Home » MUST READ
Category Archives: MUST READ
Update 5 December 2013:
Bloggers Seademon and Helen Ang’s articles relating to the issue:
The Malaysian Insider has become a centre for malay bashing and the mecca for malays who agree and love the bashings they are getting, especially from the non malays. The latest one is the article below which was pin pointed by a friend last night on how spiteful the tone it connotes.
A writer by the name Stevie Chan, a non muslim (a Malaysian chinese who probably is a christian or perhaps an atheist), had the audacity to blame the social ills and the problems in Malaysia on the shoulders of all muslims. But as always the case of these type of racists who pose themselves as intellectual and liberal, he had disguised the apparent racist condemnations under the pretext of comparing the muslims in this country, to another country that is seemingly perfect to his eyes – Denmark.
What is astounding is the fact that Stevie Chan, is talking down on all muslims and lecturing us on the values of Islam which according to him is currently absent in all of the Muslims here in Malaysia.
Below is the excerpt of his article. Our comments in blue:
Pada tahun 1882 seorang cendekiawan Islam negeri Mesir yang bernama Muhammad Abduh dibuang negeri selama enam tahun oleh pentadbiran penjajah Britan. Beliau bertumpang di Lubnan selama lima tahun diikuti setahun di kotaraya Paris.
Kalau bukan sebab dibuang negeri, dizaman itu memang tidak ramai yang berperluang pergi melancong menaiki kapal laut yang besar besar. Pasal itu bila Muhammad Abduh pulang ke Lubnan dari Paris, ramai peminat-peminat beliau sibuk tanya dia pasal Eropah.
Muhammad Abduh pun jawab, “saya pergi ke Barat dan nampak Islam merata, tetapi tiada muslim; saya pulang ke Timur dan nampak muslim merata, tetapi tiada Islam.”
This is just an introduction to warm us up and to the prepare the malays that they will be lectured and talked down to like a child. Nevermind the fact that this first few paragraphs are plagiarised from another blogpost which was first written in October 2011.
Apa yang saya akan tulis berikutnya mungkin bersifat sensitif kepada para cendekiawan Islam tanahair seperti ahli-ahli puluhan NGO seumpama PERKASA, PEKIDA, dan sebagainya; tidak lupa juga guru-guru dan idola-idola agama yang hebat seperti Azhar Idrus, Fathul Bari, Nasrudin Hassan, Dr. Maza, dan lain-lain.
Sebab itu saya ingin meminta maaf terdahulu jika apa-apa yang saya tulis disini menyinggung perasaan mereka atau pengikut-pengikut mereka.
Oh, dan juga MCMC, PDRM, JAKIM, dan sebagainya.
Stevie Chan is wrong. What he had written will not be a sensitive subject but a very offensive affront towards ALL muslims in this country. Do read on.
Perasaan saya begini: selagi saya masih seorang rakyat Malaysia yang berkongsi nasib dan masa depan bersama semua rakyat jelata, saya rasa rencana ini wajib saya tulis.
Baru-baru ini saya dan isteri saya telah pergi ke negeri Denmark, sebuah negara berfalsafakan social-demokratik, atau suatu demokrasi yang bersifat socialis.
Walaupun juga sebuah negara monarki berpelembagaan dengan raja permaisuri sebagai ketua negara dan gereja-gereja Kristian, Denmark, pada pendapat saya adalah sebuah negara yang amat Islamik, atau sekurang-kurangnya jauh lebih Islamik daripada Malaysia.
Biar saya bagi sedikit contoh.
Kaum Minoriti dan Imigran Denmark: Musim sejuk di Denmark amat menyeksakan, mungkin sebab itu ia bukan destinasi utama bagi imigran-imigran. Tetapi sistem kebajikan dan polisi imigresen yang sangat pemurah telah menarik ramai ‘asylum seekers’ dari negara-negara muslim kurang aman seperti Syria, Iran, Iraq, Morocco, Pakistan, dan lain-lain.
Stevie Chan is juxtaposing the minority muslims in Denmark to the minorities in Malaysia. Since he is chinese, the treatment of chinese in Malaysia by the majority of Malaysians (incidentally the malay muslims) is the main point he is trying to tacitly imply.
Pada masa ini bilangan warga muslim di Denmark tidak melebihi 3% daripada jumlah penduduk seluruh negara. Ia satu minoriti yang amat kecil.
Warga muslim di Denmark mepunyai kebebasan membina masjid-masjid, surausurau, dan sekolah-sekolah agama sendiri yang berbahasa pengataraankan bahasa ibunda masing-masing. Ini satu hak mutlak.
Anak-anak imigran yang masih berada di negara asal juga diberi sokongan kewangan seperti warga negara Denmark yang lain.
This is a redundant statement trying to blame the muslims here in Malaysia that the minorities do not get any chance to build their own house of worship, could not build their own vernacular schools, and trying to show us muslims here that hey, the majority christians in Denmark treat their minorities muslims way better than the muslims here treat their minority. UNFORTUNATELY, and we typed that in capital letters, judging from the commentary section of this article in Malaysian Insider, many muslim malays agreed with Stevie Chan!
It seems that Malays these days are so timid and pitiful with such low esteem that they will believe every misplaced criticisms this chinese throws at them. Oh as his article suggests, do we want to financially assist the children of immigrants here in Malaysia who are still living in their own country? Why should we? Stevie Chan is beginning to sound like a belligerent hater as we move on below.
Masa saya berada di Denmark, satu issue yang tengah rancak dibahaskan diseluruh negara itu adalah samada hanya makanan halal sahaja patut dibekalkan kepada murid-murid dan kakitangan di tadika.
Walaupun belum selesai pembahasan itu, adalah penting kita mengetahui fakta fakta ini:
1. Denmark adalah negara pemakan daging babi per capita yang paling besar didunia. Dari sarapan ke makan malam ada saja daging babi. Itu satu gaya hidup yang sudah beratusan tahun.
2. Warga muslim hanya 3% daripada jumlah penduduk negara itu. Malaysia: Penganut agama Kristian di Malaysia adalah lebih-kurang 10% daripada jumlah penduduk, dibandingkan 3% warga muslim di Denmark, mereka merupakan satu blok miniriti yang agak besar.
From the above few paragraphs, we would think that it was the majority christian Danes who tried to put only halal food in the menu of that kindergarten. But here is where Stevie Chan became malicious, and a liar.
Not only does Stevie Chan is condescendingly lecturing us muslims, he also had lied to us about the above facts. What he had cleverly omitted was that it wasn’t the Danes who magnanimously trying to put only halal food in a kindergarten. It was actually a tussle between a muslim community in a local council where they are the majority and the minority christian danes. Below is the real news:
“When some Muslims recently obtained a majority on the council running a government-financed daycare centre in Denmark, they proceeded to vote to ban serving pork to all children in the daycare (whether they were Muslim or not). This Muslim group, Dahl said, seemed to think that majorities are not responsible for protecting minorities’ rights.” – SOURCE
Of which, there was an uproar from the majority of christian Danes in Denmark!
Was Stevie Chan really serious in extolling the virtues on muslims in Malaysia should treat the chinese by feeding us muslims with lies about porks and halal food in Denmark? We wonder if Stevie Chan couldn’t get any pork for the last few years here in this muslim infested country of his, hence this malicious article of his. What about his fellow chinese who had berated the azan in Puchong recently? That is permissible? In the name of tolerance? Chinese and christians in Malaysia are blameless in all misbehaviours and social ills?
Tetapi warga Kristian di Malaysia sudah lama dinafikan pembinaan gereja baru, gereja-gereja yang kita lihat sekarang kebanyakan (kalau bukan semua) adalah yang dibina dalam zaman penjajahan. Kebanyakan warga Kristian di Malaysia berjemaah di tingkat atas rumah-rumah kedai. Bukan mereka tak mampu nakbina gereja, mereka mampu, tetapi diberi perbagai masalaah ‘tape merah’ kerajaan.
Cerita pasal kuil-kuil Hindu yang dirobohkan tanpa setitik hormat dan belas kasihan sudah muak kita dengar.
Ramai warga asing yang mengahwini warga Malaysia tidak diberi kewarganegaraan walaupon sudah berdekad menubuhkan keluarga disini.
Ke-tidak-pastian sebegini menyebabkan ramai yang tak mampu berancangan panjang untuk keluarga mereka dengan elok.
Baru-baru ini ada cerita tentang murid-murid bukan muslim di Malaysia yang disuruh makan didalam bilik salinan di bulan ramadan; ada juga cerita pasal seorang murid bukan islam yang dipukul cikgu di negeri Sabah sebab murid tersebut membawa makan tengahari yang mengandungi daging babi kesekolah.
Banyak lagi contoh-contoh jauh lebih buruk yang saya boleh tampilkan mengenai cara kita “mistreat” kaum minority dan imigran di Malaysia, tapi cukup lah.
Maybe Stevie Chan is mistaken. As far as we know, there were no changes in any of the government ruling since the day of independence about the rights of minority religions – christians, buddhists, hindus, others (except for deviant teachings) here in Malaysia. They are always allowed to have a proper place to worship their Gods. If there are any rules that were broken (encroachment of private property, irregular infrastructure etc), proper action will be taken. And prove a point, if the majority muslims are evil and mistreating the minorities here, all proper churches built before independence would’ve been razed and destroyed. But did it happen?
And to put matters into perspective, there are only around 100 mosques in Denmark. But these are not proper mosques. Denmark will only opened it’s first proper mosque soon. Therefore, what Stevie Chan wrote above is again, erroneous and meant to mislead.
Biar kita tanya soalan ini: dari segi kaum minoriti dan imigran di Denmark dan Malaysia, siapa yang lebih bertimbang rasa, lebih berperikemanusiaan, atau lebih Islamik nilainya?
Another racist and seditious statement to provoke the liberal malays into agreeing with him, that yes, the muslims and the christians in Denmark are way, way better and way more Islamic than the muslims in Malaysia.
Worse, they are malays who think that when this particular chinese is degrading the malays, this doesn’t affect them as they are not the same malays as the majority. This type of malays have lost the communal pride and become individualistic. Some call themselves liberal although in reality, they are an undignified apologist.
Alam Sekitar, Idolisasi, dan Rasuah
Deanmark: suata pagi saya dan isteri saya menaiki satu daripada puluhan bot lancongan di kotaraya Copenhagen, melalui rangkaian air dan jambatan yang cukup mengkagumkan. Tapi apa yang benar-benar mengkagumkan adalah kebersihan pengairan di Denmark, dalam masa satu jam kami berlancong diatas air, kami hanya nampak satu bag plastic di dalam air canal yang jernih. Satu jam, satu bag, air jernih.
Seminggu kemudian kami pergi ke sebuah perlabuhan besar yang sibuk, air disana sama juga jernihnya. Bayangkanlah, air jernih di perlabuhan!
Dalam masa dua minggu di Denmark, kami telah memandu dalam kereta di bandaraya utama dan menengah, suburbia, kampong-kampong dan kawasan gudang perlabuhan.
Selain daripada mengangguh diri kami dari A ke B dan menikmati permandangan yang indah, saya dan isteri saya berazam mencari lubang atas jalanraya di sepanjang 800km yang kami lingkumi.
Lubang dan ‘manhole cover’ yang tidak serata permukaan jalanraya. Akhirnya, sepanjang 800km, tiada satu pun yang kami jumpa. Di kawasan gudang perlabuhan dimana lori-lori besar berkeliaran pun kami tak jumpa.
Saya tidak akan cerita pasal penghutanan dan binatang liar dalam rencana ini sebab bab itu terlalu panjang.
Tapi ada satu lagi benda yang tidak kami jumpa disepanjang jalanan atau dimana-mana pun di negara yang aneh ini: iklan billboard barang-barang komersial mahupun ahli politik.
Malaysia: saya percaya para pembaca pasti boleh buat perbandingan bagi bab ini tanpa saya bercerita panjang lebar, kecuali mungkin ada yang fikir keadaan buruk jalanraya kita adalah kerana teknologi pembinaan kita ketinggalan zaman.
Tapi ia bukan, ia disebabkan rasuah yang berleluasa. Di Denmark, hampir semua dokumen-dokumen kerajaan adalah terbuka kepada rakyatnya; di Malaysia hampir semua dokumen-dokumen kerajaan telah dijadikan rahsia pemerintah.
Eloklah kita tanya soalan ini: di antara Denmark dan Malaysia, siapakah yang menjaga alam sekitar yang dikurniakan tuhan dengan lebih sempurna, lebih penuh hormat dan sayang? Siapa lebih Islamik? Di antara Denmark dan Malaysia, siapa yang lebih gemar memuja barang-barang komersial, siapa yang lebih gemar memuja idola-idola politik? Siapa yang lebih Islamik nilainya?
It is astounding that Stevie Chan is blaming solely the muslims here for not taking care of the environment. Is he saying that only the muslims do not know about cleanliness, only muslims immerse in corruption and only the muslims had ravaged the forest and abuse all the wild animals here in Malaysia?
Stevie Chan must be suffering from misguided chinese supremacy to think all this up and put it in a writing! We are guessing all the illegal poaching of endangered species in our forest in order to eat their paws, animal brains or snake blood are done by muslims. Not to mention the majority of illegal loggings are done by the chinese. And it is beyond reason to say that the chinese never bribe nor given any bribes in this country. But in Stevie Chan’s mind, his chinese brethren are bribe-free.
Blaming everything above on the muslims without looking at the faults of your own race is just smack of arrogance and racism. Was he dropped on his head as a baby and became a racist because of that?
Jenayah dan Hukuman
Denmark: walaupun saya tidak ada data-data yang sah ditangan, secara am negara ini saya rasa sangat selamat. Budak-budak kecil menaiki bas seorangan; bayi diparkir diluar kedai sementara ibunya membeli-belah adalah perkara yang amat biasa.
Walaupon kes-kes pencurian (property crime) ada didengari dan dilapurkan, tapi jenis yang ganas (seperti rampasan) hampir tiada.
Mengapa begitu? Sebab mereka tidak perlu melakukan jenayah ganas tahap itu.
Contohnya bila seorang warga Denmark kehilangan kerja, kerajaan akan membayar dia lebih kurang RM8,000 sebulan bagi jangkamasa tidak melebihi dua tahun. Dalam dua tahan tersebut orang berkenaan perlu mencari kerja baru, atau pulang ke institusi pelajaran untuk mengaji bidang lain yang lebih sesuai.
Pengajian sebegini dibiayai sepenuhnya oleh kerajaan.
Biasanya jenayah-jenayah di Denmark adalah yang kecil-kecilan, atau jenis misdemeanor (kacau).
Tempoh penjara bagi jenayah-jenayah sebegitu (jika dipenjarakan) biasanya sangat pendek, antara seminggu ke enam bulan.
Yang paling pelik adalah penjara untuk jenayah sebegitu ada penjara terbuka, penghuni boleh keluar masuk sesuka hati (tapi yang tidak pulang akan dibawa balik oleh polis).
Sebabnya begini: masyarakat Denmark percaya bahawa manusia tidak buat jenayah jika bukan dipaksa keadaan semasa, atau mereka mengalami kekeliruan sementara. Sistem keadilan mereka bukan untuk menghukum seseorang tetapi mengubah sikap atau keadaan mereka supaya mereka tidak mengulagi jenayah.
Sukacita saya dimaklumkan bahawa Denmark mempunyai rekod “jenayahulang” yang paling rendah didunia.
Malaysia: perlukah saya buat pembandingkan untuk bab ini?
Yes, Stevie Chan is blaming the muslims for the crime in this country. As we all know by now, Stevie Chan without putting so much in a sentence is telling us muslims that this country is unislamic because the muslims are involved in crimes and the punishment method of this country is certainly unislamic.
His argument inevitably has two facets – one, that only muslims are criminals and two, and this is ironic, would he rather have us impose hudud laws to make us more islamic?
Mungkin ada diantara kita akan berkata, “oh, cukai pendapatan di Denmark tinggi, mereka mampu membiayai semua itu.”
Adakah kita sebuah negara yang miskin? Atau kekayaan kita disalahgunakan?
Saya tanya seorang pemilik kedai kopi di Copenhagen apa perasaan beliau tentang membayar kadar cukai yang tinggi untuk mendapat sebuah masyarakat yang aman dan adil. Jawapan beliau, “bahu yang lebih besar pikul beban yang lebih berat.”
Bukankah itu nilai Islam, wahai pembaca yang dihormati?
The racist Stevie Chan, who probably tells all his friends that he is not a racist, condescendingly telling us muslims that this country, a country where the majority and the minority had lived peacefully (before he came into the picture probably) is actually not peaceful and unjust. All because the muslims here have abused the rich natural resources of this country. Mind you, only the muslims are doing this. Not him nor his kind.
Ada baiknya jika saya mendedahkan satu “rahsia” warga pelik negara Denmark ini: tidak ramai yang pergi ke gereja. Malahan banyak gereja-gereja sudah dijual dan dijadikan kedai-kedai ataupun perpustakaan.
Saya rasa ini tidak ada apa-apa perkaitan dengan agama, tapi hanya nilai kemanusian atau humanism.
Kita diMalaysia amat taksub bergaduh pasal makzab, hukum, anjing, babi, sehingga kita lupa apa nilai asas agama-agama yang kita cintai.
Walaupun zaman sekarang sudah jadi perkara biasa kita melancong menaiki kapalterbang yang besar-besar ke tempat yang jauh-jauh, dan tiada sesiapa pun yang tanya saya pasal Denmark, saya tetap nak kata:
Saya pergi ke Denmark dan nampak Islam merata, tetapi tiada Melayu; saya pulang ke tanahair dan nampak Melayu merata, tetapi tiada Islam.
Denmark menghayati nilai Islam tanpa mengetahui Islam. Melayu mengetahui Islam tapi gagal menghayati nilai-nilai asas Islam yang murni dan indah.
There you go, a clear statement of him blaming the malays and admonishing us that the malays here in this country is not only unislamic but also intolerant of the minority, and had aggressively ill-treated all the non malays and mistreated them in such ways that they can’t live peacefully in their own country. Stevie Chan must have felt living in Palestine, being bombarded by Israeli bombs as he wrote this article of his – eating dust and had to work three work shifts a day just to earn minimum wage.
Selamat menyambut hari raya Aidil Fitri, saya mengambil kesempatan ini untuk meminta maaf, zahir dan batin.
Wabillahi Taufik Walhidayah Wassalamualaikum Warahmatullahi Wabarakatuh.
This is perhaps the final nail in the coffin by the racist ‘holier than thou’ Stevie Chan. Citing an arabic phrase which generally meant – “may Allah give us guidance and success”. Since he does not believe in Allah, he is generally saying to all muslims – “may Allah give YOU guidance and success.”
What right does a disbeliever like Stevie Chan to invoke our God’s name in order to chastise us? If he believes in Allah, then he should have embraced Islam already. Does he think by writing an arabic phrase after branding all the malays as the source of social problems here in Malaysia will endear him to us more?
If he had written an article to advice the muslims in a non-offensive way, that is perhaps permissible, even welcomed. But to condescendingly blame the malays of all the social ills in Malaysia while expunging any blame from non malays is just too much to take. This is perhaps the most racist article ever printed by Malaysian Insider, written by the biggest racist around.
And it is sad that the apologists among the malays are cowering in front of Stevie Chan. He spat on top of your head and you just clapped your hands in glee. This is just like the days before independence. When conquered mentality are too coward to fight back and all insults are just taken by the mouthful.
(P/S: saya mengambil tanggungjawab penuh untuk rencana ini, ibubapa saya tidak tahu pasal tulisan saya mahupun pendapat saya atau agama saya (yang saya telah rahsiakan).
Yes, Stevie Chan, whoever he is, should be fully responsible for his article. And if he does not want his parents to know he wrote this article then maybe he should not have put his real name.
“Perhaps the less we have, the more we are required to brag.”
- John Steinbeck from his book, East of Eden
The majority of the thinking society would feel that a political leader needs to be inherently intelligent enough to know that doing things right is paramount than doing things just to be popular.
Take for example the previous Prime Minister. He wanted to do things which will make him popular with a few factions of people which in the end, led him to become the shortest serving Prime Minister in the history of Malaysia (at 5 years and 5 months, less than Tun Hussein Onn’s at 5 years and 6 months).
Being popular is good for a career in politics but that must be complimented with genuine hardwork and results which people can really see and experienced.
If wanting to be popular for the sake of being popular then people can easily see through the leaders’ smokescreen and be exposed as fake, or a con-artist. Not so much a leader, but a buffoon trying too hard to be popular.
The current Prime Minister and his cabinet has this tendency to be popular with the masses while disregarding the concept of good leadership. We can see the apex of the attempts to gain popularity concocted up by his advisors during the run up of the recent general election.
Ranging from giving too much money to vernacular schools, running election campaigns much akin to the US Presidential election (personality-driven) rather than a cohesive, BN driven (coalition-centric) campaigns, repealing important laws just to pander towards opposition sponsored ‘human rights’, etc.
But all these bending over backwards just to become popular did not yield the returns that they had hoped for. In fact, just as we had foreseen, the majority of the people saw it through and were not impressed. Popularity is never about one-off announcements to wow the crowd. It has never been about shock-factor (just to borrow a few of consultants’ jargons), quick-wins or ‘picking the low hanging fruits’.
Having a crowd to pat you on the back after giving out goodies to people will not make you more popular.
Even Winston Churchill kept perspective on the crowds that gathered to hear him speak by conceding they would be twice as big if they gathered to see him hanged.
Popularity is a series of leadership by example, a series of doing the right things and not flip flopping on decisions that will make you be seen as less intelligent. Above all, popularity will come when you do not seek it.
It’s all about action and results.
Actively trying to be popular without any substance to begin with will only make you look pathetic. Just look at Anwar Ibrahim for example. Those with critical thinking knew him as a snake oil salesman, who would sell his principles just to be popular. Even a foreign publication had called him a chameleon.
Even in his hey days of popularity back in 90s, that couldn’t make him last long in politics. As history sees it, his popularity did not save him from falling in disgrace – exposed for his inefficient handling of the 1998 currency crisis and engaged in morally wrong conduct.
On the contrary and of course as a lesson to the current crop of leaders, going against the tide will often make you last longer in politics.
Take Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad for example. He did several unpopular things during his premiership which will bring dread even to the most courageous of politicians. He sacked Anwar Ibrahim at the height of his deputy’s popularity, he clashed against the monarchy and kept their behaviours in check when a few of the rulers were misbehaving and unruly towards the people. These were extremely unpopular decisions at that time and could spell an end to a political career if popularity is what a leader seek.
But it was the right thing to do and Tun Mahathir did it because it was good for the people.
He even agreed to accept all 600,000 members of Semangat 46 back into Umno’s fold in 1996 for the sake of malay unity – a decision which was highly unpopular among Umno members when the likes of Rais Yatim, Tengku Razaleigh and Shabery Cheek returned to Umno after nearly 8 years as an opposition in Semangat 46.
In 1984, after Musa Hitam defeated Tengku Razaleigh again for the post of deputy president in Umno General Election, Tun Mahathir still appointed the latter as a minister eventhough Musa Hitam, a powerful Deputy Prime Minister and a Home Minister at that time was so much against it.
But he still appointed Ku Li nevertheless as the minister in MITI (albeit downgraded him from the Finance Minister post) since Ku Li is a capable leader and as the malay proverb goes – “kalah sekali, bukanlah kalah semua.”
Tun Mahathir made many unpopular decisions – be it concerning the capital controls during the currency crisis, his unwavering stance in curbing racist and religious extremists as well as his decisions to chastise the west and the jews for their hypocrisy and terrorism.
All these led him to become the longest serving (at 22 years 3 months) Prime Minister in the history of Malaysia.
Can we imagine any of the Prime Ministers after him doing such unpopular things? Of course we can’t. What is lacking in the current crop of Umno leaders is gumption and the believe of doing things right. In its place is the mistaken belief that their careers will last longer if they are popular. Unfortunately, they had got it backwards.
And it’s also a fact that Tun Mahathir is arguably the most popular Prime Minister we ever had. He is a walking and living brand and is a successful one at that. And all that stemmed from the fact of doing things right and not wanting to be popular.
How many times have we hear him say that he is merely stating the truth and do not care what people think about him? Plenty of times. He lives by his principles and sticks to it like glue.
On the contrary, what we have now are Umno leaders desperately trying to be popular.
Take for instance, the Ketua Pemuda Umno who is also the Minister of Youths and Sports. Apparently the day the kalimah Allah judgment was read out in the Courts of Appeal, the youth wing leader of agama bangsa dan negara party was more busy tweeting and promoting himself for a popularity contest.
The Shout Awards is a popularity award show organised by Media Prima to honour popular artists in the field of music, tv, movies and radio.
But lo and behold, a minister crept in and found himself in the nominees list as well!
How more pitiful (deserving or arousing pity) can you be when you are already a minister but still want to vie in a popularity contest? A contest where you are not really in sync with any of the categories mentioned.
Truly this is a new low for Pemuda Umno and Umno as a whole. In the face of current issues facing the party and the malays such as the attacks on the kalimah ruling by the liberals, as well as on other fronts, did the Pemuda Umno made any statements to defend the position? The only notable but half hearted statement by Pemuda Umno was when they seek explanation over news of US spying from its KL embassy.
Apart from that, the now liberal Pemuda Umno Malaysia is more than happy to enter popularity contests or collect Pakatan Rakyat leaders as their fans. God forbid, even the incorrigible Lim Kit Siang is the number one fan of Ketua Pemuda Umno now.
Nobody pointed a gun to his head and made compulsory for him to join this fluffy event. Yet he is there, tweeting and soliciting votes from the masses to vote for him for this award.
The ridiculousness of this glam-craze escapade underlines a bizarre, yet comical attitude of the Ketua Pemuda in wanting to be popular at all cost. The less he have, the more he is required to brag.
But since this is an era of liberalism and where Umno leaders want to be popular regardless if they have any substance at all, we should not be surprised. The Prime Minister and his myriad of advisors themselves are also in the forefront and believer of populist movement.
Just sit back and enjoy the entertainment all these leaders are providing us. After all, Umno is now a play and some of their leaders are actors.
You might like to read this too.
In the previous article, it was mentioned that:
It is appropriate for his mother to tell Umno to ‘choose competent leaders’. Fullstop. But to lambast Mukhriz for rising up the ranks to quickly is highly irregular considering her own son’s unfair advantage towards others for the past 9 years.
And obviously it is highly inappropriate for NST to even publish this shoddy piece of journalism. None of the other so called veterans in the article above mentioned any names of the candidates. But somehow a veteran (?) Umno woman who happens to be the Ketua Pemuda’s mother had no qualms to mudsling a candidate in public and NST had the audacity to let it print.
Now the underdog had so much work to do. Considering all government’s media is actively trying to realise the ambition of one young arrogant leader who suffers misplaced sense of self-entitlement and jealousy.
We don’t count on Mukhriz to win this weekend with all this ungentlemanly conduct by people with no class.
And the people with no class had also used the apparatus they owned to further malign and slander the underdog. The Malaysian Insider had no scruples in writing and publishing an article that had tarnished Mukhriz Mahathir’s campaign in the Umno vice presidency race.
People can read that heavily defamatory article here.
Excerpt of the article says:
Umno vice-president hopeful Datuk Mukhriz Mahathir has revved up his campaign by sending out an estimated 1.2 million SMS appealing to Umno delegates to vote for him and, if his critics are to be believed, is handing out the cash too.
Party insiders and his supporters said the Kedah Menteri Besar still has a good chance to win despite ground reports and his father, influential former Umno president Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad suggesting he may not stand a chance as he was not among those endorsed by the leadership.
“His machinery is going around the country wooing younger Umno supporters,” said a grassroots leader familiar with Mukhriz’s campaign officials.
The leader also told The Malaysian Insider money or “hujan emas” (windfall) will hit the divisions and branch members.
“From the information we received, since this morning, Mukhriz’s machinery had gone all over the country,” he said but refused to reveal the amount distributed to delegates.
Of which Mukhriz issued a stern rebuttal:
Mukhriz vehemently denied that his campaign machinery issued such SMS.
“I categorically deny what was reported both in English and Malay and demand The Malaysian Insider retract the story. I suspect The Malaysian Insider have ill intent by publishing the story and has somewhat tarnished my image as someone who uphold integrity in all that I do”, said when contacted.
“If The Malaysian Insider does not publish an open apology and retract the story by 1000am by tomorrow, then I will not hesitate to take legal action against them”.
The Malaysian Insider, which was acting in mala fide (in bad faith; with intent to deceive) predictably retracted the article an offered a pathetic and half hearted apology. But they have done their task. Damage has been done.
Knowing how all these morally destitute people work, the grassroot leader might even be a fictional character. Otherwise they wouldn’t be retracting the article as their source is solid and reliable. The Malaysian Insider’s greatest faux pas in journalism was their stupidity in not contacting Mukhriz himself to reconfirm their findings before they even publish that damaging report.
That is journalism 101. You must get clarification from the other party so that you will give an accurate news to the public. Did they even ask around and check if the delegates did receive SMS or money from Mukhriz?
But since The Malaysian Insider is really a propaganda tool for their political masters and not really a news portal, the editors and journalists are acting more and more like keyboard prostitutes than a real journalist. Have they forgotten their training?
The crux of the matter is, the good guys in Umno can’t catch a break because those who are in power are using any means necessary, including slander and malicious propaganda just to undermine those who they feel are a threat to their power crazed ambition. And these kind of despicable people have populated Umno to the brim.
Below are some reaction on Malaysian Insider’s shameless article and apology:
Thank you and good luck to all candidates.
“What he does privately is none of my business”
“His sexual preference is not important to me”
Ever since the stories of sex videos and sodomy charges have haunted Anwar Ibrahim’s political career, how many times have we heard the statements above from his rabid worshippers? Too many times I suppose.
These sycophants, who portray themselves as rational and very lucid in their opinion, are saying that whatever Anwar Ibrahim does privately, is none of their concern. It’s his politics, performance and policies that they would keep an eye on.
Actually, that is a logical stand. After all, whatever someone does behind close doors should remain private. Right?
But behind this naive consideration of his private life, lies a critical underlying message – that all his worshippers, who muttered those words, are actually accepting his abnormal sexuality.
They are actually implying that they believe he did all those things i.e., the sexual tryst in the sex video, the sodomy act etc. Otherwise, why say it at all? Regardless, these statements from his fans will always arise whenever the subject was broached.
But there is one thing that doesn’t jive with the beliefs of his supporters; Anwar Ibrahim never admitted in doing all those things. In fact, Anwar Ibrahim vehemently denied all sexual misconducts. He even made police reports against all the whistleblowers of his wrongdoings.
Even after experts from US had confirmed that it was Anwar Ibrahim in that video, he remains unrepentant and shameless and completely incapable of confessing his misdeeds. Thus, we come to the quintessential question to his fans – how can you reconcile and justify your belief (that he did all those awful things albeit, privately), to the fact that Anwar Ibrahim has no qualms in lying to you about it?
If you think he does it, then aren’t you offended that he chose not to own up and face the music? What kind of leader are you supporting? Someone who is not honourable enough to do the right thing and have an ounce of integrity and accountability to tell the truth?
Don’t you want a leader with integrity and accountability first and foremost? Policies, performance and politics is useless if you don’t have these two leadership traits.
Many leaders around the world resigned from their post when their illegal sexual affairs came to light. But it seems, for Anwar Ibrahim’s case, double standard is applied generously by his adoring fans.
Could it be that the moral standpoint of his fans have somewhat deteriorated? Probably the definition of ethics has changed when it comes to Anwar Ibrahim, and what’s worse this is acceptable for his fans.
If you are championing an unethical person, verily it shows a lot about your own ethics.
At this point it seems the unprincipled lot are wholeheartedly supporting the shameless leader. Incredibly, the fans and this shameless leader, often touted as “God’s gift to Malaysia” have kept telling themselves that they want to save Malaysia.
Their priority however, should be saving themselves first. Thank you.
This is the final part of the series. Thus far, readers can appreciate the fact that history does repeat itself and those who do not learn from it will commit the same folly again and again.
6. DAP: Tactics and campaign strategies in general elections
In 1974, DAP objected to Malaysia’s ties with China. The reason given was that it didn’t bring any benefits to the chinese in particular and Malaysians in genera (NST 21st August 1974). When former Prime Minister, the late Tun Abdul Razak paid the first official visit to China, the DAP accused the Barisan Nasional’s establishing diplomatic ties with China as an ‘election ploy’ to garner Malaysian chinese votes!
In 1987, Kit Siang questioned past government leaders criticising Malaysians investing abroad as being disloyal, but in 1994, when DAP’s closest political ally Semangat 46 chief Tengku Razaleigh questioned Malaysian chinese of their loyalty for their overseas investment in CHina, Lim Kit Siang chose the “deafening silence”, to illustrate that it was alright to sacrifice “principles” he often preached but never practices (even though Kit Siang disagreed with S46 Tengku Razaleigh’s comments and felt that the S46 leader was being out of touch from political realities).
In the 1974 election campaign, the DAP adopted the politics of desperation and racism, harping on sensitive issues despite knowing very well it could lead to racial tension. In chinese areas, the DAP put up posters “warning” chinese voters that chinese culture and education would be taken away from the by the BN. In malay areas, the DAP created issues of government inefficiency in combating inflation and corruption. The tactics were similar to those used for arousing communal hatred and dissension during and after the 1969 general elections (Straits Times 16th August 1974).
DAP promised Penangites in 1974 that if DAP captured the state government, it would investigate various allegations of malpractices and corruption against the ruling coalition and the “acquisition of sudden wealth” by prominent members of the ruling party in the last 5 years (1970 to 1974). The DAP also promised to recognise Nanyang and Taiwa graduates for appointment to local authorities and other state vacancies; grant book aid and scholarships to all needy children, and to set up a revolving book-bank; construct low-cost houses and resettle slums and squatters at permanent sites; and review the imposition of quit rents; dissolve the management committee and hold local elections; re-site the Penang bridge or to consider alternative linkage (Straits Times 1st August 1974).
In 1978, in a desperate move to uplift the DAP’s image, Kit Siang announced a DAP’s “shadow Cabinet” comprising 16 DAP MPs to monitor the respective Ministries in government. As soon as the 1978 general elections was over, the proposal frizzled out.
The 1981 DAP crisis in Penang state was worse than the one in 1978 with the Opposition party embroiled in power struggles, disunity, indiscipline and factionalism which spread from Penang to Perak, Melaka, Negeri Sembilan and Selangor. Mass resignations dogged the days of the DAP crisis in Penang, resulting in ten out of the 17 branches leaving en bloc in support of the DAP dissenters against Kit Siang’s dictatorial rule. A former DAP leader from Penang commented that (quote): “any new DAP member who joins the party cannot afford to remain neutral and is bound to be drawn into the whirlpool of factionalism and power struggles among the leaders” (Star, 25th February 1981).
The DAP Penang crisis exposed Kit Siang’s support of Karpal Singh’s bias against DAP chinese educated members. In 1981, Karpal Singh told the Press that DAP has no place for those who talk in terms of chinese unity or malay unity or indian unity. Expelled DAP Penang vice chairman Seow hun Khim urged chinese educated DAP members not ot be fooled by Kit Siang, to speak up and not act against their conscience by remaining silent. Quipping a chinese saying about Kit Siang (quote): “Kit Siang can set a big fire, but his members are not even allowed to light a lamp”. On March 1981, DAP Melaka crisis began which later led to the sacking of chinese educated Chan Teck Chan.
7. DAP and other malay parties
Tengku Razaleigh in December 1980 when he was in UMNO, called on Kit Siang to retire from politics following the latter’s public announcement of his intention to do so. Expressing fears of DAP capturing the Pengkalan Kota seat would encourage the Opposition to take control of Penang, Ku Li said the DAP would use Pengkalan Kota as a base to project its ambition. And referring to Kit Siang’s resignation and the DAP crisis, Ku Li acknowledge that the DAP scenario “reflects the kind of dictatorship ruling the DAP”. The aftermath of Kit Siang’s withdrawing his resiugnation as expected also saw many of “DAP dissenters” who had challenged Kit Siang being axed from the Party (including former DAP political chief Chan Teck Chan).
In June 1979, former Umno Vice President Tengku Razaleigh once advised the people to be wary of opposition parties like DAP and PAS which he said indulged in politics of fear. He added that DAP and PAS are always looking for opportunities to belittle BN leaders and intimidate the people with sensitive issues that could widen the relationship gap between the government and people.
8. DAP’s tired calls for human rights, freedom and democratisation
For 27 years, DAP Kit Siang and his big boys have been singing the “song of freedom and democracy” and virtually projected DAP as having sole rights to free Malaysians from repression, sufferings and injustice. But if we remember, in 1980 after the tragic DAP defeat at the Pengkalan Kota by-election in Penang, Kit Siang had the discomfort of hearing that song being sung by his supporters. There was a difference. In 1980, the song was directed at him during a time of internal turmoil. It was also a time, when ousted DAP leaders gagged by Kit Siang for years of dictatorship, began to “spill the truth of Kit Siang”. It was also a time when Datuk Seri Dr Mahathir who was Deputy PM branded DAP as the ‘Dictatorial Party’ and democratic only in name. Adding that Kit Siang applies double standards in that he will not allow party members to criticise him, while he goes around criticising everyone in BN.
Hoping that the public’s memories are short of his calls for freedom and democracy, Kit SIang went about “chopping and changing DAP rank and file” as he wished, by gagging and disciplining those he did not like during the 1980 DAP leadership crisis. In short, Lim Kean Siew once complimented Kit Siang’s character as “what is sauce for the goose is not sauce for the gander!”. The Socialist Democratic Part (formed by DAP dissidents in 1978) described the 1980 DAP crisis as a “comedy of errors”. Kit Siang conveniently accused the Malaysian press for discrupting and destriying DAP. For years, the double standard Kit Siang has accused BN government for not granting press freedom.
In 1981, DAP national publicity secretary Tan Seng Giaw charged former DAP MP Chan Teck Chan for committing a serious breach of discipline for publishing a book containing the latter’s speeches in Parliament without the consent and approval of the DAP CEC. This is the DAP’s version of “human rights and press freedom” which DAP practices within and without. On one hand, DAP challenges the government for press freedom while on the other, suppresses its own leaders’ freedom and rights to publish books (source: Straits Times 4th March 1981).
In 1980 when the press reported the DAP developments, Kit Siang questioned the “rights and freedom” of the press. He attacked the press for blowing the “small disagreements” out of proportions and therefore, irresponsible journalism. Yet, Kit Siang does the same or worse by using the DAP’s official organ “The Rocket” against Barisan Nasional government by sensationalising small issues. It was alright for the DAP to condone, promote and protect “irresponsible journalism” of the Rocket but not alright for the vernacular press to report the accurate picture of the DAP crisis.
This is the sort of mentality and attitude of Malaysia’s opposition leader in Parliament who has no courage to admit weaknesses of his leadership, but instead heaped blame against the Malaysian press and the BN for its internal turmoil. Yet, Kit Siang and his warlords are boastful and to the point of utmost arrogance to claim that they are courageous and brave to sacrifice “freedom and personal lives” for the sake of the people’s interests and rights even if they had to face the “repressive laws” of the BN government. For the wise voters, questioning the virtues of DAP must be a continuous affair. If DAP leaders cannot even admit “to themselves” their own weaknesses and faults in their leadership, where are the qualities of honesty, courage and bravery? By depriving these qualities, the DAP leaders are surmountable to being self deceiving, dishonest and cowardly “to themselves”. Needless to mention their leadership accountability and responsibilities toward voters.
……. (can we see the similarities between what happened years ago to what is happening now? A leopard cannot change its spots. A party doesn’t change its malicious ways no matter how much they are saying otherwise..)
In the 1970s the favourite political gimmick employed by DAP was to either ‘boycott parliamentary sessions and state assemblies’ or to stage ‘walk-outs’ even if the event was an important one such as Budget presentation. In 1970, 13 DAP MPs boycotted the Budget speech at the Dewan Bahasa on December 22nd, and the habitual boycotting of Parliamentary and State Assemblies became the norm of DAP’s political tactic and style for years to come.
Why is DAP adopting this irresponsible mode of representing the voters when it accused others of the same? Will such boycotting contribute to nation-building? DAP has an impeccable record of boycotts, the national education consultative council and numerous walkouts in Parliament and State Assemblies.
When DAP is not invited to give their views, the Opposition accused the BN of being undemocratic and dictatorial; but when they are invited, they have nothing to contribute. Instead they staged political gimmicks to obtain cheap publicity and political mileages. For once voters in the DAP constituencies should convey a strong message in protest against DAP’s trampling politics.
This contradiction is a typical example of DAP leadership since its founding years. Its wishy washy political policies are always subjected to the whims and fancies of its leadership depending upon the political moods of DAP leaders in exploiting the political circumstances of the day. In 1972, two DAP National Vice Chairmen left the opposition citing many of the current DAP leaders as “opportunistic, unprincipled and hankering for personal power and glory”. Many of the DAP staunched leaders like Goh Hock Chuan, Dr A. Soorian who had earlier condemned the policies of the Alliance, came to realise the ‘final truth’ of the DAP in later years.
By June 20th 1972, DAP lost four of its 13 MPs and twice that number of Assemblymen. The DAP was split in Perak, Negeri Sembilan, Selangor, Melaka (the whole committee of Melaka Branch resigned in August) and Penang. The DAP fell foul of old friends with whom it had an election understanding in 1969 and refused membership of the National Consultative Council (just as it boycotted the NECC in 1989) and boycotted KL City Day. The DAP was virtually in the ‘dumps’. Dr A. Soorian, former DAP national vice chairman was expelled because he was increasingly ‘critical’ of Lim Kit Siang for having betrayed the trust and ideal of the DAP as laid out by founder members such as Devan Nair. Lim Kit Siang’s leadership according to the former DAP leader, had no fixity of purpose or sense of direction, and “Kit Siang behaves as though the DAP belongs to him”.
4. DAP devoid of ideologies and principles
As early as 1967, precisely on 5th October, 28 years ago, current DAP Chairman Dr Chen Man Hin who held the same position then, said that the DAP was a multiracial party which would ‘never’ desert its cause by aligning itself with a racialist party, (quote): “… be it the Pan Malayan Islamist Party (currently PAS) or any other chinese or indian chauvinist party” (unquote). In 1971, DAP secretary general outdone his Chairman by saying (quote) : “The DAP must learn from the mistakes of compromising with political opportunists. The people must not repeat the mistakes of desiring on “opposition unity” at “whatever costs regardless..” (unquote).
Yet, seven years later in 1978, the same Lim Kit Siang made a generous offer to PAS to work together “in the name of benefitting all Malaysians”. The pertinent question we have to direct to Lim Kit Siang is that: “What benefits have all Malaysians received from the DAP-PAS political “marriage of convenience”? We know that DAP has played a key roe in assisting PAS in capturing Kelantan State government. We know that the Kelantanese chinese community is living in fear and apprehension of PAS in imposing the proposed Hudud laws and all types of restrictions in the name of PAS Islamic rules are being enforced, restricting Kelantanese chinese community’s rights and freedom to their economic and cultural practices.
Yet, DAP was willing to sacrifice those purported principles it so gallantly preaches by covering up PAS’ misdeeds and seeks electoral pact with PAS to fulfil Lim Kit Siang’s personal ambition of becoming Penang Chief Minister. In 1990, Lim Kit Siang stated openly in the Malaysian Press that DAP was more than willing to work with PAS to further “its own interests”. In other words, DAP National Chairman Dr Chen Man Hin’s open declaration not to align with PAS was meant either to ‘deceive’ the voters or that DAP is void of “principles”. Can Malaysian voters place their trusts upon DAP national leaders who have no principles, and having been exposed to have said something at a particular time but doing something else at another time!
Kit Siang realising his past follies and own lies had caused uneasiness within his own rank and file is trying to make amends by recently “covering up with another lie” that DAP will go to the polls “alone” suggest that DAP will distance itself from PAS. Should Malaysians voters believe again and again these lies? Should Malaysians in the coming general elections, increase DAP representation knowing that DAP rank and file are powerless to stop their “unscrupulous” Kit Siang’s lone ranger actions and absolute powers. Kit Siang being an old fox is bound to change his political tactics to woo public sympathies by “lying” that he is old and ought to be given a last term in Penang state. In the 1990 general elections, did Kit Siang give Lim Chong Eu a last chance to serve the constituents? The answer is obviously ‘no’., Kit Siang is too arrogant and in 1990, politically killed Lim Chong Eu.
Now that Koh Tsu Koon has replaced Lim Chong Eu for Gerakan in Penang, it is time that Lim Guan Eng should replace Kit Siang in DAP. What assurances are there to stop DAP from exercising “dictatorial rule” in Penang, exactly the way Lim Kit Siang runs DAP? Greater liberalisation in supporting DAP means a support of “tyranny” (unjust rule by a person or small group of people who have power over everyone else in the state or party).
5. DAP & educational policies
DAP has no constructive educational policies. Since its founding years, the party’s policy has been one of opposing for the sake of opposing. When MCA initiated the Tunku Abdul Rahman College, the DAP in 1968 “accused the MCA of using education to produce a race of fanatics who were prepared to sacrifice ordinary laws to the party machinery (source: NST 16th September 1968)”. [JMD - very much like the DAP law-breakers we have now..]
It further slandered MCA by saying that TAR College teachers would be “indoctrinated with the beliefs of MCA and that text books would be written to glorify MCA”. The DAP compared MCA’s proposed TAR College to schools in Germany turning out Hitler’s Youth who graduated into the Gestapo.
This is the type of opposition leadership within DAP of yesteryears and the quality of its leadership has since deteriorated by employing new political gimmicks, malicious methods and destructive means to keep the DAP afloat. Not only does DAP wants to do nothing to the cause of Malaysian education, the DAP leadership also wants “others” not to do anything worthwhile towards education our younger children. Envious and jealous of MCA initiating the TAR College in 1968, the DAP spread malicious lies, sowed seeds of suspicions and doubts among the community just to sabotage a beneficial community project. If DAP had been successful in sabotaging the TAR College project, hundreds of thousands of Malaysians would be deprived of educational opportunities and careers. To be exact, 40,500 TAR College graduates would be deprived by DAP of their educational opportunities and thousands of careers wiped out at the costs of nation-building.
Today, DAP lies have been proven to be malicious and has further proven that those DAP leaders who made such lies are liars. None of these graduates has been ‘indoctrinated” by MCA and not a single graduate turned out to be a Hitler Youth! [JMD - but these days it is alleged that most students in UTAR are pro-DAP. Irony.]
There is a mentality among voters who support the DAP for the very reason that the opposition was needed to “voice their grievances” and to provide “checks and balances” in government. In reality, DAP is “morally and ethically incapable of voicing your grievances for the very simple reason that DAP leadership is no longer capable to protect your interests. DAP is predominantly occupied by protecting its own political survival.
Recently the dAP has adopted “new political technologies” to survive. It has mastered the art of “claiming credits” to its name. Never mind, whether the achievements are economic, political or social related. Malaysia’s development progress is attributed to DAP’s existence! And DAP hopes to “hoodwink” the voter in the street even though it might be an insult of intelligence to the man on the street. Another “political technology” employed by DAP since Tanjong Two failed to materialise was to “beg” for sympathies by threatening to “resign”.
Lim Kit Siang during his 25 year political career as DAP Secretary General has threatened to resign no less than 50 times either within DAP or to the electorate, an average of two threats per 12 months of his political office. His practice of using “tricks and threats” to solicit sympathies is synonymous to Lim Kit Siang’s norm and childish prank he endears to, in order to keep absolute power.
DAP has been this way since its inception. Wither Malaysia should they are given another chance to wield power in Pakatan Rakyat.
I found a few pages of brief analysis on list of ideological weaknesses of the DAP leadership recently. I thought I would share some of the points to the readers out there. It is an old document – written in 1995. Therefore, all of the events quoted and examples given were not up to date to the current political environment. Nevertheless, readers could appreciate the fact that history tends to repeat itself. Some with different actors with similar issues and some with same old actors but with different issues.
1. “DAP-itis”: A Form of Political Sickness within DAP Leadership
They preach democracy, human rights and freedom, greater liberalisation but within DAP its national leaders do not tolerate dissent, constructive criticisms and especially by Lim Kit Siang’s dictatorial rule as DAP Secretary General following Goh Hock Guan’s being ousted from the post. In Parliament, DAP national leaders “acted” and projected their public images as if they are loyal and principled “Malaysian leaders” who are impeccably honest, incorruptible, and a peolpe’s champion. Yet, DAP leaders suffer from “DAP-itis” during their overseas missions by bad mouthing Malaysia, conspired with left-wing union and labour organisations to disrupt congenial relationship between Malaysian government and local labour unions, threatening job positions (eg. GSP withdrawal, union strikes etc), spreading lies, rumours, and character assassinations in the name of human rights and freedom.
In 1966, former DAP secretary general C.V. Devan Nair set list if “do’s and don’t” for DAP:
a) ”A strictly non-racial approach to all social, economic, political and cultural problems of Malaysia.”
Comment: Today, it is habitual for DAP to exploit racially sensitive issues and with forked tongues. Playing one community against the other to gain political mileage.
b) “Acceptance of the Malaysian Constitution and loyalty to constitutional methods of political action.”
Comment: Today, DAP resorts to “foreign support” to exert international pressure in blackmailing our government to conform to DAP’s demands. DAP resorts to “protest rallies”, union strikes, disloyal methods of political actions at international forums and gatherings, often used for self vested purposes such as saving their own leaders from ISA detention.
c) “Honesty and incorruptibility in private life and public activities.”
Comment: Since Lim Kit Siang’s leadership, DAP leaders have unquestionably been involved in cooperative scandals, unaccountability in collecting public funds in the name of Bukit China, education and legal aid. There is completely no accountability after the funds had been collected, how it was spent, by who, and for what purpose? Receipts were not kept and one wonders any records were made and yet the DAP has the cheek to demand BN leaders to declare their personal assets while DAP national leaders openly fail in fulfilling the responsibility of public accountability in collection of public funds and refusing to set examples. And recently DAP leaders in the Trade Union were charged for misused of funds.
d) “No cheap slogan shouting, rabble rousing or playing to the gallery.”
Comment: Not only has the DAP leaders failed to comply the abovementioned, DAP members of parliament resort to abusing Parliamentary privileges by “behaving like schoolboys” such as name calling, walking out of parliamentary sessions in protest, slandering, launching personal vendetta against BN MPs, issuing personal challenges and staging “political gimmicks” during parliamentary sessions.
In 1978, DAP was known as the “Walkout Oppositon” for its blind attitude and constant walkouts in Parliament and State Assemblies so much so that staging walkouts was their way of representing the constituents. Since Lim Kit Siang took over the reigns of DAP leadership, a ‘new chaotic” dimension was added into the Malaysian Parliament with his lackadaisical fashions. The DAP should reform itself by not using the Parliamentary privileges to launch character assassinations and malicious lies before shouting for Parliamentary reforms, and start to act responsibly in its representation to the electorate. To cover its record of treating the Parliament like a coffeeshop, DAP hypocritically called for the BN government to reform parliamentary procedures. Yet electoral history has amply proven that DAP is more interested in winning electoral seats than representing them!
For decades, Kit Siang has been arrogantly boasting that DAP leaders have sacrificed their personal lives and freedom to speak out fearlessly for Malaysian democracy, yet when they are detained under the ISA for threatening national security, the DAP sent telegrams and letters to all over the world to denounce the Malaysian government, and like “cry babies” moaned and groaned about their predicament, seeking world sympathies and pressure to seek their releases! DAP leaders’ personal behaviours are a great contradiction to their false public images as “heroes” and voters must explode this myth which the opposition has repeatedly projected to deceive the public at large!
2. DAP preaches political ideals but applies double standards within
In 1967, Lim Kit Siang preached democratic socialism to strive for a society and members equal opportunities for political, economic, social and cultural development. He condemned the Feudal society where men occupy ranks in life not because they perform any socially useful function but because of their births. Does DAP national line-up today reflects the very principles preached by Lim Kit Siang 28 years ago? Chen Man Hin and Lim Kit Siang are the DAP national Chairman and Secretary General respectively today as they were 28 years ago.
Malaysia since then has changed Prime Minister thrice and its cabinet line up many times over. DAP’s leadership history is littered with bitter expulsions and personal vendetta with recent cases of former DAP leaders Lee Lam Thye and Hu Sepang being forced out of political positions. Today, Lim Guan Eng, DAP Youth DAPSY Chief, by birth right as Kit Siang’s son, is being groomed by his father, has a tremendous bright future to lead the opposition DAP. DAP professes political ideals as a political weapon to attack others but never applies within because DAP does not believe in “practising what they professes”.
The public has been misled that DAP is the champion for democracy and democracy is within DAP but democracy has been dead within DAP for a long time. DAP rank and file have no “human rights” to dissent against the mistakes and misdeeds of their leaders though they might be “freed” to do so through expulsion. Former DAP National vice chairman Daing Ibrahim in 1978, quit the DAP, describing the party being run by a handful of dictators, who had arbitrarily expelled political opponents from within. He had exposed Kit Siang’s true colour and “DAP’s own brand of democracy”.
Malaysians have been taken for a ride for too long to believe that DAP is the champion of democracy and political freedom. It is time DAP should put its own house in order before shouting for democratisation, liberalisation and freedom of sorts! DAP crises in 1978, 1979, 1981, 1982 and 1990, had left a trial of desertions, defections and expulsions with open confessions of dictatorship and double standards of Kit Siang and his warlords. The record of sacked DAP top ranking leaders included staunched DAP leaders, DAP founder leaders and DAP leaders who had condemned the Alliance and BN governments. Lee Lam Thye and Hu Speang were only the latest additions and lineage to the long long list of former DAP leaders who finally woke up after a long, long political nightmare!
3. DAP: A record of self contradictions and selling out
The DAP, since its founding, has shouted for a ‘Malaysian Malaysia’ concept, not out of sincerity to the idea, but only as an election strategy and platform to capture votes. Till today, the DAP’s political concept merely exists in print and form. During the mid-1960s till up to the late 70s, DAP national leadership had to face widespread dissatisfactions and grievances among its supporters, that DAP never practised what it preached. Outside of its own homefront (DAP Party), its national leaders shouted the slogan of a Malaysian Malaysia. Within its frontiers, preferential treatment was given to DAP chinese leaders and supporters while ignoring the pleads of other communities within its rank and file. In 1978, DAP announcing its intention to absorb 20,000 malays into the party within 5 years, was looked upon as a political joke.
In actual fact, it was a “cover up” to hide the reality of many malays leaving the DAP in 1978. Today’s DAP remains a party that does not reflect the Malaysian Malaysia ideology, though at ground level, DAP leaders play a chauvinistic line to the tilt to deceive voters for their votes.
In 1969, former DAP national leader Lee Lam Thy strongly condemned the Alliance Government: (Quote Malay Mail 3rd April 1969): “The Alliance government is dictatorial by its ‘one voice policy’, undemocratic and unparliamentary in its practice of parliamentary democracy; intolerant of Opposition criticism; incompetent in its administration; wasteful in its expenditure; divisive in its nation building policies; shortsighted in its treatment of the people” (unquote). Little did Lee Lam Thye realised at that time that 21 years later, his criticisms and condemnations made against the Alliance were applicable to Kit Siang and his warlords. In 1990, Lam Thye quit DAP and wept openly, a disillusioned man. In 1983 and 1985, two disillusioned DAP leaders summed up the following comments on DAP before they quit the opposition Party:
a) Former DAP Youth leader (Perak): DAP lacks democracy, practices favouritism, double standards and opportunism. DAP leaders are dictatorial and hypocritical with passing weeks. They are the greatest political circus in Malaysia with threats, undemocratic restrictions, suspensions and expulsions. The DAP has lost its bearings and soul because it is being led by power crazy and autocratic individuals. A former DAP from Penang once summed up DAP leadership as “DAP has talked a lot about democracy but there is nothing in the party that is democratic at all.”
b) Former DAP State Treasurer (Melaka): (Quote) “The DAP’s activities are a danger to national unity and harmony among the different races in the country. The DAP should realise its mistakes as its efforts to harass the people and create disunity among them were totally rejected by the people.”
In 1972, hundreds of DAP members quit DAP partly attributed by disillusionments and sackings carried out by Lim Kit Siang. Popular former DAP national leaders to quit DAP included Lee Lam Thye and Hu Sepang during the 1990s. On August 3rd 1971, an entire DAP committee of the Melaka branch resigned en bloc. In 1972, the former deputy publicity secretary Encik Ainnol Jammal (DAP KL Branch quit DAP citing DAP as a chauvinistic party run by a dictator. In the same year, DAP Rocket adopted a chauvinistic approach by publishing an MCA official wearing a songkok and captioned it “the fighter ans saviour of chinese culture and education”.
Minister of National Unity the late Tun Sambathan chided DA for stooping to such a low form to score political points. In 1986, DAP carried out the chauvinistic and dirty tactic by concocting printed photographs of an MCA candidate wearing songkok and mass distributed to voters during the general elections. Since Lim Kit Siang took over the reigns of DAP leadership, the DAP is infamous for whipping up communal feelings and character assassinations for its selfish political ends.
In 1971, V. David (currently DAP national leader) who was with Gerakan had a verbal clash with former DAP leader Goh Hock Guan on the Selangor State Assembly meeting. V. David accused the DAP of playing “cowboy politics” and power crazy. Today, the same V. David is a DAP national leader who perpetuates the cowboy politics and supports “power crazy” DAP policies.
On 22nd April 1974, 102 DAP members from 5 branches in Selangor, resigned en bloc citing Kit Siang’s “dictatorial ways” as the chief reason for their resignations. (Quote): “In our investigations, we (former DAP supporters) found that Kit Siang was trying to keep power to himself by getting rid of people who did not agree with him. The DAP Constitution was changed to allow Kit Siang to assume more personal power and to mould the DAP according to his will” (unquote).
It is evident that Lim Kit Siang calls for greater liberalisation and democratisation today is hypocritical move when the DAP ideals which he personally refuses to practice and apply within his own political homefront. Voters must wake up to DAP’s hypocrisy and double standards which Lim Kit Siang steadfastly upholds for the past 28 years of his dictatorial rule . To ensure that the DAP Youth perpetuates this Hitler’s doctrine, he puts his son and future DAP successor, Lim Guan Eng to indoctrinate the younger DAP members and pro-DAP youth movements with anti-government and anti-establishment policies of the opposition.
——————————————– to be continued.
Anwar’s latest skulduggery came in a few hours ago in his blog when he desperately trying to clear his name against his position on Israel.
The blog post is titled – ‘Jangan Putar belit Kenyataan Demi Fitnah’ (Don’t twist my statement just to slander me)
Saya diwawancara oleh Wall Street Journal pada hari Khamis, 26hb Januari 2011. Antara soalan yang ditanya kepada saya adalah berkaitan dasar luar negara dan isu Palestin. Saya tuntas menegaskan bahawa kemahuan dan hak rakyat Palestin mesti dibela dan itu merangkumi hak untuk mendirikan negara sendiri serta tidak terus dizalimi. Saya juga mengungkapkan bahawa jika syarat ini dipenuhi maka wajarlah hak rakyat Israel juga dihormati.
Translation: “I stressed that the needs and rights of the Palestinian people must be guarded and that includes the right to establish their own country and not to be further victimised.”
Anwar Ibrahim changed his opinion 180 degrees in a split second after he is being criticised for being a stooge for the Americans and for supporting Israel.
Let us be clear that this latest statement to clear his name means absolutely nothing simply because the statement in bold above was not in the original Wall Street Journal article. If it is not there, then he would have not said it at all in the first place.
In the WSJ article, nothing was said about guarding the needs of Palestinian people or their rights to established a Palestinian country. No such thing was mentioned.
What Anwar Ibrahim should have done is to get WSJ to run full transcript of his interview. Or at the very least (since he is in the mood of suing everyone these days), to sue WSJ for tarnishing his image among his Muslim supporters and slandering him to be Israel’s number one fan!
The fact is ladies and gentlemen, this latest statement which was made in Bahasa Malaysia, was made purely to allay the fears of the Muslim Malays here in Malaysia.
At the end of that statement, he even strengthened this deceit by giving a warning to those who tries to twist his earlier interview. But we all know, nobody is pushing him to voluntarily make that interview and nobody is twisting anything.
We can take his words from the WSJ story word by word without changing anything and the result is still the same. He sealed his own fate with his own actions.
His latest blog posting was just a cover up to assuage his supporters.
Anwar will play by the gallery since that is his second nature. He will say one thing to an audience. And will say a complete opposite to another audience.
To the world he lambasted us by saying the elections in Malaysia is dirty and not free and fair. But he did not tell them that his PKR party just witnessed the dirtiest party elections ever conducted which resulted in an exodus a few strong supporters in the form of Zaid Ibrahim and Haris Ibrahim.
I reinforce my assertion from my previous article; that Anwar is not in the correct state of mind to lead this nation.
Maybe he should make another trip overseas to get further instructions from his masters before they can pat him on his derriere and return him here with fresh directives on what to do next.
And just like how he ended his attempt to cover up his motives and ulterior motives, I shall end this article with the same words albeit with a slight change.
“Justeru saya memberi amaran keras kepada Anwar Ibrahim jangan cuba menjadi talam dua muka dalam memutar belit kenyataan-kenyataan beliau sendiri hanya kerana untuk mendapatkan kuasa.”
Read more HERE.
To put things simple enough, RM18 million of MAS’ very important, very hard earned cash was given to another company belonged to one of its directors. Basically, a director of MAS, Tony Fernandes got RM18 million given to his other company – a football team, Queens Park Rangers (QPR).
There is a massive conflict of interest there. Worse, the transaction was transacted like a kneejerk reaction. Like someone had jerk the leash of owners of MAS and bamboozled them into agreeing to give their money to another director.
Was there a tender committee being called before the transaction was approved? Which other teams were selected in the final leg of the tender procedures? Were the teams in the Spanish Primera Liga or the Italian Serie A taken into consideration as well? We can bet there were none. Is this how a premier airline should have used its advertising money?
Right after Christmas, QPR is now just 3 points above the relegation zone. From 18 games played, they could just secure 17 points. That is less than a point for each game. If this continues, they will get less than 40 points by the end of the season. In a season where 38 games are played, the 40 point mark is the benchmark in order to survive the Premier League. If this hold true, the punters were correct in saying that QPR has 1 in 4 chance to be relegated by the end of the season.
Maybe this would be a bad omen. Just like how MAS is fighting for its survival, QPR will be fighting most in the relegation zone for the rest of the season. But unlike QPR, the management of MAS is consciously mismanaging the company towards destruction.
Conflicts of interests?
Bad advertising deals?
Azman Mokhtar, Danny Yusof and Tony Fernandes are above the petty rules and regulations! Are they? Maybe the government should give Danny a Tan Sri-ship too!
We can safely deduce that this RM18 million advertising deal is to help Danny’s partner in crime fleecing money from a GLC at the most minimum hassle and purview.
You might think RM18million is a small amount. Try counting 1 to 18,000,000 and get back to me when you’re done.
Now how about the breach in anti-trust laws? When the share-swap agreement was inked in early August, the millionaire brother of the Prime Minister, Nazir Razak had said:
“We will be looking at all the anti-trust provisions in all the markets the three global airlines operate in.”
MAS and AirAsia even said in their statements to Bursa Malaysia ‘that the collaboration agreement would only be committed upon once an anti-trust analysis had been completed and was in compliance with the applicable laws with regards to anti-trust.’
But what happened soon after was anything but being compliant to the anti-trust laws. The routes to KL – Bandung and KL – Sandakan were taken off without so much of a warning; leaving AirAsia as the sole service provider of the routes.
There aren’t any other foreign flights to ply this route for customers to choose from too.
When MAS was still plying this route, the average ticket price of AirAsia ticket to Bandung from Kuala Lumpur was around RM300 to RM400 and could be as high as RM800 if you had bought them a few days before the departure date.
But currently, even at two weeks before the date, AirAsia is selling them at more than RM1,000 each! It was RM800 if you buy slightly earlier than that.
This is in serious breach of anti-competitive laws.
Customers are at the mercy Air Asia.
Nazir Razak made to look like a buffoon by this AirAsia – MAS swap. By issuing statements when he is not even privy to the operational plans of both companies, he probably won’t deny that he has become a buffoon.
The question now is, what will Azman Mokhtar do?
Tony Fernandes made it clear that he does not give a damn about what the customers think or feel. In one episode, when had to deal with the newly revised airport tax, Tony Fernandes responded via twitter to many of the complaints by his customers with:
“It’s a free world. If you don’t want to fly and done (sic) like us you don’t. We have to use malaysian airports. That’s the difference”.
The blog journalist who blogged about this found his tweet ‘rather unbecoming, if not somewhat churlish’.
Well it seems now, passengers going to Bandung have no choice but to pay the exorbitant ticket prices.
Now everyone can fly? I don’t think so.
Rumours has it that MAS will also terminate their Haji Charter services to Jeddah in their new business plan which by the way are planned by their board of executive directors. Incidentally, two of these directors are the owners of Air Asia. So which airline will be given this concession in the future?
Anyway, Tony Fernandes had the cheek to run a guerilla type campaign against Malaysia Airport Holdings Berhad regarding the airport tax when he himself is squeezing the public. One just have to remember the inability of Azman Mokhtar in trying to get Tony to pay MAHB over the millions of ringgit in airport tax collected by AirAsia.
Only in 2010 was the sum finally paid up; not totally, and getting further discount too.
Tony is fighting for the rakyat? Tony is robbing the rakyat that’s more like it. How much does a maggi mee costs in an AirAsia flight? Very expensive.
Can we bring our own food to eat in the flight if we don’t want to pay those extremely pricey food?
Of course we cannot do that.
Do you know that flights to Jakarta via KLM is much more cheaper than AirAsia’s own flights? KLM provides food and in flight entertainment too. With all those incidental fees here and there, Tony Fernandes hoodwinked Malaysians into believing that he provides cheap flights.
Coupled with very lousy service right from the booking department all the way to the quality of its aircraft, AirAsia is a behemoth of which crooks are hiding behind it.
Tony went overboard with his campaign against the MAHB when he urged the public to stand up for the ‘unfair’ airport tax hike when in fact, airport tax had not been increased for more than a dozen of years.
He proceeded in buying full page newspaper advertisement in The Star vilifying MAHB to the extent of directing AirAsia staff to wear protest badges and putting up anti-MAHB posters all over MAHB’s airports!
Surely as the owners of the airports, MAHB has the rights to remove all those illegal and provocative posters. But when MAHB did exactly that, Tony went berserk and publicly slam them for harassing his staff!
“Malaysian airport staff tearing down our posters and taking away airport passes of our staff. And using intimidation. Can someone tell them this is Malaysia and not a police state.”
This is a typical opposition mentality whereby the main villain is antagonising and provoking the establishment and then claiming to be the victim. When you are acting like gangsters, of course someone will have to act against you.
And to think that Tony received the Asian Corporate Director Recognition Award by Corporate Governance Asia last July for his ‘contributions in enhancing business ethics, transparency and corporate social responsibility on the foundation of his success in running the airline business. In addition to these selection criteria, the award also recognizes Tony’s efforts in helping to raise the standards of corporate governance practice in Malaysia’.
Luckily the MD of MAHB, Tan Sri Bashir Ahmad stood his ground and remained a gentleman when facing this petulant CEO of a company which he had gave so many special privileges all these years.
Thomas Jefferson had said – “Nothing gives one person so much advantage over another as to remain always cool and unruffled under all circumstances.”
While Bashir Ahmad showed character and resoluteness, finesse is non existent in Tony Fernandes. At the same time, something much worse is plaguing Khazanah’s top management; their lack of accountability.
If Azman Mokhtar couldn’t curtail Danny Yusof from agreeing to that RM18 million deal, what makes you think his other investment decisions will be sound?
The deal was mired with blatant conflict of interests which is nakedly open for the public to see and yet the main shareholder of MAS is not doing anything about it. In fact, they are actively supporting this mistake!
The mismanagement and systematic destruction of MAS, the arrogance of the conniving Tony Fernandes, supported by inaction of Khazanah and their investment blunders will certainly not look good on the Prime Minister’s reputation.
But nobody seems to be awake at the moment. Everyone is being bigheaded and high and mighty yet nobody wants to be accountable.
Just like the arrogant CEO of AirAsia X, whom after been queried in twitter over the RM250 million subsidy given to them, had lashed out at people who questioned him as not having the necessary intellectual capacity.
He invited people to deal with him directly through email but then quickly dismissed any queries behind the Auditor General’s report. Nearly 2 months has passed but until this day, I have not received any explanation of the RM250 million subsidy from him.
Hot air is everywhere even during this rainy season but the government is too lethargic to take action.
I got a lot of queries from college/university students and schoolkids about the recent Bersih 20.0 demonstrations. Therefore, today I would like to provide my point of views and hopefully the most definitive guide for those who want know what Bersih 2.0 is all about.
So guys and girls, here it is. Astound your family and friends with these facts:
What is Bersih 2.0?
BERSIH started out as the Joint Action Committee for Electoral Reform, which was formed in July 2005, and the coalition’s objective was to push for a thorough reform of the electoral process in Malaysia. This committee thought that the election process in Malaysia is unfair and not free from the influence (imaginary or otherwise) of current ruling government of Malaysia. Hence they established this committee to look into these electoral processes.
The formulation of the Joint Communique
The Joint Communique was a result of an ‘Electoral Reform Workshop’ held in Kuala Lumpur in September 2006. The Joint Communique defines the long-term objectives and the immediate working goals of the coalition. One of it is the establishment of the steering committee below.
BERSIH Steering Committee
The Committee comprises members from the political parties, as well as representatives from the following NGOs: Suara Rakyat Malaysia (Suaram), Women’s Development Collective (WDC) and Writers Alliance for Media Independence (WAMI). Note that most of the NGOs are led by people actively involved with the opposition or known to affiliate themselves with the opposition. Although most of the NGOs are legitimate, the coalition itself is illegitimate as it did not register itself as a unit with the Registrar of Society.
The Beginning of BERSIH
BERSIH was officially launched on 23 November 2006 in the Malaysian Parliament building lobby. It was attended by political party leaders, civil society groups and NGOs, including PKR president Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail, PKR vice-president Sivarasa Rasiah, DAP Secretary-General Lim Guan Eng, DAP National Publicity Secretary and MP for Seputeh Teresa Kok, PAS deputy president Nasharudin Mat Isa, PAS Youth chief Salahudin Ayub, PSM Secretary-General S. Arutchelvan, Malaysian Trade Union Congress Syed Shahir Syed Mohamud, WDC executive director Maria Chin Abdullah and SUARAM executive director Yap Swee Seng.
Thus with names cited above, the opposition friendly BERSIH was formed.
Bersih’s call for FREE AND FAIR ELECTION is summarised in the following 8 points:
1. Clean the electoral roll
The electoral roll is marred with irregularities such as deceased persons and multiple persons registered under a single address or non-existent addresses. The electoral roll must be revised and updated to wipe out these ‘phantom voters’. The rakyat have a right to an electoral roll that is an accurate reflection of the voting population.
In the longer term, BERSIH 2.0 also calls for the EC to implement an automated voter registration system upon eligibility to reduce irregularities.
2. Reform postal ballot
The current postal ballot system must be reformed to ensure that all citizens of Malaysia are able to exercise their right to vote. Postal ballot should not only be open for all Malaysian citizens living abroad, but also for those within the country who cannot be physically present in their voting constituency on polling day. Police, military and civil servants too must vote normally like other voters if not on duty on polling day.
The postal ballot system must be transparent. Party agents should be allowed to monitor the entire process of postal voting.
3. Use of indelible ink
Indelible ink must be used in all elections. It is a simple, affordable and effective solution in preventing voter fraud. In 2007, the EC decided to implement the use of indelible ink. However, in the final days leading up to the 12th General Elections, the EC decided to withdraw the use of indelible ink citing legal reasons and rumours of sabotage.
BERSIH 2.0 demands for indelible ink to be used for all the upcoming elections. Failure to do so will lead to the inevitable conclusion that there is an intention to allow voter fraud.
4. Minimum 21 days campaign period
The EC should stipulate a campaign period of not less than 21 days. A longer campaign period would allow voters more time to gather information and deliberate on their choices. It will also allow candidates more time to disseminate information to rural areas. The first national elections in 1955 under the British Colonial Government had a campaign period of 42 days but the campaign period for 12th GE in 2008 was a mere 8 days.
5. Free and fair access to media
It is no secret that the Malaysian mainstream media fails to practice proportionate, fair and objective reporting for political parties of all divide. BERSIH 2.0 calls on the EC to press for all media agencies, especially state-funded media agencies such as Radio and Television Malaysia (RTM) and Bernama to allocate proportionate and objective coverage for all potlical parties.
6. Strengthen public institutions
Public institutions must act independently and impartially in upholding the rule of law and democracy. Public institutions such as the Judiciary, Attorney-General, Malaysian Anti-Corruption Agency (MACC), Police and the EC must be reformed to act independently, uphold laws and protect human rights.
In particular, the EC must perform its constitutional duty to act independently and impartially so as to enjoy public confidence. The EC cannot continue to claim that they have no power to act, as the law provides for sufficient powers to institute a credible electoral system.
7. Stop corruption
Corruption is a disease that has infected every aspect of Malaysian life. BERSIH 2.0 and the rakyat demand for an end to all forms of corruption. Current efforts to eradicate corruption are mere tokens to appease public grouses. We demand that serious action is taken against ALL allegations of corruption, including vote buying.
8. Stop dirty politics
Malaysians are tired of dirty politics that has been the main feature of the Malaysian political arena. We demand for all political parties and politicians to put an end to gutter politics. As citizens and voters, we are not interested in gutter politics; we are interested in policies that affect the nation.
BERSIH 1.0 in 2007
In 2007, BERSIH launched it’s first ever demonstration on November 10th 2007. The original BERSIH was led by led by a group consist of PKR President Wan Azizah Wan Ismail, DAP supremo Lim Kit Siang, PAS secretary-general Kamaruddin Jaffar, Wong Chin Huat, DAP publicity secretary Teresa Kok, MTUC President Syed Shahir Syed Mohamad etc.
Most of them are members of the opposition. The rally was epic. Some estimated that up to 40,000 people gathered in the streets of Kuala Lumpur to deliver the Bersih Memorandum to the King.
Upon delivery in Istana Negara, Anwar Ibrahim and PAS President, Abdul Hadi Awang were also present to lend a credence to the memorandum.
Launch of BERSIH 2.0
BERSIH issued its first joint communiqué on 23 November 2006.
At its formation, BERSIH comprised civil society organisations and political parties with the objective of campaigning for clean and fair elections in Malaysia.
BERSIH’s journey thus far has been both monumental and memorable. The public demonstration of November 2007, which saw thousands of ordinary Malaysians take to the streets in support of clean and fair elections, was a critical juncture in our nation’s electoral journey.
They believe that after almost 3 ½ years later, the aims of BERSIH continue to be relevant.
They wanted to continue its crusade for clean and fair elections independent of any political party. BERSIH is thus re-launched as BERSIH 2.0, a coalition of like minded civil society organisations. However their claim to be unaffiliated with any political party remains untrue. But of course, their aim is to effectively monitor both sides of the political divide.
The Steering Committee members of BERSIH 2.0 are as follows :
Dato’ Ambiga Sreenevasan, Chairperson – (She was the Bar Council President during the tenureship of our 5th Prime Minister, Tun Abdullah Hj. Ahmad Badawi)
Andrew Khoo - (Bar Council member)
Arumugam K. – (President of Suaram)
Farouk Musa - (President of of the Islamic Rennaisance Front)
Maria Chin Abdullah - (Executive Director of Empower)
Haris Ibrahim – (President of Malaysian Civil Liberties Movement (MCLM), a splinter political party of PKR)
Liau Koh Fah – (Chair of the Civil Rights Committee, Kuala Lumpur and Selangor Chinese Assembly Hall)
Richard Y W Yeoh - (Pakatan Rakyat’s Councillor of Petaling Jaya, Selangor)
Toh Kin Woon - (ex-Gerakan leader who quit the party to join the opposition)
Wong Chin Huat – (Chair of Writers’ Alliance for Media Independence (WAMI), a very active opposition activist)
Yeoh Yang Poh – (Former President of Bar Council)
Zaid Kamaruddin – (President of Jamaah Islah Malaysia, a PAS affiliate)
Faisal Mustaffa – Coordinator of the Secretariat (also member of PKR, Kelana Jaya division)
Events prior to 9 July 2011
Dato’ Ambiga took over the leadership of BERSIH to continue the pursuit of electoral reforms with the EC. On 27th November 2010, Ambiga and the BERSIH committee met with the EC and discussed the 17 demands for electoral reforms.
The 17 demands are:
1. Investigation of Election Offences
2. Obstruction to voters registration
3. Automatic Registration
4. Lowering of voting age from 21 to 18
5. Absentee voting for all.
6. Indelible Ink
7. Minimizing gerrymandering
8. Minimising malapportionment of constituencies
9. Meaningful campaign period of 21 days minimum.
10. Free and fair media access
11. Control of party expenses
12. Public Finance of Party Expense
13. Right to contest election after resignation
14. Administrative neutrality
15. Restoration of Local Government elections
16. Full Judicial scrutiny on Election Petitions
17. Right to observe elections
As the result of the meeting, BERSIH cut down the demand into 8 points as stated above and all the 17 demands above became redundant. The reason for the decrease is due to the invalidity and irrelevance of the other 9 points and the inability of BERSIH to find proof of the concerns. For example, point number 12 above – Public Finance of Party Expense which is translated as public money to finance political party’s expenses. A bit dumbfounded don’t you think? Why would our tax money be used to finance politicians?
Another one is the obstruction of voters registration. It was dropped because they could not find any evidence on the obstruction.
The rest of the demands are either not connected to the EC, or the EC is already implementing them or it is beyond the powers of EC to deliberate.
When we are negotiating to improve something for the good of the country, we would usually meet and have a dialog with the relevant authorities many times. Just like in school when you are a committee member and is tasked to organise a project, your committee and the relevant bodies will meet many times to see it through.
However, BERSIH only met the EC once on 27th November 2010 but subsequently proceeded to announce that the EC will not cooperate.
The announcement was triggered due to the collapse of a 2nd meeting in April 2011. The EC were said to unable to meet them due to the hectic preparation of the Sarawak state election in May 2011.
However, instead of rescheduling for another date, BERSIH announced that they will organise a demonstration scheduled on 9th July 2011.
Election Commission’s response
The EC is an institution that reports directly to the Parliament. They do not report to any ministers or political parties.
Hence, any change in the electoral process must be done by the Members of the Parliament which consist of the Barisan Nasional MPs and the MPs of the opposition pact because they are governed by the Election Act, 1958 which are passed through Parliament. They can however make recommendations to Parliament. But ultimately, it is the parliamentarians who will pass any changes in the law.
Note that with the obvious heavy presence of opposition MPs backing the BERSIH line-up, no suggestions to reform the electoral process were presented by the MPs in Parliament since 2007. Surely this would be a good and efficient way to actually improve something? However, not one Private Member’s Bill concerning electoral reforms was tabled in Parliament since the formation of BERSIH.
Nevertheless, EC’s feedback on the 8 points presented above are as below.
1. Clean the electoral roll
One of the major concerned of BERSIH is the existence of deceased persons in the list of Malaysian voters. Since people die everyday, it is impossible to update the list on real-time basis as it is required by law that the next of kin of the deceased person to personally contact the EC to notify of the death. The EC do not, and can not have the authority to automatically wipe out the names without a formal notification by the next of kin.
Imagine if the election is today. There will still be names of dead people in the list because there are people that just died yesterday.
EC’s own improvement initiative is to continuously, and expeditiously clean the electoral list immediately after being informed of any deaths.
Another point of contention is the existence of irregularities whereby there are people registered under different address or multiple persons registered under single address.
This had also been improved by the EC when changes to the Act was made in 2002. From thereon, your place of voting is determined by your address in the IC.
The irregularities existed because previously, political parties, through agents, can register their members without the members knowing it. Hence, your voting address will be determined by the person registering it for you.
Plus, in the period before 21st century, most places in Malaysia do not have individual address to a specific home. Most mail/letters that were sent to rural or semi rural areas were sent to one specific spot and collected by the people on daily basis. These spots were mostly, some ‘kedai kopi’ in the villages, post offices, house of the village head etc.
Most people at that time have ICs that indicate addresses which have only the name of the area they live in. This was way before postcodes were invented. By the way, postcodes were only introduced in the late 80s.
Due to this predicament, the problem of specific addresses in the ICs would spill over to the problems of voters’ address in the electoral roll.
However, this was rectified in 2002 whereby voting address will have to be the same with the address appearing in your IC. Voters can at anytime check their voting status and place to vote online with the EC at http://www.spr.gov.my and is encourage to report to them should there be any discrepancies.
Another problem is implementation of automatic voter registration system.
It actually means, once you reach 21, you are automatically be registered by the EC to vote.
In the highly rigid Singapore, it is MANDATORY to vote. Any citizens who did not vote will be penalised by the government.
Malaysia is different in a way she gives you the democratic right of NOT to vote. As an extension, she is giving you the right not to register as a voter as well. People have the right to vote or not to vote. And this is enshrined in our Constitution. You can actually sue the EC and demand why have you been automatically registered when the Constitution does not say so?
BERSIH’s demand seemed to take away this right. EC has the view that, even though voting is very important responsibility of a Malaysian, they must be given the right not to discharge it.
Thus, the EC do not agree with this point. However, they continuously implement awareness programs to ensure that people would know the importance of registering as a voter. They are aware that if the have to impose automatic registration, the Constitution must be amended first before they can actually implement it.
2. Reform postal ballot
BERSIH has this idea that all Malaysian citizens should vote within the SAME DAY.
Due to the illogical manner and the improbability of this to happen, the EC have only to a certain extent, implement some of the changes to improve the postal ballot.
Police, military and other security forces which made up about 200,000 voters cannot vote on the same day with the rest of us due to the fact that they have to be on high alert during election day. If all military and police personnel go out to polling centres, then obviously there will be no proper security to guard our country at that time.
Imagine if all the policemen and the army queuing up for hours on election day. Who shall look after the streets and our borders?
That is why, these people will vote few days earlier than the rest of us. This is called postal voting because the voting process is done at their police or army posts. Recently, the EC had changed the name of postal voting to ‘advance voting’. The process is still the same where you queue up, show your identification, your name will be crossed out, you receive your ballot papers to tick the candidate you choose and the ballot paper will be then slipped into a transparent box. All this will be done under the watchful eye of political parties’ agents.
The votes will then be counted on the same day. No mailing of the votes involved. Perhaps that is why there was a misperception. Just because the process is called ‘postal vote’, people thought the votes will be mailed somewhere else which gave rise to the perception that it could be abused.
3. Use of indelible ink
With regards to indelible ink, it is used among countries which have no IC, such as Africa and India. It is a very low-tech approach. It is as if everyone else is using Twitter or Google+ but BERSIH still wants you to use Friendster.
The countries in Africa or even India have not reached our level yet. We only have 12 million voters. Why should we turn our system backwards when we have reached this level of technological advancement? The reason there is a push for the use of indelible ink is due to fear of double-voting, but we have an adequate system to handle voter identification and it is nearly impossible for people to register twice.
Everyone has one IC number and one identification card. This is the ultimate control system that is used to register and identify the voters. Ever heard of anyone with two ICs? No you have not.
However, to ensure even more security and to improve on voters identification, the EC is seriously considering the biometric system. This is the thumbprint scan very similar to the ones you use in the airport when your passport is scanned.
Another big risk of the indelible ink is the potential abuse. What would stop anybody from going around in rural areas with the same indelible ink and tricks some unsuspecting old grandma into using that ink BEFORE polling day? Come voting day, she will not be allowed to vote by the officers at poll centre because her finger has already been marked. It is against the Constitution to disallowed a registered voter to vote and the grandma can sue the EC for turning her away.
Hence, biometric is the way of the future because let’s face it, everyone has thumbprints.
4. Minimum 21 days campaign period
Longer campaign period is the norm in big countries with a lot of population such as Indonesia and Thailand. We simply cannot compare our country with others that have longer campaigning days. Look at how big the number of voters is in countries such as Indonesia or Thailand.
The EC has the jurisdiction to determine the number of campaign days that they see fit. Remember, the longer the campaign period, the bigger costs are involved to manage the whole election period. More resources such as police and EC officers have to be on duty. This will take a toll in the EC expenses and ultimately, the tax payers will have to pay for these incrementals.
The shortest campaign period was 8 days in the general election of 2008 while the longest was 42 days (more than one month!) back in pre-Merdeka days of 1955. Naturally, back in those days, there were no internet or TV to quickly disseminate your political manifestos. Hence, the longer campaign period for the politicians to go around the country. How things have changed.
5. Free and fair access to media
BERSIH’s whole idea of existence is to negotiate the demands with the EC. However, this particular demand is beyond EC’s jurisdiction because they do not control the media such as Malaysian Insider, Malaysiakini, Malaysia Today, Harakah Daily Utusan Malaysia, New Straits Times and The Star.
Therefore, this demand is invalid and irrelevant.
6. Strengthen public institutions
This is also not in the purview of the EC as they are not the bosses of the Judiciary, Attorney-General, MACC and the police. There is also no law for the EC to instruct any of these institutions. In other words, the EC is indeed have no power to ‘strengthen’ public institutions.
Therefore, it is simply illogical for BERSIH to make this demand in the first place. The parliament is the correct platform to do this.
7. Stop corruption
Just like point number 5 and 6 above, stopping corruption is not the responsibility of the EC. BERSIH cannot demand the EC to end all forms of corruption because simply put, eradicating corruption is not just the duty of the EC but also the duty of all Malaysians.
The Election Commission cannot be expected to apprehend people that are bribing policemen or catching some dishonest businessman who just inflated the price of his project.
Vote buying instances have been documented to be practised by both sides of the divide and those instances have been brought to courts. Again, it is not the EC’s duty to preside over fraudulent cases. That should be the matter of the courts.
8. Stop dirty politics
Perhaps the best way to stop dirty politics is for the politicians within the government and the opposition to practise a more ethical campaigning methods.
This is certainly not under the jurisdiction of the EC.
BERSIH demonstration on 9th July
Without due regards to common courtesy and decorum, BERSIH pushed for demonstrations even after the EC had responded with the responses stated above. The tagline for BERSIH is ‘Free and Fair elections’. And they wanted to handover the 8 points memorandum to the King.
Some say it is their right to show dissatisfaction and by that extent, the people’s right to have freedom of speech.
However certain quarters have the impression that the demands do not warrant a public rally since the EC are quite open for the changes and improvements (except for the ones outside their powers).
Therefore, why should BERSIH incite the people of Malaysia to rally based on the demands that are invalid or already implemented?
If they want to call for free and fair election, at least the call must be fair and also must be free from political motives.
That is why the King made a statement that demonstrations are not the way to solve any issues in Malaysia. He practically asked BERSIH to discontinue their intention to hold street demonstrations.
A day after that, on 5th July 2011, Ambiga and several others had met the King and agreed not to organise a street rally. Interesting to note that Ambiga did not give BERSH’s memorandum to the King at this point of time.
At the same time the government had announced that BERSIH can hold their rally in a stadium which BERSIH readily accepted the offer.
Before any chance for the police to identify which stadium with the most minimum risk to congregate thousands of people, BERSIH announced that they will hold their rally in Merdeka Stadium.
Since the stadium is situated in the middle of Kuala Lumpur the police declined to give BERSIH the permit. Instead, they told the organisers that issuance of permit will be given if the rally is held at Melawati Stadium in Shah Alam. Furthermore, the management of Stadium Merdeka could not approve the use of its stadium because renovations are currently underway.
BERSIH was adamant to use the stadium despite the inability to get permit and despite the fact that Stadium Merdeka is closed for renovations.
As the result, police deemed any illegal gathering around the stadium or in Kuala Lumpur on the 9th of July will be dealt with severely. Warnings have been issued out.
Laws in this country were made to ensure everyone can live comfortably without fear. It is just like in school when there is a rule that everyone must attend all classes.
Imagine when an illegal club in school began to incite other students not to attend classes and gather in the canteen during school hours because they claim one of the school toilets is dirty.
Most of the students have never been to that toilet and do not really know the actual condition of that particular toilet. The janitor of the school made several attempts to explain to that illegal club that the toilet was indeed not perfect or slightly dirty but it is still usable and there are efforts to clean it up even more.
But this does not warrant all the students to assemble at the canteen and break the rule of not attending the classes. The rule is there to maintain order. Students are not allowed to be just anywhere they want to be during school hours. What would the school administration do?
They will naturally penalise the people who had broken the rule. Prefects will herd the students back to the classes while teachers will administer some form of punishment. Does this fall into the freedom of speech concept. Freedom of speech must first be a a valid one. It cannot be based on lies and importantly, it must not break the law.
It is the same with the BERSIH illegal gathering. The protesters made the first retaliation by not adhering to the law of public gathering whereby any mass gatherings must apply for a police permit.
Our Constitution states that we have the right to freedom of speech and expression and the right to assemble peaceably and without arms. However these rights are restricted if it is against public order or security of the people. That is why police will always supervise the issuance of permits.
On the other hand, police must practise caution when dealing with stubborn and ignorant protesters as they are humans as well regardless whether they are there with or without permit.
In order to defeat the illegal gathering, roadblocks had to be set up. This resulted in massive traffic jams all over the city. When options were available to hold the rally in a less hectic venue such as the Melawati Stadium, the police had to cordon off half of Kuala Lumpur so that thousands of protesters can be dispersed easily.
Just like the prefects in school using various methods to discipline the crowd, police used their own anti-protesters methods to drive away the crowd.
In the mean time, BERSIH leader, Ambiga had a press conference with other opposition leaders such as Anwar Ibrahim, Datin Wan Azizah, Lim Kit Siang and Hadi Awang in Hilton Hotel to announce Pakatan Rakyat’s backing over the illegal gathering.
The rally which started at 2pm, ended around 5pm. However, they still failed to hand over the memorandum to the King. Reason for this failure is not clear although rumour has it, the memorandum was lost along the way because BERSIH leaders were busy on the streets near Stadium Merdeka when in fact they should just have made a quick drive to Istana Negara to hand over the document.
The number of people that gathered that day was estimated to be as low as 6,000 and to be as high as 50,000 although the figure of 10,000 is more likely.
Results and accomplishments
1. The BERSIH organisers achieved their objective in mobilising thousands of people to gather illegally in the streets of Kuala Lumpur that day.
2. The BERSIH organisers failed to hand over the memorandum to the King TWICE.
3. Pakatan Rakyat succeeded in hijacking BERSIH’s call of ‘free’ and ‘fair elections’ and morphed it into ‘bring down the government’ and ‘reformasi’.
4. Pakatan Rakyat succeeded in painting a bad light to the government.
5. Government succeeded in giving itself a bad name.
6. Police managed to curb the demonstrations within 3 hours.
7. BERSIH managed to hoodwink the Malaysian public that the free and fair election tagline was actually not a really fair tagline.
8. Malaysia managed to be in the international media because somebody is sad that the EC will not put a permanent ink on your finger.
Did you read the previous article line by line?
Before we proceed to the next part, below is the analysis from an international observer on what had happenned on that fateful week:
By Graham K Brown - Balancing the Risks of Corrective Surgery: The political economy of horizontal inequalities and the end of the New Economic Policy in Malaysia
“The first indication that sections within the MCA was willing to push a harder line for the resolution of Chinese grievances came in November 1986, when the Selangor branch of the MCA, which was headed by the national deputy president and Labour Minister Lee Kim Sai, passed a resolution calling for the abolition of bumiputera status for the Malays and the East Malaysian natives. The resolution provoked an immediate backlash from UMNO members, who interpreted it as a demand for the end of the cherished Malay ‘special rights’. Forty-six UMNO MPs wrote to Mahathir, asking him to sack Lee from the cabinet, who himself offered to resign. Whilst the rift was quickly patched over in public – the Selangor MCA withdrew the resolution and the Sultan of Selangor publicly reprimanded Lee and warned him not to question Malay special rights – many within UMNO remained unappeased, and it contributed to deteriorating relations between the parties, most notably in the virtual demonisation of Lee that was to arise later in 1987 (Asiaweek, 23/11/1986).
Tensions between the MCA and UMNO soon spilled over into broader ethnic tension with Malaysian society. Language and education issues – a political flashpoint since the days of the Malayan Union plan in the 1940s and, as we have seen in relation to the Merdeka University controversy, accentuated by the social programme of the NEP – proved to be the spark point for the escalation of tensions.
The first round of protests came in August, when Universiti Malaya instituted a ruling limiting the use of Mandarin, Tamil and English in the teaching of elective subjects. The decision provoked demonstrations from non-Malay students, who interpreted the ruling as an attempt by the administration to boost the academic performance of the Malays compared to the other ethnic groups (NST, 02/08/1987).
The ever-belligerent UMNO Youth soon waded into the controversy, criticising the demonstrators but doing nothing to prevent counter-demonstrations by students supportive of the university’s move (NST, 04/08/1987).
As the protests continued, police were forced to keep the contending groups of demonstrators apart (NST, 18/08/1987).
By October, the DAP had become involved in the protests and the police were making numerous arrests (NST, 10/10/1987).
The Universiti Malaya uproar was soon overshadowed, however, by a national level dispute, also concerning language and education, when the Education Minister Anwar Ibrahim announced the promotion of around ninety teachers who were not educated in Chinese-language schools to senior positions in government-supported Chinese-language primary schools. The promotions caused a storm of protest from the Chinese community, which saw the move as an attempt to ‘change the character of the Chinese schools’, and perhaps ultimately pave the way for their disestablishment (Tan 2000: 244).
Although Anwar quickly backed down over the appointments, Chinese opposition parties and educationalist groups continued to protest, demanding the instant withdrawal of the appointees. Again, the Chinese parties in the BN were clearly pressurised by the protests into adopting a more chauvinistic position, for fear of losing ground to the DAP. In a sensational turn, the MCA and members from other Chinese parties in the BN, again led by Lee Kam Sai, thus joined a protest rally with the DAP and other Chinese-based opposition parties, calling for a boycott of the schools involved (NST, 12/10/1987).
The boycott saw over thirty thousand children kept away from school by their parents (NST, 16/10/1987).
The cycle of protest was intensified by a series of counter-demonstrations organised by various groups with UMNO. On the same day as the MCA-DAP joint rally, some five hundred UMNO members also held a demonstration, but the primary target of their anger was their coalition partner the MCA, rather than the DAP; demonstrators burnt MCA flags and posters (NST, 12/10/1987).
Subsequently, on October 17, UMNO Youth held a rally at a disused stadium in Kampung Baru, a large Malay district in Kuala Lumpur. The rally, attended by some six thousand people, was highly chauvinistic, and the target of the protesters wrath was against the government MCA rather than the opposition DAP.
Banners called for the resignation and of Lee Kim Sai, and urged the MCA to ‘go to Hell’ (pergi Jahanam). Other banners expressed broader and often violent anti-Chinese sentiments: ‘May 13 has begun’, a reference to the ethnic riots of 1969, and ‘Soak [the kris] in Chinese blood’ (Malaysia 1988: 17).
The UMNO Youth president, Najib Tun Razak, addressed the crowd, calling for Lee’s resignation and demanding that the MCA acquiesce to government policy, or else leave the BN (Asiaweek, 20/10/1987).
By the end of October 1987, then, ethnic tensions in the country were reaching critical levels. As news spread of freak shooting incident when an army sergeant (Prebet Adam) ran amok killing one Chinese and wounding another Chinese and a Malay in the Chow Kit area of Kuala Lumpur, the centre of the 1969 riots, many people rushed to stockpile food, fearing the outbreak of rioting. Increasing public attention was focussed on a mass rally planned for 1 November to celebrate UMNO’s fortieth year, postponed since 1986 (the actual anniversary) and relocated from Johor (UMNO’s birthplace) to Kuala Lumpur. Up to a half million Malays were expected to join the rally, in what was seen by many as a show of strength by Mahathir against the UMNO dissidents (Asiaweek, 06/11/1987).
With ethnic tensions running high, however, it was feared that the rally would prove to be the spark point for fresh riots. In such a context, there was little doubt that the government needed to take action to calm sentiments and prevent an escalation of conflict.”
Now if you’re the PM, what would you do at this point?
By Khoo Boo Teik – Paradoxes of Mahathirism : An Intellectual Biography of Mahathir Mohamad
On Tuesday, 27 October 1987, the police launched Operasi Lalang [Operation “Weed Out”] within the first day, Operasi Lalang made fifty-five arrests, all under the ISA [Internal Security Act which provides detention without trial] of DAP (Democratic Action Party) MPs, a DAP state assemblyman, second echelon MCA (Malaysian Chinese Association) leaders, Chinese educationists, prominent NGO figures, and university lecturers.
Three newspapers, The Star, Watan, and Sin Chew Jit Poh, were suspended indefinitely.
Over the next few days, more people were arrested, including politicians from Pemuda UMNO (UMNO Youth) … Gerakan, PAS (Malaysian Islamic Party,) and the PSRM (Malaysian Socialist Party,) local Muslim teachers, members of some Christian groups, and other NGO activists.
The arrests spread geographically from Peninsular Malaysia to Sarawak where local environmentalists and anti-timber logging natives were also detained. The waves of arrests, though lessening after October, continued until the number of detainees reached a peak figure of 119 in December.
Anyway, part two here is the final part where we focus on other main elements that were causing the tension culminating to the Operasi Lalang back in October 1987.
We must be vigilant at all times because regardless what our political leanings or religion is, we must stand united against any elements that can destroy the very fabric this nation had stood for.
We must not be cowered or made to believe that things will not go out of control or pressured to accept unhindered freedom of speech as the norm in this country. Sensitivities must be adhered to. Liberalisation of the mind must always be accompanied by accountability of action which as a fledgling nation, we are not yet well equipped or mastered.
Freedom is one of the most difficult concept to control.
Let’s talk about my favourite subject.
Specifically, the Operasi Lalang.
Currently there is so much myths going on regarding that incident that many have differing perceptions on the whys, the hows, the whens, and the whose who in that particular part of our history.
When at present many of our political observers from the opposition have a one sided view of it, it is not surprising that with the malicious pandemonium they brought along would permeate into the psyche of every Malaysian today.
So what really happened during Operasi Lalang in 1987?
Many of the Pakatan Rakyat mindless supporters would invariably believe all that had been said by their leaders. Among the main issues that were mentioned were:
1) More than 100 innocent opposition leaders were detained without trial in 1987 under the Internal Security Act (ISA),
2) These detainment were unprovoked and without any justification,
3) 3 main newspapers were suspended (The Star, Sunday Star, Sin Chew and Watan). This shows intolerance towards free press by the government.
That’s about it. Approximately 100 opposition leaders were detained and a few newspaper publications were suspended nearly 24 years ago and judging from how the current events in 2011 are shaping up, there is a risk that the same thing will happen again.
If we subject ourselves to the whims and fancies of Pakatan Rakyat, of course, I am sure what we fear most will come true.
Above all, apart from the BERSIH fiasco, there are a dearth of valid issues that the opposition can play therefore, what better way to, rightly or wrongly, continue to raise tension and racial discord among the races?
Make sense? After all, strife and chaos is the bread and butter of Pakatan Rakyat.
Pasted below is the white paper on Operasi Lalang which was presented to the Parliament by the Home Ministry in 1988. The paper was direct and related the events as it were.
It is hoped that we can learn from our history so that mistakes will not happen again. Due to the lengthy presentation of the white paper, we shall view this in parts. This first part are the main provocations used by the antagonists and the reactions that arose prior to the mass capture of 100 over politicians and activists.
Every Sunday, I will always grab a copy of News Straits Times just to read Shamsul Akmar’s column. In my opinion, his column delivers accurate analysis on current political issues that are plaguing the nation.
Last Sunday, he produced a great piece chastising Karpal Singh, Nik Aziz and the whole gamut of political hypocrisy institutionalised in a loose term we call ‘Pakatan Rakyat’. All in one simple and brief use of facts.
Pasted below is the article in full.
HUDUD AND KARPAL’S FAUX PAS
It seems Democratic Action Party chairman Karpal Singh’s favourite word when chastising Malay leaders who cross him is asking them to taubat or to repent.
Insisting that others taubat in the context of the Malay language places the person on a high moral ground. The person on the receiving end is nothing less than a sinner.
If such a demand had come from a respected Muslim it would have been an attempt to salvage a lost soul but from anyone lesser, it would be a tad arrogant if not outright uncouth.
Given that Karpal is not a Muslim and would only allow an Islamic state over his dead body, his demand for the taubat of Malay leaders should be nothing more than a choice of word by a politician seeking maximum impact in the public sphere.
Ironically, his latest demand for taubat from Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad is over the issue of Pas’ reneging on its struggle to form an Islamic state. Dr Mahathir had commented on the recent Pas elections that the biggest winner in the party polls was Karpal because Pas had decided to drop its pursuit for the formation of the Islamic state that would ensure the implementation of the hudud (Islamic penal code that includes amputation of limbs and stoning to death). The statesman had written that Karpal did not have to die for Pas to walk over his body to realise their Islamic state since Pas has decided to drop it.
Obviously Dr Mahathir’s posting had chagrined Karpal who did not only demand that the former repent but also spewed vitriol that Dr Mahathir is in the twilight of his years and over the hill.
While the same could also be said of Karpal, this is not the first time he had asked a Malay leader to taubat.
In 2009, Karpal had asked for opposition leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim to taubat for creating trouble and to stop betraying the people and their trust. He went further to state that the opposition pact needed another leader, a good leader and Anwar had to go.
Whether Anwar has taubat or not, with the knowledge of Karpal or otherwise, it is not on public record.
But Anwar is still the opposition leader and Karpal is still his lawyer. As such, Karpal’s demand for Malay leaders to taubat is probably something that should not be taken too seriously, as in his case with Anwar; it is merely an outburst, out of frustration or maybe a cry for attention. But in the case of his outburst against Dr Mahathir, it should be taken that the former prime minister has touched a raw nerve.
His postings had drawn not only strong reactions from Karpal but also from the staunchest advocate of Islamic state and hudud previously, Pas’ Mursyidul Am (spiritual adviser) Datuk Nik Abdul Aziz Nik Mat.
Nik Aziz went on to state that Dr Mahathir was the one who opposed Pas’ implementation of the hudud and wrote a letter to the Kelantan state government against it.
Sarcastically, Nik Aziz said, Dr Mahathir and not Karpal signed the letter. The Kelantan menteri besar gave a new twist to the whole issue; accusing Dr Mahathir as being anti-Islam.
Dr Mahathir’s reply to it was consistent: “What I oppose is Pas’ hudud.”
Given the recent development where Pas president Datuk Seri Abdul Hadi Awang declared that the Islamic state is not specifically stated in the Quran and that hudud is not a priority, such inconsistencies underscored what Dr Mahathir had been saying. If Pas today says that the Islamic state is not a requirement and hudud is not a priority, then why were they so bent in demanding that the government accede to their implementation then?
If then it was tantamount to be kufur or unIslamic to not pursue or support the hudud and Islamic state, does dropping the struggle for them today not tantamount to the same?
Is Pas today going to admit that its interpretation then on the need to pursue the Islamic state and hudud was flawed? Or is Pas today going to admit that their interpretation of the Islamic state and hudud was flawed?
Whether Pas admits it or not, or comes up with some new religious-sounding justification to their reneging from their earlier pursuits, Pas can be questioned on whether their earlier pursuits are Islamic requirements or otherwise.
If Pas says today that it is not stated in the Quran, then it means that what they had insisted on earlier was a Pas thing.
All this brings to the conclusion that the religious edicts on the need to pursue the Islamic state and hudud by Pas in the past were wrong and misleading.
So which is which? Maybe Karpal can help the Pas leaders. After all, Karpal seems to be an expert on taubat for Malay leaders. But there’s no need for it. After all, Karpal and the Pas leaders are now of one mind.
I have always stated that PAS is never serious in their Islamic Agenda. What you see about PAS; the kopiahs, the jubahs, the arabic phrases thrown here and there, have always been skin deep.
I find it ironic that Nik Aziz defended Karpal Singh in this matter. We must not forget that Karpal Singh had openly rebuked PAS’ goal for an Islamic state.”Over my dead body” was the famous line uttered by the DAP man.
It came about when PAS, in the effort to win the malay votes had promised to set up Hudud Laws should they become Federal Government. This had irked the DAP and in order to appease their non-Muslims voters, Karpal made that statement.
Nik Aziz and his ilk had always maintained that, failure to implement Islamic laws in Malaysia, will make you un-Islamic and become infidels. The apparent insinuation towards Umno is not lost there. Until this day, PAS deems Umno as un-Islamic and all of its members and supporters are not true Muslims.
Thus when the highest spiritual leader of PAS bent over backwards in defending Karpal, who is not only a non-Muslim but also one who is hostile towards PAS’ goals and objectives, one can safely assume that PAS’ raison d’être was never about Islam or Hudud. It is about attaining political power.
Nik Aziz, in protecting PAS’ belligerent political partner had overtly condemned his nemesis, Tun Mahathir Mohamad stating, illogically that it was Tun Mahathir Mohamad who had opposed PAS’ Hudud laws. Instead of chastising Karpal, he chided Tun Mahathir.
Tun Mahathir did not oppose the Islamic laws, what he opposed was the PAS’ version of the Hudud laws. This can be read in the letter sent to Nik Aziz back in 1994 as produced below:
PERDANA MENTERI MALAYSIA
YAB Tuan Haji Nik Abdul Aziz bin Nik Mat
Menteri Besar Kelantan
Y.A.B. Tuan Haji,
PENGUATKUASAAN KANUN JENAYAH SYARIAH II 1993 DI NEGERI KELANTAN
Rujukan : MB(KN)(S)16/6/(26)
Bertarikh 8 Jun 1994
Pihak kerajaan pusat sentiasa berpandukan kepada kebijaksanaan (al-Hikmah) yang telah ditunjukkan oleh baginda Rasulullah SAW. dan juga para sahabat baginda khususnya al-khulafa ar-Rasyidun dalam melaksanakan ajaran Islam lebih-lebih lagi yang berkaitan dengan hukum-hukum jenayah.
1. Jalan yang diambil oleh Kerajaan Pusat ini adalah juga berpandukan kepada kaedah yang terdapat dalam sistem pemerintahan Islam iaitu “tindakan pemerintahan adalah sentiasa bergantung kapada kepentingan ramai (muslihat umum).” Penguatkuasaan kanun jenayah yang digubal oleh Kerajaan PAS di Kelantan, menurut kajian sehingga setakat ini tidak menampakkan dan tidak menyakinkan pakar-pakar perundangan Islam yang tidak mempunyai sebarang kepentingan politik bahawa ia selari dengan ajaran dan kehendak Islam sebagaimana yang telah diuruskan dengan bijaksana oleh Rasulullah SAW. dan para sahabat.
2. Sepertimana yang Amat Berhormat sendiri sedia ketahui, KEADILAN adalah ASAS yang paling utama ditekankan oleh agama Islam apabila melaksanakan sesuatu perkara. Penekanan mengenai dengan keadilan adalah sangat terserlah dalam ajaran Islam lebih daripada penekanan yang terdapat dalam ajaran-ajaran yang lain dalam sejarah agama. Baginda Rasulullah SAW sewaktu mengembangkan agama Islam ialah usaha menghapuskan ketidakadilan yang menjadi sebahagian daripada budaya di zaman itu.
3. Tidak perlu bagi saya menyatakan disini betapa banyaknya terdapat ayat-ayat Al-Quran yang menegaskan tentang pentingnya keadilan dan lebih banyak bagi ayat-ayat yang mencela sebarang jenis kezaliman. Disamping itu al-Quran juga sentiasa menggesa supaya dielak daripada terjadinya huru-hara dan Allah sendiri sangat tidak gemarkan kapada mereka yang menyebabkan huru-hara berlaku. Kita hanya bertindak balas terhadap sikap permusuhan dan serangan yang dilakukan terhadap kita. Di Malaysia, orang bukan Islam bukan sahaja tidak memusuhi kita tetapi mereka memberi kerjasama bahkan membantu kita dalam urusan-urusan yang bersangkutan dengan kegiatan dan amalan ajaran Islam.
4. Khusus mengenai undang-undang jenayah PAS di Kelantan, kajian awal menunjukkan dengan jelas bahawa undang-undang itu yang disediakan menerusi perjuangan sebuah parti politik ternyata bukan sahaja menyebabkan ketidakadilan aakan berlaku tetapi, sebaliknya ia akan membawa kezaliman. Kebenaran kenyataan ini adalah berdasarkan kapada keterangan berikut:
(i) Dakwaan bahawa undang-undang ini akan dikuatkuasakan hanya di kalangan orang Islam sahaja dan tidak digunapakai untuk orang bukan Islam akan menyebabkan ketidakadilan dan kezaliman yang ketara berlaku. Memang benar di zaman Nabi Muhammad SAW., orang Yahudi biasa dihukum di bawah undang-undang yang berada di dalam kitab Taurat mereka tetapi kitab Taurat mempunyai hukuman yang tidak berbedza dengan hukum-hukum dalam al Quran. Mereka yang berzina umpamanya, akan dihukum rejam sama seperti hukuman terhadap jenayah yang sama bagi orang Islam. Justru itu tidak ada perbedzaan sama ada penjenayah dihukum di bawah undang-undang Islam atau Undang-undang Yahudi di zaman Nabi Muhammad SAW. Tetapi terdapat perbedzaan yang amat ketara di antara hukuman di bawah undang-undang yang ada sekarang dengan hukuman di bawah undang-undang jenayah yang dicadangkan oleh kerajaan PAS di Kelantan.
Menghukum orang Islam dengan lebih berat tetapi orang bukan Islam dengan amat ringan untuk jenayah yang sama atau jenayah dilakukan bersama amatlah tidak adil dan merupakan satu kezaliman, sedangkan undang-undang PAS akan menyebabkan ketidakadilan dan kezaliman berlaku, maka undang-undang PAS tidak boleh diterima sebagai undang-undang Islam atau secucuk dengan undang-undang Islam ataupun selaras dengan ajaran Islam. Ia sebenarnya tertentangan dengan agama Islam.
(ii) Masaalah kesalahan merogol wanita, berdasarkan kapada undang-undang PAS, jika seseorang wanita yang belum kahwin melahirkan anak maka ini adalah bukti ia telah berzina dan akan dihukum mengikut undang-undang PAS, sedangkan apa yang sebenarnya berlaku ialah wanita itu adalah mangsa rogol. Mengikut undang-undang PAS jika ia menuduh perogolnya, tuduhan hanya boleh diterima sah jika terdapat empat orang saksi (yang terdiri daripada orang-orang yang baik, yang tidak melakukan dosa besar) yang menyatakan bahawa telah melihat dengan terang dan jelas bahawa yang dituduh telah merogol wanita berkenaan.
Seperti kita ketahui, melainkan dalam keadaan perang seperti di Bosnia diwaktu mana orang Serb merogol beramai-ramai wanita Bosnia, tidak mungkin jenayah merogol dilakukan di hadapan saksi-saksi yang terdiri daripada orang-orang yang baik. Jika saksi ini melihat dan mereka tidak menolong wanita berkenaan, mereka boleh dianggap sebagai bersubahat seperti penjenayah-penjenayah Serb bersubahat dengan perogol daripada kaum mereka. Jika ada pun saksi, dan mereka tidak membuat apa-apa untuk menolong mereka tidak boleh dianggap sebagai terdiri daripada orang yang baik, tetapi disebaliknya dianggap sudah bersubahat. Dengan itu tuduhan mangsa rogol akan ditolak dan perogol akan terlepas.
Keadaan di mana mangsa rogol dihukum salah kerana melahirkan anak di luar nikah dan perogol dilepaskan sebagai tidak bersalah kerana tidak ada saksi adalah sama sekali tidak boleh diterima oleh sesiapa pun sebagai sesuatu yang adil, bahkan aia adalah satu kezaliman yang dahsyat.
5. Hukum Hudud Islam bertujuan untuk memberi keadilan kapada semua pihak. Ia bukanlah bertujuan untuk melakukan kezaliman. Undang-undang PAS jelas menunjukkan ketidakadilan dan kezaliman yang ketara akan berlaku. Justeru itu undang-undang yang disediakan oleh PAS bukanlah undang-undang yang menepati ajaran Islam. Ia hanyalah undang-undang ciptaan PAS yang bertentangan dengan penekanan oleh agama Islam yang menuntut supaya menghukum secara adil dan menolok sebarang kezaliman. Kerajaan Pusat akan sentiasa berpandu dan menerima ajaran-ajaran dan amalan Islam dari semua aspek tanpa diheret oleh kehendak organasasi politik yang mempunyai kepentingan yang lain daripada Islam dan kepentingannya.
6. Jika undang-undang PAS yang jelas mengandungi unsur-unsur ketidakadilan dikuatkuasakan dinegara ini, dan jika ia dikatakan itulah Hukum Hudud Islam maka umat Islam dan juga anggota masyarakat bukan Islam akan hilang kepercayaan Islam membawa keadilan untuk penganutnya. Ia juga memberi gambaran yang buruk terhadap agama yang suci ini dan menjejaskan imej orang-orang Islam di kalangan penganut agama-agama yang lain. Ia tetap akan menyebabkan penganut agama lain menjauhkan diri daripada agama Islam dan menyebabkan orang yang berminat memeluk Islam menolaknya.
7. Kerajaan Pusat tidak berhajat untuk bersubahat dengan PAS bagi melaksanakan ketidakadilan semata-mata untuk kepentingan politik dan sokongan oleh orang yang telah diabui matanya. Kerajaan Malaysia yang sentiasa dan terus mempertahankan ajaran dan nilai-nilai Islam tidak dapat membenarkan Kerajaan Pas menjalankan sesuatu yang bercangah dengan prinsip keadilan dalam Islam, maka Kerajaan Pusat akan mengambil tindakan yang sewajarnya terhadapKerajaan PAS demi menjaga maruah dan ketinggian martabat Islam dan penganut-penganutnya.
DR. MAHATHIR BIN MOHAMAD
15 Julai 1994
There is a term where people can change their principles just to suit their objectives. Do you know what it is? PAS had always told its audience that the party is not about protecting Malay rights. The philosophy of politics by race is shunned by PAS. In doing so, they had actually labeled any effort to uplift the standard of living via racial identification as ‘assabiyah‘.
For them, this is against the teachings of their version of Islam. For them, Islam should be the number one cause in any of your political struggle.
But only recently PAS had made resolutions to protect Malay rights and championing the Malay cause. In other words, they are becoming more like Umno.
Gone were the struggle to have an Islamic state . It has been diluted into ‘Welfare State’.
All in the name to appease your partners and not losing the non-muslim votes. All in the name of attaining power.
To further confuse its supporters, PAS is saying that they had to retreat into this style of politics so that they can easily achieve power as the Federal Government. Once this is achieved, only then they will implement the Islamic state manifesto.
This sort of trickery is not only unfair to their non-muslim voters, it is also malicious on the fact that Islam do not teach its leaders to be deceitful. Just like how Tun Mahathir reprimanded PAS on the unjust approach of its Hudud laws, this abuse of justice in the name of religion has been the modus operandi of PAS all these years.
Recently, PAS’ President, Hadi Awang lambasted Anwar Ibrahim’s sex video saying that in any sexual allegations to be brought forward, Islam requires 4 witnesses.
To me it is simple. If he wants 4 witnesses, then thousands upon thousands of people who had seen the video are deemed as witnesses. I am sure CCTV can be used as evidence. Unless of course, Hadi Awang wants the impossible. Whereby any sexual acts will automatically have witnesses standing by.
This merely the case of political survival. If a wrong has been committed, then PAS must condemn it. What Hadi Awang should have said in order to protect PAS’ integrity and Islamic credentials was to leave the matter to the authorities to investigate and opt for a wait and see attitude. After all, Islam do not condone punishment before any investigation has been made. Nor should it absolve anything prematurely.
Not only had PAS abused justice in the name of religion, now they are abusing religion in the name of power. I find it hard to believe that PAS, where the name itself signifies an Islamic party, would actually be so unIslamic in its effort to attain power.
Who would believe that PAS, who is fighting so strongly in the name of Islam could be so irresolute when it comes to a fleeting, temporary, worldly thing we call ‘politics’?