Pakatan Rakyat Buzz & Blog

Trash Talking To Tomorrow

In our Selected Exhortations category, we republish interesting stuff such as must-read articles and essays not originally written exclusively for the blawg, and which have come to our attention. Please feel free to email loyarburokker@loyarburok.com if you would like to reproduce your writing, but first follow our Writer's Guide here.

This post is by Marina Mahathir, and was published on her personal blog. It is reproduced with her kind permission, following some possible inception-mind-control thingamabob by Lord Bobo.

I know it's been a while since I posted anything here but really, work aside, I've really not felt like writing much here. Things seem to be totally going crazy in this country of ours that it just beggars belief. And even when you want to comment on some issue, something else even more stupid comes up.

Penang PERKASA Youth chief Mohd Risuan Asudin showing aggression at the anti-Lynas rally in Penang on Sunday. Risuan once presented a bulldozer to Penang chief minister Lim Guan Eng in Komtar. "During the fracas where a journalist was attacked, some Malay youths (male and females) came to us reporters to point out the attackers and told us what they witnessed," a journalist at the event said. Photo: Yeap Ban Choon

What happened to our gentle people that we now behave like thugs with people we don't agree with?

What happened to our reasonable people that we ban things on the flimsiest of pretexts?

Why do we think that doing any of these will make people love us and therefore vote for us?

Where do we think we're going with all this?

I am embarassed beyond belief about the Erykah Badu debacle. Imagine being banned when you're already in the country, and accused of wanting to insult the faith of people in your host country. Based on a bit of body art. How flimsy is our faith when it can be shaken by the sight of a piece of graphic art!

And yet she then goes over to the largest Muslim country in the world, where her poster (with the body art) is displayed everywhere with no incident and where she performs in front of the President of the country. Of course, not wanting to ever lose in this so-called war to uphold our religion ( we need a war to do that?), we make snide remarks about an entire country of over 200 million people of not really being Muslim. Guess there is no better way to win a battle than by insulting others. (In that case, let's not worry about those not really Muslim domestic workers who aren't going to come work for us any time soon, shall we?)

The non-tattoos that Badu do.

I'm tired of this nonsense. Worse, I'm tired of this nonsense having an official face. It's one thing when some group of idiots say nonsensical things but I do expect better from those who claim to rule us. To say that the Star was wrong to have published the picture (even though they did apologise) is one thing, but what has that got to do with banning the concert? People have already bought tickets, some even came from other countries so already paid for air tickets and hotel accomodation and those who bought tickets on February 22 were also donating 20% of the ticket price to Women's Aid Organisation (WAO). All gone because a tiny group of people, who probably had no intention of going to the concert anyway, decided they needed to be offended. It's not as if she was giving a free concert in the middle of Dataran Merdeka and that piece of graphic art was going to be the backdrop of the stage. People choose to buy tickets to go and see her, and the tickets were not cheap. If they felt that their faith might be shaken by seeing her perform, then they can always stay home.

There are far more important things to worry about. But time and time again, our officials have shown that they'd rather deal with the small things in life rather than what really matters. It's far more important to them to ban children's books, than ensure that our kids grow up with the best education possible. Perhaps it's because they don't have any education themselves (and I don't necessarily count having a degree as equivalent to being educated), that they behave this way. (See my last column on this subject here.)

Explain to me though how behaving like a bunch of louts will make you win votes. I may not always agree with those in opposition to the government but it's hard not to sympathise when you get thugs riding motorbikes into halls, trying to drown out ceramah, shouting down people and worse of all, physically shoving and beating up people. It makes me think of Middle Eastern politics, not Malaysian.

I remember too how at the march to protest the Peaceful Assembly Bill, someone actually organised a bunch of fake protestors with a fake banner claiming to support 'free sex'. They were young, given t-shirts and a banner and told what to do. What are we teaching our kids? To lie and deceive? That's the proper Malay and Islamic way to bring up children?

And all those posters (in colour too! Who paid for them?) of Ambiga and Pak Samad Said saying that a vote for them is a vote for free sex! Seriously?? Pak Samad? The National Laureate? Who led a march against PPSMI?? And Ambiga, who's a middle-aged Mum just like me! I guess only dumb people expect us to believe this.

And that's the trouble..when stupid people rule, they think their electorate must be even dumber than them. And why not? Everything is about dumbing down our minds, whether it's through the media or through our education system. I can't tell you how many requests I get from students for interviews to do research on totally laughable subjects. I don't blame them because if their supervisors let their research proposals through, it's the supervisors who are responsible. (I kid you not, their 'research' often consisted of newspaper articles.) One student recently sent me a 'questionaire' consisting of three multiple choice questions. And then we wonder why we have people saying this.

The thing is if we are smart, then we're often saying very different things from what those who rule us would like to hear. So since they can't fight with intelligence, they resort to the same old trick – discredit and demonise. Which to me is about as effective as pouring a kettle of boiling water on a mountain of snow.

I know the elections are coming soon. And as always, the tenor of talk gets lowered as everyone supposedly vies for the vote. But this time it's gotten even worse. So trashy is the talk these days that you have to wonder if some people are desperate or what.

So I'm just saying to those who aspire to get our votes, here is what you should do:

Be nice, be gracious, be polite — rudeness makes you look ugly.
If you disagree with someone, fine. But disagree courteously and intelligently, don't just badmouth them.
If you don't think someone's right, give your reasons why.
At least pretend your audience is smart and live up to them.
If you really think violence is the answer, we'll find you a ticket to Syria where you can indulge all you want.
If you really think you're a defender of Islam, we'll get you a ticket to trail the Republicans on their election campaign. We'll even get you a spot on Rush Limbaugh's show where you can do your defending thing.
Do stop suddenly kissing babies and hugging old people. Seriously, we don't buy it.
Leave your expensive watch at home if you're going to sympathise with how people are coping with their monthly expenses. Unless you're going to donate the cost of the watch to some worthwhile cause.
Lower your volume. Shouting something stupid doesn't make it smarter.
Tell us what your principles in life are and how you aim to stick to them.

As for the rest of us, perhaps we should be more discerning as to who we choose to rule us. I think we should look at individuals and judge them on their principles, on their qualifications and on how they behave. Not just because they're the NotBN or the NotPakatan candidates. There are good people on all sides so we should do all we can to get good people in. And perhaps we should be writing our individual demands and giving it to the candidates when they go round canvassing for our support. Just on a piece of paper saying "I will vote for you if…"

Mine would say:

…if you're female (yes, we need more women in Parliament!)
…if you vow to fight corruption
…if you promise not to impose your personal beliefs on me in any form
…if you support a free press, freedom of speech and freedom of expression
…if you believe in equal rights for everyone
…if you promise to protect the weakest and most marginalised in our society

And if you trashtalk til the cows come home, then expect the chickens to come to roost.

Celebrating Darwin Day 2012 in Singapore

A Darwin fish cookie

Every year, on the 12th of February, people all over the world are invited to celebrate Darwin Day and his renowned theory of evolution. Darwin's theory earned him a place in history as one of the greatest scientists in history and also the scorn of religious people.

I went down to Singapore with a small group of Malaysians to join the celebration organised by the Humanist Society of Singapore (HSS).

We arrived in Singapore late Saturday afternoon, just in time to freshen up to join a group of hospitable humanists for dinner. At a Japanese restaurant close to Clarke Quay, we talked about cameras, Facebook, Whitney Houston, and rock climbing. Surprisingly, no one talked about Darwin!

Charles Robert Darwin was born in Shrewsbury, England on 12 February, 1809. He graduated from Cambridge with a Bachelor of Arts before embarking on a 5 year voyage aboard HMS Beagle serving as a naturalist. After studying the animal specimens he brought back from his sea voyage around the world, he came up with the theory of evolution by natural selection. He expounded this theory in his book, On The Origin of Species, was sold out when it was first published in 1859. His theory made him a superstar of science and Darwin Day has been celebrated all over the world since Darwin's death in 1882.

On Sunday morning, the small group of Malaysians visited the Art Science Museum and strolled through an exhibition of The Titanic and Cartier watches. Then we made our way to Toa Payoh where the Darwin Day celebration was held. Like typical Malaysians, we were late. But the kind Singaporeans patiently waited for us before starting.

As we rushed into Harmony Room at One People Singapore, the first thing that caught my eye was cookies laid out on a table. Each cookie was decorated with either a "Darwin fish" (a fish with legs) or a finch (a bird studied by Darwin).

Dr. John Van Wyhe (left) and Dr. John Elliot (middle)

Two speakers presented two interesting topics for the audience. Through the magic of the Internet, Terence Tan hooked up video conferencing via Skype for a group of Malaysians who had organised Hari Darwin in Bangsar so they could see the celebration in Singapore.

Dr John Elliot, an Associate Professor from National University of Singapore, presented a talk titled Can Morality Evolve? He described how humans attain consciousness via a gradual process starting about 5 million years ago. Humans naturally do good things and not evil because it is beneficial to their own survival. Good deeds are usually reciprocated. This can also be found in the animal kingdom where vampire bats will share their meal with those unlucky to find a meal knowing, in future, they would receive a favour in return.

After the first talk, we were given a short break. Everyone quickly made a beeline for the Darwin Day cookies! It was gone in a matter of minutes and I did not get a chance to take one.

A simultaneous cyber link with Malaysian celebrating Darwin Day in KL.

While at the break, I met with Liyan Chen, one of the organisers, and asked her why she helped organise Darwin Day. She told me, "It is to remember the man who contributed so much to our understanding of ourselves as human beings." I agree; it is mind blowing to realise we evolved over millions of years.

I asked Mark Kwan, a member of the HSS, if there were any resistance to Darwin Day and he told me, "Many religious organisations oppose the idea of evolution, preferring to believe man was created by God. For me, I prefer to see the evidence before I call it fact; and evolution is fact."

After the break, Dr John Van Wyhe, a senior lecturer of Biological Sciences & History in National University of Singapore, debunked some commons myths surrounding Darwin. Many people think Darwin was so afraid for his theory that he kept it secret for 21 years; this is not true. Another myth says Darwin recanted his view that man evolved from apes and accepted the story of God creating human beings. Again, this is not true.

Then, I was invited to say a few words and I took the opportunity to thank the HSS for being a gracious host. To give them an idea of what is happening in Malaysia, I invited Colin Shafer, a lecturer at Taylor's College, to give his views on scepticism in Malaysia. He said many Malaysians would readily believe something without first checking out the facts and without thinking it through. Nevertheless, groups like Unscientific Malaysia are promoting science and scepticism.

All too soon the event came to an end and we parted ways promising to connect again on Facebook until the next Darwin Day.

Revoking aid to disabled is ‘illegal’

Joseph Tawie | March 6, 2012
Free Malaysia Today

An assistant minister's order to revoke aid to a disabled man in Sarawak because he supports the opposition contravenes the federal constitution.

KUCHING: A minister in Chief Minister Taib Mahmud's cabinet may have landed himself in hot soup after it was revealed that he had instructed two departments to revoke government extended subsidiaries and welfare aid to a disabled man who had supported an opposition candidate.

Sarawak DAP, which lodged a police report against Assistant Minister of Agriculture (Research and Marketing) Mong Dagang last Friday, said the minister has contravened the law.

Mong had allegedly directed, through a letter, the Assistant Director of Agriculture in Sri Aman to cease all forms of subsidies to Frusis Lebi.

Party secretary Chong Chieng Jen said DAP want the police to investigate Mong for his 'heinous crime'.

"This is a heinous crime, and what Mong has done is a contravention of the federal constitution which clearly provides that all citizens have basic right of association.

"This is a clear case of discrimination based on a person's political affiliation. Discrimination is a contravention of the law.

"We want the police to take an immediate action," said Chong.

Mong had allegedly issued the instruction to stop immediately all forms of agricultural subsidies to Lebi as he had openly supported an opposition candidate in the last state election.

Mong had said that Lebi had also allegedly flown the opposition flag and allowed his house to be as an operation room in the 2011 state election.

Following Mong's letter, all forms of subsidies including Lebi's welfare allowance were stopped from October last year.

Silent Mong

Chong, who is also Kota Sentosa assemblyman, said DAP will lodge a complaint with the Human Rights Malaysia (Suhakam) over the matter.

"This is something inhumane done by a BN Assistant Minister. What more to say on top of the letter there is a 1Malaysia logo.

"So much for being a a caring government," he said.

Chong added that the party would also, if needed, make a formal report with the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission.

Reacting to Mong's silence over media reports of his action, Chong said: "We are totally disgusted by the lack of response from Mong.

"He has made no comment over the issue. He tried to hide over this matter. This is something inhumane," he said adding that he will raise the matter in parliament next week.

Chong said, Najib Tun Razak as the Prime Minister who is flogging the 1Malaysia spirit must answer for this uncaring act by Mong.

Najib must answer

Chong has also demanded that Mong, who is the youth chief in BN-Parti Rakyat Sarawak, explain his actions.

"I call on Mong to give a satisfactory explanation failing which he should resign, because a person of that nature is unfit in my opinion to hold office of assistant minister.

"Even to hold office as an elected representative, he is not only unfit as he discriminated against one of his constituents, but also has no compassion for a person who needs help from the government.

"He has total lack of understanding on the principle of democracy because by supporting the opposition, Frusis (Lebi) is not against government policy. He is only against BN.

"It appears that the BN policy is 'BN first and people second' and this is against 1Malaysia: People first performance now," Chong said

This entry was posted on Tuesday, 6 March 2012, 4:36 pm and is filed under DAP, Human Rights, Najib Razak, Sarawak. You can follow any responses to this entry through RSS 2.0.

Read More @ Source

More » Bonology.com | Barisan Nasional (BN) | Sociopolitics Plus | 大马社会政治

How Effective Has the Enforcement of the Whistleblower Protection Act 2010(WPA) Been in Malaysia?

by Lim Guan Eng

Political Will, National Commitment And Even Personal Obligation Rather Than A Single Law Such As The WPA Will Determine Whether Integrity In Leadership Centred On An Ethically Based Society Can Be Established

It gives me pleasure to speak to you today at this 4th Annual Corporate Governance Summit organised here in Kuala Lumpur. I have been asked to speak on the issue of the Whistleblowers Protection Act 2010 (or "WPA") which was passed by the federal Parliament and has been in force in Malaysia since December 2010.

Many of us here who are interested in corporate governance will have been captivated by the ongoing saga of alleged corruption and mismanagement in the RM250million National Feedlot Centre project. This is a corporate governance issue as well as a national governance issue. The question is will there be any action taken or will be it just be another case of of the RM2.52 billion losses incurred by MAS without anyone being punished and even those that caused losses such as Tan Sri Tajuddin Ramli being let off the hook.

Danaharta had agreed to settle with Tan Sri Tajudin on February 14 without enforcing a High Court decision on December 2009 in Danaharta's favour ordering Tan Sri Tajudin to pay RM589.14 million to Danaharta, over a loan taken to purchase MAS. Where is the moral hazard?

I think I can summarise my view of the WPA by saying that is not so much a Whistleblowers Protection Act but rather a "Whispering to the Police Act". When one blows a whistle, everyone can hear. This Act is different. It only protects those who report to the police or other government enforcement agencies under conditions of secrecy. Under the WPA, a whistleblower is supposed to make a report to an enforcement agency such as the police. If the police don't take any action, that is tough. If the police decide that action should be taken, but the Attorney-General decides not to prosecute, that again is tough. All you have as a whistleblower is the right to be notified of the authorities' decision, and the right not to have any detrimental action taken against you.

Under the New South Wales Public Interest Disclosure Act, if no action is taken by the enforcement agencies, a whistleblower will be protected if he brings the matter to the attention of a Member of Parliament or the media. In the UK, once he has reported the wrongdoing, or if he reasonably fears retribution from his employer, there is no restriction at all on whom a whistleblower can notify as long as the disclosure in good faith and judged by an employment tribunal to have been reasonable in the circumstances.

However, in Malaysia, it is an offence punishable by a fine of up to RM50,000 and imprisonment of up to 10 years if a whistleblower or the person receiving or investigating the report discloses any information about the person accused of wrongdoing, or any other information disclosed by the whistleblower, to a third party.

Under the WPA, a whistleblower does not enjoy any protection if he decides to communicate his allegation of wrongdoing to a person other than a government enforcement agency. And under the Act, even if the report is made to a government enforcement agency, the protection can be revoked if the enforcement agency is of the opinion that the report "principally involves questioning the merits of government policy, including policy of a public body", or if the whistleblower commits an offence under the Act, such as disclosing the contents of his report to a third party.

I think we can all see that the WPA would have had absolutely no effect in the present cows and condos scandal, as it would not have protected any whistleblower who believed that the Malaysian public deserved to know about how a RM250 million soft loan given for the rearing of cattle was used to buy luxury condominiums in Bangsar and in Singapore. Without any media and public pressure, it is clear that no action would ever be taken and the allegations of wrongdoing in the NFC issue would simply have hushed up by the authorities.

But yet another issue that faces any whistleblower in this country is the fact that any information gained from government sources is routinely deemed to be an official secret, the disclosure of which is punishable under the Official Secrets Act 1972 by imprisonment of a minimum of one year and a maximum of seven years. This is not by any means a hypothetical risk. In 1979, my own father was convicted under the Official Secrets Act when he revealed the purchase price paid by the Government in a Swiss arms deal, though the minimum punishment of one year's imprisonment was not yet then in place.

Such information should be made public. Whilst any person who has been unjustly defamed or maligned by malicious and false police reports should have the right to sue, the authorities should make available to the truthful whistleblower or the "lying" whistleblower as well as to the public all information obtained from such investigations. Even I was sued by the late Tan Sri Eric Chia when I exposed the RM 5 billion Perwaja scandal but I did not obtain the requisite information from the authorities.

The test should always be whether there is real public loss of funds. If there is then the protective safeguards should be in force. If none, then the whistleblower is merely whistling in the wind. More importantly, the MACC or any body authorised to conduct such investigations must be independent, possess powers to prosecute and free from any political oversight and accountable only to Parliament.

It is obvious to me, and I hope also to you, that the WPA will always be ineffective in fighting corruption and corporate wrongdoing involving the Government as long as the Official Secrets Act is not abolished and the culture of secrecy in Government is not replaced by a culture of transparency. Since 2008, both Selangor and Penang have enacted Freedom of Information Enactments that gives the rakyat the right to demand information from the Government instead of giving the Government the right to hide information from the rakyat.

In Penang, we have replaced direct negotiations with open tenders for all major government contracts, and introduced public asset declarations for all elected State Executive Councillors. The Penang state government does not expect any praise for our political commitment and personal obligation to promote integrity in leadership and transparency. However neither did we expect to be pilloried for politicising the public declaration of assets and even allowing Ministers to be endangered if they are compelled to follow suit.

Is our crime or public safety or the performance of Malaysian police so appalling that even Ministers are not safe if they publicly declare public assets? Or should I be walking around under police protection since I am endangered as I have declared my assets. This endangered argument is nothing more than a silly pretext by Ministers who want to hide their assets from public view. Those who hide their assets behind this "endangered" argument only arouse public suspicion that they have unexplained or unaccounted assets.

But to return to the Act that is the subject of this Session, I am afraid to have to conclude that the WPA unfortunately appears to be the product of the old mindset in this country that values secrecy above everything else. I believe that it is now high time for a culture of openness and transparency to become the norm in Malaysia, both in the corporate world and in the world of Government.

The lack of protective safeguards and proactive investigation in the WPA makes no difference for genuine whistleblowers. As long as there is no leadership by example and no moral outrage against those who refuse to comply with international norms of proper behaviour and trustworthy conduct of public assets, laws such as the WPA will only be an empty symbol of our fight against corruption.

Despite laws such as the WPA, Malaysia has suffered a precipitous decline in the rankings of Transparency International's Corruption Perception Index from 56 in 2010 to 60 last year. For this reason it is political will, national commitment and even personal obligation rather than a single law such as the WPA will determine whether integrity in leadership centred on an ethically based society can be established. Thank you.

(Speech by Chief Minister of Penang at the 4th Annual Corporate Governance Summit Kuala Lumpur on 6 March 2012)

This entry was posted on Tuesday, 6 March 2012, 4:46 pm and is filed under Corruption, Good Governance, Lim Guan Eng. You can follow any responses to this entry through RSS 2.0.

Read More @ Source

More » Bonology.com | Barisan Nasional (BN) | Sociopolitics Plus | 大马社会政治

Muscle control

She can do it so can we.
There is no such thing as cannot.
UMNO must go at all cost.

Read More @ Source

More » Bonology.com | Barisan Nasional (BN) | Sociopolitics Plus | 大马社会政治

Electoral reform: Towards fairness and a level playing field

— Francis Loh
The Malaysian Insider
Mar 06, 2012

MARCH 6 — From the outset, we wish to clarify that Aliran is a member of the Bersih 2.0 coalition and one of our exco member sits in its Steering Committee.

In this regard we fully endorse the Eight Demands of the coalition to usher in free, fair and clean elections in Malaysia. We support Bersih 2.0's call that these demands should be addressed before the next elections are held. We have also gone through Bersih 2.0's submission to the Select Committee and fully support its recommendations.

For Aliran, elections in Malaysia have been generally free although there have occurred instances when voters have complained that they were denied their right to vote on polling day because their names had been removed from the rolls, or that they had been transferred to other polling stations or districts without their awareness. In the last election there were also allegations that some had not had the opportunity to vote because the stations had not remained open long enough for people to cast their votes. However, there have rarely occurred instances when ballots boxes have gone missing or that large numbers of people have been prevented from voting.

That said, there remains a major problem with Malaysian elections: they have not been conducted fairly or cleanly. Malaysians are well aware of the non-level playing field that characterises our electoral process. As elections approach, we see clearly the Barisan Nasional's (BN) near monopoly and manipulation of the mainstream media, its access to and abuse of federal government facilities and funds, and its possession of huge electoral war chests, which allow the BN component parties to outspend its challengers.

In this submission, we would like to highlight some of these instances of unfairness as they relate to the so-called 3 M's (media, money and machinery). We shall offer some recommendations on how these can be overcome.

A related problem of unfairness is how these votes are translated into seats. We shall not elaborate on this aspect of unfairness except to emphasise that we agree with the points raised in Bersih 2.0's memorandum submitted to the Parliamentary Select Committee. Clearly, if the principle of one-person one-vote is to be maintained, the electoral constituencies must be apportioned among the 13 states according to the population size of the various states.

Subsequently, the total number of seats within each state should be delineated such that the disparity among constituencies be not more than 15 per cent from the average constituency size as recommended by the Reid Commission and which was apparently followed by the first head of the Election Commission in 1959, prior to the introduction of the constitutional amendment of 1962, which also introduced Schedule 13 that, among others, restored the 2:1 weighting given to rural constituencies, before its removal altogether in the 1973 constitutional amendment. We believe that this point has been well made by Bersih 2.0 and by others. It remains for Parliament to have the political will to put this matter right and to ensure fairness in the translation of votes into seats. — aliran.com

* Dr Francis Loh is president of Aliran

This entry was posted on Tuesday, 6 March 2012, 7:10 pm and is filed under Bersih, Elections. You can follow any responses to this entry through RSS 2.0.

Read More @ Source

More » Bonology.com | Barisan Nasional (BN) | Sociopolitics Plus | 大马社会政治

LoyarBermakan: Fierce Curry House

Lord Bobo endorses this restaurant

It appears to be just another ordinary Indian restaurant, which may or may not attract your interest as you pass it by. However, with such a name, a twitch of curiosity in the corner of your mind will perhaps induce you to wonder: why 'fierce' curry?

According to Herukh T.Jethwani, the owner of Fierce Curry House, it was his father who named this shop when they took over the business in 1983. "Why 'Fierce Curry House'?" he repeats my question, "Because we want you to talk about it!"

The restaurant is conveniently located just a 5-minute walk down the road from the Bangsar LRT station. Their signature dish is the Hyderabad Biryani Dhum which originated from Bangles – a famous Indian restaurant owned by Herukh's family with at least 6 branches located throughout Kuala Lumpur. Apparently Herukh spent three months in Hyderabad watching his aunt prepare the famous 'Nasi Biryani' in order to perfect the recipe before bringing it home to KL.

The biryani was served that way at Bangles until Herukh started Fierce Curry House where the recipe was tweaked to improve the taste. Basically, improvisations were made – spices were added and better quality of rice, used. "In the restaurant, only 2 people know about the recipe." says Herukh before adding, "The biryani comprises 27 ingredients and is marinated and cooked through the night, which is why when we run out, we run out. There's no way that we can make more."

The biryani rice is served in a metal pot sealed with a kind of dough that some call the 'briyani gum'. Can eat one or not? "Well, if you really want to, you can." Herukh says.

Though the dough wasn't exactly the gastronomical delight we came searching for, it certainly contributed to the making of one. Made out of chapati flour, it acts as a sealant and an indicator for the cook. "We use it to seal the pot in order to avoid the steam and moisture from going in the biryani. When the dough becomes tough and cooked, that's when we know that the biryani is ready."

Herukh is also planning for his trademark 'fierceness' to be felt more strongly in Kuala Lumpur soon. The 'Biryani On Wheels' van will be parked at several corporate locations in the city. So if you happen to pass by one of these on a Friday, simply honk 4 times to stop the van and you can have a fulfilling 'shot' of biryani in minutes!

The biryani goes for RM15 per serving and comes in varieties of chicken, vegetarian, fish and mutton. A tad steep perhaps? If the crowd is anything to go by, Fierce Curry House's slightly-above-average-price isn't deterring Malaysians from calling in their orders to satisfy their biryani cravings. This is why, to cater to the demand, they are open to receiving orders through phone, email, Twitter, Facebook and even BBM.

: Fierce or what?

: Customer: "Lagi! Lagi! Tambah lagi!"

: Vegetarian banana leaf rice

: All that was left before the cameraman could get a snap of the fried bittergourd

: Fried ayam berempah

: Lord Bobo endorses this restaurant

: Cue the drool

Closed on Mondays, from 7am to 7pm
Fierce Curry House
16 Jalan Kemuja
Bangsar Utama
59000 Kuala Lumpur
Malaysia

Map
Facebook
Tel: +6 019 383 0945

P.S Dear patrons of Fierce Curry House, your photo will be taken and uploaded on their Fierce Facebook album and make no mistake, they WILL tag you. Make sure you dress up nicely and eat elegantly!

PAS and Islam after regime change

As Malaysia prepares for its 13^th general elections, due no later than April 2013, the long-standing competitive authoritarian regime will face one of its most difficult tests. The 2008 elections dealt a surprise blow to the incumbent Barisan Nasional (BN), and ever since, Prime Minister Najib's government has struggled to protect its now-fragile majority. After four years of renewed opposition activism, rumours of defection from UMNO (the United Malays National Organisation), and the recent acquittal of opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim, Malaysians will have the chance to vote the BN out of office once and for all.

In a post-BN Malaysia, observers will closely monitor the role of Islam in public life. Much of what happens will depend on the shape of the government that follows. In terms of the composition of a post-BN government, two outcomes seem most likely: (1) a multi-ethnic Pakatan Rakyat-based (PR) coalition in which PAS (Parti Islam SeMalaysia/Pan Malaysian Islamic Party), PKR (Parti Keadilan Rakyat/People's Justice Party), and the DAP (Democratic Action Party) all participate, perhaps along with one or more East Malaysian parties; or (2) an UMNO-PAS "Muslim-Malay" coalition, again perhaps involving the cooperation of one or more East Malaysian parties. Either way, PAS—an explicitly Islamic party—will be part of the government.

That PAS would advocate for a greater role for Islam in Malaysian public life is undeniable. PAS describes its goals as follows:

Memperjuangkan wujudnya di dalam negara ini sebuah masyarakat dan pemerintahan yang terlaksana di dalamnya nilai-nilai hidup Islam dan hukum-hukumnya menuju keredhaan Allah. [Fighting to create a society and government that is run according to Islamic principles and the laws which please Allah]
Mempertahankan Kesucian Islam serta kemerdekaan dan kedaulatan negara. [Defending the sanctity of Islam alongside independence and national sovereignty.]

The prospect of PAS in government alone is worrying for those many Malaysians (both Muslims and non-Muslims) who express concern about the Islamisation of Malaysian politics and society. Moreover, a PR-based government would struggle to balance PAS's goals with the DAP's largely non-Muslim constituency. That would make an UMNO-PAS alliance all the more attractive to PAS, while UMNO, whose membership is not restricted to Muslims but is overwhelming Muslim anyway, would likely not hesitate to return to power with a new coalition partner.

Questions about PAS after the BN may reflect the concerns that many non-Muslims in Malaysia have about the role of religion in public life, and Malaysia's Hindu minority in particular has cause for grievance on this account. But this obscures the corrosive effects that six decades of ethnic partisanship have had on the prospects for Malaysian democracy. It is a mistake, in other words, to focus narrowly on PAS, or broadly on Islam itself, when anticipating Islam in a post-BN Malaysian political order. Doing so confuses the potential consequences of PAS in government with the factors that have contributed both to PAS's popularity and to the current state of Islam in Malaysian public life.

PAS itself has not played a major role in the Islamisation of Malaysian politics or Malaysian society. Rather, it was Malay politicians in the pre-independence period (the very same group that went on to found UMNO) who enshrined Islam in the constitution and legally defined Malay-ness with reference to Islam. This was done not in the name of Islam, but to protect what were perceived to be "Malay interests" (see for example A History of Malaysia, pp. 256-257). After independence, with communism illegal, social democracy discredited (through its historical affiliation with a largely Chinese opposition party), liberalism cast as antithetical to Malaysian values, multiculturalism or pan-ethnic solidarity discouraged through the party system, and the bumi/non-bumi split underlying every aspect of social and economic policy, the only 'Malay' alternative to UMNO's Malay platform was PAS's Islamist platform.

Today, in a society in which economic function and demographic characteristics such as urbanisation no longer distinguish Malays from non-Malays as easily as they once did, core issues such as religion have a new importance for voters whose political identities are constructed through an ethnic framework.

The strategic logic of political competition in Malaysia's plural society therefore rewards parties seeking Malay votes when they appeal to the characteristics that define Malays in opposition to non-Malays. It should not surprise anyone that when Malay voters find UMNO politicians wanting, they are likely to vote for the only opposition party whose political outlook has not been labelled as "un-Malaysian" for the past half century.

Facing this, non-exclusivist opposition parties such as the DAP and PKR have struggled to transcend the ethnic paradigm in Malaysian politics. The choice for non-Malay, non-Muslim voters has been whether to cast their lot with their own regime-allied (and ethnically-constituted) parties, the "un-Malaysian" multiethnic opposition, or the Islamist PAS.

The fundamental challenge for public life in a post-BN Malaysia is not Islam, it is ethnicity's dominant role in defining Malaysians' political identity, and this challenge is just as pressing today as it would be if a new government with PAS comes to power following the upcoming elections. Of course, PAS's explicitly religious goals are important to note, but there are few things that it could do in government that are not already within UMNO's capacity today.

UMNO has presided over—and its campaign messages and public policies have encouraged—the rise of Islam in public life. It is tempting today to see what Judith Nagata called the "reflowering of Malaysian Islam" as merely a local instance of a global Muslim awakening, but this misses the very politics of Islamic politics in Malaysia.

In the Malaysian context, the rise of religion is the unavoidable consequence of the politicisation of ethnicity. A PAS-led government might go further than the BN has in prosecuting perceived insults to Islam, or in expanding the domain of Islamic family law, but such worries already mark Malaysian public life. The religious issues facing Malaysia are far deeper than the ruling party's religious outlook, and having PAS in government is best understood as the outcome of decades of social change and religious conflict rather than a possible independent cause of future religious tensions.

It is reasonable to wonder what Malaysian politics would look like with an avowedly Islamist party like PAS in government, but as always, the meaning of Islam in Malaysian public life cannot be separated from the dominance of ethnicity in Malaysian politics.

The "solution" to the "problem" of Islam in Malaysian politics—if one believes that Islam is indeed a problem—is the same as the solution to many of the other issues that face contemporary Malaysian society: a post-ethnic movement (not merely a multi-ethnic one) in which Malaysians identify, assemble, and act as Malaysians rather than as representatives of ethnic groups in a zero-sum competition for power and resources.

This is what many hope that a PR government would mean, and in rhetorical terms, that is what Najib's 1Malaysia campaign promises. A recent article in the Economist suggests that many young Malaysians would welcome such a post-ethnic politics. But they will have to wait, for Malaysian politics as BN-versus-PR restates the ethnic politics framework without moving past it.

Thomas Pepinsky is assistant professor of government at Cornell University, Ithaca, NY,USA. His work focuses on comparative politics and international political economy, with a special focus on contemporary issues in island Southeast Asia. His interests include the politics of finance, authoritarianism, Islam, and finding a way to move Ithaca to the tropics.

Mahathir’s Disastrous Financial Speculation

Asia Sentinel Correspondent

A murky and embarrassing case is closed, hiding top government officials' involvement

Sometime over the next few days, a court in Kuala Lumpur will put the finishing touches to an agreement that allows Tajudin Ramli, the former head of Malaysian Airline System, not only to walk away from charges that he had allegedly looted the airline of tens of millions of US dollars but with an RM580 million (US$ 293.2 million) out-of-court settlement from the government.

It appears to be a settlement that the government would rather keep to itself. At the heart of the agreement with Tajudin is a convoluted story that began as long ago as the 1980s when Malaysia's central bank, Bank Negara Malaysia, at the urging of then-Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad, began speculating aggressively in global foreign exchange markets, at one time running up exposure rumored to be in the region of RM270 billion — three times the country's gross domestic product and more than five times its foreign reserves at the time.

Eventually, playing with the big boys came home to roost. In 1992 and 1993, Mahathir became convinced he could make billions of ringgit by taking advantage of a British recession, rising unemployment and a decision by the British government to float the pound sterling free of the European Exchange Rate Mechanism.

Mahathir ordered Bank Negara to buy vast amounts of pounds sterling on the theory that the British currency would appreciate once it floated. However, in what has been described as the greatest currency trade ever made, the financier and currency wizard George Soros's Quantum hedge fund established short positions borrowing in pounds and investing in Deutschemark-denominated assets as well as using options and futures positions.

In all, Soros's positions alone accounted for a gargantuan US$ 10 billion. Many other investors, sensing Quantum was in for the kill, soon followed, putting strenuous downward pressure on the pound. The collapse was inevitable. Quantum walked away with US$ 1 billion in a single day, earning Mahathir's eternal enmity and earning Soros the title "the man who broke the Bank of England."

Mahathir and Bank Negara, on the other hand, walked away with a US$ 4 billion loss, followed by another US$ 2.2 billion loss in 1993, the total equivalent of RM15.5 billion. Although the disastrous trades destroyed the entire capital base of Bank Negara, after first denying it had taken place, the then-Finance Minister Anwar Ibrahim repeatedly reassured parliament that the losses were only "paper losses" and, now that he is Opposition Leader and head of the Pakatan Rakyat opposition coalition, has managed to skate free of the controversy.

Eventually, the Finance Ministry had to recapitalize the central bank, almost unheard of for any government anywhere. It is reliably estimated that Bank Negara lost as much as US$ 30 billion in this and other disastrous currency trades, costing the head of the central bank and his currency trader deputy their jobs.

It was at one with Mahathir's unfortunate penchant for believing he could beat the global financial system in other ways. In the early 1980s, at his behest the Malaysian government attempted to corner the tin market through Maminco Sdn Bhd, a dummy company set up to buy tin futures and physical tin to push up prices on the London Tin Market. Malaysia at that point was producing 31 percent of the world's tin.

However, the rising prices as a result of Malaysia's action caused miners to increase production in the other 69 percent of the tin world. At the same time the US government released its tin stockpile. The price collapsed, costing Malaysia RM1.6 billon with the subsequent low prices wrecking Malaysia's tin industry. Mahathir has repeatedly railed against western governments for rigging the rules against him.

The attempt to corner the tin market and the subsequent loss established an interesting precedent in terms of what would take place with the speculation in the pound sterling. Rather than acknowledge the losses in the tin speculation, the government set up another dummy company called Makuwasa Sdn Bhd, creating new shares supposedly reserved for ethnic Malays which were allocated to the Employee Provident Fund, the country's retirement fund for private and public workers. The plan was to sell these cheaply acquired shares at market price for a profit to cover Maminco's losses. Finally, in 1986, Mahathir was forced to admit that Makuwasa was created to recoup the government's losses from the Maminco debacle and to repay loans to Bank Bumiputra.

Fast forward to today and the out-of-court settlement between several government-linked companies and Tajudin Ramli, in which the government quietly cancelled Tajudin's debt of RM840 million. It is believed to be the biggest such sum awarded in Malaysian history.

In 1994, according to affidavits that Tajudin filed in court he bought 32 percent of the shares of the government-controlled Malaysian Airline System at a price of RM8.00 at Mahathir's behest – while the shares were trading at RM3.30 – and became executive chairman using funds from government-linked companies. According his allegations, the idea was to use the "profit" off the share sale to cover as much as possible of the forex losses by Bank Negara from Mahathir's currency speculation.

When Tajudin took control of MAS in 1994 through his company, Naluri Bhd, MAS had a cash reserve in excess of RM600 million. Seven years later, in 2001, when the government bought back MAS for RM8 a share, the state-owned airline had accumulated losses in excess of RM8 billion. The government bought back an almost bankrupt airline for the same price that it sold to Tajudin.

In the welter of lawsuits and countersuits that eventually followed, including a RM13.46 billion statement of claim that Tajudini brought against a government-linked company involved in the mess, he alleged in his affidavit that it was Mahathir who had instructed him to acquire the stake to bail out Bank Negara.

Like Mahathir, the then 49-year-old Tajudin was a native of Alor Setar in Kedah state. He was regarded as a shining example of the bumi businessman that Mahathir wanted to foster to run the country and take the commanding heights of the economy back from the ethnic Chinese.

Unfortunately, according to a long list of whistle-blowers within the airline, he was also involved in looting it of tens of millions of dollars and very nearly putting it into bankruptcy before the government buyback. When officials not connected to the United Malays National Organization recommended prosecution, they came under fire that nearly ruined their careers and almost put them in jail.

According to allegations in documents made public in August of 2010, Tajudin colluded with three other MAS officers and directors through two nominee companies, one in Singapore and the other in Hong Kong, to establish a company called Advanced Cargo Logistics GmbH Germany, at Hahn Airport in Frankfurt, Germany, to provide ground-handling services for MAS.

According to a report filed in March 2007 to then-Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi by Ramli Yusuff, the director of Malaysia's Commercial Crime Investigation Department and an official who seems to have been singularly incorruptible, "Tan Sri Tajudin Ramli was in control of MAS from 1994 to 2001. When he left MAS in 2001, MAS had accumulated losses in excess of RM8 billion (US$ 2.54 billion). Many projects were made under very suspicious circumstances."

Ramli Yusuff's report indicated a wide range of abuses that indicated Tajudin's family was deeply involved in setting up shell companies to siphon off money from MAS ancillary operations. But instead of preferring charges against Tajudin, the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) went after the inspecting officer, Ramli Yusuff instead for allegedly not declaring his assets, for misusing a police airplane, and abusing his power as a police officer, all of which were convincingly refuted.

Ramli, however, wasn't the only one to go before the courts. His lawyer, Rosli Dahlan, who was also the lawyer for the airline itself, prepared Ramli's defense against the criminal charges only to be arrested on charges of collaborating with Ramli. At one point, on a pretext that Rosli had mishandled a letter from the MACC, police officers invaded Rosli's office, arrested and handcuffed him, then kept him in a cell overnight, refusing him medical treatment for injuries to his wrists from the handcuffs. They also refused his request to file a report against the arresting officers.

Rosli went to a court especially created to handle MACC cases, only to have the case fizzle out when a prosecutor announced that neither Rosli nor Ramli had been charged for corruption, having been summarily acquitted without having to put on a defense.

For his part, Rosli has charged that the MACC, Bank Negara, the government of Malaysia and the three major newspapers owned by the political parties had conspired with those in power to damage him for his attempts to defend Ramli.

And for his part, Tan Sri Tajudin Ramli remains uninvestigated and uncharged, and a continuing example of bumiputera power at the top of Malaysia's political and social structure, apparently RM580 million richer.

It also brings into question Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak's March 30, 2010, statement that the government "can no longer tolerate practices that support the behavior of rent-seeking and patronage, which have long tarnished the altruistic aims of the New Economic Policy. Inclusiveness, where all Malaysians contribute and benefit from economic growth – must be a fundamental element of any new economic approach."

Like this:

Be the first to like this post.

Read More @ Source

More » Bonology.com | Barisan Nasional (BN) | Sociopolitics Plus | 大马社会政治

DAIM THE DEMON

J. Ong

Friends and Countrymen,

Very recently, in fact over the last few days, Malaysians have been entertained to a spat of "out of the blues" smart talks by our former robber Finance Minister Tun Daim Zainuddin.

I have been silent (not writing or commenting in Malaysia Today) for some months, but after reading the stuff coming from the sly old fox, it has prompted me to break my silence even though I have left my beloved homeland Malaysia to work overseas nearly 10 years ago. I am still a Malaysian but will not be able to play my part as citizen this coming GE13 because the Elections Commission does not give us the chance to perform this duty as citizens of Malaysia.

When Daim is diam, nothing bad will happen to Malaysia, but when he makes one single noise, you can bet your last sen that he is up to something which will further enrich himself at your expense. In order to probe into this, I made some long distance calls and sent some e-mails to my old grapevines back home in Malaysia. I have received some very interesting credible feedback which I want to share with you (and Najib, if he cares to listen).

One feedback said Daim is definitely going in for another "kill". Those of you who are old enough will remember that whenever Daim moved, whether it was the stock market or some project investment, he would, without fail, emerge with a huge spoil (profit), and then wipe his hands, and the general public would praise him for being a smart investor with vision. Daim would then go into hibernation like a snake, and re-appear at the next opportunity (most times created by him).

Now we see some articles posted on Malaysia Today plus the "rare" (mind you) interviews he gave to China Press, Utusan Malaysia, Malay daily Mingguan Malaysia, and to top them all, in The Star online news, "Najib given an A+ for performance since last polls - Najib has performed well since the last general election", said UMNO veteran Tun Zaim Zainuddin, and then he went on ostentatiously to advise Najib on how to win the next GE, with emphasis on Selangor, the main ta! rget of UMNO where Najib is the the party chief.

Daim is surely trying to attract Najib's attention. Look, in his interview with Utusan. Daim said BN needs new blood to win the next GE since BN now had a "better advantage" to win compared to 2008. He then went on to boast that he was the only UMNO leader who openly predicted BN's loss of several key states in the last election. He is making these "sound waves" to get Najib to consult him and get his advice, in return Daim will surely ask for something he wants and has now come out in the open to sing for it. This wily fox (musang) will probably get his way with Najib who is like a drowning man and will cling on to any straw. Najib is no match for this short arse and will accede to Daim's "request". All shorties (Napoleon, Hilter, Deng Xiao Peng, and Daim) are smart.

Now, we come to the crux of the matter. What is it that Daim the billionaire wants some more from Malaysia? Hasn't he got enough money already to last for another 25 generations? No, he is never satisfied, not until he has robbed us dry, while his money never has come back to Malaysia for benefit of the rakyat he robbed.

My grapevine said Daim is after the last sector of the double tracking rail project from Gemas to Johor Bahru. My friend said Daim has been eying this project with greed in his eyes, don't you know, he asked me? Daim wanted his horse, CHEC (China Harbour Engineering Corp - the company doing the Penang 2nd Bridge) or the parent company CCCC (China Communications Construction Company) to win this multi-billion ringgit project, no matter what it takes. Lately, another Daim's new horse CRBC (China Road & Bridge Corp) appeared in the race, to prevent detection by us the ordinary Rakyat. Daim may even tell Najib to force whoever the likely winner is to cooperate and work with Daim.

Therefore, this little old man has an agenda when he appeared "! out of t he blues" recently. Don't be fooled by Daim the Demon.

Read More @ Source

More » Bonology.com | Barisan Nasional (BN) | Sociopolitics Plus | 大马社会政治

Not that I do not want to support you, It’s because I can’t support you anymore

ViewAct

There has been much opposing force towards the government since 2008 and it is growing stronger each day. This force is getting beyond BN's control up to a stage where we see so many people bashing the government openly in the world wide web. Responses to current issues like Anti Lynas, Bersih rally, bad cops who rape or wound a suspect to "punish" them for a trivial offence, etc has been so bold and direct.

Short films are made to "address" those issues. Photos (even photoshopped images), recordings, etc are abundant that you simply need to google it and it would be listed in the hundreds and thousands for your viewing "pleasure". Some are purely informative as they capture and reiterate the exact moment of the alleged issue. Some are a derived "simulation" to exaggerate for your amusement. While I must praise their creativity in creating the videos and animations, it might not actually represent the truth of the issues at hand. Nevertheless, it has created a strong visual image and people do remember. I believe that is the REAL purpose of these visual displays – to impact by exaggeration, not so by truthful information.

It sends me wondering what has gotten to our country. We see Chinese fighting Chinese, Malays fighting Malays, Indians fighting Indians, but the worst of all is when they began to fight inter-racially. The strength is "tuned" to the max in their attempt to "hurt" the opposite party most. All the fights among brothers while the other part of the world laughs at our clown-ship. While forums or debates are good for the growth of both parties as well as a good source of information to the common people, resorting to personal attacks and dragging non-related issues or issues that are beyond anyone's control into it is just lame, low political etiquette. To blame someone for an issue that is in the hands of another, trying to mislead the unknowing people on the real cause is simply dirty politics. How! ever suc h dirty tricks will only backfire when the truth is revealed.

BN cannot control this. Because they have been using such methods for years; bashing the oppositions up in the mainstream media. Not only has the opposition picked this up, it seems that even the common rakyat is heading towards this direction. Good examples for education, eh? People are seen competing in generating new "Creativity" productions to be posted on the web; be it face book, twitter or blogs. Whether it is to support, or to oppose, makes good sense or simply "just for laughs", everybody starts to chip in to make their mark. Some even resort to name calling and humiliation. This has become a trend, both socially and politically.

Why has the opposition succeeded in bashing BN? Why hasn't BN been able to achieve the same degree of damage? It's simply because BN has ruled for over 54 years. A 50 over years track record of "trial and errors", "failures", "cover-ups"; not to forget successes and good developments. One might just need to cover the eyes, pick any project and they may find tons of problems worth revealing. What's more, when a mistake is covered by another mistake in an attempt to bury the first. On links to another and eventually the opposition digs up a whole chest of dirt.

BN tries doing the same but they were not able to find much. Trying to induce "it", eventuates in many untoward events. We have then witnessed the death of TBH in a desperate attempt to "investigate" and "prove" a graft case involving a mere RM 2,000. The plot failed and failed miserably. After which they continued to implicate graft cases in all opposition governed states.

Penang has been a victim to countless attacks saying that the state government has turned down such and such proposal and selected contractors of their own choice, so on and so forth. However, with the transparency and truthfulness of the chief minister in office, each an! d every such attempt is proven futile. They then resorted to attacking his family members, and issues that is beyond his control as means to tarnish his credibility. Such attempts will only make the attackers look worse. For you have to have enough "evidence" to be able to make such allegations or it will easily be intercepted and backfire. In contrast, PR has so much evidence (even tangible ones) which BN cannot intercept with equally strong evidence. They would simply claim that the opposition lied, politicized an issue, etc. Yet they couldn't reveal anything to "prove" that the opposition lied.

Such strategy will not work. For PR has so much lesser dirt for BN to dig up. Blame themselves for that. For they were so biased that they imposed so many restrictions and hindrances towards the elected opposition, narrowing down the possibility for such situations to take place. Eventually, BN has to resort to saying "PR's government has so many issues (dug up as well as made up) only within a few years of being in power. What'll it be if they are given 54 years?". Trying to pay "an eye with an eye"; this desperate attempt failed miserably. It makes them look even uglier on every side. And it is a clear indication that they are really worried now that the opposition is gaining to overtake them one day. Else, why would they behave so desperately? Why would they so desperately try to find any trace of graft within the PR government instead of proving to the rakyat that BN is the right choice? Because even they (BN) know that they couldn't be the "right choice" now. There is just too many issues and they cannot cover it up anymore. The only choice is to make the other side look uglier than themselves.

BN has once and again asked for the rakyat to "give them another chance". So that they can "prove" themselves. If the opposition is so "incapable" of governing the federal government, why would! BN even panic, and "beg" the rakyat to not vote for PR? Wouldn't it be easier to let PR be the federal government and watch them fail? Well, just like how PR is keeping an eye on the BN now, BN would be the watchman against PR then, and PROVE to the rakyat WHO IS THE BETTER CHOICE. Why the need to "give them another chance?". Either they realize that PR can do well; or PR will deploy the same political strategy (gerrymandering, press control, suppression of right of speech, etc) that BN has been using to stay in power thus denying their survival. Well, Since PR has been screaming so loudly against all that for so many years, wouldn't it be a big slap on the face if they deploy it? Don't you think that the rakyat would be mature enough to choose again then?

BN is in desperation now, and PR is getting on higher ground each day as BN tries desperately to take them down. The more they try, the worse it becomes.

Let's use a metaphor. There are 2 kids in a family with a rich aging father. Both sons have contributed tremendously to the family's wealth but being the elder brother, the family business and all matters have been placed in his hands. One fine day, the younger son found out that the elder son has secretly taken money from their dad. He falsifies documents, and stole from the aging unaware dad. At first, no one bothers much as there is still so much money in store and both of them continue to top them up. Eventually the elder son has become so greedy that he took too much money out of the store and the family is beginning to face financial difficulties. Yet the elder son demands that he deserves more as he is OLDER. IF you are in such a family, what would you do? Let the elder brother go on with squandering the money until they are all bankrupt? Or to stop him completely? Now, being brothers, would you kick him out or the house? Or simply stop him from taking any more money other than his fair share? Would you want him to repay the money he took? What ! would yo u do if he begs on his life that you don't turn him in? Even if you let him off, would you still let him squander the family's wealth lavishly? And even if he owns up to his faults, would the younger brother and the aging father trust him with the family's money anymore? Or would the father appoint the younger brother to look after the family whist monitoring the elder's subsequent behavior? What would YOU do?

What do you think the elder brother would do? Would he turn himself in, admit his mistakes and start to behave? Would he try to find similar evidences of graft of the younger brother so that they sit in the same boat? Would he drive his brother out by lies and stabbing his back, or would he decide to kill him so that he can continue to feed on the wealth and remain as the acting "head of the family"? Well, what would YOU do if you are in such a situation, being the Elder brother, or as the younger one. Better still, what would you do as the aging father?

Similarly, we are in a place where one group of our "brothers" has caused many undesired issues in the country in all areas, including financially. The other group has found out and has decided to stop him. The first group is not resentful, but continues to move in that direction, yet expects everybody else to accept their "style" and continue to give them the mandate to rule and get access to all the wealth as well as make decisions on important policies. At the same time, they blame the other "group" for revealing too much for the common people to see, spoiling their plan. Would you agree to let that continue or would you play a part in stopping it?

I'm so sorry. I do love you guys for you are still my brothers. It is not that I do not want to support you, but what you have done makes it that I cannot keep supporting you. Not this time, not this way. For the sake of us all, this has to stop and this is the point to stop.

Read More @ Source

More » Bonology.com | Barisan Nasional (BN) | Sociopolitics Plus | 大马社会政治

Armed with 'parang' a Pro-UMNO village chief shut down PKR ceramah...

badrul hisham shaharin altantuya police questioning 290509 03

A PKR youth leader said they were forced to hold off their ceramah in Negri Sembilan last month after the local village head leading a group of armed men allegedly showed up to threaten a "bloodbath".

Rembau PKR division leader Badrul Hisham Shaharin (left), who leads a ceramah tonight in Pekan Kuala Sawah in the Rantau state seat in Rembau, said they had originally planned the event for February 6.

He alleged that at that time, in the midst of preparations on the evening of the ceramah, the Kampung Kuala Sawah village chief arrived at the venue at 6pm with a group of men armed with parang.

"When trouble broke out at the location, that is just 300m from the Kuala Sawah police station, several policemen showed up. After speaking with the village chief the attackers, the police left," claimed Badrul Hisham in his blog.

"The incident was not just an armed attack but a racist one as well, as the Umno-appointed village chief insulted and swore at some Indians on duty, and even threatened a 'bloodbath'," he added.

Fearing for the safety of locals who were keen on attending the ceramah, said Badrul Hisham, they decided to postpone the ceramah.

'Police indifferent'

The youth leader said they have since lodged a police report on the incident and regretted that no action has been taken, alleging that the police have turned a blind eye because the village head was installed by the ruling government.

Badrul Hisham also reported that PKR Rembau committee member Selvam, living in the vicinity has received threats through SMS allegedly circulated by the village head.

The SMS circulating "since last night" allegedly called for Umno members to gather at Selvam's house to "destroy" the opposition's programme in the "menteri besar's territory".

"Furthermore we received a call from the police 'advising' us to cancel our programme to avoid trouble."

"PKR is extremely disappointed with the police's attitude, that is clearly reluctant to ensure peace and sides with Umno's gangsterism.

"There is no more democracy in this country, that is increasingly falling under the law of the jungle," he said.

Ketua kampung bersenjatakan parang hentikan ceramah PKR dan polis buat dont know saja...

6 Febuari lepas telah dijadualkan satu ceramah di Pekan Kuala Sawah dalam Dun Rantau dan Parlimen Rembau. Namun ketika persiapan tapak dilakukan pada hari tersebut sekitar jam 6 petang sekumpulan lelaki dengan diketuai oleh Ketua Kampung Kuala Sawah telah hadir dengan bersenjata parang.

Ketika kekecohan berlaku di lokasi yang hanya jaraknya sekitar 300 meter dari Balai Polis Kuala Sawah ada anggota polis telah datang dan selepas bercakap dengan ketua kumpulan penyerang (ketua kampung) anggota polis terus beredar.

Malah kemudian PKR telah membuat laporan polis mengenai serangan dan ugutan bersenjata namun polis gagal mengambil tindakan hanya kerana dia ketua kampung lantikan Menteri Besar NS.

Serangan bukan sahaja bersifat bersenjata tetapi juga bersifat perkauman apabila Ketua Kampung lantikan Umno ini mencarut dan memaki hamun petugas-petugas berbangsa India yang ada bersama termasuk ugut 'mandi darah'.

Pada masa yang sama apabila berita ini tersebar ada juga sekumpulan orang kampung yang menyokong PR dalam perjalanan untuk datang ke lokasi. Untuk elak kejadian kami buat keputusan ceramah tersebut ditangguhkan sahaja.

Di lokasi hampir sama tetapi diubah sedikit di perkarangan rumah Sdr. Selvam ahli Jawatankuasa PKR Rembau namun masih di Pekan Kuala Sawah. Sejak semalam telah disebarkan sms dari Ketua Kampung memanggil orang Umno berkumpul untuk 'menghancurkan' prog. pembangkang di kawasan Menteri Besar (DUN Rantau).

Malah sejak pagi tadi kami mula mendapat panggilan dari pihak polis yang 'menasihati' agar program tersebut dibatalkan kerana mahu elak kekecohan.

PKR amat kecewa dengan sikap po! lis yang jelas lemah dalam menjamin kententeraman dan akur dengan gangsterisma Umno. Demokrasi sudah tiada tetapi negara sudah semakin menjadi hukum rimba.

Mengambil sikap mengelakan kekecohan maka program diubah sedikit lokasi tetapi masih diteruskan. Mohon semua untuk hadir sama membantu kami menggempur kawasan yang konon kubu kuat Menteri Besar Negeri Sembilan. Semua diharap sebarkan makluman dan hadir beramai-ramai...

CERAMAH UMUM
6 Mac 2012, 9mlm
hadapan Pejabat PKR Pekan Rantau
(depan Petronas Pekan Rantau)
bersama
- Sdr. Rafizi Ramli (Pengarah Strategi PKR)
- YB Taufek (P/jaya PAS NS)
- che'GuBard (Ketua Cabang PKR Rembau)
- Dr. Ahmad (Penyelaras SAMM)

Umno sebenarnya makin lemah mereka panik apabila makin ramai rakyat mengetahui maklumat sebenarnya oleh kerana makin sedar mereka makin gagal guna otak untuk berhujah maka mereka terpaksa bergantung guna otat pula. Umno membawa politik negara menjadi politik rimba.- Badrul Hisham Shaharin

source:chegubard.blogspot.com/

cheers.
Read More @ Source

More » Bonology.com | Barisan Nasional (BN) | Sociopolitics Plus | 大马社会政治

Read More

Newer Posts Older Posts Home

Pakatan Rakyat (PR) Social Political Buzz & Bulls

Trash Talking To Tomorrow

Recommended Reads:

Celebrating Darwin Day 2012 in Singapore

Recommended Reads:

Revoking aid to disabled is ‘illegal’

How Effective Has the Enforcement of the Whistleblower Protection Act 2010(WPA) Been in Malaysia?

Muscle control

Electoral reform: Towards fairness and a level playing field

LoyarBermakan: Fierce Curry House

Recommended Reads:

PAS and Islam after regime change

Recommended Reads:

Mahathir’s Disastrous Financial Speculation

Like this:

DAIM THE DEMON

Not that I do not want to support you, It’s because I can’t support you anymore

Armed with 'parang' a Pro-UMNO village chief shut down PKR ceramah...

Optimized Search

Tweet & Shout

Archive