" Seorang kawan menghantar tulisan di bawah kepada saya. Sebab saya rasa dia tahu apa yang dia tulis dan dia tidak merapu, saya siarkan tanpa edit. -('Penarik beca')
"Puluhan tahun Pas dilanyak oleh Umno.
Bukan sahaja Pas difitnah, tetapi petugas dan penyokongnya dibuang kerja, dipindah ke ulu benua, tak naik pangkat, didera, ditangkap, ditembak dan DIBUNUH.
Top-top apabila Umno nak runtuh, dan seteru barunya, Anwar Ibrahim nak memerintah Malaysia, Pas hendak berkawan dan memerintah bersama dengan Umno pulak demi ketuanan dan kepentingan Melayu.dan Islam(betul ke tu?).
Wau, memang ulamak Pas (kalau ulama Umno, dipanggil ular dalam semak) pandai berhujjah dengan nas quran dan hadis. Paling kurang pun ada usul fiqhnya untuk bersekongkol dengan Umno semula. Kalau dengan DAP ada hujjahnya, inikan pula dengan Umno yang sebangsa dan seagama. Takkanlah pemimpin Pas begitu naïf dan tidak menjangka yang Pas akan meruntuhkan Umno bila bersama BA atau kini PR.
Kawannya ialah DAP yang anti Islam dan mendokong Malaysian Malaysia. Takkan tiba-tiba kesian kat UMNO dan tak percaya dengan DAP dan tak percaya Anwar yang kita tau dia lebih libral dengan islam dan Melayunya.
Sebenarnya apa wahai pemimpin Pas oi.
Engkau hendak jaga matlamat perjuangan Pas ke.
Atau engkau dah takut bersekongkol dengan DAP ke.
Atau engkau tak percaya dengan Anwar yang kau bela kes liwatnya bagai nak rak ke.
Atau engakau hendak jadi menteri ke.
Atau engkau pun dah nyanyuk, maklom le usia pun semacam Umno juga.
Nak ke syurga ke nak ke Putrajaya. Hanya satu jalan ke syurga.
Tetapi ada dua jalan ke Putrajaya. Tetapi kedua-dua jalan ke Putrajaya, Pas hanya sebagai penumpang sahaja.
50 tahun kita pertahan prinsip. La ni kita bukan langgar prinsip tapi mau jual prinsip.
Scott McClellan was a member of the President Bush's inner circle, a trusted confidant.
Scott McClellan (born February 14, 1968) is a former White House Press Secretary (2003-2006) for President George W. Bush. Karen Hughes, Governor Bush's communications director, hired McClellan to be Bush's deputy press secretary.
McClellan served as Governor Bush's traveling press secretary during the 2000 Presidential election. McClellan became White House Deputy Press Secretary in 2003. McClellan replaced Ari Fleischer, who stepped down as White House Press Secretary on July 15, 2003.
McClellan announced his resignation as Press Secretary on April 19, 2006. Many newspapers at the time reported that McClellan was forced to resign due to the Valerie Plame issue and handling of Hurricane Katrina relief.
The Book
McClellan's book is valuable, coming as it does from an insider, someone who was there, who saw it and heard it firsthand.
What is it we learn from reading his new book? That George W. Bush and his White House crew manipulated, deceived, rearranged the facts and bullied friends and foes alike in order to build a public case for striking Iraq.
McClellan's portrait of the president as a stubborn, willful man, unable to admit error, plunging ahead in the certitude of righteous truth.
Excerpts from McClellan's Book
"No single decision caused the wheels to come off the Bush White House. But the way we went about executing the decision to go to war -- from making the case to the public to inadequately planning and preparing for its aftermath as we rushed into it -- sent us badly off track."
"The president had promised himself that he would accomplish what his father had failed to do by winning a second term. . . . And that meant operating continually in campaign mode: never explaining, never apologizing, never retreating. Unfortunately, that strategy also had less justifiable repercussions: never reflecting, never reconsidering, never compromising. Especially not where Iraq was concerned."
"I still like and admire George W. Bush. I consider him a fundamentally decent person, and I do not believe he or his White House deliberately or consciously sought to deceive the American people. But he and his advisors confused the propaganda campaign with the high level of candor and honesty so fundamentally needed to build and then sustain public support during a time of war."
"If anything, the national press corps was probably too deferential to the White House and to the administration in regard to the most important decision facing the nation during my years in Washington, the choice over whether to go to war in Iraq. The collapse of the administration's rationales for war, which became apparent months after our invasion, should never have come as such a surprise. . . . The 'liberal media' didn't live up to its reputation. If it had, the country would have been better served."
"I know the president pretty well. I believe that if he had been given a crystal ball in which he could have foreseen the costs of war -- more than 4,000 American troops killed, 30,000 injured, and tens of thousands of innocent Iraqi citizens dead -- he would never have made the decision to invade, despite what he might say or feel he has to say publicly today."
On the leak of CIA operative Valerie Plame's name to discredit her husband, administration critic Joseph Wilson:
"The top White House officials who knew the truth -- including [Karl] Rove, ["Scooter"] Libby, and possibly Vice President Cheney -- allowed me, even encouraged me, to repeat a lie."
"It was all too characteristic of an administration that, too often, chose in defining moments to employ obfuscation and secrecy rather than honesty and candor."
Ezam ibarat "Ayam jantan yang gah berkokok berderau-derau, tetapi ekornya bergelumang dengan najis"
by
Mohd Rashidi Hassan
Quote:
"....Sewaktu Ezam 'bercerai' dengan KeADILan, beliau begitu rapat dengan pemimpin-pemimpin PAS, antaranyaDato' Husam Musa, Mohamad Sabu, Mahfuz Omar dan Salahuddin Ayub. Ezam juga sering berjumpa dengan Tuan Guru Dato' Nik Aziz Nik Mat dan Dato' Seri Tuan Guru Abdul Hadi Awang.
Ada banyak janji 'tidak akan masuk Umno' yang sering Ezam ulang-ulangkan di hadapan pemimpin PAS.
Ada banyak "Sumpah Keramat" Ezam dalam ceramah-ceramahnya yang menempelak, mengecam bekas PM Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad, Abdullah Badawi, Najib dan banyak lagi yang masih ada dalam rekod berbentuk kaset dan VCD.
Sewaktu saya berbual-bual dengan rakan-rakan KeADILan di pejabat Anwar di seksyen 16 Petaling Jaya beberapa hari sebelum PRU, saya ada memaklumkan kepada mereka bahawa bekas sahabat baik mereka ada mengunjungi Harakah.
"Ah! Engkau pedulikan sahaja dia tu, dia dah kena beli dengan Khairy (Khairy Jamaluddin)," dakwa seorang bekas Setiausaha Anwar.
Belum pun saya bertanya lebih lanjut beliau mendakwa, "Kami dapat maklumat dari budak-budak Gerak, RM1 juta dah masuk dalam akaun dari Norza, budak Khairy."
Saya faham mereka mendakwa seolah-olahnya Ezam sudah memperolehi sesuatu dari Khairy, melalui Dato' Norza Zakaria, Ahli Majlis Tetinggi Umno, yang dikaitkan sebagai kroni rapat menantu PM itu. -Mohd Rashidi Hassan
Ada banyak rumours diperkatakan apabila Ezam Mohamed Nor menyerahkan borang keahlian Umno seumur hidup kepada Presiden Umno yang juga Perdana Menteri, Dato' Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi di Parlimen semalam.
Ezam mengatakan beliau berhasrat masuk Umno bukan kerana mengkagumi personaliti Abdullah, sebaliknya perubahan dasar yang dijalankan khususnya dalam persoalan Badan Pencegah Rasuah dan isu kehakiman, begitu menarik minatnya.
Hakikatnya pada beliau perubahan dasar yang dibuat oleh Abdullah, Kerajaan Barisan Nasional yang ditunjangi Umno begitu mendorong pendiriannya untuk berubah.
BN dan Umno sudah berubah? Benarkah begitu? Apakah pendirian yang diambil Ezam sekarang ini, sinomin dengan perjuangan beliau selama ini?
Ezam sejak dua tahun lepas adalah orang yang tidak berparti.
Kisah Ezam keluar KeADILan bukan lagi menjadi isu. Dua tahun lalu beliau meletakkan jawatan sebagai Ketua Angkatan Muda atas alasan hendak menumpukan kepada Gerak.
Namun, ada yang mengatakan beliau bergaduh dengan Naib Presiden KeADILan, Mohamed Azmi Ali, ada juga yang mendakwa Ezam bergaduh dengan Dato' Seri Anwar Ibrahim.
Ketika Anwar dipecat pada tahun 1998, Ezam adalah Setiausaha Politiknya, manakala Azmin sebagai Setiausaha Sulit.
Kedua-dua anak muda ini merupakan antara tonggak utama dan orang kepercayaan Anwar untuk menggerakkan gerakan reformasi semasa Anwar merengkok dalam tahanan.
Dalam parti politik, pemimpin memang ada banyak perbezaan pendapat. Soal pergaduhan dan bagaimana bentuk pendekatan masing-masing tidak perlu dihuraikan di sini.
Kunjungan Ezam ke Harakah
Kira-kira tiga minggu sebelum Parlimen dibubarkan Februari lepas, Ezam Mohd Noor berkunjung ke pejabat Harakah, menemui Ketua Pengarang Kumpulan, Ahmad Lutfi Othman.
Jika tidak silap, hari itu hari Ahad. Hari cuti. Banyak pejabat ditutup, begitu juga dengan Harakah. Hanya dua tiga orang sahaja yang bekerja.
Kami mencadangkan perjumpaan dibuat pada hari lain, namun beliau tetap mahu berjumpa katanya, atas urusan yang amat penting.
Saya dimaklumkan oleh Ketua Pemberita, Wan Nordin Wan Yaacob tentang kehadiran Ezam bertemu dengan Lutfi, tetapi tidak dapat turut serta kerana ada tugasan di Alor Setar.
Butiran mengenai pertemuan tersebut dimaklumkan oleh Lutfi dalam mesyuarat Jabatan Pengarang selepas itu.
Dalam pertemuan tersebut saya dimaklumkan Ezam begitu beriya-iyameminta dibekalkan bahan-bahan untuk membantunya berkempen membantu pembangkang, khususnya PAS dalam Pilihan Raya Umum ke 12.
Bahan utama yang diminta beliau ialah mengenai laporan Badan Pencegah Rasuah dan sebarang dokumen mengenai penyelewengan yang membabitkan Menteri Besar Selangor ketika itu, Dato' Seri Mohd Khir Toyo.
Bahan-bahan tersebut sememangnya ada pada Lutfi, kerana sebelum ini beliau begitu giat mendedahkan apa yang disifatkan penyelewengan, salah laku dan rasuah yang membabitkan seorang bertaraf MB.
Pada saya, apa yang diminta Ezam barangkali ada relevannya dengan peranan beliau sebagai Pengerusi Gerak, yang digiat memperjuangan budaya bersih rasuah dalam negara.
Namun, sampai kesudah Lutfi ENGGAN menyerahkan dokumen tersebut, setelah didesak beberapa kali oleh Ezam.
Saya bertanya kepada Lutfi, mengapa tidak diberikan sahaja dokumen itu kepada Ezam, barangkali boleh membantu kempen PAS di Selangor.
Namun Lutfi enggan memberikan, katanya, dia berasa hairan mengapa Ezam tiba-tiba meminta dokumen mengenai Khir dan merasakan ada sesuatu yang pelik berlaku.
Benarkah Ezam dibeli?
Sewaktu saya berbual-bual dengan rakan-rakan KeADILan di pejabat Anwar di seksyen 16 Petaling Jaya beberapa hari sebelum PRU, saya ada memaklumkan kepada mereka bahawa bekas sahabat baik mereka ada mengunjungi Harakah.
"Ah! Engkau pedulikan sahaja dia tu, dia dah kena beli dengan Khairy (Khairy Jamaluddin)," dakwa seorang bekas Setiausaha Anwar.
Belum pun saya bertanya lebih lanjut beliau mendakwa, "Kami dapat maklumat dari budak-budak Gerak, RM1 juta dah masuk dalam akaun dari Norza, budak Khairy."
Saya faham mereka mendakwa seolah-olahnya Ezam sudah memperolehi sesuatu dari Khairy, melalui Dato' Norza Zakaria, Ahli Majlis Tetinggi Umno, yang dikaitkan sebagai kroni rapat menantu PM itu.
Persoalan mengapa Ezam meminta dokumen mengenai Khir Toyo terjawab. Khairy dikatakan tidak menyukai bekas MB Selangor itu dan berusaha untuk menjatuhkannya dengan menggunakan Ezam.
Oleh kerana itu pada saya, kebimbangan Lutfi di atas gaya body language Ezam dalam pertemuan mereka barangkali juga ada asasnya.
Di kalangan KeADILan diberitahu, Ezam ada membuat beberapa kali pertemuan dengan Khairy, sebelum ini.
Kes tentang apa yang didakwa membabitkan 'perundingan' Ezam dengan pemimpin-pemimpin Umno bukannya baru.
Beberapa tahun lepas, didedahkan kes yang sama timbul sewaktu 'perundingan' diadakan dengan Dato' Seri Abdul Aziz Shamsuddin, bekas Menteri Pembangunan Luar Bandar.
Kalangan yang masuk Umno ketika itu, membabitkan bekas Naib Ketua Pemudanya, Zahid Mat Arif dan bekas tahanan ISA, Lokman Nor Adam yang didakwa memperolehi sejumlah wang atau 'ghanimah politik' di atas penggadaian prinsip perjuangan mereka.
Zahid dan Lokman beserta beberapa yang lain, ditempelak hebat kerana meninggalkan perjuangan untuk memasuki Umno.
Ketika Lokman ditempelak, untuk menjawab segala tohmahan, Lokman mengatakan bukan inisiatif beliau pada asalnya pertemuan yang diadakan di sebuah hotel di Subang dibuat.
Katanya, beliau ada bukti dan gambar ada pimpinan tertinggi KeADILan yang mengetuai delegasi perundingan untuk memasuki Umno, ketika itu. Ada yang mengatakan dakwaan mereka ada kaitannya dengan Ezam.
Jika ini benar, soal Ezam hendak masuk Umno, bukannya perkara baru.
Maka Ezam tidak boleh mengelak untuk dikaitkan dengan persepsi bahawa, perundingan beliau masuk Umno barangkali membabitkan soal jawatan dan 'peruntukan'.
Soal banyak mana, apa yang diperolehi oleh Ezam dan rakan-rakan rapatnya, yang mendorong mereka memasuki Umno, tidak dapat dipastikan.
Apa yang Ezam mampu lakukan dalam Umno?
Sebelum ini, khususnya sewaktu Ezam 'bercerai' dengan KeADILan, beliau begitu rapat dengan pemimpin-pemimpin PAS, antaranya Dato' Husam Musa, Mohamad Sabu, Mahfuz Omar dan Salahuddin Ayub.
Ezam juga sering berjumpa dengan Tuan Guru Dato' Nik Aziz Nik Mat dan Dato' Seri Tuan Guru Abdul Hadi Awang. Ada banyak janji 'tidak akan masuk Umno' yang sering Ezam ulang-ulangkan di hadapan pemimpin PAS.
Ada banyak "Sumpah Keramat" Ezam dalam ceramah-ceramahnya yang menempelak, mengecam bekas PM Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad, Abdullah Badawi, Najib dan banyak lagi yang masih ada dalam rekod berbentuk kaset dan VCD.
Semua rekod-rekod ini menjadi bukti bahawa Ezam sebenarnya sudah menggadaikan prinsip perjuangan yang beliau sendiri bersumpah acapkali.
Tanpa disedarinya sumpah-sumpah ini semua sedang memakan diri Ezam. Hanya masa dan waktu sahaja akan menentukan. Wallahu a'lam.
Apa pun yang berlaku, sama ada ungkapan Ezam berbentuk janji, sumpah dan sebagainya, hakikat yang dibuktikan sekarang di hati Ezam hanya ada Umno, bukan PAS, jauh sekali KeADILan.
Ezam barangkali berfikir, laluannya memasuki Umno, menerusi Khairy terus kepada Abdullah boleh menjadi suatu advantage baginya.
Semuanya belum tentu! Orang-orang Umno sedang mencongak, ada tiga kemungkinan yang boleh berlaku dengan kemasukan Ezam ke dalam parti yang hampir karam itu.
Pertama, seperti kata Dato' Seri Najib Tun Razak, 'Ezam ada banyak maklumat'. Mungkin maklumat-maklumat ini boleh digunakan untuk membelasah Anwar dan menghalang pembentukan Kerajaan Pakatan Rakyat.
Kemungkinan kedua; Tidak boleh dinafikan wujud persepsi bahawa Ezam masih agen Anwar Ibrahim. Dalam keadaan sekarang, ada kalangan ahli Umno yang bimbang, Ezam boleh digunakan Anwar untuk menambahkan kerosakan dalam Umno.
Kemungkinan ketiga; Tiada apa-apa pun perubahan yang boleh berlaku kepada Umno! Sewaktu berbondong-bondong ahli Umno diketuai bekas Presidennya, Dr Mahathir keluar Umno kerana kegagalan Abdullah Badawi, Ezam pula hendak masuk Umno atas alasan Abdullah sudah mengubah Umno dan kerajaan.
Apa yang Abdullah ubahkan pun tidak diketahui. Malah Abdullah, BN dan Umno ditolak rakyat dalam PRU Mac lepas kerana dasar-dasar yang lapuk yang tidak boleh diterima.
Malahan sebahagian besar orang-orang Umno berpendapat, parti itu hanya akan berubah hanya apabila Abdullah Badawi meletakkan jawatan.
Umno ibarat Titanic dan tongkang pecah yang sedang menanti untuk karam. Mudah-mudahan 'niat' baik Ezam dan suku sakatnya menyertai kapal, boleh menampung kerosakannya untuk terus berlayar.
Barangkali Umno/BN boleh terus berlayar, tetapi bukan sebagai kerajaan, tetapi sebagai pembangkang.
Ikutlah, mungkin juga nasib Ezam untuk terus menjadi pembangkang.
Cuma, pesanan bekas rakan-rakan seperjuangan kepada anda, jangan jadi seperti "Ayam jantan yang gah berkokok berderau-derau, tetapi ekornya bergelumang dengan najis."
Ramai ahli UMNO dikatakan kurang senang dengan tindakan Perdana Menteri membenarkan Ezam memasuki semula UMNO tanpa syarat dan mempertikaikan mengapa tiada seorangpun bekas ahli KeADILan yang menyertai UMNO pada 2004 seperti Roslan Kassim dan Lokman Noor Adam sudi menemani beliau.
Didalam temuramah bersama TV3 Ezam ternyata jelas menyatakan hasratnya untuk meneruskan Agenda Reformasi Anwar Ibrahim di dalam UMNO dan cita-citanya adalah untuk membanteras rasuah di dalam UMNO.
Ahli-ahli Pakatan Rakyat akan terus memerhatikan berapa jauhkah dan setinggi manakah Ezam dibenarkan menyusup didalam UMNO untuk melaksanakan Agenda Perubahan yang diulang Ezam di dalam temubual tersebut berkali-kali.
Harus diingat ungkapan 'Agenda Perubahan' adalah 'Manifesto Anwar Ibrahim' yang menjadi teras persefahaman Pakatan Rakyat.
Sekiranya percaturan bijak pimpinan tertinggi Pakatan Rakyat ini berjaya, berkemungkinan besar Ezam akan memainkan peranannya untuk melakukan 'Agenda Perubahan' ini serta-merta dan kesannya akan dilihat pada keputusan pemilihan UMNO nanti. Sama ada kesan ini positif atau negatif kepada Dato' Seri Abdullah Badawi atau lawan-lawannya - kita tungguuuuu!
From Sin Chew Daily Article by TAY TIAN YAN (Translated by SOONG PHUI JEE)
Ezam Mohd Nor used to be an important assistant to PKR Adviser Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim and they shared similar fates. When Anwar was in power in Umno, Ezam was a rising star. While Anwar left Umno, Ezam was as well out of luck. And when Anwar was sent to jail, Ezam was imprisoned too.
During the most difficult time for Anwar and PKR, Ezam was there but when the party is about to rise, Ezam chose another path.
Outsiders find it hard to understand whether it is necessary for him to give up his sacrifices and contributions over the past 10 years just because of the breakdown of his relationship with PKR President Datin Seri Dr Wan Azizah Ismail.
Umno is a huge cruise ship (that) hits an iceberg in the dark, its navigation has been disrupted and it might sink at any moment. PKR is a speedboat (that) has successfully overtaken the iceberg and it is now speeding up.
It is logical if someone jumps from the cruise ship into the speedboat.
The other way round ??? Is Ezam a fool or has he gone mad?
Former PKR Youth leader Ezam Mohd Nor is not a fool to rejoin Umno. But what’s happening actually?
"At this moment, Umno needs Ezam and Ezam needs Umno."
Anyway, it is not surprising as Ezam is back in Umno. There were rumours three years ago when he left PKR. However, he did not choose Umno at that time but to form a non-governmental organisation called Gerak.
At that time, he was still playing the role of criticising those in power, including submitting a 600-page report to testify against a senior minister who was allegedly involved in corruption. However, no action has been taken after the report was submitted to the government.
Years ago, there were rumours about Ezam would rejoin Umno. He personally denied it at that time and convincingly, he said:
“As the leader of Gerak, I constantly report offences committed by Umno members to the police.
How could Umno accept such people like me?
Moreover, if I want to rejoin Umno, I must first fight for higher position in PKR to have a greater bargaining chip.”
We can still clearly remember his words but as the environment changed and the time has come, his stand as well “flexibly” changed. At this moment, Umno needs Ezam and Ezam needs Umno.
After the great shock of the 8 March general elections, Umno knows it very well that it's image is poor, especially in the eyes of the young generation. The party is almost a synonym for the words privileges, conservative, money and arrogance.
As Umno is now led by aging leaders and it is lack of young leaders. Ezam, whose image is healthy, can actually help the party to get close with the grassroots.
For Ezam, he has lost his stage after he left PKR. The space provided by Umno is an opportunity to him. A charismatic young leader is currently needed for Umno Youth and Selangor Umno as well needs a new strong leader. Ezam can fill in.
However, there are dissidents within Umno.
Some members are worried that accepting Ezam would be like bring the “Trojan Horse” into the party. It may be Anwar's strategy to polarise Umno.
Umno Youth Chief Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Tun Hussein's response was very subtle. He brought up three questions: What benefit could Ezam bring to Umno? Does Ezam recognise the struggle direction of Umno? What role can Ezam play in Umno?
It is impossible for Ezam to rejoin Umno without the approval of Umno President Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi and his deputy Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak. And he may not be accepted by the majority member after he rejoins the party. Certainly, as an outsider, he would not be welcomed as the Umno Youth and Selangor Umno already have their existing teams.
Ezam has came alone into a Roman arena for gladiatorial contests of power and interests. It would be like the Prometheus in Greek mythology if he wants to perform his talents in there because it is still a question whether he can survive.
It is quite impossible that Ezam is the Trojan Horse because it is too obvious. He will be targeted even before he can reach the city.
Umno is the fiery Mount Doom in the movie The Lord of the Rings and even Hercules will turn weak in there.
(Commentary on the Book, "Sharing the Nation:Faith, Difference, Power and the State 50 Years After Merdeka by: Noraini Othman, Mavis C. Puthucheary and Clive S. Kessler (SIRD, 2008, 99 pages).
You have heard about Malaysia’s ‘social contract’ but you have never seen it.
Unlike most contracts, it does NOT exist in written form.
No one even knows the exact wording. But the people who use the phrase seem very sure of its meaning. This ‘social contract’, when used by Umno leaders, refers to a deal supposedly struck among leaders of the Alliance in the heady months leading to Merdeka.
This deal was supposedly made behind closed doors.
We are told, in crude terms, that it means that Malays will continue to have political power forever, in exchange for non-Malays being granted citizenship. Funnily enough, there is NO proof that this was ever the intention of our founding fathers.
And even funnier (but maybe not in the ha-ha sense) the term ‘social contract’ was used for the fi rst time only in the 1980s.
Before that, you could say that the bargaining that led to the acknowledgement of the special position of the Malays (Article 153 of the Federal Constitution) was a pragmatic measure that took into account the fact that Malays had been organised socially and politically in the country for much longer than the other major races.
It was also one small sign that the aims of the founding parties of the Alliance were not identical. These parties banded together because they could not have achieved national power so decisively otherwise.
It was a fragile coalition glued together by political ambition – the same charge that the Alliance descendents now hurl against Pakatan Rakyat.
Mavis Puthucheary’s opening essay in Sharing the Nation, published to mark our 50th Merdeka, is a clear-eyed indictment of how this mundane and pragmatic measure became a beast that would not stop growing.
She shows how the terms of this ‘contract’ are not fixed in stone but have been altered, albeit unilaterally, as when special privileges were extended to the natives of Sabah and Sarawak too.
What sort of contract can continue to be valid if the terms keep being changed by only one party?
Yes, the ‘social contract’ has been the subject of much triumphalist ethnic chest-thumping by not only politicians but Malay-centric cultural organisations.
Such as, for example, in sentiments expressed over Gapena (Gabungan Persatuan Penulis Nasional Malaysia – The Federation of Malaysian National Writers’ Associations).
The ‘special privileges,’ as subsequently enacted in policies like the NEP, are taken as immutable rights in perpetuity rather than (to use Tun Ismail’s analogy) something much closer to a golf handicap. But why on earth should a handicap be a source of pride?
The original social contract of Western political theory refers to a situation where the individual gives up some rights to the state, in exchange for the benefi ts of being a citizen. But the Malaysian version somehow became a secret deal struck between leaders of ethnic parties.
Abuse of this ‘social contract’ idea has led to people feeling less welcome than they should be. And when people are not welcome, they tend to want to leave.
It’s ironic that some of us might feel shock and dismay at the prospect of losing a pile of rocks to Singapore, but nary a twinge that Singaporean universities and corporations are poaching so many of Malaysia’s best and brightest.
“Don’t challenge the social contract!” has been the sabre-rattling cry for the past two decades. The idea is that every little thing that was present in our original Constitution should be preserved as sacred.
But these same politicians didn’t get their knickers in a twist when this same Constitution received over 600 amendments in the past half-century.
A further irony is that this ‘social contract’ is NOT even contained explicitly in the Constitution.
What gives? There were many competing interests at play in the pre-Merdeka period.
These led to some ambiguities and contradictions relating to the rights and responsibilities of its citizens.
But the era of the “gentleman’s agreement” seems to be over.
People do not want secret deals (or, worse, secret deals supposedly made by our grandparents’ leaders) but openness.
We are no longer feudal subjects but national stakeholders.
Sharing the Nation is a slim book but it packs a wallop. In fact, that is if you were paying attention, you would notice that we only talked about the fi rst essay (out of three). If you wanna read the other two, get thee to a bookstore.
Nepal's newly elected leadership changed the country from a monarchy to a republic just before midnight Wednesday (28th May 2008), a historic move that ended about 240 years of autocratic rule in the country.
Members of Nepal's newly elected assembly attend the swearing-in ceremony in Kathmandu Tuesday.
Gyanendra Shah, 60, has the dubious distinction of being the only king in Nepal to be crowned twice and to be the country's last king after the new assembly voted to abolish the monarchy Wednesday.
After approving the move by an overwhelming vote, the body said it would send a letter to 60-year-old King Gyanendra and his family, informing them that they have 15 days to vacate the royal palace.
Of the 564 members of the assembly present for the vote, only FOUR voted to keep the monarchy.
" Current political conversation in Malaysia is about racial supremacy, racial rights and racial posturing. And it stinks." -Malaysian Unplug
Extracted from an article by Sam Webb, "New Times, New Opportunities"
Political Upsurge
The political upsurge ricocheting across the country (US) has no counterpart in recent decades.
Its breadth and depth are remarkable. Its politics are progressive.
It is framing the nation’s political conversation.
It rejects the old racist and sexist stereotypes. It is a mass rebellion against the policies of the Bush administration.
It is seeking a political leader — one who gives priority to “lunch pail” issues, appeals to our better angelsand visualizes a country that is decent, just, united and at peace with the rest of the world.
And it’s the necessary groundswell and kinetic energy for a smashing victory in November.
The setting of this upheaval is the Democratic presidential primaries. So far, the turnout has been far beyond anybody’s expectations. Records are being broken in nearly every state primary. Every sector of the people is marching to the polls.
Young voters are grabbing the electoral bull by the horns. Twice as many Democrats have voted as Republicans, an ominous sign for the GOP this fall.
The high octane of this upsurge is simply breathtaking. In every place where people gather, the candidates, the primaries and the issues are the subject of animated conversations.
If anyone thinks that issues are getting short shrift or that it is all about personalities, I can only guess that they are just watching, but not feeling and listening to the whirlwind that is blowing across the country.
Aren’t the most pressing concerns of the American people structuring the “give and take” of candidates as well as voters? This is anything but an issueless campaign. It contrasts sharply with the last presidential elections when the “War on Terror” took up nearly all the oxygen in the room.
Thanks to this surge, a woman or an African American is on track to become the presidential nominee. This reflects the growing political maturity of the American people. It should be celebrated as a great democratic achievement. Anything that is done to diminish this fact should be vigorously challenged.
Any mass organizations or movements that don’t insert themselves in a full-blooded and practical way into this very dynamic process will be left behind by their own constituencies and by events. They will miss an opportunity that comes along rarely in political life.
Young People as Voters
One of the most hopeful aspects of this people’s surge is the entry of young people who either were not of voting age in the last election or were old enough to vote but chose not to do so.
In injecting themselves en masse into the Democratic primary process, today’s younger generation is becoming an agent of change. Not since the sixties have we seen young people bring their energy and idealism to the political process on such a scale.
The beginnings of this change were evident in recent years. More young people participated in the 2004 elections and the majority of youth voted for Kerry. Furthermore, young people were a sizeable part of the anti-war movement as well as participants in other social movements.
But what we are seeing today is on an entirely different scale and level of intensity.
The reasons for this qualitative change seem clear enough. Young people are saddled with enormous debt, horrified by the Iraq war and the pervasiveness of violence, alienated from the policies of division and intolerance of the Bush administration, and turned off by a political culture that is opaque, money driven and seemingly empty of higher ideals and aims.
Sensing something different in Obama’s candidacy, they are flocking into the Democratic Party primaries in record numbers as organizers and voters.
Unlike some older people, the pressures and grind of everyday life haven’t yet worn them down. “Keep on keeping on” is not a slogan they embrace.
“Yes we can” better captures their mood. They eagerly desire and embrace change. They not only imagine the possibility of another world; they imagine its realization in their lifetime.
Befitting their youth, they take inspiration from yesterday’s struggles but they are not prisoners to them. The Sixties, even the Reagan years, are history, not lived or vivid experiences for them. Finally, the young are less inclined to be cynical. This election might not begin the world anew, but for millions of young people it is a first step.
Not least, the working class, the nationally and racially oppressed and women are leaping into this upsurge in a way not seen for many years. Each of these constituencies went to the polls in record numbers.
The Obama Phenomenon
The clearest expression of this developing movement pivots around the candidacy of Barack Obama, whose inspirational message and politics have captured the imagination of millions.
So much so that many commentators and politicians use the words “transformational” or “transforming” to describe his candidacy — that is, a candidacy capable of assembling a broad people’s majority to reconfigure the terms and terrain of politics in this country in a fundamental way.
The Obama campaign has not only brought new forces into the political process, it has also catalyzed new organizational forms.
The surge around Obama’s candidacy, much like the larger surge in the Democratic presidential primary, has a large spontaneous quality. But what makes it different is that it has the feel of “a movement.”
Its supporters see in Obama someone who is without the baggage of an older generation of politicians, and who speaks to their desires.
I have heard political commentators say that Obama mania has no spelled-out political program, lacks organizational coherence and offers no guarantees it will continue after Election Day.
Hearing such observations, I ask myself why on earth anyone would think this developing movement whose life span can be measured in months would be a well- oiled machine?
Anybody with any historical sense knows that movements in their early, and sometimes later, stages aren’t neat and tidy. Ideal types never find concrete representation in real life.
While this movement has its own dynamic, it is inseparable from the personality and politics of Barak Obama. While he is not a candidate of the left or someone we would endorse — since we don’t endorse candidates of either party — he is, nonetheless, a fresh voice on the political scene.
His strategic and tactical concepts are broad in their sweep and his politics are forward looking.
His appeal for change resonates with millions who are fed up with things as they are.
And his desire to overcome divisions between Black and white, Black and brown, white and non-white, red state and blue state, immigrant and native born, Christian and Muslim, Muslim and Jew, blue collar and white collar, male and female, gay and straight, urban and rural strikes a deep responsive chord among Americans.
After three decades of acrimonious rancor and division, people yearn for a kinder, gentler and more just country.
While much has been said about his own personal journey and its formative impact on his values and outlook, what has been greatly understated is that the struggles of the African American people and the larger movement against the right also have left their mark on his sensibilities and politics.
Not since Bobby Kennedy has a leader stepped on the stage with as much promise to reconfigure politics and the underlying assumptions that inform debate and policy choices.
His ability to articulate a vision, give voice to people’s hopes, and use the platform of politics to educate millions is extraordinary.
On paper, it’s true that some of Clinton’s positions, not to mention those of Edwards and Kucinich, are better than Obama’s. But in many ways policy statements and party platforms are not the main things that should shape judgments about a presidential candidate’s potential or the prospects for change. This is looking at politics too narrowly.
It doesn’t take into account who can inspire and unite this massive upsurge, or who can articulate a moral and political vision to tens of millions, or who has the capacity to assemble political majorities in the post-election period, or who has the ability to win a landslide victory against McCain and the Republicans in November.
On these counts, advantage goes to Obama in the eyes of many voters. That isn’t to say that Clinton wouldn’t be a worthy adversary to McCain. She would. Nor is it to suggest that she couldn’t win in a landslide. She can. But it would be much more difficult.
I also suspect that she would govern to the left of Bill Clinton’s administration, in large measure because the conditions and expectations are so different now.
But I have heard it asked, isn’t Obama a bourgeois politician? Hasn’t he raised a lot of money from Wall St.? And isn’t he is a centrist and a creature of the Democratic Party? All of these assertions are worth discussing, but none of them can be easily answered with a yes or no reply.
And even if they could, these questions by themselves wouldn’t necessarily tell us who Obama is, what his presidency would look like and how he would interact with the broader labor led people’s movement.
There’s no community service requirement in the real world; no one forcing you to care.
You can take your diploma, walk off this stage, and chase only after the big house and the nice suits and all the other things that our money culture says you should by. You can choose to narrow your concerns and live your life in a way that tries to keep your story separate from America ’s.
But I hope you don’t. Not because you have an obligation to those who are less fortunate, though you do have that obligation. Not because you have a debt to all those who helped you get here, though you do have that debt.
It’s because you have an obligation to yourself. Because our individual salvation depends on collective salvation.
Because thinking only about yourself, fulfilling your immediate wants and needs, betrays a poverty of ambition.
Because it’s only when you hitch your wagon to something larger than yourself that you realize your true potential and discover the role you’ll play in writing the next great chapter in America ’s story.
At a time of war, we need you to work for peace.
At a time of inequality, we need you to work for opportunity.
At a time of so much cynicism and so much doubt, we need you to make us believe again. " - Senator Barack Obama US Presidential Candidate (2008)
Full Text of Barack Obama's Prepared Speech
Wesleyan University Commencement Sunday, May 25th, 2008 Middletown, Connecticutt
Thank you, President Roth, for that generous introduction, and congratulations on your first year at the helm of Wesleyan. Congratulations also to the class of 2008, and thank you for allowing me to be a part of your graduation.
I have the distinct honor today of pinch-hitting for one of my personal heroes and a hero to this country, Senator Edward Kennedy. Teddy wanted to be here very much, but as you know, he’s had a very long week and is taking some much-needed rest. He called me up a few days ago and I said that I’d be happy to be his stand-in, even if there was no way I could fill his shoes.
I did, however, get the chance to glance at the speech he planned on delivering today, and I’d like to start by passing along a message from him: “To all those praying for my return to good health, I offer my heartfelt thanks. And to any who’d rather have a different result, I say, don’t get your hopes up just yet!”
So we know that Ted Kennedy’s legendary sense of humor is as strong as ever, and I have no doubt that his equally legendary fighting spirit will carry him through this latest challenge. He is our friend, he is our champion, and we hope and pray for his return to good health.
The topic of his speech today was common for a commencement, but one that nobody could discuss with more authority or inspiration than Ted Kennedy.
That is, the topic of service to one’s country – a cause that is synonymous with his family’s name and their legacy.
I was born the year that his brother John called a generation of Americans to ask their country what they could do. And I came of age at a time when they did it. They were the Peace Corps volunteers who won a generation of goodwill toward America at a time when America ’s ideals were challenged.
They were the teenagers and college students, not much older than you, who watched the Civil Rights Movement unfold on their television sets; who saw the dogs and the fire hoses and the footage of marchers beaten within an inch of their lives; who knew it was probably smarter and safer to stay at home, but still decided to take those Freedom Rides down south – who still decided to march.
And because they did, they changed the world.
I bring this up because today, you are about to enter a world that makes it easy to get caught up in the notion that there are actually two different stories at work in our lives.
The first is the story of our everyday cares and concerns – the responsibilities we have to our jobs and our families – the bustle and busyness of what happens in our own life.
And the second is the story of what happens in the life of our country – of what happens in the wider world.
It’s the story you see when you catch a glimpse of the day’s headlines or turn on the news at night – a story of big challenges like war and recession; hunger and climate change; injustice and inequality. It’s a story that can sometimes seem distant and separate from our own – a destiny to be shaped by forces beyond our control.
And yet, the history of this nation tells us this isn’t so. It tells us that we are a people whose destiny has never been written for us, but by us – by generations of men and women, young and old, who have always believed that their story and the American story are not separate, but shared. And for more than two centuries, they have served this country in ways that have forever enriched both.
I say this to you as someone who couldn’t be standing here today if not for the service of others, and wouldn’t be standing here today if not for the purpose that service gave my own life.
You see, I spent much of my childhood adrift. My father left my mother and I when I was two. When my mother remarried, I lived in Indonesia for a time, but was mostly raised in Hawaii by her and my grandparents from Kansas . My teenage years were filled with more than the usual dose of adolescent rebellion, and I’ll admit that I didn’t always take myself or my studies very seriously. I realize that none of you can probably relate to this, but there were many times when I wasn’t sure where I was going, or what I would do.
But during my first two years of college, perhaps because the values my mother had taught me –hard work, honesty, empathy – had resurfaced after a long hibernation; or perhaps because of the example of wonderful teachers and lasting friends, I began to notice a world beyond myself. I became active in the movement to oppose the apartheid regime of South Africa . I began following the debates in this country about poverty and health care. So that by the time I graduated from college, I was possessed with a crazy idea – that I would work at a grassroots level to bring about change.
I wrote letters to every organization in the country I could think of.
And one day, a small group of churches on the South Side of Chicago offered me a job to come work as a community organizer in neighborhoods that had been devastated by steel plant closings. My mother and grandparents wanted me to go to law school. My friends were applying to jobs on Wall Street. Meanwhile, this organization offered me $12,000 a year plus $2,000 for an old, beat-up car.
And I said yes.
Now, I didn’t know a soul in Chicago , and I wasn’t sure what this community organizing business was all about. I had always been inspired by stories of the Civil Rights Movement and JFK’s call to service, but when I got to the South Side, there were no marches, and no soaring speeches. In the shadow of an empty steel plant, there were just a lot of folks who were struggling. And we didn’t get very far at first.
I still remember one of the very first meetings we put together to discuss gang violence with a group of community leaders. We waited and waited for people to show up, and finally, a group of older people walked into the hall. And they sat down. And a little old lady raised her hand and asked, “Is this where the bingo game is?”
It wasn’t easy, but eventually, we made progress. Day by day, block by block, we brought the community together, and registered new voters, and set up after school programs, and fought for new jobs, and helped people live lives with some measure of dignity.
But I also began to realize that I wasn’t just helping other people. Through service, I found a community that embraced me; citizenship that was meaningful; the direction I’d been seeking. Through service, I discovered how my own improbable story fit into the larger story of America .
Each of you will have the chance to make your own discovery in the years to come. And I say “chance” because you won’t have to take it.
There’s no community service requirement in the real world; no one forcing you to care.
You can take your diploma, walk off this stage, and chase only after the big house and the nice suits and all the other things that our money culture says you should by.
You can choose to narrow your concerns and live your life in a way that tries to keep your story separate from America ’s.
But I hope you don’t. Not because you have an obligation to those who are less fortunate, though you do have that obligation. Not because you have a debt to all those who helped you get here, though you do have that debt.
It’s because you have an obligation to yourself. Because our INDIVIDUAL salvation depends on COLLECTIVE salvation.
Because thinking only about yourself, fulfilling your immediate wants and needs, betrays a poverty of ambition.
Because it’s only when you hitch your wagon to something larger than yourself that you realize your true potential and discover the role you’ll play in writing the next great chapter in America ’s story.
There are so many ways to serve and so much need at this defining moment in our history. You don’t have to be a community organizer or do something crazy like run for President. Right here at Wesleyan, many of you have already volunteered at local schools, contributed to United Way , and even started a program that brings fresh produce to needy families in the area. One hundred and sixty-four graduates of this school have joined the Peace Corps since 2001, and I’m especially proud that two of you are about to leave for my father’s homeland of Kenya to bring alternative sources of energy to impoverished areas.
I ask you to seek these opportunities when you leave here, because the future of this country – your future – depends on it.
At a time when our security and moral standing depend on winning hearts and minds in the forgotten corners of this world, we need more of you to serve abroad.
As President, I intend to grow the Foreign Service, double the Peace Corps over the next few years, and engage the young people of other nations in similar programs, so that we work side by side to take on the common challenges that confront all humanity.
At a time when our ice caps are melting and our oceans are rising, we need you to help lead a green revolution. We still have time to avoid the catastrophic consequences of climate change if we get serious about investing in renewable sources of energy, and if we get a generation of volunteers to work on renewable energy projects, and teach folks about conservation, and help clean up polluted areas; if we send talented engineers and scientists abroad to help developing countries promote clean energy.
At a time when a child in Boston must compete with children in Beijing and Bangalore , we need an army of you to become teachers and principals in schools that this nation cannot afford to give up on. I will pay our educators what they deserve, and give them more support, but I will also ask more of them to be mentors to other teachers, and serve in high-need schools and high-need subject areas like math and science.
At a time when there are children in the city of New Orleans who still spend each night in a lonely trailer, we need more of you to take a weekend or a week off from work, and head down South, and help rebuild. If you can’t get the time, volunteer at the local homeless shelter or soup kitchen in your own community. Find an organization that’s fighting poverty, or a candidate who promotes policies you believe in, and find a way to help them.
At a time of war, we need you to work for peace.
At a time of inequality, we need you to work for opportunity.
At a time of so much cynicism and so much doubt, we need you to make us believe again.
Now understand this - believing that change is possible is not the same as being naïve.
Go into service with your eyes wide open, for change will not come easily. On the big issues that our nation faces, difficult choices await. We’ll have to face some hard truths, and some sacrifice will be required – not only from you individually, but from the nation as a whole.
There is no magic bullet to our energy problems, for example; no perfect energy source - so all of us will have to use the energy sources we have more wisely. Deep-rooted poverty will not be reversed overnight, and will require both money and reform at a time when our federal and state budgets are strapped and Washington is skeptical that reform is possible.
Transforming our education system will require not only bold government action, but a change in attitudes among parents and students. Bringing an end to the slaughter in Darfur will involve navigating extremely difficult realities on the ground, even for those with the best of intentions.
And so, should you take the path of service, should you choose to take up one of these causes as your own, know that you’ll experience frustrations and failures.
Even your successes will be marked by imperfections and unintended consequences. I guarantee you, there will certainly be times when friends or family urge you to pursue more sensible endeavors with more tangible rewards. And there will be times when you are tempted to take their advice.
But I hope you’ll remember, during those times of doubt and frustration, that there is nothing naïve about your impulse to change this world.
Because all it takes is one act of service – one blow against injustice – to send forth that tiny ripple of hope that Robert Kennedy spoke of.
You know, Ted Kennedy often tells a story about the fifth anniversary celebration of the Peace Corps. He was there, and he asked one of the young Americans why he had chosen to volunteer.
And the man replied, “Because it was the FIRST time someone asked me to do something for my country.”
I don’t know how many of you have been asked that question, but after today, you have no excuses. I am asking you, and if I should have the honor of serving this nation as President, I will be asking again in the coming years. We may disagree on certain issues and positions, but I believe we can be unified in service to a greater good. I intend to make it a cause of my presidency, and I believe with all my heart that this generation is ready, and eager, and up to the challenge.
We will face our share of cynics and doubters. But we always have.
I can still remember a conversation I had with an older man all those years ago just before I left for Chicago . He said, “Barack, I’ll give you a bit of advice. Forget this community organizing business and do something that’s gonna make you some money. You can’t change the world, and people won’t appreciate you trying. But you’ve got a nice voice, so you should think about going into television broadcasting. I’m telling you, you’ve got a future.”
Now, he may have been right about the TV thing, but he was wrong about everything else. For that old man has not seen what I have seen.
He has not seen the faces of ordinary people the first time they clear a vacant lot or build a new playground or force an unresponsive leader to provide services to their community.
He has not seen the face of a child brighten because of an inspiring teacher or mentor.
He has not seen scores of young people educate their parents on issues like Darfur , or mobilize the conscience of a nation around the challengeof climate change.
He has not seen lines of men and women that wrap around schools and churches, that stretch block after block just so they could make their voices heard, many for the very first time.
And that old man who didn’t believe the world could change – who didn’t think one person could make a difference – well he certainly didn’t know much about the life of Joseph Kennedy’s youngest son.
It is rare in this country of ours that a person exists who has touched the lives of nearly every single American without many of us even realizing it. And yet, because of Ted Kennedy, millions of children can see a doctor when they get sick. Mothers and fathers can leave work to spend time with their newborns. Working Americans are paid higher wages, and compensated for overtime, and can keep their health insurance when they change jobs. They are protected from discrimination in the workplace, and those who are born with disabilities can still get an education, and health care, and fair treatment on the job. Our schools are stronger and our colleges are filled with more Americans who can afford it. And I have a feeling that Ted Kennedy is not done just yet.
But surely, if one man can achieve so much and make such a difference in the lives of so many, then each of us can do our part. Surely, if his service and his story can forever shape America ’s story, then our collective service can shape the destiny of this generation.
At the very least, his living example calls each of us to TRY. That is all I ask of you on this joyous day of new beginnings; that is what Senator Kennedy asks of you as well, and that is how we will keep so much needed work going, and the cause of justice everlasting, and the dream alive for generations to come.
Thank you so much to the class of 2008, and congratulations on your graduation.
"Dr Mahathir has a long history of mounting vicious personal attacks against those, including Bapa Malaysia (Tunku Abdul Rahman), he wanted to bring down.
He has recklessly PROPAGATED the politics of fear among the Malays ....with consequences too terrible to contemplate.
His championing of such unworthy causes as Ketuanan Melayu and other forms of Malay chauvinism can lead to an exaggerated sense of insecurity among the Malays which could well lead to an escalation of racial frictions.
Does Dr Mahathir not care that the journey he is embarking on, to serve his selfish ends, will divide and destroy Umno?
Umno should consider itself fortunate to be rid of him. -Tunku Abdul Aziz
Mahathir: The Great Meddler or the Crisis Inventor?
by
Tunku Abdul Aziz
Tunku Abdul Aziz is a former special adviser to the United Nations secretary-general on ethics.
Tunku Aziz founded the Malaysian Chapter of Transparency International . In October 1997 he was elected to the international board of Transparency International and in March the following year, he became Vice-Chairman of the Board of Directors of Transparency International. He was re-elected Vice-Chairman of the Board of Directors in October 1999.
He also serves as a member of the Asian Pacific Advisory Panel on Good Urban Governance, and is a member of the Board of the International Institute of Public Ethics. He was a member of the UNDP Advisory Panel for the Human Development Report 2002. He is on the Global Advisory Council of Caux Roundtable.
It is too much to expect Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad to feel the slightest guilt for any of his more questionable actions when he was prime minister of Malaysia.
His resignation from Umno in a fit of spite has left the nation in a state of uncertainty at a time when we could all do without the kind of crisis that the former prime minister is exceptionally good at inventing.
It must be an emotionally bruising experience for Dr Mahathir, who once held sway over us, to be told bluntly that his tantrums and ravings were not getting him anywhere.
Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi has made it clear that he has no intention of taking the taunts lying down. He will NOT allow the wily practitioner of confrontational politics to dislodge him from his perch.
Dr Mahathir has a long history of mounting vicious personal attacks against those, including Bapa Malaysia, he wanted to bring down.
He has recklessly propagated the politics of fear among the Malays following Umno's recent electoral reverses, with consequences too terrible to contemplate.
His championing of such unworthy causes as ketuanan Melayu and other forms of Malay chauvinism can lead to an exaggerated sense of insecurity among the Malays which could well lead to an escalation of racial frictions.
Many Malays question the motives of the man who claims to love the Malays and yet is apparently bent on weakening them even further. Does Dr Mahathir not care that the journey he is embarking on, to serve his selfish ends, will divide and destroy Umno?
I am on record in my column in August 2006 as telling Dr Mahathir, in terms more direct than usual even for me, to stop taking pot-shots at his anointed successor and to let Abdullah get on with the difficult job of governing a difficult country that has yet to find its identity 50 years after Merdeka.
By way of underlining my message, I took special care to tell him in the nicest possible way to start getting used to eating humble pie once out of office.
I did not say it would be easy to begin with, but I said it would not be impossible as both Tunku Abdul Rahman and Tun Hussein Onn had learnt to do it with inordinate charm and dignity.
For good measure, I told him to DISABUSE himself of any notion he might harbour about his indispensability to the Malaysian body politic.
Umno should consider itself fortunate to be rid of him. I hope history will be kinder to him than many Malaysians now think he deserves.
"...For a long while, I thought that Mahathir had abandoned his ultra Malay position when he became PM.
I remember how concerned my non-Malay friends were when he became Umno president and Prime Minister.
But I guess he had not. He has brought back to the fore his ultra Malay stance.
I guess the Tunku (Abdul Rahman) knew you better than any of us.
He hated you
for reducing the power of the Sultans and your disdain for the royalty in general.
He hated you for being racist.
He hated you till his death.
But it seems now that you have let down your guard, one that you have quite successfully hidden during your 22 year reign and in your desperation to remove Pak Lah, you have once again revealed the true extent of your racism, one that you had harboured prior to your ascendancy to the premiership.
Tun, we don't want another May 13. We do want want to become a Lebanon, a Sri Lanka.
We want to live in peace between and among all races and religions.
I would like to believe that Malaysia has changed. I would like to believe that the results of the 12th general election on March 8 2008 had fully demonstrated that we are now quite sick of divisive politics that pitch one race against the other.
Tun, you are being reckless with the future of this nation.
"... ...It would be an understatement indeed to say that for 22 years Mahathir was someone who showed no tolerance and respect for dissenting voices, whether within his government or otherwise.
Indeed, his approach to governing essentially boiled down to, in my view, three basic rules:
First, manufacture a sense of insecurity among Malays about the other races so that you can 'divide and conquer.' Clearly, his former colonial rulers were masters of this craft and Mahathir seems to really understand how to work this method.
Second, don't tolerate dissent: 'it's my way or the highway.'
Third, if there is dissent, it will be cast aside at just about any cost.
If you look back to any national episode in his 22 years of rule, his modus operandi can be summed up by the above three rules of thumb.
Of course in 1969, we got a preview of what was to come. Back then when the country found itself at a political crossroads, Mahathir took it upon himself, to some extent, to play king-maker.
As the social cauldron got stirred into a frenzy, we found ourselves as a nation at odds – and in conflict – with each other. The opportunists undermined our nationhood in part by manufacturing and then exploiting some of our insecurities about each other. Especially critical back then was the fact that we heard, not unlike today, warnings about 'unrest' and 'political turmoil' because of so-called 'extremists' among various quarters are making 'unreasonable' demands on the government. [Note: here's an example of the 'divide and conquer' rule at play.]
Out of this episode was born the Malaysia that, as prime minister, Mahathir nurtured and championed: a Malaysia in which we were reminded by the UMNO elite, at every turn, that non-Malays should 'know their place' and not question the new status quo of privileging Malays. [Note that this message was often delivered as, to put it mildly, a kind of admonishment to non-Malays and served as a seemingly populist rhetoric for ordinary (non-elite) Malays to consume.]
Indeed, contrary to the NEP agenda, the UMNO elitist DELIBERATELY set up the Malay agenda as a zero-sum game between Malay and non-Malay progress.
No doubt, while the post-1969 UMNO elite did exploit the situation to create a new political arrangement, non-Malays consented to the need for social reform and the uplifting of our brethren who were economically disadvantaged. So, it should be realized that there was a reservoir of goodwill and realisation among non-Malays that served to advance the NEP agenda.
And this is a critical point: despite [not because of] the animosity that was manufactured in 1969, we were able to come together, to transcend our differences and consent to work to build a common destiny.
But the UMNO elite always played the 'race-card' to manufacture a false division and elected to 'remind' non-Malays to steer clear of, and 'not to trample' on Malay rights.
In other words, the UMNO elite chose to legitimate themselves as the standard bearers of and 'natural protectors' of Malay rights!
What was lost in this UMNO - and subsequently Mahathir's – rhetoric was the fact that Malaysians of ALL racial groups- and by mutual consent - had decided to move forward…beyond 1969.
But Mahathir's formula of 'divide and conquer' dictated that the way to affirm Malay progress was to repeatedly remind the average Malay that the threat to his/her future came from the non-Malays.[But notice PAS, with all its emphasis on a Malay-Muslim agenda, did NOT advance itself on the 'divide and conquer' formula.]
And the best way for Mahathir to manufacture the zero-sum message was to frequently 'remind' NON-Malays to know their place in the pecking order. [Of course, by having set the tone for others in UMNO to follow suit, the performances and 'keris waving' at UMNO general assemblies were part of this theatrics.]
Over time, even the non-Malay component parties in BN began to see themselves as subservient; this was self-evident in their lack of a backbone and their demeanour. But why would the component parties in BN care about it?
The bottom line was the elite in MIC, MCA and Gerakan were themselves rewarded out of this newly emerging culture of Ketuanan UMNO. Mahathir simply perfected this 'divide and conquer' practice. (Needless to say, with the acquiescence of the component party elite who were riding the Mahathir 'gravy train.']
Hence, so long as this 'divide and conquer' formula worked, there was no need for much else.
Well, we know all about the SECOND and THIRD rules of Mahathir's method.
Dissent anywhere was not acceptable.
And when challenged, he deployed any means at his disposal. Nobody could step out of line, and if anyone did, the supremo was quick to deploy all weapons at his disposal – even to the point of compromising the well-being of the country - to get others to walk lock-step with him.
We saw this most vividly with Operation Lallang, in his response to Ku Li's challenge of the UMNO presidency, and the Anwar episode respectively.
In each instance, it was 'my way or the highway.' Dissent? How dare they challenge his supremacy?
Since leaving office, we all know how bent-out-of-shape he has gotten that Badawi has in fact marched to his own drummer and not to Mahathir's tune. The latter's response? 'Well, how dare Badawi!'
And, as we all know, our former premier has been preoccupied with undermining Badawi – but with NO success, thus far anyway, at toppling him.
Well, fast-forward to March 9, 2008 and Mahathir's mission of deposing Badawi was resuscitated.
Sticking to his tested practice of 'by any means necessary,' he has stooped, once again, to using the 'race-card' as a means to get his way – this time, to end Badawi's tenure as prime minister.
For someone who has arrested and imprisoned others for apparent 'race-baiting' and presumably promoting 'instability,' it is ironic and disgusting that this person's whole career has in fact centred on precisely such practices.
And now, he is at it again; whipping up FEAR – by manufacturing a zero-sum scenario for Malays by posturing that, for example, Hindraf's grievances threaten Malay progress; just like he did in the past with Siqiu [remember that episode?].
But nothing could be further from the truth.
Yet, this ploy is necessary for him as a way of frightening the UMNO base and destabilizing UMNO and the country, only to get back at Badawi.
Further, using the outcome of the general elections to argue that Malay progress and interests are being threatened and undermined – and Badawi is the root of this problem - Mahathir is again trying to sell us, but especially the UMNO base, the same snake-oil he's peddled for years.
Here's another irony for you:
During his years as PM, NO private citizen would have been able to get away with spewing the kind of venom and poison as HE 's been doing of late.
This alone speaks volumes of the kind of 'democracy' he practiced as PM.
Indeed, for many he truly belongs among the legends – the Mugabes and the Marcoses of the world: the legends of dictatorships.
There was no legitimate exchange of ideas and debate permitted in those 22 years. There was nothing resembling a free press, nor was there free speech to be had.
But the more open climate of exchange of ideas now – in a post-Mahathir Malaysia – is precisely what will save us from the snake-oil he continues to peddle.
For we Malaysians - yes, Malays, Chinese, Indian, and all others from whatever faith who want to transcend the politics of 'divide and conquer' and who do care about building one united Malaysia – are more discerning than he gives us credit for.
That's precisely WHY he could NOT accept dissent or openness.
Yet, the new Malaysia affords him this very basic democratic right he denied the country.
And that's the beauty of a more open system; it allows for flawed prognosis like his to be expressed; it even can take fear-mongering like the kind he's now again offering up, but we the people – Malays and non-Malays alike know a flawed remedy when we see one.
Mahathir was the one who amended the federal constitution to remove the ruler's immunity from criminal prosecution under a special court. Therefore, if even rulers cannot be exempted from criminal prosecution, then why is the former premier not brought to court for his seditious comments in Johor when he accused the non-Malays were gradually taking away the rights of the Malays?
Then, when in Japan for a conference, he went to say that extremists non-Malays were making unfair demands on the government. If anybody else had uttered those words, they would have been classified as seditious and charged accordingly. Then may I ask why is not Mahathir charged for his seditious comments? Being an ex-premier does not mean he is immune to the laws of the country which even the rulers are not exempted from.
The Attorney-General must display fairness in prosecuting offenders who have infringed on any of our legislated laws and failing to do so would give the perception that there are two sets of laws in the country - one for the ordinary citizens and one for our political leaders.
Thequay 007:
Dr M has gone overboard by using scare tactics to undermine the current government. He is making all kind of unsubstantiated accusation mainly focusing on Malay rights.
He is trying his best to stir up racial unrest in this country by making wild claims that will then result in the resignation of the current PM. He is trying to ignite racial disharmony in this country. You are now trying all your tricks to destroy Umno, BN and the country. And you are now running down everything deemed to be obstacles to your cruel intentions.
The government of the day has to react fast by arresting him under the ISA. He is running wild now and has to be tamed before he manipulate the people to create unrest. He is going for broke.
One wonders why he has to use forceful means to unseat the current PM. Is it for the good of the country or him and his family? Obviously he has much to benefit if the PM goes. Otherwise he wouldn't be so restless.
Malaysian:
I see a better Malaysia developing since Dr M stepped down as PM. During his tenure, the rakyat was kept in fear. Every conceivable institution in Malaysia was destroyed during his tenure. Corruption had skyrocketed, the judiciary was controlled by businessmen, education policies saw extreme discrimination and the entire country was running on mediocre gear.
A friend of mine commented the day after Mahathir’s retirement: ‘There is a general sense of calmness come upon Malaysia’. However, that calmness is not to be prolonged by the same man who was in power for 22 years.
Pak Lah must be commended for undertaking brave corrective policies.
Dr M is now going around whipping up racial sentiments again. I remember during his tenure, one of his favourite saying was ‘Don't play with fire’ to anyone who questioned his policies.
He is now playing with fire by whipping up racial sentiments again. Only cowards will take such measures. Can't Dr M see how divisive his ways are? I'm sure the right-thinking Malaysians want a better Malaysia where everyone feel that they have a place on this Malaysian soil.
My advice to Malaysians? Just neglect the old man's ranting and ravings and let’s go on building a great and peaceful Malaysia.
Louis Lim:
Let us not dismiss his warning of a racial unrest brewing. Of late, he himself has been playing up the ugly racial card in his many pronouncements. With his latest move of resigning from Umno and the lukewarm support from Umno members to follow suit, he is capable of bringing down the nation as a last resort to fulfill his mad desire to unseat the PM.
His inflammatory speeches may be premeditated to rouse the emotions of some nut cases out there to start a racial conflagration.
Then, like a modern day Nero, he will play his lyre and watch the nation burn whiles in the safety on his ranch in Argentina. Pak Lah ought to put his foot firmly down and put away this bitter and frustrated man before he wittingly or unwittingly wrecks havoc to this beautiful nation.
Silent Saint:
The man will not rest until he has destroyed Umno and himself. The law of karma is inevitable. What you sow, you have to reap. This man sowed greed, racism, corruption and all these are coming back to haunt him.
Abdullah is undeniably a weak and soft leader but certainly he is more human than TDM. TDM will do anything and everything to destroy his enemies, like what he did to Anwar Ibrahim.
At the age of 82, most people would turn to God and repent for their misdeeds in life but Mahathir is committing more and more sins. Bilakah anda akan taubat wahai Tun Dr Mahathir?
A man who was trusted to lead the nation for 22 long years is today going around the nation planting seeds of racial discontentment.
Mahathir knows very well, that whatever he preaches to the Malay community will eventually reach the ears of the others, thus creating more racial tension and now he warns of unrest amid political turmoil. He is blaming Abdullah for everything that’s happening in the country to his weak leadership. He will eventually burn the house to kill the mosquito.
Chuacj:
Dr M should be arrested under ISA urgently. I thought only BN is playing the racial card as they are politically bankrupt, but Dr M is fanning the racial sentiment which is more dangerous. Sadly to say, our government is so corrupt that they don't even dare to mention the word ‘corrupt"’ in parliament as it is seen as shooting at one’s own foot. The only issue they can talk about is either racial or sexist origin.
Yumcious:
Param Cumaraswamy's suggestion to arrest Dr M under ISA, though intriguing, alludes to how laws are enforced in Malaysia. It is never about the knowing, it is always about the doing. This gap is also known as one's ‘rice bowl’.
Authorities dispense justice swiftly when it is against the lowly. The very same authority also swiftly dispense away with justice with it is against the mighty. Some even get away with murder, quite literally. This is a sure-fire recipe for God to rain down curses on the nation.
We all know some are just more equal than others. Dr M will not be arrested, ‘rice bowls’ being the key reason. The only thing left is to wait for God Almighty to do His thing.
Om Prakash:
The claim of possible unrest by Dr Mahathir is clearly his own fabrication and it is his plan to actually arouse such a threat of unrest.