as i sees it

A day to remember

2012-01-09T13:00:00.005+13:00

It's time to spent! spent! spent!

2011-10-29T13:48:00.000+13:00

Why the fuss over the 2010 AG Report.

By Sakmongkol AK47

Let us show you a few examples. Perhaps then readers will understand what all the fuss is over the AG Report.

Bizarre overpricing- the National Youth Skills Institute (under the Youth and Sports Ministry) approved the purchase of a car jack that cost RM50 for RM5,700, a digital camera that cost RM2,990 was bought for RM8,254 and RM1,146 was paid for a set of technical pens with a market price of RM160;

Negligence- the Police Air Wing purchased two helicopters worth RM117.75 million, which could not be used, as they did not meet specifications. Another RM15.4mil was spent to train pilots to fly these helicopters.

Incompetence- Customs Department under-utilized its RM290mil information technology system but was planning to spend another RM451.30mil to develop a new one.

These are the findings of the Auditor General’s report a few years ago. If the transgressions were not rectified, we know it means, things have not improved. If matters are left as they are, we can then more or less expect what’s coming. We can expect the same stories about negligence and incompetence because those responsible are laid back about the issues. We have all the reasons to believe that the report for 2011, next year, will reveal the same story about misappropriation of funds, bizarre overpricing, projects not completed. These are indicators of negligence, incompetence and regretfully said- of officious arrogance.

The 2010 Auditor General's Report is precisely that- voluminous and horrifying mentions about more or less the same findings contained in reports of preceding years. What does that say? It says loud and clear, the same transgressions committed were not rectified or even allowed to continue. It means the same wrongdoings are allowed to be perpetrated because the enabling circumstances and possibly the same perpetrators were allowed to persist. It further shows those responsible to ensure the transgressions are not repeated have been incompetent and negligent in carrying remedial actions.

The same people who did all the transgressions are still in commanding positions; they will have the opportunity to improve upon their incompetence by doing more damage. The Chief Secretary’s village fool response by way of saying he is not worried and that the problem has been dealt with because he has sent circulars asking officials to exercise more discipline is a negligent expression and ensuing act of gross callousness. I am afraid, the public isn’t that forgiving.

We don’t want circulars- we want those transgressors punished or even sacked. As them to publicly explain what happened to those overspendings? Let’s ask the chairman of Giatmara for example, where is the shop that sells the heavy duty blender for 4 times the market price. Let’s make it the 1 Malaysia shop for heavy duty blenders. Maybe even give them soft loan from EPF. Let us Mydin the shop.

Yet we want to extend the services of such a fellow. Let’s elect Allred E Newman for Chief Secretary then. Then, we are assured the same transgressions repeated, will be met with the same incredulous response of what me worry!

The answer is also, we don’t have to suffer the incompetence of those entrusted to manage public money. If they don’t manage properly and because it’s our money they are managing, they deserve to be publicly assailed. This isn’t about being perplexed as to why the opposition should bicker about the report. If you do, then we shall have to explain to you in as simple terms as possible.

This is beyond opposition. This is about, the mismanagement of our money which deserves being treated as a cause of concern for possible fraud and deception.

The short answer to the question then as to why the opposition gets irked by the audit report as do all right thinking Malaysians is the money being treated isn’t the property of the transgressors. That being so, the administration of the money and the application of the funds thereof, must be done with utmost care. It’s not your father’s money. That is the short answer.

The long answer is, Malaysians are fed up of the deception and misappropriation of funds.

For the year 2010, the government approved a budget of RM 149 billion for operating expenditure. This wasn’t enough and the government had to increase the opex to 151 billion. The report said 9 ministries over spent. Here is where all of us should be concerned. This is taxpayers money being spent on opex. The 2 billion could have been spent of capex capital expenditure which builds capacity to create more wealth.

Now, Malaysians are equally outraged by the revelations of the 2010 Auditor-General Reports on the continuing financial scandals, hanky-panky and gross financial negligence in government. We are horrified to learn for example, the National Sports Institute acquired 23 horses totalling RM5.66 million without a Financial Ministry go-ahead with none of the horses competed in two recommended international championships; we have the case of the RM142 million RazakSAT malfunctioning barely a year after being commissioned; wait, we have more- The Malaysian Marine Parks Department spent a whopping RM56,350 for a pair of night vision Marine binoculars, 29 times more than its market value of RM1,940; and paid the same amount for another pair of night vision Bushnell binoculars, or 1,893 per cent more than its actual price of RM2,827.

We are once again appalled at the incompetence of front line workers incapable of appreciating the importance of proper placement of decimal points and making accounting mistakes that resulted in wasteful overspending. These should not have happened if there are efficient and proper internal audit systems. As the result of a laid back attitude, we are told of stories where a pensioner received RM21, 433 a month instead of RM214.33 for 16 months!. The mistake was detected after more than a year. The officer who finally detected the mistake should be a given a merit order.

We are also dismayed of hearing Giatmara Centre mistakenly paying RM170 per kg instead of RM1.70 per kg for sugar for a poverty eradication programme or RM25, 500 for 150 kg of sugar! This must be a special kind of sugar.

What about the village-fool response that I mentioned above? In his response to the 2010 Auditor-General’s Reports, the Chief Secretary to the Government Tan Sri Sidek Hassan has repeated his annual reaction and call to all departments and agencies to take heed of the Auditor-General’s comments and views. Which goes to show, that what I said about the same mistakes being repeated did take place, otherwise, he wouldn’t have to repeat his annual reaction would he?

No wonder then, there was this need to delay the submission of the 2010 Auditor-General’s Report to ensure that it would not completely overshadow Najib’s 2012 Budget. Otherwise, the Finance Minister’s charitable overtures would be overshadowed and overwhelmed by the over 1,300 pages of exposes of financial irregularities, hanky-panky as well as misappropriation of public funds in the first full year of PM Najib’s premiership.

All right thinking Malaysians are waiting for the Finance Minister or the Chief Secretary to explain the delay in submitting the 2010 Auditor-General Reports until after the end of the parliamentary debate on the 2012 Budget. If the Report was enclosed alongside the budget documents, the AG Report would have been the foremost parliamentary issue.

Another lost gold

2011-09-06T02:38:00.000+12:00

Subject: $31 billion Malaysian Man

Compared to some people who enrich themselves through corruption at the highest level, this guy is perhaps Malaysia's richest man , all earned through his invention and pioneering spirit -- no political or corrupt practices, no shady deals, no rent-seeking . Pure hard work and innovation

--the world famous PEN DRIVE !!

Why is he not given publicity in the mainstream media ?? Because he was not offerred a scholarship by the govt and he had to find a cheaper place to study --Taiwan. And invented the PEN DRIVE –everyone who owns a laptop, computer will also own a pen drive !!!

Sharing this success story with you.........

Had Phua Kein Seng started his pen-drive business in Malaysia he would have given away 30% of his business to bumiputras at the price of a song. He would have to appoint a few bumiputras as directors too, even if they contribute nothing to his company. And the $31 billion that his company would have contributed to the Malaysian tax coffer would have been somehow siphoned off into some umnoputra's pocket/account.

Thank God, he started his business in Taiwan!

The $31 billion Man HAPPENS TO BE A "CHINESE" MALAYSIAN THAT'S WHY THERE HAS BEEN NO PUBLICITY. YOU CALL THIS 1MALAYSIA?

$31bil Man .Interesting to know that the Pen Drive was invented by a Malaysian Chinese who could not get into one of our local universities primarily because he is not a bumiputra. He had to study in Taiwan.. What a shame to our Government....We have lost thousands of good brains abroad all because of the stupid NEP.!!Pua's mighty 'Pen'S. INDRAMALAR speaks to the creator of the now indispensable Pen Drive Fact file Name: Pua Khein Seng Age: 31 Hometown: Sekinchan, Selangor; Education: SJKC Yeok Kuan, Sekinchan; Pin Hwa Independent school, Klang; Chiao Tung University, Taiwan; Occupation: Engineer/ president of Phison Electonics Corp Current base: Taipei, Taiwan Years abroad: 12. WHEN he set off for Taiwan in 1993, Pua Khein Seng's only aim was to complete his degree in Electrical Control Engineering at the renowned Chiao Tung University and return home to work in Malaysia Never did he envision himself heading a multi-million dollar Taiwanese company that developed the world's first USB flash removable disk, which they called Pen Drive .

Pua Khein Seng went to Taiwan to get his engineering degree but ended up staying on, starting his own company and inventing the pen drive."I went to Taiwan to pursue my undergraduate degree. I chose Taiwan only because it was too expensive to study either in the United States or Singapore "However, I did well in my undergraduate programme and was offered a place to do my masters," explained Pua, who was back in Kuala Lumpur recently for a holiday. After completing his Masters in July 1999, Pua worked for about six months in a local company before deciding to set up his own venture company with four fellow engineers who had studied with him at Chiao Tung."We were confident that we had the know-how and ability to start our own business, which is focused on USB technology.

The company is called Phison because there are five of us - two Malaysians and three Taiwanese engineers," said Pua, 31, who hails from Sekinchan, Selangor. Phison Electronics Corporation was set up in November 2000 and within six months the young entrepreneurs came up with their first invention - a USB storage device called Pen Drive". We were the first company in the world to develop the USB Drive SoC (System On Chip) and we were very confident that the market for USB will be huge. At the time, no one believed in us so we had to do everything ourselves - from developing the technology, the chips to the product itself." We were only 27 years old at the time and inexperienced. But we were confident that we could design good systems and chips but we didn't know anything about selling.

So, we sought partners or traders who could help sell our products for us," Pua added. Through smart partnerships and shrewd strategies, Phison soon made its way into European, American and Japanese markets. One quick move was securing Japanese tech giant Toshiba as Phison's largest shareholder and customer." We launched Pen Drive in June 2001 and by August the same year, we broke even! From September 2001, we were reaping monthly profits from our invention and there has been no turning back since." Having established himself in Taiwan , Pua is in the midst of setting up Phison's branch in Malaysia , due to begin operations this February. "I am starting a branch in Malaysia because this is my country. I would like to contribute to its development."We have about 100 engineers at Phison in Taiwan , 20 of whom are Malaysians.

Though they studied in Taiwan, I had to re-train all the engineers I hire because, like most fresh graduates (in this field), they are not industry-ready upon graduation."Unfortunately, some of the Malaysian engineers want to return home after a couple of years because they are homesick, about to start a family and so on. Some prefer to work in Singapore , as it is closer to home. Instead of losing them to competitors, I decided to set up an office in Malaysia where they can still work for me," said Pua. Another problem faced by returning computer engineers from Taiwan, Pua added, was the lack of job opportunities for hardware engineers in Malaysia. "There is no environment or support for design engineers here in Malaysia. One of my Malaysian engineers from Phison returned home and ended up as a teacher in a Chinese school! I was shocked and thought, 'After all that training and re-training, he is going to just teach?' I told him to hold on till I open up the Phison branch in Malaysia ."Though he has been in Taiwan for the past 12 years and married to a Taiwanese, Pua is not sure how much longer he will remain there. "I have really no idea where I will be in 20 years. Maybe Taiwan , maybe Malaysia, maybe somewhere else ... it all depends on my business.

The industry is moving so fast that I cannot predict what or where I will be," he said.For the moment though, Taiwan is home for Pua, his wife and two children even though he misses the Malaysian way of life. "I come home once a year for Chinese New Year and will usually stay for about two weeks. There are several things I really miss about Malaysia. One is the food! For the past 12 years I have been craving for Malaysian food ... I miss laksa, curry noodles, chee cheong fun and all the other delicious dishes we have here. "I also miss the lifestyle and quality of life here. When I come back, I am always amazed to see people hanging out and relaxing at mamak shops at night. In Taiwan , most people would still be at work at that time of the night! "Before I got married, I used to work for 15 to 17 hours a day, everyday. Now that I have children, my wife has forbidden me to stay so late. Now, I go to work at 9am and come home by 11pm. These hours are quite normal for the Taiwanese."The man who invented USB pen-drive is a young modest Malaysian who can't even get into a local University but invented the most versatile, indispensable computer peripheral today. And helped his adopted country, Taiwan made $31bil in the process. The rest is history....

The way of the numbers game

2011-09-01T00:01:00.002+12:00

GE-13: BN wins landslide victory

Mariam Mokhtar

Aug 22, 11

MalaysiakiniOnly an optimist would believe that their vote would sweep Umno from power in GE-13. Why bother with a sham election and waste resources going through the motions of an election, where the outcome has already been decided in advance? The headlines will proudly boast: “BN wins. Najib scores a landslide victory, in a massive 103 percent turnout”.

Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak wants GE-13 before electoral reforms. In a functioning democracy, the rakyat has a choice. The fundamental difference is that we are denied that choice. We distrust our electoral processes despite Najib’s assurance about the parliamentary select committee (PSC) on electoral reforms. Will Umno/BN leave office gracefully?

At the 61st Umno general assembly Najib declared: “Even if our bodies are crushed and our lives lost, brothers and sisters, whatever happens, we must defend Putrajaya”. At the World Youth day meet in Putrajaya, Najib screamed, “Will you defend Putrajaya with me?” before breaking into a disturbing tirade: “Defend Putrajaya! Defend Putrajaya! Defend Putrajaya!”

By 2011, the People’s Volunteer Corps (Rela) would consist of 2.6 million members. Will they be issued postal votes too? Some people believe that certain western democracies are far superior, with honest and principled people in government. Not true! Politicians in foreign establishments can be just as devious and as corrupt as the Malaysian ones. Their government appears to be working only because their rakyat makes sure the politicians serve them and not the other way around. They are not afraid of criticising their MPs. Politicians who do not adhere to the minimum parliamentary standards, are booted out.

In these countries, elected representatives are monitored, pursued and made accountable for their actions. Politicians are important in that they enact laws in parliament, on our behalf. But politicians need to be regulated. They are the tools with which the state can meddle in our lives.

MPs are to be controlled

MPs are to be controlled, not controlling. It is by us being watchful, and not sycophantic, that keeps MPs in check. Malaysians have seen a constant barrage of electoral fraud. Last week, former soldiers alleged that they were ordered by their superiors to manipulate votes. But the denunciation by the Chief of the Armed Forces, General Zulkifeli Mohd Zin, who labelled these ex-soldiers as traitors, is itself an act of treachery.

Illegal workers being granted citizenship and voting rights have been unearthed. MyKads of dubious authenticity are distributed to foreigners. Political expediency seems more important than sovereignty. It appears that the NRD is a major threat to national security. Scores of centenarians, or people who have long since died, have been resurrected, to cast their votes. These accompany the usual complaints of vote-buying, intimidation and promises of aid in exchange for votes.

Gerrymandering, or the division of geographical areas into constituencies which will unfairly benefit only one party, is overlooked by the EC. Pro-opposition areas may have one MP representing over 100,000 voters in the one constituency whereas in BN strongholds, constituencies consist of around 5,000 people.

Just before Bersih’s 9 July march, Wan Ahmad Wan Omar (left), the EC’s deputy chairman, complained that NGOs were obsessed with the comparison of election practices between Malaysia and other countries. He said, “Elections observers must be domestic observers. Foreign observers, they don’t know our election laws, they don’t understand. It’s a different value system.”

Yet he failed to act after Ambiga Sreenevasan and other local election activists were banned from monitoring the Sarawak state elections. Wan Ahmad claimed that our election laws were “fair and impartial” and was stung by the “negative” comments of foreign observers. He said, “They are foreigners, who are they? Why do we need foreigners, Germans commenting on our election system?”

He is right. The culture of “You help me, I help you” is “Umno-esque” and peculiar to Malaysia. Malaysia is ‘superior’ and has nothing to learn from others. Wan Ahmad’s arrogance smacks of “Ketuanan Melayu” and extols the virtues of the warped BTN indoctrination. So what exactly is the EC’s role when it continually coughs up excuse after lame excuse of why it cannot ensure clean elections?

EC but a toothless dragon

The EC is but a toothless dragon whose only job seems to be the defence of BN. It turns a blind eye when Umno/BN uses government resources, the national media and other instruments of the state, for its own propaganda. The poor appear to be supportive of Umno and in past elections, people living in decrepit hovels have posters of Umno, Najib or Taib Mahmud (for Sarawak) adorning their homes.

In Sarawak, the villagers idolise Taib, like teenagers would their pop-idol, when Taib makes his grand entrance, by helicopter, at longhouses. Usually, his Mercedes is on standby in case Taib fancies the trek home by car. The contrast between the villagers’ pitiful surroundings with basic infrastructure, and Taib’s opulence, makes it hard to imagine how they have benefitted from Taib’s long rule. What do they hope to gain by supporting him for another term?

It is the same story in peninsular Malaysia. The rural people and the poor appear to support Umno/BN. Perhaps they are comfortable with the devil you know than the one you don’t. Perhaps the opposition has yet to gain the confidence of the rural folk. Have the destitute given up hope of change; they are prepared to accept the few tokens of appreciation like sacks of rice, Milo and sugar, in exchange for votes? Does “stability” triumph over “change”?

Bersih cannot do it alone because Umno/BN dominates Malaysian politics. Any attempt by the opposition to “oppose” in Parliament means they are not allowed to table their motions or at worst, they risk being suspended. With enormous cash reserves, and the ability to utilise government resources, unlike the opposition, Umno/BN can command political patronage amongst businesses. In an election, favours are called in and Umno/BN do act like they are above the law.

Too arrogant to acknowledge the voters

‘Najib & co’ are too arrogant to acknowledge the voters: What is the rakyat saying? What do they want? Can they cast their vote and be sure that the policies and the person they voted for, will be reflected in the final outcome?

Fraud, manipulation, phantom votes and money politics are useful instruments which have helped to prop up Umno, for 54 years. Umno has been rattled by Bersih and the popular uprising in Egypt has given Malaysians hope. The rakyat is finally getting to have a real taste of democracy but the challenges are enormous as we try and adapt to being “free” and “fair”.

The trick to improving Malaysian politics is not to allow the political parties and their leaders any let-up but to be constantly critical of their performance. Let’s have less praise and more scrutiny. GE-13 should not be held until electoral reforms are under way. Don’t be fooled by Najib’s latest spin on democracy and his smokescreen about the PSC and electoral reform.

MARIAM MOKHTAR is a non-conformist traditionalist from Perak, a bucket chemist and an armchair eco-warrior. In ‘real-speak’, this translates into that she comes from Ipoh, values change but respects culture, is a petroleum chemist and also an environmental pollution-control scientist.

Land of opportunity

2011-08-01T12:24:00.001+12:00

709

2011-07-10T03:33:00.003+12:00

Remember yellow

2011-06-30T00:43:00.002+12:00

The caveman politician

2011-05-15T13:20:00.001+12:00

BN YB Bites the Hands that Feed Him!

Sarawak Report

9 May 2011

BN is spending huge sums of money attempting to promote a democratic image worldwide. But, for free, the Pantai Damai assemblyman, Dr Abdul Rahman Junaidi, has undermined such careful PR with a series of outrageous statements.

His remarks, which were faithfully reproduced in the BN mouthpiece, The Borneo Post, on April 28th under the title “It is not fair to bite the hand that feeds you”, were directed against members of his own constituency, who had had the ‘audacity’ to vote against BN in the recent elections.

BN YBs badly need lessons in democracy

Unlike a genuine democratic politician, who would acknowledge that he had not succeeded in convincing everybody that he was the man to vote for and would commit himself to try harder next time round, this fellow chose instead to chastise and threaten his constituents! Worse, he made it clear that he was prepared to corruptly abuse his position by withdrawing legitimate state aid from individuals who had voted for the opposition!

“Our approach in Pantai Damai will be … If they insist on supporting the opposition, then maybe they should ask the opposition for aid.”, announced the cheeky Assemblyman.

Junadi is their representative not their boss!

Abdul Rahman Junadi should remember that it is the people who feed HIM, through his salary as an Assemblyman. The fishermen he was addressing also put food on his table. It is therefore HE that should remember not to bite the hand that feeds him and not the other way round. How dare he threaten his constituents in such a way?

The occasion on which Junadi made these remarks was a disgrace in itself. The man had strutted into the community to make a public handout of benefits from the federal government to the fishermen, who were entitled to it. These individuals should, of course, have been allowed the dignity of a completely private distribution of state support and not have been forced to grovel for it in public in front of this rude and threatening man.

Frankly offensive. The Borneo Post article which carried Junadi's arrogant remarks.

Indeed, who is Mr Junadi to make a big public occasion out of personally handing the fishermen their benefits? Was this money that Mr Junadi had himself earned that he was so kindly passing to them? No, of course it was not! This was Malaysian taxpayers’ money and money raised from the people of Sarawak and he has no right whatsoever to pose as the generous person handing it out.

Neither should Junadi attempt to pretend that it is his party BN that is donating the money. The only role the BN has in a genuine democracy is the responsibility over a limited period for making sure that the people who elected them (the real bosses) get the best value for their money. It is a position of trust, not of authority.

BN occupy a position of trust, not of authority

Taib favourite, YB Awang Tenga's house, paid for by the money he has earned while a BN Assembyman.

Like Junadi, BN has not provided any of the money that is being distributed. Rather they live off this taxpayers’ money themselves.

It is because they divert far too much of the wealth of Sarawak into their own pockets and far too little into the pockets of citizens such as the fishermen of Pantai Damai, that so many in Sarawak are still so poor.

These fishermen do a hard and dangerous job providing Junadi’s table with fish. He should rather have concentrated on thanking them for their role and apologising on behalf of BN that they receive so little for their pains that they have to rely on such income supplements.

This was the reason his constituents quite understandably voted in large numbers for the opposition, which has promised a far fairer distribution of Sarawak’s wealth. Junadi and BN should take note of the 45% of (officially proclaimed) votes that went to the opposition and humbly change their ways. He should work to make sure more is offered to the fishermen, not threaten them with the removal of the money that is rightfully theirs!

Just one example out of many

Junadi’s outburst is of course just a single example of numerous such threatening and patronising remarks that have been made by BN politicians in the post election period. The recent cancelling of the Borneo Cultural Festival in Sibu, just because BN lost the seat, is another.

Clearly BN’s YBs have no clue about democracy. They don’t even realise that a basic rule of democracy is that the chosen representatives and the winning party have a bounden duty to represent ALL of their people equally. Yes, that means even the ones who did not vote for them in the election!

Indeed, no genuine democratic party would act in such a way for fear of losing even more support next time. Already the petulant gesture has backfired because DAP have now stepped in to say they will ensure the event will be financed, despite BN’s bad behaviour.

The Borneo Cultural Festival, an important tourist attraction, will go ahead despite BN's attempt to 'punish' voters for not choosing them!

The truth is that BN have corruptly kept themselves in power for so many decades they do not bother to think very much about what democracy is really all about.

People like Junadi know that their election success does not rely on convincing and attracting the support of his constituents.

BN electoral success rather relies on blackmail, such as his own threat to remove benefits from communities who do not vote for him, combined with bribery, gerrymandering and outright cheating.

Only around half of the people who should be entitled to vote have been enfranchised in Sarawak and only those in the cities get a chance to do so without major bullying and intimidation. This is how BN has kept in power for a solid 50years. They are not democrats, they are dictators as Mr Junadi’s remarks have so amply proved.

Sex party

2011-04-01T00:02:00.001+13:00

Najib’s 'Talented, Wise And Thoughtful' cabinet

Written by Mariam Mokhtar, Malaysia Chronicle

Just like Sodomy II, this latest sex video is about distraction. The grainy sex video showed a man performing sexual acts with a woman. The idea was to identify the man as Opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim and hence discredit him. The main aim behind this video was to distract Malaysians from issues that affect the nation. Another was to divert the attention of Sarawakians from concentrating on the problems that will influence the state elections.

Malaysia is in deep trouble and after 53 years, BN has milked the country dry and divided a once harmonious nation.

The three Umno dim-wits who fabricated lies was never a good idea. But then, who would expect Umno to win the hearts and minds of the people using intellect?

People who are blinded by power can never see where they have gone wrong. Najib who is so fussy over image, seems to be blinded by his own greed and self-importance. Of only he could see who forms his Cabinet, heads the GLCs or Umno institutions, past and present.

The ringleader of this latest sex video is Rahim Tamby Chik. He is the disgraced, former Chief minister of Malacca who allegedly raped a minor and then had to resign. The underage girl’s grandmother sought a DAP MP’s help to bring Rahim Thamby to trial. That just shows how much trust ordinary Malays have in the elected Umno Malays. The DAP MP was himself thrown into prison. Did any of the other Umno Malays come to the defense of the girl?

Perhaps, the following questions should be incorporated in the history curriculum at school.

Who was the onetime UMNO deputy home affairs minister, who was allegedly implicated in the murder of a young woman? He is just like a current serving minister who is allegedly accused of rape. The widespread gossip connecting this onetime Umno deputy home affairs minister with the murder didn't do his political career any harm. He was ultimately named Domestic Trade and Consumer Affairs Minister in the late 90s although he lost his parliamentary seat two years later and retired from politics.

Who was the Chief Minister who had an affair with a girl who eventually gave birth to an illegitimate child? He also kept an under-aged mistress at a condominium in Kuala Lumpur. In 2003, he was also rumored to be involved with the death of another attractive young woman was found murdered in an apartment in a Kuala Lumpur suburb. Although another individual was arrested and charged with the murder, he was later declared not guilty and no one else was ever charged. The inspector general of police, Mohd Bakri Omar, classified the case under Malaysia's Official Secrets Act and no details were ever released.

Who was the non-politician but Umno mouthpiece who had an affair with a young girl while his wife lay paralysed in bed?

Who was the Chief Minister who eloped to Thailand to secretly marry his second wife?

Who is the Federal Minister who was caught with a female artiste in a Port Dickson hotel?

Who is the Federal Minister whose brother was arrested for drug trafficking?

Which Federal Minister had an affair with someone else’s wife and this eventually resulted in a broken marriage?

Which religious leader had an illicit affair and who now holds a prominent position in a very important government religious body?

Which Chief Minister had an affair with his sister-in-law who then gave birth to an illegitimate child?

Who is the son of the prominent politician who was implicated in the 2007 death of a beautiful Indian actress? The woman's body was cremated almost immediately after her death.

Who is the minister who was implicated in Malaysia’ own deep throat sexploits and would put Emmanuel to shame?

Who is the current serving cabinet minister who is accused of raping his maid?

Who is the current MP who betrayed his first wife by marrying a young starlet? His second marriage was not blessed by a recognized person of the court official and he himself is reknowned for using gutter langauge in the Dewan Rakyat ?

Which Malaysian Ambassador has been guilty of sexually exploiting women?

With ministers like these in Najib’s Sex Cabinet line-up, how could the rakyat trust the government, its courts, the police and its ministers?

Very few of the privileged elite who make up the politically powerful and rich in Malaysia ever get punished.

Now we know why BN maintains its iron grip on Malaysians so that they can continue plundering the country and robbing its rakyat. That is what BN fears most – Anwar and Pakatan.

The malaysian sex campaign month

2011-03-28T01:42:00.001+13:00

“The intent is to "confuse, confound and harass the enemy" to the point that as many troops and resources as possible will be wasted on finding POWs instead of being used on the front line.”

The above is a caption from the 1963 movie “The Great Escape” with the late Steve Mcqueen in the lead role.

With the latest caper in the news today, the exposed video of alleged DSAI having sex with a Chinese prostitute seem to have a plot taken out from the movie.

Picture this scenario:-

The video was revealed on 21 March 2011 at the same time the Sarawak parliament is dissolved to make way for the polling date fixed on the 16 April.

The video was never shown to anyone else except for the few journalists specially invited at a very private screening in Seri Carcosa under very stringent security.

The sex video will be used in the campaigning by the ruling government without failed to gain maximum support.

The trio will not surrender the video to even the police or any other authorities. Instead they demanded a RCI to be set up to verity the authenticity of the video if indeed DSAI is the man in it.

Setting up a RCI will most likely take a week to complete and another 1-2 weeks, minimum, before any findings are concluded. By then, the Sarawak election would be over.

It is not surprise that such a detail and meticulous planning are carried with no intended finale are laid out to divert the attention and gain the utmost damage to the opposition and can be used at a time where it will only serve it’s secondary purpose but not the main agenda.

Considering the snail pace of our government processes and the manner it will be handle, this issue will most likely drag itself beyond the Sarawak election date for whatever outcome it may derived.

Staying in, staying out

2011-03-24T02:41:00.000+13:00

Why, Malaysia?

By Lisa Ng

Loyar Burok

As we bring #WhyMalaysia week to a close, Lisa Ng writes a heartfelt customer complaint letter to our tanah tumpah darah, our beloved Bolehland, Malaysia.

My dear Malaysia, it doesn’t get more melodramatic than this, does it? “This” being about whether to stick with you till “death do us part” or to walk away, even if for a little while, especially if there is evidence of ill-treatment.

You see, for Christians, marriage is an unbreakable covenant between God and the couple. Some people would call it a “contractual promise” of sorts. Others would say that, however we term it, the general principle of faithfulness applies to Man and Motherland. The only difference is, even Christians are not so cruel that they insist we stick with our hurtful spouse (or even parent in some cases) if our wellbeing is at stake.

That is why my Conscience was clear when my family decided to depart from your bosom to—not necessarily greener—but relatively safer pastures. At least for now.

You may label me a traitor. Or you may accuse me of cowardice. Perhaps you may also venture so far as to call me an unfilial daughter. But loyalty is not a blind man. And I believe that loyalty to you isn’t meant to be at the expense of some measure of fairness owed to me and, more importantly, my dignity as a person. People may not be perfect and neither are governments. But there is a limit to what each person can tolerate. For the physically and/or mentally abused spouse, it could be the 100th punch to the face. For the oppressed Iban or Dayak, perhaps the face of a certain man they’ve seen on posters for a long time. But then, I’m no Iban or Dayak or any of the many indigenous tribes who can rightfully be called Bumiputera. I am, however, a true Malaysian. And while I am not entirely fed-up of the way you’re manipulating me, I am in need of some perspective.

I was born here. In Taman Cheras, Wilayah Persekutuan, to be precise. I have a valid birth cert, MyKad, Malaysian passport and even if my Bahasa Malaysia is rusty, I was brought up learning and speaking the language and when I meet a Malay, I salam them. I love your nasi lemak, roti canai, durian, cendol, satay and sayur lodeh. I am also a Malaysian because I’ve rolled with the NEP ever since I was old enough to understand its impact on me and not held any grudge against you or my Malay friends. I know how the political parties in Malaysia were formed because I rote learnt it in high school. Outside the Dewan of my school, I memorised the names of Sultans from the time of Parameswara, through the reins of the Mahmud and Iskandar Shahs, to the era of Disco, all the while sucking on those umbrella-shaped kacang merah ice creams sold unhygienically by the roadside.

During those formative years, there was already a lot of talk about different races in school having different passing marks for their SPM exams. The news was that Kelantan and Terengganu students could pass their Advanced Maths with 30% while the mark to meet for the “others” was 40%. I remember being bothered by this rumour but I don’t recall breaking up friendships with my Malay friends over this.

When I studied in Australia, my lecturers thought I was Malay because my skin is quite tanned and I don’t look typically Chinese. The only reason why I clarified that I was Malaysian Chinese was because it helped me explain the multicultural aspect of Malaysia (and prevent them from asking why I have special concessions on homes whereas my fellow Malaysians don’t). I pay taxes to you. I eat the vegetables your farmers plant. I am comfortable excusing myself when my Malay friends are fasting and I know the difference between Ponggal and Thaipusam.

I’ve even learnt a little bit of Jawi, for goodness sake.

So why do I have to prove to you that I am Malaysian, the way I just did? Because as time goes by, it seems that non-Malays need to, more and more, defend their citizenship to you. You, who BORE us. Citizenship is NOT a favour. Your granting me a Malaysian birth certificate and MyKad may require that I abide by the Federal Constitution and the laws of this country; it’s something I believe in and do. But it does not come with a gag that I have to put on robotically when your policies affect me negatively. After all, your “managers” are working for my vote. And if they’re working for my vote, then they are essentially in the service industry—and I’m not only a daughter of your soil but also your client.

So as the saying goes, this client is NOT happy with the current service. I have honoured our contract. You have not. Instead, you have tried to hoodwink me into settling for less benefits with the promise of living a quality life in peace and harmony. But as it stands, you’re not only NOT delivering on quality life; even the peace and harmony aspects are left fraying on the side.

My ringgit is beginning to take the shape of a pisang rastali. My grocery bill looks like I shopped for Louis Vuitton vegetables and Prada pork.

Meanwhile, my mother had her handbag snatched three times in broad daylight in a span of eight months. And you conteng on my Bible while allowing a self-professed scholar to irresponsibly bullhorn his total ignorance of my religion to a wide audience, by associating Santa Claus with it.

In reality, clients get to complain. Then what ensues is a review of the business contract. Here, my vote has a tendency to get rigged. And if I try to protest, I’ll probably be arrested. If I ask why I am being arrested, you’ll probably tell me I have no permit. If I ask for a permit, you’ll likely say I can’t have one because protests are wrong. Meanwhile, as we speak, a large crowd of Malaysians will be dragging a headless cow in protest against an Indian temple being built in their vicinity.

WHY, INDEED, MALAYSIA?

Does it make me less Malaysian to want more respect? More fairness? More security? Or maybe just the opportunity to live comfortably without needing to convert to Islam? Has it occurred to you that “more”, of late, simply means returning a little closer to “equality”?

Does it make me less Malaysian that I’ve chosen to continue building my life in a different country? I don’t think so. We settle wherever we feel gives us the most value for money; nostalgia and sentiments alone are not enough if one has family. This may sound a little too businesslike, but you know, even businesspeople return home once their work is done.

I will always be a Malaysian. Even if I lose all my rights overnight. You can take away my identity cards too but I will still remain nothing but a Malaysian, because identity lives in the Consciousness of our being. It cannot be taken away once it is encrypted into one’s self-awareness.

I did not want to say Goodbye to you, Malaysia. I still don’t. The day we left in the taxi was an emotional one. Because I didn’t just leave behind corruption, crime and crooked policies. I left behind 37 years of friendship, late nights at the office to support the economy, pot-holes and school songs. I left behind countless national day parades, open houses, pasar malams, mamak stalls and yau char kwei dipped in kopi-o. And yes, I left behind all my hopes and dreams for my child to experience all these things. And more.

However, staying on would be akin to accepting that all is fine and nothing needs to change. Or standing up to challenge all that is wrong. Either situation means death to me. Death to the conscience in the first scenario, and death of freedom in the second. And neither is a position I want to take because, above all things, above being Malaysian or Chinese, I am a mother first. And mothers are supposed to put their families before everything else.

Lisa Ng is a human being. She used to be a copywriter in the advertising industry. But now she just writes. For whatever helps us regain the lost art of “giving a toss” towards things that matter to the human race.

Bangsar

2011-02-21T22:16:00.001+13:00

Bangsar, an exclusive residential area sandwiched between KL and PJ. Nestled closed to most amenities around the city and businesses just off the federal highway and nearby commercial offices at Damansara heights. This area have grown by leaps and bounds in the last 10 years ever since high end high rise condominiums started forming part of the skyline that is Kuala Lumpur today.

Shopping complexes, the likes of BSC, BV and BV2, and its international brands of outlets, clearly seals this place and created an image of elites for the many first class residential buildings that it is now.

A stroll in Jalan Telawi where the many shophouses now occupied by hip restaurants and lifestyle eating outlets including mamak stores, all beckon a sense of exclusiveness. Not forgetting one will get to see as many rare life-savings-income-valued cars, SUV’s, MPV’s and sports car all lined up along the streets with datuk’s and datin’s behind the wheel or on occasions the Ahmad’s and jockeys waiting patiently and loyally for their masters. You just can’t miss this feeling when you are there.

Perhaps this is where big businesses are sealed. Boy meet girl and fall in love and live happily ever after, ala Paris, the city of love. Designer’s clothes, designer’s food, designer’s footwear and anything that cost a month’s paycheck can be termed designer.

Bangsar, dear Bangsar, and it’s residents, with their pedigrees and puppies, felines and canines in toll, that make up the image that it is today:- a success story.

In Bangsar, the bigger the car you drive, the more respect you deserved. So says it on their face when they drive by you. Even the police will hesitate issuing them summons for offences but rather check your status before doing so.

Bangsar, a place where every streets is doubled parked, and I do mean every streets! It is the privilege of one not to walk the distance or patience to find an empty spot.

Bangsar, where the rules don’t applied to the elites when they drive an exotic car. Pedestrian must give way even if they are already on the zebra crossing and better not cross their path. Because they will not surrender to you kuci rats on foot.

Bangsar, shops owners who filled the walkway with their goods and wares so you don’t miss them, or the opportune of getting the maximum visual display to make their business and premises a success. Don’t matter if you are on wheelchairs or crutches, just make sure your driver park right at the shop doorsteps so you don’t need to walk the distance.

Bangsar, a success story with a price, nevertheless. And of course, all the international schooled children, overseas graduates, expatriates and wives and husbands with foreign tongues who made it in life with their refined cultured views of the world, to finally settled in this haven called Bangsar.

Yes minister, show us how?

2011-01-01T00:04:00.003+13:00

Cost of living up, quality of life down

Written by Stanley Koh

This article that we’re reproducing from Free Malaysia Today first appeared in June. However, CPI feels that the article (slightly revised here) is relevant to today’s setting following recent developments and should be read by those who missed it the first time around.

It turns out that the government you voted in will not hold your hand to see you through hard times. Instead, it will make sure to add to your suffering because that is the easiest way it can avoid going bankrupt. Barisan Nasional has apparently decided that the time has come to remove or cut subsidies — the kind of subsidies that poor people depend on, not the kind enjoyed by big corporations and monopolistic suppliers of utilities and infrastructural support.

So what is the use of a government that will eagerly shake your hand during election time but will not hesitate to pull the rug from under your feet when it needs to save itself? Few believe that the removal of subsidies on essential food items and fuels can save the Malaysian government from possible bankruptcy. If it does go bankrupt, it will be because it has failed to cleanse a corrupt system.

It is better for Malaysians to be rich and to control a bankrupt government than to be poor and controlled by a corrupt government. Many countries have rich citizens with bankrupt governments. You do not need an economist to tell you that RM100 in Malaysia today does not buy as much as it did last year.

In what we may call the Malaysian Misery Index, we can see that food prices have been spiralling upwards for years. For example, fresh tenggiri, which was RM13.23 a kilo in 1997, now costs RM40 a kilo. A roasted duck cost RM13.47 in 1997, but is now at least RM38. And Malaysians have become used to the doubling in price of some food items during festive seasons. Most Malaysians do not expect the situation to improve. Food prices will continue to go up and there is little hope that they will come down again.

Two years ago, the BN government announced that it had set up a US$1.25 billion fund to increase food production and that it was targeting 100% self-sufficiency in rice consumption. What has happened to the fund and the target?

Double whammy

When the GST (goods and services tax) is fully implemented in 2011, it will be a double whammy for poor and middle-income households, pensioners, the unemployed and single parents. Some have argued that imposing GST on Malaysians does not make much economic sense when only 6.8% of the population are taxpayers and a large majority earn low incomes. Furthermore, it is acknowledged that most of us are paying hidden taxes in highway tolls and electricity tariffs.

Indeed, the future looks bleak.

Yet, quite a number of us are gullible enough to think that the government will protect consumers. Are we not being stupid? Isn’t it better to be wiser and brace for tougher times ahead? Instead of believing the promises of a government that has a dismal performance record, we should believe the law of inflation, which says, “Whatever goes up will go up some more.” Ronald Reagan once described inflation as a violent mugger, a threatening armed robber and a deadly hit man. In the Malaysian context, that is an apt description not of inflation, but of the BN government’s behaviour and policies.

So how do we fight the inflation of food prices?

Economists generally agree that the average Malaysian household spends about 75% of its income on food. Food price hikes will therefore have an adverse impact upon disposable income and force us to make a lifestyle change.

More than half are low-income

Perhaps economist Milton Friedman was right when he said, “If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara desert, in five years there will be a shortage of sand.” Malaysians do not take the official Consumer Price Index (CPI) seriously. They know it does not accurately reflect price rises in essential foodstuffs. Many suspect that the government uses it as an instrument to deceive the public into thinking that things are hunky-dory when they are not.

The government develops statistics so that the inflation-weary public would direct its hostility towards businesses, and not blame official mismanagement. The average household consumption expenditure over the last 20 years has increased by 181.8%. In 1973, it was RM412. By 1993-94, it had gone up to RM1,161. In 1999, it touched RM1,631.

According to Prof Lim Teck Ghee, real household income has been growing, but at the snail-pace rate of 0.9% per year. More than half of the population are in the low-income category. Today, a family of five spends 50% to 60% of household income on food compared with 20% in 1998 and 15% in 1988. Not long ago, there was official acknowledgement that 95% of families are finding it hard to cope with the rise in food prices.

In fact, the biggest failure of the Ninth Malaysia Plan is that it did not help Malaysians improve their quality of living. Inflation, whether it is imported or locally generated, raises the cost of living and lowers the quality of living.

What ‘lifestyle’ do we have?

In 2006, when Najib Razak was Deputy Prime Minister, he asked Malaysians to change their lifestyle in the face of the rising cost of living. A blogger by the name of Chong wrote in response: “Perhaps, the prime minister should have done some simple calculations himself. People like us basically have no lifestyle, just merely surviving with our earnings. So how are we going to change (our lifestyle)? “Inflation has gone up 4.5% (and above) and the government is pushing the cost of living higher by increasing electricity tariffs, but our income remains the same.”

Others felt it would be easier to change the government than to change a non-existent lifestyle.

“Instead of listening to Najib asking us to change,” one critic remarked, “why not we change the government at the next general election?” To me, that makes a lot of sense. Any government that is willing to build air-conditioned toilets around a city at more than RM100,000 each unit has no business planning a national economy. When such a government decides to cut subsidies, many of us will wonder whether the so-called “savings” will instead go towards more majestic arches, fanciful lampposts, refurbishments of VIP residences, luxurious government bungalows and fruitless overseas trips by ministers.

Any government that stands accused of having wasted RM320 billion in 20 years — through corruption, wastage and mismanagement — definitely does not deserve to be re-elected.

A precarious calm at Tenang

2010-12-25T16:30:00.001+13:00

Yet another by-election is in the coming with the death of MP Datuk Sulaiman Taha in the constitution of Tenang in Johor and scheduled on 30 January 2011. While speculations are fueling that the general election might be held either in the first quarter or second quarter of 2011, this latest by-election in Tenang may be the deciding factor for Najib to gauge his standing on the outcome of his popularity.

The significant of this by election including its result hold certain prospect to the ruling government.

Should this be a BN victory, which is their stronghold, this will catapult Najib to pursue an earlier general election in the immediate months to ride on this success and what with the recent survey by Merdeka review of his popular ratings still holding forte at 69%.

On the other hand, if a PKR victory emerged, it will make no different to any outcome in parliament neither does it do any major overhaul to the political landscape that it is now. What PKR will get is only a feel good factor knowing they are gaining some slight grounds over BN in terms of popularity, and that is about all we will get.

Even with an additional seat in parliament, the recent suspension of four PKR MP’s including Anwar himself for six months, even with a win in Tenang, will do little or nothing at all to balance any quota in parliament.

Should BN lose the Tenang by-election, he may just delay the general election further until such a time when he is much much more confident of its results favouring BN.

Should we let this be a lost and gain a bigger win later?

Winners ignored, 5th placers lauded?

2010-12-23T23:48:00.003+13:00

by Ooi Chin Wah
Letters
Malaysiakini

The World Robot Olympiad (WRO) is an event for science, technology and education, that brings together youths from all over the world in order to develop their creativity and problem solving skills through challenging and educational robot competitions.

Participating teams need to create, design and build a robot model that looks or behaves like human.

This year the task of organising the competition was given to the Philippines. The Ministry of Education and many private companies in the Philippines jointly sponsored the event.

The steering committee consists of well-known academicians from China, Taiwan, Japan, Korea and Singapore. 250 teams from 22 countries participated.

There are six gold medals on offer as there are two categories in the competition; the Open category and regular category. Each category is further divided into Elementary (primary school), Junior High (Forms 1 to 3) and Senior High (Forms 4 and 5) categories.

Malaysia won two gold medals, one by the Chung Ling High School (Kampung Baru, Penang Island) for Open Category, Senior High school level, the other by SMK Bintulu for Regular Category, Junior High School level.

This piece of news was reported under the title “Champs once again” in the Nov 14 edition of Star.

But the report is about the team that won the fifth place in the Open Category, Elementary Level. Here is an excerpt from the report:

‘Year Five pupil Muhd Syamil Khairi from SK Wan Ibrahim, Kuala Lipis, Pahang, said he and his two teammates Mohd Ezzameer Fitri and Muhammad Hazimuddin Halif took three months to build their robot which performs an orang asli dance known as the “sewang” with the supervision of their robotic club teacher Mahmud Salleh.’

There is no mention that the team highlighted in the report was awarded the fifth place in the Open Category, Elementary Level.

I can’t help but feeling that the author was trying to give the casual reader an impression that the above said team is the team that will put Malaysia at the top of the world. Was the Chung Ling High School mentioned at all? No.

The SMJK Chung Ling mentioned at the end of the report is in Butterworth. Even SMK Bintulu who won the gold medal was mentioned merely as a participating team. Here is an excerpt from the report”

‘The other teams which represented Malaysia at the olympiad were SMK Bintulu in Bintulu; SMJK Chung Ling, Butterworth; SJKC Chi Man, Kuala Lumpur; SJKC Taman Connaught, Kuala Lumpur; MRSM Kubang Pasu, Alor Setar; SMK Sultanah Hajjah Kalsom, Kuantan; SMJK Jit Sin, Ayer Itam; and Sekolah Sultan Alam Shah, Putrajaya.’

New Zealand boleh!

2010-11-17T19:21:00.000+13:00

Although I had a very short stint in New Zealand a couple of years back, my exposure there was sufficient to allowed me a perceived accurate view of the environment and atmosphere of the culture embedded into the citizen from a tender age. Values are taught about corruptions from pre-school onwards. These very same values, thru educations and interactive classes, are emphasized in their entire schooling days.

Enforcement alone and probably the last bastion of fulfilment, cannot eradicate this short fall to tackle and overcome corruption completely. It has to start from young. And to succeed, it have to be instilled into the minds of every citizen the day they start to expose themselves into society, and generations will take root and embrace this concept as they move on in life. NZ did not achieve this overnight.

Below is a caption from the NZ's SFO (Serious Fraud Office) aka Anti Corruption Agency website

New Zealand Anti-Corruption Agencies

New Zealand does not have any one single agency tasked with fighting corruption. Unlike many other countries it has not seen the need to create an Independent Commission Against Corruption. Rather it has a number of agencies that focus on the different elements in the fight against corruption. Some of these agencies have their focus on the more positive task of reinforcing values to ensure that New Zealand maintains a corruption free environment; others focus on the enforcement of the laws and the rules. The two main law enforcement agencies responsible for anti-corruption investigations and prosecutions are the New Zealand Serious Fraud Office (SFO) and the New Zealand Police.

The New Zealand Serious Fraud Office

Established in 1990, the SFO focuses on serious or complex fraud. The legislation governing the SFO does not attempt to define serious or complex fraud beyond saying that it includes a series of connected incidents of fraud which, if taken together, amount to serious or complex fraud. Rather the Act provides guidance to the Director as to the facts that the Director should have regard to in determining which cases to investigate.

Those factors are:

the suspected nature and consequences of the fraud;

the suspected scale of the fraud;

the legal, factual, and evidential complexity of any matter;

any relevant public interest considerations.

Most instances of bribery, corruption and secret commissions would fall within this descriptive section. The SFO is particularly well placed to conduct or assist with any investigation which requires an analysis of financial transactions. Instances of bribery or corruption will often only be established after a careful analysis of financial transactions and money flows.

All investigations undertaken by the SFO are conducted by a multi disciplinary team comprising an experienced investigator, a forensic accountant and a prosecutor. That team is supervised by a very experienced senior investigator or forensic accountant.

Economic crime or corruption is always clandestine and usually extremely well planned. The people involved are often well-educated and may occupy relatively senior positions in the community. The only evidence may be a complex set of arrangements understood only by those involved in the scheme. It was against that background that the New Zealand Parliament legislated special powers for the SFO.

The powers of the Director of the SFO go beyond those of the Police in New Zealand. The Director is able to issue a Notice requiring the production of any information or documents that the Director feels may assist the investigation. Furthermore, the Director, by Notice, is able to require any person to appear before the Director to answer questions. At such a compulsory interview the person must answer all questions irrespective of whether those answers will incriminate that person. However, under the legislation, the Director is not able to use any such incriminating answers in evidence against that person unless the person gives evidence inconsistent with their responses in any subsequent prosecution. All duties of confidentiality with the exception of legal professional privilege are set aside by the SFO Act 1990.

Equal no more

2010-11-13T10:46:00.004+13:00

Singapore Seen Overtaking Malaysia 45 Years After Lee’s Tears

Bloomberg

Nov 11, 2010

By Shamim Adam

Forty-five years after Singapore’s expulsion from a union with Malaysia left Lee Kuan Yew in tears on national television, the economy of the city-state he led to independence is poised to overtake its neighbor. Singapore’s gross domestic product will cap its fastest annual growth this year since independence, rising as much as 15 percent to about $210 billion, while the economy of Malaysia, a country 478 times its size, will expand 7 percent to $205 billion, government forecasts show. The nations are scheduled to release their 2010 data by February.

The island that former economic adviser Albert Winsemius once said was considered a “poor little market in a dark corner of Asia” is now ranked by the World Bank as the easiest place to do business, has the world’s second-busiest container port, and boasts the highest proportion of millionaire households, according to the Boston Consulting Group.

“Singapore kept on moving to the next level as the world economy evolved and adjusted to market demands and investors’ interests,” said Lee Hock Guan, senior fellow at the Singapore- based Institute of Southeast Asian Studies. “Malaysia was struck by the curse of resource-rich countries: It didn’t optimize its human capital.”

From a low-cost manufacturing center for companies such as Texas Instruments Inc. in the 1960s, Singapore has become the world’s fourth-largest foreign-exchange center with a S$1.2 trillion ($932 billion) asset-management industry.

Rising Wealth

Smaller than New York City and the only Southeast Asian nation without natural resources, Singapore has grown 189-fold since independence in 1965, helping boost GDP per capita to $36,537 last year from $512. Malaysia’s economy expanded at one- third the pace during the same period and had a GDP per capita of $6,975 in 2009, up from $335 in 1965.

Malaysia’s growth fell to an average 4.7 percent a year in the past decade, from 7.2 percent in the 1990s, when former prime minister Mahathir Mohamad wooed overseas manufacturers, built highways and erected the world’s tallest twin towers.

“Development is like a marathon and all policies geared toward it must be sustainable and continuous,” said Thomas Lam, chief economist at OSK-DMG, a venture between Malaysian securities firm OSK Holdings Bhd. and Deutsche Bank AG. “Malaysia runs the marathon like a 100 meter event, so you see the initial spurt but not continuous progress in the race.”

Lam, 35, is one of 386,000 Malaysians who have become permanent residents or citizens of Singapore, a list that includes Health Minister Khaw Boon Wan and Oversea-Chinese Banking Corp. Chairman Cheong Choong Kong.

‘Greater’ Opportunity

“Singapore seems to offer greater career opportunity and mobility in my field,” said Lam, the second-most-accurate U.S. economic forecaster for 2008 to 2009 in Bloomberg surveys.

After more than 140 years under British rule, Singapore joined the Federation of Malaysia in September 1963 as Lee and his colleagues sought a bigger common market to cut unemployment and curb communism. The merger survived less than two years amid ideological differences and worsening relations between the United Malays National Organisation, which dominated the ruling Barisan Nasional coalition, and Lee’s People’s Action Party.

“For me, it is a moment of anguish,” Lee said on Aug. 9, 1965, the day Singapore became a sovereign state. “My whole adult life, I believed in Malaysian merger and unity of the two territories.” Lee, 87, was Singapore’s prime minister from 1959 to 1990.

‘Loss of Time’

Winsemius, the country’s economic adviser from 1961 to 1984, said he thought the merger was a “loss of time.” Credited with helping formulate Singapore’s industrial strategy, Winsemius, who died in 1996, said the general opinion of Singapore in the early 1960s was a country “going down the drain.”

The government acted by investing in export-based industries. It built new container terminals for Singapore’s port, the genesis of the country’s development; reclaimed land offshore to attract companies such as Exxon Mobil Corp. and Royal Dutch/Shell Group for a S$30 billion oil refining complex; and moved into high-tech industries like electronics and drugs.

“Economic development does not occur naturally,” said Ravi Menon, a senior official at Singapore’s Ministry of Trade and Industry. “This is where free marketers are disenchanted with Singapore. The government has never hesitated from guiding the development process or intervening in markets where it believes such intervention will lead to superior outcomes.”

Biomedical Research

The government invested about S$500 million in its Biopolis biomedical research hub after attracting drugmakers including Pfizer Inc. and Novartis AG. It cut corporate tax rates by nine percentage points since 2000 to 17 percent, compared with 25 percent in Malaysia.

BNP Paribas has a “buy” recommendation on Keppel Corp. and SembCorp Marine Ltd., the world’s biggest builders of oil rigs and two of the companies the government backed to propagate its industrial policy. Singapore Technologies Engineering Ltd., Asia’s biggest aircraft-maintenance company, was rated a “buy” by Deutsche Bank AG.

Singapore was kicked out of the union partly because Lee opposed Malaysia’s affirmative-action policy, which provides special rights to the ethnic Malay majority. While Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Razak has pledged to roll back key policies of ethnic favoritism, he told UMNO’s 61st General Assembly last month that the “social contract” that gives benefits to the Malays cannot be repealed.

Najib’s Plan

“Singapore will overtake Malaysia because its focus is just on economic growth,” Mahathir, Malaysia’s prime minister from 1981 to 2003, said in an e-mailed response to questions. “There is no social restructuring goal such as fair distribution of wealth between races as we have in Malaysia.”

Najib is trying to return the Malaysian economy to the levels of growth that boosted stock prices almost fivefold in the decade through 1996. He set a goal of tripling gross national income to 1.7 trillion ringgit ($550 billion) in 2020, from 600 billion ringgit in 2009 and creating 3.3 million jobs.

His government unveiled an economic transformation program in September aimed at attracting investment, including $444 billion of programs this decade ranging from mass rail to nuclear power, led by private and government-linked companies. Najib is also taking steps to bolster the talent base, including plans for a teaching hospital with courses by Baltimore-based Johns Hopkins University and a new corporation tasked with luring back skilled Malaysians from overseas.

About 350,000 to 400,000 Malaysian citizens work in Singapore, including 150,000 who commute daily via buses and motorcycles to jobs in the city-state’s factories, kitchens and offices.

Export Model

“Singapore followed the export-led industrialization model to become a base for foreign manufacturers,” said Lee of the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies. “The main model for Malaysia for a number of years was import-substitution where it protected certain industries. That created inertia.”

Lee, a 52-year-old Malaysian who studied and lived overseas for more than 30 years, said he plans to return to live in Malaysia only when he retires.

Singapore beat 182 economies to take first place in the World Bank’s annual ranking of business conditions, which looks at property rights, taxes, access to credit, labor laws and regulations on customs and licenses. Malaysia climbed two steps to 21st, according to the Nov. 4 report.

Mercer Consulting ranked Singapore as Asia’s most livable city in May, even as it lags behind Hong Kong on measurements of personal freedom and media censorship. The government says restrictions on public assembly and speeches are necessary to maintain social and religious harmony among its 5 million people. The city was wracked by violence between ethnic Malays and Chinese in the 1960s.

The country must keep innovating to stay ahead, said Tomo Kinoshita, deputy head of Asia economics research at Nomura Holdings Inc. in Hong Kong.

“Singapore must keep searching for new markets,” Kinoshita said. “Less developed Asian countries are all growing quickly and trying to catch up.”

1 civil servant = 20 rakyat's

2010-11-11T18:17:00.003+13:00

Best Bloated Bureaucracy to Bleed Bolehland to Bankruptcy!

by Martin Jalleh

9 Nov. 2010

Deputy PM Muhyiddin Yassin believes that the BN is "back in business". The buoyant “Malaysian-second” in Bolehland, said that BN’s future is bright and the Opposition better not underestimate them! Bolstered by two big by-election victories he even boldly declares that the bureaucrats in Bolehland are “the best civil servants in the world”! The civil servant “have done a lot, but the people want better”. The Deputy PM was at his ironic best: "The people do not want rhetoric. The era for rhetoric has long gone. The era where the government knows all, like what the prime minister has said, has long gone.”

Strange, but it is APCO (the international communications firm which Najib is paying a bomb to spruce up his image and lobby for support in Washington) which feels that Malaysia is just another backward hole where Government knows best and press freedom is a figment of the imagination (Malaysian Chronicle)!

Yes, the rakyat knows best Muhyiddin and we fully agree with you that the civil service in Bolehland is the “best in the world” in the following ways:

Best Bloated Civil Service

With 1.3 million civil servants to a population of 26 million, Malaysia has one of the highest civil servants-to-population ratio in the world by the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development standards.

In 2009, Malaysia’s civil servants-to-population ratio was highest in Asia Pacific. Her ratio was 4.68%, compared to Indonesia’s 1.79%, Korea’s 1.85% and Thailand’s 2.06% all of which have less than half our ratio.

In 2009, Singapore had a total of 60,000 civil servants, i.e., 1.5% of the total population. Hong Kong had 160,000 out of a population of 7 million (2.3%). Taiwan (population of 23 million) was served by only 528,000 (2.3%).

Best way to bleed a budget dry“…much of the budget (2011) continues to go into operating a bloated civil service. As much as three quarters of the national budget is spent on paying salaries and other benefits to over 1.3 million civil servants. “This means that of every dollar spent in the budget, 75 sen goes towards manning the civil service, leaving little left to carry out development work that can benefit the country’s population.

“There is clearly something fundamentally wrong in the way the country’s budget is being spent when so much of the allocation goes to paying for a sector that is generally regarded as unproductive and standing in the way of efficiency.” – Dr Lim Teck Ghee, Director of the Centre for Public Policy Studies.

A post-2011 Budget dialogue highlighted the massive amount (35% of the total RM162.8 billion operating expenditure) to be spent on emoluments, pensions and gratuities of civil servants. A panelist, Ministry of Finance budget division director Datuk Dr Rahamat Bivi Yusuff admitted that there is a need to trim the civil service to reduce the budget deficit. In a public forum held in Sept this year Umno Youth chief Khairy Jamaluddin admitted that there is an over-inflated civil service and that the government will need to make tough but necessary changes in the next five or 10 years to reduce the numbers. “We are now spending more than RM41 bil a year – that’s a billion more than the market capitalisations of Khazanah Nasional and Telekom Nasional – to upkeep our 1.15 million civil servants. It’s a whopping cost, especially so when juxtaposed against the 1.14mil Malaysians who pay income tax. (There are 10.5 million employed citizens in the country, of whom 6.4 million are registered taxpayers, but actual contributions come from only 1.14 mil). – The Star, 7

May 2009.

Best way to bankrupt this nation

Whilst it is the growing trend of many countries to reduce their civil service, Malaysia, the PM’s Department in particular, has done the opposite. It more than doubled its number of civil servants from 21,000 to 43,554 this year. In stark contrast, the White House employs only 1,888 staff. The White House’s budget is US$394 million for 2011. The PM’s Department has been allocated a whopping RM18.14 billion for the year 2011, almost double the RM10.2 billion this year.

“Pemandu, which stands for Performance, Management and Delivery Unit, was set up last year under the Najib administration as one of the pillars in his Government Transformation Plan… is a massive drain on resources. In a span of two months, just to pay 50 consultants, the government spent RM20 million."

"If the civil service is consuming a big budget under the Prime Minister's Department, it is because the other agencies of the civil service are not functioning. That's why Najib consolidates everything under his department." – Ong Kian Ming, political analyst

Best contradiction of 1Malaysia

As at 31 December 2009, the racial breakdown of the Malaysian civil service comprising 1,247,894 employees was as follows: Malay (78.2%); Other Bumiputras (7.7%); Chinese (5.8%), Indian (4.0%); and Others (4.2%). “This is the worst multi-racial composition of the government service, with the lowest Chinese and Indian representation in the public service in Malaysia’s 53-year history. This is clearly seen from the three sets of comparative figures of the racial breakdown of the civil service before the NEP 1971 and as at December 2009 – Malays (60.80% and 78.2%); Chinese (20.2% and 5.8%); Indians (17.4% and 4.0%); and Others (1.6% and 4.2%). page· “It is clear that the Government is setting the worst example of a 1Malaysia Government.” –Vivian Kuan, in Loyar Burok’s Blog (8 Nov 2010).

Best in corruption

Last year two out of five civil servants were deemed corrupt by Cuepacs. It was described as a worrying trend that needed to be tackled urgently. Cuepacs President Omar Osman revealed that a total of 418,200 or 41% of the 1.2 million civil servants in the country were suspected to be involved in corruption last year (Bernama, 02.06.10). It caused Lim Kit Siang to remark that “the MACC is a big flop as it did not even arrest 0.1% of the corrupt civil servants last year”.

Malaysians generally consider political parties and civil service to be the most corrupt groups, and the government's anti-corruption drive to be ineffective, the 2009 Global Corruption Barometer (GCB) report revealed (The Sun, 03.06.09)

Best “dumping ground”

Finally, Muyhiddin should ponder on the wisdom of Sakmongkol AK47, the pen-name of Mohd Ariff Sabri Abdul Aziz, a former state assemblyman of Pahang who is a member of Umno. “Government service shouldn’t be treated as a dumping ground for academic rejects and mediocre material. Let’s demand a certain high standard and ensure we bring in talent that supports that demand for high standards. “What has the government done to improve the efficiency and competence of government servants?

There isn’t really competition there if the service is dominated by one race. There isn’t sufficient quality if the entry-level qualifications are so-so. “Yet each year, to placate civil servants, the PM will appear on TV to say, we honour our civil servants because they have done a good job, blah blah. Which is not entirely true. The service is slow, the quality of officers is questionable.

“Those people talking about the GTP have not talked openly about the issue of talent in the civil service and in government. If we don’t open up our civil service, it will atrophy. It is a simple observation of experience. If we don’t open up and cultivate competition to get into government service, we get what ails our service now – little Napoleonism – the imposition of pettiness by mediocre talent that fouls up the delivery service.”

So there you have it Muhyiddin -- the world's best bureaucratic behemoth and blunder to burden the people of Bolehland and bleed the country dry! And believe it or not its by a government who boasts about " People First, Performance Now". Little wonder that we are the world's best example of a country with growing similarities with Greece where 10% of its population are government servants and is reputed to be the most corrupt nation in the Eurozone!

But Umno likes Muhyiddin's make-believe. It will guarantee them votes in the next General Elections, which must be close at hand. Civil servants are made to believe that Umno is their (political) paymaster and they owe Umno. The party's leaders would do or say anything to convince the government servant of this, even praising them as "the best civil servants in the world"!

Smaller in numbers, greater with performance

2010-11-06T17:46:00.003+13:00

Social contract and the secret of Chinese 'success'

Written by Helen Ang

Prime Minister Najib Razak on Oct 21 at the Umno general assembly told his party delegates "... kewarganegaraan Malaysia pada dasarnya bukan lagi bersifat sama rata". This country does not have equal citizenship. Despite 1Malaysia (or Malaysian First), this is the core implication of Article 153, the 'special position' of the Malay. NEP is the realpolitik of a race-based system to distribute resources. There has been no negotiation on its implementation: Umno dictates, MCA complies although it gets around the discriminatory policy by 'settling' (read: 'gao dim' or greasing the palm).

The so-called 'social contract' carries a rider; MCA navigates the lopsided terms and conditions using money as the medium. Well-connected wheelers and dealers have obtained a satisfactory outcome for themselves via the Ali Baba arrangement.

Hence the claim by Liew Kee Sin, a Tan Sri and a tycoon, that Chinese had thrived under NEP. But only for a small handful of Chinese. Liew, the SP Setia president-cum-CEO, raised hackles with his statement at the Chinese Economic Congress organized by MCA on Aug 14. His talk was titled 'Malay and Chinese collaboration to achieve NEM'.

Incidentally, Najib delivered the keynote address at the event that included two Tan Sris and five Datuks among its speakers, and three Tan Sris and four Datuks as moderators and discussants.

Giving an example of how Chinese have fared well under NEP, Liew disclosed that SME owners can afford his company's expensive bungalows, exclaiming "One Chinaman want to build a bungalow of RM40 million!"

Zaid Ibrahim commenting on the sidelines was cheeky enough to spill the beans on the secret of Liew's success, i.e. stellar co-operation with the bumiputera shining stars.

Zaid informed us that the Chinese property magnate truly practises what he preaches, i.e. "We [Chinese] must also learn how to live with their [Malay] culture, their mindset." Racial muhibah was achieved long ago in high society.

Theory on the middle tier

The more Chinese are discriminated against in Malaysia, the better the community performs. This is a theory explored by two dons from Yale University and the University of British Columbia. The 30-page paper by Fang Han-ming and Peter Norman titled 'Government-mandated discriminatory policies : Theory and evidence' postulates that the NEP could actually have been the reason for, rather than an obstacle to, the Chinese's economic success.

Their research was published in the International Economic Review, Vol.47, No.2, May 2006, and in also our CPI archives.

They wrote: "Some minorities, notably overseas Chinese in Southeast Asia and Jews in Europe, have performed economically better than the native majorities, despite being subject to government-mandated discriminatory policies."

Nonetheless, Fang and Norman placed a caveat: the extent of the discriminatory policies is crucial. The discriminatory exclusion can only be beneficial if the government-controlled sector is small enough. Aside from the public sector, the other parts of the economy that the government can legislate are in the industries where the authorities have direct ownership or control through professional licensing. Occurring some years after the publication of the above study, the Low Siew Moi (left) episode inserts a more timely perspective. Loh, a long-time civil servant, failed to be confirmed as PKNS general manager by Selangor Menteri Besar Khalid Ibrahim due to the glass ceiling occasioned by her ethnicity. That Ketuanan Melayu objected vehemently to her appointment was a clear display of the minorities' limited access to public sector jobs and positions.

Although Malaysia is in a denial mode, foreigners like Fang and Norman nonetheless make the comparison with apartheid.

They noted: "As far as we understand, the policies facing Blacks [in South Africa previously] were significantly broader measures than those implemented in Southeast Asia. Moreover, it is necessary that some sector where investments in skills are important is left open for the discriminated group. Again, this seems like a more plausible assumption when considering overseas Chinese."

Their theory posits that exclusion from opportunities provided by the state created better incentives for Chinese to make a costly investment in skills. These skills are assets invaluable and crucial for private sector jobs.

On the flip side, giving a group (read: Malay) preferential access to high-paying public sector jobs may dampen the incentives for skill investment so crucial in the private sector.

Consequences of apartheid

Fang and Norman also tackled the vexing question of why the Malay majority would have implemented a policy that ultimately hurt itself. They believe the "natural answer is that the negative indirect effect of preferential policies in favour of the Malays was quite subtle and difficult to forecast; whereas the direct beneficial effects were obvious."

The direct benefits are that the public sector offers secure employment and generous perks. Government administration jobs ranked among the top five of 100 occupation categories, only slightly lower than architects and engineers. [S. Anand, 'Inequality and Poverty in Malaysia: Measurement and Decomposition' [Oxford University Press,1983].

From the recent budget announced for next year, taxpayers can get a clear idea of the staggering percentage of our national expenditure that goes towards paying the civil service.

Despite the minorities hardly benefitting from state largesse, Najib in his Umno speech on Thursday again made them the bogeyman. He attributed success to "creativity, innovation and the willingness of the individual to work hard and take risks".

Having said that, he added, "For example, the non-bumiputeras, after 39 years of affirmative policies being implemented, are still the race who own the largest share of wealth".

The Chinese indeed possess an unerring ability to cope with the hostile NEP environment. Yet paradoxically, this coping mechanism is a poisoned chalice with the effect of 'damned if you do, damned if you don't'. The insecure, fearful Malay views the trait of competitiveness as being 'ultra kiasu', innovative as 'underhanded'; resilient as 'cold and heartless'.

Essentially what the two Yale and University of Chicago professors have said -- if I may rephrase the idea as social Darwinism -- is that the Chinese survive when they are the fittest. But here, the fitter the Chinese are, the more the Malays feel intimidated.

The Mahathir era was a juggling act and to his credit, the maverick managed to keep all the balls in the air. Tensions aside, the good ship Malaysia Inc. stayed afloat. The Chinese were able to 'cari makan' but soon after Mahathir relaxed his iron grip and the unwritten 'social contract' began unravelling, the vessel started sinking.

A good illustration, even today, of the Mahathir-Machiavellian method is the planned development of Kampung Baru, a Malay reservation where the residents want to retain this prime real estate 100% in bumiputera hands. It was Mahathir who urged that Chinese investment be allowed for the reason of "we want to use the non-Malays as bait to lure more visitors".

Mahathir's callous remark is a backhanded compliment on Chinese capital and business acumen, but galling.

While the Fang and Norman theory may be applicable to its time (the 1980s), and to certain segments of Chinese, it doesn't cover all bases. The working class and wage-earners -- and their children -- have been shut out and victimised by NEP.

Another important factor to be borne in mind is the time frame of the Fang and Norman study. It was premised on population data up till 1988 where Chinese formed 32%. However, Chinese had since declined to 24% of the population in 2007, and further fast decreasing. It is expected that Chinese will only be around 18.6% in another 25 years or likely even lower.

Readjusting the variables to the current Chinese population ratio (and the much, much smaller slice projected in future) will be adversely affect the Fang-Norman theoretical framework. Their theory is that the NEP discriminatory exclusion is an obstacle that can be surmounted if the government-controlled sector does not encroach too much into private enterprise.

However, in the last decade we've seen how the government has grown very big and its finger in every pie. In short, the Fang-Norman model that Chinese are inveterate high performers who run harder and jump higher needs a revisit under prevailing circumstances.

The best don't come back

2010-10-22T23:26:00.001+13:00

Ipoh born, Cambridge educated, Malaysia’s loss, Singapore’s gain
By Mariam Mokhtar

He did his parents proud, his teachers are equally elated, his birthplace is euphoric to claim he is one of them, and his country would have been ecstatic.

His name is Tan Zhongshan and he was born in Ipoh. He chose to read law at university because he said, “Being in the legal line gives you a chance to make changes that have a far-reaching effect.”

In June, Tan received a first–class honours in Bachelor of Arts (Law) at Queen’s College, Cambridge, one of the world’s topmost universities. Cambridge, England’s second oldest university, usually contends with Oxford for first place in the UK university league tables. Tan excelled as the top student in his final-year law examinations, but he also won the “Slaughter and May” prize, awarded by the Law Faculty for the student with the best overall performance. In addition, he managed to bag the Norton Rose Prize for Commercial Law, the Clifford Chance Prize for European Union Law and the Herbert Smith Prize for Conflict of Laws. Tan distinguished himself and was a source of help to his fellow students, according to his tutor and the dean of Queen’s college, Dr. Martin Dixon.

Dr. Dixon said, ““He is probably the best Malaysian student I have seen in the last 10 years. He is the most able, dedicated and one of the most likeable students I have taught in more than 20 years at Cambridge. He works really hard, has great insight and intuition. He is a problem-solver, listens well and learns.”

However, the 23-year-old Tan shrugged off his accomplishments which he said was due to “consistent work and a detailed understanding of the subjects.” Tan, who plays classical guitar, was modest about his success, “It was a pleasant surprise as it is hard to predict the end results.”

Sadly, this brilliant, young Malaysian will not be working in Malaysia.

Tan, who has been in Singapore since August, expects to complete his Bar examinations by the end of 2011 and said, “I will also join the Singapore Legal Service in January”. After completing his A-levels at the Temasek Junior College, the Singapore Ministry of Education awarded him an Asean scholarship.

Tan will not be the first nor last Malaysian who we let slip through our fingers.

It makes many ordinary Malaysians quietly fill with rage that the policies of our government reward the mediocre or the ‘can-do’ types and ignore the best and the brightest. When will this madness end?

Our judiciary was one of the best in the region, but today, it is not fit for purpose.

Sadly, we have clowns and fools to dictate how our courts are run. The best comedy act was played out recently in the Teoh Beng Hock trial when Thai pathologist Pornthip Rojanasunand was cross-examined by presumably the best of the attorney general’s bunch of merry-men. If that is how Malaysian lawmakers prefer to project their image to the world, then they really need their heads examined.

We are haemorrhaging our best talent to countries that receive them with open arms. Record numbers of Malaysians are leaving – doctors, surgeons, nurses, lawyers, accountants, lecturers, engineers, quantity surveyors. We are experiencing the biggest exodus in our 53-year history. It is estimated that there are over 1 million Malaysians living and working abroad, many of whom are highly qualified personnel. If the government thinks that it is only the non-Malays who are leaving then they are wrong. If Malays are also leaving in large numbers then it should be obvious (which it is presumably to the ordinary man in the street but not to our government) that preferential treatment for Malays is not a major pull nor conducive to the normal thinking person.

What other countries do is to offer Malaysians opportunities – something which is not available, to the majority of Malaysians, of whichever racial origin. Our government fails to realise that people need to feel appreciated and thrive in conditions which stimulate personal development.

Government interference in the things that affect the personal lives of its citizens is what has kept many overseas Malaysians away. At the end of the day, most people value the things that have to do with their quality of life (not just for themselves but especially for their families), the laws, bureaucracy and tax.

Apart from having the best brains, those who left are probably the more assertive ones, the highly ambitious people who would have made good mentors, able and strong leaders. Their absence from our system only weakens us, as a nation.

Will these people return if the ISA is around? No. These people would probably find living in Malaysia under such conditions, like treading on eggshells. How about corruption, nepotism, cronyism, lack of transparency, limited civil service and educational opportunities, questionable performance-based promotion, lack of freedom of worship, expression and speech, unfair preferential housing, fear for their personal safety and lack of open tenders for government contracts?

These are some of the things that are due for immediate review, but only if Najib is serious about reversing the brain-drain and only if he wants to improve Malaysia’s economy and reputation.

At a time when the country needs to tighten its belt and take effective measures to build a quality nation based on its human capital, Najib seems to build pointless monuments in mega-projects. Why not channel the funds and invest in its best resource – its people? Malaysia is now paying the price for its crippling policies which our government feels unable, incapable or fearful of changing.

Najib recently warned us about the dangers of not embracing change. He is right. And we are all for it. Forget about directing Talent Corporation to search for these ‘overseas’ Malaysians. If Najib refuses to make the all-important changes in the country, they will not be swayed.

So when will he legislate for change?

And one last thing: We congratulate Ipoh-born Tan Zhongshan on his outstanding achievements and wish him a bright future.

It made us strife harder

2010-10-01T01:59:00.001+13:00

How the govt victimises vernacular schools

Written by Dr Boo Cheng Hau

It looks like the government's game plan is to have Chinese primary schools implode from overcrowding. Funds allocated for vernacular schools remain at the same level under the 10th Malaysia Plan (2011-2015) as previously under the 9th Malaysia Plan even though the number of pupils have increased tremendously over the past five years. The 10th Plan does not disclose the ratio of government appropriation to national schools relative to vernacular schools. Nonetheless, if we were to examine the 9th Malaysia Plan (2005-2010), the figures are revealing.

Under the 9th Plan, primary schools as a whole were allocated a budget of RM4.83 billion for development. Enrolment in Chinese primary schools was 20.96% of the total number of primary school pupils. Going by fair proportionality, Chinese-medium schools should have gotten one-fifth of the funding, or roughly RM1 billion-plus out of the RM4.83 billion.

Instead the Chinese primary schools only received a meagre RM170 million. There were 70,000 non-Chinese pupils in these Chinese primary schools during the 9th Malaysia Plan period. The majority of the non-Chinese pupils comprised Malays. Therefore, a good number of Bumiputeras ended up victimized by the government's biased treatment of Chinese-medium schools.

In fact, if we were to look back at the 6th, 7th and 8th Malaysia Plans, we can see a trend where the funding for Chinese-medium schools had been progressively cut.

Appropriation of government funds to primary schools (1991-2005)

Type of primary school	Overall student enrolment	Overall student enrolment (%)	Actual state funds allocated 1991-2005 (RM/million)	If the student enrolment ratio had been followed (RM/million)	Actual fund received per student (RM)
National primary school (Malay)	6,210,055	74.86%	6,869.00 (95.04%)	5,448.80	1,106.10
Chinese national-type primary school	1,794,357	21.63%	262.30 (3.66%)	1,541.10	146.10
Tamil national- type primary school	291,595	3.51%	95.50 (1.32%)	237.00	327.50
Total:	8,296,007	100%	7,226.80	7,226.80

Source: Sin Chew Jit Poh (Nov 24, 2005)

Earlier, in 2005, Chinese primary schools accounted for about 21% of total enrolment, including more than 60,000 non-Chinese (mainly Malay) pupils.

If we scrutinize the 15-year period covered by the 6th to 8th Malaysia Plans, we can see that Chinese primary schools received as little as 3.66% of the total government funding appropriated to primary schools.

Meanwhile Tamil primary school enrolment was 3.51% of primary school pupils but the SRJK (Tamil) only received 1.32% of the total government allocations for primary schools.

Still looking at this 15-year period covered by the three Plans, we can see that the national schools or SRK received public funding of RM1,106 per pupil (mostly Malays). The SRJK (C) received public funding of RM146 per pupil (mostly Chinese), and the SRJK (T), RM327.50 per pupil (Indians). The disparity in treatment meted to children of different races is shocking! And heartbreaking.

Heads you win, tails we lose

Malay supremacists and diehard fans of the English language like to point their finger at Chinese and Tamil schools as the cause of racism and 'disunity'.

But the fact is that more than 90% of Chinese parents and more than 50% of Indian parents send their children to Chinese and Tamil primary schools respectively. And about 80% of Chinese primary pupils and almost 100% of the Tamil proceed to Malay-medium secondary national schools.

Non-Malay parents elect for their children to have their early education in their mother tongue, and then switch to Malay and English-medium at secondary and tertiary levels.

The Malay supremacists have been actively campaigning for 'Satu Sekolah untuk Semua' with the slogan 'Satu Bahasa, Satu Bangsa, Satu Negara'.

They want 'one school' for all pupils. The system will have 'one language' as the medium of instruction. This will ultimately see as its end result the creation of 'one race'. Children of the 'one race' -- Umno's version of the 'Bangsa Malaysia' vision -- studying in 'one language' will make for a 'one united country', or so the 1-Sekolah movement claims.

Just for the sake of speculation, let's allow for a day when Chinese-medium and Tamil-medium primary schools are indeed abolished. Children of various races complete their primary education under the same roof. When all have finished Standard Six, where will they go for Form 1?

The bumiputeras will be given places at the 'Sekolah Cemerlang', the Malay-only residential schools and Mara Junior Science Colleges. The non-bumiputeras will continue to be denied places in these Malay-only secondary institutions.

It's not that we've not had past experience to learn from. When Selangor Menteri Besar Khalid Ibrahim had wanted to open the door of UiTM -- a predominantly one-race university -- just a crack to allow the entry of non-Malays, there was a massive uproar and demonstrations by Malay ultra nationalists.

The Malay reaction reminded us of the white segregationists of the American south who demonstrated in the 1950s and 1960s demanding that 'Coloureds' be barred from their public schools and universities.

Affirmative action advocates protection of minority rights including those of language and culture. Our Malaysia Boleh brand of affirmative action, on the other hand, is discriminative and more deserving of the term apartheid. Over the last two decades, all the elite schools have been catering for one race only. If this is not apartheid, what is?

We have in black and white the last four Malaysia Plans which prove beyond doubt the great discrepancy in funding accorded the different language education streams.

Historians have concluded that it was not the physical segregation during the apartheid era that was horrifying. Physical seperation could be dismantled overnight when apartheid was over, but it was the conceptualised 'separate development' suppressing the development of coloured schools that had hurt the self-esteem, and social and educational advancement of the non-whites. Apartheid was not all about physical segregation but more of separate and unequal social development.

Expansion impossible!

It is quite discernible that the government is applying a containment policy on Chinese-medium schools. In 1970, there were 1,346 Chinese primary schools. In 1990, there were 1,290 Chinese primary schools and in the year 2000, there were 1,287. In 2004, the number remained unchanged at 1,287.

As the stagnant numbers indicate, it's near impossible for a new Chinese school to be established whereas the Malay-medium national schools are not impeded as the authorities will ensure that they are built wherever there are new housing estates.

On the other hand, to build a new Chinese or Tamil-medium school, the school would have to transfer its permit from another premises, meaning that this precious permit has to be recycled because fresh ones are never issued. On top of this restriction, the school would have to buy its own land and raise its own building fund.

Currently, a few thousand trained but unemployed school teachers are waiting to be posted to Malay-medium national schools. In sharp contrast, there is an acute shortage of 3,000 teachers for Chinese schools.

There is more than one way to skin a cat. Starving vernacular education of new blood is just another method to contain Chinese and Tamil schools. The government has made not only their physical expansion impossible but their manpower constricted as well.

The sad and sorry fate of vernacular schools is reflective of the systematic and institutionalised discrimination against Chinese and Indian pupils, and Malay and other pupils in these schools.

Under the 10th Malaysian Plan, each Chinese primary school would get a monthly allowance of RM2,000 for water and electricity. According to Sin Chew Jit Poh (June 20, 2010), a total of RM70 million is allocated for the maintenance of 884 semi-government sponsored Chinese primary schools, or averagely RM80,000 per school.

As comparison, the web portal The Nut Graph -- operating under private sector sponsorship -- was incurring overheads of RM80,000 per month for its half-a-dozen reporters. The Nut Graph's monthly expenditure for a small staff was equivalent to an whole year's government funding for a Chinese primary school.

Divided into 12 months, the annual 80k allocation works out to an entire school operating on RM6,670 per month.

Can you imagine a thousand pupils scraping by in a school on this tiny sum of money? It's hardly surprising then that fundraising is a never-ending affair that pupils and their parents in Chinese-medium schools have to endure.

It has been said to be "the second income tax for Chinamen" by the 'Malay administration' of Mahathir's favourite terminology.

Choices to make for schooling

2010-09-19T17:01:00.002+12:00

Why we chose Chinese school for our children
Written by Dr Boo Cheng Hau

Foon Yew High School is the one singled out by name by Kulaijaya principal Siti Inshah Mansor who implicated it as a school with Chinese students who do not speak or read Bahasa Malaysia.

It is the only Chinese independent secondary school (ISS) in Johor Bahru. It is also where my two children are studying.

My wife and I had discussed in great length before we decided to send our kids to Foon Yew, which incidentally is my alma mater.

The fact is that I myself speak and debate in Malay with confidence in the Johor state assembly as the opposition leader. Interestingly enough, several special assistants of the Johor Menteri Besar are Foon Yew alumni who deal with the state's Chinese and Malay communities, communicating in both Mandarin and Malay.

Therefore Siti Inshah's sweeping statement that non-Malay students from vernacular schools do not speak Malay at all only proves her own ignorance and bias. After all, her non-Malay students understood her racial slurs well enough to assess her half-hearted apology as coming from a "penipu" and a "pembohong".

She is a classic example of a Biro Tata Negara (BTN) product and how a Malay ultra nationalist like Dr Mahathir Mohamed has ingrained racial prejudice into many Malays. One aspect of this racism is institutionalised towards language policies.

Parent's personal experience

My wife went to a well-known national school in Johor Bahru and has a diploma in Malay Studies. Until today, she still bitterly recalls the racist remarks made by many Malay teachers during her years in school.

Unsurprisingly, she was more adamant than I that our children should not be subjected to the same racial degradation in the national schools that she went through.

This racial taunting has been nurtured as a norm over the years by the powers-that-be through the notorious BTN. The authorities have to be held responsible for the pathetic state of inter-racial relations in the country today.

The Siti Inshah incident has made me realise how much my wife helped our children make the right choice of enrolling in my old school.

It is where we think not only that they could learn three languages, but more importantly that they are subjected to better discipline without going through the mental trauma of being victimised -- some ultra-nationalist Malay teachers utter racist slurs with impunity.

As racial degradation is bad for any child's self-esteem, I have always been determined to make sure my children do not go through what my wife went through studying in national school.

Moreover, I can afford sending my children for tuition in Bahasa Malaysia at a Malay-run private tuition centre as I always believe the best way of learning a language is from its native speakers. They enjoy learning the language from Malay teachers.

Some of the teachers have gone out their way to help my children. But some still hinted at racialism in interpreting Malaysian history, especially in upholding Bumiputeraism, which upset the non-Malay students. My children are still puzzled as to why they are not considered 'Bumiputera' as native-born fourth generation Malaysians.

Malays in vernacular school

After 53 years of Independence, we are still polarised along racial lines, and view each other with great suspicion and prejudices.

Many Malay friends of mine harbour an allegiance to Umno and hence feel obliged to defend Umno's Malay Supremism. Actually, it is an ideology whose creation has very little to do with them personally.
We have to come to terms with several longstanding issues for a sustainable inter-racial relationship in our beloved country, and among these issues is mother tongue education.

Siti Inshah's prejudice towards vernacular schools -- like my old school Foon Yew -- is quite reflective of Umno propaganda which is not only factually incorrect but certainly politically motivated.

If one feels Malays are discriminated in going to vernacular schools, why were Malays and other non-Chinese students given free tuition? Why would halal food stalls be provided in the canteen for them? Shouldn't a blanket fee waiver for non-Chinese students in Chinese schools be considered as 'reverse racism' against the Chinese students themselves?

Previously Foon Yew High School gave a blanket fee waiver to Malay students. It was only recently that the school decided all students have to pay the same fees due to its ever increasing non-Chinese intake. However, poor Malay students are still entitled to scholarships on individual need assessment.

I myself as a wakil rakyat have recommended a few Malay students for such financial assistance. In many Chinese independent secondary schools, non-Chinese students are still exempted from tuition fees. If the accusation is true that Chinese institutions are discriminative, why in the world would Malay students be given the same benefit and care in these schools?

Mara and other single-race institutions

A mirror situation to the above would be that Chinese students are welcomed into Mara junior colleges and not required to pay any fees to boot. But this doesn't happen, does it?

Therefore, Malay Supremacists like Dr Mahatir Mohamed and Siti Inshah Mansor need to get their facts correct.

Racial integration can be achieved in any language medium of the education stream if all children are treated equally.

There has been an increase in number of Malay and Indian parents sending their children to Chinese schools not only for acquiring Mandarin, but also for the schools' stricter regimen in teaching science and mathematics.

These non-Chinese parents obviously believe that Chinese schools will help provide their children better job opportunities later in life. This decision indicates that many Malay parents have taken a step forward compared to the Umno supremacists who fail to see a brighter future for their children if they were to be multilingual.

Malay and Indian parents have realized the importance of equipping their children to compete in both the domestic and international job markets. Language competency is also a boost for social mobility. Language is a skill, and no longer a racial trait anymore in our present 'global village'. This means it is a definite disadvantage for monolingual Malays when competing with multilingual Malays and others in our increasingly cosmopolitan world.

My wife and I are confident that we made the right choice for our children's future.

Swee Tan, part chinese, part NZ and part Jedi

2010-08-10T00:12:00.005+12:00

This article was emailed to me by a friend in New Zealand. Extracted from the website New Zealand Listener, below is the news I copied. Read on..... I shall not draw any analysis here, rather, such news have been aired countless times over the years. Read and tell me if you know the reality of things here. And I took the liberty to send this to MT, simply good news worth sharing to a wider audience.

Introducing Cells to suicide

by Jane Tolerton

A breakthrough strawberry-birthmark treatment discovered by a New Zealand surgeon and his team points the way to treatments for other tumours. Swee Tan is a master of the rhetorical question. Outlining how his research into strawberry birthmarks could lead to a new way of treating cancer, he asks: “Would that be a good thing?” Suggest he could be making big money in cosmetic surgery overseas, and he asks, ‘Would I be a happy man?”

Hutt Hospital’s director of surgery should be happy enough – because what began as his research into disfiguring strawberry birthmarks has just won his four-strong research team a major international science prize. The implications for cancer treatment and regenerative medicine are so valuable that news of the award has been under wraps for a couple of months while the intellectual property involved has been registered internationally.

But the prize Professor Tan really has his eye on is a national research institute he plans at Hutt Hospital, being named after the two great pioneers of plastic surgery, New Zealanders Sir Harold Gillies and Sir Archibald McIndoe. That Tan and his team have done their breakthrough research without such facilities and with little funding is testimony to their dedication – and their willingness to spend huge amounts of time working for free.

Strawberry birthmarks grow from nothing into tumours that often cover much of the face within a year – and then shrink over about a decade. The usual strategy then, in the absence of an easy, effective treatment, was “just sit and wait”.

In one in 10 cases doctors had to intervene as a birthmark moved to cover an eye or obstruct the windpipe, threatening death by asphyxiation. High-dose steroids were the first line of attack. “This is a terrible thing to do to young children,” Tan says. “It’s like using a machine gun – and it doesn’t necessarily work. In 30% of cases the birthmark shrinks dramatically, and in 40% it stops growing – but in 30% it just keeps growing. When we got desperate, we used to use daily injections of interferon – with the side effect, in one in four children, of spastic in the legs. Because of that, people moved to chemotherapy. Treating a birthmark with chemotherapy – you have to be pretty desperate.”

That moment in April when Tan’s team won the John Mulliken Prize for the best science paper at the conference of the International Society for the study of vascular anomalies amazed their international colleagues. But Tan must be getting used to being considered amazing. Vicki Lee, the CEO of Cure Kids (formerly the Child Health Research Foundation), calls him “a cross between a genius and a saint”. The Museum of Wellington has made him a Living Treasure. Nicholas, a patient who blogged about his operation and recovery declared, “Swee Tan is part Chinese, part New Zealand and part Jedi.”

Tan has a gentle charisma. But within the velvet glove of charm, the iron fist of determination is clearly evident. His wife, Sanchia, says people once told him he could never be a surgeon with his hands, roughened by hard physical work as a child.

One of 14, he was born in a little village in Malaysia. “As children, we worked in the plantations – coconut, coffee, palm oil. Life was always a struggle, but I wanted to rise above that and have a professional life, and being a doctor was my dream.”

His father had only primary-school education, his mother none. They sent Tan to a Chinese school – “which means you can’t go anywhere, not even to the local university. It was madness, but they believed they should keep the heritage. In order to go to a Western country, I had to learn English. So after high school, I went to a college run by Australians in Kuala Lumpur for nine months. The way I learnt English was to read the newspaper from page one to the last page every day. But if you want to go somewhere, that’s what you’ve got to do. You can feel sorry for yourself and do nothing or get up and do something useful – and look beyond what you’ve got.”

Australia was offering free tuition to a limited number of students from developing countries, and having gained a place Tan started at the University of Melbourne’s Medical School in 1980. He got up at 5.00am three times a week to clean a supermarket. “In my final year the surgical registrar took me aside and said, ‘I don’t think it’s good for you to be half an hour late every morning’, and I had to tell him. He said, ‘Why don’t you take out a loan, and I’ll be the guarantor.’ He took that risk with me and gave me a hand. This is something I never forget and I do for the next generation – because it is the right thing to do.”

By then he had already experienced life across the Tasman. In their fifth year students could do an elective anywhere in the world, “so I came to New Zealand – and fell in love with this country. People here are so friendly, just so accepting, interested in you, not pretentious – and they are colour-blind.”

In 1987, having worked for a year in Melbourne Hospital, where he met Sanchia, then training as a nurse, he had to leave Australia under the terms of his scholarship. He took a job at Waikato Hospital, and Sanchia joined him after graduating.

History, wonderful history

2010-08-08T02:10:00.001+12:00

For those who read about it, you will recall that in 2005, the Malaysian Govt. was excited about accidentally finding an ancient civilization in Johor . This was reported in the various newspapers. There was talk about excavating the huge site to rediscover this civilization. And then.....silence! After that, no news at all about this discovery.

A number of times I have discussed with friends that there was definitely a cover-up because the authorities did not like what was discovered - something that is contradicting what the Govt. is trying to claim. And so many years passed and now I received this email revealing what I suspected to be true! Read on.......

Good to know who are the real Pendatang... The Indians and Chinese were here way before the Malays ... You have to start learning the correct history.

Regards,
LEE Ong Kim (Dr)
Associate Professor and Head
Policy and Leadership Studies
National Institute of Education
NIE2-03-54, 1 Nanyang Walk,
Singapore 637616
Tel: (65) 6790-3236 GMT+8h Fax: (65) 6896-9151
Email:ongkim.lee@nie.edu.sg
Web: www.nie.edu.sg

An Institute of Nanyang Technological University

A small piece of History for our future generation..Why Kota Gelanggi (lost city) touted as earliest civilization in Malay Peninsula news were banned as they were Buddhist.

The Johor find of 2005 which was quietly dropped was none other than Kota Gelanggi lost city reflecting Srivijaya and its Buddhist splendour. But they deliberately disregarded it because that would have sidelined Malacca Empire and Islam which was smaller and came some 500 years later. I met Dr Lee Kam Hing, a former History prof at MU in Singapore recently at a seminar.Dr Lee, who is now Star research director, told me he was trying his best to highlight Kota Gelanggi, but that the govt killed it off. This is clearly another case to cover up the real history of Malaya and fool the younger generations into believing that our history only began from Malacca 1400.. Not only that, they try to show Parameswara as Malay and Muslim, but actually he was Hindu! If one were to condemn these UMNO scumbags on how they distort history, it will never end......the condemnations will more than cover 10 PhD thesis!

A small piece of History for our future generation Hitler's public relations manager, Goebbels, once said, 'If you repeat a lie often enough, it becomes the truth.'

Once again our government wiped out any references to a famous Melaka prince as being Hindu and belonging to the powerful Hindu empire Sri Vijaya.So all of a sudden our museums, school text-books etc. all refer to Parameswara as a Malay prince.

What race ruled or did not rule is besides the point. What is important is not butchering history to create your own truths. You cannot change your race even if you convert - Parameswara could have been responsible for Umno's proud heritage of ' Ketuanan Melayu '.

If this is what it is based on, there is no ' Ketuanan Melayu '. The lineage of Melaka Sultans are Indians, not Malays.
It is no secret that Parameswara was an Indian and a Hindu prince.

It is clear from records that Parameswara never converted to Islam. He was an Indian Hindu who fled Palembang in Sumatra to eventually found Melaka circa 1400 AD. It was Sri Maharaja who converted himself and the court of Melaka to Islam, and as a result took on the name of Sultan Muhammad Shah sometime after 1435...

The most famous of Indian Hindu Kings were Raja Chola and his son Rajendra Chola who invaded Southern Thailand, Kedah, Perak, Johor and Sumatra about 1000 AD. This is Raja-raja Chola - the Indian/Hindu kings and not Raja Chulan - a Malay king. But what is really sad is that our children are taught as though Malaysian history suddenly began in 1400 with an Islamic Melaka.

We are led to believe that the Indians and Chinese first arrived on the shores of Malaysia in about 1850 as desperate indentured labourers, farmers and miners . Nothing could be further from the truth.

The cultural influences of India in particular, and China, in South East Asia span over 2,000 years, starting with the arrival from India of the Brahmanical prince/scholar - Aji Saka in Java in AD78, through to Vietnam, Cambodia (Indo China), Thailand,Burma, Indonesia, Bali, Borneo, Brunei and beyond.

The findings at Bujang Valley speak of an ancient Indian/Hindu presence in Kedah. There were Chinese settlements in Pahang and Kelantan around the 13th-14th century and in 12th century in Singapore .

The early Brunei Sultanate had a Chinese Queen. One need not ponder at length the implications of Angkor Wat and Borobudur or that 40%-50% of Bahasa Malaysia comprises Sanskrit/Tamil words. To illustrate, some of these word are :

bumi = boomi
putra = putran
raja = rajah
desa = thesam
syakti = sakthi
kolam = kulam
bahaya = abahya
jaya = jeya
maha = maha
aneka = aneha
nadi = naadi
kedai = kadai
mahligai = maaligai
mantra = manthrum
tandas = sandas
(This list can go on)

An extremely important archeological find that pointed to one of the greatest empires in history - the Raja Chola empire that ruled from the Maldives through India , Sri Lanka and right down to South East Asia found deep in the jungles of Johor a few years ago and made headlines in the mainstream newspapers in 2005, suddenly disappeared from the newsâ€¦..

The time has arrived for us to record our history as the facts tell us and not as we would like to wish it.

The truth will never hurt anyone. Lies, always will .

National Institute of Education ( Singapore ) http://www.nie.edu.sg/

Malaysia's Economy: The great decline

2010-08-07T00:20:00.001+12:00

Malaysia's Economy: The Great Decline

Kenny Gan, Malaysia Chronicle

ANALYSIS What has happened to the Malaysian economy? We were once one of the most promising emerging economies in South East Asia and blessed with bountiful natural resources including oil and timber.

In the 1970s Malaysia was on par with other developing countries such as Singapore, South Korea, Taiwan and Hong Kong but these countries have progressed far ahead of us.

Their per capita incomes and currency values are a few multiples of ours. For example Singapore and S. Korea’s per capita incomes are US$35,400 and US$16,700 respectively while Malaysia is lagging badly at a mere US$8000. S. Korea has also exceeded us in technological products and has many global brands while all we have is Proton which cannot compete outside its domestic protected market

We appear to be stuck in the middle income trap. On one hand we are unable to compete with low cost countries such as China, India and Vietnam but on the other hand we are unable to move up the value chain to a high income knowledge based economy due to lack of skilled workers. We are unable to attract skilled foreigners to our shores while skilled Malaysians are leaving in droves. Meanwhile we are importing masses of low skilled foreigners which depress our wages. As a result our wages have remained stagnant for the past 15 years while the cost of living has escalated. The net result is that the standard of living of ordinary Malaysians is regressing due to depreciation of real income while our income gap is the widest in Asia.

The economy of a country cannot be treated in isolation to its social, human and political factors. It is closely interrelated to education, meritocracy, corruption, natural resources, productivity, creativity, democracy and rule of law among others. A strong and robust economy is the net result of good governance, good policies and proper use of resources and is reflected in the happiness and wellbeing of its citizens. In this article I shall try to explain how Malaysia has stumbled and sowed the seeds of its economic decline.
Racial policies
If any single factor can be blamed for the poor health of the Malaysian economy it is racial policies. Meritocracy is the natural selection of the economy; it ensures that the best and brightest people and companies rise to the top just as natural selection in the ecosystem ensures that the strongest and fittest organisms survive and propagate for the wellbeing of the species. If race has replaced meritocracy as the qualifying factor it means that we are not making full use of our human and natural resources with detrimental effect on our competitiveness.

Even worse, racial policies as embodied in the NEP has encouraged rent seeking and created a culture of bumiputraism where rewards are expected by a privileged group without the requisite effort. It has also led to patronage in the form of negotiated and bloated contracts such as those given to IPPs and toll concessionaires which distort economic efficiency with consequent higher cost to consumers.

Exclusion of other races from government tender and procurement means that the government does not get the best price or the best vendors. The preferential treatment and government assistance given to bumiputra contractors, suppliers and entrepreneurs shield them from real market forces which would have made them stronger and more competitive.

The special economic privileges espoused by bumiputraism require the productivity of other races to sustain. The government cannot give something for free to anybody without taking it from someone else who must give it up for free. Essentially this means a lower overall productivity and an injured entrepreneur spirit among the minority races.

Unfortunately Malaysia’s racial policies cover more than just economic privileges, it also intrude into education, employment, sports, licensing, government linked investment funds, buying houses, petrol station dealerships and new share applications and indeed into every facet of human endeavour. It is sad to say that racial policies are woven into the very fabric of Malaysian society.

The Chinese have fared better under Malaysia’s racial policies due to various factors such as their emphasis on education, their clans, the large domestic Chinese economy and their entrepreneur spirit but the Indians have become an underclass. However if any community is held back from achieving its full potential the whole country suffers.

The difference in economic opportunities and the lack of meritocracy lead naturally to a brain drain as the best and brightest Malaysians disadvantaged by race take their talents overseas. In a globalized world the educated and the skilled are extremely portable as there is a huge competition for skilled labour. Although there are pull factors enticing them away the push factors originating domestically is no less compelling.
Education
Education is the future of the county but unfortunately education in Malaysia has not been spared the deleterious effect of racial policies. As racial policies essentially mean that meritocracy takes a backseat to ethnic origin this is extremely injurious to education.

Students face race based policies after Form 5 when Malays are streamed to matriculation with a token 10% for other races while non-Malays either opt for Form 6 which is longer and harder route to university or private colleges which require considerable financial outlay. Those who go to matriculation save one academic year compared to those who go to Form 6.

Even more unfair is that the grades acquired in matriculation are taken as equivalent to the grades acquired in STPM (Form 6) for the purpose of university entry although they are in no way comparable. Matriculation students sit for segmented internal exams and a large portion of the final marks may come from projects done throughout the year while STPM students sit for a difficult final public exam which are marked externally.

After Form 6 non-Malay good achievers are confronted with unfriendly racial quotas at the gates of tertiary institutions. If they are accepted into public universities they are likely to be shunted into less popular courses with little commercial value such as fisheries, forestry and philosophy. This is despite many universities, colleges and technical schools reserved for one race only which is found in no other country in the world.

Pre-tertiary students in private colleges will continue their studies in local private institutions or overseas which again entail heavy financial commitment. Scholarships for non-bumiputras are hard to come by and every year we hear of heart-breaking stories of top students who fail to secure scholarships.
The upshot is that non-bumiputra parents have to spend a lot of money to educate their children to tertiary level. Those students who do not have well-off parents and not lucky enough to gain a place in public universities or win a scholarship are forced into the job market.

It is clear that standards in public universities have fallen drastically due to the lack of meritocracy in intake of students. This is compounded by race based preference in the employment and promotion of academic staff. Standards have also been marked down to make it easier for bumiputra students to graduate. Our universities have long dropped out of the ranking of the 200 best universities in the world. They are churning out low quality unemployable graduates who do not know how to speak proper English to join the bloated civil service or the ranks of the unemployed.

The result of our two tiered education policy is to contribute to the brain drain of young non-Malays incensed by the racial inequality in education opportunities. They head for the exit as soon as they have acquired their tertiary education while those who remain behind are a fertile breeding ground for opposition supporters. Parents have also been known to migrate in order to obtain affordable tertiary education for their children.
Corruption
Corruption is a drain on the efficiency of the economy as it upsets the principle of getting the most optimal prices for the best goods and services. As a result of corruption the buyer is likely to end up paying inflated prices for shoddy products.

Even worse the result of public corruption is to pass on the cost to the man in the street who ultimately pays higher taxes, higher utility bills, higher tolls and more expensive goods and services. Corruption is essentially a re-distribution of wealth from the poor and the middle class to the rich elite who becomes super-rich. The result is a widening income gap and a weakening middle class until only rich and poor remains as what happened in Suharto’s Indonesia.

Although corruption happens in all countries in Malaysia it has become endemic and massive due to the synergistic boosting effect of corruption and racial policies. The distribution of resources and economic opportunities by race as implemented in the NEP provides an ideal vehicle for these resources and privileges to be grabbed by the powerful and the well connected.

The NEP which was originally an affirmative action plan to uplift the poor of all races has degenerated into an umbrella to shelter all kinds of corruption, cronyism and nepotism to enrich the political elite under the guise of helping the poor Malay masses who have largely remained poor.

Bloated negotiated contracts, rent seeking deals and privatization of public assets which bring windfalls to favoured cronies while increasing costs and a lower standard of service to consumers are just another form of corruption.

Accelerated spending on defence when no threat is present and economically senseless white elephant projects continue to bleed the country Can a small developing country like Malaysia afford to spend RM6.75 billion for locally made naval vessels which were never delivered, RM12.5 billion for the PKFZ white elephant, RM3.7 billion for two bare Scorpene submarines, RM8 billion for 257 locally made armoured personnel carriers, RM2.2 billion for 3 navy supply ships, RM12.5 billion for economically senseless double tracking railway from Ipoh to the Thai border and RM811 million for a new palace? These are just but a sampling of countless huge financial scandals.

Corruption has become so massive that it is now measured in hundreds of millions and even billions for each corrupt deal. No developing country of Malaysia’s size can withstand such massive leakage and wastage without depreciation of its currency, yawning fiscal deficit, damage to its economy and hardship to its citizens who face rising cost of living and depreciation of real income.
Democracy
Although it may not seem obvious the economy is also directly affected by democracy, rule of law and treatment of human rights. The economy is nothing if not driven by human emotion and sentiments such as industriousness, entrepreneurship, motivation, creativity, confidence and most of all, hope. Authoritarian regimes inevitably have poor or broken economies because of their abuse of human rights which crushes the human spirit.

Foreign direct investment which is vital for a small developing economy is affected by concerns over political stability, adherence to rule of law, fairness of the judiciary, protection of human rights and crime rate as well as government policies, cost of labour and education level of the workforce.

Unfortunately Malaysia’s record of upholding democratic principles and human rights has been poor. We live in a pseudo-democracy where institutions such as the police, the MACC, the Attorney-General chambers, the judiciary and the press are subverted to serve the ruling party to maintain its power. They are abused to harass the opposition while turning a blind eye to the corruption of the political elite.

Death in custody is common in the police force who seems more interested in going after opposition politicians for minor and dubious transgressions than in fighting crime. This has contributed to a high crime rate which has seen gated communities springing up willy-nilly as citizens take measures to protect themselves, sometimes illegally.

Nowhere can the breakdown in rule of law be seen as clearly as in the infamous Perak power grab where BN toppled the Pakatan Rakyat government by enticing its elected representatives to defect by immoral means and hung on to power by brute police force and controversial judicial judgements while ignoring the calls of the citizen for new elections.

Nowhere can we see a greater abuse of our democratic institutions as in the odious sodomy case against Anwar Ibrahim where the whole apparatus of government, enforcement and judiciary were employed to drag an opposition leader to court on the most flimsy and dubious of charges while employing disreputable and unlawful court processes to deny justice to the accused.
These negative factors in conjunction with racial quotas make the country less attractive to investors who are spoilt for choice over where to put their money. Foreign direct investment (FDI) to Malaysia has been falling steadily for the past decade and we now lag behind countries like Vietnam and Indonesia in attracting investments. In fact Malaysia recorded a negative FDI inflow in 2009 which is a rare phenomenon in developing countries and points to signs of capital flight.

Private investments which include both foreign and domestic investments have been declining since the 1997 financial crisis and now stand at a mere 10% of GDP from its peak of 37% pre-crisis. This ranks among the lowest in Asia so it appears that not only foreigners but Malaysians are also losing confidence in their own economy.
Towards a precipice
Hence we can understand why the Malaysian economy has fallen way behind other countries which it was once on par with despite our rich natural resources. The economy has been clobbered by racial policies, falling education standard, brain drain, massive corruption and a damaged democracy.

If any one reason is the root of all reasons it is racial policies which has resulted in economic inefficiency and distortion, affected meritocracy in education, caused a brain drain, become a vehicle for wastage and leakages and resulted in the abuse of democratic institutions to protect the lifestyles of the ruling elite. They are also responsible for dampening the human spirit required to drive the economy.

Things would have deteriorated much faster if not for the revenue generated from oil which is now supporting 40% of the national budget. What would happen when oil runs out?

Efforts to resuscitate the economy must tackle the myriad of racial policies in education, business, commerce, financing, investments, employment, licensing and countless other sectors. This requires great political will and a prime minister with considerable political skills to wean the Malays from their racial privileges.

However BN being a Malay nationalist party is unable to muster the political will despite lofty rhetoric that the New Economic Model will remove rent seeking and inefficiencies while striving towards a market driven economy. After pressure from right wing groups the 10th Malaysian plan rolled out can only offer more of the same old affirmative action for bumiputras and setting a superfluous bumiputra equity target of 30% which is all but unachievable due to constantly moving goalposts.

In the near future Malaysians will be hit with rising prices due to planned removal of subsidies and a spike in inflation when GST is implemented while salaries remain stagnant. This will put pressure on the poor and middle class who are already struggling to make ends meet. Despite this the BN regime does not appear to be curbing its profligacy in spending nor in curbing leakages.

Should BN continue to govern after the 13th general election there is every chance that Malaysia will become a maid exporting country five years later. Economic decline is not linear but exponential because negative factors compound and feed each other. It declines slowly at first then it gathers speed before falling off a cliff. We are probably at the edge of the precipice.

A political solution is required to fix the economy and pull Malaysia back from the precipice. Only an inclusive ruling coalition based on social justice and fair treatment for all races has any chance of uplifting the economy.

Scholars without a ship to sail

2010-07-14T01:35:00.002+12:00

Scholarships are now granted to deservingly straight A's students. Automatic if you scored 9 A's. The government decision to approve or agreed to such conditions are not out of any analysis or foresights planning, but was done out of public pressures. Students, non-bumi's especially, have been getting the raw deal from the many stories one heard from friends and relatives.

Question:- Do our government have to bow to pressures before deciding on the most logical and feasible thing to do?

Another question:- Didn't our government or leaders appoint qualified ministers to cast in the most workable solutions to our nation's education system and criteria for scholarship's award?

I tend to think, wait, or am I really allowed to anyway, that a minister is there just to look good and make ceremonious appearances, giving grand speeches, presenting datas or solving issues on ad-hoc basis. Any projects or implementation must derive some publicity to make their tenure look good instead of setting in place long term solutions.

I simply have to make it on my own and continue paying my taxes for what it's worth. Maybe that same minister is wearing a gold watch that I indirectly and unwittingly paid for.

Kissing footprints

2010-07-13T01:41:00.002+12:00

Does A Tun-ship, etc., have legal immunity?

By Bluesyworms Jazzyworms

As rumours about Samy Vellu's and now Musa Aman's Tun-ship circulated over the Net, another old issue regarding the title itself started to circulate as well. The 'myth' that a Tun-ship carries with it a legal immunity have been debated over the Net for years. No one really knows whether it is true or false.

My Opinion

As far as I know, a Tun-ship does not confer on to the holder any sort of immunity from any criminal nor any civil charges. They do not have any automatic diplomatic immunity. The police can still take action towards them if they park their car in the middle of the highway for no justifiable reason. They can't just barge and trespass into other people's property. They have no authority over any civil servants. And the recipients still have to pay taxes.

In short, their rights are just like any other Malaysians. The same goes to other titles like Tan Sri, Datuk Seri, Datuk, Dato, Pehin etc etc etc ...

It is just a title, you get a fancy medal and the only privilege accorded is a free entry to use the VIP room at KLIA etc. If you still don't believe me, then please go to this official government website regarding the Agong and the titles confered by His Majesty. Read and be enlightened;

http://www.malaysianmonarchy.org.my/portal_bm/rk6/rk6b.php?id=rk6_c1_13&title=Keistimewaan%20bagi%20Penyandang%20Darjah%20Kebesaran%20Persekutuan

Regarding Other Titles

If the recipient is a 'Tun', you call him/her 'Yang Amat Berbahagia'. If it is a Tan Sri or a Datuk, you call him/her 'Yang Berbahagia'. Generally the wife for a Tun will be called 'Toh Puan'. I said 'generally' because if the recipient is a hereditary Dato' or you receive a Datukship from Terengganu, normally the wife will be addressed as 'Toh Puan' too. Yes folks, there are titles that are hereditary in Malaysia, just like some of those English Lords with their 'Baron' and 'Duke' titles. The current Prime Minister, Dato' Seri Najib Razak is one of them. He is the 'Orang Kaya Indera Shahbandar' of Pahang that carries the hereditary title Dato'. His eldest son will automatically get the title after his death. Yeah I know I know, once I didn't know about these hereditary 'Datukship' too. You can close your open mouth now ....

A Tan Sri's wife is called 'Puan Sri'. A Datuk Seri's wife is called 'Datin Seri'. And a Datuk's wife will be called 'Datin'. Please be aware that only IF the recipient is a woman, then her husband has no title altogether, though you can call him a 'Toh Puan', 'Puan Sri' or 'Datin' if you are bold enough. Just make sure there is a 1Malaysia Clinic nearby. On second thought ... never mind.

So is it a Dato' or a Datuk? Again, generally, a Dato' normally is a title given from a state. A Datuk on the other hand is a title you get from the Agong and Federal Government. Hence the difference in spelling.

Tun and Tan Sri however, are given exclusively by the Agong and Federal Government.

Anyhow, back to the topic. Now is there any legal immunity given to these titles? Nope!! There is none.

Highest Civilian Title in Malaysia

Some may argue that because 'Tun' is the highest title of the land, therefore there must be such immunity. There are two contradictions with this argument. First, as I have mentioned above, I found no such privilege nor any written law that supports this argument.

Second, is the fact that 'Tun' is not the highest title of the land. The highest title in Malaysia is the Seri Pahlawan Gagah Perkasa [SP] which ironically does not carry any namesake whatsoever. Here is the list of all Federal Titiles awarded according to priority.

http://www.malaysianmonarchy.org.my/portal_bm/rk6/rk6b.php?id=rk6_c1_2&title=Senarai%20Anugerah%20Mengikut%20Susunan%20Keutamaan

You can see that both the titles that carry the title Tun, ie Seri Maharaja Mangku Negara [SMN] and Seri Setia Mahkota [SSM] are ranked 4th and 5th respectively. Not even a third placing ....

Tunship above the Sultans and Agong?

We must remember that even the Sultans can be sued via special provisions according to the Federal Constitution. It is therefore impossible that a person carrying the title 'Tun' can be immune from the law. Are these people above the Sultans and Agong?

Case Law?

To further prove that a Tun has no legal immunity is the legal case of Dato' Seri Anwar Ibrahim v Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad [High Court number S4-23-15-2006; Appeal Court number W-02-609-2007]. Though Anwar Ibrahim failed in this case so far, none of the judges be it in the High Court nor Appeal Court cited legal immunity confered on a Tunship as the reason for dismissing the case. In fact this case proved that a person having the title Tun can be sued.

How Did The 'Myth' Start?

1. Limited number of recipients.

- A Tunship is confered via two titles, the Seri Maharaja Mangku Negara [SMN] and the Seri Setia Mahkota [SSM]. At any one particular time, only 25 people are allowed to receive the SMN title and another 25 people receiving the SSM title. Hence there are only a maximum of 50 'Tuns' around at any particular time. If the maximum number has been reached, the only way to award another Tunship is to wait for any one of the 50 recepients to, well ... die.

Hence, because of these limited numbers of recepients, the chances of any of them being charged legally is 0.000002 percent out of 26 million Malaysians.

2. Lack of courage by the enforcement agencies

- Majority of the recepients are still or was holding a high ranking position in Government. Some are or were Judges, Ministers, Parliament Speakers, IGP, AG etc etc etc.

If these people are still holding such a position, it is very unlikely that they will be legally charged with anything. They may be the top man in these agencies, so no one dares go against the 'boss'.

If they are retirees or not a civil servant, the majority of these people are usually too 'well connected' to those walking the corridors of power in Malaysia. Hence most of the time no agencies nor private individuals dare to persecute or legally sue them for anything for fear of adverse repercussion.

It is really more a question of courage rather than the so called 'immunity'.

3. Custom

- In the old days, before Merdeka, most of the people holding these titles are usually related or connected to the Sultans or Istana themselves. They may be a cousin 5 times removed from the Sultan, or one of those high ranking families that work in the palace for generations. Most of the titles are hereditary and as I said earlier, limited to those related to the Sultans or connected to the Istana via being a palace official. Hence even if you are only a Datuk, it is very unlikely in those days that you will be prosecuted for anything without the Sultan's consent. Having a title means in short, you are legally immune unless the Sultan says otherwise.

But since the formation of Malaya, later Malaysia, the government decided that some form of titles should be created or allowed to be given to palace outsiders, similar to the British Royalty. This is also needed because the title Agong was also just created as the new sovereign of the Federetaion of Malaya, later Malaysia. You can read here;

http://www.malaysianmonarchy.org.my/portal_bm/rk6/rk6b.php?id=rk6_c1_1&title=Sejarah%20Anugerah%20Darjah%20Kebesaran%20Persekutuan

Since then many things have changed, and the palace does not have much of the authority nor immunity it had in the past, save only to an extent the Sultans themselves. Today even a palace official can be legally prosecuted or face a civil suit.

However, the Malaysian mindset somehow are still trapped in those pre-Merdeka days when it comes to these titles. Many still believe that a Tunship, some even thinks a Datukship, confers on the receipient legal immunity.

Malaysians are obsessed with titles

Why the need for the title then? What benefit can you get? Surely there must be a reason why so many Malaysians want it?

Well, lets face it. Most in our society today only respect three things. Money, power and if you are white. Yes folks, that's the truth. If you go to a high class restaurant in KL wearing tattered clothes, unless you can show either of these three things, you'll be thrown out to the streets. Money is easy to show, but how about power? That's where the 'titles' come in. Only those who have 'power' and are 'connected' can have these titles. Only then the restaurant will give you their first class treatment. Doesnt matter if you are a bankrupt Tun or Datuk, many will still view you with awe.

What about being 'white' you asked? Well to sidetrack a bit, to most Malaysians if you are white, ie caucasian, that automatically means you have money and power. Doesn't matter if you are actually a hillbilly redneck with no money whatsoever, Malaysians will still think you are rich, educated etc. Sad but true.

Back to the topic, this obsession with titles among Malaysians are so bad that for example, you can see some Malays even use the title Haji or Hajjah as a form of a title. I don't find Muslim scholars in Arab countries using it as often as us here. Even the renown Islamic scholar Dr. Yusoff Qardhawi does not use it.

Some Malaysians are even willing to buy these titles. If they can't buy it allegedly from the Sultans or government, they buy it from the Sulu Sultan, which confers the similar title of Datu' or Datuk. That title cannot be used in Malaysia, but no one really cares. Just a few days ago the nation was shocked when a Sabahan even superimposed his picture and allegedly claims he was conferred the title 'Sir' by the Queen of England. He has now claimed it was from the government of Papua New Guinea ... sigh ....

Having a title means prestige in Malaysia. It opens doors to many things, like getting your children in that famous school. Police respond to an emergency much quicker. Your dealings with the banks will be much easier. Malaysians put more weight on your opinions. They listen more to you. Even if you talk nonsense!! The higher the title, the better it is.

So far through my experience, that's what I see. Having such titles really do smooth things out. Another sad but true scenario ....

Yes, there are problems associated with having such titles as well. The pressure, the expectation, the constraints .... But that's another story. Generally, Malaysians still are obsessed with these titles.

Conclusion

Unless someone can prove legally that a Tunship does have legal immunity, I stand by what I wrote here. To me, a Tunship does not have any legal immunity whatsoever. They still pay taxes etc. Whatever 'immunity' they have come from other external reasons, not the Tunship itself.

Good public relation

2010-07-01T01:33:00.004+12:00

Our ministers here don't ever answer your questions. All they do is justifies what they do and tell you what happened. If you question them more, they will lash back at you for being so persistent.
.

20 ways to survive and stay alive in Malaysia

2010-06-30T21:25:00.000+12:00

1. Do not cross the zebra crossing even when it’s green. Vehicles here are colour blind, and the only colour they obey is blue. Not green, not amber, not red, but blue (policemen).

2. Do not talk on your mobile when walking along the street. The open signal attracts other undesirable frequencies (snatch thieves).

3. Do walk on the street. The pavement is meant for motorcycles.

4. Better to park your car illegally and nearer than to park in a legally dimly lighted (usually) lot.

5. Be prepared to feed 2 hours of parking fee for a 1 hour visit to any government department.

6. Plan ahead and start whatever process for any government applications. Like minimum 5 years in advance.

7. New house comes standard with defects and delayed. Always have lawyers readied because developers do.

8. Make sure you’re heavily insured and well protected before boarding any public transportation.

9. Learn as many languages as you can. Policies of language use changes every 10 years.

10. When caught, you can always pay on the spot for traffic offences. Just make sure you have small notes. And don’t expect any receipt, If you do, then you have to pay even more.

11. Make sure you know important people before starting business. It’s not what you know.

12. Don’t bother reading any fine print in contract. There isn’t any. Rules are made up as you go along.

13. Smile, always smile, if you want to be served faster at government counters even if they don’t. And don’t forget to call them “datuk” or “datin” even if they’re not.

14. If you’re in an unfortunate dent and bent motor accident, always settle there and then. Making a report will make you the guilty party no matter how right you are.

15. When buying anything from pasar malam, always shout “too much” even when you know it’s not.

16. You can drink first then drive. Just don’t drink and drive at the same time.

17. User friendly in any amenities means money friendly. Meaning you got to pay for it.

18. Gabbage collectors come on festive holidays. Leave your rubbish outside and stay away from your house.

19. Public services don’t solve your problems. They tell you on and on what the problems are.

20. And finally, don’t blog if you cannot say anything defaming.

House cleaning

2010-05-16T02:09:00.000+12:00

Selepas Tsunami (After the Tsunami) from Pusat KOMAS on Vimeo.

Fly them in for the quota

2010-05-15T21:24:00.004+12:00

Sodomy III : How Mahathir screwed the Sabahans!

May 13, 2010

by Haris Ibrahim

First, go read what straits-mongrel has to say HERE.

Let me quote straits-mongrel.

“Project IC, or more pointedly Project M, refers to the “allegation of systematic granting of citizenship to immigrants (whether illegal or legal immigrants) by giving them identity documents known as IC (identity card), and subsequently, MyKad” (Wikipedia). It is alleged to be a covert exercise with its roots in the early 1990s to alter the demographics of Sabah to make it more favorable to the ruling government and certain political parties…If true, Project IC is not merely about the story of a power-crazed government pulling all the stops to retain its position. It is about the social repercussions which hurt the state and the very people who were invited inside our borders…And it is not a Sabah problem, hermetically speaking. It is a Malaysian one. With a MyKad in hand, any person can enter Semenanjung. No New Economic Model is going to be far-sighted enough to handle that situation. We’ll be seeing the effects of all this in less than a generation”

Oi, straits-mongrel, quit larking about and say it like it is. Foreigners in Sabah were given citizenship by BN under the stewardship of Mahathir to create a bank of voters for UMNO.

in an interview reported in BERNAMA, exposed a Malaysian identification card (IC) scam known as Project IC in Sabah. Malaysiakini reported that the powerful KadazanDusunMurut (KDM) Task Force in Sabah want “Hassnar to be held accountable for his admitted role – which he “regrets” – in placing 15,000 illegal immigrants on the electoral rolls after 1985″.

Malaysiakini also reports that Hassnar has also publicly alleged several times that other operatives committed the same offence for 135,000 illegal immigrants between 1970 and 1985. Two days ago, Malaysiakini reported that Dr. Chong Eng Leong, who has been fighting a lonely battle to ‘shame the federal government into admitting that MyKads have been issued to illegal immigrants in Sabah’, has given up.

“The federal government continues to hide behind blanket denials. My successful court battle in Likas in 1999 – and book, ‘Lest we forget’, are a matter of public record.”, Dr. Chong is reported to have said. Notes of proceedings in the Likas election petition case that went before the High Court in Kota Kinabalu

That court battle that Dr. Chong speaks of culminated in a decision by Justice Muhammad Kamil Awang, declaring the Likas election in 1999 null and void. For those of you who would care to read the judgment in full, the same, in PDF, is linked below.

Likas case

I would urge you to take time to read this judgment in full as it is a damning testimony of the absolute travesty that the Elections Commission has become. If you do not have the stamina to plough through the entire judgment, at least read in entirety from pages 172 to 181.

One of the grounds raised in the petition in court, in disputing the Likas election results of 1999, was that the Election Rolls 1998 which were used in the state election in March 1999 for the Likas Constituency was illegal as it contained the names of non-citizens and persons who had been convicted for possession of fake identity cards.

Let me share with you some telling findings by the learned judge,excerpted from his judgment. “It is public knowledge that the presence of a large number of illegal immigrants in Sabah has been for quite some years, and that there are numerous cases of illegal immigrants who have been registered in the electoral roll as voters using fake identity cards or identity cards illegally obtained. This is of grave concern to the Sabahans in particular, and in general to all Malaysian citizens” – paragraph d at page 173 of the judgment.

“The SPR has to face the truth. The 4,585 objections in List A were cases of persons having dubious identity cards or persons who had been convicted of having fake identity cards. The people who raised the objections were exercising their rights as citizens, and it is unthinkable that the SPR should shut-off the objections in List A without a public inquiry. It is a constitutional wrong for SPR to have rejected the objections outright. More importantly, it is wrong for SPR to allow non-citizens and disqualified persons to be on the electoral roll as voters. It appears that the certification of the electoral roll for the 1998 Likas Constituency by SPR ultra vires the Constitution and is in fact illegal” – paragraph g at page 175

“How easily many of the immigrants, Filipinos and Indonesians, had obtained citizenships in this maner, ie, through their applications for identity cards, was well illustrated by the testimony of Asainar b. Ibrahim @ Hassan, (PW11), a former District Chief for Bandar Sandakan from 1982-1985″ – paragraph f at page 177 “The instances of non-citizens and phantom voters in the electoral roll as disclosed at this trial may well be the tip of the iceberg. “Phantom”, according to the Concise Oxford Dictionary, 9th edn, means a form without substance or reality; a ghost; a specter, and in the context of a phantom voter, it means that the voter is a non-citizen who is in an electoral roll by virtue of a fake identity card or identity card obtained illegally. It cannot be denied that the registration of voters in the Likas electoral roll was in contravention of the law. No one, including the government department or institution, is above the law” – paragraph h at page 178

“It appears that the SPR had deliberately or knowingly sent those letters (exh. P21 and P22) that prohibit the holding of a public inquiry (except in cases of death or loss of eligibility). No one knows the reason or the rationale for doing so, this is best known only to the SPR. It is obvious that the SPR’s lack of action in holding a public inquiry in the face of the objections is unacceptable. Therefore the certification in December 1998 of the electoral roll for Likas Constituency was not bona fide. The failure of SPR to maintain an electoral roll in accordance with the law makes the electoral roll illegal. Such is the case in the 1998 electoral roll for Likas Constituency (N13). I would in the circumstances, uphold the petitioner’s petition that the 1998 electoral roll for Likas Constituency (N13) was illegal” – paragraphs c, d and e at page 179

Dr Chong also said that ‘former Prime Minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad in particular had a lot of explaining to do on the matter but chose to remain silent despite his name cropping up regularly in court cases, books and media reports’. “…Dr Mahathir is very vocal on many issues but when it comes to the issuance of MyKads in Sabah, he’s petrified to the point of complete silence. Dr Mahathir is the key to this whole MyKad puzzle in Sabah involving illegal immigrants and the extraordinary population increase in the state.” Dr. Chong’s suggested solution : kick BN out in the next elections so that a new state government can initiate a Royal Commission of Inquiry into the issuance of MyKads to illegal immigrants.

This low-life of a former Prime Minister almost lost the UMNO elections in 1986-1987 ( some say he in fact lost but, in true Mahathir fashion, cheated and pulled through with a margin 0f 43 votes ) and decided that his political survival, henceforth, was never to be left to chance. So with the birth of UMNO Baru, the party constitution was set so that practically no one could garner enough nominations to ever challenge him again.

His presidency in UMNO secure, he now had to make sure that his Prime Ministership and UMNO’s reign could be secured by an unassailable bank of voters. And Sabahans today must pay the price for this man’s insane quest to hold power! I was told, when I was in Kota Kinabalu for the SABM forum in March, that many Sabahans fear that today they are outnumbered by Mykad-holding foreigners. Yes, thanks to Mahathir, these Mykad-holding foreigners will now have a greater say in who runs the state and, through their representation in Parliament, the fate of our nation.

The mental divide

2010-05-03T01:24:00.002+12:00

Thuan Chye responds to Utusan Malaysia
May 2, 2010
www.freemalaysiatoday.com
Thuan Chye Responds to “Orang Cina Malaysia, apa lagi yang anda mahu?”(Utusan Malaysia article)
By Kee Thuan Chye

COMMENT Every time the Barisan Nasional gets less than the expected support from Chinese voters at an election, the question invariably pops up among the petty-minded: Why are the Chinese ungrateful?

So now, after the Hulu Selangor by-election, it’s not surprising to read in Utusan Malaysia a piece that asks: “Orang Cina Malaysia, apa lagi yang anda mahu?” (Chinese of Malaysia, what more do you want?) Normally, something intentionally provocative and propagandistic as this doesn’t deserve to be honoured with a reply. But even though I’m fed up of such disruptive and ethnocentric polemics, this time I feel obliged to reply – partly because the article has also been published, in an English translation, in the Straits Times of Singapore.

I wish to emphasise here that I am replying not as a Chinese Malaysian but, simply, as a Malaysian. Let me say at the outset that the Chinese have got nothing more than what any citizen should get. So to ask “what more” it is they want, is misguided. A correct question would be “What do the Chinese want?” All our lives, we Chinese have held to the belief that no one owes us a living. We have to work for it. Most of us have got where we are by the sweat of our brow, not by handouts or the policies of the government.

We have come to expect nothing – not awards, not accolades, not gifts from official sources. (Let’s not lump in Datukships, that’s a different ball game.) We know that no Chinese who writes in the Chinese language will ever be bestowed the title of Sasterawan Negara, unlike in Singapore where the literatures of all the main language streams are recognised and honoured with the Cultural Medallion, etc.

We have learned we can’t expect the government to grant us scholarships. Some will get those, but countless others won’t. We’ve learned to live with that and to work extra hard in order to support our children to attain higher education – because education is very important to us. We experience a lot of daily pressure to achieve that. Unfortunately, not many non-Chinese realise or understand that. In fact, many Chinese had no choice but to emigrate for the sake of their children’s further education. Or to accept scholarships from abroad, many from Singapore, which has inevitably led to a brain drain.

The writer of the Utusan article says the Chinese “account for most of the students” enrolled in “the best private colleges in Malaysia”. Even so, the Chinese still have to pay a lot of money to have their children study in these colleges. And to earn that money, the parents have to work very hard. The money does not fall from the sky.

The writer goes on to add: “The Malays can gain admission into only government-owned colleges of ordinary reputation.” That is utter nonsense. Some of these colleges are meant for the cream of the Malay crop of students and are endowed with the best facilities. They are given elite treatment. The writer also fails to acknowledge that the Chinese are barred from being admitted to some of these colleges. As a result, the Chinese are forced to pay more money to go to private colleges. Furthermore, the Malays are also welcome to enrol in the private colleges, and many of them do. It’s, after all, a free enterprise.

Plain and simple reason

The writer claims that the Chinese live “in the lap of luxury” and lead lives that are “more than ordinary” whereas the Malays in Singapore, their minority-race counterparts there, lead “ordinary lives”. Such sweeping statements sound inane especially when they are not backed up by definitions of “lap of luxury” and “ordinary lives”. They sound hysterical, if not hilarious as well, when they are not backed up by evidence. It’s surprising that a national daily like Utusan Malaysia would publish something as idiosyncratic as that. And the Straits Times too.

The writer quotes from a survey that said eight of the 10 richest people in Malaysia are Chinese. Well, if these people are where they are, it must have also come from hard work and prudent business sense. Is that something to be faulted?

If the writer had said that some of them achieved greater wealth through being given crony privileges and lucrative contracts by the government, there might be a point, but even then, it would still take hard work and business acumen to secure success. Certainly, Syed Mokhtar Al-Bukhary, who is one of the 10, would take exception if it were said that he has not worked hard and lacks business savvy.

Most important, it should be noted that the eight Chinese tycoons mentioned in the survey represent but a minuscule percentage of the wider Chinese Malaysian population. To extrapolate that because eight Chinese are filthy rich, the rest of the Chinese must therefore live in the lap of luxury and lead more than ordinary lives would be a mockery of the truth. The writer has obviously not met the vast numbers of very poor Chinese.

The crux of the writer’s article is that the Chinese are not grateful to the government by not voting for Barisan Nasional at the Hulu Selangor by-election. But this demonstrates the thinking of either a simple mind or a closed one.

Why did the Chinese by and large not vote for BN? Because it’s corrupt. Plain and simple. Let’s call a spade a spade. And BN showed how corrupt it was during the campaign by throwing bribes to the electorate, including promising RM3 million to the Chinese school in Rasa.

The Chinese were not alone in seeing this corruption. The figures are unofficial but one could assume that at least 40 per cent of Malays and 45 per cent of Indians who voted against BN in that by-election also had their eyes open. So, what’s wrong with not supporting a government that is corrupt? If the government is corrupt, do we continue to support it?

To answer the question then, what do the Chinese want? They want a government that is not corrupt; that can govern well and proves to have done so; that tells the truth rather than lies; that follows the rule of law; that upholds rather than abuses the country’s sacred institutions. BN does not fit that description, so the Chinese don’t vote for it. This is not what only the Chinese want. It is something every sensible Malaysian, regardless of race, wants. Is that something that is too difficult to understand?

Some people think that the government is to be equated with the country, and therefore if someone does not support the government, they are being disloyal to the country. This is a complete fallacy. BN is not Malaysia. It is merely a political coalition that is the government of the day. Rejecting BN is not rejecting the country.

A sense of belonging

Let’s be clear about this important distinction. In America, the people sometimes vote for the Democrats and sometimes for the Republicans. Voting against the one that is in government at the time is not considered disloyalty to the country.

By the same token, voting against UMNO is also voting against a party, not against a race. And if the Chinese or whoever criticise UMNO, they are criticising the party; they are not criticising Malays. It just happens that UMNO’s leaders are Malay.

It is time all Malaysians realised this so that we can once and for all dispel the confusion. Let us no more confuse country with government. We can love our country and at the same time hate the government. It is perfectly all right.

I should add here what the Chinese don’t want. We don’t want to be insulted, to be called pendatang, or told to be grateful for our citizenship. We have been loyal citizens; we duly and dutifully pay taxes; we respect the country’s constitution and its institutions. Our forefathers came to this country generations ago and helped it to prosper. We are continuing to contribute to the country’s growth and development.

Would anyone like to be disparaged, made to feel unwelcome, unwanted? For the benefit of the writer of the Utusan article, what MCA president Chua Soi Lek means when he says the MCA needs to be more vocal is that it needs to speak up whenever the Chinese community is disparaged. For too long, the MCA has not spoken up strongly enough when UMNO politicians and associates like Ahmad Ismail, Nasir Safar, Ahmad Noh and others before them insulted the Chinese and made them feel like they don’t belong. That’s why the Chinese have largely rejected the MCA.

You see, the Chinese, like all human beings, want self-respect. And a sense of belonging in this country they call home. That is all the Chinese want, and have always wanted. Nothing more.

Biting the dust for freedom

2010-04-24T21:45:00.000+12:00

Another blow to media independence and the PM’s credibility
Written by Dr Lim Teck Ghee

Friday 23 April 2010
Press statement by Dr Lim Teck Ghe, Director CPI

Yesterday, senior producer Joshua Wong Ngee Choong announced his resignation from ntv7. He said he did so because of complaints from the Prime Minister’s Department and Prime Minister’s wife Rosmah Mansor in reaction to two recent Chinese talk show programmes focusing on current political developments. According to Wong, the company Natseven TV Sdn Bhd has now set restrictions for the ‘offensive’ show Editor’s Time which “are not justifiable, threaten(s) the independence of my job as producer…is also a form of self-censorship, (and)… is against the principle of fair and independent reporting. These restrictions have seriously affected the professionalism of the [production] team.”Besides implicating various senior staff of the television station for pressuring him to engage in self-censorship aimed at pleasing the BN and Umno leadership, Wong disclosed that he had learnt that “the First Lady (Rosmah) complained about … Penang roadshow [held on 8 April] – all the way from Washington” and that he “later found that the First Lady had received complaints from other people, and she re-directed the complaint to the top management.”

As for the role played by the Prime Minister’s Department, below is the sms complaint that Wong states was conveyed by the PM’s department.

CPI translation Extracts:

“They [the ntv7 programme, its panellists and studio audience] mock the KPI and BN’s position. Mock 1Malaysia. Challenge PM to comprehensively revamp BTN. Question the action of Dato Nasir Safar when Dato Nasir has courageously resigned [as Najib Razak’s aide].

… What is very dangerous, they demand the freedom of speech, right from the start of the debate session just now. Meaning, no investigation is required to be made, the way they talk and they allow the audience to ask questions [gives the impression] as if our government is so bad.

What more do these Chinese want, they are [already] richer than the Malays. I suggest that we wage war on these Chinese. [Appeal] to Malay Parliamentarians, Umno/Supreme Council and all Umno leaders, wake up … they are increasingly biadab/ill-mannered.”

Who controls the media?

Natseven TV belongs to Media Prima, the country’s most powerful media conglomerate that similarly owns 100 percent equity interest in TV3, 8TV and TV9. It also owns 90% of NSTP.

Sitting in Media Prima’s board of directors are, among others, former Utusan editor-in-chief Johan Jaafar, former NST group editor Ahmad A. Talib and prominent businessmen some of whom are associated with Umno.

Media Prima’s largest shareholder is Gabungan Kasturi, reportedly owned by Amanah Raya – a trust management company belonging wholly to the Malaysian government holding the shares through the Minister of Finance (Incorporated).

Media Prima’s main minority shareholder is the Employees Provident Fund (note: EPF’s investment panel is headed by former chief secretary to the government Samsudin Osman).

The role of ntv7 in this scheme of things is that the free-to-air station positions itself as the “Home of Feel Good – Malaysia’s Favourite Chinese and Urban Station”; in other words, it is targeted mainly at a Chinese and urban demographic.

In giving the reasons for his resignation, Wong alleges that Sofwan Mahmood (whom the Media Prima corporate directory lists as ntv7 Deputy Editor-in-Chief, News) “said that it is not advisable to talk about [the Hulu Selangor by-election] as … the show will embarrass Najib’s administration”.

Wong also alleges that his superior Tan Boon Kooi had informed him of the ‘advice’ given by Media Prima group editor (News and Current Affairs) Manja Ismail that opposition MP Tony Pua should not be invited as guest speaker (note: Manja was the Berita Harian group editor from April 2006).

From the above, it can be seen that all terrestrial television, although ostensibly private stations, have indirect links to either Umno or the Umno-controlled federal government, and that their key decision-makers are the Media Prima bigwigs who have a career history in corporate entities that are strongly pro-Umno.

Questions for the Prime Minister

These are our questions for Najib.

1. Wong has made a serious allegation that the complaint against his programme was conveyed by Rosmah. Najib’s high-profile wife holds no public office but is playing a partisan political role surpassing that of any other spouse of previous prime ministers. Najib should clarify whether Rosmah or her staff issued the cease-and-desist order to Media Prima and ntv7.

2. Is Najib aware that the instructions to Wong purportedly came from his PM’s department? These instructions to Editor’s Time were, in effect, to gloss over or black out coverage of political developments in Hulu Selangor that are unfavourable to the ruling party. If the allegation is false, then Najib quickly should reassure the public that the government is not pulling the strings on what news and views are fit for public consumption.

3. Apart from this specific case of blatant intimidation and attempted censorship of a supposedly private television station, TV1 and TV2 are state-controlled television stations with no autonomy either to exercise free and fair reporting. Can the Prime Minister clarify whether there is a direct chain of command from his office and his officers giving directives to the civil servants heading these national broadcasters?

We note that RTM director-general Ibrahim Yahaya was former Berita Harian editor-in-chief and TV3 broadcasting manager.

Implications of Wong’s resignation

Wong’s resignation should not be treated as another run-of-the-mill case of a middle-management media practitioner coming up against the stone wall of political masters and media owners dictating content.

Instead, his resignation puts the spotlight on how corrupt the stifled system has become. How can a current affairs programme be barred by ntv7 from discussing the Hulu Selangor by-election just because Umno wants to exercise damage control and only permit views that portray the party, its leadership and its governance in a rosy light?

More pertinently, Wong asks “How can we continue to keep silent, to tolerate and allow these [abuses of power] to happen again and again?” Other Malaysians are asking the same questions.

The BN has maintained its stranglehold on power because the mainstream mediam (MSM) has colluded to keep it in power. From Wong’s superior Tan Boon Kooi to Lee Lam Thye who sits in Media Prima’s board of directors to the handsomely paid hacks in the print media, the professional disinformation industry has aided and abetted in propping up Umno hegemony.

Slanting information and depriving audiences of alternative views while at the same time setting a biased agenda and story angle is tantamount to brainwashing the masses.

Wong is to be applauded for his principled resignation. We are glad that his break with the cartel has allowed the dirty racket that has been operating in the mainstream media for so long to now be revealed.

We must build on this revelation of MSM’s inner workings to ensure that government control over what Malaysians can view and read is truly breached so that the electorate is no longer kept in the dark.

No longer voting by emotions

2010-04-20T20:00:00.000+12:00

Somebody to vote for - not just against!
By Antares of Magick river

As a kid growing up in a small southern town called Batu Pahat, in the seemingly halcyon 1950s, I recall seeing the entire town festooned with navy blue buntings bearing a white sailboat motif.

That was the symbol of the Alliance Party and, although I was too young to poke my nose into politics, I understood that it represented the newly-hatched Malayan government led by Tunku Abdul Rahman.

My father was a health inspector and, as a civil servant, he was expected to support the ruling party - but I suspect he rarely bothered to vote. In those days there weren't too many political alternatives.

The Labor Party of Malaya, registered in 1952, came up with a logo that featured a hoe crossed with a pen against a large gear on a blood red background. Far better than the hammer and sickle, I suppose - since the pen suggested literacy and a degree of intellectuality. Still, for most middle-class families, the hoe (or cangkul in Malay) was hardly in keeping with their aspirations towards ever greater gentility.

So I remained blissfully unaware of shifting undercurrents in local politics and - even after the eruption of violence that began on 13 May 1969 - I found myself far more interesting than the political milieu. To a certain extent that still holds true, I have to admit.

The introduction of the New Economic Policy in 1971, under the premiership of Tun Abdul Razak (right), followed swiftly by the National Cultural Policy, effectively turned me into a "second-class citizen" in the country my grandparents had opted to make their permanent home. I remember hearing a lot of bitter comments from my father - but he never translated any of his grievances into political action. As far as my dad was concerned, Lee Kuan Yew was the sort of leader he could respect - yet he was far too comfortable to consider moving to Singapore.

I was thus utterly indifferent when the Alliance Party reinvented itself as the National Front or Barisan Nasional, opting for the archaic weighing scale as its new party symbol. (Ironically, there's a neo-Nazi racist party in Britain which calls itself the National Front. I wonder if the Barisan Nasional is aware of this prophetic coincidence.)

Having grown up in an urban environment, I noticed that the NEP created an interesting phenomenon whereby there were suddenly a lot more Malays driving expensive cars than 10 years ago. I thought that was a positive development. It was a necessary phase, perhaps, to accelerate the proliferation of a Malay middle-class which would effectively bridge the cultural divide between urban and rural folks. One of the significant spin-offs of the NEP was that many Malays were able to send their children abroad for further studies - and many returned effectively bilingual, with Caucasian spouses in tow and a distinctly cosmopolitan worldview. What once was the exclusive prerogative of the Malay aristocracy now became available to a wider spectrum of Malay society.

Monolingual Malays - particularly the ones embedded in the deep rural constituencies - remained somewhat insular and prone to xenophobia. Umno was quick to realize that these grassroots members served the party best as an ignorant, emotional voter base that could easily be swayed by official propaganda piped through the mass media. There was really no point in ensuring that they had access to different languages and cultural templates.

Accordingly, the education system was designed to be strictly utilitarian - preparing the young for jobs in an industrial society, but not encouraging them to be curious about the larger world or to acquire a taste for knowledge. A well-informed, discerning voter base is an extremely volatile one.

I recall seeing Dr Mahathir's face for the first time in the newspaper. Even though he was only a deputy minister then and I knew next to nothing about the man, something in his demeanor made me shudder. It was a visceral reaction that has never entirely left me - and perhaps never will until I get word of his departure from this planet.

To avoid the feeling of mild nausea each time I caught sight of Dr M's sneer in the papers or on TV, I focused my attention and energies on the performing arts - specifically theatre and music. That was entirely therapeutic for me. Not only did such activities keep me (relatively) sane, they also won me a wide circle of friends and invites to endless parties.

It was becoming more than obvious by 1986 that Dr M had given a sinister twist to the word "entrepreneurship" with his misguided attempt to create a Frankenstein's monster called the Bumiputra Billionaire, aided and abetted by the ultimate Mafia don, Daim Zainuddin (right).

When people become exceedingly rich by inventing something universally popular and useful - or through the display of extraordinary talent, whether in the cultural or athletic field - one can only applaud wholeheartedly. However, fast bucks obtained through political skullduggery and financial shenanigans are hugely damaging to the moral equilibrium of a nation. What happens is that the horizon of decency quickly becomes obscured, to the extent that honest truth-speakers become a threat to the corrupt status quo.

In October 1987 Mahathir, acting in his capacity as home minister, invoked the obnoxious Internal Security Act and ordered the arrest and detention without trial of some 106 people - many of whom were my personal friends and none of whom could seriously be considered a threat to anybody except Mahathir himself. A couple of newspapers were shut down and a climate of fear quickly descended upon the nation. People became apprehensive about discussing politics in public places. Each time somebody uttered the dreaded name "Mahathir" people would immediately look around to see if anyone was watching.

The Special Branch of the Royal Malaysian Police (modeled after the British Special Branch) began playing a major role at the start of the so-called Emergency in 1948. Its prime target was to infiltrate Communist cells operating within the country and gather intelligence deemed necessary to safeguard the nation's security.

However, the definition of "Communist threat" soon expanded to include leftwing political parties with socialist ideologies and outspoken critics of the government. According to Umno and the Malay ruling elite, anybody concerned about social justice, human rights and a level playing field was potentially dangerous to the status quo and therefore had to be closely watched, harassed at every turn, and thwarted from ever attaining political power - even through legitimate and peaceful means.

At that point I was compelled to remove my head from the proverbial sand and start paying close attention to all the hanky-panky that was going on in the political Punch'n'Judy show.

For a start I decided to register myself to vote. And I'm proud to say I have voted against the Barisan Nasional at every opportunity.

Although it felt a little strange to occasionally have to vote for a candidate from the Islamic party, it was still far better than voting for any of the arrogant, greedy, hypocritical rogues in the ruling party. I wasn't entirely comfortable with the Chinese-dominated Democratic Action Party (I used to be a closet Sinophobe, despite my Chinese ancestry) - but their leaders were truly inspiring in their sheer tenacity and focus, especially veteran generals like Lim Kit Siang and Karpal Singh. All of them seemed ready to go to jail for their beliefs.

In 1999 when Wan Azizah inaugurated Parti Keadilan (Justice Party) to keep the spirit of reform alive while her husband languished in prison, I was prompted to join. Indeed, it was the first time in my life I actually felt drawn to committing myself to a political organization.

No opposition party on its own had the wherewithal to combat the firmly entrenched power of BN - but towards the end of 2007 Anwar Ibrahim finally succeeded in pulling together the tripartite political coalition now known as Pakatan Rakyat.

DAP's emphasis on sound financial management, PKR's focus on social justice, freedom and human rights, and PAS's spiritual foundation combine to forge a conscious, functional union of Head, Heart and Soul.

Finally we have somebody worth voting for - not just against!

Rote learning

2010-04-11T20:18:00.002+12:00

Our education and examination system have produces outstanding students in the years that it was revamped back in the mid 80’s. Although I have since left secondary school and college way after it was introduced and implemented, recently I had the privilege to expose myself to some feedbacks from friend’s children who scored distinguished and numerous A’s in their examinations. Below are comparisons of questions that I have sat for and between those younger generations who excel in this new system.

Essay 1: Peter went to the bank to withdraw money today.

Before 80’s

Question: If Peter said on Tuesday he is going to the bank in 3 days, what day will that be when he goes?

80’s onward

Question: What did Peter do at the bank today?

Essay 2: Ahmad traveled to Johor Baru from Kuala Lumpur with his family. He started very early in the morning at 6.30am because the distance was 240km away and he reached Johor Baru at 9.30am.

Before 80’s

Question: Ahmad drove at 80 km per hour to reach Johor Baru by 9.30am. If he drives at 90km per hour, what time will he reach Johor Baru?

80’s onward

Question: What time did Ahmad start his journey from Kuala Lumpur to Johor Baru?

Essay 3: When the police arrived at the house after receiving a 999 call 20 minutes ago, the robbers have already fled from the scene. They escaped with a total value of RM5,000.00 of jewelries and cash thru the back door of the house just 5 minutes before the police arrived.

Before 80’s

Question: If the call to the police was made at 12.13am, what time did the robbers escaped and what time did the police arrived?

80’s onward

Question: How much the amount of jewelries and cash did the robbers stole?

Essay 4: John, Jerry and Jimmy are brothers. Each of them have son. John’s son is Jacob. Jerry’s son is Jeremy. Jimmy’s son is Jake. John is uncle to both Jeremy and Jake. While both of them are nephews to John, Jacob is cousin to them both.

Before 80’s

Question: What relation is Jacob to both John’s brothers?

80’s onward

Question: Name Jeremy and Jake’s fathers.

Essay 5: The cat managed to climb into the opened window after smelling the fish left by the kitchen table. The cat then grab the fish by its teeth and jump out the window into the garden and escape just as the dog stroll into the kitchen.

Before 80’s

Question: Did the dog scares the cat when it appeared in the kitchen?

80’s onward

Question: What stroll into the kitchen?

Religion by colour

2010-03-13T23:33:00.002+13:00

Are you more Islam than anyone

I don’t have any racist intention in this writing. My goal is to educate everyone that discrimination is not something that you want to go through in your life. I have gone through many levels of discrimination in my life right from primary school until today. It is not my fault to be born an Indian ethnic, Muslim and Malaysian.

By AO Musa

If I have a choice I will choose the best. What is most painful is the way society treats you. I’ve gone through this and now my children are going through the same problem. This situation has never changed from the past 32 years and in fact is getting worse every day.

I hope after you read this, you will better understand the feelings of a discriminated citizen. I’m proud of what I am and I prefer to be known as an Indian Muslim rather than change my race to Malay. This is my story ….

If you are an Indian in race and Islam in faith, then you will be automatically called a “convert”. That is what is planted in most of the Malays' brain in Malaysia, no matter whether adults or children. I don’t blame the children as they learned this from their parents.

For the past 32 years, I always get this from most of the Malays that I come across in my life. A Malayalee by race and Islam in faith has dragged me into this discriminated stance for as long as I can remember. “Saudara baru ke?” “Bila masuk Islam?” “Satu family ke masuk Islam?” is something that I am used to hearing. At first, I always took the trouble to explain to them that I’m Islam from the beginning and never converted.

However, at one point of time I started to question myself “am I surrounded by idiots or don’t I have any sign of Muslim in me?” At this point, I started to do my research about my own family background. I learned that my great grandfather on my mom's side was a dae’i migrated from Yemen to India somewhere in the 1800’s to start his life as a merchant and also to preach about Islam. Married to my great grandmother who is the daughter of one of the prominent Muslim leaders in the state of Kerala (but I’m not in any way associated with TDM!).

My grandfather was also one of the notable figures in Kerala who fought for the freedom of India as well as a highly respected religious teacher. It was told to me that when he passed away (3 days before I was born), the state of Kerala announced a public holiday as a sign of mourning and respect for his contributions to the country and the state.

My great grandfather on my father's side migrated to Malaya from India also somewhere in the 1800’s to become a religious teacher in Rawang. Rawang used to be a plantation area and the majority of the population there were Indians. There were a number of Malay communities but further down towards Serendah to Tanjong Malim. He was invited by the Indian Muslim community who migrated earlier since there were not many religious teachers around to educate their children. I was told that during this time, the Islamic knowledge among the Malays was very poor. Mixing religion and culture is something that blended into their daily life.

The point is, I couldn’t find the point when my ancestors converted to Islam. As far as I ccould track, all of them were Muslims. This makes sense since Islam was brought to India by Malik Bin Dinar somewhere in 625 AD. The first mosque built in India was in Kodungallur, Kerala in 629 AD which was about 22km from where my ancestors came from. There are high chances that they converted to Islam during the Prophet Muhammad's lifetime (571 – 632 AD).

Islam came to Malaya somewhere in the 12th-13th century. The Terengganu Stone Monument was found at Kuala Berang, Terengganu where the first Malay state to receive Islam in 1303, Sultan Megat Iskandar Shah, known as Parameswara prior to his conversion, is the first Sultan of Melaka. He converted to Islam after marrying a princess from Pasai, of present day Indonesia. The conversion of the Sultanate of Malacca by Rowther and Marakkar traders from Tamil Nadu into Islam is the milestone of Islamification of Malay people in Malaya or Tanah Melayu (fact from Wikipedia).

So, the Indian Muslims converted to Islam 700 years before the Malays even heard about Islam. History tells us that Islam is brought to Malaya by Indians, Arabs and Chinese and yet we are the ones called converts. Yes, we are converts and in fact all of us are converts. However, Malays should not forget that the Indians are 700 years senior than them in Islam.

Who is the “convert” now? Are you still telling me that you are more Islam than anyone else???

Dave save the day

2010-03-10T22:55:00.001+13:00

This is a clip from the movie "Dave". I wouldn't go into details about what the plot and story line is for this movie, but in essence, we look at everyday issues with such complex approach that we sometimes forget that the simplest of answer will just solve the day. Maybe our mind is only fulfilled if the problems are more challenging and we get a sense of accomplishment. Just view and see.

The right pedestal to speak up

2010-03-05T21:47:00.003+13:00

The price of speaking up
By Jacqueline Ann Surin
jacquelinesurin@thenutgraph.com

.
CONSIDER this. Despite the available evidence of Al Islam's unethical undercover report in which the magazine's Muslim journalist spat out the holy communion to photograph, no action is going to be taken. The Attorney-General's Chambers decided this despite the police reports and a memorandum lodged by Catholics about the insensitive treatment of a holy sacrament in Christianity.

Then consider this. Because some Muslims perceive that Islam is being challenged by a non-Muslim journalist, English-language daily The Star could potentially lose its publishing permit. At the same time, because some Muslim groups have taken offence at a statement by Sisters in Islam (SIS), the Muslim women's group will likely be investigated under Section 298A of the Penal Code for causing disharmony and disunity on grounds of religion.

What exactly do these developments tell us about the Barisan Nasional (BN) administration's idea of justice and fairness? And how can citizens make sense of how our government is responding to these issues?

Muslim "sensitivities" paramount

It's clear that when it comes to defending a particular faith community's sensitivities, Muslim sensitivities trump all others. And because the majority of Muslims in Malaysia are racially categorised as Malay, it would be logical to surmise that the BN government is only interested in defending Malay-Muslim Malaysians' rights.

Other faith communities, mostly comprising the other races, will just have to contend with being second-class citizens who will not be accorded the same protection as the majority.

Actually, the state shouldn't even be in the business of defending those who have been personally offended by the views or actions of others. Indeed, Al Islam's offence was unethical journalism and acting in ways which were un-Islamic despite its pretext of acting in the ummah's interest. Hardly a crime against an individual or the state. No, the state should not be in the business of penalising offensive actions or words.

But since the state has decided to be the guardian of public sensitivities through various legal provisions, it needs to demonstrate that it will treat all citizens and their complaints fairly and equally.

By not doing so, the BN administration, now under Datuk Seri Najib Razak's leadership, is clearly proving that it is incapable of treating all citizens with equality. And that if you're not a Malay-Muslim in Malaysia, there are no guarantees that the state will do right by you.

How else would we be able to make sense of why the administration will not act on addressing Catholics' hurt feelings, but will immediately snap to action when some Muslims' sensitivities are affected?

Price to pay

There is another lesson to be learnt from what has happened recently. If one speaks up for justice and compassion in Malaysia, there is a strong likelihood that there will be a penalty to pay. More troublingly, it is the state that will ensure a price is exacted against citizens who speak up against injustice.

What exactly was The Star's managing editor P Gunasegaram's crime when he appealed for compassion in the name of religion in his 19 Feb 2010 column titled Persuasion, not compulsion?

Why was The Star made to feel so threatened by the state that it felt compelled to remove Gunasegaram's column from its online version, issue a public apology, and censor long-time columnist Datin Paduka Marina Mahathir?

Sure, at least five police reports have been lodged against The Star, including by the Selangor Islamic Religious Council (MAIS). But what crime was committed that the daily should be given a show-cause letter by the Home Ministry? And why is it a crime for a non-Muslim to reasonably appeal for justice and compassion in the name of Islam? How does doing that denigrate and undermine Islam? How can it even be offensive to Muslim sensibilities when Islam preaches justice, peace, compassion and fairness?

.
To be sure, the argument used by these complainants — that no non-Muslim should speak up about the administration of Islam in Malaysia — is actually just a red herring. Because SIS, too, hasn't been spared from the wrath of those who have been "offended" by the organisation's statement condemning the clandestine caning of three Muslim women for "illicit sex".

And what was SIS's crime? Seems like it was that SIS spoke out against the state's use of Islam to justify the cruel and inhumane punishment of Muslim women for a private sin the state should have no business policing. Its crime was that it was courageous enough to speak up against abuse of power in the interest of justice and compassion.

So what can we conclude? It's not about whether one is Muslim or non-Muslim. Anyone, regardless of faith, who dares to challenge the state's interpretation of Islam will be threatened and punished until they back down.

Really, we shouldn't be too surprised that the BN administration is doing this. After more than 50 years of BN rule, there are more than enough examples of how the government will crack down on those who speak up for truth and justice. From arrests under the Internal Security Act and charges under the Sedition Act to the closure of newspapers including The Star during 1987's Operasi Lalang, the BN is a government that will be neither challenged nor held accountable.

Hence, the use of Islam and the introduction of the notion that Malaysia is an "Islamic state" is really just another way to stifle challenges and attempts at holding state power accountable. After all, God's laws, unlike human-made laws, are sacrosanct and cannot ever be challenged. How convenient, no? This, then, is what our current government is all about. My question is, do we really want more of the same?

Jacqueline Ann Surin wishes more citizens, newspapers and organisations would stop allowing state and non-state actors from bullying us into submitting to injustice and violence. She believes that standing up to bullies is the best way to stop them from getting their way.

Pounding the concept till it sinks in

2010-02-02T01:45:00.000+13:00

The typical Malaysian problem
NEWS/COMMENTARIES

(Jakarta Post) As pointed out by Azmi Sharom of University of Malaya in his dissertation (www.projectmalaysia.org), "at the crux of the problem facing plurality in Malaysia" are the twin issues of race and religion.

And its roots are found in the very constitution of Malaysia, which, in Azmi's words, "was and is a strange creature that combines liberal democratic ideals and what can only be described as racially based preferential treatment".

The Malaysian constitution stipulates that "Islam is the religion of the federation; but other religions may be practiced in peace and harmony in any part of the federation."

Prior to Malaysia's independence in 1957, it was the Alliance Party (later Barisan Nasional) - consisting of the United Malay National Organization (UMNO), the Malayan Indian Congress (MIC) and the Malayan Chinese Association (MCA) - that had suggested the inclusion of this article.

It was, obviously, a shrewd political maneuver by UMNO to gain support from the Islamic groups, and blessed by its two partners.

Such a move, however, did not make Malaysia an Islamic state. The Alliance assured the Reid Commission, responsible for drafting the Malaysian constitution, that "The observance of this principle . shall not imply that the state is not a secular state."

UMNO was aware that without the support of the two other parties, it was in no position to singularly represent the diverse Malayan federation and the multiracial and pluralistic Malaysian society.

The Reid Commission was further assured by the trio that, "Making Islam the official religion of the federation is primarily for ceremonial purposes, for instance to enable prayers to be offered in the Islamic way on official occasions, such as the installation of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong *King*, Merdeka Day *Independence Day* and similar occasions."

Tunku Abdul Rahman, one of the founding fathers of the Malaysian state, was more blunt in saying that, "I would like to make it clear that this country is not an Islamic state, as it is generally understood; we merely provide that Islam shall be the official religion of the state."

The Malay rulers were a step ahead in asking the commission to ensure that "in an independent Malaya all nationals should be accorded equal rights, privileges and opportunities, and there must not be discrimination on grounds of race and creed". They were not in favor of any special preferential treatment for the Bumiputra, or the indigenous Malays.

The Alliance, however, saw the large chunk of indigenous Malays as its potential vote-bank, and was eager to impress them by appearing as a hero. Thus, special quotas for entry into the civil service, public scholarships and public education were proposed.

The commission was left with no choice but to accept the proposal, granting the King of Malaysia responsibility for safeguarding the special position of the indigenous peoples.

The provisions, however, were temporary in nature. The Reid Commission suggested that 15 years after independence, such provisions should be reconsidered, and that the "legislature should then determine either to retain or to reduce any quota or to discontinue it entirely".

Tun Dr. Ismail, one of the nation's founding fathers, likened the special privileges of the Malays to a golf handicap, only to be used until the time comes that such a crutch is no longer needed (The Reluctant Politician).

The article was, thus, due for review in 1972. Unfortunately, this never happened. During the 1969 elections, thanks to the ambitious politicians playing with the religious and racial sentiments of the masses to gain votes, the foundation of the Malaysian state suffered its first crack. The riots of May 13 that year were the outcome of broken promises and broken hearts.

Less than 15 years after its independence, Malaysian society was already divided between the indigenous and the non-indigenous. Malaysia was no longer united. Insensitive to this, the Malaysian government introduced economic and development policies that widened the gap, rather than build bridges.

To worsen the situation, following a wrong trait of nationalism, being Malay became identical with being a Muslim. Azmi cites the success of the Iranian revolution for the "growing Islamization of Malaysia", resulting in the "personal changes, in dress, manner of speech and shifting value systems".

But that was not the only reason. The 1980s and 1990s were also the decades of petrodollar supremacy. Money from Saudi Arabia and other affluent Middle Eastern countries flowed in freely, causing more division and more harm to Malaysian society.

The situation was such that non-Muslim Malaysians were compelled to reinstate their pre-independence identities. They were, once again, Chinese or Indian. For they would not be considered Malays if they were not Muslim.

Meanwhile, the Islamic parties gained ground, which made then prime minister Mahathir Mohammad feel threatened. In a desperate attempt to secure his position, he brought Anwar Ibrahim, popular among Malaysia's Islamists, into his fold. That way, the shrewd senior politician thought, UMNO would have their support.

The rapport between the two leaders, however, did not last long. Anwar's popularity also became the cause of his downfall, when Mahathir finally sacked him in 1998.

Without Anwar on his side, and still eager for the support of Islamist groups, Mahathir made another major political blunder in 2001: he declared Malaysia an Islamic state. His opponents knew it was a political gimmick. However, as Lim Kit Siang, a veteran opposition leader believes, it "opened the way for the Islamists".

That was the final blow to the promises made by the nation's founding fathers and rulers. In a country where political parties have always been race- and community-based, the blow caused almost irreparable damage.

Malaysia, our neighbor, our younger brother, begins this year with attacks on churches. Shameful. It tarnishes the image of peace-loving Malays. What is the solution? Remain Malay. Follow the religion of your heart, but keep to your own culture. Shun the Middle Eastern, Indian and Chinese identities, norms, lifestyles, cultures and values - you are Malay. We are siblings. Your problems, your pains, are our problems and our pains. God protect you!

The writer is a spiritual activist and author of more than 130 books (www.anandkrishna.org).

Fearing the new

2010-01-31T02:40:00.000+13:00

It is not about the Malays being divided as a race, it is about the Malays (and Malaysians) being divided by class
Suara Keramat Pak Sako

In a speech yesterday, Mahathir Mohamad blamed PAS and PKR for dividing the Malays, putting this down to greed for power amongst different Malay factions consisting of disgruntled political aspirants desiring political positions.

If Mahathir’s logic is correct, then the split amongst the Japanese in Japan between supporting two different political parties with different cultures, experiences and policies must be a bad thing. These Japanese political parties are the centre-right LDP which had governed Japan and is noted for entrenching patron-client relationships between politicians and corporations; and the DPJ, a reform-minded, social-democratic party that claims to be more people-centric. These parties more or less reflect the distinction between Barisan Nasional and Pakatan Rakyat.

Going by Mahathir’s argument, then, this split would have seriously enfeebled the Japanese race, resulting in civil strife or at least hard rancour amongst them, or exposing them as a whole to “attack”, “manipulation”, “subjugation” or “domination” (or insert other terms to taste) by citizens of non-Japanese ancestry (smaller than in Malaysia as a proportion but growing) or by neighbouring nations such as North Korea, Russia or China (recall how we are made to fear Singapore).

But this has not been the case. Japan has not collapsed by having an ‘inexperienced’ ruling political party. Japan as a country is richer for having this new-found choice in being able to switch between alternative politics. Japan’s socioeconomic “evolutionary potential” is rejuvenated by the competition that the DPJ poses for the LDP. We, too, should ask ourselves, as the Japanese have, whether we wish to stick with the stale ways of the old guard whose interest it is to maintain the status quo, the old socioeconomic arrangement which benefits powerful special interests/elites; or whether we want renewal, a restructuring of socioeconomic arrangement that liberates us from the stranglehold of the elites so that the ordinary person can demand and receive a greater share of the nation’s wealth without being held at ransom by threats of unemployment (or inflation) and have a bigger, freer say in how we country to be like and how our social freedoms are defined?

The Malays are not not dividing themselves; they are opening themselves up to choices

In Malaysia, the Malays are beginning to explore choices, and there is nothing wrong in wanting a Greek salad over a nasi lemak. It could in fact be a healthier choice.

Accordingly, many Malays have taken the brave leap for change, to embrace newer values that enables them to bond better with fellow citizens and to rightfully ask for a fairer share of the nation’s “cake”. The Malays and other Malaysians demand this not from any particular race group, but from the politically influential — the governing/aristocratic/corporate class consisting of a mix of the various races. And in doing so, the new lower and middle-class Malays are forging a more harmonious and united relationship with their non-Malay counterparts. In doing so, they are not at all submitting their rights to the ‘others’; they are enhancing their collective rights as citizens in solidarity. The key point to note is that the problem is primarily an issue of socioeconomic class and class domination, not an issue race domination.

But this point is precisely what Mahathir’s and UMNO’s racial rhetoric is attempting to mask.

The Malays that are vulnerable to such scare tactics cling on out of fear and ignorance to old, outdated values promoted by certain powerful groups. These groups dangle candies to society (government handouts or more shopping malls) to lull them, and bring about a basic level of ‘political stability’ through restrictive, questionable rule and extensive control of public apparatuses. This enables powerful groups and elites to appropriate the lion’s share of a nation’s wealth.

So far in the history of Malaysia as an independent state, the majority of the people have conditioned to be content (‘puas hati’) with the moderate amount of income and wealth and fairly restricted social liberties that they have been accorded.

This situation was made possible because Malaysia has been blessed with an exceptionally high level of natural and human resources per capita, i.e., we have had an overabundance of resources relative to our small population size. Each Malaysian in theory could be very well off, with hundreds of thousands of ringgit sitting in their bank accounts, for example, or have superior social services such as those in countries like Canada, Australia or Sweden.

But this has not been the case.

What has been happening is that out of the total economic profits our country generates annually, most of the ordinary Malaysians have been apportioned the minimum amount of income, infrastructure and amenities necessary to placate or satisfy them while the remainder is reserved for the elites, a capture made possible by

(i) widespread rent-seeking, which includes the collusion of politicians and the corporate and social bigwigs to apportion for themselves the nation’s capital to derive supernormal profits (defrauding by power and capital)

(ii) restrictive labour laws that discourage unionisation and wage bargaining power and keep real wages down (economic oppression)

(iii) distracting society with cheap entertainment, restricting free reporting of the actual state of the nation, and threatening possible imprisonment if the status quo is questioned using excuses such as “this shall destabilise racial and religious harmony”, etc. (dumbing down)

For comparison, observe that this has not been possible in Indonesia because given its resources Indonesia has a large population and so it is harder to create this critical mass of satisfied, contented middle class citizens. This has also not been possible in Thailand which has not been endowed with plentiful high-value resources like us (and they have a substantially large population too).

In this view, Malaysia is indeed economically unique and blessed. But it also means that a braver, more vigilant and empowered society is all the more crucial to prevent easy abuse by those who govern it (elite capture).

As Malaysia’s resources run out (the depletion of its natural resources from its wasteful, inequitable squandering and the loss of human capital as a result of severe “brain drain”), sudden belt-tightening policies are proposed and instituted. These policies ranging from the imposition of the GST, the drastic removal of subsidies, and the scaling back of government expenditure on public services such as healthcare. There is an acceleration in the rate of liquidation of natural and environmental resources such as our remaining forests and wetlands in a desperate bid to generate cash. In connection with this is a rash of license issuance to foreign commercial and investment banks either inject more liquidity into our financial markets and/or to allow foreign investment in various development projects the details of which we know precious little of. At the same time, there is a stagnation of real incomes; the nominal wage of a fresh engineering graduate in 2000 was on average RM1700 and this has remained more or less the same in 2010, ten years hence, even as the prices of goods increased.

The bulk of the burden of these actions fall on the ordinary rakyat, whether Malay or not. It may fall disproportionately on the ordinary rakyat depending on how the “economic pie” is cut. It is possible that Malaysians are suffering the economic pinch a little excessively because

(i) the elites may be trying to maintain their cut of the economic pie and their present standard of living, without having to reduce the amount of gains or profits that they have been receiving, or by only slightly sacrificing these gains, or by eliminating contenders (e.g., the shooting down of people linked to the previous prime minister), and

(ii) the government is unwilling to appropriate and repatriate past gains and profits (that may be squirreled away overseas) made illegally and through corrupt rent-seeking, or stem practices such as the excess resource allocation or rent-seeking for the influential interest groups concerned

This issue of the influential class requires highlighting because not only is it the crux of the matter, it is also a matter of justice. It is about whether you feel that some groups deserve to enjoy supernormal profits, political privileges and positions at the expense of the rakyat’s welfare. One could even ask whether they are intentionally distracting the rakyat from thinking about this question by conditioning them to believe that their enemies are their fellow citizens of a different skin colour (or that they risk being enslaved by other races if they aren’t united as a race themselves).

So is PKR and PAS bad for giving Malays and Malaysians as a whole the choice to alter the socioeconomic arrangement of Malaysia?

Those groups offering the Malay choices in styles of governance (greater transparency, responsiveness and reduced corruption and rent-seeking) and different opportunities for improvement (e.g., greater social empowerment and alternative modes of development besides the build-malls-and-shop-all-day approach) should be praised and supported. Those who try to instill fear in the Malays in an attempt to hold them back from thinking broadly and limiting them from freely expressing choice should be censured.

The fact is that the Chinese or Indians are not going to take over Malaysia and turn the Malays into slaves. Although there are safeguards, these groups do not intend to do that to begin with. Believers of social Darwinism should rein in their alarmist attitude and understand that social cooperation and fair and equitable rules improves everyone’s lot and that not all the needy belong to a single race group. These social Darwinists should also not underestimate the potential for adaptation and improvement or cooperation of any race group.

As we can already see by what is happening on the ground, especially post-March 2008, the ordinary Chinese and Indians want to and are willing to live and work together with the Malays if given the chance. This is evident from the momentum of the Saya Anak Bangsa Malaysia (SABM) movement, to cite an example. The Perkasa group which Mahathir extols is precisely the type of groups fomenting division amongst the Malays. They frighten off the Malays from contemplating choice and taking a leap and they do this for various self-interested reasons. That they are lobbying the sultans to support their partisan political stand is disturbing.

Mahathir is in essence barking up the wrong tree. If he is indeed worried about the division of Malays, then he should encourage them to unite under the more reformist and progressive umbrella of Pakatan Rakyat. Their fellow non-Malay Malaysians are waiting for them there.

Note: Read also Suflan Shamsuddin’s The Fallacy of Malay Unity.

band of sticks rotting now

2010-01-30T07:34:00.001+13:00

The Fallacy of Malay Unity
by Suflan Shamsuddin*

They say, that when a stick is on its own, it can be broken. But when many sticks are bound together, they become strong and unbreakable. So for Malays to be strong and unbreakable they must unite. For if not, then the non-Malays, and all those who wish to undermine the Malay race and Islam, will break them. This is what Perkasa and others like them peddle to the Malays. What a load of hogwash! And I say this as a Malay and a Muslim.

In reality, this call for Malay unity is the opposite of what is needed to bring members of my community out of its despair. And the reason is simple.

The price Malays pay for this unity is their individuality. If you belong to a herd, and your strength comes from the herd, then as an individual, you are weak. No capacity for self determination when left to your own device. You become subservient to a set of values that is driven by the elite, who will act as your protector, and who will demand your obedience. You will have no capacity to challenge the elite, and you will cower to those in authority, happy to be either an underachieving dependent of the system, or aspiring to join the ranks of the elite, to do that which once was done unto you.

The outcome of continued dependence on Malay unity is obvious. A select, strong and powerful elite will remain in control of wealth and power; and a mass of happy ignorant followers will continue to be dragged along with what is pronounced by those with authority, never daring to question, never daring to challenge, and ever willing to fight the fight, if called upon by their leaders.

As a community, you might say (but hardly unequivocally) that you are strong. But as individuals, you would be weak, with no sense of personal accountability, no understanding of the importance of individual freedoms, no desire to self-improve and work hard, no desire to play fair.

The world has moved on. Today, national boundaries help determine where we pay our taxes, and under which legal jurisdiction are we subject. But with the revolution of information and technology, territorial national boundaries do nothing to keep global market and socio-economic forces from affecting each and every one of us as individuals every single second of the day.

No matter who we are, whether we be Malays, Chinese, Indian, the responsibilities are the same. We each need to be fully contributing and responsible individuals, who will add value to that part of society to which we belong (whether we define that territorially, religiously or culturally), and to care for and look out for the happiness and welfare of those whom we love.

And for us to be able to do this effectively we must be individually capable. Each of us must build the right set of values, priorities and character, and not simply belong to a herd, following aimlessly with everyone else. Because market forces don’t affect the herd in today’s global world. It affects the individual. And a weak, non-contributing and continually dependent Malay, no matter how strong his community might be as a united force, is no good to anybody.

I shudder to think of the kind of Malays that will be created if Perkasa had its way.

*The views expressed here are the personal opinion of the columnist. Suflan qualified as a barrister at law from Middle Temple and has been called to the Malaysian Bar. He is currently working in a Fortune 500 company as a senior counsel and is based in London. He is also author of the book “RESET: Rethinking the Malaysian Political Paradigm”.

Only RM2, Mutilpy that by....

2010-01-21T03:18:00.000+13:00

When schools run short of funds
By Terence Fernandez, Down2Earth, The Sun

OVER 10 years ago, as a reporter for The Malay Mail, I was part of a team which exposed a dubious instruction from the then Selangor Education Department director. He had directed all schools in the state to buy name tags for their students at a cost of RM2 each.

One of the issues was that some schools on their own had bought name tags for students through their co-operative societies, with the endorsement of their parent-teacher associations (PTAs). But no, they still had to buy these name tags – from a single supplier to “meseragamkan” (standardise) school uniforms in Selangor.

Granted, RM2 is not much but multiply that by 200,000 students and the company stood to earn RM400,000.

We discovered that the directive was from the state education director who neither consulted the Education Ministry nor obtained its approval. Worse, no tenders were called and the company was selected by the director. Why? Because we later discovered, one of his relatives was a director of the company supplying the tags.

When the story made the front page, there was hell to pay with voices of protests from parents, politicians, NGOs and even ministry officials. When we caught then education minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak in the lift, he was visibly furious with the scandal and promised action.

A few weeks after the story broke; the director was transferred to another department where he whiled away his time until retirement.

However, no further action was taken against him or the company whose directors laughed all the way to the bank. The only losers being the former state director and the thousands of parents who had to fork out RM2 each so that everyone in the neighbourhood, school and in between would know their children’s first names.

This was definitely something for the Anti-Corruption Agency to investigate but nothing was forthcoming.

If it had occurred today when people are less tolerant, when the enforcement agencies are under immense scrutiny and perhaps after the change in political climate, I trust there would have been a slew of prosecutions.

Now the reason for this trip down memory lane is because 10 years on, profiting from schoolchildren is still a million-ringgit business, with schools and schoolchildren being targets of profiteers.

Due to the high traffic flow and the large group of potential clients, we see billboards taking up space on school grounds; businessmen – from ice-cream sellers to apparel companies hawking their wares and telecommunications companies renting parking space.

Now when these agreements take off more often than not, someone in the school had given the green light and that person is the principal or headmaster.

My father who was a headmaster for three years said he had always had to chase profiteers out of his office – stationery salesmen, badge manufacturers, and the like. While he sometimes allowed them to make a presentation, he would show them the door the moment they said something like: “Cikgu ambil lah 10%” (You take 10%).

And I figure this is what is going on in some schools, when some headmasters aided and abetted by PTA chairmen put pecuniary interests above the welfare of children.

Granted that some schools are in dire need of funds and the profits are to be channelled back into the school, but taking the easy way out by taking children to ransom and digging into the parents’ pockets to buy useless items or things that can be bought at a fraction of the cost outside is not the answer.

Even allowing school land to be used by advertisers and companies needing to solve their parking woes is not in the best interest of the child – which should be the paramount consideration.

In the days when the private sector was less generous – and even now in some well-organised schools, the school with the children in tow would get together to organise fundraisers: be it through bake sales for a trip to the nation’s capital; funfairs to renovate the canteen; charity shows for a school building; or marathons to benefit under-privileged students.

With all the hype created, neighbourhood businessmen and personalities would start contributing and at the end of the day, you would end up raising more than you initially intended.

But these days, sadly the welfare of the children is not on the minds of some administrators in our education institutions. And like some of the parasites who prey on the millions of potential clients from kindergarten to Form Six, they too get drawn in by the capitalist talk.

It is time to end the exploitation of schoolchildren and for a clear direction from the Education Ministry for all activities to benefit school coffers be vetted and have the best interest of the child at heart. Otherwise, the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission may have to investigate more civil servants.

As a former part-time teacher Terence has firsthand info as to how some of these dubious deals are signed. He is deputy editor special reports & investigations and can be reached at terence@thesundaily.com

How right you are, Marranci

2010-01-20T20:09:00.000+13:00

The “Allah” case in Malaysia
January 18, 2010 by marranci

Recently Malaysia has been at the centre of another controversy. After the fatwa against Yoga (in which it was suggested that Muslims were better to abstain from it), the sentence against Kartika Sari Dewi Shukarno (who was condemned to strokes of an “Islamic” cane), and the severed cow heads left on an area awaiting the construction of a Hindu temple, today churches, and other non-Muslim places of worship, have been torched over the issue of whether non-Malay Muslims, and in particular Christians, can use the word ‘Allah’. The Malay government, controlled by UMNO, clearly supports the opinion that “Allah” is, at least linguistically, a Malay Muslim theo-semiotic possession, despite the word being Arabic. Yet to understand the present situation we need to look at how Muslim Malaysians make sense of their social political identity within the country.

To do so we must refer to Article 160 of the Constitution of Malaysia in which a ‘Malay’ is described as a Malaysian citizen, born to a Malaysian citizen, who professes to be a Muslim, habitually speaks Bahasa Melayu, adheres to Malay customs, and is domiciled in Malaysia or Singapore. Furthermore, the constitution, in article 152, defines some privileges for Bumiputra, the Muslim ethnic majority of the country.

The privileges, based on internal economic and social political protectionism, have culminated in the so-called New Economy Policy, which, although officially terminated in the 1990s, still influences the relationship among the ethnic groups. These policies, and such protectionism, are not recent. The British colonial rule of Malaya set precise ethno-religious boundaries, with a certain level of protection for the Muslim Bumiputra, which the independent nation, and its constitution and legislation, have ideologically maintained.

Although there is clear evidence that the majority Muslim Malays have benefited from such privileges and closed the social and economic gaps with the other ethnic populations, particularly the Chinese, the continued reliance upon protectionist measures has helped to create a general feeling that these privileges are essential to maintain the equality of Muslim Malays vis-a-vis the non-Muslim Malaysians of other ethnic groups.

This way of thinking is arguably an internalization of British colonial opinions, in which Muslim Malays were seen as admirable for their artistic ability and beautiful “heritage”, but otherwise lazy by nature, unadapted to business and childish in their way of being. To the British, these negative descriptions were not made as criticisms but rather as statements of ‘natural’ fact. Hence, to preserve and protect this population, the British implemented particular protections, which at the end proved to be counterproductive in many respects.

We need this background information to understand the present issue over the name “Allah”. Of course, many commentators have decided to place this controversy within the context of ‘religious fanaticism’ and ‘Islamism’, or generally within the phenomenon of ‘religion’.

Although I do not deny that, in Malaysia, religion plays a role, it would be naive to believe that this is a theological discussion gone wrong. Rather, the controversy is rooted within the framework above. There are two main reasons that I want to highlight here.

The first has to do with the increasing challenges that UMNO faces politically. In the changing political landscape of Malaysia, UMNO needs to reinforce a solid political base of supporters. It could be said that the “Allah” controversy, and the decision of the government to support the legal action, was aimed at political ends as much as, if not more than, religious ones. Indeed, the debate may well engage a new kind of UMNO supporter: young, unhappy with differences, fearful of local and global competition and very attached to those protectionist policies which the opposition appears to oppose.

The Christian church, then, becomes a symbolic target at which to direct the discontent and frustration, as well as fear, about an uncertain future in which previous privileges may be removed and competition felt sharper than ever before. Although much more could be said about this, let us move to a second, more social anthropological aspect.

If we pay a second of attention to the ethnic composition of Christians, who officially account for 9.11% of the population, we may notice the diversity in ethnic profile. Differently from the case of Hinduism, which can be linked directly to Indian Malays, or Buddhism (the second religion in the country) to the Chinese, Christians are from all the main ethnic groups, with the number of Bumiputra Christians (8.9% of the Christian population) being nearly equal to those of Chinese origin (9.6% of the Christian population), and not very distant from the number of Indian Christians (7.7 % of the Christian population).

The central fact here is that the relationship between ethnicity and religion is highly complex, despite appearing on the surface to be relatively direct. The convenient colonial divisions, in which ‘Bumiputra’ meant Muslim, are not valid here. We have an intra-ethnic, although unpublicized, division.

Here lies the basis for the theo-semiotic challenge, which appears rather absurd to a majority of Muslims and also in the context of the linguistic history of Bahasa Melayu. The word ‘Allah’ is seen here to be only for those Bumiputra who are Muslims. The monopoly of the Arabic signifier of the ’signified’ God has become a logical conclusion to the protectionist and anachronistic Article 160 and 153 of the Malaysian constitution.

The relationship between the economic and social aspects of such protectionism (extending even to the domain of theology) is not as strange as it may appear at first glance. Malaysia is changing, as any other Southeast Asian country, and it is facing the same global challenges that any other population has to in this century, which is marked by so many ‘post-’ concepts (post-communism, post-modern and so forth).

Yet the colonial ghost is still haunting the country and trying to conserve an ethnic-religious identity based upon privileges that, in reality, end up threatening Malaysia’s security and unity. If Malaysia does not eventually deconstruct the left-overs from the colonial ideology and realize that the idea of ethnic and religious superiority (beyond contradicting Islamic teaching) is a burden of the past that stops the country’s development and damages its international reputation, it will remain mired in tragic, and sometimes tragic-comic, controversies.

In the long run, these controversies may endanger not only the racial and social harmony of Malaysia, but also – because of the epidemiological power of these religiously packaged controversies -neighboring countries such as Indonesia and perhaps, although with less likelihood, Singapore.

Why we must continue to blog

2010-01-18T00:24:00.004+13:00

Rais: Internet can erode the country's culture
NEWS/COMMENTARIES

(The Straits Times) - The Malaysian government has warned against excessive use of micro-blogging sites like Facebook and Twitter, arguing that they could erode the country's culture, a report said on Sunday.

Rais Yatim, the information and communication minister, said Muslims and other religious groups must be wary of the Internet as it was introduced by the West.

'We are not saying they cannot use Facebook or Twitter, but when using such facilities, they must upkeep the values taught by Islam, Buddhism or Christianity to maintain our culture,' he was quoted as saying by the New Sunday Times newspaper.

Mr Rais said users must not be influenced by what they see and hear when using the Internet. 'We must be strong in our belief and culture because the identity and image of our country depends on us,' he said.

The government decided last August not to implement a controversial plan to create an Internet filter blocking 'undesirable' websites after coming under fire from rights groups.

Malaysia's lively blogosphere has been a thorn in the side of the Barisan Nasional government, which was been in power for more than half a century but was dealt its worst ever results in the 2008 elections.

And this is why we must continue to blog/facebook/twitter/surf:-

1. Government control main stream media, filtered for our reading pleasures so they don’t look bad. Eg. Kugan custodian death during police interrogations. They issue statement he died of fluid in his lungs.

2. Government think the people owe them for running the country. But they own us much more. They just don’t want to tell us and continue to keep us in the dark for as long as they can. Eg. Oil royalty issues. Their take is 80%, our take is 5%. They think we dont know how to add up 80 and 5?

3. They shield the truth from us so they can continue to rip the soils from under our nose. Eg. PKFZ and Pempena scandals. All for the nation development with a little "expenses" for management.

4. Anything they do cannot be questioned. We are like children waiting for feeding time. Eg. 2010 Budget debate, or none at all. Yes its called that but you can"t debate on it.

5. They are never concrete answers or solutions to the way they tackle issues. In short, no action plan, just gibberish slogans and speeches to divert our attention. Eg. H1N1 outbreak. We are short of this, short of that. Hospital can't cope with the number of patients, we don't have this, dont have that.

6. They can’t handle criticism, not at all. Can’t hold themselves together once we break their chains of commands. Eg. TBH death in custody at the MACC office. Almost the entire committee resigned. Issued contradicting statements.

7. They don’t really know where they stand even with the country’s laws. One is a threat to them by mere outspokenness and controversies. Eg. RPK & Theresa Kok’s illegal ISA detention. Classic, truly classic.

8. They will continue to do what they like till they no longer able to sweep anymore under the carpet and thanks to internet. Eg. Award for the helicopter purchase and the missing jet engine..

9. They don’t do their work as diligently and professionally as we want them to. Can’t hold their grounds against better opponent. Eg. Pedra branca lost to Singapore. Since they have the documents, we just use theirs and send a team to debate with them.

10. Sorry, this will go on and on. Finally, over 50 years of independence, they still compare our country to third world countries to assure us we are better. Eg. Education system or is it uneducating system.

Justifications & Desperations Fumbles, Big Time!!

2010-01-17T13:55:00.000+13:00

IGNORANCE BREEDS ARROGANCE
by Bosco Philip Anthony

A little more than a week has passed since some of the Christians churches were burnt or vandalized. The politicians have had their say. On the other hand the biosphere and the print media from around the world are abound with expressions of dismay at the way the government leaders have argued that the making of the word Allah to be synonymous with the word God may “confuse Muslims and ultimately mislead them into converting to Christianity.”

The question that has to be asked is: Are the Muslim leaders of the government themselves recognizing the fact that the Muslims themselves do not have self confidence in their faith in Islam? Or do the government leaders treat the one and only God of human beings as a tribal deity? Or are the government leaders pronouncing to the world that they have a “copyright” for the word “Allah” as stated by Marina Mahathir?

We have lived in this country where we see that the police force does not tolerate even passive resistance such as the wearing of “Black” shirts or having peaceful demonstrations such as “candle light” vigils and to proclaim that democracy is dead.

So how did the police authorities allow the protesters after Friday prayers to demonstrate at the mosques in Kuala Lumpur and Shah Alam where they openly carried banners which state “Allah is only for us.” There is even a video that is on You-tube where a protester has shouted the words “bakar gereja” and is this not an offence.

In actual fact on the night after the demonstrations the churches were firebombed or vandalized. Why has that individual not been arrested and charges in court?

Now every United Malay National Organisation (UMNO) politician is trying to make political mileage with the issue of the generic term “Allah.” Khairy endeavours to preach to the Christians that we have to practice religious tolerance. He conveniently does not seem to under that the problems were in the first place diabolically conceived and created by UMNO.

UMNO, for its own survival, has indoctrinated a small band of immature people to think that UMNO has the authority to claim that the name of “Allah” who is the God for all human being’s, is a private property of UMNO. So the issue is no longer a theological matter but has been converted into a political matter.

Then we have Nazri who states that the East Malaysian people of Christian faith can continue to use the generic term Allah. Nazri fails to understand that the people of Sabah and Sarawak have been using it for centuries.

Then as reported in the (Star of 18.01.2010) Nazri states although he agree that the word “Allah” had been long used in Christianity way before Islam existed , Nazri said “That’s why I say it is all right in Sabah and Sarawak but culturally you cannot apply it in a place where Allah has always been Islam’s God.”

Nazri must have become intellectually bankrupt after he joined UMNO. Now we have a God for Islam and a God for Christianity. We also have a Malaysia for Sabah and Sarawak and another Malaysia for Malaya. Is this not a lode of nonsense?

In the Sunday Star of January 17, 2010 it is reported that Muhyiddin the Deputy Prime Minister stating that Nazri’s statement in Sabah and Sarawak was Nazri’s own opinion. Then Muhyiddin goes on to state, “It is not a political issue. It is an issue of peace and harmony in Malaysia being threatened. We must protect this (peace) at all costs.”

As the days pass by it is clearly becoming apparent that the cause of all this confusion about the use of a generic term Allah, are caused by the UMNO leaders in government and UMNO politicians in general.

All their statements appear to be totally illogical. No sane person can make any sense of such politically motivated statements. It is not that the people of the faith of Islam are “confused” but it is apparent that the UMNO politicians are like drowning men trying to clench to the “straw” that is, the generic term of Allah for their own political survival. Thus all their statements on the term Allah are a “logical fiction.”

All people in general are mature and follow the teachings of their faith by reason and wisdom then by blind faith. The government cannot compel a Muslim in general to follow Islam through the prism of reason and wisdom. It ultimately depends on the individual.

This nation has a majority of Muslims. There is no need for the Muslims to feel insecure. But the government leaders should not under any circumstance attempt to regulate the belief of the Muslims in order to protect the leaders so that UMNO can continue to stay in power.

As Hawkin’s has stated religion spreads like a virus infecting the young, depressed, hopeless and those individuals who are at their weakest point, both emotionally and intellectually.

In the same token, Allah does not need Malaysian corrupted politician and leaders to assist Allah to regulate Islam.

Hence the government’s ban on the use of the generic term Allah in the Bible imported from Indonesia and in the Malay language of the Herald is deemed as tyrannical as it grossly violates Article 3, 5, 8, 10 and 11 of the Federal Constitution.

May Allah save us from the tyrannical rule of UMNO as their leaders are ignorant of their faith in Islam. This has led them to their current state of arrogance in not having their faith in all other people who are practicing the Muslim, faith.

Forgive the UMNO leaders, Allah, for they know not what they are doing.

Please go to this link and watch the video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=piCBoHA0F-4&feature=related

Shifting House

2010-01-16T22:05:00.000+13:00

The impact of migration
By Ding Jo-Ann
dingjoann@thenutgraph.com

WITH the recent attack on churches, a Catholic school and a Sikh gurdwara, migration is likely to be on the minds of some Malaysians. Despite government assurances that "everything is under control", diminishing respect for rights as demonstrated by the "Allah" issue has naturally caused consternation among educated Malaysians.

At the same time, Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak says Malaysia must become a "high-income" economy so that it can stave off decreasing prosperity and standards of living. Indeed, a government-commissioned 2007 World Bank report on Malaysia's education system and economy says Malaysia has "no choice" but to change its economic model.

Malaysia, the report said, can no longer compete with the lower wages in developing countries like China and Vietnam.

But with mass migration and the loss of skilled Malaysians, is it realistic to expect Malaysia to compete with developed economies? Will enough skilled Malaysians stay on so that Malaysia can escape the middle-income trap?

Skilled workers crucial

Malaysian Institute of Economic Research executive director Datuk Dr Mohamed Ariff Abdul Kareem says skilled workers are crucial to move the economy up the value chain.

"When foreigners come looking to invest, they look for people with skills ... If skilled people are leaving to go elsewhere, this will be a spoke in the wheel for us," says Ariff in a phone interview.
Malaysian Employers Federation executive director Shamsuddin Bardan adds that while the number of unskilled foreign workers has increased, the number of skilled expatriates has dwindled.

Services)"In 2000, we had about 80,000 expatriates [in Malaysia]. By 2008, there were only about 38,000. Coupled with that, our professionals are also moving overseas," he says. Shamsuddin tells The Nut Graph in an e-mail interview that there are currently about 785,000 Malaysians working overseas.

Recruitment agency Kelly Services' vice-president and country general manager Melissa Norman confirms that the oil and gas, Islamic banking, and high technology sectors have faced challenges in finding suitable skilled labour.

"Countries such as China, Vietnam, India, Singapore, Australia and certain Middle Eastern countries have benefited from our brain drain," says Norman.

Wider economic ramifications

Other than the skills shortage, mass migration of skilled Malaysians also has wider economic ramifications.

Rating Agency Malaysia's group chief economist Dr Yeah Kim Leng says those emigrating tend to be in the high-income bracket with higher spending capabilities. "[Their] absence will have a negative impact on consumption and consequently on the country's overall domestic demand," he says.

"Emigration also causes a withdrawal of capital," Yeah adds. "When [skilled Malaysians] relocate, they bring with them whatever wealth and savings they have. It would contribute to the outflow of capital from the country."

Low pay, discrimination, corruption

One of the factors affecting Malaysia's unattractiveness to skilled workers is the relatively low wages compared with developed countries.

Shamsuddin says: "In the US, Malaysian professionals could earn about US$100,000 a year, which is about RM340,000 a year. They would need to earn about RM28,300 a month here [to match that]."

In addition to the wage packages, Yeah says emigration can be worsened if there are discriminatory policies and loss of confidence. "Loss of confidence can be triggered by various factors such as rising crime rates, corruption, deteriorating quality of life and general concerns over the longer term prospects of the economy," he says.

"The underlying reasons for migration must be examined. Although most countries face this problem, country-specific reasons need to be looked at in greater depth."

"It's not just monetary," says Ariff. "It goes beyond dollars and cents. [Emigration] is not confined to any particular group. It's everyone; even Malay [Malaysians] are leaving."

Long-term solution

The 2007 World Bank report also cited the lack of scientists and engineers, and lack of capacity for innovation as some of Malaysia's greatest weaknesses in moving to a knowledge-based economy.

"If we can't bring those abroad back home, we have to somehow increase our own supply. It will require a massive shift in the education system to supply these skills in the long term. The system needs to be completely overhauled," Ariff says.

However, he notes that there seems to be a lack of political will in this direction.

Ariff says the lack of skilled workers in Malaysia will be especially felt once economic conditions improve. "Once the economy grows, we will feel the impact because we need [skilled talent] for the economy to expand," he says. "Either we have to bring people home or attract skilled foreigners."

YeahHe notes, however, that employing foreigners is only a stopgap measure.
... and the good news?

With the economic crisis hitting developed nations hard, Yeah posits that emigration to developed countries may have reduced for now. "In fact," he says, "if developing economies can step up growth and lure back their own as well as foreign talents, a [brain drain] reversal may be in the works."

Norman agrees that skilled Malaysians would be returning to Malaysia as a result of the global economic crisis. "The question is, are there sufficient numbers to stem the brain drain?" she asks.

Additionally, Yeah notes that the policies in attracting skilled professionals back to Malaysia have yet to show results. "We have to give it a couple of years, but implementation needs to be more effective."

Shamsuddin encourages Malaysians to return. He argues that since it is still a young nation, many opportunities remain available. However, he says if Malaysians choose not to return, they can still contribute their ideas and expertise from abroad.

Running faster

The 2007 World Bank reports that many of Malaysia's fiercest competitors are working diligently to improve their higher education and national innovation systems. The report states that Malaysia will have to run even faster than its neighbours if it does not want to lose ground, what more to gain ground.

Although the outlook appears daunting, the World Bank report concludes it is by no means impossible. All we need to do, it says, is upgrade our university systems, develop innovative production modes, and address skills shortages that hamper efforts to produce more sophisticated goods and services.

With a UBS Securities Asia Limited report stating that there has been massive capital outflow from Malaysia in the last 12 months, these steps are more crucial than ever to ensure Malaysia's economic survival. But with a government that is constantly mired in issues arising from bad policies favouring majority over minority rights, will we still have the resources to think about global competitiveness, and move to the next level?

Moulding an enemy

2009-12-20T22:13:00.000+13:00

BTN is hardly an innocent selling toothpaste
Written by CT Wong

Hijacking the mind and feelings of a particular race for the purpose of consolidating power is so openly propagated that a realization of how individuals or groups can be deliberately primed for a malicious political purpose is simply paralyzing.

Anecdotal evidence points to the Biro Tata Negara (BTN) courses being nothing more than doses of racist poison while at the same time, its proponents defend them as “nothing wrong”. Alongside the debate on course content, we need to critically look into what really is indoctrination and whether the method is effective.

Although the misgivings were kept under the lid for years, the BTN participants who are our civil servants and students could clearly sense that something was wrong with the teaching or ‘patriotic education’.

So how to distinguish indoctrination and its concept and practice?

Max Hocutt, the emeritus professor of philosophy at the University of Alabama defined indoctrination as this: “ You were indoctrinated if you were told only one side of the story, or told that believing another side would not be an error but an evil.

“You were indoctrinated if no evidence was cited, or if evidence was tendentiously selected while contrary evidence was ignored, suppressed, or distorted by misleading or charged terminology.

“You were indoctrinated if you were made to feel not that the proposition merited belief on its own account but that doubting it would expose you to the disfavour of your fellows, the government, or the deity.

“In short, you were indoctrinated if the appeal was emotional rather than rational, or if your agreement was secured by threat of force or by fraud rather than by citation of fact.”

This means that you are banned from questioning whatever beliefs were being inculcated. Was this what happened with BTN?

Some social scientists go so far as to argue that indoctrination, even if the content is unquestionably moral, yet produces psychological, moral or ethical cripples. Crippling results when the reflective capacities of the persons involved are arrested or inhibited.

However, the real danger of indoctrination lies not so much in the mass manufacture of ‘moral’ robots or moral dwarfs but in the suppression of conscience in times of crises. The indoctrinated individual can easily become a bystander, accomplice or willing executioner in a system with unequal power differentials.

Primal thinking facilitates hostility

When we are in a life-or-death situation, our human brain as an information-processing system operates differently than in normal times. It operates on the level of what Aaron T. Beck in his ‘Prisoners of Hate’ terms “primal thinking”.

These are fundamental cognitive processes whereby the external ambiguous stimuli are rapidly processed as directed towards ‘me’ (self-reference or personalization) and the dichotomous judgment (us or them, friend or enemy) and overgeneralization is made immediately. It also carries a sense that our physical and psychological identity is under threat.

In a kill-or-be killed emergency situation, primal thinking is efficient as a situation is being evaluated rapidly so as to prepare the individual for the fight-or-flight option. Also, schemas or pre-existing stereotypes are also invoked for rapid information processing.

However, primal thinking is often inaccurate as many details are deliberately left out. When such mode of thinking is activated during normal times, it causes cognitive distortions – as what is desired for indoctrination.

Calling the opponent as “anti-Islam” or “anti-Malay” is a typical example of primal thinking. This is a black and white, oversimplistic, overgeneralized dichotomous thinking.

Indoctrination involves the invoking of primal fear that the self-identity which is welded deliberately to race and religion is under threat. The loss of self-identity has the equivalent effect of the loss or death of self. Fear of the loss of self often leads to anger and hostility towards the out-group members.

Selective memory of past wrongs

According to Beck, individuals or groups can be trapped in a prison of primal thinking. Such people surrender their freedom of choice and abdicate their rationality when their image of the Enemy creates a destructive hatred.

He argued that there are certain similarities between interpersonal conflicts and intergroup conflicts in that “…The overreactions of friends, associates, and marital partners to presumed wrongs and offences are paralleled by the hostile responses of people in confrontation with members of different religious, ethnic, or racial groups.”

Also, he argued that “ ...the biased, distorted thinking of a paranoid patient is akin to the thinking of perpetrators embarking on a programme of genocide.”

His proposition explains and predicts that there are basic emotional and cognitive components underlying domestic violence, racial conflicts, genocide and war. Negative, hostile framing of one another are common among them, and they perceive and react to the threat arising from the constructed image instead of seeing the adversary as they actually are.

The image created is that of an Enemy – dangerous, malicious and evil. Also, there are selective memories of past wrongs, real or imagined and the attributions of causes of social problems in a malevolent way.

Emotions, thinking and behaviour are interlinked and mutually interact with each other. Dysfunctional and biased thinking transforms hurt to anger, and anger to hostility and hostility to violence.

The hurt feelings become malignant and vicious when the ‘victims’ mutate into victimisers who seek revenge and retaliation, at all costs and by all means. The self-proclaimed victim becomes the aggressor – be it the road bully that rams into a slow driver for holding up traffic or the invading nation attacking a weaker state for being opposed, or a dominant ethnic group embarking on a ‘cleansing’ of an ethnic minority for “asking too much”.

The path from hurt to hostility is non-linear. It is not inevitable. However, individuals or groups can be deliberately primed for a malicious political purpose.

The image of the Enemy

Humans basically find killing or hurting others repulsive. However, the natural restraint could be overcome by justification rooted in primitive beliefs of absolute right and wrong.

The self-justification isolates and stigmatizes the outgroup as ‘aliens’. An image is constructed around the Enemy as conspiratorial, deceptive, manipulative, dangerous, malevolent, violent and evil. Since the Enemy is evil, a justification is made to punish, expel and eliminate them by any means. The ends justify the means.

The moral codes are suspended. A new moral code is substituted. Hence, the cry for defending one’s race or religion or country carries a new and sinister meaning. The perpetrators of ethnic violence hijacks the mind and the feelings of its own race for their purpose of gaining or consolidating power. The greatest tragedy of Malaysia’s mass killings of May 13 is that the lessons are not learnt, wrongly learnt and wilfully mislearnt.

Systematic, conscious and deliberate efforts are being made to create the Enemy in the public space in some of the mainstream media or government-sponsored programmes. The explicit or implicit eliminationalist ideology is so openly propagated that the normal revulsion against cruelty towards other human beings is alarmingly lacking.

Adaptive evolutionary strategies like the primal thinking that help the human species to survive during kill-or-be killed emergency situations are now seen to be deliberately promoted in the public domain without any moral restraints as if the condoning of genocidal inclinations in mass killings is just as innocent as selling toothpaste. This is a warning for humanity.

Bail Out! Bail Out! Bail Out!

2009-12-17T23:30:00.000+13:00

MALAYS MUST READ THIS!
http://margeemar.blogspot.com/

HAVE YOU EVER CONSIDER WHY OUR MONEY IS SMALLER THAN SINGAPORE?HAVE YOU EVER THOUGHT WHY OUR ECONOMY IS LESS THAN GOOD WITH ALL OUR RESOURCES?

THIS NEWS REPORT OF THE MB OF NEGERI SEMBILAN SENDING MYR 10 MILLION TO LONDON IS ONLY THE TIP OF THE ICEBERG. LET US SEE WHETHER THE ANTI CORRUPTION AGENCY WILL ACT AS IT ACTED ON NON ISSUES OF THE OPPOSITIONS THAT EVEN LED TO MURDER.

LIKE I HAVE MENTIONED IN THE PAST MONEY HAVE BEEN SIPHONED OUT OF THE COUNTRY BY CROOKED POLITICIANS. MONEY HAVE BEEN WASTED BY OTHER RACES WHO FEEL INSECURE BY INVESTING IN HOMES OVERSEAS ESPECIALLY IN AUSTRALIA AND NEW ZEALAND AND THE AMOUNT OF MONEY LOST THROUGH INDIANS AND CHINESE SENDING THEIR CHILDREN OVERSEAS TO STUDY. WE HAVE SO MUCH MONEY DRAINING OUT OF MALAYSIA BECAUSE OF AN INEPT GOVERNMENT WITH OUT DATED POLICIES THAT REFUSE TO CHANGE EVEN AFTER A MASSIVE POLITICAL SETBACK.

BY JUST CUTTING CORRUPTION, GIVING THE OTHER RACES DUE RECOGNITION, GIVING FAIR EDUCATION TO ALL, THIS COUNTRY WILL LEAP BACK INTO PROSPERITY. CAN'T WE SEE IT THAT ANY AMOUNT OF MONEY LEAVING THIS COUNTRY MEANS THERE IS LESS FUND CIRCULATING HERE, DEPRIVING. OUR PEOPLE ARE SENDING TOO MUCH MONEY ABROAD BOTH LEGALLY AND ILLEGALLY.THE PEOPLE WILL BE UNITED AS ONE NATION WITHOUT THE FALSE BUMIPUTRA BARRIER. THEN ALL WILL SERVE THIS GREAT NATION. ALL RACES MUST UNDERSTAND THIS, THE RACIST POLICY OF UMNO IS DAMAGING THIS NATION. THE AVERAGE MALAY MUST BE BOLD TO BRING ABOUT THIS CHANGE THROUGH THE BALLOT.

The multi-billion ringgit Port Klang Free Zone scandal may be big, but it is only the latest in a long line of scandals going back to the early 1980s.

Time magazine quoted Daniel Lian, a Southeast Asia economist at Morgan Stanley in Singapore , saying that the country might have lost “as much as US$100 billion since the early 1980s to corruption”.

The scandals listed below are only a small sample of the looting of the country's coffers:

In July of 1983, what was then the biggest banking scandal in world history erupted in Hong Kong , when it was discovered that Bumiputra Malaysia Finance (BMF), a unit of Bank Bumiputra Malaysia Bhd, had lost as much as US$1 billion which had been siphoned off by prominent public figures into private bank accounts.

The story involved murder, suicide and the involvement of officials at the very top of the Malaysian government. Ultimately it involved a bailout by the Malaysian government amounting to hundreds of millions of dollars.

Mak Foon Tan, the murderer of Jalil Ibraim, a Bank Bumi assistant manager who was sent to Hong Kong to investigate the disappearance of the money, was given the death sentence, and Malaysian businessman George Tan who had participated in looting most of the funds, was jailed after his Carrian Group collapsed in what was then Hong Kong's biggest bankruptcy, and a handful of others were charged.

No major politician was ever punished in Malaysia despite a white paper prepared by an independent commission that cited cabinet minutes of Prime Minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad giving an okay to a request to throw more money into the scandal in an effort to contain it.

That was just the first Bank Bumi scandal. The government-owned bank had to be rescued twice more with additional losses of nearly US$600 million in today's dollars.

Ultimately government officials gave up and the bank was absorbed into CIMB Group, currently headed by Nazir Razak, the sitting prime minister's brother.

Bank Negara lost RM20 bil

That scandal, which stretched over several years before its denouement in 1985, set the tone for 24 years of similar scandals related to top Malaysian officials and was the first to prove that in Malaysia, you can not only get away with murder, you can get away with looting the treasury as well.

Perwaja Steel, for instance, lost US$800 million and its boss, Eric Chia, a crony of Mahathir's, was charged with looting the company. He stood trial, but was acquitted without having to put on a defense.

In the mid-1980s, the Co-operative Central Bank, a bank set up to aid the Indian smallholder community, had to be rescued by Bank Negara, the country's central bank, after hundreds of millions of ringgit in loans granted to a flock of Umno and MIC politicians became non-performing.

Some had never been serviced at all. Although the chief executive and general manager were charged with criminal breach of trust, none of the politicians were ever charged.

Before that, the Malaysian government was believed to have lost US$500 million in an attempt at Mahathir's urging to corner the London tin market through a company called Maminco, driving the world price of tin from US$4.50 per tonne to US$7.50.

It then sought to cover up the loss by establishing a US$2 company called Mukawasa from which allocations of new share issues to the government's Employees Provident Fund (EPF) were diverted. Mukawasa expected to sell the shares at a windfall profit to hide the tin speculation.

Mahathir also was behind an attempt by the then governor of Bank Negara, the central bank, to aggressively speculate in the global foreign exchange market. Bank Negara ended up losing an estimated RM20 billion. The governor, Jaffar Hussein, and the head of forex trading, Nor Mohamed Yakcop were forced to resign.

' Malaysia 's Enron scandal

There have been many other political and financial scandals since. In 2005, Bank Islam Malaysia , the country's flagship Islamic bank, reported losses of RM457 million mainly due to provisioning totaling RM774 million as a result of bad loans and investments incurred by its Labuan branch.

Cumulatively, Bank Islam ran up non-performing loans of RM2.2 billion, partly from mismanagement and poor internal controls but also "years of regulatory indifference fueled by the misconceived notion of an untouchable Bank Islam because it was a favourite child of the Malaysian government, being the first and model Islamic bank in the country and region," according to a December 19, 2005 article in Arab News.

"Bank Islam had a reputation in the market for being the spoilt child of the Malaysian Ministry of Finance; and the perception of the bank was more of a Muslim financial fraternity or government development financial institution," the report said.

In 2007, in what was called Malaysia's Enron scandal, the publicly traded Transmile Group Bhd, whose chairman was former MCA president and cabinet minister Ling Liong Sik, was caught having overstated its revenue by RM530 million.

A pretax profit from RM207 million in 2006 was actually a loss of RM126 million, and a pretax profit of RM120 million in 2005 was a loss of RM77 million, causing the government postal company Pos Malaysia & Services Holdings Bhd to warn that its earnings for the 2006 financial year might be affected by the reported overstatement, as the postal group owned 15.3 percent of Transmile.

Bailouts and more bailouts

Over the years 2001 to 2006, the government had to spend billions to rescue seven privatised projects including Kuala Lumpur 's two public transport systems, the perennially ailing Malaysia Airlines, the national sewage system and a variety of others that, in the words of one study, "had been privatised prematurely."

The government also repeatedly bailed out highway construction concessionaires, all of them closely connected to Umno, to the tune of another RM38.5 billion.

In 2008, it was revealed that Rafidah Aziz, who had served as trade and industry minister for 18 years, had been peddling approved permits for duty-free car sales and allegedly lining her pockets.

Two companies which didn't even have showrooms – one of which belonged to the husband of Rafidah's niece – received scores of permits.

Although Rafidah came in for heavy criticism from within Umno, she remained in office until she was defeated in party elections.

In the 1960s, federal prosecutors in the United States who were attempting to jail the late labour boss Jimmy Hoffa for looting the Teamsters Pension Fund of millions of dollars with his cronies were puzzled by the fact that their revelations appeared to have little effect on the union's rank and file.

It was because no matter how much money Hoffa and his cronies stole, there was always money left because the fund was so rich. That appears to be the case with Malaysia .