Home » Posts tagged 'Reference'

Tag Archives: Reference

The AG’s report will not find anything wrong with 1MDB. Here’s why..

The Prime Minister, in his usual tactics of delay and diversion had failed in his responsibility of answering questions about 1MDB and had shirked on his duty as its Chairman of Board of Advisors and also as the Finance Minister, He is now shifting the accountability of answering the questions to the Auditor General and PAC.

He had since 2013 to answer the allegations himself but waited till last month to order the investigations, and now hiding behing AG and PAC as if these two are a pair of judges that must not be questioned while overseeing a trial.

He said in his blog:

  1. It is unfair for certain politicians to convict the government in the court of public opinion way before the actual facts are laid down by lawful authorities, namely the Auditor-General and the bi-partisan Public Accounts Committee (PAC).
  2. When concerns began to be raised, I wanted a detailed explanation, so I ordered the Auditor General and PAC to investigate 1MDB’s books. Anyone found guilty of embezzlement or misappropriation will be brought to justice.
  3. We are expecting the release of the preliminary report by Auditor General very soon. In the mean time, please do not speculate and form conclusions without the information that will be laid out by the Auditor General, who will provide a detailed report into 1MDB’s finances.
  4. We all want detailed answers but it is only proper to let the auditors do their job and tell us clearly what the situation really is. If we pre-empt it, we would be undermining them, as many others have done. This is not the proper procedure. If we are sincere in finding out the truth behind those allegations, we need to get the information from legitimate sources (like the Auditor General) and not third-party news portals or online blogs that might have hidden agendas.

Firstly, the Auditor General and PAC are not the judiciary where there will be a ‘contempt of court’ if anyone, including the Prime Minister should answer the questions regarding 1MDB. As it is, there are a few feeble attempt to defend 1MDB in the media, namely Salleh Keruak and a few facebook/twitter accounts set up by the PM’s social media office.

Secondly, and this is quite perplexing; why would the PM need a detailed explanation on 1MDB when he is actually for all this time holds two other posts (as FM and top boss of 1MDB). Is he not accountable for the operations and management of 1MDB? It is after all, a 100% subsidiary of Ministry of Finance.

This only exposed him as the most lackadaisical Prime Minister who has been ignorant of grave issues that are happening under his nose.

Plus, if the Prime Minister himself does not know how to explain about 1MDB, his barking dog Salleh Keruak certainly knew less about 1MDB than the Prime Minister.

The PM is after all, the most legitimate of all sources. But he wasn’t sincere in giving us the truth for the past couple of years.

Thirdly, and this is confirmed by an auditor friend in a Big Four firm – Auditor General will not find anything wrong in 1MDB’s accounts because, just like the international audit firms that had been auditing 1MDB, it will be bound by auditor’s scope and procedures. And these procedures will audit on form, rather than substance. To put it in layman’s terms – it will not audit ‘intention’ of a transaction. It will only audit the procedures of the transaction.

For instance (we start with the easiest for now):

1) Who is Jho Low and why is he dictating the business and acting on behalf of 1MDB as proven in the hacked email correspondence between him, 1MDB and the middle eastern business partners?

Most likely answer in AG report: Our investigation found nothing unusual in the accounts as all transactions are approved and signed by the relevant parties and had authorisation by the Board of Directors of 1MDB.

(the PM could have just called this business partner of his to get to the bottom of it and let us know how it went)

2) Why are the IPPs bought in 2012 at a price more than its market value and paid higher than normal commission rate to Goldman Sachs (at 10%) for the issuance of subsequent bonds?

Most likely answer in AG report: The purchases were done according to proper Board resolutions with friendly parties a.k.a. accredited valuers being called to get the market value of those assets. Payment of 10% to Goldman Sachs were done accordingly and the appropriate banks have confirmed its remittance.

(as the Chairman of the Board of Advisers, the PM could have easily gotten the answers for this since 2013 but of course he waited until 2015 and will let the AG report answer on his behalf)

3) The valuation report on the oil exploration reports in Turkmenistan and Argentina received only on 29th September 2009, a day after 1MDB’s joint venture deal with Petrosaudi was signed. 1MDB put in USD1 billion for the JV yet Petrosaudi put in USD1.5 billion of dodgy ‘oil exploration rights’ which revealed on hindsight, did not exist at that point of time. On the same day of signing, Petrosaudi asked 1MDB to repay the 3-day loan worth USD700 million which Petrosaudi had ‘supposedly’ given to the JV company on 25th September. The questions is.. WHY to all these?

Most likely answer in AG report: We could not get the 3rd party confirmation from Petrosaudi regarding those transactions but all the paperwork seemed to be in order. The Chairman and the shareholder of 1MDB had sighted the paperwork and given their approval in September 2009. We deem the transaction as immaterial as total number of assets in 1MDB is worth RM52 billion while the money unaccounted is less than 10% materiality level.

(good luck in explaining this one)

4) According to 1MDB accounts, at least RM7 billion was deposited in Cayman Islands by 1MDB through its many vehicles. But this has been denied by the Prime Minister during his delayed telecast interview last month. So where is the money?

At first he said the money is not in Cayman Islands

At first he said the money is not in Cayman Islands, but in other places.

Then he said the money will be brought in when the time comes. So where is the money located?

And he said the money will be brought in when the time comes. So where is the money located?

Most likely answer in AG report: 1MDB have safely assured us by way of director’s statutory declarations and   gave us enough comfort that the monies are there in the accounts although it is beyond our scope of work to check into 3rd party accounts such as Good Star Ltd and Petrosaudi. Overall, the 1MDB accounts is deemed true and fair and have followed all the relevant accounting regulations and standards.

(The AG team will be stretched and overwhelmed with the magnitude of this work scope)

There you go. The reasons why the AG report might not find anything. The PM is just buying off time by getting the AG to audit 1MDB’s accounts as an excuse to get a breather from all the questions asked. The issue is larger than just its accounts. It’s about governance, abuse of authority and corruption. This is precisely how Arthur Andersen gave a good audit report for Enron back then. Unless forensics audit is done, or MACC is brought in then the AG can never find anything at fault with the accounts. Either way, neither party can gain any credibility if the sitting Prime Minister still hold the post of Finance Minister and Chairman of Advisory Board of 1MDB while investigation is ongoing.

_______________________

For more questions, please read: http://kadirjasin.blogspot.com/2015/05/soalan-penyiasat-1mdb-wajib-tanya.html

1MDB – Persoalan Yang Tidak Terjawab Sampai Sekarang

As at 11th May 2015, the Prime Minister still hasn’t replied and give answers to the original questions about 1MDB. His answers were always in the form of attacking the bearer of those questions. But now, nearly all of his bootlickers, who not too long ago were defending 1MDB have came out in the open and asked him to answer what the rakyat had wanted to know. These are the questions, they were laden with facts, not simple allegations as what Salleh Said Keruak (who took the role of Nazri Aziz as the barking dog during Pak Lah’s time) had been trying to spin. We just want to know the truth.

Taken from chedet’s blog:

6. Dakwaan-dakwaan yang telah dibuat terhadap 1MDB bukan berbentuk tuduhan melulu. Ia disertai dengan fakta yang jelas, iaitu jumlah hutang, siapa yang mengurus, siapa yang menerima wang berbillion Ringgit, pelaburan yang dibuat, dimana wang ini disimpan, dalam bentuk apa.

7. Nama Jho Low disebut berkali-kali. Demikian juga nama-nama syarikat miliknya. Tuduhan dibuat berkenaan dengan pembelian rumah mewah olehnya di London, New York dan Holywood. Lepas itu rumah dijual kepada anak tiri Perdana Menteri dengan harga ratusan juta Ringgit. Sudah tentu ini tidak disebut dalam akaun 1MDB yang akan diperiksa oleh AG.

image2

8. Pada mulanya duit Riza Aziz dikatakan warisan harta kekayaan dari keluarga Tun Razak. Kemudian dakwaan ini dinafi. Soalannya jika tidak dari keluarga Tun Razak dari mana datang wang yang banyak ini. Apakah ianya hasil dari perniagaan? Jika ya, apa perniagaan, dimana? Sudahkah cukai pendapatan dibayar? Kepada Kerajaan mana?

9. Pelaburan ratusan juta untuk filem “The Wolf of Wall Street” oleh Riza Aziz, anak tiri Dato Sri Najib datang dari mana? Filem ini tidak memberi keuntungan. Tidak mungkin filem ini membiayai rumah mewah yang dibeli dengan ratusan juta Ringgit atau Dolar Amerika.

10. Semua perkara-perkara ini tidak akan terdapat dalam akaun 1MDB. Tetapi rakyat ingin tahu kerana melibatkan Jho Low. Dan Jho Low disebut-sebut berkenaan dengan pengurusan 700 juta USD dari 1MDB.

image1

11. Ada yang disebut berkenaan Petro Saudi yang juga menerima bayaran ratusan juta dolar dari 1MDB Benarkah Petro Saudi ini mendapat konsesi kawasan minyak dan gas di Argentina, di Turkmenistan dll. Apa buktinya? Benarkah JV dibuat dengan Petro Saudi sebelum ‘due diligence’ dibuat. Katanya sementara 1MDB melabur USD1 billion dalam JV dengan Petro Saudi, tetapi Petro Saudi tidak melabur satu sen pun. Apa jadi kepada wang IMDB dalam JV tidak jelas.

12. Apa sebabnya lebih dari 6 billion Ringgit (Dollar) disimpan di Cayman Island? Kerajaan tidak pernah simpan duit di lain negara selain pembelian bond. Apakah bond dibeli? Apa hasilnya?

image3

13. Katanya wang sebanyak USD1 billion sudah dibawa balik dari Cayman dan disimpan dalam bank Singapura. Kononnya Bank Negara menjadi masalah kerana proses menyimpan wang yang banyak mesti melalui proses yang rumit. Bolehkan Bank Negara jelas kenapa menimbul masalah sedangkan 1MDB adalah syarikat Kerajaan yang dikuasai oleh Kementerian Kewangan. Jika mudah di Singapura kenapa susah sangat di Malaysia?

14. Urusan Kerajaan pernah dirahsia. Tetapi soal bayar balik hutang adalah public knowledge (dalam pengetahuan orang ramai). Orang ramai ingin tahu benarkah Ananda Krishnan memberi pinjam RM 2 billion untuk bayar faedah ini. Apakah faedah yang dikenakan oleh Ananda? Apa cara bayaran balik hutang Ananda? 1MDB dikatakan untung. Kenapa tidak dapat bayar faedah 2 billion Ringgit.

14. Why has the 1MDB become controversial? What is wrong with 1MDB?

15. From the beginning it was wrong. It started off as an off-budget and it was not put before the Parliament.

16. The money was borrowed. So it is not sovereign wealth but sovereign debt.

17. The bond raised by Goldman Sachs costs more than is usual for Government borrowings. The interest rate at 5.9% was too high. Government loans usually attract about 3% or below.

18. In addition 10% commission went to Goldman Sachs which means that 1MDB gets only 90% of the money borrowed yet has to pay interest on 100%, raising the interest rate to 6.6%. Averaging at 6%, yearly interest on 42 billion Ringgit is about RM 2.5 billion. Since 2009 there has been no income from all the assets. And 1MDB had to borrow RM2 billion to pay the interest. The loan is now RM42 billion.

19. Total initial borrowings amounted to 42,000,000,000 (42 billion Ringgit). As far as can be ascertained the investments are as follows:

a. Purchase of Tanjong Energy (now known as Powertek Energy Sdn Bhd) from Ananda Krishnan for RM 8.5 billion. This is higher than market price. The licence was about to expire.

b. Purchase of Genting Sanyen Power (now known as Kuala Langat Power Plant) for RM 2.3 billion. Again high above market price. The licence was abut to expire.

c. Purchase of Jimah Energy for RM 1.2 billion.

d. Purchase of 70 acres of land in Jalan Tun Razak for RM320 million i.e: RM64.00 psf. Land last sold in the area was at RM7,000 psf.

e. Purchase of 495 acres of land in the former Sungai Besi TUDM airport (now known as Bandar Malaysia) about RM 363.5 million i.e: at RM 91.00 psf. Estimated value RM1,000 psf.

f. Purchase of 234 acres land in Air Itam in Penang RM 1.38 billion i.e: at RM135.00 psf.

20. It should be noted that TRX land is close to land recently sold at RM7000.00 psf. Assuming the market price is RM3000.00 psf the true value of this land is 6 billion Ringgit. The Government has therefore lost 5 billion plus because 1MDB paid only RM320 million.

21. With regard to the Sungai Besi Airport land, 1MDB paid 363.5 million Ringgit for 495 acres – i.e at RM91 psf. Assuming market price for this land is RM1000 psf. the Government lost approximately 20 billion Ringgit.

22. The land in Penang is of poor quality and has more than 1000 squatters. Yet 1MDB paid RM1.3 billion i.e at RM 135 psf.

23. These are all the purchases that are known. They all add up to RM14.7 billion. So there is approximately 27 billion Ringgit left.

24. More than 1billion US Dollars were said to be paid to Petro Saudi without verification as to the value of this company or its assets.

25. Where is the rest of the money?

26. A certain amount was registered in the Cayman Islands. What was the money used for? What was brought back to Malaysia. What was brought back and deposited in a Swiss bank in Singapore. Why? Where was the money brought back from? Why is this money not used to pay the RM 2 billion interest. Why did Bank Negara allow the first tranche to be repatriated to Malaysia and not the second tranche. Now the Swiss bank has told the Singapore authorities that the document did not originate from them and does not represent a true account of the assets of 1MDB. So where is the money said to be registered in the Cayman Islands and is now brought back.

27. Clearly 1MDB is not getting any return from its investments. Not only is it losing money but the Government has lost money when 1MDB paid only RM683 million for TRX and Sungai Besi. Total loss incurred by the Government is approximately 25 billion Ringgit.

28. 1MDB revalued all its assets at 52 billion Ringgit. That is because Government land was brought at far below the market price. It can only use this money to repay loans if it succeeds in selling them off as land or after development. Progress on TRX is very slow and there is no work on Sungai Besi land. No money will be generated during development; only outflows.

29. It is this disappearance of a huge amount of borrowed money by 1MDB and the inability to answer questions regarding what happened to the funds that disqualifies Najib from being Prime Minister of Malaysia.

Highly memorable quotes from Nik Aziz

Since Umno are in the midst of idolising and respecting their political nemesis in Kelantan (to the point they might not want to put a candidate in the coming by election), here is a tribute to the politician named Datuk Nik Aziz, the former Menteri Besar of Kelantan and also the Mursyidul Am of PAS (equivalent to Spiritual Leader). Below are a few most memorable quotes from him..

On Umno rejecting Islam and are not muslims, and how PAS had educated DAP in accepting hudud way better than Umno could:

“Harapkan UMNO nak ajak Islam lagu mana, dia sendiri tolak Islam. UMNO tolak Islam, nak dia perkenal Islam pada MCA dan DAP macam mana. Satu rahmat Cina Malaysia ini kerana Pas bersama DAP. Serangan DAP kepada Islam Alhamdulillah sekarang ini bertukar daripada langkah mayat kepada boleh berunding, Alhamdulillah kejayaan. Mana UMNO boleh buat.” Source.

Condemning all Umno members as rejecting Islam and won’t get any pahala (rewards) from Allah:

“Mereka tolak Islam. Tolak Islam, tolak agama Allah lah. Tuhan mana nak bagi pahala? Sebab mereka berbalah dengan Tuhan. Mereka sembahyang tak dapat pahala.” Source.

On rape:

“Dah dia buka aurat. Dirogol. Padanlah muka dirogol. Dia dok jual murah murah. Betis dia, muka dia, peha dia. Rogol lah! Peduli apa?” Source.

Defending Shahnon Ahmad and his book ‘SHIT’ for the usage of lewd profanities like “pu*imak”, “b*toh, hurled towards the then PM in 1999:

”Allah sendiri gunakan perkataan memaki, mencemuh atau mencarut, jadi manusia sendiri berpeluang menggunakan maki hamun tetapi terserahlah kepada manusia di mana tempatnya”. Source.

On who is better suited to be a leader of the country:

“Tiada sesiapa di muka bumi ini yang tahu menjaga dunia termasuk menguruskan soal budaya, ekonomi serta harta benda, melainkan ulama.” Source.

On smokers, or seemingly pious people who don’t follow religion: 

“Lembu yang berak di tengah jalan tidak boleh diambil tindakan undang-undang kerana tidak mempunyai otak dan fikiran. Tetapi manusia yang mempunyai otak sanggup melakukan perbuatan yang menyalahi agama dan kesihatan, apatah lagi dalam keadaan berpakaian melambangkan Islam. Maka, mereka yang melakukan perbuatan (menghisap rokok) itu dianggap lebih hina daripada lembu” Source.

On PAS getting helped by the anti-hudud DAP (even Satan) in facing the general elections in 1999:

“Siapa yang nak tolong kerajaan Islam, kami sebagai pemimpin Islam mesti terima sama ada DAP, MCA, dan MIC. Kalau nak tolong mengapa kita tolak. Jika DAP ikhlas nak tolong PAS, saya terima. Usahkan DAP, syaitan pun boleh saya terima.” Source.

In 1963, criticising the Alliance for partnering non-muslims in forming the Government:  
“Orang-orang Islam yang berkongsi dengan orang-orang kafir untuk memerintah negara, menjadi kafir atau haram.” Source.
In partnering DAP to face the general elections:
“Ini penting kerana kita juga mahukan sokongan dan undi bukan Islam dalam usaha memenangi pilihanraya umum akan datang.” Source.
While asking Datuk Seri Dr Mahathir to resign in 1999 claiming the PM is old and senile:
“Jika Mahathir letak jawatan pada hari ini, esok saya pula letak jawatan sebagai Menteri Besar Kelantan.” Source.
Al Fatihah.
Other quotes may refer to here and here.
Footnote: In 2002, Datuk Fadzil Noor the President of PAS passed away and in the subsequent by-election BN won the parliamentary seat. BN has always put a candidate and they never shied away from a by-election because they ‘respect’ their late adversary. If it was the other way around, no favours will be given from PAS towards BN. Not even a little respect. None was given by Nik Aziz towards Umno when he was alive. 

Why Umno leaders can’t seem to get it

A couple of days ago Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad wrote an article to highlight his complaints on the direction of this country, particularly to criticise the administration of Prime Minister Najib Razak. As a citizen of this country, and like everybody else, he has the right to criticise and give his views.

Basically, in his 34 paragraphed article, he outlined a few of those grievances. We are sure there are many, but perhaps these are the main ones (in 6 paragraphs only):

25. Apakah dianya yang saya fikir salah. Ia bermula dengan pendirian melayani semua tuntutan musuh. ISA dan undang-undang buang daerah dimansuh. Tindakan ini tidak sedikit pun mengurangkan tentangan oleh parti lawan. Sebaliknya jenayah bertambah dengan banyaknya kerana pembebasan ketua-ketua geng.

26. Demikian juga dengan sikap merendah diri kepada negara jiran sehingga urusan dalam negeri pun tertakluk kepada pendapat Kerajaan negara jiran. (JMD: this is pertaining Singapore, on how the way we develop Johor; our own state, and the high speed rail must take into account what Singapore wants)

27. Tetapi pendapat kaum dan parti yang kuat menyokong untuk menyelamatkan kedudukan Kerajaan tidak diberi layanan yang saksama.

28. Wang Kerajaan diguna untuk mempengaruhi sokongan rakyat apabila sahaja pilihanraya umum diadakan. Ini menjadikan rakyat terlalu bergantung kepada Kerajaan untuk segala-galanya. Bagi yang betul-betul miskin, bantuan seperti ini memanglah wajar. Tetapi beribu rakyat yang ditawar menolak bantuan wang seperti ini. Semangat rakyat untuk bekerja menjadi luntur apabila mereka diberi ganjaran tanpa apa-apa usaha oleh mereka. Semangat ini tidak akan menolong pembangunan Negara.

29. Dasar ekonomi mengutamakan tuntutan pengguna. Impot barangan digalakan dan industri tempatan diabaikan, bahkan dihalang oleh dasar Kerajaan.

30. Cuti ditambah sehingga adakalanya pekerja bercuti lebih satu minggu. Sebaliknya gaji minimum dinaikkan tanpa mengambilkira kenaikan kos yang boleh menjadi perniagaan dan perusahaan tidak bedayasaing dengan barangan impot.

31. Sesungguhnya banyaklah dasar, pendekatan dan perbuatan Kerajaan pimpinan Dato Seri Najib yang merosakkan hubungan antara kaum, merosakkan ekonomi dan kewangan negara.

32. Semua ini disebabkan penyokong Kerajaan tidak pernah menegur pemimpin.

The above are his grievances on how the policies and changes made by the PM is disastrous and have little benefit for the country as a whole.

BUT WHAT ARE THE REPLIES FROM UMNO LEADERS CONCERNING THESE PROBLEMS?

Hishamuddin Hussein, a senior minister with an Umno VP post retorted with:

Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein has to come to the defence of Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak, saying he is doing his best in administering the country.

The defence minister cited accomplishments such as the handling of the remains from the MH17 tragedy, where he was quoted as saying by news portal Malaysiakini that Najib succeeded where US president Barack Obama and Russian President Vladimir Putin had failed.

“If Najib did not take the brave stand of facing the separatists, I may not be standing here today to organise the arrival of the corpses (of Malaysians),” Hishammuddin was quoted as saying by the portal.

“Ask if Obama could do it, ask if Putin is able to do it.”

Najib’s handling of the MH17 tragedy allowed investigators to access the crash site and bring back the remains of the MH17 victims.

What has MH17 got to do with the grave error in listening to the opposition calls to repeal the ISA? Do you know why the ISA is still needed? Because sometimes, when anti-opposition groups made unsavoury remarks towards the opposition, the opposition themselves want people who made those remarks to be treated under the ISA!

But the main point is, why isn’t the points made by Tun Mahathir are replied specifically? Is it because there are no replies forthcoming? Are the braincells incapable to think? This is precisely what Tun Mahathir had said in his article; when the most obvious mistakes are made the PM, the Umno leaders are incapable to criticise those mistakes.

And changes made if it is not beneficial to the society, it could be disastrous for the nation. Tengku Adnan, another Umno leader seemed not to get what Tun Mahathir had said.

“Give Najib a chance to make changes to bring the country forward. It takes time to make those changes,”

Yes ultimately, any PM wants to make a change. But if those changes are strategically disastrous (as mentioned by Tun Mahathir), then BN really do not need time. They really need a miracle to make things better.

The inability of Umno leaders to address each and every point made by Tun Mahathir is really comical. Not to mention the reply by Umno Federal Territory Youth Chief. The skill of saying something which addresses nothing is really being honed here. Again, if the changes prove to be a disadvantage for Barisan Nasional in surviving the next general election, there is no need to say that the PM is working hard to make these changes.

Umno Youth should just focus on making themselves attractive to GLCs. Who knows one day they may sit on the Tender Committee Board and dish out tenders for friends? If there’s a way to use a shortcut to get whatever you want in your political career, why not use it? Right?

But using a shortcut to reply on the points made by Tun Mahathir is really not an intelligent way to address the problems facing this country. If you couldn’t deal with simple questions by Tun Mahathir, how do you expect people to believe you can handle more complicated problems facing us?

As a conclusion, no hard feelings. Maaf zahir dan batin.

Solar panels on roads

We find this new technology and idea very refreshing, innovative and not to mention will help reduce costs and increase environmental health.

This, and other forms of renewable energy is the way to go for the future.

Korupsi, Kolusi dan Nepotisme (KKN) – THE ANWAR WAY

The latest development on the Kajang by election is that Wan Azizah could be the next Menteri Besar of Selangor. With this news, the nepotism practised by Pakatan Rakyat is truly institutionalised.

Anwar Ibrahim cannot accuse anyone else of practising nepotism and cronyism because Pakatan Rakyat, that loose coalition of convenience led by him is riddled with blatant instances both practices.

Lim Guan Eng, the Chief Minister of Pulau Pinang has a father who is the party leader of DAP. And now, we might have a Menteri Besar of Selangor whose husband is the party leader of PKR.

Perhaps, it is time all Pakatan Rakyat leaders from the top all the way to the bottom climb down their puny horse and admit that their coalition is much worse than Barisan Nasional. Worse, because they do not practise what they preach. Below is the list of cronyism and nepotism practised by Anwar Ibrahim since he was in power.

______________________________________

Written By Allan Chan

Anwar Ibrahim banyak bercerita tentang korupsi, kolusi dan nepotisme. Mungkin antara penyokong beliau, mereka sengaja tidak mahu lihat cacat cela kepada Anwar. Mungkin kerana mereka sendiri yang mendapat faedah daripada KKN Anwar. Dan sekarang, orang miskin dan orang biasa dikelabui oleh mereka-merekka yang mendapat faedah untuk menentang kerajaan yang telah memperkayakan mereka.

A good example is Anwar’s former private secretary Nasaruddin Jalil, who ran away to study law in Buckingham after he was implicated in a CBT case involving KUBB. Nasaruddin came back to become “vice-president of Mbf” – a politcal payoff by the Mbf group to Anwar, the finance minister. Nasaruddin became owner of an airline, was awarded the privatisation of the ambulance services (which charges the poor for services provided free previously by the Government), a finance company and many others.

Kamaruddin Jaafar – a research officer in the Prime Minister’s Department was made political secretary to Ghafar Baba on Anwar’s recommendations. Ghafar was in his own simple way too trusting. He brought in an enemy into the camp, little knowing that Anwar would one day use all information gathered by Kamaruddin to topple Ghafar as deputy prime minister. Betraying the trust of people is an Anwar trademark.

Kamaruddin was rewarded after leaving Ghafar. He became co-owner of listed company Yangtzekiang, later renamed Westmont. He became chairman and co-owner of many of Vincent Tan’s companies, receiving many privatisation projects, including Digicom, the cellular phone, the Linear City and others. Kamaruddin through his involvement with Charterfield, received six major contracts in the KLIA – a project chaired by Anwar Ibrahim. He became major shareholder in Kanzen after Anwar “persuaded” Chen Lip Keong to finance and guarantee the purchase of Kamaruddin’s shares. Kamaruddin became one of the richest Malays in Kuala Lumpur in six years from 1992 to 1998. In 1992, as political secretary to Ghafar, he earned a total of RM7,000 ringgit a month, including perks.

There are many others. The crude Ahmad Saad, Anwar’s deputy in the Permatang Pauh division. Since Anwar became finance minister, he did an MBO of Volvo’s Federal Auto Holdings. Ahmad Saad controls listed LBI Berhad.

Anwar’s secretary in the division – Ishak Ismail – controls Idris Hydraulics and Kentucky Fried Chicken. When the Lau brothers of Leong Hup Holdings tried to ouster Ishak in a boardroom battle, they were arrested by police. On whose instructions?

Anuar Othman of Kumpulan Pinang. The number of privatisation projects within Penang and the country that went to Kumpulan Pinang will astound Malaysians.

Sarit Jusoh, his former political secretary, who owns a piece of KFC.

Yusof Yusoh, or Yusof Perancis, his former private secretary, who has received licences for two Independent Power Plants in Sabah.

Azmin Ali, a private secretary to Anwar since he graduated in 1988. Living in a posh double story bungalow in Damansara Heights, chauffeur driven in a BMW – all on a salary of RM2,500 a month. Azmin’s wife, Shida. An executive director of Phileo Allied’s property divison. Paid RM20,000 a month by crony Tong Kooi Ong.

Nazeri Abdullah of MRCB. For being a close supporter, he became controlling shareholder in four listed companies – MRCB, NSTP, TV3 and Malakoff. Not to mention the numerous privatisations and IPPs he received.

Ahmad Zahid Hamidi – he was a staunch ABIM supporter from the early days. In five years – from 1993 after he quit his RM7,000 a month job as political secretary to Najib Tun Razak – controlled listed companies such as Kretam and Hexagon and became chairman of Bank Simpanan Nasional. His multi-million dollar house in Country Heights and his 10 luxury cars are an open secret.

Latiff Mirasa – from being private secretary to Farid Ariffin in the Health Ministry earning RM2200 in 1993, he became a very rich businessman in 1994. He used his money to challenge and defeat Farid for the head of the Bagan Umno division. Then Anwar made him an executive councillor in Penang after the 1995 general elections. But he quit two years later to concentrate on “his lucrative business”.

Ismail Munir – another ABIM man. Suddenly, he was awarded a RM 2 billion IPP project by Anwar. Another mega-rich friend overnight.

Salomon Salamat, a former political secretary. Overnight a shareholder in listed companies and a multi-milliionaire, barely months after leaving his RM7000 job as political secretary to Anwar Ibrahim.

Rahim Ghouse – a relative through marriage and Anwar’s divisional Youth leader. Suddenly a major shareholder in listed Abrar Corporation and its executive director. From no background in business to running a multi-million dollar corporation backed by Kuwaiti funds. It is no surprise Abrar is today on the verge of bankruptcy.

Tong Kooi Ong – a young stock-broker, a whizz-kid, who packaged the MRCB deal for Ahmad Nazeri Abdullah. He was given the Central Co-operative Bank, now Phileo Bank, and now controls three listed companies through Anwar’s largesse. All within a period of five years. Tong could threaten Securities Commission chief Munir Majid with impunity. With similar impunity, he refused to join the Malaysian Stockbrokers Association, the only non-member in the industry, because he had direct access to Anwar.

And then, the family.

Father-in-law Dato Wan Ismail – director and shareholder in many listed companies, including Stamford College.

His daughter Wan Fairuz, sister of Wan Azizah, received 2000 acres of land in Batu Berendam, Malacca. Her former occupation? Photographer of Bernama news agency, earning RM1200 a month.

Anwar’s sister, Farizun Ibrahim, a housewife, with no experience in business. A co-owner of the Gianfranco Ferre franchise together with his adopted brother, Sukma Dermawan.

His father, Datuk Ibrahim Abdul Rahman. Chairman and substantial shareholder of IOI Berhad. Dato Ibrahim was awarded 50,000 hectares of state land for ranching by the Sabah Government over whom Anwar exercised tremendous influence. Received bumiputra share allocations in many listed companies.

His brother, Rani Ibrahim. Deputy head of Bagan Umno division. Deputy chairman of Olympia, a gambling company which obtained gambling liciences for Sabah from the Finance Ministry despite objections from the Sabah Government. Recipient of many bumi share issues.

Brother Marzuki Ibrahim. An operator of a petrol pump. Received licence to operate another two petrol pumps. Received bumi shares in listed FACB Berhad.

Brothers Idrus Ibrahim, a teacher, and Rosli Ibrahim, no known job, but driving in Mercedes Benzs and living upper middle-class lifestyles.

Anwar does not practise cronyism or corruption. Malaysians are being asked to believe that all those named above and many more whose names are not mentioned here but who, having been ordinary Malaysians like the rest of us, suddenly live the lifestyles of the rich and famous. Only because they knew Anwar and were his friends or relatives. What then is KKN?

-END-

A guide on what not to do during the #MH370 crisis

There are so many speculations on the recent crisis pertaining flight MH370 which could distract and hamper the search and rescue activities currently underway in the South China Seas.

Fortunately, the management of this crisis has been handled very well by Malaysia Airlines and the relevant authorities. With the Department of Civil Aviation taking charge of the search and rescue missions, it is commendable on the part of the agencies involved to remain professional in their duties.

The management of the crisis could have gone either way and it is a mark of true professionalism that Malaysia Airlines so far is on the dot in the proper procedures in handling this serious incident. Below is an article from the Business Insider which could have been taken as a case study on what not to do during an aviation crisis.

Asiana Airlines Needs Serious Help With Crisis Management

As the FAA and NTSB continue to investigate the July 6th accident in which 3 were killed and 182 were injured at San Francisco International Airport (SFO), crisis management experts are scratching their heads at the perplexing response of Asiana Airlines.

Crisis Management protocols

When there is a crisis, the proper procedure is for PR-savvy company representatives to talk with the public through the media to reassure them that everything is being done to investigate the cause and insure the safety of the airline and the wellbeing of its passengers.

The idea is to get ahead of the story and make current and future customers as comfortable as possible in doing business with the Airline. As Korea’s second biggest airline, Asiana needs to make every effort to take care of its passengers and protect its reputation while allaying the fears of the flying public.

Asiana’s response

Asiana, however, has done the opposite of what crisis management protocols suggest. With the exception of a brief apology to victims and families a day after the crash, Asiana has been largely silent. When CEO Yoon Young-doo arrived at SFO airport 3 days after the accident, he declined to comment. Even more surprising, the airline did not have a trained public relations representative accompany the CEO to address the media either. The following day, six of twelve flight attendants appeared at a news conference, but none of them said a word, and some hid their faces. It appears they don’t know that when you are silent, many in the public think you are hiding something. While lawyers often recommend you don’t talk, marketers know that silence is the opposite of what a company faced with such a crisis should do.

Attempt to silence passengers

What’s even worse is the Airline has instructed passengers not to talk with anyone. On Wednesday, CBS This Morning featured a story about the Xu family who told reporter Carter Evans in an interview he taped on his iPhone that the Airline controlled nearly every aspect of their lives and told them not to speak with the media. In fact, when the reporter arrived at their hotel, airline security tried to prevent him from speaking with the family. Since these efforts to stifle the media appeared on camera on a major news broadcast, they supported what the Xu family was saying and raised further suspicions about Asiana.

Pointing fingers

Even though the pilots involved in the crash were novices landing and supervising the landing of a Boeing 777 at SFO, they pointed the finger at the automatic speed controls of the plane. According to the head of the NTSB, there are no signs of failure of the automatic speed controls or other automatic flight equipment on the plane that crashed. Such accusations by the pilots do nothing to inspire public confidence – especially since the early evidence points to pilot error as a potential cause of the accident. Also, the fact that this is the first fatal accident involving a Boeing 777, which has a record of being one of the safest planes in the sky, makes the finger-pointing even more suspicious.

Risky Business

While flying is the safest form of travel, it is a risky business for those involved in making and flying the planes. When bad things happen, the best companies can do is to quickly figure out the problem and be forthcoming with customers. What can any business learn from this latest incident involving Asiana Airlines? Employ the fact procedure to protect your reputation.

    • Admit the problem, and apologize if necessary (do not “point the finger” at others because it is likely to compromise your credibility).
    • Limit the scope (in this case put the incident in perspective and provide data that shows that flying on a Boeing 777 from Asiana is very safe).
    • Propose a solution so it will not happen again (if it is found to be the cause, a more rigorous training and pilot supervision program would be the solution).

If implementing the fact procedure is premature

In a case such as this when the cause of the accident is not yet known with certainty, the airline should not be silent as Asiana has been. And, it should not try to control what the passengers say to the media. This just fuels suspicion. It should make it clear to the flying public that it (1) is doing everything in its power to cooperate with the investigation and (2) will continue to do whatever is necessary to insure the safety of its airline and the wellbeing of its passengers.

Since Asiana has proven to be inept in this crisis, and some believe this may be a cultural issue, it should hire US crisis management experts for advice to protect its reputation going forward.

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/asiana-airlines-accident-response-continues-to-be-just-plane-stupid-2013-7#ixzz2vY1AbuMP

Letter from a reader on the ‘Allah’ imbroglio

The curious case of (the maybe) mad grab for political power in Sarawak (and perhaps Sabah, too)

By Ruhayat X

I didn’t want to say anything about the Allah issue since there are too many idiots on both sides as it is. But then the Klang church decided to conduct their BM services using Allah, but not their Tamil and English ones. I found that curious. And enlightening.

Because the word for God in Tamil is not Allah?

News flash: neither is it in Malay.

A question of motives
I question the motive and the timing. I will argue that the motive is dictating the timing, as we will see later. For now:

The argument that has become a familiar refrain is that the Christian natives of Sabah, Sarawak and Indonesia have been using Allah to refer to God for generations. Well, then, I’m sorry to say, but for those very generations, they have been terribly misled by their shepherds.

To bow to Allah is like bowing to Krishna. Both heretical gods to Christians.

Or as a Christian commenter to a blog put it:

“Allah is not simply the Arabic word for “god” – the word Allah in pre-Islamic times referred to the Moon God in the Arabic pantheon of gods. To suggest that Jews insert “Allah” instead of the words which we do use (HASHEM, etc.) is blasphemy in and of itself. We might as well use the word Zeus or Shiva! (…) His name is not, by any stretch of the imagination, “Allah”.”

It seems the bibles should indeed be amended to reflect the truth, yes, but that truth is not what they might think it is.

When Allah is not god
Perhaps a brief appreciation of semiotics and etymology?

In England, Hoover is a brand that has become so ubiquitous it is sometimes used as hoover – small h – as a noun to mean vacuum cleaners, or a verb (to hoover) to mean vacuuming. Here, Colgate became the same. Malay to child: “Gi kedai beli colgate skek” – meaning, any toothpaste will do, not just Colgate.

Now observe:
The Malays will sometimes say Tuhan when what they mean is Allah. “Tuhan je yang tahu” – in their hearts, they think of Allah.

But it is NEVER used the other way. The Malays would never use Allah as a catch-all for Tuhan. I have never heard a single Malay say, “Orang Buddha pun ada Allah. Allah dalam agama Buddha kata…” Never.

So I said, the Christian natives have been badly led astray. Lead them back to the straight path. Teach them: it’s Tuhan, not Allah.

An Arabic God, then?
You may then want to argue about the Arab etymology of the noun Al-Lah. The God. A seemingly generic term. So you want to transfer the language specific to the usage in one community, into quite a foreign context, thinking the same meaning ought to apply. How colonial.

But it doesn’t matter – you are on the side of the righteous. So you suddenly champion the voice of a renowned international Muslim cleric, who says Allah is a universal entity and all humanity can use his name. Fair enough. But my advice then is this: if you wish to take the words of clerics from foreign realms, than take the whole of their decrees, not only whenever it suits you.

Take what they say about the universal usage of Allah if you must, but don’t reject their words once they start imposing syariah on you. Cherry-picking to suit arguments ain’t the traits of a learned person.

But another big but
We borrow again from a Christian source to share with you this revelation: that Allah is not the generic term for God. Viz:

“In summary, ArabBible uses the definite, common noun, “al-ilaah” to refer to God, rather than the Islamic proper noun, “Allah”. We believe this is based on good Biblical and linguistic precedents.

Yet know that in Islam the different realms have traditionally been governed by indigenous authorities who have autonomous power. That’s why our laws have some variations, to take into account the special needs and traditions of a given people and their environment.

Thus, without denying the authority of Yusuf Qardawi, I stand by argument that the term “Allah” has specific meaning to the Malays different than in the Middle Eastern context. We have Allah, and we have Tuhan. Whereas to the Arabs, Muslim or otherwise, Allah is Tuhan is Allah.

Educate yourself a little. Read the Quran and see what characteristics this Allah – who calls himself such – ascribes himself. And then know what the Malays mean when they say “Allah”.

Christians who deny Allah
We’ve already had the strange phenomenon of non-Muslims suddenly championing a Muslim cleric to state the case for Allah. You realise it works just as well the other way around, too, right?

“The names of Allah reveal him as a distinct entity. Likewise, the names of the God of Israel, reveal Him as a distinct entity. The conclusion is that the two beings do not agree in their names and therefore do not agree in their personalities, purposes, character, attributes or essence.
–2008 Hannah Henderson
Hannah Henderson is an ordained minister and writer for Heavenly Manna.”

And I did say, didn’t I, that if you use Allah instead of Tuhan, your akidah sudah terpesong. This is from another Christian personality:

““Allah is an extremely powerful demon. He is a demon God. What Muslims are worshiping is actually a demon. They think they are worshiping God, they’re deceived, they’ve been fooled, so I don’t want to be hard on them, the Muslims have been fooled, they’ve been lied to, they’ve been deceived, they think they are worshiping the true God but they are worshiping a demon-god, this is according to the New Testament.”

See? Now set ’em back on the right path, Good Paderi Andrew, saviour of Christian souls!

And Allah for all…
While he’s on his crusade, we’re sure Paderi Andrew will sooner or later demand changes to both the Rukunegara and Negaraku, too. Yes?

Kepercayaan kepada Allah?

Rahmat bahgia, Allah kurniakan?

I will, however, accept the universal usage of Allah once the Vatican starts using it to refer the true God. Allah only for BM and Iban speakers? That’s hardly universal.

You know, if the Klang church had conducted services in all languages using the single term “Allah”, we wouldn’t even need to have this discussion.

It’s even stranger because a book store near my place plays Islamic ceramahs in Tamil all the time and guess what, they use Allah every time. So Allah exists in Tamil. Just not in church. And this is “universal”. Uhuh. Now we have to question the motive. Now we ask, wait, hang on a sec, what’s really going on?

The question of why
Christian natives in Sabah and Sarawak have been using Allah for ages with no big drama, nor does it raise even an eyebrow of their Muslim or other fellow citizens. So why now? And why such vehement insistence to extend its use on the Peninsula? For the sake of migrant Borneans? But they have been migrant here in drives for ages, too!

I can’t speak for all the Malay Muslims out here but frankly, I don’t like the stink of the motives. I don’t think he is sincere in wanting to use the “universal term” of Allah. I do think our pastor is dabbling in some pretty unChristian behaviour here.

So far there has been no big reaction from Putrajaya other than “Keep Calm And Remain Sane”. But whatever I might think of the Ah Jib Gor administration, I think he knows that the damage control he needs to do is not here in Semenanjung. But over there in Sarawak, and Sabah.

Because when you reflect on it to its logical conclusion – why is this happening = who profits the most out of it? – this is what the whole Allah campaign seems to be really about:

It hides the wedge of a knife into the BN honeypots of East Malaysia.

To risk disunity to wrest power, now that takes some special kind of crazy, don’t you agree.

How to fiddle in Rome
The tragedy is that could it be that Muslims are being pitted against Christians ostensibly so that some people could shake Sarawak, and maybe Sabah, and take power at the next General Election? If so, see what some people would do just to come to power.

At the Tuol Sleng in Phnom Penh I first observed, how evil could be so mundane. A torture prison set up in the ordinary precincts of a school. Can you imagine? It’s hard to as you stroll through the leafy walkway outside. It’s just a school. Until you see the rows and rows of faded black and white photos of the men, women and children who had been “processed” through it.

This is true also of Machiavellian politics. They make you think of some grand agenda, a clash of civilisations, something romantic.

But in the centre of it lies something so mundane: a simple political power play.

END.

The sly christian priests and the naïve muslims

It is tiring to educate people on the issue of “kalimah Allah”. And it is even more exhausting to think that we have to explain to certain group of muslims on why the word ‘Allah’ should not be used by christians here.

Muslims in general, if they had known the real reason on why here in Malaysia it is offensive for christians to use it, they should not be supporting a church in Selangor who remained recalcitrant and arrogant in continuing the use of the word Allah in their hymns and masses.

Even people like Marina Mahathir and her like minded muslims friends are too ignorant and could not fathom the reason on why christians here in Malaysia should not use the word Allah in the face of the majority of Malaysians. And who are the majority of Malaysians? The muslims of course.

So here is the answer from a renown scholar by the name Dr. Zakir Naik. The answer gets interesting after the 2.30 minute mark. This is 9 minute video in which the muslims and the christians should watch:

Basically, what Dr Zakir is saying, christians can use the word Allah – but if you associate Allah (the one True God) with Jesus Christ or the Trinity, then you are ‘kufur’. Why would us muslims want to permit ourselves to become kufur just like the christians?

Why would Marina Mahathir, who worships Allah S.W.T. whereby Allah that she worships does not have a son, and certainly have got nothing to do with the Holy Spirit, is crying on top of her lungs to defend the christians on their right to equate Allah with Jesus, or Allah with the Holy Spirit?

Now this is why it is offensive for muslims (except for some muslim politicians and the more liberal muslims) to see the christians using the word Allah in their christian and sermons.

Those liberal muslims are so naive in their freedom of speech and religion of other people they forgot what effect this will have on muslims here.

The christians in Malaysia especially in Selangor have never used the word Allah in any of their prayers before. We at this blog have never met any of our christian friends who had prayed to Allah all this while. And apparently, not all christian churches in Malaysia agreed to use the word Allah in their mass. To them, Allah as a God is a different concept altogether from their own understanding of God – Yahweh, Jesus Christ etc.

If you are christian and reading this, do you use Allah in any of your prayers? Unless of course you are that small part of East Malaysians who actually used the word Allah in their bibles over there. But that is another matter which will be discussed later below.

But first, what is the agenda of this one Father Lawrence Andrew who insisted that christians in Selangor must be given the right to use the word Allah? Why is he so insensitive to jeopardise the harmonious relationship between muslims and christians over here? Christianity teaches blatant disregard towards tolerance and

If Father Lawrence himself never prayed to Allah all these years, it will be hypocritical for him to start now. It does not matter if he lamely stated that just recently, his flock has many East Malaysians now. Is he saying that being tolerant towards the sensitivities of muslims in Selangor takes a back seat over the need of much smaller community?

There should be give and take when looking at the bigger picture.

The other problem besides the muslims giving permission for other people to equate Allah towards something the He is not (syirik), is the potential fraud and subterfuge that comes with the use of Allah in Christianity.

This was somewhat shown in one of the previous article “Worshiping Jesus in Islam”. This time, the covert Christian evangelicals and their tactics can even be read openly in their portals such as the article “Son and The Crescent” in the Christian Today portal, as well as in the article “Case for God“. The links provided in latter has examples on the proselytisation of muslims into christians.

The evangelicals use tactics which they term as Conceptualisation and Localisation when preaching christianity to muslims. They use terms and jargons familiar with the muslims in the effort to convert them. To cut the story short, that is the reason why the malay bibles exist today with the word ‘Allah’ transcribed into them instead of the word ‘Tuhan’ which is a more logical translation for God.

Ultimately, the christians in East Malaysia during the British era was taught the bible using the bibles from Indonesia and this is what the Father Lawrence and Marina Mahathir is frighting today – that the christians in East Malaysia have used the word Allah in their bibles for centuries, which incidentally, this argument is based on the wrong facts and entirely founded on the grounds of subterfuge propagated by the christian missionaries a couple of centuries ago. How unfortunate.

Below is the video by christians, for the christians on how they covertly change their proselytisation technique to suit every culture they come across. What these evangelicals want it to spread Christianity and Jesus Christ around the world.

This deception and double-dealing is something that is real which muslims must be wary about. We have enough agitators which want nothing more than to see chaos and racial upheaval in Malaysia so that they can benefit from it one way or another. Does Father Lawrence want to see this happen by remaining stubborn and wilfully defiant?

Even an imam (Imam Muhammad Musri) from in the USA recently wrote something in Huffington Post recently. Although he is quite ignorant in his article especially pertaining to the real happenings here in Malaysia, he did mention about the stealth of christians in trying to proselytise muslims:

Screen Shot 2014-01-09 at 7.42.25 PM

His only ignorance is when he thought the word ‘Allah’ is the right term for ‘God’ among Malaysians. Which is definitely not true. The right term for God is Tuhan. For Malaysians, Allah is an arabic word recognised only by muslims as God.

But as  Muhammad Musri said above, fraud (stealth proselytisation) deserves appropriate penalties (which obviously is stated in our own Constitution) and it is up to the muslims to defend themselves against these tricksters.

As a conclusion, there are two fronts on why the muslims are against the word ‘Allah’ being used by the Christians:

1) they do not want to be an accomplice when some people equate Allah for something He is not, and;

2) the element of trickery evidenced by the centuries of proselytisation methods among the evangelicals towards the unsuspecting muslims.

If you are a muslim and your iman is strong, congratulations. But there are many muslims out there who are ignorant and not strong enough to counter the onslaught from some christian missionaries whose sole objective is to bring the muslims to embrace christianity.

If you have not listened to what Dr Zakir Naik said in the video above, please do so. It will give you some comprehension on the subject. And please watch the second too. Thank you.

The snapshot on global economy and the local economy

If anyone of the readers here haven’t read the Confessions of an Economic Hitman book, here is a Youtube video where the author summarily describes the content of the book in about 11 minutes.

Locally, our own economy is floundering.

None of the great economic consultants employed by the Prime Minister are able to find the right formula to revitalise the local economy yet. Today, the blogger Darah Tuah wrote a snapshot on the economic position of this country right now particularly the economic relationship between the bumiputera and the non-bumiputera. The blogger gave recommendations as well.

Maybe PEMANDU and other advisers can learn a little bit of something about it too.

Please have a read HERE.

Thank you.

Worshiping Jesus in Islam

Thanks to blogger SatD, we came across this intriguing article on covert Christian evangelicals in East Africa. It tells a story of a muslim man who became an ardent follower of Christ eventhough outwardly, he is still deemed by the general community as a muslim.

But as the interview progressed, it is becoming clear that he is really a pure Christian at heart whereby he discounted the role of Prophet Muhammad and elevated the position of Christ (Isa Al Masih) and of course, believe in the Trinity (Holy Spirit, Father and Son).

In the belief system of any muslim, the centre of it all is the iman; and the most important part of the iman is the belief in Allah. The one true God. He neither begets nor was begotten. Which runs contrary to the Christian beliefs.

However, from the interview below which appeared in the web portal Christianity Today, the interviewee (known as a pseudonym of “Abu Jaz”) is clearly a member of an evangelical movement trying to subvert the unassuming muslims into a practising christian.

Remember SatD’s post about the type of muslims which are targeted by the Evangelicals? Within the post there is a schedule on the types on Christians in the muslim world:

vcfd

Types of Christians (C1 to C6) in the muslim world and how they are perceived by fellow muslims

Abu Jaz is clearly a C5 type of christian. And together with his movement, they are trying to move into C6 where they will be perceived as muslims but privately, they are christians. Note that for a muslim, the moment you believe in the Trinity and the bible, in substance, you are no longer a muslim. And Abu Jaz cited extensively verses from the bible and not once from the Quran. He even talked about syncretism between Christian and Islam.

Do read below on their modus operandi, which among others, telling muslims that they (the Christians) worship Allah too. The opening paragraphs are just misdirection in stating that Abu Jaz is still a muslim and not necessarily be a christian. But as mentioned before, as the interview progressed, it is an obvious fact that Abu Jaz is clearly a christian. We assure you this interview is a really great read in knowing the intricacies of the evangelical movement in East Africa.

________________________________

Worshiping Jesus in the Mosque

Can people from other religious traditions genuinely follow Jesus without becoming “Christians”? The question is a point of much dispute within today’s missions world. Those who follow Jesus yet don’t formally express Christian faith are said to belong to insider movements. And no insider movement has received more attention than Muslims who embrace Christ yet stay within their Islamic community. “Insiders” are hard to access due to cultural, geographic, and linguistic barriers. As a result, many Christians have taken positions on insider movements without ever having met or spoken with someone who belongs to one. In the following exclusive interview, we hear from just such an insider.

The following is the synthesis of two interviews conducted in 2011 with “Abu Jaz,” a key leader in a movement that describes itself as the People of the Gospel. This group represents several thousand Muslims in eastern Africa who have converted to faith in Christ during the past decade, but who have remained in their Muslim communities. Abu Jaz is married and has three children. He started followingIsa al Masih (“Jesus the Messiah”) as the Savior 18 years ago.

The interview was conducted by “Gene Daniels,” a missionary in the Muslim community for over a decade, who has published many articles in missionary journals. Christianity Today has verified the authenticity of the interviewer and interviewee, whose real names are withheld so that the work of the People of the Gospel will be protected.

Describe your conversion to Christ.

One night the only food my wife and I had was a small portion of macaroni. My wife prepared it very nicely. Then one of her friends knocked on the door. I told myself, The macaroni is not sufficient for even the two of us, so how will it be enough for three of us?But because we have no other custom, we opened the door, and she came in to eat with us.

While we were eating, the macaroni started to multiply; it became full in the bowl. I suspected that something was wrong with my eyes, so I started rubbing them. I thought maybe my wife hid some macaroni under the small table, so I checked, but there was nothing. My wife and I looked at each other, but because the guest was there we said nothing.

Afterward I lay down on the bed, and as I slept, Isa came to me and asked me, “Do you know who multiplied the macaroni?” I said, “I don’t know.” He said, “I am Isa al Masih. If you follow me, not only the macaroni but your life will be multiplied.”

He didn’t tell me that he was God; he didn’t tell me that he died on behalf of me; he didn’t say, “I am the Son of God.” He didn’t talk to me about any complicated theological issues. He only told me that if I followed him, he would multiply my life. At that time, I was very happy if he only multiplied the macaroni like he did that day. I didn’t understand what he meant when he said that my life would be multiplied. Now I understand what that means. But at that time, I accepted him simply as the “lord of macaroni.”

Much like the crowds in the Gospels who accepted him as “lord of bread.”

Yes, I just accepted him as one who satisfied my needs. That day I understood that because Allah loved me, Isa came to my home.

When I think back now, the kingdom of God came to my home. Jesus said, “[I]f I cast out demons … the kingdom … has come upon you” (Luke 11:20, NASB). Any miracle that takes place by Isa al Masih speaks of the kingdom of God. It was not because I was poor that Isa came to my home; there are many poor. It is not because he wanted to multiply my macaroni. Maybe there might be other people who can multiply macaroni, like magic. So what is the purpose? Isa al Masih came to my home with the kingdom of God. He didn’t completely explain theological issues, he only said, “If you will follow.”

I went to an [evangelical] church after that, and I faced a cultural challenge as a Muslim. Everything was different—their way of worship, the way they sang songs, the way they danced. Nothing was familiar to me.

I have my own expression of worship. When it comes to greetings, I say, As-salaam ‘alaykum (“Peace be upon you”), and I expect people to reply, Wa ‘alaykum Salaam wa rahmatu l-laahi wa barakaatuh (“Peace to you and may God’s mercy and blessings be upon you”). And we Muslims have a way of shaking hands. But in the church, it was totally different. Nobody liked my expressions. Brothers and sisters told me that As-salaam ‘alaykum and Wa ‘alaykum salaam were from the Devil, so it was hard for me to join and start life with members of the church.

I went to an [evangelical] church, and I faced a cultural challenge as a Muslim. Everything was different—their way of worship, the way they sang songs, the way they danced. Nothing was familiar to me.

One day the pastor came to me and said, “How are you?” I answered, “Alhamdulillah!” (“Praise be to God!”). The pastor was very angry. He said, “No, brother! No more Alhamdulillah. Your God is changed from Allah to God [using the tribal name]. You have to express your thanksgiving to God as a Christian, and we have our own expression of thanksgiving to God.” He ordered me to say, “Praise the Lord” and “Praise to God.” He asked me to not use the term Allah because Allah is evil, Allah is the Devil, Allah is the black stone, Allah is an idol. That was the first time I had heard [anyone say] that Allah is an idol or evil. I was shocked. When I do my spiritual duties, I think I am doing them for Allah. He is the one who created the universe, sustains the universe, and judges the universe. I couldn’t in my mind imagine that Allah is an idol or evil.

The next day the pastor asked, “How are you?” I wanted to replace his words with my own Alhamdulillah, but since the pastor warned me not to, I didn’t. I tried to say, “Praise the Lord,” or “Praise to God,” but for 33 years I had never used these words or the tribal name for God, and it was difficult to do so. So I stayed [in the church] without sayingAlhamdulillah for more than three months. I simply said, “I am fine.” I wanted to express my gratitude to Allah, but because of their understanding [of the term], I suppressed it.

Then I started questioning the justice of God. I asked him, “God, you are the one who put me in a Muslim culture; it was not my choice. They don’t allow me to express [my praise] in the congregation. When they hear Islamic terminologies, they immediately rebuke me, so I prefer to keep silent. You like the Orthodox culture, you like the traditional African culture, you like Jewish culture, you like the European culture, you like cultures of other people groups, but you dislike the Muslims. So you are not just.”

This stayed with me for two years. But finally, because I had no other alternative, I completely accepted the evangelical cultural context, and I dissolved all of my Islamic cultural identity. No more Islamic terms; [you could say] that in my context I became circumcised. Then people finally accepted me as a believer, but it isolated me from my own Muslim community.

Did the church accept you when you abandoned your Islamic identity?

When I changed my culture they thought I had finally become a believer; before that they did not consider me one. When I changed my culture to become like them, they even clapped their hands and said, “Now Abu Jaz has become a believer.” But I had already believed for two years.

After some time, I had the chance to go to a Bible college. While I studied there, I learned the difference between the supracultural substance of the Word of God and the cultural form that expresses it. Then my question was answered, [and I understood] that God really does love everyone. God opened my eyes to understand that all cultures are equal in his eyes. It is not holy contexts, only holy texts.

From that time, 1998 by the European calendar, I started to prepare myself to speak with my own community. In the Bible college, I discovered myself, and I wanted to restore my cultural identity again, the identity of my culture, not for the sake of the people, but to express myself and my faith in God. I went back and restored my former Islamic cultural identity. Then I rejoiced that God is just.

Still, even if I had theological and cultural challenges in the Christian community, I experienced love there, a love that was alive. The believers showed me and my wife kindness and love. So I praise God for these people.

But I understand the pain of Muslims. I understand what they fear. When they hear the Good News, they want to have Isa al Masih, but because they have been told that it is only Christians who think about him, they reject him. But now we are not repeating the same mistake.

Talk a little about the theology of your movement.

We do not use systematic theology, even though I studied [it] in Bible college and understand how and when Christians developed different Christologies, for example. I know church history, and I know the creeds and when they started. The early church fathers faced external and internal challenges; they wrote the creeds to solve their own challenges, in their own contexts. So if [the] church fathers solved their own problems by finding answers in the Word of God, then the people who are working among the Muslims have to identify their own problems and even call councils to discuss the challenges and apologetic [issues] in these contexts.

How do you go about sharing the gospel in your context?

It is important to start [by asking], What is the purpose of preaching the gospel? We find our thinking in Acts 14:15, where Paul says, “We are bringing you good news, telling you to turn from these worthless things to the living God, who made the heavens and the earth and the sea and everything in them.” So bringing the Good News to people is turning them back to their Creator God. Of course, we must do this in Isa, in Jesus, but we have to start just as Paul did, with the Creator God.

This is general revelation. If we destroy general revelation, there is no more special revelation. As far as I know, Paul directly addressed non-Jewish religions twice, and both times, he started with general revelation but ended up with Jesus, the ultimate revelation of God, as the one appointed by God the Creator to save people. The Book of Acts tells us that. But to believers, in the Epistles, he taught them that Jesus is divine. No one can say Jesus is Lord without the Spirit (1 Cor. 12:3).

Muslims believe there is a Creator of heaven and earth, and his name is Allah. If you tell a Muslim about the Creator of heaven and earth, but say that the Creator is not Allah, the Muslim will be very confused. What you are telling him is not good news.

We need a Muslim-focused church-planting strategy, a church that uses the terms and forms from their Muslim community, not something from other religious communities.

If you believe that even Muslims have received general revelation, then you have to start there. If you don’t believe this, you don’t believe your own [evangelical] theology. But if you come to them with good news, [to] restore their relationship with the Creator God, then you have to receive the name they have for him, Allah. If we say that the one they know as Allah is not God, we are not [speaking] against the religion of Islam, or Muhammad or Qur’an, but against the doctrine of general revelation. The missionary must first receive the name of the Creator God from the people, and then they have heavenly authority to give the people the name of the Savior, Isa al Masih.

How is this different from simply believing in the Muslim prophet Isa, as in the Qur’an?

Muslims believe that Isa is a prophet and messenger of Allah, but that he is superseded by Muhammad, the prophet of Islam. According to Islam, salvation is based on the teaching of Muhammad. But you still have something to start with in Islam. You start with their limited Christology and Christ’s role in the kingdom of God, mainly his role in the Day of Judgment. Muslims start to think from Islamic Christology, but they end up with Isa [as the one] who overcame the power of death. They progressively understand him, from prophet and messenger to Savior and then to Lord. But this takes time and the Holy Spirit, as it also did for Peter.

But while they are slowly coming to understand who Jesus is, why don’t you also slowly bring them into the Christian church?

It is possible for Muslim-background believers to join the existing church. But the evangelical church in my country represents a mixture of two religious forms, the Coptic Church and traditional religion.

If I say to Muslims, “Come to this church with me,” I am inviting them to a very strange thing. Also, this is saying to them that they do not deserve a church that connects with their community. This is why we need a Muslim-focused church-planting strategy, because it will produce a church that uses the terms and forms from their Muslim community, not something from other religious communities.

Many Christians in the West would agree that Muslim-focused evangelistic strategy is needed. But many of them also feel that a Muslim-focused church is going too far.

Why is it too far? All people have a church-planting strategy that fits their religious context. Why is there a [problem] when we come to Islam? So we ask, “Do Muslims deserve a church that fits their cultural context?” We are not trying to bring them into the already [existing] evangelical church. They should have a church that reflects their culture. Then we can say that we have an indigenous church, one that grows from the soil of the Muslim community. To “hook” one person into the evangelical church is possible. But the question is how we can fish with a net.

When you are talking to one person you [are also] talking to his community. He represents the whole community. What we say to one will go back to all the rest. So we want to reach a whole community and bring community transformation. The content of church is from heaven, but the form of the church should be from the ground, the culture. The church should reflect Muslim culture, not Muslim theology.

How do the people in your movement view Muhammad? Is there confusion?

First, we cannot rule out syncretism at the beginning of a new believer’s life. The purpose of discipleship is to separate their old beliefs from their new beliefs. So when they put their faith in Jesus, they may have at the same time Muhammad in their heart. But when they start to pray in the name of Isa for their own need, they experience joy, assurance, and peace. And when they pray in the name of Jesus and find people healed and demons cast out, they completely stop thinking about Muhammad. It is a process of the Holy Spirit.

[We should] categorize people in how they relate to Jesus: Where are these people, and where is Jesus in their life? We should ask, “Does this person accept Isa as Lord of their life?”

But what about Muhammad?

Before [they believe in Isa], Muslims acknowledge Muhammad as the final prophet of God. Then we tell them about Isa al Masih. They already know that Isa al Masih was a prophet that raised people from the dead. They know that Isa al Masih did miracles and that he will come as the sign of the Day of Judgment.

Even though they know all this, they are not intentionally thinking about Isa; they are thinking about Muhammad. But when we tell them the gospel, they begin to think about Isa intentionally as the one who will save them from the Day of Judgment, from Satan, from antichrist, from death.

At that point, they mix Muhammad with Isa al Masih. Before, Isa was not the issue. Muhammad was the issue. But when they hear about Isa, they start to bring Isa up to the level of Muhammad. Before, Muhammad was the one who controlled their life.But when they hear the Good News of the kingdom of God, they start to think about Isa. Now syncretism has started; before there was no syncretism. If missionaries don’t ever want problems with syncretism, then just leave them with Muhammad [grins].

But syncretism did not start with us. It started even in Paul’s time. That was the reason Paul wrote the Epistle to the Galatians. It is not [an] issue because we are Muslims; syncretism starts because people normally start with their own religious background. When people start to think about Isa intentionally, the Holy Spirit has room to lead them into all truth, even if they first mix Isa and Muhammad. The Holy Spirit through time will glorify Isa al Masih in their lives.

So after the new birth, the Holy Spirit begins to open their minds to understand more fully the Messiah.

Yes, of course. Before they believe in Jesus, the Holy Spirit will convict them about sin, righteousness, and judgment. As soon as they give their will to Jesus, they will receive the Holy Spirit and be born again and become a child of God. Then the Holy Spirit starts to live in them. Because the Holy Spirit lives in them, he will lead them to all [the] truth of Jesus. Then the Holy Spirit will give them revelation, and they will say that Jesus is Lord.

The [rest of the community] have started to think now, and they say, “Lial lial rasul Isa“—”These are the people of the messenger Isa.” They’ll say, “Who are these people? These people are not Christians. These people are not Muslims. Who are they? Let’s go and hear what they are thinking.” We explain as much as possible from the Bible. People ask us, “Who is Isa for you?” Our answer is, “He is the Word of Allah.” Then we quote from the Qur’an, but explain what the “Word of Allah” means from a biblical perspective.

If the Muslim community thinks the new believers “are not Christians and are not Muslims,” what do the new believers themselves think? What is their self-identity?

When they first come to believe in Isa, of course they still think [of themselves] as Muslims. What else could they think? We are not telling them they are now Christians.

But when they understand the gospel more clearly, they don’t want to have an Islamic religious identity. Yet they also do not want to let go of their cultural identity as Muslims, which naturally includes forms from their previous way of life and worship.

Where is Jesus in the life of the people in your movement, the People of the Gospel?

When people want to know our faith articles, we can tell them. But when it comes to individual people, we cannot say so easily, because they are not all on the same level. We find some people who say Jesus is God, some who understand that Jesus is the Savior. Others say he is the Word of Allah, without explanation, as they are struggling to understand what that means. Sometimes they understand Isa, other times they don’t. So we have to instruct them.

We have to teach them from the things that they already know. For example, some people may not [understand] if I tell them that Jesus died on their behalf. Islam has a different theology of sin; they don’t accept that Jesus died on their behalf. It is true that he died on their behalf, but it is not the only benefit [of Christ’s death].

When he died on the cross, he defeated death and the one who owned the power of death, Satan. And because God raised Jesus from the dead, he was appointed by God as a judge on the Day of Judgment, and the Savior from the Day of Judgment. The Cross is the answer for every [issue] in life. It is the solution regarding our relation to God, Satan, sin, death, and so on.

It is the evangelist’s responsibility to choose which benefit of the Cross is the answer for the spiritual needs a Muslim feels. Then gradually the Holy Spirit will explain the benefit of the Cross as it relates to their sin.

Muslims are afraid of evil spirits; they are afraid of the Day of Judgment. They are afraid of the Devil. I have a message from the kingdom of God that addresses all of these spiritual needs. So we are using the Muslim way of thinking about Isa, even if it is incomplete. If Muslims understand even one of these, they will call to Isa, and the Holy Spirit can lead them to understand more benefits of the Cross.

There are lots of opportunities in Islam; there are also lots of challenges. But the opportunities are bigger than the challenges. We must remember that it is not we who are bringing God to the Muslim people. He was already here.

Malaysian Insider now takes below average columnists

Oh dear, we think MALAYSIAN INSIDER has really gone down the drain in terms of editorial quality.

An article which was filled with factual errors and major delusions was published by this portal.

That article which was titled – ‘May 13 was not a racial riot’ was written by one called Stephen Ng.

We do not know who this Stephen Ng is, but we wish to correct his writing.

Maybe he was ignorant. Maybe he was brainwashed by Kua Kia Soong. But one obvious fact remains, he got his facts and chronology of the events wrong.

Basically, Stephen Ng was writing fiction.

Just like how DAP intended to falsify history by telling the current generation they were innocent and was not involved in the riots AT ALL, Stephen Ng was trying to divert the blame entirely on Umno; which he massively failed to do so.

Son, if you wish to rewrite history, please do so among your other gullible and ignorant friends. But you are writing for public consumption. You have ended up being a fool.

So let us begin.

We shall ignore the first part of his article since that was merely a justification to show the audience that he is credible enough to talk about May 13. But being a 5 year old boy in 1969 doesn’t warrant him any credence what more by only referring to Kua Kia Soong as his source of materials. Thus, based only by experience as a 5 year old boy living in the East Coast and using Kua Kia Soong’s laughable May 13 book as reference, we can already establish Stephen Ng’s expertise on the subject is next to nothing.

He said:

As a boy, I was listening in to every conversation that took place between my mother and other relatives and friends. There were horror stories of Malays killing the Chinese, and Chinese killing the Malays. But a phone conversation between my mother and my father that has never escaped my attention was that everything was peaceful in the East Coast.

My Father said that the Chinese and the Malays were having breakfast together. There was no riot in the East Coast. It was business as usual for them. Muthusamy, Ali and Ah Chong were still friends, when things went awry in Selangor. Why is that so, Datuk Seri Nazri?

JMD : Indeed there were no riots and relatively peaceful in the East Coast because the racial riots happened in Klang Valley. This IS a fact. Riots and racial clashes did happen. Stephen should be thankful his chinese neighbours didn’t provoke the malays there in East Coast. Why is that Stephen Ng? Because the chinese there were in the minority and at a minuscule percentage as compared to the much bigger chinese population in Klang Valley.

Racial riots? No way!

My answer is simple: May 13 was NOT a racial riot. It was the work of a few politicians who capitalised on sentiments of the day.

Although there were obvious bad vibes between the races, mainly perpetuated by politicians, citizens of the newly-minted country, who had already learnt to accept each other, were beginning to enjoy being fellow Malaysians.

In Kelantan and other parts of the country, or should I say, where PAS was in control, people were able to live more harmoniously since the day of Prophet Muhammad!

JMD : Yes because there were no DAP or Labour Party or Gerakan Party in Kelantan in 1969. Of course people in Kelantan lived harmoniously.

Who then caused the May 13 riots? I only found the answer very much later when I started reading the book by Dr Kua Kia Soong, May 13, and made my own observations in the past six years.

JMD : Please read other books than Kua Kia Soong’s heavily biased book. Kua Kia Soong was just trying to exonerate DAP.

Let me briefly share my thoughts.

May 13 is the work of politicians who lost the 1969 general election. The opposition had tied with the Alliance for control of the Selangor state legislature, a large setback in the polls for the Alliance. The big difference now is that Selangor is totally under Pakatan rule for the good of the people.

Several factors had created the tension. The then Menteri Besar of Selangor, Haron Idris was discontented with the results of the election. At the same time, another camp was discontented with Tunku Abdul Rahman, our beloved Bapa Malaysia.

At that point in time, Dr Mahahtir Mohamed had been sacked after his book, The Malay Dilemma, was banned. Tunku had warned that Mahathir was a big troublemaker, and Umno would be making a big mistake if it was to take him back into its fold.

JMD : Tun Mahathir was sacked by Umno more than TWO MONTHS after the racial riots. So Stephen Ng’s stupid assertion that May 13 happened because Tun Mahathir was sacked is not true at all. May 13 happened two days after the general elections. Therefore Stephen Ng, when was it Mahathir got sacked which had caused the riots?

Furthermore, Malay Dilemma was published a year after the riots (1970). Stephen Ng, when you say “At that point in time, Dr Mahahtir Mohamed had been sacked after his book, The Malay Dilemma, was banned”, you were dead wrong. Did you even made any serious attempt to read before you attempt to write this? Tunku never warned about Mahathir being a troublemaker prior to the riots. What are you smoking Stephen?

In his book, Dr Mahathir was able to create a sense of insecurity amongst the Malays and later to control their minds. This was a necessity for a non-Malay, like Mahathir to later become the country’s leader.

JMD : So Malay Dilemma which was not even written yet on 13th May 1969 was creating sense of insecurity amongst the Malays which caused the riots? Don’t you feel like an idiot now Stephen?

Knowing that his own kind is generally not accepted even amongst the Malays, till today, he would not admit that his father was from Kerala in India.

JMD : This paragraph above is the most racist thing this Stephen ‘I am not a racist’ Ng had written. Tun Mahathir’s father wasn’t from India. He was born here in this country. How delusional can you be? And you said Mahathir’s kind wasn’t accepted by the Malays? Care to elaborate what ‘kind’ is that? The condescending and supremacist undertone in Stephen Ng’s writings is not lost among the readers.

Seizing the opportunity to force the Tunku to step down, Dr Mahathir, Abdul Razak Hussein and Haron Idris were the key players in Umno politics.

JMD : So, since the chronology is all wrong, Stephen Ng had to improvise about this fictitious plot. If he had read Tunku’s own book, May 13 Before and After, Tunku himself admit there was no such thing. In fact, Tunku was the one suggested to form Mageran (don’t know what Mageran is? Look it up, Stephen).

To reach that state of Emergency, they had to lash it out on the economically stronger community – the Chinese, and in particular, the DAP, accusing the DAP as a provocateur. Why only the DAP and not the MCA, as both were also Chinese? The present MCA does not even come close to the MCA of those days, when it was still popular with the New Villages.

JMD : Stephen Ng must be such a simpleton. It was the DAP and the Labour Party who acted as provocateurs. There are no two ways about it. The undeniable FACT is, DAP was the provocateurs! Why is this so hard to swallow? Of course MCA wasn’t involved in the victory procession and provoking the malays in Kuala Lumpur on the 11th, 12th and 13th of May 1969. MCA was with the Alliance. And they lost badly. Why on earth would Stephen Ng want to bundle up MCA as the guilty party as well?

Fact is, DAP members who are mostly chinese and the now defunct Labour as well as Gerakan Party which were made up mostly of Indians and chinese were doing all the rankling against the malays.

It clearly shows this was not a racial riot, but the political manipulation by a few.

JMD : Yes and this is based on all the above fiction? Have you not seen pictures from that day?

In my opinion, everything was lumped into one big blame on the DAP because they won big. This is the same modus operandi used by Umno Baru till today, except that this time around, it is not only the DAP, but Pakatan taking over the state of Selangor.

JMD : Your opinion is wrong. Yes Stephen, your effort to absolve DAP of any guilt is as absurd as Kia Soong’s book. We can smell the desperation there. Afraid that your beloved DAP was actually a villain back then? Couldn’t accept the reality that DAP then (and now) were racist to the core? Judging from your racist jibe about Mahathir, you and DAP are in the same mould as well.

Our advice to Stephen Ng is this – in order to be a good writer on history or any subjects, one must read a lot more materials. Not just books by Kua Kia Soong, but also books from other writers.

Therefore to save society from people who write bad articles, we beg Stephen Ng to read just thesee two materials as a start:

The true and fair view of 13th May 1969 Racial Riots (there are some cool pictures in here Stephen, mostly on the chinese DAP etc throwing insults and provoking the malays)

White Paper on the May 13, 1969 Racial Riots

After reading these two, we assure Stephen Ng that the riots on May 13, 1969 were indeed, racial. Please do not lie to your readers. It is already too much that you look down on other people’s ‘kind’, please do not be a liar too.

Thank you.

Also, please read – “May 13 NOT a racial riot” — and so the Dapster denial begins

Why is DAP so eager to censure Tanda Putera?

Why is DAP so eager to censure Tanda Putera without any of their leaders seen it?

Simple.

DAP is so against Tanda Putera because it is a fact that they were one of the villains during May 13 racial riots and one of its leaders at that time is still alive today.

Don’t torture yourself with endless possibilities; for more information, just read:

NOC White Paper

The true and fair view of 13th May 1969 Racial Riots

Thank you and Selamat Hari Merdeka!

%d bloggers like this: