Sunday, 16 May 2010

SIBU BY-ELECTION: Pakatan Rakyat/DAP Won the Seat Previously Held by BN

BREAKING NEWS!!!

THEY ALL CAME TO VOTE
AS RESPONSIBLE CITIZENS
SIBU ELECTION

NOW... Will Najib fulfill his promises to the Sibu voters he made before polling day?

Read here for more in Malaysiakini

10.58pm:
Election Commission makes OFFICIAL announcement:

DAP - 18,845
BN - 18,447
Ind -232
Majority - 398

A crowd of 3,000 gather outside the main tally centre at Dewan Suarah to celebrate DAP's victory in Sibu. They shout, "Dacing tipu". Independent Narawi Haron lost his RM10,000 deposit.

The two-hour delay in the announcement of the result was due to a dispute in the postal ballots where 208 votes were rejected. This however did not change the final result. According to the EC, the dispute was over the validity of witnesses' signature for postal votes.

The final result of the postal ballots:

DAP - 70
BN - 2,323
Ind - 36
Rejected postal votes - 208

Pakatan Rakyat has managed to reverse its series of losses with this win in Sibu.

For DAP, this is the FIRST by-election which the party has won in 13 years. Sibu will be the party's second parliamentary seat in Sarawak to its existing Bandar Kuching.

NAJIB'S BUY-ELECTION TACTICS AND BRIBES
DIDN'T WORK FOR SARAWAK/SIBU VOTERS

"You Help Me, I Help You"

Sibu voters have replied to Najib, "I can't help you."

What Now, Mr Prime Minister?
Abandon Them even though they are Malaysian citizens and taxpayers?




With the defeat in Sibu, BN may delay the Sarawak state election to next year. Sarawak will need to call the state polls by middle of next year.

Sibu By-Election - The Countdown Begins

ITS OFFICIAL

PAKATAN RAKYAT/DAP WON THE SIBU BY-ELECTION

DAP's Wong Ho Leng is the new MP for Sibu, wresting the seat previously held by BN(SUPP)


Returning Officer finally announcing results:
PAKATAN RAKYAT/ DAP won by 398 votes

DAP 18845
BN 18447
Majority - 398


That's all for now. Goodnight Malaysia. Sleep well.
 
Appreciation and thanks to
Anil's blog AND to Lina Soo on LINASOO blog for referencing the updates on the election results throughout polling day.
-Malaysian Unplug

TIME LINE:....

That's it!!!

10.50 pm

DAP candidate Wong Ho Leng arrives at the counting centre with Lim Guan Eng

Malaysian Insider reports DAP wins with majority of 398
DAP wins with 18845, BN 18447, Ind 232


POSTAL VOTES: Official
Total ballots issued: 2827
BN 2323,
DAP 70,
Ind 36..
Rejected: 208. Unreturned: 190




10.30pm
Postal votes for DAP was reduced by 17 in EC's official tally.

Official announcement to be made at the Civic Centre
.

"It's not the people who vote that count. It's the people who count the votes." (Josef Stalin), EC proving Stalin correct?

Utusan Malaysia reports (10.13 pm)
Calon DAP, Wong Ho Leng menang pada pilihan raya kecil Parlimen Sibu selepas menewaskan calon Barisan Nasional (BN), Robert Lau Hui Yew dan calon Bebas, Narawi Haron dengan majoriti 2,651 undi.
Ho Leng yang juga Pengerusi DAP Sarawak memperoleh 18,775 undi manakala Robert Lau 16,124 undi manakala Narawi hanya memperoleh 196 undi.arawi juga hilang wang pertaruhan.
10.20 pm
EC finally gave the Form 15 to DAP. There was a small discrepancy in the postal vote results,but it was accept under protest by DAP,

One analyst wrote:
This silence and reluctance by the SPR to keep the public fully informed about what is happening or to announce the results forthwith does not inspire public confidence in their professionalism. This only undermines their role in the eyes of the public and makes it even more difficult for them to oversee future elections.
10.15 pm
EC Officer said postal vote result was given to BN but the same postal vote result was NOT given to the DAP.

EC officials tried to carry and move all the 11 postal ballot boxes away, without first giving DAP the Form 15 which confirms the official tally for the by-election.

10.05 pm
Is this Sibu by-election going be an Election Commission scandal??

Bernama earlier reported there are 2,537 postal votes.
But now Malaysiakini reports there are 2,572 postal ballots.


According to PR's Sivarajah, No recount at this stage. Recount only at count at saluran level. Reference to Regulaions 25(13) of conduct of elections regulaions 1981


Saturday, 15 May 2010

Must Read Article: To the Malays, What More Do YOU Want from the Chinese ?

Read here for more

Quote

".....I find myself in a strangely odd position – an Indian speaking up for the Chinese.

To me they ( the Chinese) are the LEAST nihilistic of people.

There is much we have learnt from the Chinese economic model based on hard work, perseverance and skills development

Since 1969, the Chinese have seen the New Economic Policy (NEP) at work and not at work.

The Chinese with much public grace and equally much private grumbling have largely accepted the pain of economic restructuring.

They still account for easily 80% of the income tax revenue of the country.

  • We must RESPECT them for their singular ability to create new wealth and not be merely consumers of old wealth.

  • We must RESPECT them for their resourcefulness and for their incredible pertinacity in the face of adversity.

  • We must COMPLIMENT them their innate understanding of the importance of personal savings in the economic life of an individual and of the investment opportunities that arise out of deferred gratification.

  • We must THANK them for showing us in practical terms what self-reliance and self-sacrifice really means.
The fact that the Chinese migrant is a prized economic asset is indisputable.

That this prized asset cannot be got for free is also indisputable.

It is also indisputable that he comes with the political rights of a human being – the right to prosper WITH DIGNITY.

But No! All this is NOT ‘what more the Chinese want’.

It’s more, much more than that!

"What more the Chinese want" is FOR THE ROT TO STOP!!

They can clearly see with eyes teared by 5,000 years of the painful tide of relentless history. A history filled with upheavals, turmoil and revolution has given them an inbuilt ‘antenna’ that warns them when a society is approaching decay, decline and disaster.

The Chinese have sounded the alarm bell for all of us.

What MORE do we want from them?....."
- Howl Pillai


CENTER FOR POLICY INITIATIVES

What MORE do we want from the Chinese?

by

Howl Pillai

Friday, 14 May 2010

I find myself in a strangely odd position – an Indian speaking up for the Chinese.

It has recently been asked of them: “What more do the Chinese want?”

If it were merely rhetorical, I will defend the right to ask questions of such a nature in the name of free speech and healthy discourse.

Unfortunately it is not a question. It is a blatant threat.

The politicians behind the threat have clearly identified themselves. They have also now shown their hand. They are shamelessly indulging in the gutter politics of communalism.

A demonstration 10,000-stronghad been planned for May 13 in Terengganu. We should reject this threat for the same reason we reject a bribe.

Racial politics and corruption are slowly and surely destroying the very fabric of nationhood. A country that was put together carefully with effort, toil and sacrifice deserves better.

We must therefore entirely reject the threat and answer the question only in its rhetorical form: What more do the Chinese want?

Since 1969, the Chinese have seen the New Economic Policy (NEP) at work and not at work. But for all its faults, the NEP has distributed great wealth and provided unheard of opportunities to create a Malay middle class and super-rich elite of Umnoputras.

It has also allayed the fears of the Malay man-in-the-street that he/she will be ‘lost in the world’ (Tak akan Melayu hilang di dunia).
  1. The Chinese with much public grace and equally much private grumbling have largely accepted the pain of economic restructuring.

  2. They still account for easily 80% of the income tax revenue of the country. But in this same period, true to their kind, they have girded their loins and redoubled their efforts.

  3. Ever so quick to seize new opportunities, they have continued to prosper in spite of the excesses of the NEP. Surely there is nothing in this world and no religious or secular law that prevents a man or woman from prospering economically through the sweat of his brow or the straining of his sinews or the mental acuity of his business dealings.

  4. We may not like the Chinese trait of applying themselves diligently to the task at hand and to the exclusion of all others; or their fiercely competitive nature; their kiasu-ness; their calculative frugality; their risk-taking; their business shrewdness; their culinary indulgences and their relentless pursuit of investments, returns and wealth in all its myriad forms.

    But remember, they too may not like our traits of indifference, impracticalness, lebih kurang-ism … the list both ways is endless.

  5. But we must respect them for their singular ability to create new wealth and not be merely consumers of old wealth.

  6. We must respect them for their resourcefulness and for their incredible pertinacity in the face of adversity.

  7. We must compliment them their innate understanding of the importance of personal savings in the economic life of an individual and of the investment opportunities that arise out of deferred gratification.

  8. We must thank them for showing us in practical terms what self-reliance and self-sacrifice really means.

  9. Surely, they more than anyone else have shown that the secret of capitalism lies in its unsurpassed ability to promote capital formation that fuels ever more new ventures and so ad infinitum.

  10. They have shown us also that wealth has a generational purpose and that it is linked to a vision of the future we have for ourselves, our families, our society and the country we live in.
To me they are the LEAST nihilistic of people.

There is MUCH we have learnt from the Chinese economic model based on hard work, perseverance and skills development.

True, the pursuit of wealth and economic success is often accompanied by greed and avarice. Which race in the world is free from such follies and frailties?

The fact that the Chinese migrant is a prized economic asset is indisputable. That this prized asset cannot be got for free is also indisputable.

It is also indisputable that he comes with the political rights of a human being – the right to prosper with dignity.

But No!

All this is NOT ‘what more the Chinese want’.
It’s more, much more than that!
  • I have every reason to believe that the Chinese, who so often go about their tasks with one eye on the future, have come to the inevitable conclusion that if left unchecked, the politicians of this country will be the ruin of us all.

    The Chinese are not Neros to helplessly fiddle while Rome burns.

  • What more the Chinese want’ is for the rot to STOP.

  • They can clearly see with eyes teared by 5,000 years of the painful tide of relentless history. A history filled with upheavals, turmoil and revolution has given them an inbuilt ‘antenna’ that warns them when a society is approaching decay, decline and disaster.
They know that a rotten tree will not bear good fruits for long. They know there will be nothing left to share with or without the NEP and its sketchy successor, the NEM.

They know that zero, simply put, is indivisible.

The Chinese have sounded the alarm bell for all of us. What more do we want from them?

Friday, 14 May 2010

Malaysia's Sodomy Trial: Who is On Trial? Anwar or the Malaysian Judiciary ?

Read here for more in the The Economist

the economist

Sodomy, The Sequel

Another tawdry court case for Anwar

May 13th 2010 | KUALA LUMPUR

PUTTING an opposition leader on trial inevitably carries a whiff of politics. When that leader is Anwar Ibrahim, and the charge is sodomy, the same accusation used in 1998 to wreck his political career and confine him to jail for six years, the whiff becomes a stink.

Mr Anwar, a former deputy prime minister, is playing a familiar role in “Sodomy II”, as the newest case is known. He is in the dock again, but in the court of public opinion it is Malaysia’s judiciary and its political masters who face the judgment of a sceptical nation.

On May 10th the defence began its cross-examination of a former aide to Mr Anwar, Saiful Bukhari. In February he testified that Mr Anwar sodomised him in a borrowed flat on June 26th 2008. In Malaysia “carnal intercourse against the order of nature” is punishable by up to 20 years in prison, even between consenting adults. A conviction would automatically bar Mr Anwar from politics for five years and send his parliamentary coalition into disarray.

Mr Saiful, now aged 25, is the prosecution’s star witness. Karpal Singh, the doughty chief defence lawyer and an opposition MP, began by asking about Mr Saiful’s acquaintance with the prime minister, Najib Razak. Mr Anwar’s team claims that a political conspiracy has been undertaken to discredit him. The government denies it strenuously. But the circumstances of Mr Saiful’s accusation remain murky.

Mr Saiful has told the court that he went to visit Mr Najib, then deputy prime minister, at his house on June 24th 2008—two days before the alleged incident—to talk with him about his own troubles.

That an ordinary citizen should have been granted such access has stoked suspicions.

On the very same day, Mr Saiful went to see a police officer who played a key role in “Sodomy I”. Later, according to Mr Saiful’s testimony, he spoke by phone with Malaysia’s senior cop.

How did he get the number? asked Mr Singh. Overheard it from Mr Najib, came the rather feeble reply.

Other questions touched on the findings of the doctors who examined Mr Saiful. Two days after the alleged molestation, they found no sign of penetration.Another doctor wrote that the witness had inserted a plastic object into his backside.

“Nothing wrong with your anus. Why all this fuss?”
asked Mr Singh, crossly. Challenged over the medical reports, Mr Saiful protested that he could not see his own anus. The judge concurred.

Malaysians have grown used to such smut in the courtroom.

Mr Anwar’s first trial featured a crusty mattress that the prosecution said was stained with his semen, proof of sodomy. Mr Anwar was released in 2004 only after it was ruled that testimony against him had been coerced.

Four years later, as Mr Anwar prepared to stand for office again, with hopes of toppling a shaky government, Mr Saiful joined his campaign as a volunteer.

Whatever the merits of his complaint, it is hard not to suspect a political hand at work. Mr Singh seems determined to reveal whose.

The trial has proved a distraction for Mr Anwar. His party has suffered a string of defections and lost a recent by-election. Another by-election looms in the important state of Sarawak on May 16th. The trial has forced Mr Anwar to cut short his campaigning. He has managed to keep up his foreign jaunts though, staying on the international stage, and chiding Mr Najib’s government for having hired an American lobbying firm to raise Malaysia’s profile.

In 1998, when Mr Anwar was first taken down, his supporters thronged the streets. Reactions this time have been more muted.

Foreign governments took a dim view of Sodomy I; America’s vice president at the time, Al Gore, said it “mocked international standards of justice”. Twelve years ago Malaysia was teetering on the brink of financial ruin, and nervous foreign investors looked to Mr Anwar as a safer pair of hands. Fearing a power grab, the prime minister, Mahathir Mohamad, sacked his uppity deputy and imposed capital controls.

This time Malaysia’s finances are in fairly good shape and it is the rich world that is fretting over deficits. It may find less to say about Sodomy II.

Thursday, 13 May 2010

Zulkifli Noordin, Ular Dalam Selimut

Read here for more

Zulkifli Noordin's assignment from UMNO is to take Kedah away from PAS to Barisan Nasional


The issue is simple, really. Every candidate who contests the state and parliamentary elections is supposed to file a copy of his or her statement of accounts or statement of expenditure with the Elections Commission. This to ensure that no one violates the Election Offences Act by spending more than RM100,000 for a state seat and RM200,000 for a parliament seat.

Now, if you fail to file your statement of accounts/expenditure or your statement shows you have spent more than the allowed figure or your statement is in error, such as many expenses are missing from your statement, then the Elections Commission can disqualify you.

In short, you lose your seat.

Zulkifli Noordin, the PKR candidate who won the Kulim parliament seat in the 2008 general election, did not submit his statement of expenditure for the 2004 general election. And the Umno candidate who lost, Abdul Aziz Sheikh Fadzir, had proof of this. So Aziz filed an election petition to ask the court to disqualify Zul. (Remember Aziz, the man who wanted to burn down the Selangor Chinese Assembly Hall about ten years ago?)

Zul panicked. So he quickly doctored a set of accounts with forged documents and bills to buttress his case in court. Unfortunately, Zul got caught. Now it is no longer a simple case of failing to file your statement of accounts, which is a mere disqualification. It is now a case of fraud, which is a criminal offence that attracts a jail sentence.

Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak saw a golden opportunity in Zul’s predicament. Zul has been caught with his pants down. So Najib summoned Zul for a meeting and told the latter that Umno will withdraw the election petition and help save his arse. But he must first agree to a deal. And the deal is: Zul need not go to jail, but he would have to ensure the return of Kedah to Barisan Nasional.

In short, Zul will act as Umno’s Trojan Horse in Pakatan Rakyat.

Zul agreed to the deal and Najib instructed Aziz to withdraw the election petition. Aziz was mad as hell (he knew Zul was dead meat) but he had no choice in the matter. He reluctantly withdrew the election petition and Zul was saved. But now Zul works for Umno, no longer for Pakatan Rakyat.

Now can you understand why Zul is doing the things he is doing? No doubt it appears odd that Zul is doing all sorts of things that is hurting the opposition. But that was the deal. And once Kedah falls then Zul would have paid his dues and he can then officially join Umno.

When you lie to cover a lie you eventually get caught. And Zul got caught. If he had not tried to cover his mistake by forging his statement of accounts then at worse he just loses his seat. But because he forged his statement of accounts it is now more than a simple disqualification. It is fraud. And the crime of fraud is more serious. You can go to jail.

Umno just loves criminals. Criminals can be used. And since Zulkifli made the mistake of doing something criminal, Umno is able to use him. And use him Umno did, and still is.
-Raja Petra Kamarudin

Wednesday, 12 May 2010

Malaysia - A Nation on a Brink of Failure

by

Stanley Koh

Read here for more

We can forgive the typical Malaysian his sneer and scepticism when he hears politicians promising change. We can even understand it if he has despaired that things will ever get better.

With all the news we have been getting lately, many are wondering whether we are on the brink of becoming a failed nation.

  1. A policeman shoots a child dead. We are shocked, but then we remember that there have been many extrajudicial killings before and that, in many of the cases, there have been no closure for the victims’ families.

  2. The government sets up an independent panel to inquire into the latest shooting, and we are reminded of the royal panel that probed the VK Lingam tapes and got nowhere.

  3. The government announces its intention to go for nuclear power. This scares us, because it is the same government that lost jet engines to thieves and the same government that spent millions of ringgit buying a submarine that had to be repaired before it could dive. Can the same government ensure the safety of a nuclear power plant?

  4. A local warlord raises the spectre of another May 13, and we recall the kris wielding of the current home affairs minister and, before him, the current prime minister.

  5. We wonder if Umno will ever stop threatening racial violence every time it feels cornered. But we have no doubt that if clashes do happen, it is the opposition politicians who will be rounded up and imprisoned without trial.
Indeed, we have yet to see any evidence that those who have been ruling over us are capable of change.

To the Chinese community, the ruling regime is best described by two idiomatic expressions: “hu zuo fei wei” and “hu e bu quan” (literally, “acting wildly in defiance of moral law or public opinion” and “spending money like soil”).

Both characteristics are sustained by hypocrisy.

We are told that 1Malaysia is a sort of road map leading towards a great sense of unity among Malaysians, that the project embraces everything that is good—a determination to wipe out corruption, a more open government, etcetera, etcetera.

So far, the fight against corruption seems more like a campaign to put opposition politicians behind bars.

We may have to wait forever for the result of investigations into how Khir Toyo got the money to build his mansion, to name only one case.

As for a more open government, one wonders if the prime minister—or his wife—even understands that openness must go hand in hand with robust debate.

The media must be allowed to air the widest spectrum of views on current affairs and perennial concerns. Instead, media organisations must take directions from Mrs Prime Minister, whom no one elected to office.

Can a political leadership that staunchly defends race-based policies, media censorship and other draconian laws and that speaks the political dialect of lies, evasion and self-denial be capable of guiding us to a happier future?

The answer may lie in a funny story currently making the email rounds. It goes like this:
A little boy waiting for his mother to come out of the grocery store is approached by a man who asks, “Son, can you tell me where the post office is?”

The boy replies “Sure. Just go straight down the street a couple blocks and turn to your right.”

The man thanks the boy and says, “I’m the new pastor in town. I’d like for you to come to church on Sunday. I’ll show you how to go to heaven.”

The boy replies with a chuckle, “Oh, come on! You don’t even know the way to the post office.”
Given our seemingly hopeless situation, should we give up the fight and forget about seeing change for the betterment of our nation?

Perhaps we should remember the following words of Martin Luther King Jr:
“Our survival depends on our ability to stay awake, to adjust to new ideas, to remain vigilant and to face the challenge of change.

Change does not roll in on the wheels of inevitability but comes through continuous struggle.

And so we must straighten our backs and work for our freedom. A man can’t ride your back unless your back is bent.”
Perhaps it is time that we reward our failed government with a broom and replace it with a wiser government that exercises power prudently and with a conscience.

Sunday, 9 May 2010

UMNO Daulatkan Raja-Raja Melayu ? Satu Kemunafikan Kebetulannya

Read here for more

umno raja melayu


Quote:

"...Dalam keadaan yang LEMAH sekarang UMNO sudah tidak dapat membelakangkan fakta bahawa Raja-Raja Melayu itu adalah simbol yang kemuncak kepada kita orang Melayu… tiada Raja tiada Melayu. Perasaan cinta UMNO kepada Raja hanya waktu parti itu sedang kehilangan sokongan padu orang Melayu.

TETAPI semasa UMNO sedang KUAT dahulu, UMNO telah lupa daratan dengan menghentam Raja-Raja Melayu seperti Raja-Raja Melayu itu sudah tidak berguna lagi.

Malahan dalam perhimpunan agung UMNO pada tahu 1992 dahulu Mahathir hanya menyindir Raja-Raja saolah-olah Baginda-Baginda sebagai sumber kita untuk mendapatkan Bintang dan Pingat sahaja.

Ungkapan itu telah mendapat tepukan gemuruh perwakilan yang terdiri daripada Melayu UMNO...."

-Aspan Alias


Alhamdulillah! UMNO sudah daulatkan Raja-Raja Melayu

by

Aspan Alias

Excerpts:

Saya bergembira dan bersyukur kerana UMNO masih memerlukan Raja-Raja Melayu.

UMNO mula menyedari pentingnya Raja-Raja Melayu dejak berlaku rampasan kuasa diPerak tahun lepas ...dan sejak itulah kedengaran dimana-mana ahli-ahli UMNO melaungkan, Daulat Tuanku..Daulat Tuanku.

Baru dua hari yang lepas UMNO Subang Jaya telah membuat lapuran Polis terhadap Zaid Ibrahim kerana memberikan sedikit pandangan tentang boleh atau tidak bercakap pasal politik didalam masjid....kononnya Zaid Ibrahim durhaka kepada Sultan dan untuk menunjukkan bahawa UMNO amat cintakan Raja dan institusinya.

Pada hal Zaid hanya memberikan pandangan peribadi dan TIDAK pun menghina dan menunjukkan sikap tidak menjunjung titah DYMM Tuanku Sultan Selangor.

Dalam keadaan yang lemah sekarang UMNO... Raja-Raja Melayu itu adalah simbol yang kemuncak kepada kita orang Melayu…tiada Raja tiada Melayu.

Tetapi perasaan cinta UMNO kepada Raja hanya waktu parti itu sedang kehilangan sokongan padu orang Melayu.

Kesayangan Raja-Raja Melayu oleh UMNO pada tahun 1980-1990-an

TETAPI semasa UMNO sedang kuat dahulu, UMNO telah lupa daratan dengan menghentam Raja-Raja Melayu seperti Raja-Raja Melayu itu sudah tidak berguna lagi.

Malahan dalam perhimpunan agung UMNO pada tahu 1992 dahulu Mahathir hanya menyindir Raja-Raja saolah-olah Baginda-Baginda sebagai sumber kita untuk mendapatkan Bintang dan Pingat sahaja.

Ungkapan itu telah mendapat tepukan gemuruh perwakilan yang terdiri daripada Melayu UMNO, tanpa menyedari bahawa mereka sedang mempersendakan diri dan bangsa mereka sendiri.

Saya masih ingat lagi bagaimana beberapa orang Melayu menitiskan air mata kesedihan melihat sikap laku pemimpin ulung negara menempelak Raja-Raja dan disambut dengan tepukan perwakilan semasa itu.

Cik Gu Kahar Ahmad dari Muar, yang kebetulan bersama saya semasa melihat dan mendengar ucapan Mahathir melalui TV di hotel penginapannya di Kuala Lumpur, kata dengan marah bercampur sedih:
“Awak tengoklah Aspan, melayu sedang mabuk, pemimpinnya gila pengikutnya mabuk…menghina bangsanya sendiri. Tanda cakap kawan Aspan…tak lama lagi Mahathir akan buat apa sahaja untuk mengekalkan kuasanya. Raja-Raja kita ni akan dilucutkannya kuasa, kerana Majlis Raja-Raja ada kuasa untuk melucutkan jawatannya sebagai PM..dia takut…percayalah cakap kawan!”

Dia orang itu akan menjilat ludah mereka nanti tu! Mereka bukan ada malu, nanti mereka akan dengan tidak ada segan dan silu akan menyorok di bawah ketiak Raja-Raja bila tersepit nanti. Kalau sampai masa keadaan itu berlaku hadiahlah Al-Fatihah kepada kawan kalau kawan sudah meninggal waktu itu."
Sesungguhnya usaha untuk mengenepikan kuasa yang masih ada sikit-sikit pada Raja-Raja Melayu itu bermula pada tahun 1983 lagi di mana Raja-Raja mesti menandatangani semua yang diluluskan oleh Parlimen dan Dewan-Dewan Undangan Negeri-negeri dalam tempoh 2 minggu.

Jika Kebawah Duli-Duli Tuanku tidak menandatangani apa yang diluluskan oleh pihak legislatif akan secara automatik menjadi undang-undang. Maka dengan pindaan itu maka Raja-Raja Melayu seperti tidak wujud dalam konteks apa-apa pindaan yang diluluskan oleh pihak legislatif.

Di sinilah bermulanya Raja-Raja Melayu secara beransur-ansur dilupuskan daripada kedaulatannya yang dilakukan oleh pemimpin negara yang diketuai oleh UMNO.

Rakyat Bukan Melayu

Rakyat bukan Melayu hanya memerhatikan sahaja kelakuan pemimpin Melayu yang giat melumpuhkan serta mengaibkan bangsanya sendiri dengan menghina Raja-Raja mereka. Bagi bukan Melayu, mereka tidak dapat berbuat apa-apa kerana orang Melayu sendiri berusaha untuk melemahkan kewujudan bangsanya sendiri.

Tetapi kemuncak kepada pencerobohan ke atas institusi Raja-Raja ini berlaku pada tahun 1993, di mana Raja-Raja Melayu menjadi sasaran politik Melayu yang amat menyedihkan dan merupakan sejarah paling hitam bagi bangsa kita ini.

MUST WATCH VIDEO !! ANWAR Tells His Audience, " You Are a GREATER Malaysian When You....."

Speech Given at a 160-Table Dinner in Skudai, Johor on 7th May 2010

Video Clips In Four Parts:

Part One: "This is OUR Land and OUR Country...for All Malaysians"




http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XSMA8J5kslo&feature=player_embedded


Part Two: " Chua Soi Lek, What do you do for the Chinese TODAY"?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SsK3zk6eB5k&feature=player_embedded


Part Three:"Why the hypocrisy about beer?"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2mhOwDKEDJE&feature=player_embedded

Part Four: "Save this country from the abuses of UMNO "

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=khKedsK4zhk

Related article in Malaysiakini: Read here

Anwar Ibrahim yesterday took Pakatan Rakyat's theme of 'Selamatkan Malaysia' ('Save Malaysia') deep into a seemingly impregnable Umno bastion where he delivered a rousing retort to the ruling party's 'Malays are under threat' cry.

Anwar spoke at a PKR-organised dinner in Gelang Patah in Johor, where his party's candidate had come within 1,000 votes of upsetting her Umno rival at the last general election.

Anwar argued:
  • To those who say this country is for the Malays and that they are under threat in their own country, I say you are a greater Malaysian when you fight against the plunder of your country's wealth by a few.

  • “You are a greater Malaysian when you are concerned about the rights and welfare of the poor among the Malays, Chinese, Indians, Dayaks and Kadazans in the whole country.

  • You are a greater Malaysian when you decide not only to be good in Bahasa Melayu but also at English and then go on to learn Mandarin because that would help your country economically in a highly competitive world.

  • You are a greater Malaysian when you are not only roused to indignation by the shooting death of an Aminulrashid Amzah but also over the deaths of Teoh Beng Hock and A Kugan while they were under investigation.

  • “You are a greater Malaysian when you say, 'enough is enough, this country is mine as much as it is yours' and you decide to use your vote for a new future for your country at the next general election.”
With that flourish, Anwar went on to tell his audience of 1,500 largely Chinese diners that he was prepared to “bear any burden, meet any hardship, suffer any humiliation, support any friend, and oppose any foe” to assure that this “beautiful country of ours is saved from the depredations of Umno-Barisan Nasional.

Anwar suggested to the diners that they were in great company for having paid to come to hear him speak because recently he had been invited to speak before distinguished audiences in Oslo and at Cambridge where he was asked why he was never invited to address Malaysian universities. “I told them the standard at Malaysian universities was higher than at Cambridge and that probably I was deemed not qualified enough,” he cracked to laughter from the audience.

Dinner over, a tired-looking Anwar proceeded to Plentong, a few kilometers away, where he addressed a crowd of about 4,000.

To the largely Malay audience, he said that he felt more authentically Malay and Muslim when he fights for the rights of all Malaysians regardless of their race or religion.

“Am I not a greater Malay for doing so?” he asked the crowd who harrumphed in appreciation.

Saturday, 8 May 2010

Selangor Sultan and the Mosque Controversy: Zaid Ibrahim is on the Right Side of the Law and Should NOT Apologise

Read here for more in Malaysia Today




Photobucket

PKR's Zaid Ibrahim said the Selangor Religious Council (MAIS) chairman Mohamad Adzib Mohd Isa had advised him in a letter that it is an offence for anybody to go against or dispute any order or directive by the sultan.

According to Zaid, "He (Mohd Adzib) further said that any order or directive issued by the sultan or MAIS has the effect of the law and is enforceable as such without having the need for it to be gazetted."

Zaid said that he will be replying to the letter, and is also prepared to seek an audience with the sultan to offer his explanation.He added that he has the utmost respect for Malay rulers, including the Selangor sultan, and that he has no reason to belittle them.

Zaid insisted he is NOT  apologising for his personal opinions.

He said,
" But this is an issue of public interest and as a politician, it is my duty to give my views.
So I will be writing a letter to the palace to seek an audience with the king if that would help clarify this matter.
Malay rulers as heads of Islam do NOT  have the authority to issue orders, directives and decrees without first going through the state assembly and gazetting those decrees.
We are a constitutional monarchy and rulers must abide by the rules of the constitution at both the state and federal level. So I believe that Section 12 is not valid.
Orders and decrees must be gazetted so that people understand their scope and exactly what is prohibited.

It doesn't make sense that laws debated in Parliament and the state assembly have to be gazetted but those issued by rulers are excused. The law is applicable to them as well because it has an impact on the public.
In our system of governance, we select members of parliament and state assemblymen to enact laws.  If we allow anyone else to do the same, then there is no democracy in this country because the people will not have a say.
......Perkasa is a strange creature but this is what you get from an organisation sponsored by Dr Mahathir (Mohamad).

And I will not entertain Perkasa because it is a fascist organisation that doesn't deserve to be entertained."
He slammed the burning of his effigy and the “irresponsible attacks” by politicians on “someone who is giving his legal opinion”, stressing that such acts cannot be condoned.

“These are gangster politics,he said. These are tactics that were once used by Hitler and Mussolini and are now outdated except in Umno and Perkasa.”

In his blog posting on Wednesday, he said that the sultan's remarks on the issue are merely personal opinions, and at least, a piece of advice to any party, and should not be mistaken for a decree or an order.

Zaid had said in his blog:
"In the constitutional monarchy system, the sultan cannot make decrees like back in the times of the Malaccan sultanate.

"According to the constitution, whatever the sultan wishes, must be channelled through Mais which will then meet and decide on gazetting any laws such as fatwa."
That raised the ire of several Malay rights NGOs, including Perkasa, which burned his effigy as well as demanded that he be exiled from the state.

Several police reports were also lodged against Zaid.

Friday, 7 May 2010

Kelantan Wayang Kulit: The Royal Drama

Kelantan Royal Tussle

by

Regina Lee

Read here for more in Malaysiakini

KELANTAN ROYAL FAMILY - WHO'S WHO

Kelantan sultan

Sultan Ismail Petra, who suffered a stroke last May is said to be incapacitated.

Raja Perempuan
Tengku Anis Tengku Abdul Hamid
Elia Suhana Ahmad (second wife). Divorce filed on March 9 by the sultan through third party.

Children
No 1 son: Tengku Muhammad Faris Petra (regent; acting sultan)
No 2 son: Tengku Muhammad Faiz Petra
No 3 son: Tengku Muhammad Fakhry Petra

Daughter: Tengku Amalin A'ishah Putri


Chronology of events

May 14, 2009
Tuanku Ismail is admitted to Hospital Universiti Sains Malaysia (HUSM) for heart problems and transferred to Singapore's Mount Elizabeth Hospital, where he undergoes a nine-month-long treatment.
NONE 
May 24, 2009
Tengku Faris (right) is appointed acting sultan by the state's Council of Succession.

(Note: Read here  related articles on Tengku Faris's controversial royal speech with racial undertones at the Barisan Bertindak Perpaduan Melayu gathering


May 31, 2009

Tengku Fakhry's teen wife, Manohara Odelia Pinot, runs away in Singapore during the couple's visit to Tuanku Ismail. She later alleges abuse and has since been seeking a divorce.

June 27, 2009
Kelantan palace comptroller Abdul Halim Hamad releases statement saying that matters between Manohara and Tengku Fakhry are personal, and have nothing to do with Tuanku Ismail, Tengku Faris, and the Kelantan Sultan's Office.


NONETengku Fakhry (right) later claims that it is slanderous and files a defamation suit against palace officials. The court subsequently throws out the case.

Sept 9, 2009
Tengku Fakhry sues his brother Tengku Faris over a luxury car, a Bentley Brooklands, for a declaration that the car was purchased for Tengku Fakhry or Tuanku Ismail's disposal, and that detention of the car by Tengku Faris is unlawful.


Sept 16, 2009
Tengku Faris removes Tengku Fakhry, the third in line to the throne, from the Council of Succession.


Dec 1, 2009
Tengku Fakhry sues eldest brother, Tengku Faris, the Kelantan Government, the Succession Council secretary and five others challenging the decision to remove Tengku Fakhry from council.
He subsequently looses the case when the High Court rules that Tengku Fakhry's decision cannot be reviewed.

March 4, 2010
Tuanku Ismail returns from Singapore. He is said to still be incapacitated.


March 9, 2010
The Sultan of Kelantan files for divorce from his second wife Elia Suhana Ahmad. It is revealed later that the plaintiff is not Tuanku Ismail himself, but one Nik Rorhana Wan Abdul Rahman.


March 13, 2010
Tengku Faris issues a statement saying that he is still acting Sultan despite his father's return, and that his brother Tengku Fakhry, has no authority to act on the sultan's behalf.


March 15, 2010
Both princes Tengku Faris and Tengku Fakhry move to strip individuals linked to each side of the warring camps of their datuk-ship.


March 25, 2010
Tengku Abdul Aziz Tengku Hamzah, Tengku Faris' uncle, is declared the acting Sultan replacing Tengku Faris. The move is announced by Wan Hashim Wan Daud, who claims to be the sultan's private secretary, and is acting on Tuanku Ismail's orders.Wan Hashim is arrested a few hours later for “inciting unrest” but is released two days later.


March 26, 2010
Tengku Faris removes his uncle Tengku Abdul Aziz as chairman of the Succession Council, replacing him with Tengku Laksamana Kelantan Tengku Abdul Halim ibni Almarhum Sultan Ibrahim.
Council secretary Aisery Alias and Deputy Mentri Besar Datuk Ahmad Yaakob also announce that the removal of Tengku Faris as acting sultan is illegal as it was not sanctioned by the state Royal Succession Council.

May 1, 2010
Kelantan palace guard, Ramli Mohd, is shot by two men while on the way home from work shortly after midnight.


May 4, 2010
Tuanku Ismail, Tengku Anis and Tengku Fakhry are stopped by a Special Actions Unit, a team of elite policemen, just 50 metres from the palace gates when they are about to head to the Kota Bharu airport at 7.30pm.
They had wanted to send Tuanku Ismail back to Mount Elizabeth Hospital in Singapore for his follow-up treatment but are rerouted to Hospital Universiti Sains Malaysia in Kubang Kerian.

Tengku Fakhry is also detained for about four hours while Tengku Anis claims that she has been holing up and sleeping on the floor in HUSM to evade police arrest.

May 5, 2010
Palace comptroller Abdul Halim says that Tengku Faris has ordered Kelantan chief police officer Abdul Rahim Hanafi to “ensure the safety of the ruler” following the shooting of the palace guard. The re-routing is also to enable medical specialists to examine Tuanku Ismail and give their views to the regent and the state government on follow-up treatment.
"Previously, certain quarters had prevented specialists from administering follow-up treatment and therapy on the sultan," says Abdul Halim.

May 7, 2010
Lawyers claiming to be acting on behalf of the sultan file a habeas corpus writ to “release” the sultan.

Related Article

Read here for more in Malaysiakini

As the lawyers for the sultan of Kelantan filed a habeas corpus application today, Tengku Muhammad Fakhry, the third son of the Kelantan Sultan, explained in a supporting affidavit what transpired on Tuesday evening.

Tengku Fakhry   related in his 14-page affidavit he and his mother, the Royal Consort, were taking his father to Kota Bharu airport enroute to Singapore, only to end up in the Hospital Universiti Sains Malaysia (HUSM) in Kubang Kerian.

He claimed a group of 30 to 40 police special action squad personnel in balaclavas, and armed with submachine-guns stopped the vehicles in the royal entourage after they had left Istana Mahkota.

The prince related how the policemen had pointed their weapons at his mother and other passengers in the motor vehicle, and forcibly ordered them out.
He also claimed that His Royal Highness did not agree to be brought to the HUSM.

Tengku Fakhry, also related how, at the hospital, her mother was stopped by the armed men, who pushed her out of an elevator to separate her from her husband, but she managed to persevere and re-enter.

The prince also related how she was prevented by many police officers from following the Sultan to his room and when she demanded an explanation, none of the policemen were able to provide one.

He also claimed his mother was refused access to be with her husband but she managed to gain entry into the room.

14 Year Old Aminulrasyid Amzah Murdered by Police for Nothing

aminulrasyid amzah


Update:

BEFORE  there were Aminulrasyid Amzah (above) and Norizan Salleh, both of whom were shot by the POLICE  in a hail of bullets, there was Siti Nasrinda Sumirin 

Twenty-three-year-old Siti Nusrinda was injured in her waist by a “blind and wild rampant shot” while driving with her fiance in Klang last August.

Another bullet had apparently grazed her 'tudung' in the incident - another few inches and she would suffered the fate of 14-year-old Aminulrasyid, who was killed during a police car chase last Monday.

Siti Nusrinda has today filed a RM2 million suit against the police and the government for the lack of action taken by the police in her case and for the injury she sustained. Read here for more

--END OF UPDATE

Read here for more in Malaysian Insider


This is where Aminulraysid lived… and died

by

Sheridan Mahavera

By most accounts there was nothing eye-catching about him. Not the way he spoke, how he ribbed his friends or how he dressed.

Aminulrasyid Amzah was quite simply a quiet, diminutive 14-year-old schoolboy, according to those who lived around him and who saw him last.

If he was part of your school-yard group, he would have been one of the followers. Not the one everyone bullied but certainly not the one with the zaniest jokes, the one who got all the girls’ phone numbers or the one who shaped opinions.

He is remembered as being a part of the many regular groups of schoolboys who roamed the neighbourhood after class. Who ate out with their families at the community’s food court and who haunted the cybercafés.

In essence, he was part of the scenery of Shah Alam’s Section 11. One of this Malay-Muslim city’s oldest neighbourhoods and which is known for its seamless mix of working class and upscale houses.

That is what has rankled many in Section 11 — that others are trying to force them to believe something which they feel they know as intimately as their backyards.

It is not just that his death is a tragedy; it is also the conflicting reports surrounding it.

What the authorities say happened on the day clashes with the accounts of eye-witnesses who saw the boy’s car being chased and peppered with bullets, and who saw how the wreck sat in the drain.

And then there is the part about him being called an armed robber.

According to those who saw him last that day and night, some of them who also saw the car chase, it would be a stretch to believe he was a hardcore criminal who had to be put down.


Wednesday, 5 May 2010

UPDATED !! Titah Raja BUKAN Arahan atau "Decree" Mengikut Perlembagaan Persekutuan Malaysia

Quote

Sultan Selangor telah bertitah bahawa masjid tidak boleh digunakan untuk tujuan politik. Titah itu luas sekali skopnya.

Titah itu adalah pendapat peribadi baginda. Ia BUKAN arahan, perintah atau “decree”.

Dalam sistem Raja Berpelembagaan, sultan TIDAK boleh mengeluarkan arahan atau perintah seperti zaman raja-raja Melaka dahulu.

Menurut Perlembagaan, apa-apa kehendak baginda mestilah disalurkan melalui Majlis Agama Negeri yang bermesuayarat dan keputusan mesyuarat itu akan diwartakan atau dijadikan “gazette” tentang apa-apa peraturan yang dikira perlu seperti mengeluarkan fatwa yang sah dan sebagainya.

Pendapat sultan hanyalah pandangan peribadi.

Jadi tak timbul soal Tok Guru Nik Aziz melanggar arahan Sultan Selangor seperti yang didakwa oleh Perdana Menteri Najib Razak.

Tok Guru dan ramai lagi orang Islam yang TAK sependapat dengan pendirian peribadi Sultan Selangor.
- Zaid Ibrahim


Beza arahan dan pandangan peribadi

oleh

Zaid Ibrahim

Read here for more

Sultan Selangor telah bertitah bahawa masjid tidak boleh digunakan untuk tujuan politik. Titah itu luas sekali skopnya. Saya yakin baginda berniat ikhlas dan jujur tetapi tafsiran titah itu mungkin diambil kesempatan oleh pihak-pihak tertentu.

Titah itu perlu diambil kira dalam konteks Perlembagaan Persekutuan dan kuasa-kuasa raja. Contohnya, apakah doa yang disambut oleh semua mukmin supaya “raja kita sanjung dan dipanjangkan umur” itu sebenarnya tidak bersifat politik? Kadang-kadang kita dengar dalam khutbah rasmi solat Jumaat yang memuji-muji kerajaan Barisan Nasional. Apakah itu bukan politik?

Titah itu adalah pendapat peribadi baginda. Ia bukan arahan, perintah atau “decree”. Dalam sistem Raja Berpelembagaan, sultan tidak boleh mengeluarkan arahan atau perintah seperti zaman raja-raja Melaka dahulu.

Menurut Perlembagaan, apa-apa kehendak baginda mestilah disalurkan melalui Majlis Agama Negeri yang bermesuayarat dan keputusan mesyuarat itu akan diwartakan atau dijadikan “gazette” tentang apa-apa peraturan yang dikira perlu seperti mengeluarkan fatwa yang sah dan sebagainya.

Pendapat sultan hanyalah pandangan peribadi. Sekurang-kurangnya ia boleh dianggap sebagai nasihat yang baik – untuk semua pihak, bukan bagi mana-mana individu atau kumpulan sahaja.

Jadi tak timbul soal Tok Guru Nik Aziz melanggar arahan Sultan Selangor seperti yang didakwa oleh Perdana Menteri Najib Razak. Tok Guru dan ramai lagi orang Islam yang tak sependapat dengan pendirian peribadi Sultan Selangor.

Pada zaman sekarang dan mengikut Perlembagaan, tak sependapat hanya bererti berbeza pandangan. Ia bukan satu kesalahan. Ia juga bukan perbuatan menghina.

Lainlah pula bila Sultan Pahang menitahkan supaya Kartika Sari Dewi tidak perlu dirotan; ia adalah keputusan yang sah kerana baginda ada kuasa di bawah Enakmen Pentadbiran Agama Islam Negeri untuk berbuat demikian. Itu pun ramai yang membantah dan melenting, malah ada yang mengkritik keputusan Sultan Pahang, termasuk dari Persatuan Peguam Syarie Malaysia.

Jadi mengapa Najib tidak membela Sultan Pahang atas keputusan baginda yang sah dari segi undang-undang tetapi hanya mahu membela Sultan Selangor walaupun itu hanya pendapat peribadi?

Sebabnya, politiklah. Bila Sultan melakukan sesuatu yang nampak menguntungkan UMNO, maka mesti Najib bela.

Sepatutnya Perdana Menteri mesti faham perbezaan antara perintah dan arahan, dengan pendapat dan pandangan peribadi, dalam konteks Perlembagaan Persekutuan. Barulah rakyat terutamanya orang Islam tidak mudah dipesongkan dengan dakyah politik.

ENGLISH TRANSLATION of Above Article by Zaid Ibrahim

The Sultan of Selangor recently declared that mosques could not be used for political purposes. It was a widely general pronouncement. I am certain that His Highness’s intention was sincere, but certain quarters have probably chosen to interpret the statement to their own advantage.

The pronouncement must be considered in the context of the Federal Constitution and the powers that rulers may exercise. For example, should we consider it a political issue when a Friday congregation praises the sultan and supplicates with God to grant him a long life? And sometimes we hear Barisan Nasional being praised in officially-approved Friday sermons. Is that not political?

The pronouncement was His Highness’s personal opinion. It was not a directive, command or decree.

In a constitutional monarchy, sultans CANNOT  issue directives or commands like they could during the time of the Malacca Sultanate. 

According to the constitution, whenever a sultan feels a need to make a religious ruling, his proposal must first be considered by the state religious council, which would gazette the result of its deliberation as a fatwa or some other form of proclamation. 

A sultan’s opinion is his own. It can be considered good advice — to be heeded by all, not just certain individuals or groups.

Therefore, the question of Tok Guru Nik Aziz disobeying the Sultan of Selangor does not arise, even if Prime Minister Najib Razak says it does. Tok Guru and plenty of other Muslims do not share the Sultan of Selangor’s personal opinion.

In our time and according to the constitution, it is not wrong to have differences of opinion. To differ is not the same thing as to insult.

It was a different case when the Sultan of Pahang decreed against the caning of Kartika Sari Dewi. It was a legitimate command; the State Islamic Administration Enactment gives him the right to issue it. 

Even so, many were upset and expressed their disagreement. Indeed, some quarters, including the Malaysian Syariah Lawyers Association, criticised the Sultan of Pahang for that decision.

So how was it Najib did not defend the Sultan of Pahang for his decree, which was legitimate, while he is so ready to defend the Sultan of Selangor for his personal opinion?

The reason, of course, is politics. When a sultan does something to UMNO’s advantage, Najib must defend him.

We would expect the Prime Minister to know the difference between a decree or directive and an opinion or personal view and to behave accordingly. Otherwise, the rakyat, especially Muslims, will continue to be misguided through political manipulation.

Friday, 30 April 2010

Raja Petra Speaks Out: Selangor Palace Short-Changed Selangorians to Federal Govt

Read here for more

Feudal Malaysia

by

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Excerpts: Read here for more

Malaysians probably do not comprehend why I decided to exile myself from Selangor because of my conflict with the Sultan. Maybe they think I am overreacting or exaggerating things a bit. Well, many do not understand how the ‘system’ works. It is not carved in stone. It is not even written on paper. But it is the law, nevertheless, and a law that I comply with.

If you can remember, this all started with what happened in Perak. I wrote an article asking Nizar Jamaluddin to defy the Sultan of Perak and not bow down to his demands. I also told him to hold his ground and take the Sultan head on.

The Selangor Sultan was very angry and he called my family for a meeting to express his displeasure. The instruction given to my family was that I was to issue a public apology for this treasonous act.

My Aunt, Raja Fuziah Tun Uda, sent me an e-mail, which I published in Malaysia Today. The e-mail made it very clear that I had committed an act of treason and that I was to issue a public apology to the Sultan of Perak. I was also told that I have disgraced the family name and if my grandfather were still alive he would have been very upset about what I had done.

I was given an ultimatum. If I did not issue that public apology then the family was going to insert advertisements in the mainstream newspapers condemning my act. In short, the family would distance itself from what I had done and in a way disown me.

I refused to issue that public apology. Instead, I wrote another article and condemned my family. I also, at the request of my Aunt, published the exchanges of e-mail messages. Maybe she wanted the Sultan to know that they had spoken to me as instructed.

That sealed my fate. My family declared me a treasonous person and someone who had brought shame to the family name. I was also told that the police had been instructed to launch an investigation and charge me for treason, an offence that carries the death sentence.

I wrote another article relating how the palace had boycotted my father’s funeral, although the palace did allow him to be buried in the Royal Mausoleum in Kelang. This, again, made the Sultan very angry and this time he really went berserk.

I received word from the palace that I would not be given a grave in the Royal Mausoleum when I die. I responded by saying that when I die just cremate my body and scatter the ashes wherever my children wish for it to be scattered, which of course sent shivers up the spine of Muslims because Islam does not allow cremation.

My feud with the palace is still ongoing and there were many other incidences since then. In fact, my feud with the palace goes as far back as when the last Agong was still alive and when Tun Dr Mahathir was the Prime Minister of Malaysia.

This earlier feud was with regards to Putrajaya. The federal government had annexed Putrajaya against the wishes of the Royal Council. The current Sultan was then only the Acting Sultan while his father was the Agong.

The Royal Council was summoned for a meeting and the Agong told them that the federal government is annexing Putrajaya and that they are not to oppose the move. The Council was to have no say in the matter.

I wrote an article asking the entire Royal Council to resign and for the Sultan to abdicate the throne. I also declared that the Sultan and the Royal Council are traitors to Selangor.

This caused a huge uproar in the palace. The Agong told my uncle, Raja Datuk Redzwa, that he is going to summon me to the palace so that I could be given a dressing down. My Uncle told the Agong to just try that and see who whacks whom. “Remember his father, Abang Din?” asked my Uncle. “Well, Peter is exactly like his father so you may want to reconsider whether you want to face him.”

The Acting Sultan eventually summoned me to the palace for a meeting so that I could be informed of the actual situation. The Agong, however, abandoned his plan to talk to me.

The actual situation, according to the Sultan, was that Dr Mahathir had made a secret deal with the Agong behind the backs of the Acting Sultan and the Royal Council. When the Acting Sultan requested to meet Dr Mahathir, His Highness was told that there is nothing to talk about as the matter had already been settled.

Actually, the Agong did not have the authority to give Putrajaya to the federal government. It is a state matter and the Agong is the head of the federation and not the head of Selangor. Furthermore, the federal government had already annexed Kuala Lumpur as the federal capital. Therefore, if they insist on annexing Putrajaya as the new federal capital, then they have to give back Kuala Lumpur to Selangor.

When the federal government realised that annexing Putrajaya means they would have to give back Kuala Lumpur to Selangor, they decided to call Putrajaya the ‘administrative centre’ while Kuala Lumpur remains the federal capital. In reality, Malaysia has two federal capitals but with different labels.

When I was detained under ISA in 2001, I was interrogated about this matter. I had committed treason, I was told, and treason is punishable with death.

I asked my Special Branch interrogators whether any of them are members of the Royal Family. None were. Then you have no business interfering in palace matters, I told them. This is a matter between the Sultan and me and Bukit Aman should stay out of it.

The Special Branch officers said that acts of treason is a national matter and a matter of national security. So they can get involved. I replied that if this were 200 years ago I would lead an army on the palace and dethrone the Sultan and put someone else on the throne.

The Special Branch officers were speechless. They shook their heads and muttered that I am really asking for it.

So my feud with the palace is not new. It goes back to the day they buried my father about 40 years ago. It became worse when I opposed the annexation of Putrajaya and asked the Sultan to abdicate. The final break was when I opposed the illegal takeover of Perak and whacked the Sultan of Perak.

And yes, the Sultan can declare someone persona non grata. But I did not allow him to do that to me. Before he could do that, I declared that I am in self-imposed exile. And that really pissed the palace big time.

Anyway, I have a score to settle with the federal government. They have to choose whether Kuala Lumpur or Putrajaya is going to be the federal capital. They can’t have both. And if by God’s grace we get to change the federal government, then I am going to make it my life’s mission to get back Putrajaya, which was illegally annexed by the federal government.

Hidup Selangor!
-Raja Petra Kamarudin

Wednesday, 28 April 2010

Pakatan is on Track to Putrajaya, Or Is it ?

Read here for more article by Kenny Gan

Review of the Hulu Selangor Election Results and Advice to Pakatan Rakyat Leaders

by

Kenny Gan

It was an intense hard fought by-election in a traditional Umno stronghold which many said was too close to call. BN’s Hulu Selangor campaign was as dirty and nasty as any other by-election and dirtier than most with the stakes seen as a referendum to Najib’s administration.

BN fought mostly with character assassinations and money and but both sides have released strategically timed policies, land titles and grants although naturally PR could not match BN’s largesse.

The campaign was fierce and furious with both sides throwing in their biggest guns with PR bringing in revered Tok Guru Nik Aziz to shore up Zaid’s Islamic credibility among the conservative Malays. The normally ignored orang asli were wooed by BN with parties, booze and cash and Felda settlers who were nursing grievances for decades suddenly found the sky raining with money and promises.

Even Maika shareholders were buoyed by the strategically timed news that a buyout of their troubled investment is in the works.

In an uncharacteristic move for an incumbent prime minister which underscored how important this by-election is, Najib Razak himself joined the fray.

The Election Commission also got into the act by a dubious transfer of 14,000 voters between polling stations seen as a calculated move to cause confusion. Several hundred pro-opposition voters were also transferred outside the constituency and denied their right to vote.

When dust of battle had settled and the votes counted, it was BN which emerged victorious by a thin majority of 1725 votes of the 49000 votes casted. But if BN thinks that this by-election win means they have swept popular support away from PR, they are deluding themselves.

BN won only because of EC’s shenanigans and their win at any cost tactics supported by wheelbarrows of money. Such questionable tactics would not be able to be repeated in a general election. Bribes are ineffective if there is a possibility of the bribe giver being kicked out of power.


A BN stronghold

Hulu Selangor is a mixed parliamentary seat constituency with 54% Malay, 27% Chinese and 19% Indian voters and a traditional BN stronghold.

In 2008 BN won the three state seats under the Hulu Selangor parliament seat with convincing majorities. It lost the parliament seat by a whisker thin majority of 198 votes which is swamped by the 1466 spoilt votes. As this large number of spoilt votes can be seen as protest votes against an unpopular candidate by BN loyalists, this means that BN could have won in 2008 with a more popular candidate than G. Palanivel.

Hence it is fair to say that the 2008 tsunami did not upset the BN stronghold of Hulu Selangor. To defend this seat against BN is far harder than pro-opposition seats like Permatang Pauh or Penanti.

Hulu Selangor is an ideal mid-term check for PR. It is called a semi-rural constituency but is more rural than urban. The people are primarily concerned with bread and butter issues although they also have some grasp of national issues.

The mixed nature of this constituency is a good test of PR versus BN’s strength in mixed seats which will be the main battleground in the next general election. It is a test of whether Najib’s 1Malaysia has made any impact in mixed seats.

As the constituency is under Selangor it may be seen as a referendum on the performance of the PR state government for the past two years. It can also be seen as a referendum on Najib’s performance since taking the reins as prime minister.

However BN’s thin majority in their traditional stronghold despite fighting a no-holds-barred contest did not furnish the pointer that Najib wanted. If anything, it shows that support for PR is still strong. We must remember that BN goes into every election with tremendous advantages of money, machinery and media especially in a by-election where it can focus its resources. To think that only a mere 900 voters need to change their votes to reverse the result is cold comfort although BN’s propaganda machine will go to town with this narrow victory.


A changed political landscape

It is worth noting that prior to 2008, BN could have won this mixed seat merely by putting up some posters. Mixed seats were considered safe seats for BN and recognizing this, the Election Commission created lots of mixed seats.

The fact that BN had to fight tooth and nail with PR and used every dirty trick in the book for a narrow victory shows how much the political landscape has changed since 2008. Gone are the huge majorities it used to enjoy for this seat prior to 2008.

BN’s slim victory shows that the 2008 general election results was not a fluke brought about by temporary anger at BN. Just as a tsunami sweeps in and changes the landscape irreversibly what happened after the 2008 political tsunami is a sea change in mindset. This change in mindset is best exemplified by the loss in safe status of the mixed seats.

To maintain its hold on power in the face of blatant corruption and institutional abuse, Umno has traditionally depended on racial divide and rule tactics by playing on racial and religious fears. It was in the mixed seats that such tactics had been played to great advantage for BN. But the 12th general election has turned this on its head with voting across ethnic and religious lines for the first time and this trend is again affirmed in this by-election.

What this means is that voters now vote on democratic issues instead of fears of racial strife or unchecked Islamization. In the era of new politics they look at performance, policies, social justice, service delivery and whatever future hopes and expectations they have of the political parties. This is what a two party system is all about.

A coalition which represents all races is essential for success in mixed seats. Where previously only BN could claim to represent all races, the PR coalition comprising of PKR, DAP and PAS can lay an even stronger claim of multi-racialism. The rise of PKR as a true multi-racial party with a Malay spine is a nightmare come true for BN.

A rejection of 1Malaysia

It is clear that with the receding of racial and religious fears, BN has to find another strategy. This came in the form of Najib’s 1Malaysia promoted incessantly by the mass media as a catchy slogan.

But 1Malaysia is an intractable contradiction to the race based underpinning of Umno and the concept of Malay special privileges which has been used as the basis for corralling Malay support.

To provide a counterbalance to 1Malaysia for the Malays, Umno nurtured the swift rise of Perkasa to outsource its racial posturing. Meanwhile the non-Malays are expected to return to the BN fold on the shady and vague promises of 1Malaysia.

For a true 1Malaysia, the slogan must be match by the reforming of racial policies especially race based economic policies to provide fairer opportunities and treatment to all races. But it goes without saying that Najib’s 1Malaysia will never be fleshed out but remain a hope and a promise to pull in the non-Malays. With 1Malaysia and Perkasa, Umno hopes to have its cake and eat it too.

The Hulu Selangor by-election result shows that the astute Chinese have rejected Najib’s slick slogan which is nothing more than an attempt to pull the wool over the people’s eyes.

The Indians have returned moderately to BN’s fold could mean that the Hindraf factor has largely dissipated. The Indians are mainly concerned with bread and butter issues and PR will have to do more work to convince them that it represents a better future for them than BN. They should also be educated that accepting BN’s gifts for votes is selling their future away.


The way forward: Can BN compete?

In a democratic competition with PR for the hearts and minds of the people there are certain areas where BN or specifically Umno can never reform despite loud proclamations to the contrary. Among them are corruption, abuse of public institutions and fair treatment of races.

As a party structured on the feudal system of patronage where largess are given for political loyalty, the use of public funds to fund the patronage will forever remain an essential feature of BN’s rule. The vehicle for siphoning of public funds may take the form of inflated negotiated contracts, anti-people sweetheart deals, crony privatization or allocation of national resources, licenses for rent seeking and unproductive projects and may be properly termed corruption.

To allow the corruption to continue public institutions such as the police, the MACC, the judiciary and the media must be co-opted and subjugated to serve interest of the ruling regime instead of the public.

An egalitarian society is not to BN’s interest as BN’s power depends on leveraging a racially polarized society. The race based parties whose raison d’etre depends on fighting for racial rights have no reason to exist in a racially egalitarian society. The use of a cheap slogan like 1Malaysia without any substance behind it does not convince the non-Malays.

BN is critically aware that its fate is tied to the economy. Rising cost of living against stagnated income does no favours for any ruling regime. However to lighten the people’s burden and boost the economy is yet another structural contradiction for BN.

Endemic corruption is ultimately passed to the man in the street and raises the cost of living. A profligate spending government has no choice but to reduce subsidies and increase taxes. Race based quotas and rent seeking activities impose inefficiencies on the economy and hamper its performance. They also lead to the flight of skilled human capital which further drags down the economy.

Hence we can conclude that BN is unable to compete with PR in the next couple years leading to the 13th general election. Time is not on the side of a decadent regime. As the years pass, more young voters join the ranks, the online media penetrates deeper, rural areas become more urbanized, the cost of living goes higher, corruption bites deeper, more scandals will be exposed and 1Malaysia rings hollower.

If PR can survive BN’s incessant attacks until the next general election it stands an excellent chance of wrestling Federal power from BN. Despite PR’s loss the Hulu Selangor by-election result shows that PR is firmly on track to Putrajaya.
-KENNY GAN

Monday, 26 April 2010

Must Read Article: What I Learned from HULU SELANGOR BUY-ELECTION

Read here for more in ARTiculation Blog

by

Art Harun

Okay guys. The by-erection is over.

As many of you might notice, I am a history freak. I just love history. I don't know why. But one thing for sure, I like to look at how people behaved or acted before so that I could learn a lesson or two from them in order to enable me to predict how people will behave in the future. I think that's part of the reason why I love history.

What can I learn from the Hulu Selangor buy-election?

  1. First and foremost, this buy-erection teaches me the sure fire way on how to get something done in my constituency. Let's say there are pot holes everywhere on the roads leading to my house. Or there is an old abandoned school project (there are everywhere, aren't they?) which stands like a sore thumb in my housing area which has also doubled up as a drug haunt.

    Let's say my kids need a laptop each. And the old folks near my house need some help with their monthly expenditures to make ends meet. Or I need some road humps near my house because there are bloody idiots who drive 80kph on roads in housing estates in their Cayenne or whatever behemoth they drive. And I have been writing countless time to my MP to help. But there isn't anything done.

    The trick is to ask my MP to resign. Or to pray that he or she would kick the proverbial bucket.

    Then a buy-erection would be declared. And oh my God wouldn't all my prayers be answered instantly! The abandoned school project will immediately be revived. All the pot holes will instantly disappear. My kids will get new laptop. The road humps will suddenly grow on the road in front of my house. Like wow wow.

    And I tell you what. If Barisan Nasional wins, I could even get to go to Putrajaya to see the Prime Minister who will see to it that a sum of RM3 million or whatever will be allocated for my mosque, Chinese school or whatever. Fooh...like tawdally simply happenin'.

  2. I also learned from this buy-election that many Malays do not know the difference between a "gift" (for which they should be thankful or grateful) and something which they are already entitled to.

    Yes. I am talking about the RM50000.00 each paid to 100 FELDA settlers. That money was not a gift from the government. Nor was it a contribution of any sort from the government. That money belonged to the settlers in the first place because their lands have been taken away more than 10 years ago. That money was long due to them. So there was nothing to be thankful to the government for paying it.

    I mean, should I thank you if you had taken my Porsche GT3 (note: this is just an example. I do not have a Porsche GT3 or any Porsche for that matter) about 4 years ago and now you pay me 500 bucks for it?

    Yes. But the FELDA settlers could not differentiate between the two. They are owed about a million each for their lands. They are now paid 50000 bucks and they thought it was a gift.

    What to do?

  3. I also learned that the Chinese people don't give two hoots to the Barisan Nasional or MCA. To them, the BN or MCA can do or say what they like and they just could not care bloody less. If Pakatan Rakyat had put a chimpanzee as a candidate, the majority of the Chinese people would vote for that chimpanzee. Even if Chua Soi Lek was the challenger.

  4. Then I learned that the majority of Indians in Hulu Selangor however are a predictable lot. They would follow whatever the Barisan Nasional say. Even if UMNO rejected their own party's preferred candidate, the Indians would still support BN. MIC had wanted Palanivel. Local UMNO boys preferred Mugilan. UMNO head honchos put in he-whose-name-is-truly-1Malaysia. And they still supported him.

  5. The next thing I learned is the fact that HINDRAF is now more complicated and dynamic than middle-east politics. They have right winged HINDRAF. Then the left. Then the right-leftist and also the left-rightist. Then they have the true HINDRAF. Also the true right, left, right-leftist as well as the leftist-right. Which makes all the other HINDRAF, whether right, left, rightist-right and leftist-right untrue. Then they have the extreme right, which in other word is known as right-right HINDRAF. As well as left-left HINDRAF.

    I don't even know who they support. Or whom they are against. I think they should change their party's name to HUH?DRAF instead.

  6. This buy-election has also taught me that Ibrahim Ali is, at the very least, mildly schizophrenic. One minute he wears an Independent MP hat. In this mode, he is an independent MP who is not aligned to anybody or any party. The next minute, he is the PERKASA leader. In this mode, he fights for the Malay rights, kiss his short Keris in public and wave it about town.

    Sometime he fights for Islam, or so he says. Of course he forgets that under Islam, human beings are all equal and the only thing which differentiates people in the eyes of God is piety and how he or she adheres to His wishes.

    Then he went to Hulu Selangor and campaigned for Kamalanathan, whom, the last time I checked was not a Malay. On this, Ibrahim Ali said he was in Hulu Selangor not as PERKASA leader but as an independent. Now, if he was an independent who is not aligned to anybody or any party, why was he campaigning for the Barisan Nasional's candidate? Didn't that make him aligned to the BN?

  7. Apart from Ibrahim Ali, I also learned that Kamalanathan is also probably a schizo or a very forgetful boy. When Nasir Safar made some statements which he (Kamal boy) deemed racist, he shouted and screamed on his blog that "the authorities should take the strongest possible steps by charging him with sedition."

    However, during the bye-erection, he refused comment when asked about Nasir Safar. Not only that, he mentioned that PERKASA's fights for Malay rights is a-okay by him. And this coming from an Indian, who, in the eye of PERKASA, is "second class citizen." Classicus confuse-ious.

    In the same blog entry, he also proclaimed that "I think I am more Malaysian than he is." But when he was asked whether he is an Indian first or Malaysian first, if I remember correctly, he refused to answer. (I stand corrected on this as I am writing this purely from memory).

  8. Be that as it may, I am really proud that YB Kamalanathan has mastered and in fact practised one of the scared act in the Malay culture. That is the act of respecting our leaders and elderly persons by kissing his or her hand. YB, I am proud to call you a brahder Bro. And you speak Bahasa Melayu well too. Even better than Zaid Ibrahim. If we ever meet YB, I expect you to kiss my hand okay. After all I am older than you.

  9. Hulu Selangor bai-elecsyen had also given me a peek into the Malay Muslim psyche. Alhamdulillah. And that is, alcohol is a big no no. Yea. Nope. Alcohol consumption is a sin. A very big sin. And repentance is not enough to wash you off that sin. Because alcohol consumption my friend, is drunkenly sinful.

    You can plunder the country. Commit adultery with children. Commit murder. Commit breach of trust. Have sex with some sex worker from China or where ever. Marry a nice trophy wife without telling your first wife. Lie to your wife. Be a hypocrite all the way.

    Yes. But drink alcohol? Wooooo, that's sinful Bro. It is sinful unless you did it when you are in Barisan Nasional. HUaHAHaHAHAHaHa... kayu!

  10. The next thing I learned is that Mirzan Mahathir is very clever. All the board members of San whatever parent company had wanted to diversify into some other business rather than concentrate in the business of manufacturing and selling beer (although why they would want to do so is beyond my comprehension when they earn a hell lot of pesos doing so) but they did not know how to do so or what to do.
    They then brought in Mirzan to help them to diversify.

    Perhaps they had wanted to diversify into car manufacturing la kot. That's why. But then again, Mirzan must have been one of the smartest diversification strategist around. Caya lu la Bro. You make me stand proud as a Malaysian.

  11. The most important thing that I learn from the Hulu Selangor be-elektion is that the Chinese would get to see the Prime Minister and demand 3 million clams only if the Barisan wins.

  12. Hmmm..."Saiful whatever" is better than the whole Chinese community in Hulu Selangor then.
    Why?

    Because he got to see the Prime Minister in his house and there wasn't even a bi-erection. (careful, careful, no pun intended, okay...LOL!!!) Oh sorry, I mean, by-election, not erection.

-Art Harun

Sunday, 25 April 2010

UPDATED: Hulu Selangor By-Election.... The Countdown


 IT WAS A BUY-ELECTION WON BY UMNO-BN

OFFICIAL TALLY:
BN =24,997 
 PKR= 23,272

MAJORITY WIN BY BN:  1,725 votes

Money was literally thrown at the Malay voters to vote an Indian candidate.  (RM  64 Million for Hulu Selangor)

The dirtiest election campaign by UMNO-BN in recent memory.

Nonetheless, the  people of Hulu Selangor has spoken loudly


Go to Anil Netto Blog for Live Updates

FINAL VOTER TURN-OUT ( 5 PM) :  75.87 % voter turnout or 48,935 out of 63,701 voters

TIMELINES: (STAY TUNED ON THIS PAGE)WILL BE UPDATED UNTIL FINAL RESULT KNOWN


8.00 PM
FINAL RESULT: BN WON THE BY-ELECTION

The BN have nothing to gloat over after splashing out and promising all that money.
7.55 PM
Mkini official:  BN 19067 / PKR 17554   - A Margin: 1513


7.45 PM

PKR needed 80% of non Malay votes, he only got 68%.
 Latest unofficial tally from Aku Budak Balun @ Hulu Selangor: BN 20,827 PKR 20,293 
7 more polling districts to report
7.40 PM

10,000 votes more to be couted


 Latest unofficial from Khairy: : ‎​19,067 BN - 17,554 PKR ....BN led by 1,300 votes

PKR admit lost in FELDA area...

7.35 PM


PKR supporters believe Not enough Malay support and support from urbanites to bring PKR across theline

 7.30 PM
 
There are still a lot of votes left to count. Around 30,000.
Official EC tally so far: BN 3,134 PKR 3,772
7.20PM
Votes in Malay areas coming in only trending 40% to 43% for PR only. PKR might be in trouble
 
Total Tally:  PKR 9,116 BN 7,280

7.15PM

These results so far are mostly from the Chinese polling center. The votes from Malay area yet to come in 
 UNOFFICAL TALLYBN 6985 - PR 8885.... PKR leading by about 2,000 votes

7.10 PM
  
Anil Netto noted kampung/rural votes still be counted
Pakatan Ops Centre tally:    BN 6,840 PKR 8,509 


7.06 PM

 Kampung Padang
Saluran 1: PKR - 77 BN - 209

Saluran 2 PKR - 154 BN - 191
Unofficial PKR 8509 BN 6840 ... PKR still leading.. lead extends to about 1,500

Batang Kali - PKR 901 BN 798


Total Tally: PKR 7162 BN 6063... PKR is still leading


6.50 PM

Ampang Pecah PKR - 148  BN - 216
 
38,000 votes more to count.....STILL TOO EARLY TO CALL 

Unofficial   TOTAL COUNT:  PKR 6141    BN 5278

  6.45 PM

With 11,000 votes tallied PKR leading by 900 majority.
(Fahmi Fadzil reports)


UNOFFICIAL Total Count:  PKR 5176 BN 4682 
PKR leading at this stage according to Malaysiakini 

6.35 PM


PKR  wins Kg. Bharu:   KKB by 736 votes.


6.30 PM

Ulu Yam Bharu - BN 572, PR 397 


Kuala Kubu Bharu (Sal 1-3 ) - PKR 897, BN 499



6.25 PM

Unofficial,   Kg Baru Cina PKR leading in 2 saluran
6.20 PM
 Anil Netto reports no clear trend 

Postal Votes:PKR - 120, BN - 767 Rosak - 12


6.15 pm
  
RASA BN 75 PKR 301
 PERTAK   PKR 22  BN 15
 SALURAN 1  KUALA KELOMPANG BN 128 PKR 98 ROSAK 6

KUALA KUBU SALURAN 2:    BN 155 PKR 105 

BATANG KALI SALURAN 1 BN 94 PKR 171 

Unofficial results:
SMK Dato haji Kamaruddin
PKR - 135
BN - 82

Ulu Yam Barat  (6.15 pm)

PKR - (138)
BN - (226)

6.00pm

Unofficial - PKR leading in Soeharto

5.30pm

Unofficial,  PKR leading in Gedangsa (counting on-going)
5.05 pm:

PKR wins Bukit Frasers: PKR (22) BN (15) Spoilt (1) 38/68 (55.9%)
(Zorro reports)

-----------------------------------------------
  5pm: Voting Closed


4.30 pm

VOTER TURNOUT

Kg Jumut, Hulu Bernam 70%

Bandar Kalumpang 65%

hulu Yam Timor 71%

Sg Tengi Selatan 81%

Bukit Berungtung 58-3%

SK Taman Buaya Raya 38.96%
of 1350 eligible voters.


3.05PM

VOTER TURNOUT:
Sg Buaya 67%

SJKC Batang Kali 70%

SRJKC Choong Chee 81%

SMK Bukit Sentosa 40%

SJK(T) Sg Choh 70% (situation here has turned chaotic....FRU has been deployed)

SRKRT Changkat Ledang Asa (Hulu Bernam) 63%

SK Sg Selisek (Hulu Bernam) 73%
SKGesir \Tengah (hulu Bernam) 45%
SJK(T) KKB 53.54%

3PM:
Voter turn out is 67.18% - 43,333 out of expected 63,701 voters.