinese businessmen and it is they who run the business.... The corrupted Umno politicians open the doors. The Chinese walk in and wheel and deal. Chinese businessmen are attracted to corrupted Umno politicians like flies to shit -- and the smellier the shit the more the flies',

I am really disappointed with your reference to a chinese man walking into a malay business setup to wheel and deal.

What is your point here, Mr. RPK ? Would it be okay if another malay man walks into Johari's business? Or an indian for that matter?

I had you thinking that we are all malaysians, one race-one nation. Comments like yours with reference to a 'chinese walking in' is not very helpful indeed. Is that statement really necessary? I really don't think so Mr.RPK.

And as to this comment,

'Mahathir is devious. Mahathir is a strategist. Mahathir is a schemer. Mahathir is brutal. Mahathir is an antagonist. Mahathir is a realist. You can throw Mahathir off a tall building and he will always land on his feet. Am I singing Mahathir’s praises? Hey, this is no flattery. A man like this lives by the adage that the ends justify the means. And this is a dangerous kind of man. This kind of man leaves no stone unturned in the pursuit of his objective. You do not need to like him. You can hate him. But never cross him for if you do you will wish you have never been born', what is the matter brader, have you lost it ?

From where I am standing you cannot blame me for thinking that you are idolising Mahathir.

I had you thinking you were a greater than that and I am particularly fond of your saying that you should make distinction between the song and the singer. You may love the song and not necessarily the singer. Now tell me, has Mahathir been a good singer (his 22 years as PM) or his songs ( corporate governance over 22 years)been music malaysians' ears or that of the international community. I don't think so on both counts. You may disagree. I think there is not much to choose between Mahathir's government of 22 years and Abdullah's administration of 3 years.

You also said Mahathir was a giant of malaysian politics. Really?? Does he really deserve this high an accolade?

And here I was thinking and telling my UK friends that I know of one RPK who is a fantastic political analyst. You could easily led me believe that there are no more worthy and capable leader other than Mahathir!!!

Friday, September 15, 2006 10:54:44 PM
Quo Vadis said...
FOKS, I AM SORRY TO SAY THAT THE RAMBLINGS OF THE DRUG ADDICT SB ARE BASED ON THE ASSUMPTION THAT ANYTHING THAT EMERGES FROM HIS ALCOHOL SODDEN CRANIUM ARE BIZARRE BASED ON HIS LSD N OTHER WEED CONSUMPTION.

BREAKING NEWS! BREAKING NEWS! SODOMISED BENNIT IS THE DRUG CONDUIT FOR AFGHAN DRUGS. HIDES OUT IN TAIPING, HAS POT SESSIONS COUPLED WITH WITCH COVEN SATANIC PRACTICE WHERE HE RUBS THE SACRIFICED ANIMAL'S BLOOD ALL OVER, GOES INTO FRENZY GYRATIONS AND STUFFS HIS MIDDLE FINGER INTO HIS ARSE.

SODOMISED, SO HE HAS ONLY AN URETHRA OPENING! SUFFERING FROM INCONTINENCE HE HAS TO WEAR DIAPERS!!!!

THE PRODUCT OF A RAPE! HIS HINDU RUBBER TAPPER MOTHER WAS RAPED BY HIS ILLITERATE LECHEROUS ENGLISH PATER. SHE ABANDONED HIM. DEPRIVED OF MOTHER AND HER MILK,
HE HAS NOW BECOME A DEPRAVED OBJECT OF FILTH.

Saturday, September 16, 2006 7:01:56 AM
Head_Hunter said...
mogan sivas........

no. i don't think RPK has changed despite d appearances, trust me. it's just that there's something deeper going on that he cannot tell us.

bon chance RPK.

Saturday, September 16, 2006 8:55:47 AM
confuse_us said...
These further proved on what I have written earlier that “majority of these politicians “ do not seems to be doing the right things and evidently, do not know the right things to do. ”
The country needs leaders who SOLVE PROBLEMS others fear and not the so called leaders who like RPK said only enjoyed kicking deflated balls.

These politicians have resorted to REACTIVE politics, only react (or shall I say bicker) when the damages had been done just to be Champions. We need true leaders who practice PROACTIVE politics, who act and react FAST before any damages are done.
Don’t fret people, we do have true leaders and they are contributing in their own ways like what RPK is doing to further enlighten us. Like I mentioned before, the current situation are 5 % of us are true leaders, 5% are the corrupted ones who had misled the other 90% who can easily be deceived to perceive. So people, please wake up and study the jigsaw puzzle and we can reduce the 90% majority. (Democracy, my foot)

Confuse_us’s ART OF WAR says “If your enemy is competent, you better be prepared but if your enemies are ignoramuses, you have won half the battle”

Saturday, September 16, 2006 10:01:20 AM
kampongman said...
Kamponmg people, the majority of people want a change,... a change for the better for all Malaysiana..
Dont think AAB, Mahathir or even BN can deliver it... so many broken promises, so many false hopes. As I always said, it is time for a change..Let the duel between AAB and Mahathir ends with both TKOed..

Saturday, September 16, 2006 10:07:13 AM
desiderata said...
headhunter -- your PLOT is interesting.

Re: "so when is this all going to happen? i really don't know. perhaps, i should best leave it to RPK to tell us. game? RPK." -- I think RPK has stopped telling Anwar's side of da story ... it's still a mystery to me WHY?

But you recall on Anwar's RELEASE from prison, who paid him a visit along with a PASSport to go to Germany for medical treatment. The answer, my friend, is blowing in the wind..

It's not going to come from RPK, it's from PKR!

Sunday, September 17, 2006 12:04:07 PM
NextPM said...
RPK,

We bloggers here are debating or gussing who could be the next PM if Pak Lah step down.

For Najis to take over is will be the same, we bloggers will still be complaining about that administration in Malaysia Today at that time.

Annuar whether he is interested or not we do not know.

Mahathir, No way we don't want him.

How about you, RPK? You could form a political party which would get the support from moderate malaysians like us. You could be our next Prime
Minister and you could choose your next Cabinet from the bloggers here in MT seriuosly I mean what I said. How many of you bloggers agrees with me?

Sunday, September 17, 2006 1:58:32 PM
isanmaya said...
RPK,

Haven't you heard a Malay proverb "gajah sama gajah bergaduh, pelanduk mati di tengah-tengah"? This is what going to happen to us, the Rakyat. AAB, or TDM, or whoever is up there couldn't care less about us down here. They are not fighting for us. It's for their own consumption. They have these powers given by us (we are to be blamed for electing them in the first place, anyway!). We can shout, and shout 'till we drop dead all over the world about the bad things they did to this beloved country. And you think they really care? Our cries won't even drop a single hair from their head (maybe Najib seemed to be dropping more, and more of his hair nowadays, thinking about the next step to becoming the numero uno once AAB left his chair vacant). But we, the Rakyat will be living from bad to worst conditions. Come next election, Malaysia will be ruled again by the same species of PM, Ministers and cronies. They'll sell us to the root. Whether they came from UMNO, MIC, GERAKAN, MCA or whatever parties we, the rakyat wil be the victims of their supremacy.

To some of us, as long as there're rice to eat, water to drink, roads to travel, houses to live in there's nothing to complain. You can get rich from whatever sources, or whatever courses you take, they don't care. These people are the best victims of those in power. And most us Malaysians are "don't care people"!

Ever think of changing this mindset?

Monday, September 18, 2006 1:07:46 PM
Pu3 said...
NextPM, are u SERIOUS? RPK be the next PM..... i dont think so. we like him the way he is now. Please dont change him to be the dirty politician.....please!

Monday, September 18, 2006 5:43:13 PM
tukjanggut said...
"Chinese businessmen are attracted to corrupted Umno politicians like flies to s"

woudln't cronies be a better word ?

Monday, September 18, 2006 6:23:57 PM
Ahmad Boestamam SR said...
flies to shit? check this out :http://suptorpedo.wordpress.com

Monday, September 18, 2006 10:37:52 PM
latent energy said...
The position of a Prime Minister is an honorable one.

The position of the Prime Minister is the number one in Bolehland. The integrity, reputation, trustworthy, honesty, sincerity, kindness of the Prime Minister is a reflection of Bolehland. As a matter of fact, he mirrors the traits of the Rakyat!

If the Prime Minister is an honorable man, his Rakyat feel proud of him, because the Rakyat can also be considered as honorable Rakyat.

On the contrary, if we have a pariah Prime Minister, definitely the Rakyat must be pariah. Just imagine, 25 millions of the Rakyat are just plain pariah like the Prime Minister, whether you like it or not!

This is a universal concept! If the leader in that country is a pariah, the denizens in that country must also be pariah. This is the general perception of the people of the world!

Despite the United States of America is the number one superpower in the world, but because they have a pariah president in George W. Bush, the people of the world perceive the American citizens as pariah people; because only pariah citizens will elect a pariah president as their president. He is a disgrace to the American people and mankind and should be sent to Guantanamo detention camp!

The Malaysian people can be considered as a shameful lot when compared to the Philippines, the people of Thais, Indonesia and Nepal. The people of those countries can feel proud themselves for overthrowing the corrupt tyrants in their countries. Only Malaysians are acquiesced to the corrupt and unscrupulous politicians to take charge of the nation. Yes, Malaysia is a pariah country with pariah denizens and is ruled by a pariah government!

If the Prime Minister is respected in the country and the world over, it is because he has done a good job in administering the country. The Prime Minister has integrity, honesty, audacity and the alacrity in his dealings with his subordinates in the country and his peers of other countries all over the world. His relationship with his Rakyat is compassionate!

The Prime Minister has managed the country effectively, efficiently and the country has vibrant economy. He is praised and highly respected in the country by his Rakyat.

But if a Prime Minister is corrupt, selfish, inefficient, lazy, lack of knowledge in administering the country efficiently; is practicing nepotism, cronyism, misuse of executive power, legislature, judiciary, misappropriate of public funds; not implementing policy of egalitarian but practicing racial discrimination for personal agenda, then this Prime Minister is not an honorable Prime Minister.

Do we want a dishonorable Prime Minister to lead us, to lead the nation? Do we, our children and grandchildren have a future with such a dishonorable PM?

Is the current Prime Minister an honorable Prime Minister? Has he got the integrity, honesty, sincerity, wisdom, kindness, magnanimity and the improvising ability in dealing with the day-to-day problems facing the nation?

The Rakyat took a long time to get rid a corrupt dictator but the current Prime Minister just assumes the policies of the previous dictator. Is this what the Rakyat want?

Yes! The current PM is not an honorable PM. Where are all the promises before the General Election? Where is his agenda of putting service before self? This current PM is not only stupid but is also liar who is an dishonorable man!

This dishonorable PM must resign now before more damage is done to the nation! Yes Mr. Prime Minister, please resign now or face the humiliation of being booted by the Rakyat! Then stop giving stupid excuses and analysis why the Rakyat boot you out of the government.

Go get yourself a new wife, balik kampong together with your racist and corrupt sil and play with your grand children or migrate to Australia with your corrupt and racist sil, get a kangaroo wife and play and hop together with the kangaroos or flying kite.

You are not the Rakyat’s choice but the formal dictator’s.You are just a bloody nuisance to the Rakyat and country, Mr. zzzz Prime Minister!!!!

Tuesday, September 19, 2006 8:57:47 AM
Dan John said...
To hell with the current PM or the future PM, whoever he is....

Old or new PM, money corruptions WILL exist, cronies live forever, parasites of the country, bad guys never dies

That makes me think of changing sides

Rich country, poor rakyat, fucked-up PM

Liquidate Petronas and share amongst us its profits

Tuesday, September 19, 2006 12:00:53 PM
hairulallias said...
don't vote pak lah !!! kick him out !!!

Tuesday, September 19, 2006 1:06:25 PM
Take Action 4Justice said...
Welcome


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

29. The Japanese Surrender (15 August 1945): Independence Cheated by 48 Hours -- Copyright © 2004 Malaysia Today (Malaysia Today), 05:04:13 09/19/06 Tue [1]
Malaysian Medical Association, the National Association for Medical Doctors was formed in 1959, -- "JASA UTAMA" is the MMA's motto. (Malaysian Medical Association), 03:25:57 09/19/06 Tue [5]
Doc Bloggers: Palmdoc, TECheah, Dobbs, Vagus, UK Doc and Friends. -- Linking you to Malaysian Medical Websites since 1996 (Malaysian Medical Resources), 03:32:35 09/19/06 Tue [1]
National Pharmaceutical Control Bureau -- DRUG CONTROL AUTHORITY, MINISTRY OF HEALTH MALAYSIA (LIST OF REGISTERED PRODUCTS), 03:35:27 09/19/06 Tue [1]
Mewujudkan penglibatan dan penyertaan masyarakat untuk kesihatan bagi merangsang dan memudahkan -- KEMENTERIAN KESIHATAN MALAYSIA (Selamat melayari Portal KKM), 03:39:19 09/19/06 Tue [1]
The need for a professional organisation to assure the maintenance of a high standard -- Academy of Medicine of Malaysia - Founded 1996 (Academy of Medicine ofMalaysia), 03:46:33 09/19/06 Tue [1]
Malaysia is NOT a Dumping ground for your evil Japanese (or otherwise) Fluoroquinolones -- Evil Japanese (or otherwise) Fluoroquinolones (Malaysia isNOTa Dumping ground), 05:53:23 09/18/06 Mon [19]
Malaysia is NOT a Dumping ground for your evil Japanese (or otherwise) Fluoroquinolones -- Evil Japanese (or otherwise) Fluoroquinolones (Malaysia isNOTa Dumping ground), 05:55:09 09/18/06 Mon [1]
What Evil&Sins thatYou commit in thisLifetime, YourChildren willPAYfor it For the Next10GENERATIONS! -- What evil & sins that You commit in this Lifetime (Sins of Thy Father), 06:01:50 09/18/06 Mon [1]
What Evil&Sins thatYou commit in thisLifetime,YourChildren willPAYfor it For the Next10GENERATIONS! -- Your Children will PAY for it For the Next 10 GENERATIONS! (WhatSinsYouCommitInDisLifetime), 06:06:53 09/18/06 Mon [1]
Tell theStupid,Domineering,Dominating,Manipulative,VisciousBITCH; the company doesn't belong to her! -- Stupid,Domineering,Dominating,Manipulative,Viscious BITCH (The co. doesn't belong to her), 18:12:02 09/18/06 Mon [1]
Bermaharajalela, berleluasa kuasa luar bidang kuasa -- Syaitan Besar! Iblis! Sembayang Hantu! (Berfitnah, Main Politik Jahat!), 18:16:06 09/18/06 Mon [1]
Decent, honest businessman, upright citizen but the evil man does, only God can forgive! -- The evil man does, only God can forgive! (HonestBiznessmanUprightCitizen), 18:21:22 09/18/06 Mon [1]
Fluoroquinolones destroyed millions of innocent lives, YOU People ought to be Hung & Shot! -- Fluoroquinolones destroyed millions of innocent lives (YouPeopleOught to beHung&Shot!), 18:25:15 09/18/06 Mon [1]
Your Billions can buy the VIP's, Minister & the Govt., but You can Never touch me! -- Your Billions can buy the VIP's, Minister & the Govt (You can Never touch me!), 18:28:31 09/18/06 Mon [1]
You ingat ada Duit saja "kautim" , ini apa budaya? -- Bukan semua orang boleh di jual-beli lah! (Orang ada prinsip, tau?), 18:32:17 09/18/06 Mon [1]
Tak payah cakap banyak lah, settle mahkamah saja! -- Kau ada apa masalah dengan saya, sila rujuk pada peguam, ok? (PenipuPembohongPengkhianat), 18:37:23 09/18/06 Mon [1]
Kafir-mengkafir, Baduah punya anak gampang! -- Makan suap orang Jepun punya Duit, semua mampus lah! (JualDiriyaMaruahBangsa&Negara), 18:42:42 09/18/06 Mon [1]
Thinking Allowed. Thinking Aloud. -- Jeff Ooi - Email Jeff Ooi: jeffooi.screenshots@gmail.com (Mobile: +6019-3761397), 00:03:33 09/19/06 Tue [1]
I want my day in court, I want a fair hearing -- Prove that the judiciary is not dead in Malaysia (Prove minister is not corrupt), 18:52:04 09/18/06 Mon [1]
Let justice take it's natural course -- Don't deny me of natural justice (Justice Shall Prevail), 18:56:00 09/18/06 Mon [1]
Justice can only be in the form of a one lump sum compensation, period! -- Justice must not only be done but must be seen to be done (Prove it & selttle in court), 18:59:27 09/18/06 Mon [1]
If Malaysia cannot give me justice, then forget it! -- I can start a brand new life, afresh (Migrate2Australia, or America!), 19:03:15 09/18/06 Mon [1]
Steal Ringgit from M'sia & runaway to invest in foreign countries! -- M'sian Govt. will shut your illegal operation down (What unscrupulous biznesman), 19:15:28 09/18/06 Mon [1]
Umno's 60th Annivesary & Mahathir's DVD -- Jeff Ooi - Email Jeff Ooi: jeffooi.screenshots@gmail.com (ThinkingAllowedThinkingAloud.), 00:24:15 09/19/06 Tue [1]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Website - http://www.voy.com/207120/

Wednesday, September 20, 2006 9:06:16 AM
Post a Comment

< Previous | Home | | Send this page to a friend.
Copyright © 2004 Malaysia Today | www.malaysia-today.net
Website - http://www.malaysia-today.net/CorridorsPower/2006/09/web-of-deceit.htm

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Mahathir Mohammad
(no login)
60.49.210.137

Mr Lee should look after his 'rice bowl' and not interfere with other countries

No score for this post
September 25 2006, 12:03 AM 








Khairy accused of 'ruling' Terengganu with friend
Thaksin's $3b in assets may be seized by military rulers
Civilian Deaths Soar to Record High in Iraq
Christians pray that Muslims find Jesus
A Catholic stamp to an U.S. War
Mahathir dismisses Singapore as a "tiny" country
Tun DrM to Muslims: Don't go overboard
MALAYSIA TODAY LIVE FROM THE GRAND SEASONS HOTEL
Couple in court tussle over son's conversion to Islam
Najib criticises MM Lee's comments on Chinese




Saturday, September 23, 2006
Mahathir hits out at MM Lee's comments on Chinese

He says Mr Lee should look after his 'rice bowl' and not interfere with other countries

By Reme Ahmad
The Straits Times

KUALA TERENGGANU - TUN Dr Mahathir Mohamad said yesterday that Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew should just look after his 'rice bowl' and not interfere with other countries.

The former Malaysian prime minister said if Mr Lee has the right to question the affairs of Chinese Malaysians, then he wants to ask why the Singapore Government made it 'official' policy to marginalise Malay Singaporeans.

Tun Dr Mahathir was asked to respond to comments made by Mr Lee at a dialogue for good governance in Singapore last Friday.

Answering a question, Mr Lee had said that it was important for Singapore to have a government that was 'really firm, stout-hearted, subtle and resolute'', noting that the attitude of Malaysia and Indonesia towards the Republic was shaped by the way they treated their own ethnic Chinese minorities.

Mr Lee said: 'My neighbours both have problems with their Chinese. They are successful, they're hard-working and therefore they are systematically marginalised, even in education.

'And they want Singapore, to put it simply, to be like their Chinese, compliant.'

Tun Dr Mahathir retorted yesterday: 'I look at the houses in KL of the people that are 'systematically marginalised'. They have bigger houses than mine.'

The former Malaysian leader also told Mr Lee not to feel smug, noting that the Minister Mentor looked wise in his own 'tiny' country.

He said China did not think much of Mr Lee, who was also 'marginalised by Chinese in the world'.

'Don't be like that, Kuan Yew! You just look after your rice bowl, that is all. The country is tiny, don't be too proud,' Tun Dr Mahathir said in response to a written question by a member of the public who attended the function here.

Asked at a news conference why he thought Mr Lee had made the comments, Tun Dr Mahathir said: 'He feels he is strong. He is the proud type. He is not bothered with his neighbours. That is why he deliberately raised something he knew to be sensitive in our country.'

In the same vein, the former Malaysian premier said he had the right to ask about Singapore's treatment of its Malay citizens.

'We also can ask: What is the position of Malays in Singapore. Why is it they cannot be trained to carry arms in the army?

'Why is it that Malays in Malaysia are experts in the military but in Singapore they cannot hold high posts? Why are Malays officially sidelined?

'Why is it that the Malays in Singapore are marginalised to the extent that they have no status at all? This is done deliberately by Singapore. There is no other country that does it like them,' he said.

Other Malaysian politicians and a consumer group yesterday also commented on Mr Lee's remarks.

Gerakan deputy president Koh Tsu Koon, who is also Penang's Chief Minister, said the Chinese community in Malaysia was neither marginalised nor 'compliant' and had the opportunity to participate in the administration of the country.

Dr Tan Seng Giaw, deputy chairman of the opposition Democratic Action Party, told TV3: 'In a relationship between neighbours, we must avoid hurting the feelings of our neighbours.'

MCA president Ong Ka Ting said Mr Lee's statement was not only unfair, but also not good for the harmonious ties among the different races in Malaysia.

'He, as a former prime minister, should know better that such statements could have bad impact on the neighbouring country. He is someone who is over-confident. He always thinks that he is right but the statement by MM Lee is unfair to Malaysia,' Datuk Seri Ong said.

'I feel that Malaysians should not be trapped. We must remain united, we must continue to cooperate in our community. We know what we are doing and we should not let such statements cause disharmony or doubts,' he added.

The Malaysia Islamic Consumers Association (PPIM) said the statement by MM Lee had a hidden agenda aimed at tarnishing Malaysia's image.

The PPIM urged Mr Lee to retract his 'baseless statement'.

posted 9:54 AM

64 Comments:
confuse_us said...
See, it is happening over and over again just like a sinusoidal cycle.
People, people, people… please do not be misguided.
Can’t you all see… whenever the situation becomes too hot for the “POLITICIANS”, they find something to keep the public occupied and most of the times it will be something about our neighbors but I believe the situation is very, very HOT now, so much so, they have to turn into a racial issue just to get the Public to fight each other.
Remember what RPK has written “After all, someone cannot exploit you unless you want to be exploited. ……” and what I have written “ Like I mentioned before, the current situation are 5 % of us are true leaders, 5% are the corrupted ones who had misled the other 90% who can easily be deceived to perceive. So people, please wake up and study the jigsaw puzzle and we can reduce the 90% majority. (Democracy, my foot) ”

Again, I would like to propose “The time has come for us, the REAL professionals, who care about the country, regardless of RACE AND CREED to form an OFFICIAL pressure group to look into the FOUR perspectives that are unique to Malaysia namely POLITICAL, CORPORATE, SPIRITUAL AND SOVEREIGN. I would like to nominate RPK as our first President.

Anyway, just to add some spice on Singapore (it is okay to be competitive with your neighbour and it is healthy within certain limitation) , she is like vermiform appendix… it is there and does not serve any single purpose but can sometimes be a pain in the XXXX (stomach lah). So, Corrupted Politicians, do not give us appendicitis or we will REMOVE you.

Confuse_us’s ART OF WAR says “If your enemy is competent, you better be prepared but if your enemies are ignoramuses, you have won half the battle”

Saturday, September 23, 2006 10:46:16 AM
myview said...
To say that Singapore Malays are not allowed to hold guns in the army are totally untrue and an exageration. The Malays in Singapore is proud that they do not need clutches like their brothers in Malays. How many of them apply for PR in Malaysia or cross to Malaysia to work? If they succeed, it is truely based on their own abilities. We rarely hear Malays in Singapore said they are being deliberately marginalised. A small country like Singapore cannot afford to discriminate against whoever are capable. Every talent has to be used to the fullest in order to ensure their survival. But, in Malaysia, we hear tonnes of greviences from the non-Malays from being unable to get scholarships, unable enter public universities, unable to get government contracts, paying more for properties, insufficient number of chinese schools, funds for Chinese school being abused, etc. The only non-Malays who don't complain are those who need to preserve their positions in the govermnment. In fact, Malaysia is the only country in the world today where the majority discriminate against the minority since the fall of apartheid system in South Africa.

Saturday, September 23, 2006 10:48:03 AM
harlim said...
Yes the Malays are marginised in Singapore. If they can make the grade to study in the tertiary insitutes like NUS, NTU and the Polytechnics - they DO NOT HAVE to PAY Fees even if they are Part time students!!! They get FREE from the Singapore Government. Damn marginised.

Saturday, September 23, 2006 11:10:55 AM
ymygeram said...
Mahathir- Pak Lah = LKY
Mahathir ???????
LKY !!!!
Pak Lah...
Bloggers + RPK ?

Saturday, September 23, 2006 11:19:07 AM
laksamana said...
The issue here is not who said it but whether what was said is true.

However, you may wish to note the following facts.

One is a leader of a multi-racial party while the other is a leader of a party which subscribes to racial and religious prejudices.

One is highly regarded as an elder statesman and well respected by many while the other has now become a pariah in his own racist party.

Whoever is more successful is very clear for all to see although I feel that Malaysia could have done much better than what it is today if racial and religious prejudices are not condoned by the ruling party.

Saturday, September 23, 2006 11:41:55 AM
basheer said...
Solid point from TDM "I look at the houses in KL of the people that are 'systematically marginalised'. They have bigger houses than mine."

Pity the Chinese in Malaysia, being marginalised but KAYA-RAYA, business in Malaysia semua dia punya, kedai runcit in Malaysia semua dia supply, pasar borong semua dia sapu, pasar raya pun dia juga, apa benda buat duit dia mesti ada share punya,..kesian the Chinese, teruk betul orang Melayu kat Malaysia ya!

Saturday, September 23, 2006 11:42:55 AM
NEXXXTPM said...
the chinese in malaysia are MALAYSIAN

the chinese in indonesia are INDONESIAN

the chinese in australia are AUSTRALIAN

the chinese in thailand are THAIS

the chinese in israel are JEWS

the chinese in canada are CANADIANS

if you say that they are still chinese, SORRY TO SAY SIR, I AGREE WITH YOU

MANA KETAATAN PADA NEGARA???? SEMUANYA BULLSHIT.

Saturday, September 23, 2006 11:58:54 AM
Ramlan Ugau said...
Agree with you basheer. That's why we should keep NEP.NEP need major overhaul over its systems. Enforcements and constant monitoring to avoid abuses.

No doubt there were corrupt practices while implimenting NEP, but its the only solution to solve Malay backwardness in major economic fields.

Saturday, September 23, 2006 12:00:54 PM
NEXXXTPM said...
orAng cina dimalaysia sudang naik TOCANG

HE..HE..HE

its normal immigrants' behaviour.

bila mula datang, baik and no komplen.

lama kelamaan, wants their rights.

finally, the chinese will says this is our country.

singapore is a very good example. MEREKA INI PANDAI MANIPULATE UNDANG2. INDIA PUN KALAH. KALAU ADA INDIA DAN KALU ADA ULAR, PASTIKAN BUNUH INDIA DULU KALAU MAHU BUNUH ITU ULAR.

kalau tak jaga2, pulau pinang pun akan jadi singapura.

Saturday, September 23, 2006 12:04:34 PM
NEXXXTPM said...
TDM and LKY sudah merapu2.

itu tandanya mereka sudah nyanyuk zaman muda.

nyanyuk zaman moden mereka nampak macam pandai, tetapi sebenarnya disebaliknya.

my advice to this great statemen, take a rest dan buat amal ibadat.

TDM, this is your last chance to convert LKY.

I just want to see TDM and LJY go to heaven.

Then, you will see, TDM and LKY, KEJAYAAN DIDUNIA DAN DI AKHIRAT

Saya rasa semua bloggers setuju.

Saturday, September 23, 2006 12:13:58 PM
malayan union said...
Mahathir certainly has a big chip on his shoulder each time the subject of LKY and Singapore crops up. The more he derides and berates Singapore for its small size, lack of resources, etc., the more he is exposed as being extremely jealous and hateful of LKY and Singapore...the same kind of hatred that arabs continue to show towards the Jews and Israel..

But it is precisely this kind of hatred and jealousy of Mahathir and UMNO towards LKY and Singapore that has made S'pore not only survive, but also prosper against great odds for the past 41 years...and will even spur S'pore towards greater determination to succeed... That is exactly what is happening to Israel and shows Israel becoming even stronger and stronger vis-a-vis the Arabs..God is VERY VERY FAIR in putting jealous people in their proper places to stew in their own juices..

Coming back to LKY's latest remarks, yes they indicate Singapore's success and ability to hold its head high in the international arena..and yes it has the effect to shame Malaysia and UMNO...politicians in Malaysia, yes, especially UMNO/BN,gets hurt very bad each time a veteran politician like LKY, socks them in the balls with the recent remarks that UMNO marginalizes the Chinese in Malaysia and expect Singapore and PAP to be submissive and compliant like Koh Tsu Koon, Gerakan and Penang to KL...no way will Singapore do that...otherwise it would be just like Penang, being neither here nor there, and each time the Chinese in Penang show some success, there will be jealous UMNO types trying to bring them down...

As for the compliant Malaysian Chinese leaders in Gerakan and MCA, over the years their subservience to UMNO in BN have made them develop the helpless feeling of having no choice except to support your oppressor (UMNO) out of fear that in not doing so, UMNO will put even greater pressure on them...the pragmatic nature of Malaysian Chinese leaders in MCA, Gerakan, SUPP and PPP is such that they will never dare to antagonise UMNO...unless they see signs of UMNO losing power...then there is nothing to stop them from even reaching out to LKY and yes China, Taiwian..when the crunch comes to ensure their survival.....

Saturday, September 23, 2006 12:25:58 PM
bennyloh said...
Solid point from TDM "I look at the houses in KL of the people that are 'systematically marginalised'. They have bigger houses than mine.
Many live in small houses/ dwellings, have kids who work very hard to get 7A's but could not afford to further their studies and they are all in KL!
Come election time the MCA reps. will come and try to propogate MCA's good to the race. These reps even have kids under schlorships in Singapore Universities because they couldn't even fight for their kids to enter the Universities here! Hypocrites.

Saturday, September 23, 2006 12:26:32 PM
Bigjoe99 said...
The man still can whip up a frenzy using Singapore as a bogeyman even now. Too bad he can whip his Kubang Pasu delegates to a frenzy. Oh!! They did - against him!!!!

If Kubang Pasu people don't want to listen to him who want to listen to him now?

Saturday, September 23, 2006 12:27:09 PM
itscool said...
When we talk about marginalisation, we have to view it from the macro point of view. TDM is quoting of big houses that are owned by all races- now even more glaringly by main beneficiaries of the NEP. That is a micro view.

Just look at the existing hindrances from licencing to monopolies in trades/ownerships that affects millions of Malaysians.

That was what MM Lee was talking about and definitely not about how rich Robert Kwok is.

Saturday, September 23, 2006 12:45:24 PM
EngrishHirarious said...
SOMETHING THAT MAHATHIR WILL NOT DO:

Under Pak Lah administration, the Chinese, or other minorities in Malaysia are not marginalized like before. Better treatment now.

A link for Coward Radical Malays and for True Malaysians.

http://www.msdchicago.org/new/test/students/PELAJARBARU.html

Saturday, September 23, 2006 12:52:04 PM
culling wild boars said...
NEXXTPM is benjyz, the usual UMNO agent provocateur, a typical babi hutan who always eats shit and najis....his style of writing is always the same...penghasut, perkauman extrim......

NEXXTPM/Benjyz will always admit that melayus/umno in the right even when they are in the wrong..

NEXXTPM/Benjyx to the Indians is a big, in fact the biggest pariah that eats the shit of the kerbau and lembu in the sawah and in turn speaks through his arse as he has always been doing..that is why the remarks of NEXXTPM nothing but SHIT, SHIT, AND MORE SHIT...

NEXXTPM/Benjyz should know that his melayu/umno are nothing but pencuri of tanah orang asli and rename it tanah melayu..

NEXXTPM/BENJYZ is also a pendatang haram from either yunnan or java..but all the same pendatang haram.......

NEXXTPM/Benjyz patutnya jadi osama bin laden's latest suicide bomber..he will go to hell and eat 72 rotten raisins instead of 72 virgins....

NEXXTPM/Benjyz...sila lah pegi the next jamban....lihat banyak tahi dalam tong jamban....put your face in it.....

ha ha ha....NEXXTPM/Benjyz....babi hutan umno terbesar, terkotor, terekstri.....penghasut terbesar,....FUCK OFF!!!!!!!!!!!!

Saturday, September 23, 2006 12:54:39 PM
NEXXXTPM said...
malayan union,

this world is no big deal to muslim.

finally, everything will come to an end.

to muslim, building life hereafter is more important.

that is why there are no competition in wealth in the muslim world. what you see is indivudual's greed.

you all chinese like to equate success with money and development because that has been your culture. no intention to offend you.

if you want to compare, please compare apple and apple.

to the chinese, SURVIVING, STRUGLING, WAR, FIGHTING AMONG CLANS AND SO ON is synonym in your culture because of what happen in the mainland.

SO IT IS NORMAL TO SEE THE SUCCESS OF THE CHINESE WHICH MUST BE EQUATE DUE TO HISTORY THEY HAVE.

YOU CAN BE RICH, MODERN, HAVE HIGH IQ BUT DO NOT BELITLE OTHER RACES ESPECIALLY YOUR COUNTRYMEN. WHAT THE MALAYS ARE DOING WILL BE THE SAME IF YOU ARE IN OUR SHOES.

Saturday, September 23, 2006 12:57:46 PM
commodore said...
Yeah, we need people like TDM, who is brave enuf to speak his own mind.Certainly not AAB who spoke something today and reversed it the very next day.What's wrong with marginalising the chinese here, LKY? You and your mentee (Lim Chong Eu ang Koh soo koon) did even worse to the malays in singapore & penang!, even with limited opportunity (LCE & KSK).I invite all chinese a.k.a pigs to condemn me....kakkakakakkakakkakakkakakakkakakkakakakakkakakkakkakak

Saturday, September 23, 2006 1:03:29 PM
NEXXXTPM said...
to all chinese bloggers,

i admit that i look racist, but actually i am not a racist.

i use to live in kepong/jinjang and i am very friendly with the chinese.

we help each other.

i am a racist when you belitle the malays.

actually you all chinese must be proud of your success and i respect you all for that.

my supreme respect for you when you look HUMBLE and not telling how bad is the government of the day and then make comparison with singapore.

Saturday, September 23, 2006 1:07:01 PM
KoSong Cafe said...
LKY is having the last laugh, judging from the performance of tiny red dot,Singapore without natural resources, compared with Malaysia, largest or ex- largest of tin, rubber, palm oil and so on, and now a big producer of oil.

Malaysia has institutionalized racial discrimination, so how can Najib say that it did not marginalize non-Malays? It is either or, and not both correct. Either he cannot understand English or he takes the people as stupid.

Why ask MCA or Gerakan leaders whether the Chinese are marginalised or compliant? Of course, being compliant, they will say it is not!

Ask the people themselves in coffeeshops and other neutral places.

Mustapha said the university elections were fair and that a survey of parents showed that they are supportive of UUCA! Believe that?

Saturday, September 23, 2006 1:08:38 PM
EngrishHirarious said...
Dear nexxxpm,

Go to the link I posted above, and look how Pak Lah himself has been racist against the Hopeless Malays.

Time to back down.

Saturday, September 23, 2006 1:11:17 PM
Meritocrcy said...
Hi Nexxxxxxxxtpm

Have you wondered why when there are fewer Indians than Malays in the general population in Singapore, that there are many more Indians than Malays in high positions in politics, medicine, business, law, and many other fields that require talent and hard work in Singapore.

Why are the Malays underperforming in both Malaysia and Singapore?

In Malaysia, there are crutches or tongkats available, but in meritocratic Singapore even the smaller minority Indians outperform the bigger minority Malays

Looking forward to your sharp analysis and reply.

Saturday, September 23, 2006 1:14:04 PM
NEXXXTPM said...
ironically,

why you chinese never complaint about the different fees imposed by matsalleh countries.

in the uk, the fees for chinese is very high compare to locals or eec countries.

you talk about fair play in malaysia but what about other countries.

actually, we are just doing what others are doing.

Saturday, September 23, 2006 1:14:56 PM
NEXXXTPM said...
meritocrcy,

that the politics LKY is playing.

malays know what game lky is playing.

they use indians as baits so that we will eat it.

i hope you indians must be aware of such thing.

Saturday, September 23, 2006 1:18:37 PM
itscool said...
Nexxxxtpm....

You are still spewing your conclusions without facts to justify your comments.

In a debate, give your reasoning and facts- not just say it.

As it is, others have to assume your reasons/justifications for your comments.

Peacedude does that all the time...so are you too?

Saturday, September 23, 2006 1:23:36 PM
bigben said...
Laxasamana and many others here have said more than need to be said. LKY is a highly respected statesman throughout the world. Bapa corupsi, well he's been deemed a pariah by his own Malay community.

The people who suffer most in this country due to this racist UMNO strategy unfortunately are the ordinary Malays. The people who benefit the most are the UMNOputras, MCAputras, MICputras, Gerakanputras and of course the hand full of crooked chinese business men (Lee Kim Yew, Vincent Tan, Yeoh Tiong Lay et al ) who are in cahoots with these policians to rape the country.

It makes me sad that the Malays ( majority of whom are good people ) do not realise the truth about how they are being misguided by the UMNOputras.

It's so disgusting to see these two clowns from Gerakan coming out to defend our policy. Being beneficiaries of the system they of course will be biased. Every single MCA, Gerakan and MIC leader curses and swear about the system and the UMNO racist when they are amongst themselves. I can say this because I know them very well. They are such a bunch of hypocrites.

Saying Singapore is easy to govern because it is a small country is such a stupid arguement. Penang, Kuala Lumpur, Johore are all much much smaller than Singapore but how do we match them in terms of development?

My advise is that we listen to this great statesman and try to learn from him instead of going into a state of denial.

Saturday, September 23, 2006 1:40:02 PM
alibaba said...
NexxPM,

With Malays originating from Borneo and practicing intermarriage amonsgt relatives, the IQ level is affected. Even TDM knows this.

Now you know why they underperform.

Saturday, September 23, 2006 1:42:29 PM
alibaba said...
lky - if he applies his own standards to himself, there won't be the lee dynasty in singapore. think about these:

Wife (Ho Ching, Temasek Chief) reports to Husband (PM & Finance Minister

Wife make a wrong investment in Metropolis - got promoted

Wife did it again buying corrupted Thaksin co in Thailand. - no news of being sacked.

Brother-in-law (Singtel CEO) reports to Ho Ching (PM's wife)

Father (MM) reports to son (PM)

Father & son got special discount when buying property from Ong Beng Seng. Discoount not available to general public - bribery is ok with some.

and we could go on.

is this meritocrasy or nepotism?

Saturday, September 23, 2006 1:48:43 PM
malayan union said...
NEXXXTPM said...
malayan union,

this world is no big deal to muslim.

OF COURSE, YOU SAY THE WORLD IS NO BIG DEAL TO YOU BECAUSE YOU PREFER TO BE THE KATAK DI BAWAH TEMPURUNG..THAT IS WHY YOUR BAHLOL UMNO LEADERS PUT PREFER TO PUT STUPID MALAYS IN CHARGE OF STRATEGIC PLACES, UNIVS, IN FACT, EVERYWHERE, INSTEAD OF CAPABLE AND CLEVER CHINESE AND INDIANS...THE RESULT AS EVERYONE CAN SEE OVER THE PAST 37 YEARS...MALAYSIA IS GOING TO THE DOGS AND PIGS...WE ARE GOING TO BE LIKE ZIMBABWE HAVING 10TH CLASS MENTALITY WITH 1ST WORLD INFRASTRUCTURE...YOUR UMNO BAHLOH THINKING IS THAT THE REST OF THE WORLD CAN PROGRESS, BUT WHAT IS THE USE IF MELAYU BECAUSE OF LAZINESS CANNOT KEEP UP AND CHINESE AND INDIANS,PROGRESS
...BETTER TO LET MALAYSIA BECOME BACKWARD SO LONG AS MELAYUS CAN BENEFIT AND BE COMFORTABLE UNDER OUR TEMPURUNG.....

finally, everything will come to an end.

YA IF EVERYTHING COMES TO AN END, WHY DO YOU MELAYUS CONTINUE TO BE JEALOUS OF OTHERS AND FRUSTRATE THEM...IT IS LIKE YOU CANNOT RUN FAST IN RACE, BUT INSTEAD OF TRYING YOU TIE UP THE LEGS OF YOUR OPPONENTS!...THIS IS TYPICAL MELAYU PRASANGKA HASAD DENGKI...FIKIRAN SEMPIT SESUAI NYA DI TEMPURUNG UNTUK KATAK2...

to muslim, building life hereafter is more important.

YOU MUNAFIK...WHY ARE YOU UMNO PEOPLE CONTINUING TO BECOME RICH AND CORRUPT THROUGH PLUNDERING COUNTRY'S RESOURCES....ON ANOTHER LEVEL..WHY A 47 YEAR OLD LIKE DATUK K WANTS TO MARRY A 27-YEAR OLD LIKE SITI NURHALIZA...IF AS YOU SAY YOU PREPARE FOR AFTERLIFE, YOU WOULD NOT DO ALL THE BAD THINGS TO THE CHINESE AND INDIANS...YOU WOULD INSTEAD HELP THEM KNOWING THAT YOUR ALLAH WILL BE PLEASED....LOOKS LIKE YOU PEOPLE PREFER THE COMFORTABLE LIFE IN BOLEHLAND AND SAY TO HELL WITH THE AFTERLIFE...THAT IS WHY I CALL YOU MUNAFIK AGAIN....


that is why there are no competition in wealth in the muslim world. what you see is indivudual's greed.

INDIVIDUAL OR NO INDIVIDUAL YOU CANNNOT HIDE THE FACT THAT THE GREEDY PERSON HERE IS THE MUSLIM.....

you all chinese like to equate success with money and development because that has been your culture. no intention to offend you.

WHAT ABOUT YOU UMNO PEOPLE? YOU ARE CLEARLY FOLLOWING THE EXAMPLE OF THE CHINESE...ISN'T THAT YOUR CULTURE TOO...WHY DO YOU UMNO PUTRAS CONTINUE TO PLUNDER OFF THE NATION'W WEALTH...

if you want to compare, please compare apple and apple.

DID YOUR UMNO PEOPLE DO THAT IN SELECTING STUDENTS TO LOCAL UNIVS? YOUR SO-CALLED MERITOCRACY IS NOTHING BUT COMPARING APPLE TO ORANGE...IF YOU COMPARE APPLE TO APPLE, FOLLOW REAL MERITOCRACY...AT BEST ONLY 20% OF MELAYUS CAN GET IN...I AM NOT THE ONE WHO SAYS THIS...IT IS YOUR GREAT MAHATHIR AND WHAT HE SAYS IN THIS CASE IS VERY TRUE......


to the chinese, SURVIVING, STRUGLING, WAR, FIGHTING AMONG CLANS AND SO ON is synonym in your culture because of what happen in the mainland.


THAT IS WHY WE ARE TOUGH AND RESOLUTE,,,WE SURVIVE AGAINST GREAT ODDS...WE SEND OUR CHILDREN TO UNIVS THROUGH OUR BLOOD SWEAT AND TEARS..UNLIKE YOU MELAYU PEOPLE WHO HAVE NO BACKBONE..GOVT GIVES YOU ALL THE SCHOLARSHIPS, NEP HELP, ANYTHING UNDER THE SUN...STILL YOU ARE NOT EVEN HALF AS GOOD AS THE CHINESE...YOU GIVE CHINESE HALF OF YOUR PRIVILEGES...THEY WILL SHOW YOU THEY CAN BECOME TWICE AS SUCCESSFUL? BUT ARE YOU PREPARED TO DO THAT? NO YOUR UMNO BOSSES PREFER TO MAKE YOU MELAYUS KATAK DI BAWAH TEMPURUNG...LET COUNTRY BECOME BACKWARD SO LONG AS MELAYUS CAN BECOME COMFORTABLE...BUT HOW LONG CAN YOU LAST...ONE DAY ALL RESOURCES OF COUNTRY RUN DRY...BY THEN ALL CHINESE WOULD HAVE LEFT COUNTRY...SO YOU HAVE NO MORE SCAPEGOATS LEFT...THEN THAT WILL BE THE BEST TIME TO SEE HOW YOU MELAYUS WILL REACT....MY BEST BET IS THAT ALL OF YOU WILL COLLAPSE INTO THE SEA...AND HANG TUAH WILL TELL YOU....MELAYU DAH HILANG DI DUNIA....

----------------------------------
SO IT IS NORMAL TO SEE THE SUCCESS OF THE CHINESE WHICH MUST BE EQUATE DUE TO HISTORY THEY HAVE.

YOU CAN BE RICH, MODERN, HAVE HIGH IQ BUT DO NOT BELITLE OTHER RACES ESPECIALLY YOUR COUNTRYMEN. WHAT THE MALAYS ARE DOING WILL BE THE SAME IF YOU ARE IN OUR SHOES.

---------------------------------

what the fuck are you talking about? you melayus have been given all the privileges and help under NEP for more than 30 years and still complain that you cannot succeed? and you have the cheek here to tell me that you can succeed if you are in our shoes..

COME! COME! YOUR GOMEN HAS BENT BACKWARDS MANY TIMES IN TRYING TO PUT YOU INTO OUR SHOES WITH ALL KINDS OF NEP INCENTIVES....AND STILL YOU FAIL!!!!! YOU ARE TYPICAL MUNAFIK! DON'T TALK THROUGH YOUR ARSE!!!! THE WHOLE WORLD IS LAUGHING AT YOU!!!!

Saturday, September 23, 2006 1:51:41 PM
malayan union said...
commodore said...
Yeah, we need people like TDM, who is brave enuf to speak his own mind.Certainly not AAB who spoke something today and reversed it the very next day.What's wrong with marginalising the chinese here, LKY? You and your mentee (Lim Chong Eu ang Koh soo koon) did even worse to the malays in singapore & penang!, even with limited opportunity (LCE & KSK).I invite all chinese a.k.a pigs to condemn me....kakkakakakkakakkakakkakakakkakakkakakakakkakakkakkakak

Saturday, September 23, 2006 1:03:29 PM

NO COMMODORE.

YOU ARE INSIGNIFICANT. WE JUST LET A ROTTEN BABI HUTAN LIKE YOU CONTINUE TO WALLOW IN HIS OWN SHIT AND URINE IN YOUR PIG STY IN PWTC

Saturday, September 23, 2006 1:54:42 PM
NEXXXTPM said...
meritocracy

if indians are good, how come they cannot develop india?

why are there many poor indians around the world.

so the issue here is not the race it is the individuals.

alibaba,

there are many chinese who are like malays so do there are malays who are like chinese.

i hope u just stop making provocative statement and let we in this blog matures and increase our scope of horizon.

Saturday, September 23, 2006 1:56:38 PM
melindubuda said...
In all honesty, ethically and morally, shouldn't Lee Kuan Yew and his PAP party apparatus be charged with ETHNIC CLEANSING of the minority Malays?

Didn't they deliberately took over lands once belonged to poor Malays in the name of Compulsory Acquisition and SOCIALIST RE_ENGINEERING and dispersing the Malay population in different corners of Flats and areas.

This is the post-World War 2 subtle form of socialist re-engineering of a minority people; they did this kind of thing in the Balkans, and Eastern Europe in the name of Communism or Socialism; in North West China, Tibet, Mongolia.

And most recently, Howard's Australia policy of Integration smacks of ethnic cleansing in the name of pluralism, and western-Christian-based democracy.

The worst kind was perpetrated by Queen Isabella and Ferdinand against the Moors and Jews.

TDM despite all your faults and aberrations, you are right to denounce this white-shirt-trousers Chinese Socialist Lee Kuan Yew.

LKY is a confused educated chinese unabale to reconcile with his ancestors-&-idol worshiping to the rational arguments of his Western education during a period of Socialism in post WW2 United Kingdom -- Laski, Trokyism, Marxism LSE and the cambridge socialists.
{Remember Harold Wilson, Tony Benn, and the eye-browed once Foreign Secretary -- they went and fought with the Internationale Brigade against Fascist Franco in Spain]

It is about time you Malays open your eyes and understand Occidentalism and their philosophies and the Western-Christianity and MISGUIDED "educated" Chinese confused about ehir origins, identity and prupose of Life --- money and food only paradigm]

Saturday, September 23, 2006 2:12:17 PM
Vindica said...
TDM felt the sting from the small shrimp and where he is now? The land he ruled for 22 years and the legacy he is fighting against, stuck in the political wilderness. Pity him for he has not much time left to undo what he had done. Yes, ABB and the present government was also his legacy which he deeply regretted and he wants to dismantle that. Should all be taken in by his rhetorics and "bogeyman politics?" Why not get down to the real down-to-earth issues that all Malaysians are pretty concern about?

Politicians as we should be aware, are very fond of using "bogeyman politics" to divert the people's attention from vexing issues of their own doing. Though this does not not provide answers or a road map on how to overcome such issues that are on the agenda of many Malaysians, the diversions serves them well as it will somehow get the attention of the citizens and they will put them on the backburner or even better forget all about them. The populace will generally take the clarion call to show nationalistic or race/religious fervour as we have seen countless times throughout local history. That politicians are less concerned with significant domestic issues, and to take the bull by the horns to resolve them can be seen by such so-called "bogeyman politics." While it may be perceived as good politics for the politician's path to higher office and political gain, it does nothing to deal with these significant issues or to suggest a method to enhance the economic opportunities and standard of living that Malaysians want and cherish.

That it is necessary to improve the lives of every citizens and to work collaboratively to improve the business climate which enhances the Rakyat's lives is not the reason for their being in the government. Though there might be disagreement in it's present state, there should be no question that the climate must continually improve in order to be competitive. They lack foresight and the need to understand that the world has changed and that we are in a global economy and time is of the essence. The computer, the Internet and the end of the Cold War have limited if not destroyed the protection that our national and state boundaries once provided. Having land with rich resorces to be milked for personal gains will not ensure the prosperity of the nation nor it's people. In the end the future of coming generations will see the depletion and degeneration of their country. A country that is poor because her citizens were not properly educated and groomed to take over the successes of their forebears who worked their mind and soul for their country's good. A country racked since May 13th with greed and corruption, racial disharmony and a great number being marginalised.

All our policies and philosophies upon which those policies were based must be reviewed and challenged through the prism of this change. Our policymakers must recognize this by placing greater emphasis on education attainment and workforce skills. They must continue to upgrade these but they must also look at significantly reducing the cost of doing business if there is going to be real opportunity. The past practices of their predecessors need to undergo drastic transformation by putting less emphasis on race/religion and more towards one that encompasses all that is more meritocratic. The economic pie must be equally shared amongst all and not just by a few for the younger generations to want to stay on and be part of nation-building.

Now is not the time for classic "bogeyman politics," but the time for real leadership. Political advantage might be gained through this tactic but in the long run the ordinary worker will be shortchanged.

Many including LKY will give credit where credit is due, but I doubt he holds a high regard for TDM, although unlike TDM whose has been reported to utter words "bomb Singapore." Is it becasue Singapore will not retaliate unlike Indonesia and Thailand that it is alright to say such things about a close neighbour? I dare TDM to say the same about Thailand and Indonesia. How about taking over their Thailand's Muslim south as they are not happy being part of Thailand?

By Vindica

Saturday, September 23, 2006 2:13:18 PM
alibaba said...
NexxxPM,

The truth hurts isin't it when you know where you are from and how you destroy your own race!

Well, you can still change and be mature.

Saturday, September 23, 2006 2:15:52 PM
Head_Hunter said...
mahathir said.........
_______________________________________________________________

Why is it they cannot be trained to carry arms in the army?
_______________________________________________________________

didn't our singapore malay bloggers already clarified that this is absolutely NOT TRUE?
_______________________________________________________________

'Why is it that Malays in Malaysia are experts in the military but in Singapore they cannot hold high posts? Why are Malays officially sidelined?
_______________________________________________________________

turning d tables, can v ask mahathir.........

'Why is it that d Chinese in Singapore are experts in d military but in Malaysia they cannot hold high posts? Why are Chinese officially sidelined?

in truth, it is not only d chinese who r being sidelined but all non-malays including d non-malay bumiputras. look at d recent call by d umnoputras for Idris Jala, a Christian Iban, to resign from MAS. do u think they wud hv done d same had it been a melayu who was at d helm?

or asking d only non-malay CM to move over? or that almost all our DGs n SGs of ministries r melayus? or our military n police's top brass r melayus? or that all d important ministries r headed only by melayu politicians? or d almost solid proportion of lecturers in all our public universities r melayus?

remember when syed hussein al-attas wanted to promote some non-malays in MU bcoz he felt they were better qualified, how did d melayus protest? n what eventually happened to him?

r v to believe there r no qualified non-malays to occupy those positions? NO. what these idiots want is only to see a melayu up there regardless of whether he can perform or not. they celebrate mediocrity n wud rather see d thing fail, as v r now witnessing in many of our institutions, than to let a non-malay hv a go at it.

if u do not see this as marginalization, what is it then????

mahathir, wud u care to explain!!!

Saturday, September 23, 2006 2:22:13 PM
Leslie Liu said...
Didn't dare to post anything here.

Very dangerous.

Saturday, September 23, 2006 2:26:16 PM
NEXXXTPM said...
alibaba,

we muslim has nothing to proof.

it is a question how much can you obey Allah and follow the Sunnah of Prophet Muhammad SAW.

dont equate malay as muslim

muslim belongs to all races. good examples, there more muslim in india and china.

the question is whether obey Allah follows the Prophet Muhammad SAW.

please dont equate money, worldly success, development with islam.

you can take it. we do not want it.

Saturday, September 23, 2006 2:28:26 PM
belonbesi said...
alibaba, careful you can be sued by him, I remember a Singaporen is still in foreign country as he was alleged CRIMINALLY defamed Lee and son.If he stay put surely he will be ordered to pay millions to Lee and will be imprisoned.
You only repeated his statement.

Saturday, September 23, 2006 2:31:54 PM
NEXXXTPM said...
head_hunter,

overseas chinese must always refer to china.

41 years ago can you chinese ask that question?

do you dare to ask all the question in this MT?

ironically, you chinese do not even dare to ask in your own country.

can you ask your right in china?

SO, WHAT IS THE BIG DEAL. PLEASE BE FAIR. LOOK AROUND. DONT BE LIKE KATAK DALAM TEMPURUNG.

LKY WILL BE NOTHING IN CHINA.

Saturday, September 23, 2006 2:36:00 PM
alibaba said...
nexxxPM,

I see, you call yourself a muslim, but you certainly don't talk like one!

Muslims are peacemakers and use language acceptable to allah - you seem to be the direct opposite?

Saturday, September 23, 2006 2:37:42 PM
NEXXXTPM said...
alibaba,

u are right.

nobody can say that he is a good muslim.

i am a weak muslim. thats why i retaliate in this blog.

all my posting are retaliating posting in nature.

i do not badmouth my countrymen. i am just defending my race. when i was in the uk, i told the matsalleh that the chinese are malaysian

Saturday, September 23, 2006 2:43:04 PM
devious17 said...
Another sandiwara to avert attention from local issues and to make bn look good in our eyes,pooraah!

TDM, each and every of your misdeeds done to the rakyat or this country is in the log books of God! You will be dealt with at akhirat.May God have mercy on your pitiful soul.

nexxpm,

At least LKY has a place to go back to even though he may be insignificant in China but what about you? You are neither indon nor asli, your breed has been kacuk like wild monkeys in borneo that you dont have a place of origin.

The reason I am saying this to you is that you and peacedude are of the same fowl(realise I used breed and fowl for animals) mind and mentality ashaming Islam. As many has observed you and your kind may not be muslim at all to begin with.

Saturday, September 23, 2006 2:48:41 PM
alibaba said...
nexxxpm,

your confession as a weak muslim is accepted, but this is no license to speak like a infidel.

are you now switching back into rece? - defending your race? I already gave you insights on how you could not only defend your race but actually improve it. TDM touched on it when he wrote the malay dilemna

Saturday, September 23, 2006 2:52:08 PM
darwisigila said...
Likuanyu banyak masa mau usik jiran dia sebab dia pandai jaga itu singapura-pura.Dia punya rakyat hidup aman dan damai.

2 minggu lepas sorang lelaki kurang siuman kena jel sebab ada lukis gamba dan tulisan mengenai anak dia dalam lif dan dinding bangunan.Hahahahahaha.....lukis gamba pun kena jel daa.Itu pasai sana banyak aman dan bersih.

Saturday, September 23, 2006 2:58:13 PM
kttang2001 said...
Dear Malaysian Politicians,

Yes, LKY comments will hurt you. Take it in stride. Many Chinese Malaysians or ex-M'sians have made it good here in Singapore. Even more than half a million from Malaysia cross over to look after their rice bowl daily in causeway checkpoints.

Continue to slam Singapore, you will make their people stronger & mentally fight for their own Survival.

When Singapore is getting Free Trade Agreement, DR M was slamming us like nobody business. Look @ the global economy now, how it evolves.

We will only declare defeat when you hit us with bombs....Previously DR M threatened to CUT OFF WATER SUPPLY.
Our sons/grandchildren will always remember. We are also kicked out of Malaysia. Singapore is a broken child 41 years back, WE value what we are today.

We will fight towards the next 100 years. All are welcome to Singapore to make it your HOME, we value your talents.

Saturday, September 23, 2006 3:05:29 PM
Betulsalah said...
nexxxpm,

your confession as a weak muslim is accepted, but this is no license to speak like a infidel.

You are putting all the malay in disgrace. Hope your F f does not talk like you.

Saturday, September 23, 2006 3:13:26 PM
rocky lim said...
The spat that has been created by the recent statement by the Senior Minister LKY has to be put in the correct perspective.

1. The Singapore leader has no business in interfering in the internal affairs of Malaysia as we a sovereign country.Unfortunately the cat is out of the bag . This has become global news & the 'discriminative' policies of Malaysia might come under greater international scrutiny.

2. It is obvious that the Chinese & Indians in Malaysia perceive that they have been marginalised.No need for LKY to say it. Take a survey among the non Malays and I bet you that over 90 % feel that they have been marginalised.Over the past 30 years , the marginalisation has progressively increased, & this was particularly true during the reign of TDM.No better with AB.

3. The marginalistion of the non Malays is more than a perception as it is based on hard statistics.Look at the number of non Malays in the civil service which is by far the biggest employer.Less than 1 in 10 of new civil servant recruits are non Malays.The same holds true of a host of other sectors.



4. The marginalisation of the non Malays has been instituitionised after the advent of the NEP & the unofficial ' ketuaan" policy. There are many instances of marginalisation particularly in the military & police,civil service &public universities. Few counties in the world have instituitionalised discrimination . Unfortunately Malaysia is one of them.South Africa was the other but in a more malignant form.

5. Unlike Singapore, Malaysia does not run on meritrocracy.The result; The Malaysian economy is stalling.The only thing that is saving us from economic doom is petroleum & nearly 40 % of our budget income is derived from this commodity. This is frightening as our oil resources will be depleted soon, and it is envisaged that we will become a net importer of petroleum in 4 to 5 years time.

6. On the other hand the Singapore economy is flourishing with wages & standards of living much higher than us. Forty years ago, shopkeepers in Johor Baru were known for their refusal to accept the Singapore dollar. Look at it today. Worth 2.5 x ours. Singapore is today the high tech center of South East Asia while due to our NEP & "ketuaan" policies & dismal education standards we are rapidly losing out & that too, to our poorer neighbours.At the rate of descent we might in 10 to 20 years become the Zimbabwe of Asia.

7. The denial of our MCA,Gerakan & MIC politicians in public is expected as they are all worried about their butts. But talk to them in private & they will tell you a different story more horrifying than what we read in the papers about injustice.

8. The marginalisation of the non Malays has also encompassed the political parties,with the MCA,Gerakan & MIC being the poodles of the UMNO.A recent article in Malaysiakini by Khoo KP attests to this.

I am a businessman who travels extensively around the region. Let there be no doubt that we are rapidly losing out to our neighbours. I was in India recently and am amazed at the pace of development there compared to my last visit about 5 years ago.China is in another league and will be a superpower in the not two distant future. Thailand & Vietnam are all catching up fast.

Talk to foreign investors and most are reluctant to invest in Malaysia due to a host of reasons which have been elaborated elsewhere. As I see it we are resting on our laurels and due to our 'ostrich in the sand'attitude & marginalisation of the Chinese & Indians may become the story of a very promising & talented country which became the basket case of Asia due the folly of its leaders.

Who knows. Another Harvard case study in 2020.

Saturday, September 23, 2006 3:21:14 PM
bananaramas said...
the chinese are race who worship money as god. that's why even by controlling 70% of economy they still complain and complain. these pigs would complain about every fucking thing. i read the star's letter to editor...one complaints "the passport got too many pages, i want slimmer one for less fee for me lite traveller". or the usual one letter that crops in a few months "let's legalize prostitution, whoooooo!". recently this racist just voted en masse for the hugely untalented Suki or was it Puki i couldnt really care of One in a Million singing show. the like to scream racist but you know they are the worst one.

Saturday, September 23, 2006 3:26:41 PM
Fighter said...
Yes, as i have said before, this is exactly how Mahathir would answer LKY, not like what Najib did a few days ago.

This is THE only way to answer to Singapore unlike our current WEAK leadership.

Saturday, September 23, 2006 3:58:21 PM
Head_Hunter said...
nexxxtpm............

sorry le. i can't understand a word u r saying. bahasa ngko berbelit-belit la.

cam tu tak heran la klau cina2 semua pandang rendah kat korang pasal nak berdebat pun tak erti. buka je mulut dah kalah. cuba ko blog dlm bahasa melayu lepaih ni, mungkin baru nampak ade ide skit.

pasal bila aku baca post ngko tu, aku tertanya "huh! apa binatang ni?"

Saturday, September 23, 2006 4:13:48 PM
itscool said...
devilistgod...


What are you babbling about?

points 1 - 40 all rubbish post.
Not a single one with any fact to back up.

One thing common among you fellas...babble but no facts!!!

btw..dont use capital letters. It doesn't make you great. It is difficult to read. Most of us dont read it because they are in capitals....get it? let this cina man teach you how to be effective okay?

Saturday, September 23, 2006 4:28:07 PM
Ali Imran said...
Dear fellow Malaysians,

Let good sense prevail in MT. We still need each other, and importantly, we need to assess and correct ourselves first before we insult each other. To most of us, our children have no where else to go except this Malaysia. They deserve better.

A.

Saturday, September 23, 2006 5:03:17 PM
Head_Hunter said...
headache06............

ngko lagi sorang. tak habih je aku bagi nasihat kat nexxxtpm tadi, boom! ngko pulak timbui.

istilah yg ko patut pakai tadi adalah "chinaman". bukannya "chinesemen". bunyik dia tak sama. bila ko cuba nak maki cina pakai "chinesemen" tu, takde oooooomph. lagi, ia buat ko nampak bodoh.

cuba ko post lagi skali.

Saturday, September 23, 2006 5:06:38 PM
budak johore said...
Tun Dr Mahathir retorted yesterday: 'I look at the houses in KL of the people that are 'systematically marginalised'. They have bigger houses than mine.'

Mahadead, you are a outright liar, look at your palace!

Mahathir's Palace of Versailles

‘Don't be like that, Kuan Yew! You just look after your rice bowl, that is all. The country is tiny, don't be too proud,' Tun Dr Mahathir said in response to a written question by a member of the public who attended the function here.

Yeah! Mahadead, don't be like that, if you want to meet Bush, do you have to pay a US$ million to lick his arse?

Lobbying: Malaysia paid corrupt lobbyist to set up Mahathir's meeting with Bush

You are a disgrace to all the Rakyat. Look at the mirror, you are the greatest!

Malaysia's Prime Minister of Shame and Disgrace

A new meaning to the seven-year itch

Asked at a news conference why he thought Mr Lee had made the comments, Tun Dr Mahathir said: 'He feels he is strong. He is the proud type. He is not bothered with his neighbours. That is why he deliberately raised something he knew to be sensitive in our country.'

You are a dirty corrupt bastard! Better take good care of your backside oh!

Anwar awaits his fate after final submissions are made in his sodomy trial

Saturday, September 23, 2006 5:22:24 PM
orang kampong said...
mahadead is not a trustworthy person , just twist and turn to suite his arguement.
Character wise he is a bankrupt..

Saturday, September 23, 2006 5:39:24 PM
against batuapi said...
If what LKY said is not true, then KJ recent racial comments, Hishamuddin's arrogant defence of KJ & UMNO Youth's recent actions with regards to Gerakan and MCA show otherwise. UMNO Youth is just a youth movement in a coalitin party like Barisan Nasional and yet it can act like it controls the whole country. And such are the future leaders we have in Malaysia?

Saturday, September 23, 2006 6:04:12 PM
NEXXXTPM said...
head_hunter,

do you wash your shit after you shit.

sebab tu orang melayu pandang rendah dengan orang cina.

balik cina.

go home please.

cina needs you.

ini blog bukat for debatelah bodoh tetapi untuk hentam menghentam antara melayu dan cina sengkek.

Saturday, September 23, 2006 6:17:33 PM
old-garage said...
As I saw, from before LKY are succes in sistematically marginalised the Malay. We see, how many are there, the malay Minister or in up position in Singapore? From before, LKY are succes to take all the land or area which have big population of Malay Singapore and send them to pangsa-pangsa or flat area which there were few number of Malay there. So at the end, when there are election day, none of the Malay win the election. And the partie which fight for malay right are weaker and cant voice anything.

Sunday, September 24, 2006 8:53:34 PM
Tungsten said...
Our former P.M, Tun Mahathir once said that
he would call spade a spade and that he would not
hesitate to criticise or condemn any nation that in
his his opinion had faltered.In this vein he had
unhesitatingly criticise U.S for their role in the
middle east, the Israels in their conflict with the
Paletines, the insurgents in the southern Thailand,and
to a certain extent even Singapore whenever there was
a need to find a bogeyman to justify our shortcomings
.So if our leaders has no hesitation in criticising
every one and sundry whenever they feel like it what
is the rationale for not been able to accept criticism
from a foreign perspective?
Our leaders must accept the fact that the
right to speak the truth is not the exclusive domain
of our leaders alone.Others who view our system and
our citizens been harshly treated have every right to
voice their misgivings.More so with Singapore
especially where the citizens of both countries have
an embryonic,historical relationship.Most Singaporeans
have relatives in Malaysia and vice versa.How the govt
treats its subject in Malaysia invariably is felt by
the citizens of Singapore because of this close
relationship.
It would be foolish for our leaders to deny that
what M.M Lee Kuan Yew said is not true.By the act of
denial our leaders are merely prolonging and
accentuating the disunity that is currently prevailing
in our country.However, M.M LKY is guilty of one
important ommission.The chinese are not the only
people being marginalised.The Indians, the aborigines,
and the rural malays should also be included in the
marginalised community.Quite obviously, the
beneficiaries have been the elite, politically
connected malays that have been in power for the last
49 years.

Monday, September 25, 2006 12:09:31 AM
karl said...
My dear Malaysian friends,

malay or non malay and bumis and non-bumis. Listen to me carefully and I'm going to be honest about what I'm going to say. As a SINGAPOREAN malay I'm very proud to be a SINGAPOREAN. Unlike Malaysian malay, we MELAYU SINGAPORE need to work hard to get what we want to be. It's not true that if some of you still think that no MELAYU in the Military, Its not true that the MELAYU(S) never made it to UNI, (I'm one of them). There are nothing compare to all of you, which you guys are being categories for being bumi and non bumi.... as for us Singaporean ... we are singaporean and therefore all of us are bumis.

Once again I want to make myself clear that I'm proud being a Singaporean MELAYU !!!!!!!!!! Bukan mengampu atau membodek.. But like what we malays always say... DIMANA LANGIT DIPIJAK DISITU LANGIT KUJUNJUNG...

MAJULAH SINGAPURA

Monday, September 25, 2006 12:14:09 AM
karl said...
MALUNYA AKU..... KORANG TAK MALU KE

Monday, September 25, 2006 12:17:30 AM
Anti-Corruption guy said...
Kepada Saudara NEXXXTPM:

Salam and May Peace Be Upon You.

I thought that I highlighted to you that your comments on MT are entirely unacceptable.....You are really a disgrace to US MALAYS. As I have said in my previous post, your statements are bordering on being a criminal similar along the lines of the Nazis. Please stop being a bigot because right now as I'm starting to think it has something to do with your upbringing.

If you can't resist spewing your verbal diarrhoea then please go to the 'Swimming Pool' section.

Good luck in your next post.


Selamat Berpuasa Saudara NexxtPM.

Monday, September 25, 2006 12:32:41 AM
Shahidan said...
It seems MOST bloggers on the MT site suffer from an inability to discuss serious issues rationally. Every issue under discussion is seen through racial lenses and crudely argued from that perspective. If such moronic race-hate mongering is allowed to become the dominant discourse among our citizens, I fear May 13th may seem like a tea party in the aftermath of what could be brought about by this mindset. We all owe it to ourselves to tackle many of the national problems through robust rational arguments. In opposing restrictions on our democratic rights and civil liberties, as many of these bloggers seem to demand, our objective must surely be to encourage the flowering of rational debate.

Lee Kuan Yew's comments referred to in the wire services lend further proof to the fact that he is a frustrated racist who was denied a larger stage to act out his Anglophilia upon Singapore's expulsion from Malaysia. His racist references to the genetic superiority of the Chinese have been debunked by scholars all over the world.

Those Malaysians who hero worship this repressor and consider his ideas on the Chinese attributes of being harder working and smarter than the natives may want to explain why China, their homeland, has been one of the poorest nations on earth for the past 200 years. Did the Chinese people not work hard then? Did the genetic attributes referred to by Lee happen only in the last few decades when the Chinese economy has begun to boom along its coastal regions and were all Chinese lazy opium smokers, as described by western writers, in the past? And if the Chinese were so intellectually superior how come small European countries could defeat it - as they did Indonesia, Malaysia and Indochina -and colonise it and carve it out among themselves? And how come before China's revolution, which wrested national sovereignty for its people, the Chinese were treated like dogs when the parks in Shanghai had big notices declaring 'No dogs or Chinese allowed'?

The answers to these questions cannot be understood in the the racist rantings of Lee Kuan Yew, but can only be understood in the context of the anti-colonialist and anti-imperialist struggles of the peoples of Asia to carve out their own destinies. In a word, the answers lie not in genetics but in sociology and economics. Had it not been for China's revolution, China would not have been able to lift some 300 million people out of abject poverty in the last couple of decades.

China is only too well aware of Lee Kuan Yew's role in making Singapore a cog in the US 'containtment of China' policy. It has become a naval platform for the US Navy. As a littoral state in the Malacca Straits, the US finds Singapore's support for its proposed military intrusion in this choke point, on the pretext of combating potential terrorism, most welcome. The rewards for sucking up to the US includes prioritising Singapore as an investment destination and elevating the leader of this tiny population into an Asian 'statesman'. Never mind that he violates every democratic principle in the book: no tolerance for any opposition, the closing down with impunity of any newspaper that dares to criticize big brother Lee and his PAP cronies, the imprisoning without trial of trade union leaders, student leaders and even religious and NGO activists, not to mention trumped up charges against opposition leaders who are bankrupted by politically appointed judges. Principles which we are reminded daily by the US and British leadership for going to war in Iraq seem irrelevant in this crony's fiefdom. Meanwhile, Bush never tires haranguing China's leaders for lacking in this department.

If LKY is so clever, how come he plays lap dog to Bush and Blair? Is it any wonder the Chinese see Lee Kuan Yew and his Junior as running dogs of the US. The Chinese consider Malaysia a more important friend because of our South-South pro-China stance against the West.

Finally, just a couple of points on the economic performance of Malaysia and Singapore. As anyone who has a basic grasp of political economy will explain, the defining characteristic of a third world economy is its rural sector with a large peasant population which is engaged in activities yielding low value and productivity. In contrast, the urban sector is defined by its high value output of industrial goods and services and leading on to knowledge-based activities.

At the point of independence, Malaysia had all the attributes of a developing agricultural economy with policies aimed at transiting into industrialisation through import- substitution and modernising its rural sector. Singapore had none of the problems associated with having a lagging rural economic sector. Lee Kuan Yew's book 'From Third World To First World' is, therefore, itself a fraud because it never had the transition problems of a Third World economy. As a city-state which tolerated no alternative views and wa allied with the West in all the major international conflicts of the era, including the US war of aggression against Vietnam,, it was able to embark on its capital formation journey unimpeded.

As the brain drain began to be seriously felt in the last couple of decades, it must be acknowledged Singapore has adapted itself to the challenge by welcoming talent from everywhere. Many aggrieved Malaysians who have been denied scholarships or jobs have been lapped up by Singapore. Herein, Malaysian leaders need to rethink and change course in some of their policies by bringing in greater flexibility and fairness. It is tantamount to shooting ourselves in the foot when we deny our talent the support they so badly need. I refer particularly to scholarships and loans to needy students regardless of race. They are the potential brainpower that will be taking the nation to the next level of growth and developemnt. I am reminded of the 14-year old Chinese student from Seremban several years ago, who, at that age, was already dabbling in Newtonian maths. The father, himself a maths teacher, had been running from agency to agency to secure a scholarship, but to no avail. I believe he was eventually given a sholarship by the States. Such inexplicably stupid decisions have been made hundreds of times over and need to be urgently addressed. Singapore's bureaucracy is also much more responsive to the needs of its people. We can learn from them on that score. For a start, we must get tough on discipline in the bureaucracy to ensure efficiency and on-time product delivery.

We have many things going for us in Malaysia. We should be brutally critical about our shortcomings with a view to overcoming them. The continued racial slurs by bloggers is getting stale, tiresome and boring and does not contribute positively to the discourse.

Monday, September 25, 2006 1:28:21 AM
d_BigFoot said...
Better to call a spade a spade

Kim Quek

......
Lee Kuan Yew’s comments have understandably riled many Malaysian leaders particularly those in the ruling coalition, but he should also have struck resonance among many who have silently put up with these unjust policies all these years.

As for the great silent majority in this country, they should now ponder what would serve their interests best: to save face by angrily rebutting Lee Kuan Yew or to stare at the ugly truth bravely and institute changes that will put the nation on the right path?....

Right on, Kim, you go girl! You've spoken the thoughts of many.

And to those who feel the same but voiced differently to "save face" or to "keep their jobs", these are unprincipled men, perhaps taking the path of "dying in quiet desperation" is a better alternative. To do otherwise, you're not acting in the best interest of the country, in the long run.

Monday, September 25, 2006 10:20:19 AM
Post a Comment

< Previous | Home | | Send this page to a friend.
Copyright © 2004 Malaysia Today | www.malaysia-today.net
Website - http://www.malaysia-today.net/Blog-n/2006/09/mahathir-hits-out-at-mm-lees-comments.htm

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
B.Suresh Ram
(no login)
60.49.210.137

Kit Siang questions PM's stand on 'marginalisation'

No score for this post
October 7 2006, 8:01 PM 

Take Action 4Justice said...
Date Posted: 19:15:28 09/18/06 Mon
Author: M'sian Govt. will shut your illegal operation down (What unscrupulous biznesman)
Subject: Steal Ringgit from M'sia & runaway to invest in foreign countries!
In reply to: The evil man does, only God can forgive! 's message, "Decent, honest businessman, upright citizen but the evil man does, only God can forgive!" on 18:21:22 09/18/06 Mon

Don't think you have multiple citizenships, you're hell of a great! The Malaysian governtment will revoke your M'sian citizenship & kick you out of the country to Fantasy Island in Timbuktoo! These Hokkien People are a bloody disgrace to the Chinese community! Even the Japanese also spit at their graves and urinate at their ancestors & SHIT on your tombstones! Website - http://www.voy.com/207120/3/52.html

Saturday, October 07, 2006 4:31:50 PM
007zain said...
.
A Voice : Very good & logical analogy! Cool.

Alibaba : Good point.

Mal928 : Quote, "I think the bloggers here are trying to voice opinions on how we can improve.". Cool. Just think Deep & Wide for our Nation's Stability sake.


GOD BLESS ALL TRUE MALAYSIANS!
.

Saturday, October 07, 2006 4:37:18 PM
a little brother said...
I think this LKS also practices margin! Comrade Butoh should be able to comment from his thought process…. more so since he was commenting on a democratic party, the so called ‘ Democratic Action Party’!

Maximum 10 years for MCA ministers proposed

OPPOSITION WITHIN THE OPPOSITION

SKY still a force to be reckoned with: STAR

Sarawak election – the giant pork-barrel beckons!

DAP to decide fate of trio in their absence today

Ex-Nibong Tebal MP leaves DAP

Saturday, October 07, 2006 5:49:59 PM
pretty sotong said...
a voice said :

"The idea of a Fair and Meritocracsy based system sounds like an ideal situation but it will only serve the Interest of the Non Malay at the detriment of the Malays."


Are you saying that we malay can't compete in meritocracy system? don't underestimate your own race. frankly speaking, what you wrote above really bring shame to the malay race... and what i see from your posting is just excusise to steal from the non-bumi! no?

i'm not sure you know how it feels when you acheive something and automaticlly the whole world thinks that is not because of the efford you put in but becaause of bias policy! to me is just shame shame shame!

Saturday, October 07, 2006 8:29:07 PM
chin said...
Well said, pretty sotong, fellow malaysians please vote wisely.

Saturday, October 07, 2006 10:23:20 PM
HonestTruthful said...
Voice said...
" And, you expect Malay to relinquish their Interest for the sake of Principle? Get real, please!"........

"Tell me now. Is monopoly and ganging up to corner market a proper Principle of Fairness and Meritocrasy? Clearly you are not preaching Principle but are Interest driven!"
==========

My answer to your first question again is YES, I expect them to do the right thing for all the citizens. Abiding to ones Principle equals Integrity and Honesty. Unfortunately, these qualities are surely lacking in the current government.

Your 2nd question begets another question from me.....do you actually think all non-malays are secretly meeting in a dungeon somewhere ganging up against Malays? If they are, I wonder why they left me out. Tell me also who are the monopolies? Truth is the UMNO government is the biggest monopoly (Petronas, TNB, etc etc) and have been giving out freebees to Malays for the longest time through NEP while the non-Malays have only themselves to depend on.

Sorry, but you have to come up with something more convincing. You might as well just put it simply that Malays need the NEP because Malays cannot compete fairly in a meritocratic system.

The way I see it, I think I have more respect in the Malays than you do. It's the government and their racist policies that the I have problem with, not the Malays.

Sunday, October 08, 2006 12:22:18 AM
HonestTruthful said...
Voice,
check out this web site about rich people....
http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2006/9/9/nation/15384956&sec=nation

In your opinion, it is still right that these Malays in the news above continue to get the NEP benefits right? Even if at the expense of the non-Malays who are poor and struggling to put their children to school?

Sunday, October 08, 2006 1:54:38 AM
Take Action 4Justice said...
Date Posted: 18:55:48 09/24/06 Sun
Author: Hokkien Chinese all over the world (Overseas Hokkien Chinese)
Subject: Your wife's sodomised by your buddy, she's infected with AIDS!
In reply to: Forum 54 's message, "BlogThis! General Discussion Forum" on 22:42:15 09/22/06 Fri

You Hokkien people are good for nothing scumbags, real scum of the earth; whose only natural prowess is to play evil dirty politics. You just have to look at MCA, you'll get the picture. Their children will be sodomised by the Japanese and they'll be nothing but eunuchs. What is left of their family jewels(already mandul=barren or infertile), will sleep on the roadside for the next 10 generations! N/B:After being sodomised, they'll be impotent, anyway! It's a well-known fact that the Hokkien people's daughters are all sold to the brothels to work as prostitutes and their God-forsaken sons are all gangland leaders & loan-sharkers! Modern-day;21-st century type are politicians, gambling tycoons, nightclubs tai-pans, directors of public-listed companies, etc., This is the Law of the Universe:this is known as retribution. Too many Hokkien people in the world, population explosion. Some heads got to be on the chopping block. So these Hokkien families will be the first to be sent to the electric chair or the guillotine. Website - http://www.voy.com/207120/2/88.html

Sunday, October 08, 2006 10:59:33 AM
Post a Comment

< Previous | Home | | Send this page to a friend.
Copyright © 2004 Malaysia Today | www.malaysia-today.net

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
Sham Democracy
(no login)
60.49.210.137

A Report on Malaysian Elections

No score for this post
October 18 2006, 4:33 AM 

Sham Democracy - A Report on Malaysian Elections Website - http://www.malaysia-today.net/Sham_Democracy.pdf

 
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.Respond to this message   
 
< Previous Page 1 2 Next >
  << Previous Topic | Next Topic >>Return to Forum  
Create your own forum at Network54
 Copyright © 1999-2014 Network54. All rights reserved.   Terms of Use   Privacy Statement