Saturday, May 22, 2010

IGP, stop foaming at the mouth!we know how you got your job a gift from MAHATHIR

IGP, stop foaming at the mouth!we know how you got your job a gift from MAHATHIR


IGP, stop foaming at the mouth!we know how you got your job a gift from MAHATHIR

Posted: 22 May 2010 11:58 AM PDT

"The people must understand that when facing the police, they must adhere to police instructions and directives,"said Musa.

What's wrong with the maLAYSIAN society: Innocent get killed, CRIMINALS get respectIn 2007, six (6) police officers and two (2) underworld figures signed Statutory Declarations alleging that senior police officers right up to the IGP have links with the Chinese drugs, prostitution, illegal gambling and loan-shark syndicate based in Johor and which was expanding its operation throughout Malaysia. Another police officer made a police report alleging that his family was kidnapped by the ACA to force him to change his statement while the head of the CCD and his lawyer were arrested and charged for alleged criminal offenses for detaining underworld bosses under the Emergency Ordinance.
i BELIEVED THAT THE HIGHEST OFFICE IN THIS LAND ARE ALSO INVOLVED DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY IN THIS DASTARDLY CRIME ..AA CRIME AGAINST THE PEOPLE OF MALAYSIA…
Innocents are shot dead without a thought while CRIMINALS under the garb of politicians can slaughter the soul of the nation but are spared. This is a sad reality in today'MALAYSIA IGP sent ASP Hong to Chennai to look for Bala.. Oh,polis you are really disgusting.BALANEVER LEFT MALAYSIA THE DAY HE WAS KIDNAP FROM HIS HIS HOUSE IN RAWANG BY OUR SPEACIAL BRANCH AND WAS PUT UP IN PRINCE HOTEL WHAT YOU KUGAN HIM TO CHANGE HIS S.D SO IMPORTANT FOR IGP TO PROTECT A NAJIB SO THAT IGP CONTRACT CAN BE RENEWED TO
MAKE MORE MONEY
PDRM = "Anjing UMNO"TDM is the biggest crook of all. He knows a lot of things including RPK complaint about Najib's offer to shut his mouth. Instead of disposing the culprit, he could just joke with him to share the offer.
I hate Malaysia's politicians especially BNs.
The PDRM that never takes any action against a person who is remotely a VIPI, too, have my questions, let's put those aside.
PDRM is more interested in making money, protecting UMNO goons than caring the safety of the Rakyat.
If i were you ASP Hong Kin Hock, better resign or you also will be one of them because you are force to work in their system, you get it !!!
All I can say is the police and the courts are really efficient when it comes to Raja Petra son's crimes. I salute them. Hope they can be as efficient when it comes to other crimes, too.
PDRM is more interested in making money, protecting UMNO goons than caring the safety of the Rakyat.
If i were you ASP Hong Kin Hock, better resign or you also will be one of them because you are force to work in their system, you get it !!!
I wonder, when it comes to big and internationally acclaimed crimes like murder by military/c4 explosives, we still do not yet know WHY the hell did those two cops blow up Altantuya, when they didnt even know her.
Nobody could tell us WHY are the then Najib Tun Razak's bodyguards involved in a love/domestic/sex affair(as we are told to believe) that they have to blow up the poor woman and leave her two sons orphaned?
Are these kind of tasks (like blowing up jilted girlfriends of political analysts close to high ranking officials) part of the cops/VIP bodyguards' job?
readmore

Mr Tan Sri IGP Sir, from my experience, adhering to police instructions and directives requires me to "share" my hard earned ringgit with your people every time I am pulled up for a traffic infringement. That "ringgit" stays in their pockets and does not find its way into Government coffers – which must be upsetting for those who are entrusted to "spend" this money – i.e. the Barisan Nasional politicians! It is not my place to ask the Barisan Nasional politicians where or how they spend this money; suffice to say that writing cheques the day after a by-election could be a preferred option.

By steadyaku47

First, IGP, you must learn humility. Humility is something I learnt from my parents from the time when I was conscious of our ability to push our weight around (if we wanted to) with the servants that worked for my parents and with the policemen who worked under my late Father when he was a senior police officer. My parents always told us to respect them so that they would respect you in return. If your parents did not teach you that … then you are excused.

During my late father's time, we called the ordinary policemen "mata-mata" or even "datok" with a small "d". They were people we respected and they were the eyes of the nation, of the of the people, to ensure that all is good and well in our country and that we and our children were safe. And then from "mata mata", I noticed that people were calling them "bakul" behind their backs. At first, I wondered why and then it hit me. You put things into a "bakul". And so when you put things into the hands of these policemen, you can "selesai" any "problems" you might have with them. Then, at just about the same time, we all spontaneously started to refer to them as "babi".

We all know, Tan Sri, for a Malay to be called "babi" is an insult. But then, we Malays were ourselves calling these policemen "babi" with relish and gusto because by then and by their actions these policeman have earned the right to be called "babi". By this time the Policeman had become legal thugs paid for by our tax money!

I see in you what I saw in your minister – a propensity to shoot from the hip and the "Look at me I am the Minister/IGP mentality" – doing and saying things with arrogance and without much thought of the consequences or what it does to the office that you are holding. We respect the post of IGP because we remember Hanif. Do we see another IGP getting a Tun ship … I think not! Anyway, between you and Din as the Malay proverb says "Bapa borek, anak rintek"i.e. if the father has freckles … so has the son.

Your time is almost over (thank GOD!). We live in hope that IGPs that will surely come after you will take cognizance of the hope of the people. That they are more emphatic of the needs of the people to have an honest PDRM. Our hope is not much – just do your job and live within your means as we try to do. Understand that the "them and us" mentality is destructive to all of us.

For now, the police are thugs. As the first tier, UMNO had already replaced the Sultans in their excesses and greed. The Police have now taken over from the thugs, the gangsters and the criminal elements of our country in intimidating the people for their own personal gains. PDRM is better disciplined, better armed and have the support of the so-called legitimate Barisan Nasional government behind them. So my dear IGP, do you not think that the people are worried? Do you not think that the people have a sense of hopelessness because if we cannot look to the police for protection – then who?

Have you ever put yourself in the position of someone who has to pay a bribe to the police? Think! You are caught talking on your mobile while driving and stopped. You know you have done wrong. So you wait in your car as the policeman approaches. You tell yourself off for doing something stupid then you prepare yourself for the unpleasant task of dealing with the policemen. You say "Sorry". He says it is not enough. Slowly, a feeling of disgust and anger starts from deep within you. Angry because this man wants money for doing what he is paid to do and disgust because he makes no pretense about it being his right to get that money off you! And so, and my Tan Sri IGP, you are the man in charge of PDRM, are you not?

We now come to the present day. People are clamouring publicly for you to go. Everywhere in cafes, over meals, amongst friends, we talk about how corrupt and brutal the police have become. PDRM is no longer a beacon of hope and a force for good in our country. PDRM is a force for good only for Barisan Nasional. You do their bidding. You put away those that are seen to be a danger to Barisan Nasional. You set your force upon that defenseless crowd and whack them (as Petra is fond of saying!) and you hit them without mercy when it pleases the BN government.

And then the killings and the torture you inflict upon those in your custody – simply unforgivable! Because these people cannot fight back, cannot defend themselves and they are murdered by your officers because this is the culture now condoned and prevailing within the PDRM – sanctioned by you, your minister and the Basrian Nasional govt.

Until such time as you understand the disgust and contempt we the people have for PDRM and the BN government for allowing PDRM to be what it is today, then … until that time … we the people will be your enemies, not your friends. We the people will be your nemesis, not your supporters. And we the people will look upon PDRM the same way you all look upon us – as a group to be cowered into submission through whatever means. You do it to us with force – we will do it at the next general election with our votes. You will no longer be IGP but the people will still be able to cast their votes come the next General Election next year!

Posted by the taxidriver786


There are just no good Muslim women out there Embracing the Sacred: Love, Emotions, and Sexuality Sexuality

Posted: 22 May 2010 10:16 AM PDT


It's rightly said that you perform well in bed when you have the desire to score brownie points.

Everyone likes to enjoy lovemaking with a fully charged up mind and at the same time they want an equally aroused partner in bed to ensure gratifying sex. It's the emotion, mood and the present state of mind that adds to the sexual ecstasy.

A recent study revealed that women with a high emotional intelligence have better sex lives and they experienced more orgasms than those with low EI who suffered orgasmic disorder. "The findings show that emotional intelligence is an added advantage in many aspects of your life, including the bedroom. This study enormously helps in the development of behavioural and cognitive therapies to improve women's sexual lives," said Professor Tim Spector, director of the Twin Research Department at King's College London.

Relationship counselor Gitanjali Sharma explains, "Emotional intelligence is basically the ability to understand your emotions and those of people around you. It's about reading emotions, balancing and regulating them. If you are emotionally satisfied, you are in a happier mood which applies to your bedroom too. It's important to realise that sex starts in one's mind before it reaches the body. Before having sex physically, you actually get physical mentally and that is possible only with an emotionally sound mind."

Dr. Kamal Khurana, a marriage and relationship counselor agrees, "Women give sex to get love, so they want a lot of reassurance and companionship from their male partner. They have a sex drive, but eventually it's more about emotional warmth, which turns into an expression of love and sex. When women receive more of emotional support in dealing with their mood swings, they are happier and consequently perform well in bed."

Elucidating the fact that women can spice up their sex lives with a dash of emotions, we get experts to share some emotions that can do wonders in your sexual paradise when dealt with in a desired way…

Angry : Anger has to do with fear and it is a very healthy emotion. Anger problems can make hungry-for-sex women become so adamant on controlling their anger that they stop feeling sexy. It's often an alarm clock for their male partner where men are expected to understand that there's something making the woman angry. Anger leads to rejection of the male in an intimate act. The emotion of anger clearly shows that there is a problem deep down due to which the female partner may not be responding in the desired manner.

Spice up the emotion : Dr. Kamal Khurana, a marriage therapist suggests, "Of course you should not talk at that particular time, but men should try and find out the right time to reach out to their lady love. Try talking about what is bothering your lady in a nice manner, which is not hurtful or provoking. As soon as you trace the reason behind her anger, try bringing in a dash of surprise humour to lighten up her mood. Express your love through a meaningful gesture by saying 'I love you' via a card, keeping romantic notes below her pillow, cracking a sexual joke or sending her favourite flowers."

Overjoyed : When a woman is going through this emotion, she would evidently want to go on talking about her elated state of mind. Having such a good mood, she would undoubtedly perform well in bed, but her mind is likely to be diverted.

Spice up the emotion : Gitanjali Sharma, a relationship counselor states, "It's entirely up to the male partner as to how he handles his woman in bed on that particular night. It's important for him to listen to her and support her and be a part of her celebration. Understand that she is at her joyful peak, so it will be wrong to expect her to be on the peak of sex too. Be patient and make the most of this emotion by going with the flow. Connect with her and laugh out loud on whatever she says and then as the passion builds on, you can proceed for an intimate session."

Anxious : Anxious people do not often experience a satisfying orgasm. Anxiety exists when a woman is afraid of something that might happen in the future or something which she has experienced during a particular day. When she goes to bed with these anxieties running through her mind, she is not mentally prepared to enjoy sex. If this emotion is not dealt with properly, possibilities are there that sex would be avoided often and there will be more of excuses in your relationship.

Spice up the emotion : "Ensuring that your woman doesn't get carried away with this emotion, the male partner has to be supportive here. When in such a mood, sex should not be treated as a tick-marked routine thing which has to be done mundanely. The act should be aimed at comforting each other and the secondary stage should involve body contact. Lot of discussions would help bringing you partner closer to you and as you touch upon the different domains of her life, sex will naturally flow," suggests Dr. Khurana.

Isolated : This emotion can bring drastic results in a woman's sex life. Due to a feeling of isolation, she may suffer from depression and have a low confidence level. With feelings of being disowned, she would not want to attach herself with anyone, thus bearing a clear unwillingness towards sex. On the other hand, seeking physical and emotional support, she may become too vulnerable thereby indulging in sex just to come out of this isolation.

Spice up the emotion : "In such circumstances, men must communicate with their female partners to try and help her regain high emotional intelligence. Loving gestures from your end will reassure her and make her come close to you. Once you have given her the recognition and made her feel important in some way, she would be all into you and will be charged up for a sexual session too," says Gitanjali.

Silence : There must be certain inhibitions that induce a woman to remain silent for a prolonged time span. When a woman is unable to express her mind freely, or she is undergoing emotional pain, her self-esteem is low. During lovemaking moments when your lady love is in such a mood, she will behave as if sex is a forced pressure on her.

Spice up the emotion : "The basic idea while dealing with this emotion is to make her open up and speak out her mind. Chances are high that she might have certain sexual preferences, which she is finding tough to communicate. So make her feel at ease, indulge in a healthy conversation over a coffee, empower her to be expressive and say whatever she wants to without any apprehensions. Once her thoughts are conveyed in a proper manner, she will look forward to lovemaking, sans any uneasiness," feels Dr. Khurana.

Negative attitude : A pessimistic emotion makes a woman see everything wrong around her. Indulging in negative self-talk, there is nothing that seems to bring joy to her. Even if her male partner approaches her for sex, she is likely not to respond in a desired way.

Spice up the emotion : "The male partner needs to instill a positive feeling to help the woman come out of her negativity. It's advisable to highlight positive things and good attributes about her and pamper her so as to create a feel good feeling. It's only after creating this good mood around a lady that her libido can be nurtured too," shares Gitanjali.

How do you make your partner reach the Big O?
Love, the word itself sparks innumerous thoughts in our mind. Everyone defines love differently and have their own picture of what they call the 'perfect romance'.

Thanks to romantic novels and mushy movies, we all are quite familiar with popular love quotes; like, lovers never disagree, only love at first sight is true love and so on.

The problem starts when people start following these love rules blindly. Dr Sameer Parikh, a psychiatrist opines, "Misinterpretation of these love rules is what we call romance myths. Our thought process is bound to have an impact on our life and our relationships. By blindly following these statements, you end up setting rigid boundaries for yourself. If your partner doesn't behave the way you want, you get unduly upset. And that is definitely what is unhealthy for a relationship."

Read on to find out some of the most popular romance myths that we love to nurture and how they can secretly spoil our relationship.

Love is blind
On your fifth date you think, you are perfect for each other and can accept your partner with all his irritating habits. A few months later, you might disagree with yourself.

Software professional Renuka Singh reveals, "We joined this organisation on the same day and clicked well during our orientation period. Within months, we started dating. My guy was quite popular amongst the females in our department. At least 3-4 chat windows would always be open on his computer. Initially, I preferred to ignore this by thinking networking in office is important. It's been a year now and I am quite upset with his flirtatious behaviour. I don't doubt his intentions, but at the same time I don't want my guy to be so easily available."

Reality Check : Dr Parikh recommends, "Most people ignore their partner's shortcomings in the initial phase of their courtship. For example, if your guy is possessive, you may like it for a while and may think that he is so sweet and caring. After 8-10 months, you may find it suffocating. So it's better to keep your eyes and ears open in love. Do not let your obsession grow so much that you fail to see what reality is."

Absence makes the heart grow fonder
Many people believe that spending time apart and missing each other can actually bring them closer. However, you should better be careful while interpreting the word 'absence'.

Sunil Mehra, who works with a Gurgaon-based MNC tells, "We were together from a year when my girlfriend decided to go to Australia for studies. Making a long distance relationship work isn't an easy task, but I still prepared myself for it. Calling everyday wasn't possible and she didn't have the time to chat. I felt as if it was only me who wants to make our relationship work. Finally, I too stopped making efforts and decided to move on. Now she is back in India and wants to be with me, but I am dating someone else now."

Reality Check : Dr Kamal Khurana, a marriage and relationship counselor claims, "When you are not able to talk everyday or do not meet each other for weeks, obviously you will have a lot to share and cherish when you meet. The only condition is – you should make efforts to be connected while you are not physically together. The duration also matters a lot. If you can live without your partner for three years without much conversation that means you don't need him/her. Emotional warmth and physical intimacy matters a lot in a relationship."

Embracing the Sacred: Love, Emotions, and Sexuality

BY ADAM SITTE, MAY 19, 2010

Since my previous article, "There are Just No Good Muslim Women Out There" I received a series of responses that have challenged me to examine further some of the arguments I made and consider actionable means with which to address the issues that were raised. A segment of my article that drew heavy response was my insistence that it is a silly logical leap to assume increased emotional proximity causes unfettered sex. A recent article on CNN.com has me revisiting this issue of sexuality and Muslim relationships, fortifying my belief that rethinking relationships, and even actively discussing sexuality, is neither an inevitable nor a particularly rational progenitor of premarital sex.

Focusing its lens on the 'hook-up' culture (marked by uncommitted sex, often with multiple partners) endemic of American society today, the CNN.com article cites various studies that are increasingly pointing to the toll that hooking-up takes on one's psychological well-being. One such study from James Madison University in Virginia shows that no-commitment sex can have an especially damaging effect on women, who for a variety of physiological and sociological reasons tend to find more attachment and desire for a continued relationship after sexual encounters. In both men and women, hooking up can cause increased tendency towards depression, detachment and low self-esteem.

The article highlights a group called the Love and Fidelity Network, "a secular, nonprofit group dedicated to helping college students open the discussion for a lifestyle that doesn't involve casual sexual activity with anonymous or uncommitted partners." The group, which evolved in response to both the general uneasiness with the no-commitment experience and the increasing presence of sex-positive programming on university campuses tailored towards the hooking-up model, advocates and provides support for individuals wishing to practice sexual integrity and premarital abstinence. They are present on 20 campuses nationwide and are part of an emerging effort by various organizations and social networking groups pushing to resuscitate a veritable dating- and marital-based culture.

As a matter of message, approaching sex in an appropriately enthusiastic and positive manner is an anemic facet of American Muslim society. I get the feeling that the apprehensive response to my assumed dismissal of the 'dangers' of sex is a product of a Muslim community that approaches sex and sexuality in a peculiarly unhealthy way. I take issue with sex being the barricade to talks about improved relationship models and the dread of emotional proximity causing sex partly because romantic relationships are eventually supposed to lead towards sex. Writing about the smugness of American Muslims when it comes to sex and their tendency to dismiss the importance of love and passion, Sister Barnburner on GOATMILK writes "What Muslims have come to call 'practical' is in actuality ludicrous, socially damaging and impractical in the extreme. In a marital partnership, practical means strong affection and good sex… Anything less is relationship suicide. Anything less is fitna waiting to happen." Sex is a major part of marriage. The whole point of relationships, whether they are dating, chaperoned meetings or an entirely arranged affair is to find someone and get married. Emotional proximity can and does at some point lead to both marriage and sex—as it should in a reasonable community.

What's more, as Nadiah Mohajir recently wrote in an article for Altmuslimah, and countless studies have shown, a robust education in human sexuality starting at early ages is heavily correlated with being more likely to delay having sex and to reduce unwanted pregnancies. Even in its most normative strains, Islam as a religion is quite descriptive about sex. It is well recorded that the Prophet (SAWS) and his companions were explicitly thorough, and positive, when talking about it. Yet, when human sexuality is discussed within Muslim communities, it is generally discouraged or attached to overtures about the devil, zina or hellfire, establishing a 'sex-negative' attitude within the general hospice of our society. It is unhealthy, and this attitude is continually the roadblock in our community developing more appropriate and applicable modes of romantic relationships.

The recognition among American youth such as those involved with the Love and Fidelity Network that the sexual norms of college culture are psychologically damaging, along with their subsequent proactive efforts to carve out a space for their views, should be an example to young Muslims. It is possible to take active ownership of our sexuality and relationship experiences without it digressing into promiscuity and breaking religious obligations. While we have been turning these issues into repressive silences, young people across the country are beginning to react to a cultural aspect they have been disenchanted with—an aspect we carry religious conviction is wrong—and are building improved, workable, supportive means of establishing healthier, more fulfilling relationships. This group can talk about relationships and sex without having it. So can we.

I am convinced that there is some middle ground between a hook-up culture and the immature, emotionally detached experience that marks our community's expectation of relationships, a middle ground that can be found while walking hand-in-hand with our religion's sexual principles. We can (and need to) talk about and pioneer new systems of dealing with emotions, romance, dating, relationships, and yes, even sex, without compromising what we believe. Moreover, we need to be free to do so on our own terms. Sexuality, just like how one interacts with the opposite gender or finds a spouse, is a personal matter that one does in consultation with their own needs, individual beliefs and religious sensibilities, yet it is regularly commandeered by the ubiquitous 'community's' expectations and often-inapplicable standards. Rather than trying to hammer out a singular definition of what relationships and sexual identity mean, we should be tenaciously working to forge vibrant systems of edification by which we are empowered to search for those answers on an individual basis, based on what is relevant, makes sense and speaks to our emotional, intellectual, spiritual and sexual selves.




Football 39 Years “There are Back”

Posted: 22 May 2010 09:48 AM PDT

Blackpool 9 years ago was on the brink to drop out of the Football League. Now they are back in the Land of 'Milk and Honey" the Premier League. Cardiff City was expected to join West Bromwich and Newcastle into the Promised Land but at Wembley it did not happen. Ian Hollaway the Blackpool Manager outwitted Dave Jones Cardiff Manager with his teams enthusiasm and never say die attitude even though they were twice behind.

Cardiff City has been in the the news as a consortium from Malaysia has bought into the shares of the club and expected them to be in the Premiership. Extracted statement," Vincent Tan and his group's recent purchase of a controlling stake in Cardiff City (by the way, Cardiff City is in the playoff for the Premier League) … and all of a sudden,The potential upside to a Cardiff City promotion is tremendous. It's not going to be taps that we are going to open, it's going to be floodgates ."

However it turned out to be a momentous day for Blackpool and we saw a scintillating game and a dramatic game with 5 goals in the first half. Blakcpool won 3-2 and many congratulations to them.

The consortium will need to bear with Championship Football for another season or more as Cardiff City will do well to even come as close as to even sniff Wembley turf. It gets even harder as there are always an "Indian Sign" hanging over the Wembley Play-off Losers.

It isn't always rosy for any company to take over a football club riddled with debts eventhough the facilities areall  first class.The structure might be in place but Cardiff will need more than a miracle worker or consortium to make her dream of Premiership Football alive. Back door through Football bookies or betting syndicates could just be an answer.Hmmm.

But British Football will not easily fall prey to what happened to Malaysian Football at its pinnacle. Whoever thinks that football is short term fast gains better just use their money some where else where it could generate faster gains.

The recent headline news of "Sports Betting License Approval" by the Malaysian Government was also to assist the consortium to advertise the company responsible as millions usually tune in every weekend to follow the Premeirship. This indeed is a Dampener and 'Bad News" as far as Advertising Action Plans goes. However to the opposition voices in the legalised betting saga this Blackpool Win is a Blessing in disguise.

Blackpool for 39 years have lived their dream and today they have not only joined the Big Boys but the Reality is that they are Back to where they should be. The whole town and the community will welcome the Chelseas,MU,Arsenals and Liverpool to Bloomfield Road and they will  enjoy every minute of it in the 2010-2011 season.

 Cardiff City and the new partners so near and yet so far.They had expected a 90 Million Pounds Windfall by going to the Premiership but Blackpool Won on the Day……



Mugilan launches GAS against Samy Vellu

Posted: 22 May 2010 05:00 AM PDT

Expelled MIC Youth deputy chief V Mugilan said he would launch a mass movement called GAS (Gerakan Anti-Samy Vellu) to campaign against the long-time party president. At a press conference today, the rebel leader said the campaign will kick off with a gathering in Kuala Lumpur on May 30. www.malaysiakini.com
Views: 305
4 ratings
Time: 10:00 More in News & Politics


BUM 2010: The Kalimah Allah session

Posted: 22 May 2010 05:24 AM PDT

As was rightly pointed out, it is pointless to continue discussing the matter because it only makes people upset. Some argument or other is going to make some people in the room upset or it would make the viewers here upset.. best to just let the authorities to sort it out and then just accept it,

Watch live streaming video from malaysia4all at livestream.com


“we are being gracious” not to enforce the law strictly. Which means, “be grateful to UMNO OR ELSE!”. we dont give dam if you are the Malay Rajas

Posted: 22 May 2010 04:39 AM PDT

hope one day our kings and sultan will speak for the other halve citizens.On the issue of racism

Such is the quality of UMNO leaders.No class, no civility, no manners.
UMNO has a "wonderful" track record of being above the law, even the laws the forcibly pass for their own twisted and selfish means. This is just another long list of sad examples. I am not a lawyer but even I know that there are many unfair laws that have been passed despite protests using stupid rationale like "it is a law but it doesn't mean we will enforce it". So why pass these laws? Simple – so they can use them when it suits them and ignore them when it suits them … with the excuse of "we are being gracious" not to enforce the law strictly. Which means, "be grateful to us your Masters OR ELSE!".
And I blame the BN component parties for creating this situation by sucking up to UMNO. It's a result of years of lack of integrity in politics.

RELATED ARTICLEUMNO bastards are great friends of the Jews, Those Jews bastards don't really care that UMNo are the corrupt oppressors

BN style of politics cannot be salvaged. It cannot be patched up as it is fundamentally flawed.
bloated ketuanan melayu powerplay political greed and more greed, political leadership suffers from extreme bouts of unpatriotism, greed, selfishness, unquenchable thirst for wealth and the protection of ill-gotten gains. does malaysia need such leadership?hidden dramas hours before najib's swearing-in?who cares about the details… the fact is that the king condoned the appointment of a man of known dubious character to be pm of malaysia
what this motherfukers Fifteen NGOs barking at ISLAM propagates the idea that the rightful ruler of this world is Allah(SWT) alone. not the Sultans

Johor adalah antara negeri yang paling banyak menanggung hutang kepada Kerajaan Pusat dan Johor jugalah negeri di mana paling ramai Melayu yang menjadi penyokong UMNO. Seperti anak yang terlalu dimanjakan, rakyat Johor dari bani umno yang bermazhab Hadhari terus manjadi lalai dan mamai. Mereka leka dan lupa bahawa negeri mereka tergadai sedikit demi sedikit angkara habuan yang tidak seberapa.

Kelantan adalah negeri yang paling sedikit menanggung hutang kepada Kerajaan Pusat dan Kelantan jugalah negeri di mana paling ramai Melayu yang menjadi penyokong PAS dan Pakatan Rakyat. Bebanan hutang yang sekarang ditanggung dan telah dilunaskan 3/4 daripada jumlah asalnya 19 tahun lalu sebenarnya adalah peninggalan penjajahan regim UMNO yang memerintah Kelantan sebelumnya.

Selangor adalah negeri yang paling kaya dalam peta Malaysia. Selangor jugalah negeri yang paling ramai perompak dan penyamun kelas atasan dari kalangan orang Melayu. 50 tahun Selangor dijajah oleh pemimpin pengkhianat daripada regim zalim, UMNO. Dalam masa itu jugalah Selangor telah melahirkan ratusan malahan mungkin ribuan pengkhianat, perompak, penzina, penipu dan pembunuh dari kalangan Melayu.

Melayu ini memakai baju Melayu. Melayu ini memakai songkok hitam. Melayu ini bercakap dan berucap dalam bahasa Melayu. Melayu ini jugalah yang menipu, merompak, membunuh dan menzalimi bangsa Melayu. Melayu ini jugalah yang disokong dan disanjung oleh Melayu, Cina, India, pendatang haram Bangla, pendatang haram Myanmar, pendatang haram Indon, hantu dan iblis, hanya kerana mereka berkuasa dan berbani UMNO serta bermazhab Hadhari.

Hasil daripada pemerintahan regim UMNO dan berkat Dasar Ekonomi Baru yang dilaungkan oleh UMNO, maka lahirlah jutawan-jutawan Melayu yang antaranya bernama Muhammad a/l Muhamad, Khir a/l Toyo, Satim a/l Diman, Zakaria a/l Derus, Adnan a/l Mansur, Idris a/l Jusoh, Hisham anak Husin, Sharil anak Samad, Khiri anak antu, Adnan anak Yaakub, Shahidan anak Kasim dan beratus yang lain di mana semuanya menjadi jutawan hasil berkat Dasar Ekonomi Baru tajaan UMNO yang disokong oleh pencacai mereka yang miskin dan papa kedana.

Mac 2008 kekuasaan mereka terjejas, kekuasaan mereka terhakis. Mereka menjadi binggung dan semakin sewil. Mereka hilang pertimbangan. Kepala regim mungkin bertukar Mac 2009 ini. Kepala baru, perangai pun baru dan berbeda daripada kepala yang sedia ada. Kepala sedia ada, makan secara senyap. Kepala baru, makan riuh rendah. Kepala nak makan, bini Kepala pun nak makan. Mereka berebut sehingga ada yang menjadi korban dan ada yang hilang dari pandangan, seperti Altantuya dan Balasubramaniam.

Era santai, rompak, joli dan relax yang mereka nikmati selama 50 tahun telah semakin tercemar. Mereka bimbang. Mereka tiada pilihan kerana mereka tiada keimanan. Mereka tiada pilihan kerana mereka semakin hilang sokongan. Kali ini mereka tidak merompak wang kerana mereka telah lama dan banyak merompak. Mereka telah banyak wang. Sekarang adalah masa untuk mereka melabur semula. Melabur untuk memastikan mereka akan terus dapat melakukan rompakan 50 tahun lagi, untuk ini mereka mesti mengekalkan penjajahan zalim regim mereka. Sekarang mereka menjadi perompak orang. Mereka merompak orang yang dangkal keimanannya. Mereka merompak orang yang cetek semangat juangnya. Mereka merompak orang yang lupa asas perjuangannya.

Ketawa terbahak-bahak.
Sakit perut nak terberak.
Apalah nasib kutu berahak.
Bila Najib mengidamkan Perak.

Sejarah Penderhakaan UMNO Terhadap Raja-Raja Melayu

Posted by: Kerajaan rakyat // Category: SundalUMNO

Oleh mNasir


Where is UMNO's soul? May I remind UMNO members, that the soul of UMNO is expressed clearly in Fasal 3 of UMNO's Constitution:
Mempertahankan kemerdekaan dan kedaulatan negara.

Malaysia raised the tone of the allegations to a more dangerous level.

DAULAT TUANKU....Bismillahir rahmanirr ahiim..

Assalamualaikum kepada semua pembaca terutamanya dari kalangan penyokong Umno. Berikut saya sertakan beberapa fakta sejarah mengenai penderhakaan Umno kepada raja-raja melayu.Dalam fakta ini saya tidak boleh mengingati tarikhnya dengan tepat. Akan tetapi insyaAllah kepada semua pembaca yang mengikuti dengan rapat perkembangan politik tanahair sejak dari tahun 80an lagi akan ingat peristiwa-peristiwa ini semua.Juga sekiranya ada kesilapan dalam fakta-fakta ini harap ada pihak tampil untuk membetulkannya.Dan kalau saudara-saudara sekelian ada penambahan,digalakan juga untuk menambah.Kita sebarkan agar generasi muda sekarang tahu akan siapa sebenarnya Umno ini.Saya susun mengikut negeri-negeri.

Kelantan:

Tan Sri Mohammad Mohammad Yaacob yang juga Menteri Besar Kelantan pada era pemerintahan BN di Kelantan (1978-1990) sentiasa lari ke Kuala Lumpur apabila ada majlis rasmi di istana di Kelantan.Ini adalah kerana beliau sentiasa tidak sebulu dengan Tuanku Sultan Kelantan.

Dato'Annuar Musa pernah pada sekitar tahun 90an dahulu ketika krisis imuniti raja-raja melayu meledak,telah menabalkan Tengku Ibrahim (kalau tidak silap saya sepupu kepada Tuanku Sultan Kelantan) sebagai Sultan Kelantan yang baru.Majlis pertabalan itu telah disempurnakan di bawah sebatang pokok gajus di sebuah padang sekolah di Kelantan.Ini kerana beliau ingin menunjukkan kuasa beliau kepada rakyat dan Tuanku.

Namun segalanya gagal malah beliau pula didakwa terlibat dengan kes kehilangan wang PPRT yang sehingga sekarang masih menjadi misteri.

Tun Mahathir pula pernah cuba memalukan Tuanku dengan penyiarkan berita beserta gambar oleh akhbar-akhbar utama negara tentang Tuanku yang dikatakan telah melarikan kereta Lamborghini Diablonya dari simpanan kastam. Peristiwa ini juga berlaku pada ketika kemuncak krisis imuniti raja-raja melayu.

Dalam satu Persidangan Agung Umno,kalau saya tidak silap Dato'Alwi Che Ahmad (Ketua Penerangan Umno Kelantan sekarang) telah melafazkan kata-kata berikut kepada Tuanku "Raja Adil Raja Disembah,Raja Zalim Raja Disanggah"sebagai amaran kepada Tuanku agar tidak mencampuri urusan politik di Kelantan.

Negeri Sembilan :

Yang Di-Pertuan Besar Negeri Sembilan sebelum perlantikan baginda kejawatan Yang Di-Pertuan Agong juga telah dimalukan oleh Tun Mahathir dengan penyebaran berita bahawa baginda menyimpan minuman keras di istana beliau.Hal itu juga disebarkan oleh seluruh akhbar utama negara ketika krisis imuniti raja-raja melayu sedang berlaku.

Selangor :

Menteri Besar Selangor ketika itu Tan Sri Mohd Taib telah melukakan hati Almarhum Sultan Selangor iaitu Sultan Sallahuddin Abdul Aziz dengan "kisah" beliau dengan puteri Tuanku (Ku Yah).Sehinggakan dalam satu siaran berita apabila ditanya wartawan tentang suatu perkara berkaitan dengan menteri besarnya ketika itu,Tuanku menjawab "Kalau bagi kat Mamat tu habislah dengan-dengan saya kena pindah kat Pulau Ketam"Jawapan itu cukup menyerlahkan kekecewaan baginda kepada Tan Sri Mohd Taib yang juga Pengerusi Perhubungan Umno Selangor pada masa itu.

Pahang :

Walaupun Tuanku diketahui ramai bahawa Tuanku adalah seorang penyokong kuat Umno dan BN akan tetapi sokongan itu tidak bermakna bagi Tun Mahathir ketika krisis imuniti raja-raja melayu kerana baginda juga tidak terlepas dari dimalukan oleh Tun Mahathir.

Baginda digambarkan sebagai seorang sultan yang mempunyai harta kemewahan yang melampau dan membazir kerana baginda mempunyai kapalterbang peribadi pada ketika itu.Disiarkan juga kepada seluruh rakyat kapalterbang baginda itu.

Perak :

RELATED ARTICLEPerak Raja Muda Raja Nazrin Shah said Malaysians must embrace multiculturalism and reclaim religion from those who distort the truth.principles of equality and fairness were necessary to the creation of a "truly pluralistic society."

RELATED ARTICLE Datuk Mukhriz Mahathir the mother of all thief wants take legal action against DAP national chairman Karpal Singh then can we hang his father who is guilty of TREASON,krissmuddin and KJ AND THE GENG BAN THEN ?

;" style="font-size: 1em; line-height: 1.65em; ">

Reformasi kedua di Kuala Kangsar

FEB 7 — Setelah lebih sepuluh tahun reformasi berkaitan pemecatan Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, kali ini berlaku peristiwa seumpamanya berkaitan pemecatan tidak sah Datuk Seri Nizar Jamaluddin.

Jika gelombang reformasi tahun 1998 berlaku di Kuala Lumpur kemudian merebak ke seluruh negara, reformasi kali ini berlaku di Kuala Kangsar dan bakal merebak ke seluruh Perak, malah mungkin ke seluruh negara. Sekiranya reformasi sebelum ini kerana tidak puas hati dengan Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad, reformasi kali ini disebabkan tidak puas hati dengan Sultan Perak dan pimpinan Umno. Yang sama, kedua-dua reformasi itu tercetus disebabkan rasa tidak puas hati rakyat yang membuak-buak terhadap ketidakadilan.

Dalam reformasi tahun 1998, Dr Mahathir yang mengukir nama baiknya hampir 18 tahun sekali tersalah tindakannya, nama beliau menjadi busuk dan dibenci oleh ramai rakyat Malaysia.

Demikianlah juga Sultan Perak yang telah memerintah hampir 25 tahun sebagai Sultan yang dihormati, sekali beliau bertindak secara tidak adil rakyat Perak kiri dan kanan sudah mula mencemuh.

Dikatakan Sultan Perak dan Raja Muda begitu terkejut dengan reaksi rakyat Perak menentang tindakan baginda.

Baginda menyangka bahawa rakyat Perak akan akur dengan keputusannya, tetapi peristiwa di Kuala Kangsar ini sememangnya di luar dugaan baginda. Kedudukan baginda sama seperti kedudukan Dr Mahathir pada tahun 1998.

Baginda Raja Muda Nazrin yang menaiki takhta dengan melangkaui giliran pastinya terkejut keretanya telah dibaling batu oleh para penunjuk perasaan. Baginda yang sejak sehari dua ini bertitah dengan tulus dan mulus menyatakan peranan Raja yang mesti mendukung keadilan, dapat melihat sendiri apabila rakyat memberontak setelah dirasakan Raja tidak adil dan berpihak.

Sehari dua ini kalau baginda turun kepada rakyat, tidak mustahil peristiwa yang berlaku kepada Bush akan turut berlaku kepada baginda. Cuma rakyat Perak mungkin tidak baling kasut sebab ramai di kalangan mereka yang tidak berkasut cuma berselipar. Kalau rakyat Perak membaling selipar apalagi jenis selipar jamban, maka sudah tentu Raja Nazrin akan rasa lebih terhina.

Demikianlah juga ayahanda Baginda Sultan Azlan, baginda juga pasti terkejut apabila rakyat sudah berani mempertikaikan kewibawaan baginda. Dalam laman-laman web kutukan demi kutukan telah dilempar kepada Sultan Azlan. Malah lebih mengejutkan lagi dalam web rasmi Sultan Perak, rakyat telah mencaci nista baginda di dalam buku pelawat web tersebut.

Perkataan-perkataan yang dilempar kepada Dr Mahathir, kini dilemparkan pula kepada Sultan Azlan. Sambutan 25 tahun baginda di atas takhta telah dicemari dengan kemarahan rakyat. Sepanjang 25 tahun baginda dihormati, kali ini rakyat tidak lagi menghormati baginda malah dicaci nista oleh mereka.

Dalam artikel kami yang lalu, kami telah menyatakan kalau Sultan Perak memilih untuk untuk menerima pandangan BN, maka sejarah hitam akan terpalit dalam 25 tahun pemerintahan baginda. Rakyat sekarang bukan lagi rakyat yang tidak bijak. Mereka telah mendapat ilmu setaraf dengan baginda, malah mungkin lebih.

Rakyat hari ini telah menolak propaganda media sebagaimana yang dilakukan dalam pilihan raya umum dan dua pilihanraya kecil yang lalu. Mereka telah mendapat berita dari pelbagai sumber.

Minda politik mereka telah beranjak kepada minda politik kelas pertama seperti di negara maju. Golongan yang sebaya dengan Baginda Sultan Perak ramai yang telah kembali menemui Allah, justeru rakyat baginda sekarang benar-benar telah berubah.

Peringatan yang diberikan oleh Mursyidul Am Pas, supaya Sultan Perak meneliti keputusan baginda supaya selaras dengan kehendak rakyat seharusnya diberi perhatian. Sekiranya tidak peristiwa yang berlaku hari ini adalah natijahnya. Lebih daripada itu, sebagaimana yang disebutkan oleh Mursyidul Am Pas, kemungkinan sistem beraja di negara ini akan turut menjadi sejarah sebagaimana yang telah berlaku di negara-negara lain.

Tindakan baginda dipertikaikan oleh banyak pihak termasuk di kalangan vateran Umno sendiri seperti Dr Mahathir, Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah dan Datuk Rais Yatim. Demikian juga dengan Suhakam, turut mempertikaikan pembentukan kerajaan BN yang tidak sah ini.

Reformasi kali kedua ini mewarisi semangat reformasi kali pertama. Rakyat bangun menyatakan bantahan atas ketidakadilan. Kali ini mereka tidak mempedulikan siapa, kerana jelas kemarahan mereka ditujukan kepada Sultan Perak selain daripada pimpinan Umno.

Biarpun media massa memainkan peranan untuk mengelirukan rakyat bahawa Nizar dan penentang keputusan Sultan ini sebagai derhaka, hari ini telah diterima umum derhaka kepada kezaliman itu sesuatu yang mulia.

Zaman feudalisme dunia dan negara ini telah lama berlalu. Sekiranya Hang Tuah dan Hang Jebat menjadi calon Menteri Besar Perak sekarang, rakyat hari ini akan memilih Hang Jebat.

Sebagaimana propaganda media memburuk Anwar dan mewajarkan tindakan Dr Mahathir semasa reformasi 1998 tidak ditelan oleh rakyat, maka dipercayai propaganda media pada kali ini juga tidak akan berkesan.

Betapa lagi kalau Pakatan Rakyat bertindak bijak sepertimana tindakan mereka tahun 1998 yang lalu. Kalaupun kerajaan haram BN tidak tumbang, nama pemimpin mereka termasuklah nama Istana Perak akan terus buruk di mata rakyat.

Hari ini bukan sekadar zaman feudal telah berlalu, tetapi zaman politik perkauman juga hampir tamat. Faktor ini akan menjadikan reformasi kali kedua ini mungkin lebih berjaya. Cuma mungkin bahangnya hanya dirasai di Perak tidak di negeri yang lain. — Harakahdaily.net


Tuanku Sultan Azlan Shah,sultan yang tercerdik dan terpintar yang lahir dikalangan sultan-sultan yang sezaman dengan baginda.Baginda adalah bekas hakim dan diangkat menjadi sultan setelah kemangkatan sultan Perak Raja Idris Syah dan Raja Muda Perak yang tarikh kemangkatan kedua-duanya adalah hampir jaraknya.

Ketika itu baginda menjadi Raja Dihilir Perak.Oleh kerana kecerdikan bagindalah maka Tun Mahathir rasa tercabar dan ingin menghapuskan imuniti raja-raja melayu ketika itu.Pelbagai cara jahat digunakan untuk menundukkan Tuanku dan akhirnya Tuanku mengaku kalah dan tunduk kepada Tun Mahathir.

RELATED ARTICLE

PART2WAS THE SULTAN OF PERAK BLACKMAILED? a company owned by Raja Datuk Seri Eleena Raja Azlan Shah. Thus far no action has been taken by the Anti-Corruption Agency

Filed under: Uncategorized — taxi2driver @ 6:26 am Edit This


READMORE THE SULTAN HAD NO CHOICE. WAS HE BLACKMAILED? 20 MILLION MALAYSIANS SAY NO to NAJIB I DONT want to give my children a DIVIDED Malaysia. NEVER.


Johor :

Baginda juga menerima nasib yang sama seperti Tuanku Sultan Pahang iaitu seorang yang kuat menyokong Umno.Akan tetapi amat malang sekali kerana baginda juga termasuk dalam senarai sultan yang dimalukan Mahathir.

Pelbagai skandal dan cerita dikeluarkan oleh Umno yang diketuai oleh Tun Mahathir tentang baginda.Ini termasuklah juga kisah anakanda Tuanku,Tengku Majid yang ketika itu mewakili pasukan hoki Johor di SUKMA 92 telah memukul penjaga gol pasukan Perak selepas perlawanan.

Berita itu disensasikan sebegitu rupa.Memang ianya satu kesalahan,akan tetapi jika tidak kerana krisis imuniti raja-raja ketika itu,adakah kisah itu akan disebarkan?atau sekadar didiamkan seperti kisah Prebet Adam?

Kerana tekanan Umno jugalah maka Pasukan Timbalan Setia Negeri iaitu pasukan askar peribadi Tuanku dibubarkan.

RELATED ARTICLERaja dan demokrasi — Dato' Nik Abdul Aziz Nik MatMaka orang-orang yang zalim itu dimusnahkan sampai ke akar-akarnya. Segala Puji Bagi Allah Tuhan semesta Alam." (Surah Al An'aam: Ayat 45). — Harakah Daily

Terengganu :

Almarhum Tuanku Sultan Mahmud al-Muktafi Billah Syah telah diugut oleh Mahathir untuk diturunkan dari tahta dengan menggunakan Tengku Ali.Tengku Ali telah mengemukakan tuntutan di mahkamah agar dikembalikan kuasa sultan kepadanya yang mana didalam dakwaannya pemecatan beliau sebagai sultan pada zaman pemerintahan Jepun adalah tidak sah.Sehingga beberapa sesi perbicaraan berjalan,kes itu kemudiannya digugurkan oleh mahkamah.

Begitulah antara beberapa kisah dan senarai penderhakaan Umno kepada raja-raja Melayu.Bagi yang tidak tahu tentang krisis imuniti raja-raja,ianya bermula kerana ada beberapa akta yang tidak persetujui oleh yang Di-Pertuan Agong yang mana ketika itu Agong mempunyai kuasa untuk menolak akta yang telah diluluskan oleh Dewan Rakyat dan Dewan Negara.

Dek kerana tercabar dengan kebijaksanaan Sultan Azlan Syah (Agong ketika itu) maka Tun Mahathir telah memaksa semua raja-raja melayu menandatangani akta yang menyatakan bahawa setiap akta yang telah dipersetujui di Dewan Negara dan juga enakmen yang dipersetujui di Dewan Undangan Negeri akan digazetkan selepas beberapa tempoh walaupun tidak ditandatangani oleh Agong dan sultan.

Hanya Kelantan dibawah kekuasaan PAS satu-satunya negeri yang mempertahankan kedaulatan raja-raja melayu walaupun Umno yang menguasai negeri-negeri lain ketika itu mengaku bahawa dialah juara dalam mempertahankan bangsa melayu.Demi untuk mencapai maksud itu,maka Tun Mahathir telah menggunakan segala ugutan-ugutan yang saya nyatakan diatas kepada raja-raja melayu.

Pada ketika itu jugalah RTM dan TV3 iaitu dua pemutar belit utama Umno telah menyiarkan dengan banyaknya cerita-cerita perihal raja-raja melayu yang mana kesemuanya berkisar tentang kezaliman raja-raja melayu.Antara yang sempat saya ingat ialah Sultan Mahmud Mangkat Dijulang.Cerita ini pada waktu itu telah disiartayang beberapa kali dalam jarak masa yang dekat.Demikianlah dahsyatnya kelakuan Umno sekiranya mereka tidak mendapat apa yang mereka kehendaki maka akan mengamuklah mereka dengan gilanya.

Maka satu perkara yang amat penting bagi kita semua ketika ini,ialah kita seharusnya sedar bahawa Umno adalah penderhaka kepada raja-raja melayu yang tiada tolok bandingnya.Saya yakin dan percaya seluruh raja-raja melayu masih ingat akan peristiwa itu.Betapa hinanya raja-raja melayu diperlakukan Umno.

Pernah juga disiarkan didalam akhbar ketika itu dimana tempat duduk diraja di Stadium Merdeka bagi perlawanan bolasepak telah digunakan oleh jurugambar untuk merakam perlawanan.Ini untuk menunjukan kepada rakyat bahawa raja sudah tidak dihormati lagi.Itulah yang dilakukan oleh Umno kepada raja-raja satu ketika dahulu. Jahat bukan?

Jadi,adakah anda semua hairan dan terkejut dengan segala apa yang telah berlaku sekarang ini?Perkara yang saya sebutkan diatas pada pandangan saya adalah lebih dahsyat daripada apa yang berlaku sekarang kerana ianya melibatkan perlucutan kuasa raja-raja melayu.Alhamdulillah Umno tiada majoriti 2/3 hari ini di parlimen bagi menggubal akta baru yang mungkin memberi kesan yang lebih teruk kepada institusi raja kita.Apatah lagi dengan berlakunya peristiwa seperti sekarang ini.Kalau tidak,mungkin jawatan Yang Di-Pertuan Agong akan tinggal sejarah sahaja kerana amukan Umno…siapa tahu…?

Dan apabila mereka merasa tersepit,maka raja-raja melayu akan dijadikan tunggangan mereka bagi melepaskan diri.Contohnya seperti gesaan Umno bagi mengharamkan penggunaan nama Islam kepada semua parti-parti politik.Umno dengan selambanya menggunakan Majlis Raja-Raja untuk tujuan politik mereka itu.Bagi saya ini adalah wajah sebenar Umno dulu,kini dan selamanya.Sejarah adalah sejarah.Ianya tetap akan diceritakan secara benar walaupun Umno cuba membohonginya.Yang benar pasti datang dan yang batil akan tumbang.Renung-renungkanlah semua.

Raja Petra Kamarudin

In a speech before Malaysia's Dewan Rakyat, or parliament, on February 14, 1993, then-Prime Minister asked that the body strip the country's sultans of their immunity to the law. In the speech, he accused them, among other things, of giving away parts of the country to the British, oppressing the people, breaking civil and criminal laws, misusing the money and property of the government and pressuring government officials. The measure, which included a rule to allow commoners to criticise the Sultans, even the Yang di-Pertuan Agong, or king without fear of the Sedition Act other than questioning the legitimacy of the monarchy itself, was passed overwhelmingly by the parliament, apparently without outcry over Dr Mahathir's rather tough treatment of the country's nine monarchs.

Asia Sentinel brings this up in light of the growing controversy in Malaysia over opposition protests against the Sultan of Perak's decision to oust the Pakatan Rakyat chief minister of his state and sanction the appointment of a member of the United Malays National Organisation as the new chief minister despite the fact that a 28-28 tie remained, and that the Pakatan Rakyat had asked for a snap election to determine which coalition should rule the state.

When Karpal Singh, national chairman of the Democratic Action Party, offered to sue Sultan Raja Azlan Shah in the courts to get his decision reversed, scores of UMNO members filed complaints and led rallies against Karpal Singh for insulting the sultan. Members of the press, including Jed Yoong of the Asia Sentinel, have also been cited.

It would appear from Dr Mahathir's 1993 speech that it is perfectly legal to sue members of the royalty. It would also appear that UMNO members, particularly prime ministers, can make allegations against the country's royalty that opposition leaders and members of the press can't. We invite readers to decide for themselves. We reprint Dr Mahathir's historic 1993 speech below in its entirety.

*****************************************

Mr. Speaker Sir,

I request to propose that is a Bill named "An Act to amend the Constitution" to be read for the second time. Speaker Sir, allow me to introduce and comment on the Act that I mentioned above

2. When the country demanded independence, the country's leaders, who received a huge victory and united support in the 1955 General Election, decided that our country would be administered via Parliamentary Democracy and Constitutional Monarchy.

3. This system was chosen because when the Malay states were administered via the feudal system with power vested in the hands of the Rajas, the Malay states were weak and its administration was in chaos. The states could not establish peace and enforce laws. As a negative result, the states were forced to put themselves under the influence of foreign powers like China, Siam and the West. Finally, all the Malay states were conquered by the British and ruled as a British colony via agreements between the Rajas that administered with the British Government.

4. After the Second World War, the Malay Rajas hoped that when the British administered again, their positions as Rajas, under the advice of the British officials, would be reinstated. The Malay states would be ruled by the British although not like Singapore, Penang and Malacca, where the British had full power.

5. For the majority of the Malay people in the Peninsular states, they were ready to accept a rule in which the Malayness of the Malay states was recognized by the British, although the administration was almost completely controlled by the British. Yet, there were opinions among some Malays that the Malay states should be completely freed from British colonial rule.

6. Malays only realized that they might be marginalized and be made beggars in their own states when the Malay Rajas bowed to MacMichael's threats and signed a new agreement with the British to return the Malay states directly to the British to be ruled as British colonies like Singapore, Penang and Malacca.

7. Because the Rajas so easily handed over Singapore, Penang and Pangkor to the colonialists and then the Malay states, the People ("rakyat") could no longer accept a system that only gives power to the Rajas and the People are not given any role in the country's politics. Also, after World War 2, absolute monarchies decayed throughout the world. Everywhere, absolute monarchies were abolished. Where it was maintained, the powers of the Rajas were limited by the Constitution, or the country's basic law. Hence, when the Federated Malay States demanded for independence, the leaders of the People studied administrative systems while taking into account of the history of the Malay States and other administrative systems.

Mr. Speaker Sir,

8. The old administrative system in the Malay states was a feudal system in which the Rajas had absolute power without a written Constitution. This feudal system was determined by customs that were often manipulated by the people in power. If the people in power breached the customs, it was difficult for palace officials and the People to criticize and make charges. But when the situation became too bad, it was likely that customs were put aside and revolt occurred. But this method brought definite negative consequences without guaranteeing that the revolt would improve the situation.

9. Therefore, the opinion that Rajas should be placed under a Constitution that determined the status and role of the Rajas was born. With this method, the Rajas could no longer act as they liked. The powers of the Rajas would be determined by the Constitution, that is the country's basic law. Yet, there were Rajas who were willing to hand over their own states to foreign powers while ignoring the Constitution.

10. Yet when the Constitutional Monarchy was drafted for the Federation of Malaya, which at that time was moving towards independence, those drafters of the constitution still believed that the Rajas would abide by not only by what was written but also what was written between the lines, that is the spirit of the Constitution.

11. During the British colonial period, because they could appoint or remove Rajas, therefore Rajas accept the advice of the colonial rulers. This matter is included in the agreement between the British and the Malay Rajas in which the advice of the 'British Resident' or 'British Adviser' must be sought and abide by the Rajas save those that relate to Islam and Malay customs. For the British, that the advice must be abided by the Rajas is not strange because in the Government system in Britain, their 'King' or 'Queen' must accept the Government's advice. If not, the King will be removed from the throne. Hence, when King Edward VIII married a divorcee, he had to abdicate the throne on the Government's advice, although there was no specific allocation for this action. What was enforced was not the law but the country's political interests, and the British Kings abide by the country's politics. That's the reason that even before that, the British Parliament decided that Queen Elizabeth pays income tax. She herself just decided to pay income tax. The British Constitution, although not written, is abided from the perspective of spirit and custom.

12. Because the Malay Rajas in colonial times followed the advice, therefore it was believed that the problem of Rajas breaking the law would not happen.

13. The drafters and founders of the administration of the independent Federation of Malaya also believed that the provision that the Rajas that could not be charged in court is only a sign of the majesty of the King and not as a right to commit crimes. Certainly, the drafters of the Constitution and the founders of our country's independence did not mean this provision gave the Rajas the right to be above civil and criminal laws. Constitutional Monarchy has never given privilege to the Rajas to commit crimes. But if the Rajas break the law while carrying out official duties, the Rajas are free from charges. This is because the Government is responsible and the party that should be charged.

14. In the effort to oppose the Malayan Union and return the Malay states and Straits states to the 'status quo ante', that was the situation before World War II, the People played an important role although there is no legal provision. It was clear at that that time to the people that the Rajas without the People's support are easily controlled by the colonialists and other parties. Hence, the People had to be given rights in the country's politics and administration. The role of the People must be determined by the law.

15. Looking at this reality and once again taking the example of Britain, the independent Federation of Malaya chose the Parliamentary Democracy system. The People will elect their representatives to the Dewan Rakyat (People's House or Parliament) and the Dewan Undangan Negeri (State Legislative Assemblies) who will be the main law and policy makers. This allowed the People to play their roles in an orderly and organized manner.

16. Once again following the system in Britain, the laws can only be valid after they are signed by the Rajas. In Britain, this is not a problem because it is not possible that the King will reject the advice of the Cabinet. But in Malaysia, the word 'advice', that the drafters of the constitution believed would have the same meaning like in Britain and during the colonial period, is not clearly interpreted. Therefore, the Rajas can reject the Government's advice.

17. If the Government admits to be made up of representatives chosen by the People to determine the People's power, but the advice of the Government may not be accepted, this meant that the Parliamentary Democracy does not exist and the People are not in power. In some matters, not only the agreement of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong is required, but also the Council of Rajas.

18. Although the representatives were free to speak in the Dewan Rakyat and Dewan Undangan Negeri about any topic, but they could not touch on the Rajas because any criticism of the Rajas could be interpreted as sedition and they could be charged under the Sedition Act. This provision was a result of an amendment made in 1971. Before this, criticism of the Rajas could be made in the house. In Britain and other countries, the Parliament was free to criticize the Rajas. It is clear that that criticizing the Rajas does not destroy the Rajas' majesty.

19. While this prohibition on criticism is said to protect the Rajas' majesty, but when the Rajas are not criticized, they will not be aware of the wrongs that they have committed. Hence, maybe more wrongs will be committed and these wrongs may become more serious. This not only contaminates the Rajas' majesty but can also cause the People to hate the Rajas. It is not true to say the prohibition on criticizing the Rajas will protect the Rajas' majesty. Actually, the majesty of the Rajas will be contaminated because of this prohibition.

20. With the possibility that the Rajas reject advice while being free from criticism and any fair action, hence, the Rajas are actually not Constitutional Monarchs anymore but have become absolute Monarchs. Once again Parliamentary Democracy no longer exists because no action can be taken towards the Rajas that do not receive the advice of the People's Government and commit wrongs.

21. In 1983, action was taken to amend the Constitution so that at the very least the power of the Agong to reject Bills written by Parliament was abolished. This effort was successful but not fully. What was approved in the end was the power of the Agong to reject Parliament Bills was reduced a little by having a new provision such that he can refer back to Parliament if he is unwilling to sign the Bill that has been approved by Parliament. If Parliament approves it again, whether with or without amendments, the Bill will be valid law in 30 days (Article 66(4) Constitution) although unsigned by the Agong.

22. But approvals this way are limited to matters that do not touch on the rights and privileges of the Rajas. To amend the Constitutional provisions that touch on the Rajas, the Council of Rajas must give their agreement.

23. At the state level, no amendments was made to state Constitutions. Hence, there are no laws that could be approved without being signed by the Rajas. This means the powers of the Rajas in the state is beyond the powers of the Dewans Undangan Negeri that represent the People.

24. These provisions do not become problems if there are no opposing opinions between the Rajas and the Dewans Undangan, or there is no wrongdoing by the Rajas, or there is no Malay custom that does not like to jeopardize the relationships with the Rajas. Unfortunately, because the Chief Ministers and Prime Minister are Malays that are unwilling to be on bad terms with the Rajas, when the Rajas do something that is not supposed to be done, no effective criticism is made. Even if there is, the unwillingness of the Rajas to care about the criticisms of these official advisers does not bring about any action towards the Rajas.

25. Hence, in the history of independent Malaysia, the actions of the Rajas and parties who hide behind the Rajas that exceed the rights and privileges of the Rajas become more serious over time. The possibility is that it will become more serious in the future. If there are no amendments to the law, like those suggested here, without doubt worse matters will happen that will cause the Raja Institution to be hated by the people. It is not impossible that if one day in the future, demands are made to completely abolish the Raja System although there are provisions in the Constitution.

26. Hence this amendment that is suggested aims to avoid or prevent the escalation of hatred towards the Rajas that could bring about demands to abolish the Raja System. This amendment is to save the Rajas themselves and the Constitutional Monarchy system. To strengthen the Constitutional provisions to maintain the Raja System, provisions are made such that any suggestion to abolish the Raja System will be interpreted as sedition and falls under Sedition Laws.

27. This amendment does not touch on the privileges given to the Rajas. Rajas will continue to be of Raja status, and facilities provided to the Rajas and the Royal Families according to the Constitution will be continued.

28. To guarantee that Constitutional Monarchy is really effective, three amendments need to be made to the Federal Constitution. First, the Constitutional provision related with the immunity of the Rajas from any legal action as in Clause (1) Article 32 where after the word "court" is added the words "but only those related with whatever that is done or left to be done by him in the carrying out or that which resembles the carrying out of his functions under any written law". This means no court action can be taken towards the Rajas who are carrying out their official duties.

29. Sovereign Immunity is a feudal concept – a concept in which allegedly 'The King can do no wrong'. According Dr. Hogg in his book 'Liability of the Crown', this concept is based on the excuse that a King cannot be charged in his own court. This excuse has long been questioned and rejected by European law experts like Adams who feel that there is no doubt that feudal lords are under their own courts – 'No doubt at all of the subjection of feudal lords to their own courts'.

30. Under the Government of India Act 1935, the Governor General or Governor is only immune when carrying out official duties.

31. In the United States, President Nixon's demand such that he is exempted from a legal provision is rejected by the Supreme Court.

32. In England, the Queen cannot be arrested and the arrest of anyone cannot be made on palace grounds. Even charges towards the Queen cannot be made in court.

33. But in a paper that discussed the Constitutional Law of India, under the Crown Proceedings Act for England the original provision has been amended such that 'Civil proceedings by and against the Crown' can be made. Hence, the difference of 'proceedings' towards the 'Crown' is equivalent to the People.

34. In the same paper it was mentioned that it has become a 'fundamental general rule' that 'His Majesty cannot sanction any act forbidden by the law'. When he cannot sanction, he also cannot do something wrong. Hence, 'His Majesty is under and not above the laws (and) he is bound by them equally with his subjects'.

35. Provisions in the Constitutions of Spain, Belgium, Norway, Denmark, Sweden and Luxemborg all give immunity to the King only when carrying official duties as King. Any wrongs in carrying out official duties fall upon the Government or Ministers.

36. There are no special provisions in any Constitution in European countries that give immunity to the King when carrying out unofficial activities. Yet, the Kings in the respective countries are still recognized and sovereign. They continue to be sovereign and did not lose their sovereignty. The opinion that Kings are only sovereign if the Kings can commit crimes as they like is not supported by the practices of other countries in this era. Even in the older eras, the King is often punished when he commits any wrongdoing, like in the case of Charles I in England and Louis XVI in France.

37. Only in the Constitution of Malaysia is a specific provision under Article 181(2) that 'no proceedings whatsoever shall be brought in any court against the Rules of a State in his personal capacity'.

38. Almarhum Tunku Abdul Rahman Putra al-Haj, this country's first Prime Minister, had written that immunity is not 'satisfactory' because 'Rajas can kill anyone without any action taken against him'. The result of provision 181(2) is very wide. Because the Constitutions of the Federation and States are also law, Article 181(2) actually allows Rajas to breach the Constitution. Because of that, when Rajas conduct business, although prohibited by the Constitution, nothing can be done by the Government. The Agong cannot be charged in any court. But the Council of Rajas can sack him from his position. On the contrary as a Raja, Article 181(2) will protect him.

39. If Malaysia intends to become a country that practices Parliamentary Democracy and Constitutional Monarchy, the immunity that is given to the Rajas must be abolished. Because the Constitution in countries that practice the Constitutional Monarchy System doesn't give immunity to their Kings, the abolishment of the immunity of the Malay Rajas cannot jeopardize their sovereignty. In the modern era, only because the King can't commit crimes as they like, the King's status will not be jeopardized, especially in a country that practices Parliamentary Democracy and Constitutional Monarchy.

40. To guarantee the effectiveness of the abolishment of immunity, two more provisions in the Constitution needs to be amended. The first is related to the provision in Article 63(2) that protects a person from taking part in a debate in Parliament or Parliamentary Committee from being questioned in court, which has been amended by Article 63(4) if it touches the provision of the Sedition Act. This provision is made in 1971. This means criticism towards the King can be made before 1971 without jeopardizing the Raja's sovereignty. Hence, it allows again the People's Representatives to criticize the Rajas who were wrong without denying the original rights and privileges of the Rajas. The amendment of Article 63 after Clause (4) reads:- "(5) Notwithstanding Clause (4) no one can be charged with any proceedings in any court related with anything that is said by him about the Agong or a Raja while taking part in whatever proceedings in any of the Parliamentary Committee or any of its task force except if it organizes the abolishment of the Constitutional position of the Agong as the Head of the Government of the Federation or the status of the Constitutional Monarch of a state, according to whichever applies". Article 72 of the Federal Constitution is amended by inserting after Clause (4) the following Clause:- "(5) Notwithstanding Clause (4) no one can be charged with any proceedings in any court related to anything that has been said by him about the Rajas in any state while taking part in any proceedings in the Dewan Undangan in any state or in any committee unless if he organizes the abolishment of the status of the Raja as the Constitutional Monarch of the state".

41. The interpretation of the sedition towards the King in the Constitution is so wide until no criticism is can be made in Parliament by members of the Dewan Rakyat or Dewan Undangan. Hence, the media also has no opportunity to report. Criticism can only be made by the Rajas' advisors behind closed doors. If this criticism is ineffective, there is nothing that can be done.

42. Actually all three former Prime Ministers, as advisors to the Rajas, have already criticized the Rajas many times while they were in service. I know criticisms have been made because this matter has been repeatedly reported in Cabinet meetings and also the UMNO Supreme Council.

43. Allahyarham Tun Hussein Onn, as Prime Minister, had in his written speech in a Raja Council Meeting, only attended by His Highnesses or their representatives, harshly criticized the doings of the Rajas that should not be done.

44. But all these criticisms are not effective. The matters touched upon continued to be done, even intensified. What was never done during the British era and in the early years of independent Malaysia are now done obviously and widespread.

45. Although almost all Prime Ministers and Chief Ministers report to the UMNO Supreme Council, there are problems that they face but the public are not told. Hence, the public do not know the problems faced by the Government. Most of them continue to believe that the system of Constitutional Monarchy is operating smoothly with the Rajas honoring all the provisions in the Constitution. Only a small portion of the People know and they are not comfortable with the Rajas' doings. But they can't express their views and feelings because there is a Sedition Act.

46. The Sedition Act and the relevant provisions for sedition towards the Rajas in Article 63(4) of the Constitution prohibits the People from getting information and voicing their opinions. They can only talk among themselves. Political leaders, including Government leaders, definitely hears and realizes that the views and anger of a number of People that knows about the Rajas' doings. Such is their anger till there are, mostly among the young generation, that consider the Raja System to be behind times.

47. But because of the Sedition Act and prohibitions on criticizing the Rajas, Rajas do not listen and do not believe their advisors when such information is conveyed about the People's anxiety. The Rajas and the Royal Families seems to opine that all of these are inventions of the advisors to the Rajas to scare them or snatch the Rajas' rights.

48. In this situation, the Rajas not only continue their habits that the People dislike and are uneasy with but also matters that are hated by the People. If this trend is not stopped, the feelings of the People towards the Raja will boil over and become so bad that at a point of time in the future, the People may no longer be able to control their feelings. Letters to newspapers that expressed such feelings have existed for a long time.

48. With your permission Speaker Sir, I wish to read an excerpt of an article sent to The Straits Times in 1946 by a prominent Malay leader, when the British suggested the formation of the Malayan Union. This leader went on to hold a high position in Government. This article was not published in the Straits Time but was passed to me recently by the writer.

50. This writer says, with your permission, 'All intelligent Malay leaders ought now seriously to give most profound and careful thought to the question whether the time has not ar- rived when the Malay Royalty (I mean the Sultan and Raja) should gracefully withdraw themselves altogether'.

51. If opinions were already like this in 1946, is it not possible that it will arise again in 1993 if the Rajas are not stopped from doing things that are undesirable?

52. The protection and privilege given to the Rajas aim to put the Rajas in a high and majestic place. The protection and privilege is not to allow the Rajas to do whatever they like including committing crime. Rajas who are aware and understand the true meaning of these provisions will always take care to prevent contaminating itself in acts or behaviours that are not good and disliked by society. Rajas who are aware will know acts that ignore the feelings and opinions of society will cause the People to finally remove the Rajas, and even abolish the Raja System. This is what happened in countries that are now republics.

53. In Malaysia, the protection given is very thick. Sovereign Immunity from laws and prohibitions from criticism, although only by members of the Dewans Undangan that has been entrusted to administer the country, separates the Rajas from the real world. In this situation, the acts and behavior of the Rajas will become worse in the long run. This is happening in Malaysia.

54. Hence, it is important Members of the Dewan are given back the right to criticize the Rajas in their debates. Without this right, the Members of the Dewan will fail to practice the Parliamentary Democracy system and will fail to prove that the People are the ones in power in this system. Without this right, the ones in power are the Rajas and not the People.

55. With the existence of a prohibition on criticizing the Rajas, Members of the House actually cannot protect the Raja Institution and Raja System. Hance, the freedom of Members of the House to speak in the House should not be blocked by the Sedition Act like provided for under Article 63(4) and 72(4). With the addition of Article 63(5) and 72(5), the Members of the House not only can protect the Raja's position but also the Constitutional Monarchy that is clearly protected by the Constitution, because it is mentioned in Article 63(5) and 72(5) that the exception from the Sedition Act does not include organizing the 'abolishment of the Constitutional status of the Agong as the Head of the Federation or the status of a Raja in a state'.

Mr. Speaker Sir,

56. The second matter that can void the abolishment of the Rajas' immunity is when doing something that breaks the law in a non-official matter is the Rajas' right to pardon as provided for in Article 42. With this provision, a Raja can pardon himself if he is convicted by a court after immunity from legal action is withdrawn. This means the withdrawal of immunity is meaningless and ineffective.

57. Hence, the Government proposes that Article 38 and 42 of the Federal Constitution be amended as in Clause (2) Article 28 and Clause (12) Article 42. Clause (2) Article 38 of the Federal Constitution is amended – (a) by substituting the comma at the end of the paragraph (c) with a semicolon; and (b) by inserting after paragraph (c), the following paragraph: "(d) giving pardon, reprieve and respite, or to remit, suspend and reduce sentences, under Clause (12) Article 42,". Article 42 of the Federal Constitution is amended by inserting, after Clause (11), the following Clauses: "(12) Notwithstanding the contents of this Constitution, if the powers mentioned in this Article – (a) have to be carried out by the Yang di-Pertuan of a State and are required to be carried out on himself or his wife, his sons or daughters, these powers have to be carried out by the Chief Minister of the State that will act on the advice of the Board of Pardons formed for the state under this Article and needs to be chaired by; (b) are required to be carried out on the Agong, a Raja of a State, or his Consort, according to whichever is applicable, these powers needs to be carried out by the Council of Rajas and the following provisions are required to be used: (i) when attending any proceeding under this Clause, the Agong cannot be accompanied by the Prime Minister and other Rajas cannot be accompanied by their Chief Ministers; (ii) before making any decision about any matter under this Clause, the Council of Rajas must consider whatever written opinion that may be given by the Attorney-General about this matter. (c) are required to be carried out by the Agong or the Raja of the related State with his sons or daughters, according whichever is applicable, the powers have to be carried out by a Raja of a State named by the Council of Rajas and that Raja has to act according to the advice of the relevant Board of Pardons formed under this Article. (13) For the meaning of paragraph (b) and (c) Clause (12), the Agong or respective State Raja, according to whichever is applicable, and the State Yang di-Pertuas cannot be made members of the Council of Rajas".

58. With this amendment, the Raja cannot hear the plea and pardon himself. If the Raja or his Consort who pleas for pardon, the Council of Rajas will hear and decide on the respective case.

59. The Raja also cannot listen to the plea of and pardon his offspring. The Council of Rajas will appoint another Raja to hear and decide on the pardon pleas of a Raja's offspring.

60. With the abolishment of the immunity of the Rajas from legal action, except when carrying out official duties, it is believed that a Raja will not commit acts that can be charged in courts. With this, the Raja will be honored by the People.

61. The abolishment of the ban applied on Members of Parliament and the Dewans Undangan Negeri by the Sedition Act will prevent the Rajas from committing any act that may attract the criticism of the respective members of the house.

62. The abolishment of the powers to pardon himself will make legal action more effective.

63. The real reason for these amendments is not because the Government or the People want to drag the Rajas to court as they like. The reason is so that the Rajas will constraint themselves from committing acts that can negatively cause legal action. Hence, the Rajas will be respected more.

64. It should be reminded that the respect of the People towards the Raja cannot be determined by laws. With your permission, 'Respect must be earned'. Having laws that scare the People will not bring 'respect'. With the realization that the Rajas can be brought to court, Rajas will certainly avoid committing acts that will cause the people not to respect the Rajas. Hence, the Raja Institution will be better respected and better preserved.

65. To strengthen the efforts to preserve the Rajas and Raja System, any suggestion or exertion to abolish the Raja System is interpreted as sedition and will be charged under the Sedition Act.

Mr. Speaker Sir,

66. I feel very sad that today I am forced to present to the august House a Bill to amend the Constitution that has in some way contaminated the good name of the Rajas and the Raja Institution. With a heavy heart I presented and explained the suggested amendments.

67. That the Government made the decision to amend the Constitution is not without reason. Actually, as I have said, the Government has refrained from making these amendments since the start when we achieved independence. But this approach does not alleviate the situation. On the contrary, the situation became worse.

68. In the end, an incident in which a Raja assaulted a citizen and before this another incident in which the son of a Raja assaulted a citizen. The Government cannot look lightly at such events without jeorpardizing the Government's credibility as responsible leaders.

69. The Government is forced to make a firm stand to protect the People from being oppressed by the Rajas. Certainly, this stand was not made because of these two incidents only. Before this there were many incidents where the Rajas oppressed the People, Rajas broke civil and criminal laws, Rajas misused the money and property of the Government and country, Raja pressuring and oppressing officials.

70. The incident in Johor is only, with your permission, 'the straw that broke the camel's back'. The People's reaction towards these incidents clearly shows that the People no longer accept and 'tolerate' these kind of acts.

Mr. Speaker Sir,

71. There are people that ostensibly wish to give powers to and defend the Rajas when the Raja commit crimes. They try twist the People's thoughts by accusing the Government is trying to abolish the Raja System.

72. I wish to assert that the Barisan Nasional government does not at all suggest to abolish the Raja System. This is clear from the suggested amendments. Any suggestion to abolish the Raja System will be interpreted as sedition and the Government will take action under the Sedition Act upon anyone who suggest or act to abolish the Raja System.

Mr. Speaker Sir,

73. The government is aware that the People, specifically the Malays accept and support the Malay Raja Institution. The accusations that the Government is trying to abolish the Raja System is merely because of political interests. The Government represents the majority of the Malays and other races will abide by the wishes of the People and will not do something that is unpopular.

74. Because it is clear that the majority of the people of all races still wants the Raja System, specifically the Constitutional Monarchy System, the Government will guarantee that this system is protected by the Constitution.

Mr. Speaker Sir,

75. There are parties that opine that the Malay Rajas are needed to protect the Malays. The MacMichael Agreement and the Malayan Union incidents clearly prove that those who are willing and able to protect the Malays are the Malays themselves. If not because they rose up and opposed the Malayan Union, today, the Malays would have been beggars in their own country.

76. The attempts by some parties to scare the Malays towards the amendment are caused by those who wish to use racial sentiments for the interests of their own parties. Their history does not assure us that they are sincere. They are the ones who try to weaken the Malays by breaking up UMNO and working with certain parties that are viewed with suspicion by the Malays.

77. Can merely barring the Rajas from committing crimes cause the Rajas to lose their sovereignty and no longer be Rajas? The opinion that the Rajas can only be Rajas if they are given rights and given privileges to commit crime contravenes the concept of Rajas as the source of law. In the old era in the West, Kings possessed the right to commit crime. For instance, according to the concept, with your permission, 'Droit du seigneur' (right of the Lord) or the Right of the Lord, the King has the right to spend a night with all newlyweds.

78. But in the West, all these rights have been abolished. That is why Western countries that preserve the Monarchy System does not have specific immunity for the Rajas. Even if there is a mention that the King cannot be brought court, it is only a formality. King, Government and the People know if the King commits a crime, he will be brought to court, and he will be removed from his throne. Hence, the Kings in the Western countries will not intentionally commit crime.

79. Although it is clear that the Kings in the West are not immune from legal and non-legal action, the Kings are still Kings. They are respected and admired.

Mr. Speaker Sir,

80. In the British era, the Malay Rajas were not only immune but were also under the orders of the British officials. They can be appointed and removed from the throne. One of MacMichael's threats so that the Rajas would sign the Malayan Union Agreement is they will be removed from the throne if they do not sign the Agreement.

81. In this situation, the Rajas will continue to be Rajas. The People are not demanding the Rajas be dislodged or the Raja System to be abolished although the Rajas handed over the Malay states to the colonialists. Happily I am reminded that at that time the Rajas in Indonesia, India and Pakistan have been rejected by the People who demanded for independence. On the contrary, Malaysians, mainly the Malays and UMNO, have fought to save the Rajas and Raja System.

82. The opposition of the Malays against the Malayan Union is clear because the fortunes of the Malays are in the hands of the Malays. The safety of Malays is not jeopardized with the Malay Rajas who do not have the right to commit crime. There are parties that say the abolishment of the Raja's right to commit crime, the Malays are no longer Malays and that will be the end of the special position of the Malays. This is not true. This is slander. Those who guarantee that the Malays will continue to be Malays and Malay rights are protected are the Malays themselves. They, through their representatives and the Government that they choose, create and implement various activities to protect and fight for the honour of the Malays.

Mr. Speaker Sir,

83. A Raja asked why the Constitutional amendments are related to Islam when the Government does not agree with the implementation of Sharia and Hudud law. According to him, he is ready to accept Islamic law without immunity but is unwilling to accept the country's laws which are not Islamic law.

84. With or without his blessing, the position of the Malay Rajas since Merdeka has been determined by the law, that is the Constitution. These laws also give certain special privileges to the Rajas. Among these privileges is immunity from legal action. If the Rajas were willing to accept the immunity under laws which are not Islamic laws, why is the abolishment of immunity in the same laws are not accepted by the Rajas?

85. In Islam there are two principals that are strongly held by the law. The first is there is no difference among Muslims in enforcement of Islamic laws. Raja and People are the same. The immunity for Rajas contravenes this principle. Rejecting the abolishment of the immunity so that the difference between Raja and People is preserved in the laws does not reflect a strong adherence to Islamic principles.

86. Receiving immunity from laws said to be not Islamic law, but rejecting the abolishment of this immunity in the same laws clash with the allegation that only Islamic law is acceptable.

87. Islam gives much leeway. Islam takes into account all factors and circumstances faced by its believers. Such that even in carrying out religious duties, environment, an individual's health and the current circumstances are considered. Therefore, praying can be made without certain movements, without facing the kiblat, before, after or together, in a congregation or alone. Palestinians, who were driven out by the Zionist Rule, could pray without taking off their shoes. In other religious duties, there is also leeway. Such is with the enforcement of hudud law. The state of the environment and society must be considered. That is the reason why not many countries in which the majority of the residents are Muslims do not establish hudud law. Those who do, also do not fully implement them.

88. The Government does not reject hudud law. The implementation must take into account the situation of the country in which Muslims only make up 56 percent and they are still weak in many fields. The administration who rejects the leeway given by Islam actually does not follow Islamic teaching. Islam does not order Muslims or a Muslim Government to blindly implement Islamic law until one is destroyed. That is why the Prophet asks his followers to go to Habsyah to save himself. That is why the Prophet migrated to Medina to save Islam and the Islamic struggle.

89. If the conditions allow, we will implement hudud law. But while waiting for hudud law to be implemented, we do something against Islamic teaching. Actually, crimes are prohibited by the country's laws and also Islamic laws. Does the said Raja want the freedom to commit crime only because we have not implemented hudud laws that prohibit the same crime?

90. The second principle is there is no immunity in Islam. All laws are the same for all believers. A Raja that wants to be immune from the law certainly opposes this Islamic principle.

Mr. Speaker Sir,

91. Finally, I wish to touch on the problems related to advising the Rajas. Like I have mentioned, Rajas must accept the Government's advice. In other countries where the Monarchy System still exists although without specific provision that the Kings must act according to the Government's advice, the Kings never act contrary to the Government's advice. Hence, the relationship between the King and Government who represents the People remains good. More than that, in these countries, these Kings are respected and revered by society.

92. Unfortunately, in Malaysia, although there are provisions that the Rajas should act according to the Government's advice, the Rajas hold on to the interpretation of 'advice' as widely accepted – that is advice can be accepted or rejected. This interpretation is wrong. In this area, there are also some matters that the Rajas consider no advice is required to be given. Hence, many things are done in opposition of the Government that represents the People.

93. The problem faced today is caused by the opinion that Rajas could overstep the People's Government. This deceitful act occurs because advice is ignored. An impasse on this amendment is also caused by the unwillingness of the Rajas to accept advice.

94. If this continues, the Parliamentary Democracy Government can no longer fully and truly exist. This is the reason the Government is bringing these amendments to the House. If this process is challenged, the decision can be brought to court. As a Government that holds firm to, with your permission 'rule of law', we will abide by the decision of the courts. At the same time, this matter should not be seen from the legal angle only. It also has to be seen from a political angle.

95. When the Rajas handed the Malay states to the British, the People took the political action to get back the Malay states and preserved the Raja Institution. Although, from a legal point of view, the People do no have the right to as all agreements are made between the British and the Rajas only, the British honored the People's political action.

96. I hope the Malay Rajas also take the lesson from our country's history, specifically the history of the Malayan Union and accept the political will of the country. Although the signs show that the Malay Rajas accept this amendment, I hope after the amendment is approved by the Dewan Rakyat and Dewan Negara, the Malay Rajas will accept and approve these laws.

Posted by the taxidriver786


hope one day our kings and sultan will speak for the other halve citizens.On the issue of racism

Posted: 22 May 2010 04:34 AM PDT

"we are being gracious" not to enforce the law strictly. Which means, "be grateful to UMNO OR ELSE!". we dont give dam if you are the Malay Rajas

Such is the quality of UMNO leaders.No class, no civility, no manners.
UMNO has a "wonderful" track record of being above the law, even the laws the forcibly pass for their own twisted and selfish means. This is just another long list of sad examples. I am not a lawyer but even I know that there are many unfair laws that have been passed despite protests using stupid rationale like "it is a law but it doesn't mean we will enforce it". So why pass these laws? Simple – so they can use them when it suits them and ignore them when it suits them … with the excuse of "we are being gracious" not to enforce the law strictly. Which means, "be grateful to us your Masters OR ELSE!".
And I blame the BN component parties for creating this situation by sucking up to UMNO. It's a result of years of lack of integrity in politics.

RELATED ARTICLEUMNO bastards are great friends of the Jews, Those Jews bastards don't really care that UMNo are the corrupt oppressors

BN style of politics cannot be salvaged. It cannot be patched up as it is fundamentally flawed.
bloated ketuanan melayu powerplay political greed and more greed, political leadership suffers from extreme bouts of unpatriotism, greed, selfishness, unquenchable thirst for wealth and the protection of ill-gotten gains. does malaysia need such leadership?hidden dramas hours before najib's swearing-in?who cares about the details… the fact is that the king condoned the appointment of a man of known dubious character to be pm of malaysia
what this motherfukers Fifteen NGOs barking at ISLAM propagates the idea that the rightful ruler of this world is Allah(SWT) alone. not the Sultans

Johor adalah antara negeri yang paling banyak menanggung hutang kepada Kerajaan Pusat dan Johor jugalah negeri di mana paling ramai Melayu yang menjadi penyokong UMNO. Seperti anak yang terlalu dimanjakan, rakyat Johor dari bani umno yang bermazhab Hadhari terus manjadi lalai dan mamai. Mereka leka dan lupa bahawa negeri mereka tergadai sedikit demi sedikit angkara habuan yang tidak seberapa.

Kelantan adalah negeri yang paling sedikit menanggung hutang kepada Kerajaan Pusat dan Kelantan jugalah negeri di mana paling ramai Melayu yang menjadi penyokong PAS dan Pakatan Rakyat. Bebanan hutang yang sekarang ditanggung dan telah dilunaskan 3/4 daripada jumlah asalnya 19 tahun lalu sebenarnya adalah peninggalan penjajahan regim UMNO yang memerintah Kelantan sebelumnya.

Selangor adalah negeri yang paling kaya dalam peta Malaysia. Selangor jugalah negeri yang paling ramai perompak dan penyamun kelas atasan dari kalangan orang Melayu. 50 tahun Selangor dijajah oleh pemimpin pengkhianat daripada regim zalim, UMNO. Dalam masa itu jugalah Selangor telah melahirkan ratusan malahan mungkin ribuan pengkhianat, perompak, penzina, penipu dan pembunuh dari kalangan Melayu.

Melayu ini memakai baju Melayu. Melayu ini memakai songkok hitam. Melayu ini bercakap dan berucap dalam bahasa Melayu. Melayu ini jugalah yang menipu, merompak, membunuh dan menzalimi bangsa Melayu. Melayu ini jugalah yang disokong dan disanjung oleh Melayu, Cina, India, pendatang haram Bangla, pendatang haram Myanmar, pendatang haram Indon, hantu dan iblis, hanya kerana mereka berkuasa dan berbani UMNO serta bermazhab Hadhari.

Hasil daripada pemerintahan regim UMNO dan berkat Dasar Ekonomi Baru yang dilaungkan oleh UMNO, maka lahirlah jutawan-jutawan Melayu yang antaranya bernama Muhammad a/l Muhamad, Khir a/l Toyo, Satim a/l Diman, Zakaria a/l Derus, Adnan a/l Mansur, Idris a/l Jusoh, Hisham anak Husin, Sharil anak Samad, Khiri anak antu, Adnan anak Yaakub, Shahidan anak Kasim dan beratus yang lain di mana semuanya menjadi jutawan hasil berkat Dasar Ekonomi Baru tajaan UMNO yang disokong oleh pencacai mereka yang miskin dan papa kedana.

Mac 2008 kekuasaan mereka terjejas, kekuasaan mereka terhakis. Mereka menjadi binggung dan semakin sewil. Mereka hilang pertimbangan. Kepala regim mungkin bertukar Mac 2009 ini. Kepala baru, perangai pun baru dan berbeda daripada kepala yang sedia ada. Kepala sedia ada, makan secara senyap. Kepala baru, makan riuh rendah. Kepala nak makan, bini Kepala pun nak makan. Mereka berebut sehingga ada yang menjadi korban dan ada yang hilang dari pandangan, seperti Altantuya dan Balasubramaniam.

Era santai, rompak, joli dan relax yang mereka nikmati selama 50 tahun telah semakin tercemar. Mereka bimbang. Mereka tiada pilihan kerana mereka tiada keimanan. Mereka tiada pilihan kerana mereka semakin hilang sokongan. Kali ini mereka tidak merompak wang kerana mereka telah lama dan banyak merompak. Mereka telah banyak wang. Sekarang adalah masa untuk mereka melabur semula. Melabur untuk memastikan mereka akan terus dapat melakukan rompakan 50 tahun lagi, untuk ini mereka mesti mengekalkan penjajahan zalim regim mereka. Sekarang mereka menjadi perompak orang. Mereka merompak orang yang dangkal keimanannya. Mereka merompak orang yang cetek semangat juangnya. Mereka merompak orang yang lupa asas perjuangannya.

Ketawa terbahak-bahak.
Sakit perut nak terberak.
Apalah nasib kutu berahak.
Bila Najib mengidamkan Perak.

Sejarah Penderhakaan UMNO Terhadap Raja-Raja Melayu

Posted by: Kerajaan rakyat // Category: SundalUMNO

Oleh mNasir


Where is UMNO's soul? May I remind UMNO members, that the soul of UMNO is expressed clearly in Fasal 3 of UMNO's Constitution:
Mempertahankan kemerdekaan dan kedaulatan negara.

Malaysia raised the tone of the allegations to a more dangerous level.

DAULAT TUANKU....Bismillahir rahmanirr ahiim..

Assalamualaikum kepada semua pembaca terutamanya dari kalangan penyokong Umno. Berikut saya sertakan beberapa fakta sejarah mengenai penderhakaan Umno kepada raja-raja melayu.Dalam fakta ini saya tidak boleh mengingati tarikhnya dengan tepat. Akan tetapi insyaAllah kepada semua pembaca yang mengikuti dengan rapat perkembangan politik tanahair sejak dari tahun 80an lagi akan ingat peristiwa-peristiwa ini semua.Juga sekiranya ada kesilapan dalam fakta-fakta ini harap ada pihak tampil untuk membetulkannya.Dan kalau saudara-saudara sekelian ada penambahan,digalakan juga untuk menambah.Kita sebarkan agar generasi muda sekarang tahu akan siapa sebenarnya Umno ini.Saya susun mengikut negeri-negeri.

Kelantan:

Tan Sri Mohammad Mohammad Yaacob yang juga Menteri Besar Kelantan pada era pemerintahan BN di Kelantan (1978-1990) sentiasa lari ke Kuala Lumpur apabila ada majlis rasmi di istana di Kelantan.Ini adalah kerana beliau sentiasa tidak sebulu dengan Tuanku Sultan Kelantan.

Dato'Annuar Musa pernah pada sekitar tahun 90an dahulu ketika krisis imuniti raja-raja melayu meledak,telah menabalkan Tengku Ibrahim (kalau tidak silap saya sepupu kepada Tuanku Sultan Kelantan) sebagai Sultan Kelantan yang baru.Majlis pertabalan itu telah disempurnakan di bawah sebatang pokok gajus di sebuah padang sekolah di Kelantan.Ini kerana beliau ingin menunjukkan kuasa beliau kepada rakyat dan Tuanku.

Namun segalanya gagal malah beliau pula didakwa terlibat dengan kes kehilangan wang PPRT yang sehingga sekarang masih menjadi misteri.

Tun Mahathir pula pernah cuba memalukan Tuanku dengan penyiarkan berita beserta gambar oleh akhbar-akhbar utama negara tentang Tuanku yang dikatakan telah melarikan kereta Lamborghini Diablonya dari simpanan kastam. Peristiwa ini juga berlaku pada ketika kemuncak krisis imuniti raja-raja melayu.

Dalam satu Persidangan Agung Umno,kalau saya tidak silap Dato'Alwi Che Ahmad (Ketua Penerangan Umno Kelantan sekarang) telah melafazkan kata-kata berikut kepada Tuanku "Raja Adil Raja Disembah,Raja Zalim Raja Disanggah"sebagai amaran kepada Tuanku agar tidak mencampuri urusan politik di Kelantan.

Negeri Sembilan :

Yang Di-Pertuan Besar Negeri Sembilan sebelum perlantikan baginda kejawatan Yang Di-Pertuan Agong juga telah dimalukan oleh Tun Mahathir dengan penyebaran berita bahawa baginda menyimpan minuman keras di istana beliau.Hal itu juga disebarkan oleh seluruh akhbar utama negara ketika krisis imuniti raja-raja melayu sedang berlaku.

Selangor :

Menteri Besar Selangor ketika itu Tan Sri Mohd Taib telah melukakan hati Almarhum Sultan Selangor iaitu Sultan Sallahuddin Abdul Aziz dengan "kisah" beliau dengan puteri Tuanku (Ku Yah).Sehinggakan dalam satu siaran berita apabila ditanya wartawan tentang suatu perkara berkaitan dengan menteri besarnya ketika itu,Tuanku menjawab "Kalau bagi kat Mamat tu habislah dengan-dengan saya kena pindah kat Pulau Ketam"Jawapan itu cukup menyerlahkan kekecewaan baginda kepada Tan Sri Mohd Taib yang juga Pengerusi Perhubungan Umno Selangor pada masa itu.

Pahang :

Walaupun Tuanku diketahui ramai bahawa Tuanku adalah seorang penyokong kuat Umno dan BN akan tetapi sokongan itu tidak bermakna bagi Tun Mahathir ketika krisis imuniti raja-raja melayu kerana baginda juga tidak terlepas dari dimalukan oleh Tun Mahathir.

Baginda digambarkan sebagai seorang sultan yang mempunyai harta kemewahan yang melampau dan membazir kerana baginda mempunyai kapalterbang peribadi pada ketika itu.Disiarkan juga kepada seluruh rakyat kapalterbang baginda itu.

Perak :

RELATED ARTICLEPerak Raja Muda Raja Nazrin Shah said Malaysians must embrace multiculturalism and reclaim religion from those who distort the truth.principles of equality and fairness were necessary to the creation of a "truly pluralistic society."

RELATED ARTICLE Datuk Mukhriz Mahathir the mother of all thief wants take legal action against DAP national chairman Karpal Singh then can we hang his father who is guilty of TREASON,krissmuddin and KJ AND THE GENG BAN THEN ?

;" style="font-size: 1em; line-height: 1.65em; ">

Reformasi kedua di Kuala Kangsar

FEB 7 — Setelah lebih sepuluh tahun reformasi berkaitan pemecatan Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, kali ini berlaku peristiwa seumpamanya berkaitan pemecatan tidak sah Datuk Seri Nizar Jamaluddin.

Jika gelombang reformasi tahun 1998 berlaku di Kuala Lumpur kemudian merebak ke seluruh negara, reformasi kali ini berlaku di Kuala Kangsar dan bakal merebak ke seluruh Perak, malah mungkin ke seluruh negara. Sekiranya reformasi sebelum ini kerana tidak puas hati dengan Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad, reformasi kali ini disebabkan tidak puas hati dengan Sultan Perak dan pimpinan Umno. Yang sama, kedua-dua reformasi itu tercetus disebabkan rasa tidak puas hati rakyat yang membuak-buak terhadap ketidakadilan.

Dalam reformasi tahun 1998, Dr Mahathir yang mengukir nama baiknya hampir 18 tahun sekali tersalah tindakannya, nama beliau menjadi busuk dan dibenci oleh ramai rakyat Malaysia.

Demikianlah juga Sultan Perak yang telah memerintah hampir 25 tahun sebagai Sultan yang dihormati, sekali beliau bertindak secara tidak adil rakyat Perak kiri dan kanan sudah mula mencemuh.

Dikatakan Sultan Perak dan Raja Muda begitu terkejut dengan reaksi rakyat Perak menentang tindakan baginda.

Baginda menyangka bahawa rakyat Perak akan akur dengan keputusannya, tetapi peristiwa di Kuala Kangsar ini sememangnya di luar dugaan baginda. Kedudukan baginda sama seperti kedudukan Dr Mahathir pada tahun 1998.

Baginda Raja Muda Nazrin yang menaiki takhta dengan melangkaui giliran pastinya terkejut keretanya telah dibaling batu oleh para penunjuk perasaan. Baginda yang sejak sehari dua ini bertitah dengan tulus dan mulus menyatakan peranan Raja yang mesti mendukung keadilan, dapat melihat sendiri apabila rakyat memberontak setelah dirasakan Raja tidak adil dan berpihak.

Sehari dua ini kalau baginda turun kepada rakyat, tidak mustahil peristiwa yang berlaku kepada Bush akan turut berlaku kepada baginda. Cuma rakyat Perak mungkin tidak baling kasut sebab ramai di kalangan mereka yang tidak berkasut cuma berselipar. Kalau rakyat Perak membaling selipar apalagi jenis selipar jamban, maka sudah tentu Raja Nazrin akan rasa lebih terhina.

Demikianlah juga ayahanda Baginda Sultan Azlan, baginda juga pasti terkejut apabila rakyat sudah berani mempertikaikan kewibawaan baginda. Dalam laman-laman web kutukan demi kutukan telah dilempar kepada Sultan Azlan. Malah lebih mengejutkan lagi dalam web rasmi Sultan Perak, rakyat telah mencaci nista baginda di dalam buku pelawat web tersebut.

Perkataan-perkataan yang dilempar kepada Dr Mahathir, kini dilemparkan pula kepada Sultan Azlan. Sambutan 25 tahun baginda di atas takhta telah dicemari dengan kemarahan rakyat. Sepanjang 25 tahun baginda dihormati, kali ini rakyat tidak lagi menghormati baginda malah dicaci nista oleh mereka.

Dalam artikel kami yang lalu, kami telah menyatakan kalau Sultan Perak memilih untuk untuk menerima pandangan BN, maka sejarah hitam akan terpalit dalam 25 tahun pemerintahan baginda. Rakyat sekarang bukan lagi rakyat yang tidak bijak. Mereka telah mendapat ilmu setaraf dengan baginda, malah mungkin lebih.

Rakyat hari ini telah menolak propaganda media sebagaimana yang dilakukan dalam pilihan raya umum dan dua pilihanraya kecil yang lalu. Mereka telah mendapat berita dari pelbagai sumber.

Minda politik mereka telah beranjak kepada minda politik kelas pertama seperti di negara maju. Golongan yang sebaya dengan Baginda Sultan Perak ramai yang telah kembali menemui Allah, justeru rakyat baginda sekarang benar-benar telah berubah.

Peringatan yang diberikan oleh Mursyidul Am Pas, supaya Sultan Perak meneliti keputusan baginda supaya selaras dengan kehendak rakyat seharusnya diberi perhatian. Sekiranya tidak peristiwa yang berlaku hari ini adalah natijahnya. Lebih daripada itu, sebagaimana yang disebutkan oleh Mursyidul Am Pas, kemungkinan sistem beraja di negara ini akan turut menjadi sejarah sebagaimana yang telah berlaku di negara-negara lain.

Tindakan baginda dipertikaikan oleh banyak pihak termasuk di kalangan vateran Umno sendiri seperti Dr Mahathir, Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah dan Datuk Rais Yatim. Demikian juga dengan Suhakam, turut mempertikaikan pembentukan kerajaan BN yang tidak sah ini.

Reformasi kali kedua ini mewarisi semangat reformasi kali pertama. Rakyat bangun menyatakan bantahan atas ketidakadilan. Kali ini mereka tidak mempedulikan siapa, kerana jelas kemarahan mereka ditujukan kepada Sultan Perak selain daripada pimpinan Umno.

Biarpun media massa memainkan peranan untuk mengelirukan rakyat bahawa Nizar dan penentang keputusan Sultan ini sebagai derhaka, hari ini telah diterima umum derhaka kepada kezaliman itu sesuatu yang mulia.

Zaman feudalisme dunia dan negara ini telah lama berlalu. Sekiranya Hang Tuah dan Hang Jebat menjadi calon Menteri Besar Perak sekarang, rakyat hari ini akan memilih Hang Jebat.

Sebagaimana propaganda media memburuk Anwar dan mewajarkan tindakan Dr Mahathir semasa reformasi 1998 tidak ditelan oleh rakyat, maka dipercayai propaganda media pada kali ini juga tidak akan berkesan.

Betapa lagi kalau Pakatan Rakyat bertindak bijak sepertimana tindakan mereka tahun 1998 yang lalu. Kalaupun kerajaan haram BN tidak tumbang, nama pemimpin mereka termasuklah nama Istana Perak akan terus buruk di mata rakyat.

Hari ini bukan sekadar zaman feudal telah berlalu, tetapi zaman politik perkauman juga hampir tamat. Faktor ini akan menjadikan reformasi kali kedua ini mungkin lebih berjaya. Cuma mungkin bahangnya hanya dirasai di Perak tidak di negeri yang lain. — Harakahdaily.net


Tuanku Sultan Azlan Shah,sultan yang tercerdik dan terpintar yang lahir dikalangan sultan-sultan yang sezaman dengan baginda.Baginda adalah bekas hakim dan diangkat menjadi sultan setelah kemangkatan sultan Perak Raja Idris Syah dan Raja Muda Perak yang tarikh kemangkatan kedua-duanya adalah hampir jaraknya.

Ketika itu baginda menjadi Raja Dihilir Perak.Oleh kerana kecerdikan bagindalah maka Tun Mahathir rasa tercabar dan ingin menghapuskan imuniti raja-raja melayu ketika itu.Pelbagai cara jahat digunakan untuk menundukkan Tuanku dan akhirnya Tuanku mengaku kalah dan tunduk kepada Tun Mahathir.

RELATED ARTICLE

PART2WAS THE SULTAN OF PERAK BLACKMAILED? a company owned by Raja Datuk Seri Eleena Raja Azlan Shah. Thus far no action has been taken by the Anti-Corruption Agency

Filed under: Uncategorized — taxi2driver @ 6:26 am Edit This


READMORE THE SULTAN HAD NO CHOICE. WAS HE BLACKMAILED? 20 MILLION MALAYSIANS SAY NO to NAJIB I DONT want to give my children a DIVIDED Malaysia. NEVER.


Johor :

Baginda juga menerima nasib yang sama seperti Tuanku Sultan Pahang iaitu seorang yang kuat menyokong Umno.Akan tetapi amat malang sekali kerana baginda juga termasuk dalam senarai sultan yang dimalukan Mahathir.

Pelbagai skandal dan cerita dikeluarkan oleh Umno yang diketuai oleh Tun Mahathir tentang baginda.Ini termasuklah juga kisah anakanda Tuanku,Tengku Majid yang ketika itu mewakili pasukan hoki Johor di SUKMA 92 telah memukul penjaga gol pasukan Perak selepas perlawanan.

Berita itu disensasikan sebegitu rupa.Memang ianya satu kesalahan,akan tetapi jika tidak kerana krisis imuniti raja-raja ketika itu,adakah kisah itu akan disebarkan?atau sekadar didiamkan seperti kisah Prebet Adam?

Kerana tekanan Umno jugalah maka Pasukan Timbalan Setia Negeri iaitu pasukan askar peribadi Tuanku dibubarkan.

RELATED ARTICLERaja dan demokrasi — Dato' Nik Abdul Aziz Nik MatMaka orang-orang yang zalim itu dimusnahkan sampai ke akar-akarnya. Segala Puji Bagi Allah Tuhan semesta Alam." (Surah Al An'aam: Ayat 45). — Harakah Daily

Terengganu :

Almarhum Tuanku Sultan Mahmud al-Muktafi Billah Syah telah diugut oleh Mahathir untuk diturunkan dari tahta dengan menggunakan Tengku Ali.Tengku Ali telah mengemukakan tuntutan di mahkamah agar dikembalikan kuasa sultan kepadanya yang mana didalam dakwaannya pemecatan beliau sebagai sultan pada zaman pemerintahan Jepun adalah tidak sah.Sehingga beberapa sesi perbicaraan berjalan,kes itu kemudiannya digugurkan oleh mahkamah.

Begitulah antara beberapa kisah dan senarai penderhakaan Umno kepada raja-raja Melayu.Bagi yang tidak tahu tentang krisis imuniti raja-raja,ianya bermula kerana ada beberapa akta yang tidak persetujui oleh yang Di-Pertuan Agong yang mana ketika itu Agong mempunyai kuasa untuk menolak akta yang telah diluluskan oleh Dewan Rakyat dan Dewan Negara.

Dek kerana tercabar dengan kebijaksanaan Sultan Azlan Syah (Agong ketika itu) maka Tun Mahathir telah memaksa semua raja-raja melayu menandatangani akta yang menyatakan bahawa setiap akta yang telah dipersetujui di Dewan Negara dan juga enakmen yang dipersetujui di Dewan Undangan Negeri akan digazetkan selepas beberapa tempoh walaupun tidak ditandatangani oleh Agong dan sultan.

Hanya Kelantan dibawah kekuasaan PAS satu-satunya negeri yang mempertahankan kedaulatan raja-raja melayu walaupun Umno yang menguasai negeri-negeri lain ketika itu mengaku bahawa dialah juara dalam mempertahankan bangsa melayu.Demi untuk mencapai maksud itu,maka Tun Mahathir telah menggunakan segala ugutan-ugutan yang saya nyatakan diatas kepada raja-raja melayu.

Pada ketika itu jugalah RTM dan TV3 iaitu dua pemutar belit utama Umno telah menyiarkan dengan banyaknya cerita-cerita perihal raja-raja melayu yang mana kesemuanya berkisar tentang kezaliman raja-raja melayu.Antara yang sempat saya ingat ialah Sultan Mahmud Mangkat Dijulang.Cerita ini pada waktu itu telah disiartayang beberapa kali dalam jarak masa yang dekat.Demikianlah dahsyatnya kelakuan Umno sekiranya mereka tidak mendapat apa yang mereka kehendaki maka akan mengamuklah mereka dengan gilanya.

Maka satu perkara yang amat penting bagi kita semua ketika ini,ialah kita seharusnya sedar bahawa Umno adalah penderhaka kepada raja-raja melayu yang tiada tolok bandingnya.Saya yakin dan percaya seluruh raja-raja melayu masih ingat akan peristiwa itu.Betapa hinanya raja-raja melayu diperlakukan Umno.

Pernah juga disiarkan didalam akhbar ketika itu dimana tempat duduk diraja di Stadium Merdeka bagi perlawanan bolasepak telah digunakan oleh jurugambar untuk merakam perlawanan.Ini untuk menunjukan kepada rakyat bahawa raja sudah tidak dihormati lagi.Itulah yang dilakukan oleh Umno kepada raja-raja satu ketika dahulu. Jahat bukan?

Jadi,adakah anda semua hairan dan terkejut dengan segala apa yang telah berlaku sekarang ini?Perkara yang saya sebutkan diatas pada pandangan saya adalah lebih dahsyat daripada apa yang berlaku sekarang kerana ianya melibatkan perlucutan kuasa raja-raja melayu.Alhamdulillah Umno tiada majoriti 2/3 hari ini di parlimen bagi menggubal akta baru yang mungkin memberi kesan yang lebih teruk kepada institusi raja kita.Apatah lagi dengan berlakunya peristiwa seperti sekarang ini.Kalau tidak,mungkin jawatan Yang Di-Pertuan Agong akan tinggal sejarah sahaja kerana amukan Umno…siapa tahu…?

Dan apabila mereka merasa tersepit,maka raja-raja melayu akan dijadikan tunggangan mereka bagi melepaskan diri.Contohnya seperti gesaan Umno bagi mengharamkan penggunaan nama Islam kepada semua parti-parti politik.Umno dengan selambanya menggunakan Majlis Raja-Raja untuk tujuan politik mereka itu.Bagi saya ini adalah wajah sebenar Umno dulu,kini dan selamanya.Sejarah adalah sejarah.Ianya tetap akan diceritakan secara benar walaupun Umno cuba membohonginya.Yang benar pasti datang dan yang batil akan tumbang.Renung-renungkanlah semua.

Raja Petra Kamarudin

In a speech before Malaysia's Dewan Rakyat, or parliament, on February 14, 1993, then-Prime Minister asked that the body strip the country's sultans of their immunity to the law. In the speech, he accused them, among other things, of giving away parts of the country to the British, oppressing the people, breaking civil and criminal laws, misusing the money and property of the government and pressuring government officials. The measure, which included a rule to allow commoners to criticise the Sultans, even the Yang di-Pertuan Agong, or king without fear of the Sedition Act other than questioning the legitimacy of the monarchy itself, was passed overwhelmingly by the parliament, apparently without outcry over Dr Mahathir's rather tough treatment of the country's nine monarchs.

Asia Sentinel brings this up in light of the growing controversy in Malaysia over opposition protests against the Sultan of Perak's decision to oust the Pakatan Rakyat chief minister of his state and sanction the appointment of a member of the United Malays National Organisation as the new chief minister despite the fact that a 28-28 tie remained, and that the Pakatan Rakyat had asked for a snap election to determine which coalition should rule the state.

When Karpal Singh, national chairman of the Democratic Action Party, offered to sue Sultan Raja Azlan Shah in the courts to get his decision reversed, scores of UMNO members filed complaints and led rallies against Karpal Singh for insulting the sultan. Members of the press, including Jed Yoong of the Asia Sentinel, have also been cited.

It would appear from Dr Mahathir's 1993 speech that it is perfectly legal to sue members of the royalty. It would also appear that UMNO members, particularly prime ministers, can make allegations against the country's royalty that opposition leaders and members of the press can't. We invite readers to decide for themselves. We reprint Dr Mahathir's historic 1993 speech below in its entirety.

*****************************************

Mr. Speaker Sir,

I request to propose that is a Bill named "An Act to amend the Constitution" to be read for the second time. Speaker Sir, allow me to introduce and comment on the Act that I mentioned above

2. When the country demanded independence, the country's leaders, who received a huge victory and united support in the 1955 General Election, decided that our country would be administered via Parliamentary Democracy and Constitutional Monarchy.

3. This system was chosen because when the Malay states were administered via the feudal system with power vested in the hands of the Rajas, the Malay states were weak and its administration was in chaos. The states could not establish peace and enforce laws. As a negative result, the states were forced to put themselves under the influence of foreign powers like China, Siam and the West. Finally, all the Malay states were conquered by the British and ruled as a British colony via agreements between the Rajas that administered with the British Government.

4. After the Second World War, the Malay Rajas hoped that when the British administered again, their positions as Rajas, under the advice of the British officials, would be reinstated. The Malay states would be ruled by the British although not like Singapore, Penang and Malacca, where the British had full power.

5. For the majority of the Malay people in the Peninsular states, they were ready to accept a rule in which the Malayness of the Malay states was recognized by the British, although the administration was almost completely controlled by the British. Yet, there were opinions among some Malays that the Malay states should be completely freed from British colonial rule.

6. Malays only realized that they might be marginalized and be made beggars in their own states when the Malay Rajas bowed to MacMichael's threats and signed a new agreement with the British to return the Malay states directly to the British to be ruled as British colonies like Singapore, Penang and Malacca.

7. Because the Rajas so easily handed over Singapore, Penang and Pangkor to the colonialists and then the Malay states, the People ("rakyat") could no longer accept a system that only gives power to the Rajas and the People are not given any role in the country's politics. Also, after World War 2, absolute monarchies decayed throughout the world. Everywhere, absolute monarchies were abolished. Where it was maintained, the powers of the Rajas were limited by the Constitution, or the country's basic law. Hence, when the Federated Malay States demanded for independence, the leaders of the People studied administrative systems while taking into account of the history of the Malay States and other administrative systems.

Mr. Speaker Sir,

8. The old administrative system in the Malay states was a feudal system in which the Rajas had absolute power without a written Constitution. This feudal system was determined by customs that were often manipulated by the people in power. If the people in power breached the customs, it was difficult for palace officials and the People to criticize and make charges. But when the situation became too bad, it was likely that customs were put aside and revolt occurred. But this method brought definite negative consequences without guaranteeing that the revolt would improve the situation.

9. Therefore, the opinion that Rajas should be placed under a Constitution that determined the status and role of the Rajas was born. With this method, the Rajas could no longer act as they liked. The powers of the Rajas would be determined by the Constitution, that is the country's basic law. Yet, there were Rajas who were willing to hand over their own states to foreign powers while ignoring the Constitution.

10. Yet when the Constitutional Monarchy was drafted for the Federation of Malaya, which at that time was moving towards independence, those drafters of the constitution still believed that the Rajas would abide by not only by what was written but also what was written between the lines, that is the spirit of the Constitution.

11. During the British colonial period, because they could appoint or remove Rajas, therefore Rajas accept the advice of the colonial rulers. This matter is included in the agreement between the British and the Malay Rajas in which the advice of the 'British Resident' or 'British Adviser' must be sought and abide by the Rajas save those that relate to Islam and Malay customs. For the British, that the advice must be abided by the Rajas is not strange because in the Government system in Britain, their 'King' or 'Queen' must accept the Government's advice. If not, the King will be removed from the throne. Hence, when King Edward VIII married a divorcee, he had to abdicate the throne on the Government's advice, although there was no specific allocation for this action. What was enforced was not the law but the country's political interests, and the British Kings abide by the country's politics. That's the reason that even before that, the British Parliament decided that Queen Elizabeth pays income tax. She herself just decided to pay income tax. The British Constitution, although not written, is abided from the perspective of spirit and custom.

12. Because the Malay Rajas in colonial times followed the advice, therefore it was believed that the problem of Rajas breaking the law would not happen.

13. The drafters and founders of the administration of the independent Federation of Malaya also believed that the provision that the Rajas that could not be charged in court is only a sign of the majesty of the King and not as a right to commit crimes. Certainly, the drafters of the Constitution and the founders of our country's independence did not mean this provision gave the Rajas the right to be above civil and criminal laws. Constitutional Monarchy has never given privilege to the Rajas to commit crimes. But if the Rajas break the law while carrying out official duties, the Rajas are free from charges. This is because the Government is responsible and the party that should be charged.

14. In the effort to oppose the Malayan Union and return the Malay states and Straits states to the 'status quo ante', that was the situation before World War II, the People played an important role although there is no legal provision. It was clear at that that time to the people that the Rajas without the People's support are easily controlled by the colonialists and other parties. Hence, the People had to be given rights in the country's politics and administration. The role of the People must be determined by the law.

15. Looking at this reality and once again taking the example of Britain, the independent Federation of Malaya chose the Parliamentary Democracy system. The People will elect their representatives to the Dewan Rakyat (People's House or Parliament) and the Dewan Undangan Negeri (State Legislative Assemblies) who will be the main law and policy makers. This allowed the People to play their roles in an orderly and organized manner.

16. Once again following the system in Britain, the laws can only be valid after they are signed by the Rajas. In Britain, this is not a problem because it is not possible that the King will reject the advice of the Cabinet. But in Malaysia, the word 'advice', that the drafters of the constitution believed would have the same meaning like in Britain and during the colonial period, is not clearly interpreted. Therefore, the Rajas can reject the Government's advice.

17. If the Government admits to be made up of representatives chosen by the People to determine the People's power, but the advice of the Government may not be accepted, this meant that the Parliamentary Democracy does not exist and the People are not in power. In some matters, not only the agreement of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong is required, but also the Council of Rajas.

18. Although the representatives were free to speak in the Dewan Rakyat and Dewan Undangan Negeri about any topic, but they could not touch on the Rajas because any criticism of the Rajas could be interpreted as sedition and they could be charged under the Sedition Act. This provision was a result of an amendment made in 1971. Before this, criticism of the Rajas could be made in the house. In Britain and other countries, the Parliament was free to criticize the Rajas. It is clear that that criticizing the Rajas does not destroy the Rajas' majesty.

19. While this prohibition on criticism is said to protect the Rajas' majesty, but when the Rajas are not criticized, they will not be aware of the wrongs that they have committed. Hence, maybe more wrongs will be committed and these wrongs may become more serious. This not only contaminates the Rajas' majesty but can also cause the People to hate the Rajas. It is not true to say the prohibition on criticizing the Rajas will protect the Rajas' majesty. Actually, the majesty of the Rajas will be contaminated because of this prohibition.

20. With the possibility that the Rajas reject advice while being free from criticism and any fair action, hence, the Rajas are actually not Constitutional Monarchs anymore but have become absolute Monarchs. Once again Parliamentary Democracy no longer exists because no action can be taken towards the Rajas that do not receive the advice of the People's Government and commit wrongs.

21. In 1983, action was taken to amend the Constitution so that at the very least the power of the Agong to reject Bills written by Parliament was abolished. This effort was successful but not fully. What was approved in the end was the power of the Agong to reject Parliament Bills was reduced a little by having a new provision such that he can refer back to Parliament if he is unwilling to sign the Bill that has been approved by Parliament. If Parliament approves it again, whether with or without amendments, the Bill will be valid law in 30 days (Article 66(4) Constitution) although unsigned by the Agong.

22. But approvals this way are limited to matters that do not touch on the rights and privileges of the Rajas. To amend the Constitutional provisions that touch on the Rajas, the Council of Rajas must give their agreement.

23. At the state level, no amendments was made to state Constitutions. Hence, there are no laws that could be approved without being signed by the Rajas. This means the powers of the Rajas in the state is beyond the powers of the Dewans Undangan Negeri that represent the People.

24. These provisions do not become problems if there are no opposing opinions between the Rajas and the Dewans Undangan, or there is no wrongdoing by the Rajas, or there is no Malay custom that does not like to jeopardize the relationships with the Rajas. Unfortunately, because the Chief Ministers and Prime Minister are Malays that are unwilling to be on bad terms with the Rajas, when the Rajas do something that is not supposed to be done, no effective criticism is made. Even if there is, the unwillingness of the Rajas to care about the criticisms of these official advisers does not bring about any action towards the Rajas.

25. Hence, in the history of independent Malaysia, the actions of the Rajas and parties who hide behind the Rajas that exceed the rights and privileges of the Rajas become more serious over time. The possibility is that it will become more serious in the future. If there are no amendments to the law, like those suggested here, without doubt worse matters will happen that will cause the Raja Institution to be hated by the people. It is not impossible that if one day in the future, demands are made to completely abolish the Raja System although there are provisions in the Constitution.

26. Hence this amendment that is suggested aims to avoid or prevent the escalation of hatred towards the Rajas that could bring about demands to abolish the Raja System. This amendment is to save the Rajas themselves and the Constitutional Monarchy system. To strengthen the Constitutional provisions to maintain the Raja System, provisions are made such that any suggestion to abolish the Raja System will be interpreted as sedition and falls under Sedition Laws.

27. This amendment does not touch on the privileges given to the Rajas. Rajas will continue to be of Raja status, and facilities provided to the Rajas and the Royal Families according to the Constitution will be continued.

28. To guarantee that Constitutional Monarchy is really effective, three amendments need to be made to the Federal Constitution. First, the Constitutional provision related with the immunity of the Rajas from any legal action as in Clause (1) Article 32 where after the word "court" is added the words "but only those related with whatever that is done or left to be done by him in the carrying out or that which resembles the carrying out of his functions under any written law". This means no court action can be taken towards the Rajas who are carrying out their official duties.

29. Sovereign Immunity is a feudal concept – a concept in which allegedly 'The King can do no wrong'. According Dr. Hogg in his book 'Liability of the Crown', this concept is based on the excuse that a King cannot be charged in his own court. This excuse has long been questioned and rejected by European law experts like Adams who feel that there is no doubt that feudal lords are under their own courts – 'No doubt at all of the subjection of feudal lords to their own courts'.

30. Under the Government of India Act 1935, the Governor General or Governor is only immune when carrying out official duties.

31. In the United States, President Nixon's demand such that he is exempted from a legal provision is rejected by the Supreme Court.

32. In England, the Queen cannot be arrested and the arrest of anyone cannot be made on palace grounds. Even charges towards the Queen cannot be made in court.

33. But in a paper that discussed the Constitutional Law of India, under the Crown Proceedings Act for England the original provision has been amended such that 'Civil proceedings by and against the Crown' can be made. Hence, the difference of 'proceedings' towards the 'Crown' is equivalent to the People.

34. In the same paper it was mentioned that it has become a 'fundamental general rule' that 'His Majesty cannot sanction any act forbidden by the law'. When he cannot sanction, he also cannot do something wrong. Hence, 'His Majesty is under and not above the laws (and) he is bound by them equally with his subjects'.

35. Provisions in the Constitutions of Spain, Belgium, Norway, Denmark, Sweden and Luxemborg all give immunity to the King only when carrying official duties as King. Any wrongs in carrying out official duties fall upon the Government or Ministers.

36. There are no special provisions in any Constitution in European countries that give immunity to the King when carrying out unofficial activities. Yet, the Kings in the respective countries are still recognized and sovereign. They continue to be sovereign and did not lose their sovereignty. The opinion that Kings are only sovereign if the Kings can commit crimes as they like is not supported by the practices of other countries in this era. Even in the older eras, the King is often punished when he commits any wrongdoing, like in the case of Charles I in England and Louis XVI in France.

37. Only in the Constitution of Malaysia is a specific provision under Article 181(2) that 'no proceedings whatsoever shall be brought in any court against the Rules of a State in his personal capacity'.

38. Almarhum Tunku Abdul Rahman Putra al-Haj, this country's first Prime Minister, had written that immunity is not 'satisfactory' because 'Rajas can kill anyone without any action taken against him'. The result of provision 181(2) is very wide. Because the Constitutions of the Federation and States are also law, Article 181(2) actually allows Rajas to breach the Constitution. Because of that, when Rajas conduct business, although prohibited by the Constitution, nothing can be done by the Government. The Agong cannot be charged in any court. But the Council of Rajas can sack him from his position. On the contrary as a Raja, Article 181(2) will protect him.

39. If Malaysia intends to become a country that practices Parliamentary Democracy and Constitutional Monarchy, the immunity that is given to the Rajas must be abolished. Because the Constitution in countries that practice the Constitutional Monarchy System doesn't give immunity to their Kings, the abolishment of the immunity of the Malay Rajas cannot jeopardize their sovereignty. In the modern era, only because the King can't commit crimes as they like, the King's status will not be jeopardized, especially in a country that practices Parliamentary Democracy and Constitutional Monarchy.

40. To guarantee the effectiveness of the abolishment of immunity, two more provisions in the Constitution needs to be amended. The first is related to the provision in Article 63(2) that protects a person from taking part in a debate in Parliament or Parliamentary Committee from being questioned in court, which has been amended by Article 63(4) if it touches the provision of the Sedition Act. This provision is made in 1971. This means criticism towards the King can be made before 1971 without jeopardizing the Raja's sovereignty. Hence, it allows again the People's Representatives to criticize the Rajas who were wrong without denying the original rights and privileges of the Rajas. The amendment of Article 63 after Clause (4) reads:- "(5) Notwithstanding Clause (4) no one can be charged with any proceedings in any court related with anything that is said by him about the Agong or a Raja while taking part in whatever proceedings in any of the Parliamentary Committee or any of its task force except if it organizes the abolishment of the Constitutional position of the Agong as the Head of the Government of the Federation or the status of the Constitutional Monarch of a state, according to whichever applies". Article 72 of the Federal Constitution is amended by inserting after Clause (4) the following Clause:- "(5) Notwithstanding Clause (4) no one can be charged with any proceedings in any court related to anything that has been said by him about the Rajas in any state while taking part in any proceedings in the Dewan Undangan in any state or in any committee unless if he organizes the abolishment of the status of the Raja as the Constitutional Monarch of the state".

41. The interpretation of the sedition towards the King in the Constitution is so wide until no criticism is can be made in Parliament by members of the Dewan Rakyat or Dewan Undangan. Hence, the media also has no opportunity to report. Criticism can only be made by the Rajas' advisors behind closed doors. If this criticism is ineffective, there is nothing that can be done.

42. Actually all three former Prime Ministers, as advisors to the Rajas, have already criticized the Rajas many times while they were in service. I know criticisms have been made because this matter has been repeatedly reported in Cabinet meetings and also the UMNO Supreme Council.

43. Allahyarham Tun Hussein Onn, as Prime Minister, had in his written speech in a Raja Council Meeting, only attended by His Highnesses or their representatives, harshly criticized the doings of the Rajas that should not be done.

44. But all these criticisms are not effective. The matters touched upon continued to be done, even intensified. What was never done during the British era and in the early years of independent Malaysia are now done obviously and widespread.

45. Although almost all Prime Ministers and Chief Ministers report to the UMNO Supreme Council, there are problems that they face but the public are not told. Hence, the public do not know the problems faced by the Government. Most of them continue to believe that the system of Constitutional Monarchy is operating smoothly with the Rajas honoring all the provisions in the Constitution. Only a small portion of the People know and they are not comfortable with the Rajas' doings. But they can't express their views and feelings because there is a Sedition Act.

46. The Sedition Act and the relevant provisions for sedition towards the Rajas in Article 63(4) of the Constitution prohibits the People from getting information and voicing their opinions. They can only talk among themselves. Political leaders, including Government leaders, definitely hears and realizes that the views and anger of a number of People that knows about the Rajas' doings. Such is their anger till there are, mostly among the young generation, that consider the Raja System to be behind times.

47. But because of the Sedition Act and prohibitions on criticizing the Rajas, Rajas do not listen and do not believe their advisors when such information is conveyed about the People's anxiety. The Rajas and the Royal Families seems to opine that all of these are inventions of the advisors to the Rajas to scare them or snatch the Rajas' rights.

48. In this situation, the Rajas not only continue their habits that the People dislike and are uneasy with but also matters that are hated by the People. If this trend is not stopped, the feelings of the People towards the Raja will boil over and become so bad that at a point of time in the future, the People may no longer be able to control their feelings. Letters to newspapers that expressed such feelings have existed for a long time.

48. With your permission Speaker Sir, I wish to read an excerpt of an article sent to The Straits Times in 1946 by a prominent Malay leader, when the British suggested the formation of the Malayan Union. This leader went on to hold a high position in Government. This article was not published in the Straits Time but was passed to me recently by the writer.

50. This writer says, with your permission, 'All intelligent Malay leaders ought now seriously to give most profound and careful thought to the question whether the time has not ar- rived when the Malay Royalty (I mean the Sultan and Raja) should gracefully withdraw themselves altogether'.

51. If opinions were already like this in 1946, is it not possible that it will arise again in 1993 if the Rajas are not stopped from doing things that are undesirable?

52. The protection and privilege given to the Rajas aim to put the Rajas in a high and majestic place. The protection and privilege is not to allow the Rajas to do whatever they like including committing crime. Rajas who are aware and understand the true meaning of these provisions will always take care to prevent contaminating itself in acts or behaviours that are not good and disliked by society. Rajas who are aware will know acts that ignore the feelings and opinions of society will cause the People to finally remove the Rajas, and even abolish the Raja System. This is what happened in countries that are now republics.

53. In Malaysia, the protection given is very thick. Sovereign Immunity from laws and prohibitions from criticism, although only by members of the Dewans Undangan that has been entrusted to administer the country, separates the Rajas from the real world. In this situation, the acts and behavior of the Rajas will become worse in the long run. This is happening in Malaysia.

54. Hence, it is important Members of the Dewan are given back the right to criticize the Rajas in their debates. Without this right, the Members of the Dewan will fail to practice the Parliamentary Democracy system and will fail to prove that the People are the ones in power in this system. Without this right, the ones in power are the Rajas and not the People.

55. With the existence of a prohibition on criticizing the Rajas, Members of the House actually cannot protect the Raja Institution and Raja System. Hance, the freedom of Members of the House to speak in the House should not be blocked by the Sedition Act like provided for under Article 63(4) and 72(4). With the addition of Article 63(5) and 72(5), the Members of the House not only can protect the Raja's position but also the Constitutional Monarchy that is clearly protected by the Constitution, because it is mentioned in Article 63(5) and 72(5) that the exception from the Sedition Act does not include organizing the 'abolishment of the Constitutional status of the Agong as the Head of the Federation or the status of a Raja in a state'.

Mr. Speaker Sir,

56. The second matter that can void the abolishment of the Rajas' immunity is when doing something that breaks the law in a non-official matter is the Rajas' right to pardon as provided for in Article 42. With this provision, a Raja can pardon himself if he is convicted by a court after immunity from legal action is withdrawn. This means the withdrawal of immunity is meaningless and ineffective.

57. Hence, the Government proposes that Article 38 and 42 of the Federal Constitution be amended as in Clause (2) Article 28 and Clause (12) Article 42. Clause (2) Article 38 of the Federal Constitution is amended – (a) by substituting the comma at the end of the paragraph (c) with a semicolon; and (b) by inserting after paragraph (c), the following paragraph: "(d) giving pardon, reprieve and respite, or to remit, suspend and reduce sentences, under Clause (12) Article 42,". Article 42 of the Federal Constitution is amended by inserting, after Clause (11), the following Clauses: "(12) Notwithstanding the contents of this Constitution, if the powers mentioned in this Article – (a) have to be carried out by the Yang di-Pertuan of a State and are required to be carried out on himself or his wife, his sons or daughters, these powers have to be carried out by the Chief Minister of the State that will act on the advice of the Board of Pardons formed for the state under this Article and needs to be chaired by; (b) are required to be carried out on the Agong, a Raja of a State, or his Consort, according to whichever is applicable, these powers needs to be carried out by the Council of Rajas and the following provisions are required to be used: (i) when attending any proceeding under this Clause, the Agong cannot be accompanied by the Prime Minister and other Rajas cannot be accompanied by their Chief Ministers; (ii) before making any decision about any matter under this Clause, the Council of Rajas must consider whatever written opinion that may be given by the Attorney-General about this matter. (c) are required to be carried out by the Agong or the Raja of the related State with his sons or daughters, according whichever is applicable, the powers have to be carried out by a Raja of a State named by the Council of Rajas and that Raja has to act according to the advice of the relevant Board of Pardons formed under this Article. (13) For the meaning of paragraph (b) and (c) Clause (12), the Agong or respective State Raja, according to whichever is applicable, and the State Yang di-Pertuas cannot be made members of the Council of Rajas".

58. With this amendment, the Raja cannot hear the plea and pardon himself. If the Raja or his Consort who pleas for pardon, the Council of Rajas will hear and decide on the respective case.

59. The Raja also cannot listen to the plea of and pardon his offspring. The Council of Rajas will appoint another Raja to hear and decide on the pardon pleas of a Raja's offspring.

60. With the abolishment of the immunity of the Rajas from legal action, except when carrying out official duties, it is believed that a Raja will not commit acts that can be charged in courts. With this, the Raja will be honored by the People.

61. The abolishment of the ban applied on Members of Parliament and the Dewans Undangan Negeri by the Sedition Act will prevent the Rajas from committing any act that may attract the criticism of the respective members of the house.

62. The abolishment of the powers to pardon himself will make legal action more effective.

63. The real reason for these amendments is not because the Government or the People want to drag the Rajas to court as they like. The reason is so that the Rajas will constraint themselves from committing acts that can negatively cause legal action. Hence, the Rajas will be respected more.

64. It should be reminded that the respect of the People towards the Raja cannot be determined by laws. With your permission, 'Respect must be earned'. Having laws that scare the People will not bring 'respect'. With the realization that the Rajas can be brought to court, Rajas will certainly avoid committing acts that will cause the people not to respect the Rajas. Hence, the Raja Institution will be better respected and better preserved.

65. To strengthen the efforts to preserve the Rajas and Raja System, any suggestion or exertion to abolish the Raja System is interpreted as sedition and will be charged under the Sedition Act.

Mr. Speaker Sir,

66. I feel very sad that today I am forced to present to the august House a Bill to amend the Constitution that has in some way contaminated the good name of the Rajas and the Raja Institution. With a heavy heart I presented and explained the suggested amendments.

67. That the Government made the decision to amend the Constitution is not without reason. Actually, as I have said, the Government has refrained from making these amendments since the start when we achieved independence. But this approach does not alleviate the situation. On the contrary, the situation became worse.

68. In the end, an incident in which a Raja assaulted a citizen and before this another incident in which the son of a Raja assaulted a citizen. The Government cannot look lightly at such events without jeorpardizing the Government's credibility as responsible leaders.

69. The Government is forced to make a firm stand to protect the People from being oppressed by the Rajas. Certainly, this stand was not made because of these two incidents only. Before this there were many incidents where the Rajas oppressed the People, Rajas broke civil and criminal laws, Rajas misused the money and property of the Government and country, Raja pressuring and oppressing officials.

70. The incident in Johor is only, with your permission, 'the straw that broke the camel's back'. The People's reaction towards these incidents clearly shows that the People no longer accept and 'tolerate' these kind of acts.

Mr. Speaker Sir,

71. There are people that ostensibly wish to give powers to and defend the Rajas when the Raja commit crimes. They try twist the People's thoughts by accusing the Government is trying to abolish the Raja System.

72. I wish to assert that the Barisan Nasional government does not at all suggest to abolish the Raja System. This is clear from the suggested amendments. Any suggestion to abolish the Raja System will be interpreted as sedition and the Government will take action under the Sedition Act upon anyone who suggest or act to abolish the Raja System.

Mr. Speaker Sir,

73. The government is aware that the People, specifically the Malays accept and support the Malay Raja Institution. The accusations that the Government is trying to abolish the Raja System is merely because of political interests. The Government represents the majority of the Malays and other races will abide by the wishes of the People and will not do something that is unpopular.

74. Because it is clear that the majority of the people of all races still wants the Raja System, specifically the Constitutional Monarchy System, the Government will guarantee that this system is protected by the Constitution.

Mr. Speaker Sir,

75. There are parties that opine that the Malay Rajas are needed to protect the Malays. The MacMichael Agreement and the Malayan Union incidents clearly prove that those who are willing and able to protect the Malays are the Malays themselves. If not because they rose up and opposed the Malayan Union, today, the Malays would have been beggars in their own country.

76. The attempts by some parties to scare the Malays towards the amendment are caused by those who wish to use racial sentiments for the interests of their own parties. Their history does not assure us that they are sincere. They are the ones who try to weaken the Malays by breaking up UMNO and working with certain parties that are viewed with suspicion by the Malays.

77. Can merely barring the Rajas from committing crimes cause the Rajas to lose their sovereignty and no longer be Rajas? The opinion that the Rajas can only be Rajas if they are given rights and given privileges to commit crime contravenes the concept of Rajas as the source of law. In the old era in the West, Kings possessed the right to commit crime. For instance, according to the concept, with your permission, 'Droit du seigneur' (right of the Lord) or the Right of the Lord, the King has the right to spend a night with all newlyweds.

78. But in the West, all these rights have been abolished. That is why Western countries that preserve the Monarchy System does not have specific immunity for the Rajas. Even if there is a mention that the King cannot be brought court, it is only a formality. King, Government and the People know if the King commits a crime, he will be brought to court, and he will be removed from his throne. Hence, the Kings in the Western countries will not intentionally commit crime.

79. Although it is clear that the Kings in the West are not immune from legal and non-legal action, the Kings are still Kings. They are respected and admired.

Mr. Speaker Sir,

80. In the British era, the Malay Rajas were not only immune but were also under the orders of the British officials. They can be appointed and removed from the throne. One of MacMichael's threats so that the Rajas would sign the Malayan Union Agreement is they will be removed from the throne if they do not sign the Agreement.

81. In this situation, the Rajas will continue to be Rajas. The People are not demanding the Rajas be dislodged or the Raja System to be abolished although the Rajas handed over the Malay states to the colonialists. Happily I am reminded that at that time the Rajas in Indonesia, India and Pakistan have been rejected by the People who demanded for independence. On the contrary, Malaysians, mainly the Malays and UMNO, have fought to save the Rajas and Raja System.

82. The opposition of the Malays against the Malayan Union is clear because the fortunes of the Malays are in the hands of the Malays. The safety of Malays is not jeopardized with the Malay Rajas who do not have the right to commit crime. There are parties that say the abolishment of the Raja's right to commit crime, the Malays are no longer Malays and that will be the end of the special position of the Malays. This is not true. This is slander. Those who guarantee that the Malays will continue to be Malays and Malay rights are protected are the Malays themselves. They, through their representatives and the Government that they choose, create and implement various activities to protect and fight for the honour of the Malays.

Mr. Speaker Sir,

83. A Raja asked why the Constitutional amendments are related to Islam when the Government does not agree with the implementation of Sharia and Hudud law. According to him, he is ready to accept Islamic law without immunity but is unwilling to accept the country's laws which are not Islamic law.

84. With or without his blessing, the position of the Malay Rajas since Merdeka has been determined by the law, that is the Constitution. These laws also give certain special privileges to the Rajas. Among these privileges is immunity from legal action. If the Rajas were willing to accept the immunity under laws which are not Islamic laws, why is the abolishment of immunity in the same laws are not accepted by the Rajas?

85. In Islam there are two principals that are strongly held by the law. The first is there is no difference among Muslims in enforcement of Islamic laws. Raja and People are the same. The immunity for Rajas contravenes this principle. Rejecting the abolishment of the immunity so that the difference between Raja and People is preserved in the laws does not reflect a strong adherence to Islamic principles.

86. Receiving immunity from laws said to be not Islamic law, but rejecting the abolishment of this immunity in the same laws clash with the allegation that only Islamic law is acceptable.

87. Islam gives much leeway. Islam takes into account all factors and circumstances faced by its believers. Such that even in carrying out religious duties, environment, an individual's health and the current circumstances are considered. Therefore, praying can be made without certain movements, without facing the kiblat, before, after or together, in a congregation or alone. Palestinians, who were driven out by the Zionist Rule, could pray without taking off their shoes. In other religious duties, there is also leeway. Such is with the enforcement of hudud law. The state of the environment and society must be considered. That is the reason why not many countries in which the majority of the residents are Muslims do not establish hudud law. Those who do, also do not fully implement them.

88. The Government does not reject hudud law. The implementation must take into account the situation of the country in which Muslims only make up 56 percent and they are still weak in many fields. The administration who rejects the leeway given by Islam actually does not follow Islamic teaching. Islam does not order Muslims or a Muslim Government to blindly implement Islamic law until one is destroyed. That is why the Prophet asks his followers to go to Habsyah to save himself. That is why the Prophet migrated to Medina to save Islam and the Islamic struggle.

89. If the conditions allow, we will implement hudud law. But while waiting for hudud law to be implemented, we do something against Islamic teaching. Actually, crimes are prohibited by the country's laws and also Islamic laws. Does the said Raja want the freedom to commit crime only because we have not implemented hudud laws that prohibit the same crime?

90. The second principle is there is no immunity in Islam. All laws are the same for all believers. A Raja that wants to be immune from the law certainly opposes this Islamic principle.

Mr. Speaker Sir,

91. Finally, I wish to touch on the problems related to advising the Rajas. Like I have mentioned, Rajas must accept the Government's advice. In other countries where the Monarchy System still exists although without specific provision that the Kings must act according to the Government's advice, the Kings never act contrary to the Government's advice. Hence, the relationship between the King and Government who represents the People remains good. More than that, in these countries, these Kings are respected and revered by society.

92. Unfortunately, in Malaysia, although there are provisions that the Rajas should act according to the Government's advice, the Rajas hold on to the interpretation of 'advice' as widely accepted – that is advice can be accepted or rejected. This interpretation is wrong. In this area, there are also some matters that the Rajas consider no advice is required to be given. Hence, many things are done in opposition of the Government that represents the People.

93. The problem faced today is caused by the opinion that Rajas could overstep the People's Government. This deceitful act occurs because advice is ignored. An impasse on this amendment is also caused by the unwillingness of the Rajas to accept advice.

94. If this continues, the Parliamentary Democracy Government can no longer fully and truly exist. This is the reason the Government is bringing these amendments to the House. If this process is challenged, the decision can be brought to court. As a Government that holds firm to, with your permission 'rule of law', we will abide by the decision of the courts. At the same time, this matter should not be seen from the legal angle only. It also has to be seen from a political angle.

95. When the Rajas handed the Malay states to the British, the People took the political action to get back the Malay states and preserved the Raja Institution. Although, from a legal point of view, the People do no have the right to as all agreements are made between the British and the Rajas only, the British honored the People's political action.

96. I hope the Malay Rajas also take the lesson from our country's history, specifically the history of the Malayan Union and accept the political will of the country. Although the signs show that the Malay Rajas accept this amendment, I hope after the amendment is approved by the Dewan Rakyat and Dewan Negara, the Malay Rajas will accept and approve these laws.

Posted by the taxidriver786


Allah revisited... at BUM 2010

Posted: 22 May 2010 10:31 AM PDT

I thought its all over or at least things have cooled down. Now I understand why some politicians and even bloggers love riding on sentiments, very sensitive sentiments.

At bloggers BUM 2101 Forum today, the Allah issue took center stage again (here). Panelists, both from Umno and the Opposition exchanged views and words about Allah.

When one said Allah is a universal word and can be used by all religions, the other contested it. Although different opinions didn't lead to breakup among friends (both from pro and anti-govt), I personally believe such a topic could have been avoided.

Speakers like PKR's Zaid Ibrahim, lawyer Harris Ibrahim and Khalid Samad of PAS spoke different aspects of Allah and on individual tone. So was blogger Akramshah Sanusi.

The bottom line is, let us not relive and add fuel to the issue. Although the government, especially Umno has yet to come up with a solid proposal as to how the issue should be resolved, let's everybody - irrespective of political parties and religions - put it to rest and live as Malaysians!


Sibu Tali Gantung Buat Anwar…..

Posted: 22 May 2010 03:28 AM PDT

Hishamuddin Rais
Mei 20, 10
12:53pm

Saudaraku yang baik hati,

Aku menulis surat ini di pagi sesudah Pakatan Rakyat memenangi kerusi Sibu. Aku tahu bahawa kaum kerabat Pakatan sedang dalam keriangan. Syabas! Aku tahu kau juga sedang tersenyum puas kerana kemenangan ini. Aku hanya ingin sama berkongsi riang.

Kemenangan di Sibu rasa aku adalah kemenangan rakyat yang mahukan perubahan. Kemenangan itu adalah manifestasi kebencian majoriti warga Sarawak yang telah bosan dengan tindak tanduk dan rompakan gerombolan manoriti pemimpin politik Sarawak.

Hari-hari akhir hegemoni seorang pemimpin Melanau telah kelihatan. Ini aku amat yakin.

Sebelum kau terus membaca surat aku ini, aku perlu minta maaf terlebih dahulu. Ini kerana surat ini akan membawa berita yang tidak akan mententeramkan hati kau.

Aku sebenarnya adalah pembawa ayat-ayat songsang. Aku pembawa ayat-ayat setan yang selalu tidak menyenangkan hati. Aku menjadi perawi yang membawa surah-surah yang menggegarkan keyakinan diri.

Ingin aku beritahu bahawa isi surat ini telah aku fikirkan ketika kiraan undi semakin melonjak untuk Pakatan. Setiap kali undi melonjak setiap kali degup jantung aku bergegar. Apakah kau faham apa yang ingin aku katakan ini?

Aku mahu kau sedar bahawa kemenangan di Sibu adalah notis akhir untuk menghantar Anwar Ibrahim ke tali gantung. Kau faham?

Nah! Ke tali gantung - inilah ayat-ayat songsang yang ingin aku bawa ke hadapan muka kau. Ayat-ayat songsang ini mengerunkan bunyinya. Kau ulang baca sekali lagi: Kemenngan di Sibu adalah tali gantung untuk Anwar.

Ingatkah pada Lunas?

Mungkin kau anggap aku ini sasau dan kurang siuman. Kau salah. Atau aku ini selalu 'potong stim' dan merosakkan suasana ghairah di pesta. Kau salah lagi. Biar aku terangkan kenapa.

Begini kisahnya: Kau ingat pilihan raya kecil Lunas? Oh, maafkan aku, mungkin kau masih anak sekolah ketika itu. Atau kau tidak mengikuti politik semasa. Atau kau ketika itu sedang dilamun cinta berahi berpacaran.

Biar aku surahkan tentang Lunas ini. Pilihan raya kecil Lunas ini berjalan pada bulan November tahun 2000. Ini ketika Dr Mahathir Mohamad masih berkuasa.

Dalam pilihan raya kecil Lunas ini Saifuddin Nasution, calon Parti Keadilan Nasional (KEADILAN) - ketika itu belum bergabung dengan Parti Rakyat Malaysia (PRM) - telah menang.

Satu kemenangan yang amat memberangsangkan. Perasaan di Lunas ketika itu samalah seperti kemenangan di Sibu minggu ini.

Pemerhati politik melihat Lunas membawa tanda-tanda bahawa Dr Mahathir semakin di benci oleh rakyat. Imej Dr Mahathir sedang diperlecehkan rakyat di sana sini. Ini betul. Tetapi ada satu pekara yang gagal dilihat dan dibaca oleh pemerhati politik. Pekara ini ialah: Kuasa bukan mudah dilepaskan.

Kemenangan KEADILAN di Lunas telah membangunkan Dr Mahathir daripada tidurnya. Dr Mahathir terus merancang dengan licik untuk memastikan KEADILAN tumpas dan tidak dapat bergerak bebas.

Setahun sesudah pilihan raya kecil Lunas, Dr Mahathir menangkap 10 orang aktivis reformasi, termasuk pimpinan muda KEADILAN. Kesemuanya ditangkap bawah akta ISA.

Lebih penting daripada semua p'raya kecil

Berhadapan dengan kemenangan KEADILAN di Lunas, Dr Mahathir telah sedar bahawa imejnya amat dibenci rakyat. Selain menggunakan ISA, dengan liciknya Dr Mahahir telah melantik Abdullah Ahmad Badawi sebagai penggantinya.

Melantik Abdulah seumpama melantik seorang tukang kebun menjadi gabenor bank negara. Tetapi inilah kelicikan Mahathir Mohamad

Nah! Kau akan bertanya apa sangkut pautnya Lunas dengan Sibu? Bagaimana Sibu ini menjadi tali gantung untuk Anwar?

Sabar, sabar. Kau lupa bahawa Sibu ini lebih penting daripada seribu Lunas. Sibu lebih penting daripada semua pilihan raya kecil di semenanjung Malaysia. Ketika kau merayakan kemenangan di Sibu ini, aku ingin mengingatkan kau bahawa Sibu dan seluruh Sarawak, termasuk Sabah adalah peti duit simpanan untuk gerombolan.

Apabila kau menang di Sibu ertinya kau telah mula menghafal angka pin kepada peti duit simpanan gerombolan. Seperti aku katakan tadi: Kuasa bukan senang untuk dilepaskan. Kau sedang bermain dengan bahaya.

Yakinlah, ketika ini para gerombolan dari semenanjung sedang merancang untuk melupuskan Taib Mahmud daripada arena politik Sarawak. Gerombolan di semenanjung menganggap susuk si Taib ini adalah susuk yang paling di benci oleh warga Serawak.

Ini samalah seperti Dr Mahathir mencari penggantinya dahulu; kalau tidak diganti si Taib Mahmud, akan menuruti apa yang terjadi kepada Wan Mokhtar Wan Ahmad di Terangganu.

Apa ini ada sangkut paut dengan tali gantung?

Serangan bertalu-talu ke Sarawak

Ah! Kau kurang sedar bahawa Pakatan sedang mengancam keselamatan gerombolan. Kalau dahulu gerombolan hanya diserang di semenanjung tetapi kini serangan bertalu-talu telah beralih ke Serawak.

Ini tanda-tanda yang amat bahaya untuk gerombolan. Bank simpanan gerombolan telah mula pecah. Suasana ini amat merbahaya.

Aku yakin gerombolan - sesudah Sibu - akan bertindak ganas. Justeru Anwar perlu digantung secepat mungkin. Ini yang aku maksudkan dengan tali gantung daripada Sibu. Apakah kau tidak faham bahawa daripada kaca mata gerombolan - mereka melihat nyawa dan kuasa hanya dapat diselamatkan dengan memenjarakan Anwar.

Jika Anwar terus bergerak di luar penjara maka tali gantung ini akan beralih menjerut kepala mereka sendiri.

Aku tahu masih ada kawan dan teman-teman yang membaca bahawa sandiwara yang sedang dipentaskan di mahkamah Jalan Duta ini akhirnya akan membebaskan Awar Ibrahim.

Saudaraku yang baik hati,

Aku harap kau tidak tersalah anggap apabila kau melihat sandiwara di mahkamah yang sedang dipentaskan ini. Aku tahu bukan semua anggota gerombolan yang mahu Anwar di penjara. Ada yang memiliki jalur pandangan yang berbeza.

Mereka merasakan jika Anwar di penjara maka masa depan gerombolan semakin bertambah gelap dan nyawa gerombolan akan bertambah pendek. Mereka ini tidak ramai.

Ilusi

Gulungan minoriti ini sesudah Sibu akan merasa diri mereka terancam sama jika Anwar masih bebas. Kini, aku yakin mereka juga mahu Anwar dipenjara secepat mungkin.

Sesudah kemenangan Pakatan di Sibu, aku amat yakin kes Anwar akan dipercepatkan bagi memastikan beliau diketepikan daripada politik tanah air kita. Anwar wajib diketepikan sebelum pilihan raya Sarawak yang wajib diadakan sebelum akhir tahun 2011.

Kepada kau dan kawan-kawan dalam Pakatan, hanya satu harapan aku: Aku berharap kau tidak akan memiliki apa-apa ilusi tentang mahkamah. Aku juga berharap kau akan dapat memahami tentang kuasa.

Telah aku katakan beberapa kali - kuasa tidak mudah untuk dilepaskan. Di malam pengiraan undi di Sibu itu, kau sendiri dapat melihat bagaimana gerombolan dan apparatchik (pengikut setia) Suruhanjaya Pilihan Raya (SPR) bekerja keras untuk mengabui mata rakyat agar gerombolan terus menang.

Aku sebagai pembawa ayat-ayat songsang sekali lagi ingin mengingatkan kau bahawa konspirasi untuk melupuskan politik Anwar akan bertimbun.

Kau tunggu dan lihat. Hanya yang ingin aku ingatkan, dalam merayakan kemenangan di Sibu sedarlah bahawa tali gantung untuk Anwar Ibrahim semakin rapat.

Wassalam.


Rosmah teaches Martha Stewart about “a meal every 2 hrs”

Posted: 21 May 2010 11:34 PM PDT

Caption contest anyone? :)

Am I the only one who's a little sketched out by Martha Stewart's visit?

Not much against her personally, but the way she's being wined and dined by Rosmah, and the copious 'praise' she's giving, makes me think: this must be costing Malaysians a pretty penny :P

Anyone know how much exactly? All for a bunch of tweets? (one day @NatAsasi will make equal millions I'm sure, haha)

I mean, this is from the wonderful people that brought us the 2 page Rosmah ad – and inviting Martha Stewart round seems to fit into the whole 'look at me! look at me! i'm kicking it with the rich and famous' kinda mould :P

Of course, I cannot help but recall that Martha Stewart has been convicted and jailed for financial cheating – which went put together with Rosmah and all involving her, just increases the sketch factor.

The whole thing just makes my hair stand on end just a little bit :P "Rosmah effect"? :P :)

Parting shot:

"A food coma – a meal every two hours – here you are asked – have you eaten?" she tweeted on Wednesday.

A meal every two hours would certainly account for the girth of a certain someone :D Upon seeing said someone, I think it's more like "I'm going to be eaten!!" :P :)


What is there to invest anymore?

Posted: 21 May 2010 09:55 PM PDT

It used to be when friends asked me what shares to buy, I would recommend a few solid blue-chips, like Perlis Plantations (PPB), Public Bank (PBB)and Sime Darby.

I have also told them to buy and keep these shares long term. In fact, I myself have gained quite a lot from the appreciation of these shares over the years. PPB and PBB are both selling  over double digits per share now. Over the years, they have given out  bonus issues as well as attractive dividends and people  who have bought them even 5 to 10 years back would have made a ton of money and those who have bought in the 80s much more.

Financial people used to say that if you want to know about Malaysian economy and its future prospect, just look at the conglomerate Sime Darby Bhd. It has wide ranging businesses, from retails, trading, plantations, industries, constructions, cars, real estates, healthcare, energy  and so on. Those who have bought Sime Darby's shares before would have made quite a bit too.

Many of the management in Sime rose through the ranks over the years  and they  have inherited the  culture of being careful, conservative and  prudent, since many of the companies in Sime's  stable like Dunlop Malaysia, Tractors , Guthrie, Golden Hope (formerly Harrison and Crosfield) and so on were formerly run by the British .

The British, despite the colonial power that it was , did many good things to Malaysia. Unfortunately,  many of these we have squandered in the name of nationalism. Of course, there were some not-too-good things left behind too; one of the most glaring being the racial divide that was a direct result of the British system of divide and rule. Despite that, we cannot deny that there were many good things that were left for us.

Among the good things left behind were  good roads and communication , fair and independent judicial system, good  healthcare , and a relatively good education system. Besides the  road system that still remains good, all the other systems have turned from good to mediocre, and from mediocre to bad.

One of the legacies left behind by the departing British was the civil service, which was fair, efficient and most importantly, it operated according to the rules and laws of the land. I would not want to use that to compare with the present civil service, since this is outside the topic I am discussing today, and I leave it to you to assess for yourself.

Another legacy was of course good business practices in many former British companies which had been  taken over by Malaysians since our independence.

For those who have worked in these companies and rose to managerial positions, they have inherited a sense of openness, fairness and most importantly accountability.

But over the years, as the political and economic landscape changes in Malaysia, we can see a slow but definite change in business practice too.

It is no longer how good a person run his  business that determines the success or failure of that company. It is who that person is and whom that person knows that determine the success of his businesses.

Those who have connections and  pull the right strings get all the lucrative projects, and not only that, slowly and surely a culture of cronyism and kickback started. To get business means that you must know the right people, but you must also be prepared to offer 'commissions' for these 'right' people to get the business you want.

Once the culture of cronyism sets in, the whole philosophy of how to do business in Malaysia changes. It  is no longer about who has the best to offer the country, but rather who has the best to offer the decision makers, both in public or private sectors.

We all know that once a culture has taken roots, it is a mammoth task to change that culture. In this case, the roots are so deep that even a tsunami may not uproot the whole culture of cronyism and ways of doing business.

Not too longer ago, in 2007, we had the Transmile debacle, in which accounting frauds covered up a multi-million loss and turned that loss into multi-million paper gain — to the tune of a whopping overstatement of hundreds of millions. The share price of that company dropped steeply after this was made known  and hundreds of minor shareholders, which could have been you and me, suffered losses because of the fraud.

Sime is no Transmile. It was a profitable company. It used to be very well run and most fund managers and many private investors would invest in it as a form of 'fixed deposits';  as a hedge against violent share price movement, since as a blue-chip, even during a bear market, its price would hold relatively well as compared to many other companies.

So the news of cost overrun and loss to the tune of a billion in this company- mind you, BILLION- is a shocking news. How could that have happened?

Dr Mahathir has written in his blog that the company knew about the losses 3 years ago, but why wasn't the public told of these? As a public company, it has an obligation to reveal all these not only to its shareholders, but the public as well, since everyone of us could be a potential investor in that company.

What went wrong? Was it due to genuine mistakes, the bad business decisions? Was there any misappropriations? Was there any frauds?

These are the questions that need to be answer, and answer quickly,  since as a company that prides  itself as the cream of Malaysian economy,  a loss of confidence in that company by investors, whether local or foreign,  would have far reaching consequences.

If investors cannot even trust a blue chip company like Sime, what is there to invest anymore?




Efforts To Make Our Metropolitan Park As A Successful Eco-Park Are Being Stepped Up

Posted: 21 May 2010 09:08 PM PDT

By the Administrator

The MPPP's only eco-park called the Metropolitan Park situated in Relau which occupied about 140 acres have become the focus of attention of the new local government under Pakatan Rakyat. Lately, a visit was made by Councillors and officers to step up efforts to make this park a success.

Eco Park 1EP 4EP 5EP 6Eco Park 2

R18052010077R18052010076R18052010078R18052010079R18052010080R18052010081R18052010082R18052010083R18052010084R18052010085R18052010088R18052010090R18052010089R18052010091R18052010092R18052010093R18052010095R18052010098R18052010097R18052010099R18052010100R18052010101R18052010102R18052010103R18052010104R18052010106R18052010107R18052010108


Penang Set Up A New Speakers’ Square, A Right Step Towards Free Speech!

Posted: 21 May 2010 08:58 PM PDT

By the Administrator

                   R21052010120

R21052010122            R21052010121

The Penang Island Municipal Council has approved the use of its stage on the field of Padang Kota Lama to become a new Speakers' Square as requested by the Penang Chief Miniter. This is something unprecedented.

Every Wednesday and Sunday from 6pm to 9pm, any member of the public could use it as a platform to express his views and opinions free of charge and without the need of any formal application, as the purpose is just to give room to freedom of expression as enshrined in the Federal Constitution.

However, the speaker does not enjoy the same extent of freedom as granted to the Hyde Park Corner in London, whereby speakers there enjoy absolute immunity from legal restrictions. Here, Malaysian laws such as the Internal Security Act, the Sedition Act, defamation both statutory and common law, etc. are still enforceable.

Nevertheless, it is still a good beginning towards free speech and definitelyone step foward in respect of the rights of man.


Oh Malaya, my land of the free

Posted: 20 May 2010 11:23 PM PDT

By Antares

COMMENT I love living in this land called Malaysia and calling myself a Malaysian (especially when I'm abroad) even if these are only ephemeral terms of reference. After all, when I was born, there wasn't a "Malaysia" on any map.

There was only a Malaya on the Malay Peninsula, later also called Tanah Melayu.

Those words Malaya and Melayu could have been inspired by the Tamil word for mountain, malai. The peninsula is geologically part of a giant cordillera spanning the Asian continent. Interestingly, the Sanskrit name "Himalaya" comes from hima (snow) and alaya (abode) — but it could also mean "snowcapped mountains."

That my country of birth was once called Malaya doesn't actually mean it belongs to the people now calling themselves Melayu, whom the Orang Asli regard as pendatang or dagang (migrants or itinerant traders). History also reveals extensive Hindu and Buddhist influence when the land was part of the Srivijaya — and later the Majapahit — empires.

The fiction of a Malay "race" is supposed to have its origins in Jambi, Sumatra, but you won't find any tribe called "Melayu" there although there is reportedly a river called Melayu running through a tiny village of the same name in the vicinity of Jambi.

A Singaporean friend once joked that the word melayu means "to flee or migrate" based on the notion that Sumatrans who fought tribal wars and lost would flee across the Straits and henceforth were called Melayu (fugitives or migrants). But I have yet to find any confirmation for this.

My tattered kamus (dictionary) also shows layu, meaning "to wither, droop, or dry up."

So even if I were born Melayu, I'd prefer to be called Malaysian, notional though the name may be (at least it has fewer negative connotations).

I remember once chatting with a couple of Filipinas whom I had earlier overheard yakking away in Tagalog. The word malaya came up a couple of times, so I asked the girls what it meant in their tongue.

Progress might have been all right once, but it has gone on too long.
Ogden Nash

"Free," one of them said. "Malaya means free in Tagalog."

My ears perked up. "You mean free as in free gift... or free as in not owing the bank any money?"

The girls laughed and said malaya means free as in having no master.

Now that's a very nice meaning of Malaya, I thought.

Is it possible that "mountain" in Tamil (malai) became "freedom" in Tagalog (malaya) because lowlanders have traditionally been subject to institutionalised religion, government and taxation, whereas highlanders are usually safe from the grubby, grasping fingers of priests and princes, because of inaccessibility?

I'd be very happy to be called Malayan – a free spirit.

But it really doesn't matter what conjured-up name we choose to use for ourselves. What matters is whether we feel a soul connection to the land we have chosen to call home.

Former PM Abdullah Badawi made a big fuss over the upside-down Malaysian flag on Sheih Kickdefella's blog and used that as an excuse to get the blogger arrested. The flag is only a symbol of the notion of Malaysia. Why get worked up over mere symbols?

It is in how profoundly we love the land that separates the true human being from other pestilential lifeforms in our species.

Indigenous peoples all have a psychic and emotional bond with the land where their ancestors' bones are buried, a powerful sense of belonging to the land, not one of "ownership" by legal or illegal means.

But those descended from piratical tribes roam in search of plunder. They feel no spiritual affinity with the land and are only there as opportunists, to rape, steal and ultimately destroy.

During the Mahathir era, the entire machinery of state propaganda was harnessed to indoctrinate the masses with a spurious notion of "development."

What our Great Leader Dr M sold us was a false vision — a nicely gift-wrapped Pandora's Box of environmental, social and moral problems. But it paid off big fat commissions to Umnoputra cronies and it entrenched corporate piracy as a way of life.

The world economic crisis offers us an opportunity to wean ourselves off our addiction to crass consumerism. We will regain a sense of perspective when we can once again feel a soul connection to the land, and learn to love what's natural and truly aligned with life.

The Orang Asli have survived for millennia and can show us how to be humble. Our Mahathiric attempt to "conquer" Mother Nature is like ludah ke langit (spitting at the sky). We end up with spittle in our own eye.

Chief Minister Taib Mahmud, take note, and abandon your 13 dam projects in Sarawak. Inviting Chinese contractors to rape the ecosystem isn't such a clever thing to do — no matter how much money can be skimmed off from the cost of these environmentally disastrous projects.

Remember, when earthquakes hit Szechuan, China had to evacuate millions of people downstream because dangerous cracks appeared in hundreds of large dams.

If you really love the land that supports and sustains you, don't destroy the only thing that's real, the land where your ancestors' bones are buried.


A different version of this article was first published at the Magick River blog. Antares, an activist and blogger, has found refuge living close to the land.


Odor in the court: The stink of judicial hypocrisy But it is not just civil society that is being irreverent to judges

Posted: 21 May 2010 08:42 PM PDT




Odor in the court: The stink of judicial hypocrisy But it is not just civil society that is being irreverent to judges

, the Supreme Court threw out yet another petition seeking to reinstate L K Diverse interpretations of conspiracy

We just don't seem to get it. The normal standards of accountability don't apply to judges. We are unable to grasp their argument that, much as it is desirable in other institutions, transparency in the judiciary will compromise its independence, a larger constitutional value. Hence, we persist with the folly of expecting judges to be swept away by the wave of transparency triggered Justice is blind because it needs to be;a form ofbastardised bureaucratised justice.

Advani as an accused in the trial of the conspiracy to demolish Babri Masjid. This is despite a host of circumstances pointing to the probability of Advani, NDA's prime ministerial candidate in the upcoming election, being involved in the conspiracy. Not the least of which was his notorious rath yatra in the run-up to the demolition. And the testimony of the IPS officer in charge of his security, Anju Gupta, stating that his speech on the spot minutes before the demolition had added fuel to the fire.

related article two faces of the tainted Attorney-General's discretion to decide on the charge against a person.readmore Saiful met Rodwan in room 619 of the Concorde Hotel.DNA evidence can be fabricated,Umno lawyer bastard Shafee Abdullah the sodomologist is good in helping Gani in fabricated fake charges

On February 13, in the first of the Nithari serial killing cases to be decided, a trial court pronounced death sentence on Moninder Singh Pandher for a murder that took place when he was far away in Australia. And for the murder of a girl who he did not even know. As the prosecution admitted, there was no evidence to suggest that it was at Pandher's instance that his servant Surender Koli had raped and killed 14-year-old Rimpa Haldar, the victim who lived in a slum near his house. Yet, Pandher was held to be a conspirator mainly because his sexual profligacy was found to have brought out depravity in his servant.


related articleTO ASSHOLE LEADERS OF BARISAN NATIONAL WHO THINK NOTHING BUT ASSHOLE SINCE SODOMY I TO SODOMY 11,ACCEPT MY LITTLE ANG POW PLEASE

The two interpretations of criminal conspiracy could not have been more different: ultra liberal in the case of Advani and stretched in the case of Pandher. Neither interpretation seems justified in the given facts and circumstances. Both the interpretations raise questions about the rigor and detachment with which the judiciary at all levels performs its job. One way of coming to terms with this distinction is to re-adopt the outdated notion that king could do no wrong. Going by his logic The battering ram strategy projected by Anwar Ibrahim's legal team against the legal version of the 'Stonewall Jackson' tactics of the prosecution enters its latest phase at the Court of Appeal today.High Court justice Mohamad Zabidin Mohd Diah As if that were not bad enough, the statement is cheeky enough has accepted that there is a material contradiction between statements made by Saiful that the alleged sex between him and Anwar was non-consensual and the actual charge against Anwar which holds that he had consensual sex against the order of nature.While agreeing that there is a contradiction, Justice Zabidin has however ruled it did not merit compelling the prosecution to release statements and reports made by Saiful to the investigating officer.The norm in matters like this is that all statements and reports pertaining to the charge are made available to the defence once charges have been preferred.A watching public is being asked to believe that this departure does not vitiate the government's claim that Anwar is being accorded due process of the law.The script is something like this – the judge will throw DSAI (Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim) into jail and let him serve the full term. By then, Prime Minister Najib Razak would rule in peace and then after two decades of looting the rakyat's wealth, DSAI will be found innocent by an appellate court – just like in Sodomy I.

The decadence of our judiciary is glaring for all to see and witness. Before there is a total collapse of our justice system, let us all fellow Malaysians act immediately.

What Karpal Singh asked is a basic fundamental right of all citizens of the world, not just Malaysia. Yet that basic right has been denied. In other words, our human rights are being mutilated by our own courts, by our sacred institution – the judiciary.

S. AUGUSTINE PAUL

S. Augustine PaulS. Augustine Paul
justice is subjective. If I recall my Political Science class "US Legal System" years ago, only 10 percent of cases go to trial. The rest 90 percent result in plea bargain, this is because lawyers ( gatekeepers to law system) are expensive.


related articlesThe malaysian governtment did the unthinkable, Augustine PauL Federal Court judge GOT THIS POSITION TRU corruption

Charge Najib,Ezam,Rosmah, charge them for abetting SAIFUL for making a false report and causing all the trouble.Send them to jail


It is clear that the only way Malaysians are ever going to get justice and an independent judiciary is a change of government.

Look the Anwar Ibrahim case. Why is the prosecution so afraid to provide the police statements by Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan? Only if you have something to hide and not standing straight that you are afraid. This is a trial by ambush. They are waiting for the defence to say their piece and then change the statements accordingly.

Where is the transparency?

"This appears to be what Anwar's lead counsel Karpal Singh and his team is up to, scouring every wall that the prosecution has placed in their path."

The writer has to appreciate that it is just the working of our judicial system. It is adversarial in nature. We are stuck with this adversarial system however imperfect it may be until we come up with something better.

Two lawyers in court are just like two gladiators in a public arena battling it out with sword and shield. The lawyer uses both 'sword' and 'shield'. The 'road block' the writer is referring to is the 'shield'.

The system is adversarial in nature and the hope is that the party who has the law on his or her side will win in the end. Miscarriage of justice happens all the time as the system is not perfect. Sometimes a guilty party walks free. It is better than a few criminals get to walk our streets rather than have an innocent party incarcerated for crimes he did not commit languish in jail.

The script is something like this – the judge will throw DSAI (Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim) into jail and let him serve the full term. By then, Prime Minister Najib Razak would rule in peace and then after two decades of looting the rakyat's wealth, DSAI will be found innocent by an appellate court – just like in Sodomy I.

In the case of countries like Malaysia, the jury system offers the best protection against the kind of 'miscarriage of justice' that we are seeing lately. Do you think a jury of his peers numbering twelve from all walks of life, race, occupations, political affiliations, sexual orientations etc would deliver a guilty verdict against Anwar for sodomy?

Don't get me going by talking about our judges! Many are unfit to be sitting on the Bench.

Justice is blind because it needs to be; otherwise it would see too much. It needs to be detached from too much context. Just as it does not spare the guilty whatever their station in life, it does not punish anyone more than what is prescribed.

And from USA comes a development which is highly germane. Former New York Police Commissioner Bernard Kerik is expected to turn himself in Monday to begin a 48-month prison sentence. Kerik was sentenced in February after he pleaded guilty to charges of lying to Bush administration officials who vetted his unsuccessful 2004 nomination for homeland security secretary. Kerik,54, pleaded guilty in November to tax fraud and six other felonies.

Simultaneously, in India, we have the bizarre incident in Pune in which the Deputy Home Minister of Maharashtra, Ramesh Bagwe is alleged to have sworn a false affidavit to the EC when he filed his nomination for the assembly seat there, hiding a criminal background. Pune police officially say that the Minister has a large number of cognizable offenses registered against him which were not disclosed in the affidavit………..Now cacophonic party politics has taken over, which will detract the main issue.

Do we have any hope? Perhaps not in the foreseeable future, that is, not unless many people like THE TAXIDRIVER AND RAJA PETRA write many blogs of this type, and many of us jump in & debate and discuss and put one hell of pressure for changing the system.

Posted by Chittarkottaian


Diverse interpretations of conspiracy SAIFOOL’S asshole Odor in the court: The stink of judicial hypocrisy But it is not just civil society that is being irreverent to judges

Posted: 21 May 2010 08:26 PM PDT


Odor in the court: The stink of judicial hypocrisy But it is not just civil society that is being irreverent to judges

, the Supreme Court threw out yet another petition seeking to reinstate L K Diverse interpretations of conspiracy

We just don't seem to get it. The normal standards of accountability don't apply to judges. We are unable to grasp their argument that, much as it is desirable in other institutions, transparency in the judiciary will compromise its independence, a larger constitutional value. Hence, we persist with the folly of expecting judges to be swept away by the wave of transparency triggered Justice is blind because it needs to be;a form ofbastardised bureaucratised justice.

Advani as an accused in the trial of the conspiracy to demolish Babri Masjid. This is despite a host of circumstances pointing to the probability of Advani, NDA's prime ministerial candidate in the upcoming election, being involved in the conspiracy. Not the least of which was his notorious rath yatra in the run-up to the demolition. And the testimony of the IPS officer in charge of his security, Anju Gupta, stating that his speech on the spot minutes before the demolition had added fuel to the fire.

related article two faces of the tainted Attorney-General's discretion to decide on the charge against a person.readmore Saiful met Rodwan in room 619 of the Concorde Hotel.DNA evidence can be fabricated,Umno lawyer bastard Shafee Abdullah the sodomologist is good in helping Gani in fabricated fake charges

On February 13, in the first of the Nithari serial killing cases to be decided, a trial court pronounced death sentence on Moninder Singh Pandher for a murder that took place when he was far away in Australia. And for the murder of a girl who he did not even know. As the prosecution admitted, there was no evidence to suggest that it was at Pandher's instance that his servant Surender Koli had raped and killed 14-year-old Rimpa Haldar, the victim who lived in a slum near his house. Yet, Pandher was held to be a conspirator mainly because his sexual profligacy was found to have brought out depravity in his servant.


related articleTO ASSHOLE LEADERS OF BARISAN NATIONAL WHO THINK NOTHING BUT ASSHOLE SINCE SODOMY I TO SODOMY 11,ACCEPT MY LITTLE ANG POW PLEASE

The two interpretations of criminal conspiracy could not have been more different: ultra liberal in the case of Advani and stretched in the case of Pandher. Neither interpretation seems justified in the given facts and circumstances. Both the interpretations raise questions about the rigor and detachment with which the judiciary at all levels performs its job. One way of coming to terms with this distinction is to re-adopt the outdated notion that king could do no wrong. Going by his logic The battering ram strategy projected by Anwar Ibrahim's legal team against the legal version of the 'Stonewall Jackson' tactics of the prosecution enters its latest phase at the Court of Appeal today.High Court justice Mohamad Zabidin Mohd Diah As if that were not bad enough, the statement is cheeky enough has accepted that there is a material contradiction between statements made by Saiful that the alleged sex between him and Anwar was non-consensual and the actual charge against Anwar which holds that he had consensual sex against the order of nature.While agreeing that there is a contradiction, Justice Zabidin has however ruled it did not merit compelling the prosecution to release statements and reports made by Saiful to the investigating officer.The norm in matters like this is that all statements and reports pertaining to the charge are made available to the defence once charges have been preferred.A watching public is being asked to believe that this departure does not vitiate the government's claim that Anwar is being accorded due process of the law.The script is something like this – the judge will throw DSAI (Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim) into jail and let him serve the full term. By then, Prime Minister Najib Razak would rule in peace and then after two decades of looting the rakyat's wealth, DSAI will be found innocent by an appellate court – just like in Sodomy I.

The decadence of our judiciary is glaring for all to see and witness. Before there is a total collapse of our justice system, let us all fellow Malaysians act immediately.

What Karpal Singh asked is a basic fundamental right of all citizens of the world, not just Malaysia. Yet that basic right has been denied. In other words, our human rights are being mutilated by our own courts, by our sacred institution – the judiciary.

S. AUGUSTINE PAUL

S. Augustine PaulS. Augustine Paul
justice is subjective. If I recall my Political Science class "US Legal System" years ago, only 10 percent of cases go to trial. The rest 90 percent result in plea bargain, this is because lawyers ( gatekeepers to law system) are expensive.


related articlesThe malaysian governtment did the unthinkable, Augustine PauL Federal Court judge GOT THIS POSITION TRU corruption

Charge Najib,Ezam,Rosmah, charge them for abetting SAIFUL for making a false report and causing all the trouble.Send them to jail


It is clear that the only way Malaysians are ever going to get justice and an independent judiciary is a change of government.

Look the Anwar Ibrahim case. Why is the prosecution so afraid to provide the police statements by Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan? Only if you have something to hide and not standing straight that you are afraid. This is a trial by ambush. They are waiting for the defence to say their piece and then change the statements accordingly.

Where is the transparency?

"This appears to be what Anwar's lead counsel Karpal Singh and his team is up to, scouring every wall that the prosecution has placed in their path."

The writer has to appreciate that it is just the working of our judicial system. It is adversarial in nature. We are stuck with this adversarial system however imperfect it may be until we come up with something better.

Two lawyers in court are just like two gladiators in a public arena battling it out with sword and shield. The lawyer uses both 'sword' and 'shield'. The 'road block' the writer is referring to is the 'shield'.

The system is adversarial in nature and the hope is that the party who has the law on his or her side will win in the end. Miscarriage of justice happens all the time as the system is not perfect. Sometimes a guilty party walks free. It is better than a few criminals get to walk our streets rather than have an innocent party incarcerated for crimes he did not commit languish in jail.

The script is something like this – the judge will throw DSAI (Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim) into jail and let him serve the full term. By then, Prime Minister Najib Razak would rule in peace and then after two decades of looting the rakyat's wealth, DSAI will be found innocent by an appellate court – just like in Sodomy I.

In the case of countries like Malaysia, the jury system offers the best protection against the kind of 'miscarriage of justice' that we are seeing lately. Do you think a jury of his peers numbering twelve from all walks of life, race, occupations, political affiliations, sexual orientations etc would deliver a guilty verdict against Anwar for sodomy?

Don't get me going by talking about our judges! Many are unfit to be sitting on the Bench.

Justice is blind because it needs to be; otherwise it would see too much. It needs to be detached from too much context. Just as it does not spare the guilty whatever their station in life, it does not punish anyone more than what is prescribed.

And from USA comes a development which is highly germane. Former New York Police Commissioner Bernard Kerik is expected to turn himself in Monday to begin a 48-month prison sentence. Kerik was sentenced in February after he pleaded guilty to charges of lying to Bush administration officials who vetted his unsuccessful 2004 nomination for homeland security secretary. Kerik,54, pleaded guilty in November to tax fraud and six other felonies.

Simultaneously, in India, we have the bizarre incident in Pune in which the Deputy Home Minister of Maharashtra, Ramesh Bagwe is alleged to have sworn a false affidavit to the EC when he filed his nomination for the assembly seat there, hiding a criminal background. Pune police officially say that the Minister has a large number of cognizable offenses registered against him which were not disclosed in the affidavit………..Now cacophonic party politics has taken over, which will detract the main issue.

Do we have any hope? Perhaps not in the foreseeable future, that is, not unless many people like THE TAXIDRIVER AND RAJA PETRA write many blogs of this type, and many of us jump in & debate and discuss and put one hell of pressure for changing the system.

Posted by Chittarkottaian


Melayu Umno cuma pandai anti sini anti sana

Posted: 21 May 2010 07:45 PM PDT


Oleh Anak Mami

Satu demi satu kebejatan politik dan tindakan pentadbiran dilakukan oleh UMNONGOK tetapi orang Melayu UMNO masih juga sokong UMNO tu. Strategi yang digunakan oleh UMNO ialah dengan mengapi-apikan sentimen perkauman orang Melayu terhadap Cina. UMNO mendakwa bahawa Cina menjadi ancaman kepada Melayu. Oleh itu bersatulah Melayu tolol di bawah UMNO Dengan tindakanh itu maka Melayu tolol tu pun lupalah apa-apa kebejatan yang dilakukan oleh para pemimpin UMNO@ apco tersebut.

Kenapa pemikiran Melayu semakin kolot dan talol ? Ini adalah satu proses pembersihan otak yang dianugerahkan oleh UMNO , contohnya Utusan Meloya, tidak juga Biro Tata Negara, yang sering menghasilkan golongan melayu pemikiran sempit, Bagi puak UMNO, semakin melayu jadi talol maka semakin kuatlah kuasa mereka.

Kini kita boleh nampak sikap diskriminasi, perkauman yang amat berleluasa, melayu talol ini hidup bagai katak di bawah telaga, mengandaikan dunia ini seolah olah seluas telaga, bila hujan , katak katak menyeronokkan diri dalam telaga. Ini lah hakikat melayu enggan terima pembangunan dalam segai mentality mahupun pshically.

Kalau kita memandang memang UMNO pandai gunakan isu Islam sebagai modal politik, Tetapi sejauhmakah melayu itu mengamalkan Islam dalm hidup harian mereka. Mengikut statistic oleh pengaji masyarakat, seramai 80 peratus Melayu sendiri tidak menjalankan solat, ini bermakna 80 peratus Melayu di Malaysia tiada sembahyang, yang ada sembahyang pun seolah olah bagai `show' saja. Tambahan pula UMNO giat meniupkan angin anti Yahudi, kalau diperhatikan Melayu memang ingin melancarkan perang dengan Yahudi, kadangkala ulama, orang kuat islam menyebarkan ideology anti Yahudi contohnya henti gunakan facebook.

Facebook – adalah hasil ciptaan dari golongan Yahudi, kalau lah Melayu nak diperbandingkan dengan kaum Yahudi, memang otak melayu disifatkan jauh berbeza, melayu cuma pandai mengaibkan bangsa lain, memperhuduhkan bangsa lain, memperlekehkan bangsa lain, Cumalah tanya , apakah sumbangan Melayu terhadap dunia ini, memang pun Melayu di bumi ini tiada ada kedudukan langsung, Bangsa melayu ini bagai lalat yang berkecimpung di sampah sarap. Melawan dengan bayangan sendiri.

Eloklah, kalau Melayu ingin membisik bisik tetang Yahudi, baik lah digalakkan melayu itu menonjolkan kepintaran diri, bukti kepada dunia Melayu itu satu bangsa yang berkualiti, hasil barangan Melayu ini adalah tanpa tandingan, sehingga hari ini, mana lah ada Melayu yang boleh mengoyangkan dunia ?? Dunia sedang mengalami perubahan mentality, social, pemikiran …. Tetapi Melayu hanya duduk berangan angan ingin masuk syurga, Ini lah satu hasil dari unsure politik UMNO, memperbodohkan bangsa melayu demi kuasa.


Sarawak natives fear threat of palm oil estates

Posted: 20 May 2010 09:05 PM PDT

Land cleared around a Penang villageBy Anil Netto

COMMENT A increasing number of natives in Sarawak state in north Borneo are alarmed at encroaching forest and oil palm plantations, which are taking over their native customary land and destroying their traditional lifestyles and biodiversity.

In Long Berawan, a village in the north of the state, a community of a thousand Berawan and Tering indigenous people who live in longhouses is worried about plans by a reforestation and plantation group to take over 80,000 hectares of native land. And there are other villages and communities similarly affected.

"The land is being given to the big companies to do the plantations in our area," says Dennis Along, a villager who comes from a traditional farming family. "In future, it will be very hard for the longhouse people to do farming. There is no free land for us to do farming any more, because the company is taking over the land."

The villagers here used to cultivate paddy, plant rubber trees and grow a variety of local fruit trees — as part of a shifting cultivation tradition that goes back hundreds of years. "We move to a new area every year because we want to make the ground more fertile," explains Along.

"When we move our rice fields, we plant fruit trees — rambutan, durian, langsat, jackfruit — to help replenish the soil." Their land is also home to wildlife such as wild boar, monkeys, deer and all kinds of local fish varieties.

Now, they are going to lose all that as plantation companies have taken over their land, laments Along.

Similar large forest plantation projects are slated for the Kakus and Belaga regions.

The loss of biodiversity when land is cleared for plantations is alarming. "When a huge area is cleared for plantations, all the plants will be cleared, because they are clearing up the land," explains Raymond Abin, coordinator of the Sarawak Conservation Action Network, which consists of environmental and indigenous rights groups in Sarawak.

"After that, they will do the excavating work in order for them to plant the oil palm. This will invariably lead to serious soil erosion that would flow into the streams and rivers and kill a lot of fish."

In addition, foreign workers hired by the plantation firms are often concerned about their own survival and extract as much fish from the rivers as they can. "There will be little wildlife once the forest is gone and replaced by tree or oil palm plantation," says Abin.

The immediate impact on surrounding communities is water pollution and flash floods.

In Sarawak, forest plantations are mainly of fast maturing tree species such as acacia mangium and rubberwood (timber latex clones). Acacia mangium is a highly invasive species regarded as a threat to natural forests and the natural environment.

Forest plantations too

Whatever the condition of the existing forest, planting fast-growing acacia involves prior clear-felling and removal of stumps, resulting in a denuded landscape ready for replanting. It is also a sterile monocrop that allows little to grow beneath it. Acacia plantations thus cannot support the rainforests' original faunal diversity.

The 'Global Biodiversity Outlook 3' report released by the Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity — an international treaty adopted in Rio de Janeiro in June 1992 — earlier this month noted that the 2010 biodiversity target agreed to by the world's governments in 2002 has not been met at the global level.

"The loss of biodiversity is an issue of profound concern for its own sake. Biodiversity also underpins the functioning of ecosystems, which provide a wide range of services to human societies. Its continued loss, therefore, has major implications for current and future human well-being," the report said.

According to the website of the Malaysian Timber Industry Board, the Plantation Industries Ministry aims to develop 375,000 hectares of forest plantation for timber at an annual planting rate of 25,000 hectares per year for the next 15 years.

This is part of an aggressive programme that includes providing soft loans to companies for the development of such plantations "to reduce pressure on native forest as a source for raw materials and to ensure its continuous availability for the domestic timber industry." Sarawak also plans to double its oil palm coverage to one million hectares by this year.

The loss of biodiversity in tree plantations in Sarawak is significant in the global equation, says political economist Andrew Aeria. "But don't expect Sarawak politicians to be bothered by all this. All they are interested in is the profit margin of their crony companies and their family-linked companies involved in tree plantation projects."

Meanwhile, the villagers in Long Berawan are still engaged in farming using their traditional practices ‐ but for how much longer?

"When the plantations come — and they are starting work now..." Along's voice trails off. "Now they are doing work in the jungle, and after the jungle, the native customary land, and after that, the whole place, and definitely our farms will go."

- Inter Press Service


Letter from an ex-wife of a gambler ~ From Cikgu Aliya's blog

Posted: 21 May 2010 05:50 PM PDT

Najib Raja Judi Sukan.jpg

This repost is dedicated to the Prime Minister of Gambling, Mohd Najib Abdul Razak, Putrajaya, Malaysia with the following message :

Assamualaikum.

O Treacherous One,

You may refuse to speak or comment about your approval of the sports gambling license which you conveniently skirt around by saying you are not going to talk about it but as a Muslim citizen of this country, I have pledged not to let you get off scot free until either one of us passes away or you cancel that sports betting license and carry out your duties as a civil servant who dubiously swore upon the Holy Al Quran to uphold its tenets and abide by Almighty Allah's Commandments when you took office under dishonorable circumstances by replacing another incompetent fellow who screwed up his term as well!

You think approving sports betting is no big deal, eh?

You obviously aren't that religiously savvy or compliant for you are truly blind to Almighty Allah's forbidding of drinking intoxicants or engaging in gambling as laid down in Surah Al Maidah Chapter 5 Verse 90 of the Holy Al Quran Al Karim :

90. Ya ayyuha allatheena amanoo innama alkhamru waalmaysiru waal-ansabu waal-azlamu rijsun min AAamali alshshaytani faijtaniboohu laAAallakum tuflihoona

90. O ye who believe! Intoxicants and gambling, (Dedication of) stones, And (divination by) arrows, Are an abomination, Of Satan's handiwork:

Eschew such (abomination), That ye may prosper.

You are now officially held responsible over all the misery and mayhem that is going to be further unleashed onto this nation's citizens lives as a result of treacherous you making legal what Allah Azza Wa Jalla has made HARAM!!!

You say that gambling is only for the Non Muslims of this country?

Accursed One!

Have you ever studied their beliefs before approving such a license?

Who the hell told you that its okay in the beliefs of the Kaffirs that its alright to gamble?

They may be Disbelievers in the matter of Aqeedah towards faith in Allah Subhanahu Wa Ta'ala but that does not mean that their teachings or principles of whatever that they believe in allows them to gamble and commit all other sin as which you now espouse!

Here, read what a Non Muslim ex-wife of a gambling addict has to share with Cikgu Nur Aliya Yeoh of her traumatic life with a gambler:

***************************************************************************

http://pukullima.blogspot.com/2010/05/letter-from-my-friend.html

Dear Aliya,

I'm writing in to share my own bad experience with your readers. I'm shocked to learn that gambling will be allowed in Malaysia and be made legal during the World Cup season. Gosh, how can it come to this? I thought that gambling is forbidden in Islam.

As an ex-wife of a habitual gambler, I know only too well what it's like to live under the same roof with somebody who gambles. My ex-husband not rich. He was a government servant but most of his friends were businessmen. From them, he picked up bad habits - smoking and gambling. They made huge bets on horse racing. Unlike his friends who can fall back on their businesses when they lost money, my ex had only his monthly salary to survive.

Soon he was always short of money. I hated the weekends because he would borrow my money for gambling. When I refused to lend him, he shouted at me. He forced me to lend him, even $10 was fine. He bought the newspaper just to get the timetable and schedule of the horse races. Then he would leave the house to be with his friends at the coffee shop, listening to the news about the races and return home only for his dinner at night. I have to spend my own money on the household, he never helped even a sen. I never knew when he won because he never gave me any money or pay back his debts.

He even lied to me. I had a car, which I bought and had finished paying for with my own salary. Without my knowledge, he traded that car to pay for his gambling debts. He told me that he had sold the car. He got another car, this one in his own name but I was still forced to pay for it because I drove it to work. When I asked him money for the old car, he kept giving excuses. Finally after all the documents were signed and the car officially sold, he told me the truth. He did not get a sen from the car sale because he owed the new owner money. I was furious but it was too late. I had to suffer for his gambling habit.

He never learned his lessons but continued gambling. For years, he never spent any money for the household, repairs, bills or food. He bought many things for himself when he won some money but he never returned any of my money to me. His mother knew about his gambling but she blamed me for not stopping him. When I refused to give him any more money, he stole my jewellery and pawned them. Then he blamed me when I scolded him, saying that as a wife, I should have supported him. He did not take any responsibility for his actions but blame me for not helping him. It was always me who was wrong, never him.

I got fed-up with his gambling. He didn't want to stop. I no longer feel his love. The marriage was empty. I did not want to continue paying his debts. There were days when I cried because I was left with only $10 to survive for another 2 weeks before the next pay day. I did not want to suffer for the rest of my life living with an irresponsible gambler. So I left him. I wanted a divorce. He accused me of having an affair and refused to cooperate. He blamed my family for encouraging me to divorce. So I threatened to expose his problems to his boss, and that made him sign the forms. I told him that I want the divorce because I could not trust him anymore. I borrowed money from my family to pay for the divorce.

I did not get a sen from the divorce. I did not get anything from the marriage except heartache and material loss. He refused to pay alimony. He also refused to return my jewellery he had pawned. The day I left the house, I cursed him for his evil ways, for his lies and not returning what belonged to me. I was glad that we had no children to follow his bad ways, because we had stopped sleeping together after I discovered his lies about the car.

Now I am happy. I have learned to survive on my own. I may be poorer now but I still have my dignity, my job and my family. I no longer need the things he still owe me but I will not forgive him until he say sorry. I know that he has found another woman he has managed to trick to be his new wife. Now she is the one suffering. He is also in bad health due to his smoking.

I hope that no other wife or family will have to suffer for the husband's or son's gambling habit.

Gambling is evil. It break down families. A gambler will never stop gambling once he taste the joy of some winning. My ex gambled on horse racing, which was about a few hundreds a bet.

What about football betting? It might come to thousands of dollars a game. And if the gambler cant pay, who will end up the victims? His family, his wife, his children.

Please tell your friends not to gamble or trust a gambler.

I was a fool but now I have learned my lesson well - after losing my car, my jewellery, my money and my house.

Nobody should be made to suffer the bad gambling habits of another family member. Gambling should be banned or stopped, not encouraged.

regards,
Eileen

image: http://www.cartoonstock.com/newscartoons/cartoonists/gri/lowres/grin915l.jpg


1 comment:

韋于倫成 said...

要保持更新呦,加油!!!期待你的新文章!!! .........................................