- Najib is Malaysia's most dangerous man!
- Anwar Ibrahim has always been an integral part of that shadowy international Muslim Brotherhod!
- Dato Munir Bani Sultan Selangor yang Baru?
- If There Are More Muslims Like Art Harun, There Would Be More Muslims
- Lulusan Universiti Gaji Tak Naik Semenjak 1980an
- Isu SUK Selangor: Solah Hajat Perdana
- Irina Sheik footballer Cristiano Ronaldo’s girlfriend.why Ronaldo cannot get enough of her body
- (Gambar) Ceramah Pakatan Rakyat Di Tenang
- Taib not “running away” like Chong..??
- Khusrin's AP void without MB's acceptance...
- Shamelessly Blatant Schilling by TV3
- Not Suicide, Not Homicide, Then Accident?
- Malaysia A Flawed Democracy, Says EIU - By Shannon Teoh.
- LEARNING FROM WEB-VIDEOS
- UMNO could no longer count on the strong support of the majority of Malays
- UMNO in Desperation - Anwar Ibrahim
- Guan Eng Commended On MPPP’s RM35 Million Surplus
- "Minta solat hajat, kami dah tak larat"-Dr Halimah
- Khairy Jamaluddin’s Leadership with no Inspiration Mahatir’s UMNO finally shut door at his face
- Protest Memo to IGP: 3 extra-judicial killings, incl one 15 yr old
Posted: 06 Jan 2011 10:31 AM PST
"This deliberate attempt by Putrajaya to cause turmoil in Selangor is reminiscent of the debacle that Najib engineered in Perak last year. The ousted Perak Menteri Besar Nizar Jamaluddin who suffered at the hands of Najib has already warned Selangor of the fate that will befall them if they do not take precautions. If Najib was surprised at the way the rakyat reacted to his machinations, none was more surprised than the Sultan of Perak. His Royal Highness was taken aback at how Najib managed to galvanise the rakyat. In the end, evil may have triumphed but as they say, elephants never forget…..and others might even add, they never forgive either. Najib is desperate. And a desperate man will resort to desperate measures," - by MARIAM MOKHTAR, Malaysia Chronicle.
Holy Toledo! Read the rest of her story here. She really blasted the Prime Minister. However, knowing Malaysia Chronicle and on which side they are, it came as no surprise.
"This man is dangerous. He was not elected as Prime Minister and has no known credentials of being a leader. Being a career politician by piggy-backing on the name of his father is no real test of leadership. What true experience has he of the real world?
No leader blatantly offers the people of a town RM5 million in exchange for votes. No leader tries to influence voting by offering to repair schools. Broken-down schools should be repaired as a matter of course.
Najib's cabinet is in disarray and tainted with known charges of corruption, sexual scandals including rape, and mismanagement of the public purse..."
I think Najib is already immune to it. There are so many of them now i.e Malaysiakini, Free Malaysia Today and others.
Where does this MARIAM stay? In Singapore? Or Australia? Or could it be China, Alaska or Vladivostok?
Posted: 06 Jan 2011 10:19 AM PST
A very dangerous man to world peace, his favourite reading is Hitler's Mein Kampf!
By Seth Mandel of the Blitz, 5th Jan, 2011
The continued fall of Malaysian opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim—and the role it's playing in the unraveling of Malaysia's democratic politic—has been back in the news since Anwar was suspended from parliament.
But what often goes unmentioned is the American role in all this, and how our State Department continues to publicly cheerlead for a man who is an agent of Saudi Wahhabism, a prominent member of the Muslim Brotherhood, and an agitator of a Thai region that became a breeding ground for recruits to the Iraqi insurgency.
In the 1990s, Anwar was deputy prime minister and finance minister to Mahathir bin Mohamad, Anwar's mentor. When Anwar began challenging Mahathir's policies and then his leadership, Anwar was arrested and jailed for corruption and then sodomy.
But by that time, Anwar had sufficiently impressed high-ranking members of the Clinton administration, such as Madeleine Albright, Defense Secretary William Cohen, and most significantly, Al Gore. They came to his defense, and catapulted him to international acclaim as a persecuted "moderate Muslim" who was tormented and imprisoned for trying to bring freedom to the Muslim world.
The problem here is twofold: Anwar retains that fame, to the detriment of his party and Malaysian politics, and more importantly, it isn't true. In its investigation of Soliman Biheiri, the Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement discovered that Anwar was a trustee of the World Assembly of Muslim Youth (WAMY). WAMY was founded by the Saudis as one of two major organizations, going back to the 1960s, tasked with spreading Wahhabi Islam. If that weren't reason enough for concern, WAMY was infiltrated by al-Qaeda and held a working relationship with Hamas.
WAMY was also linked to the Muslim Brotherhood through its activities with a Brotherhood think tank in Virginia called the International Institute of Islamic Thought (IIIT). The IIIT has published a book calling for violence against Israel and has been under investigation for ties to terrorist groups since 2002. Anwar—trumpeted by Gore as "one of the most enlightened and visionary political leaders in Asia"—is a co-founder of the IIIT. ( Read more here on what Claire Berlinski has to say about the Muslim Brotherhood in which Brother Anwar Bin Ibrahim is still an intergral part of)
Meanwhile, as the American governing and intellectual class took to Anwar's defense after his arrest, so did thousands of Thai Muslims. According to The Nation (Thailand), 3,000 Muslim youth rallied for Anwar in Pattani. Gatherings for Anwar in Yala and Satun recorded a turnout of about 5,000.
Dr. Pirayos Rahimura told the paper, "We have to accept that there is a deep bond between Anwar and the young Muslims here. He is highly respected."
More than respected, Anwar has cultivated a reputation as a patron of the heavily Muslim southern provinces of Thailand, especially through the Young Muslim Association of Thailand. In 2001, that association led a boycott of American products to protest the U.S.-led military mission in Afghanistan. In 2003, Muslim organizations of those provinces spearheaded a drive to recruit Muslims to fight for the insurgency in Iraq.
None of this dampened the left's enthusiasm for Anwar, who is again on trial for sodomy. On Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's swing through Asia, she announced she would be meeting face-to-face with Anwar. At the last moment, that meeting was canceled, so Clinton used a press conference with her Malaysian counterpart to press the Malaysian government publicly on Anwar's behalf.
One of the most troubling aspects of this is the deleterious effect Anwar's celebrity has had on Malaysia's politics. Members of Anwar's People's Justice Party (PKR) have begun wondering whether Anwar's fame is the only reason he is still the nominal head of the party. And his self-involved leadership—which has been tearing the party apart—is laying the groundwork for early elections and a landslide victory for the ruling party, which is looking to regain what it lost in the 2008 elections.
Prime Minister Najib Razak, of the ruling Barisan Nasional, "told some 2,300 cheering delegates at a coalition convention that elections will be held 'soon' and that the political juggernaut which has ruled for more than half a century would not be unseated," according to AFP.
It's a setback for multiparty rule in Malaysia, but not nearly the most outrageous feature of our support for a man like Anwar Ibrahim.
Posted: 06 Jan 2011 09:46 AM PST
Hairan dengan tiba-tiba sahaja Dato Munir Bani keluarkan kenyataan menafikan perkara yang diperkatakan oleh Baginda kepada Menteri Besar sendiri. Dato Munir berlagak sebagai Sultan Selangor mempertahankan pendapat Baginda Sultan Selangor mempunyai suara melantik Dato SUK Selangor.
Padahal Baginda Sultan Selangor sendiri menyatakan kepada Tan Sri Khalid, bahawa Baginda tiada kuasa melantik Dato SUK. Soalnya sekarang, adakah Selangor mempunyai SATU atau DUA Sultan?
Dan Dato Munir Bani juga menunjukkan kebodohan beliau dalam Undang-Undang Tubuh Selangor apabila beliau mengatakan Baginda Sultan mempunyai suara dalam menentukan siapa menjadi SUK.
Padahal pakar perlembagaan seluruh Malaysia menyatakan tiada satu pun peruntukan Undang-Undang yang membuktikan dakwaan tersebut. Hanya pendapat Dato Munir Bani semata-mata.
Akhir sekali, kalau hendak kenal siapa Sultan Selangor yang sebenarnya, bolehlah merujuk kepada gambar di bawah.
Sekian, terima kasih.
Aide's remarks not Sultan's views, claims Selangor MB
Posted: 06 Jan 2011 01:36 PM PST
Life imitating Art. This is a must read:
Allow me to begin by wishing you a happy new Gregorian year. May this new (Gregorian) year bring with it God's goodness for all of us.
I am writing in response to your article, "Politik murahan yang memualkan" .
I have disagreed with you before and I must say, this time, with respect, I disagree with you even more.
First of all, let me say that I do not know for sure whether the Prime Minister's minders did in fact ask the Bishop to remove all crucifixes and prohibit the Christians from reciting hymns at the function attended by the Prime Minister. There are reports which say that that happened. And there are also reports which say that it did not happen.
Whatever it is, assuming that it did take place, one thing is for sure. The instruction or request did not come from the Prime Minister.
I am really disappointed that you viewed the Prime Minister's visit to the function at hand was a lowly act of besmirching his feet with dirt. This is what you said:
The expression "mencemar duli", loosely translated means to dirty one's feet or sole. That expression is normally used to express gratitude to our Rulers for having graced any of our function with their Highness' presence. It is expressed thus;
"Patik menjunjung kasih Tuanku kerana sudi mencemar duli Tuanku ke upacara ini."
By using that expression to describe the Prime Minister's visit to the function at hand, you are implying that it was actually beneath the Prime Minister to attend such a function and that the Prime Minister was actually going out of his way to lower himself to attend the said function.
Doctor, with all due respect, that was unbecoming of you as an ulamak.
We live in a multi-ethnic-faith society. It was none other than the Prime Minister himself who is advocating the concept of 1Malaysia. That concept, as I understand it, would among others, entail the acceptance by all of us, regardless of breed, creed and faith that we should, as the people of Malaysia, live in harmony and respect for each other.
The Prime Minister is the Prime Minister of Malaysia. He is not the Prime Minister of the Muslims or Malays only. As President of UMNO, he may be the leader of the Malays who are members of UMNO. As President of the Barisan Nasional, he is the leader of everybody who is a member of the component parties of the BN. But as the Prime Minister of Malaysia, he acts for all of us Malaysians.
In that capacity, he has to attend to the interests of all of us, regardless of our faith and race. If he attends a hari raya celebration, he must also attend a Deepavali and Chinese New Year celebration. The same goes with the Christmas celebration. He just has to attend it because he is the Prime Minister of Malaysia.
It is not beneath him to do so. By attending a Christmas function, he is not "mencemar" his "duli" or dirtying his feet or sole. He is performing his social duty as a Prime Minister. If he did not perform such action, than it is his reputation as a leader which is going to be "tercemar".
Your argument that Muslims are prohibited from attending religious celebrations of other faith than Islam is simplistic at its core. To my mind Islam is all about one's closeness to God and His will. What problem would God have against anybody who attend a non-Muslim celebration if his faith in God and His way is unshakeable?
Are you saying that by attending the function that night, the Prime Minister's faith in God would in any way diminish? I think we should all give the Prime Minister a little bit more credit here.
In fact, the latest pronouncement on this issue was made by Dr Ghaith bin Muhammad al-Sheikh al-Mubarak, a member of the Council of Senior Ulamak of Saudi Arabia. He opined on 23rd December 2010 that Muslims can take part in religious festivals of other faiths if the purpose of their attendance is to attract non-Muslims to Islam.
According to local daily the Saudi Gazette, he said "by attending festivals of other faiths Muslims could help to "pacify their souls" and when a Muslim rejects an invitation to attend such a festival it could alienate non-Muslims and divert them from the right path.
And so Doctor, it would appear now that it all boils down to one's intention. Was the Prime Minister intending to be a Christian by attending that function or was he making a move for unity that night?
While I was studying at King's College, my law library was housed in an old church. Are you saying that I should not have gone to the library because it was in a church Doctor? Are you saying that before entering the library I should have requested the librarian or College authority to respect me by removing all crucifixes adorning the walls?
You cite the example of Caliph Omar not wanting to pray in a Church as an example. This is what you said:
"Sudah tentu kita masih ingat kisah Khalifah Islam kedua, Saidina Omar Al-Khattab yang pernah melawat gereja. Ketika tiba waktu sembahyang, paderi tersebut menawarkan Omar untuk solat di gereja. Namun, Saidina Omar menolak dan memilih untuk tidak solat di dalam gereja kerana ditakuti boleh menimbulkan fitnah. Mungkin orang Kristian akan beranggapan Omar mahu menukarkan gereja menjadi masjid. Semua ini dilakukan atas kebijaksanaan seseorang pemimpin."
With respect Doctor, that is not the true historical account of the incident. Caliph Omar declined to pray in the Church of Holy Sepulchre not because he feared unwarranted aspersions or he did not want the Christians to think that he (Omar) would want to turn the church into a mosque. That was a twisted view.
For the record, Caliph Omar captured Jerusalem after a brief and bloodless seige, from the Byzantines in February 638. Caliph Omar Ibn al-Khattab accepted the city's surrender from Patriarch Sophronius in person.
Omar was shown the great Church of the Holy Sepulchre and offered a place to pray in it, but he refused. He declined out of absolute respect for the Christians and their church and not out of fear as you stated. He declined because he thought that if he did so, a precedent would be set and that future generations of Muslims might say that Omar prayed there and then they might convert that Church into a Mosque. It was out of that concern and respect that he refused to pray there.
He then proceeded to pray at the steps outside the Church. By doing so he averted the possibility of the Church being turned into a mosque. Such was his great respect for Christians, Christianity and churches.
Fair enough, Omar's fears almost came to reality when in 1193 Saladin's son Aphdal Ali build a mosque near the site of that incident although the location is not exact, for the entrance to the Church was on the east in Omar's time and the present entrance was only inaugurated in the 11th century.
You made a big issue on the apparent Christmas celebration in Malaysia which according to you is way out of proportion considering Christians constitute only about 10% of our populations. Are they to blame if shops and shopping complexes, and in fact the whole commercial world in the whole universe, view Christmas and its celebration as a commercial activity rather than a pure religious event?
The thing about Christmas "celebration" which is way out of proportion in our country and any other country in the world is this. It is not about religion at all. It is the capitalism god at work. You should realise that dear Doctor.
As a Muslim, I am in fact thankful that our Hari Raya is not celebrated in such a big way as Christmas is. At least Hari Raya is preserved as a pure religious event where Muslims would go to the mosque and visit each other and undertake charitable work. Even then, our Hari Raya has, nowadays, morphed into a cultural and social event. Notice for example, dear Doctor, how we have open houses which really in effect not "open" anymore nowadays?
Caliph Omar, for example, refused to build a huge mosque after capturing Jerusalem. He opted to build a modest mosque on the Temple Mount instead. Clearly, size and quantity was not important to him. What matters is his faith I suppose.
Complaining on the number of churches and how big Christmas celebration is in our country is, to me - and I say this with the greatest of respect to you - childish. It is reflective of the inferiority complex which we Muslims are imbued with nowadays. It makes us want to retire into our cocoon, sulking and whining at how big and prettier other people are and how we should resent them and how unfair this whole new world is to us. If the Prophet were to behave like that in his early days in Mekah, I wonder whether Islam would be a great way of life it is now.
The great way of life that we know as Islam is not about public holidays or the size of our mosques. If you are going to compare the number of public holidays we have, are you going to equate football with our religion just because we have a public holiday after winning the Suzuki Cup recently, just as we have a public holiday for hari raya every year? We have more and bigger office complexes than mosques. Don't you feel these office complexes are more important than mosques and thus conclude that our people place office complexes on a higher plane than mosques?
The Prophet (peace be upon him) was well known for his respect to other religions, especially to the kitabiyyah (the people of the book, namely, the Jews and Christians). In a letter from him to Negus, the king of Abyssinia, he wrote:
From Muhammad, God's Messenger, to the Negus Asham, the King of Abyssinia;
Peace be upon you! On this occasion, I praise God, the Sovereign, the Holy One free from all defects, the Giver of security, the Watcher over His creatures, and I bear witness that Jesus is a spirit from God, and a word from Him, whom He bestowed upon Mary, who was chaste, pure and virgin. I call you to God, One with no partner. (Ibn Kathir, al-Bidaya 3.104).
The Prophet (peace be upon him) was not only respectful to a Christian King but he in fact acknowledged Jesus and Mary in his letter. Such was the message of one-ness which the Prophet (peace be upon him) was advocating.
It is known that in Islam, we are allowed to marry the ahlil-kitab (people of the book) without them having to convert to Islam. I would ask, if this is so, would our Christian spouse be required to remove her crucifix before we sleep with her every night? How would she pray in our house in that event?
The contemporary approach towards achieving the globalisation of Islam is one of inclusiveness, dear Doctor. As such, it comes as no surprise, for instance, for Sheikh Ahmed Hassoun, the Mufti of Syria to declare that Islam commands its followers to protect Judaism early last year.
While the world is fast moving into an era of inter-faith acceptance and embrace inter-religious accord, it is disheartening to see Malaysia regressing into medieval insecurity and inferiority complex. It is this complex which causes the likes of the Mufti of Johor to issue a fatwa saying Islam forbids Muslims from dressing up as Santa forgetting that Santa is not a religious icon but rather a commercial icon which has been elevated to a cultural one (which is similar to the act of giving away "duit raya" on hari raya in Malaysia).
You make known your concern of the visit by the Prime Minister being politisised and reminded of an incident where a former leader was undermine by a picture before. That was of course referring to the picture of Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah who was pictured wearing a Kadazan headgear with a crucifix symbol in 1990.
How sad. That picture was misused as a character assassination by none other than the government- controlled mainstream newspapers in an election to defeat the Tengku.
If that happens to the Prime Minister just because he attends the Christmas function recently, don't you think Doctor that it is your duty as an ulamak to educate the Muslim public, as part of your dakwah, to ignore such irresponsible and gutter politics?
By condoning the alleged action in requesting the removal of the crucifix, I am afraid to say that you are in fact indirectly promoting that kind of silly politicisation of theocratic phobias.
As Muslims, we make noises when people of other faiths perceivably treat our religion with disrespect. If non-Muslims could be asked to wear tudung before entering the mosque to observe the sanctity of our mosque, why can't we Muslims, reciprocate and accord the same respect to other faiths by at least allowing them to bear their objects of faith?
Islam, from the very beginning - and I mean to say from day one - was inextricably connected to Christianity in many ways than we would even care to admit. On the very day the Prophet (peace be upon him) was revealed the first verse Iqra', he did not know what had happened to him. He ran back home in fear, trembling in shock. Do you remember who told him that he had been appointed God's messenger?
It was none other than Khadija's (the Prophet's wife) cousin, Warqa bin Naufal, a Christian with knowledge of biblical lore, who told Muhammad (peace be upon him) that he had been revealed a divine message, just like Moses before him. Such was the close association between Islam and Christian on the very first day of its existence.
Why can't we Muslims acknowledge that and stop being in fear and stop disbelieving in our ability to be true to our faith?
Why can't we work towards inclusiveness, towards unity, towards acceptance and towards one-ness.
Or does God really want us to remind ourselves of how different we are from the rest of the world all the time?
Posted: 06 Jan 2011 08:45 AM PST
NOTA EDITOR: Sebelum ini Tulang Besi telah menyatakan gaji rakyat Malaysia tidak banyak naik semenjak Wawasan 2020 dilancarkan UMNO dan Barisan Nasional.
Terbukti dari artikel Berita Harian di bawah, gaji siswazah baru tamat pelajaran di dalam julat RM1500 hingga RM2000. Julat gaji ini adalah tahap gaji sebelum Wawasan 2020 dilancarkan.
Ini menandakan semenjak Wawasan 2020 dilancarakan yang terus menerus menjadi kaya adalah kroni dan UMNOPUTRA. Rakyat biasa dan marhean hanya mendapat abuk dan juga kenaikan kos hidup.
Berita gembira tahun 2011 SEMUA BARANG NAIK HARGA. Sampai ke tahap orang-orang kampung pun dah mengeluh.
SATU LAGI PEMBANGUNAN TAJAAN BARISAN NASIONAL
Apa Guna Pembangunan Kalau Poket Kita Kosong
MASIH RAMAI LULUSAN UNIVERSITI BERGAJI KECIL
Posted: 06 Jan 2011 07:52 AM PST
NOTA EDITOR: Tulang Besi menyeru setiap muslimin dan muslimat untuk meluangkan masa dan tenaga untuk hadzir dalam majlis ini. Bawa keluarga masing-masing dan bawa jirang tetangga sekali.
Setakat usaha Tulang Besi, telah berdoa di hadapan Kaabah dan meminta Allah SWT melaknat Khusrin Munawi serta semua yang terlibat dalam konspirasi jijik ini.
Assalamu'alaikum Warahmatullah & Selamat Petang,
Posted: 06 Jan 2011 07:49 AM PST
Here is Russian model Irina Shayk modeling some sexy lingerie and selling undies for La Senza. In case you are still wondering who Irina Shayk is… she is footballerCristiano Ronaldo's girlfriend. And if anyone should have been Maxim's hottest girl of 2010 it should of been this her, sorry Katy you are cute but… mhmmm. Anyway, Irina has been dating Cristiano Ronaldo for a few months now. And clearly we can see why Ronaldo cannot get enough of her body. Not to mention her perfect lips for blowjobs. Enjoy! Click on pictures to enlarge.
Irina Shayk (sometimes credited as Irina Sheik, born Irina Shaykhlislamova on January 6, 1986 in Yemanzhelinsk, Russia, USSR) is a Russian fashion model known for her 2007 through 2010 appearances in the Sports Illustrated Swimsuit Issue.
Posted: 06 Jan 2011 06:28 AM PST
Hari ini Tenang dimeriahkan lagi oleh Ceramah Pakatan Rakyat. Yang hadir, Anwar Ibrahim, YB Zuraidah dan lain-lain...
[ADS] Terima Email Dan Dapatkan $$$ Setiap Kali Membacanya !!!
[ADS] Malaysia Online Contest, Promotion & Earning Blog!!!
Shamsul Iskandar dan Khalid Samad melaporkan ribuan penduduk telah menghadiri Ceramah Pakatan Rakyat di Tenang station...
Semakin ramai brkumpul bila DSAI mula berucap. Angin perubahan d Johor. Tua, muda inginkn perubahan.
Posted: 06 Jan 2011 05:20 AM PST
It seems word on the ground is that both these YBs one ADUN N51 for Balingian Taib and ADUN N12 Chong are in the news for various reasons. Both of them are very hot items and you can just sit in any corner of a coffeeshop in Sarawak and their names will certainly crop up.
Whats more one is seen in the news practically everyday especially in the Chinese press "championing various grievances for the people" and issuing statements against the ruling government. Taib has been in the news of late with his "marriage" to a young bride of 28 years and many conspiracy theories has emerged that it was 'hush hush' and quickly arranged by the sister in order to avoid unnecessary adjustments/fall-outs within the family circles.
What seems a beautiful marriage is now seen by Taibs opponents as a way of Taib himself getting ready to leave his 30years throne and move himself up to be the Governor and subsequently being awarded a Tunship. The internet portals are circulating it round and word on the ground is that it has "REALLY CAUGHT FIRE"
A very senior opposition member even said,"You want to bet. I am increasing my bet and even said and quoted to us that his sons father in law is saying Taib is leaving.' So our reply was simple,"Like Chong he is leaving to give the seat to someone else younger." That is nothing wrong and maybe he wants N50 Dalat which is just next door or N62 Lambir in Miri to prove his detractors wrong.
As in Chongs case he is moving as he knows that he will be in a tough fight against a sworn enemy in former Asst.Minister Alfred Yap. Even on ground zero the people have come out and complained in their own way that he has not done much for Kota Sentosa. The do love him in Kota Sentosa but a YB who is not seen to improve the livelihood and economic activities of the constituency and hardly seen would be bests suited for other areas says a voter.
Going to Batu Kawa would just fit in nicely and do mor good than harm for his own credibility. He would love to overcome and go against all odds and get another scalp in another Assistant minister in the Chief Minister's Department Tan Joo Phoi N13. As our tiger liew columnist puts it nicely( We all know Ah Jen loves to eat ministers for breakfast and so this time around he will boldly go into Batu Kawa where minister Ah Phoi is ripe for the kill.)
So is Taib leaving like so many has speculated?
The oppositions much loved BN ADUN N14 Karim Hamzah was asked on the spot ,"YB can cfm CM Taib still lead Sarawak in the coming State elections.?"
He answered," THATS FOR SURE "
(It must be noted that various reports from a number of agencies have been gathered and put forward which is not very favourable towards Taib leading the charge in the next elections. The reports are somewhat mixed and each of us can form our own opinions)
See Chee How Information Chief of PKR Sarawak in a telephone interview with audie 61 said,"IF DUN and general elections are held together,Taib will go before dissolution. If held separatedly he may lead State BN for the elections.He will be forced to step down before general election date.He is too much a liability to BN and Najib.
YES we are only to happy to facilitate his retirement for him if we win 40 seats."
In the Malaysian corridor magazine Volume 05/10 KDN PP.16707/11/2010(025884) this was published in a comprehensive interview with Taib Mahmud by Managing Editor Juhaid Yean Abdullah
The questions to Taib on Politics.
Q. You have been appearing quite a lot in the mass media lately even appearing on the front page of national dailies.There has been speculation about your future.What do you think is that so?
A. These are naughty people who are trying to poke me. They have I've been around for 30 years and that I am no longer wanted.If I am no longer wanted I can leave.This is democracy.But when I suggested that I wanted to leave politics my own party people are unhappy.
I think this naughty people are trying to shift the blame on me. I know who they are. They are facing problems and in trying to resolve them,make me a target. If I am really not popular,how is it that my party.PBB.won 100 per cent of all the seats we contested in the last State elections in 2006.Likewise,the parties that supported me .they also had more or less 100 per centrecord in winning the seats allocated to them.
Q.The PM has said that he would be talking to you about you political future.Why the need to do so? Have you spoken to him?
A. Yes.I have spoken to himand met the PM.I told PM'you are the leader of BN,if you want me to lead Sarawak BN into the next state elections, I will stay.If not,I can always find a replacement who can work together to achieve victory?
Q. How did PM respond to that?
A. Well,PM told me,"then you lead lah,Taib"
WILL NAJIB FLIP-FLOP ON TAIB.??
Posted: 06 Jan 2011 05:03 AM PST
Message contains attachments
1 File (18KB)
Khusrin's appointment void without MB's acceptance
By Kim Quek
After 10 days of raging controversy, the federal government's chief secretary Sidek Hassan finally opened his mouth. And it was as startling as when he let off the bombshell on 27 Dec 2010 by making the shocking announcement that the least acceptable candidate - Khusrin Munawi - was appointed the new state secretary of Selangor. Khusrin was considered by the Pakatan Rakyat state government as hostile and incompetent.
In a statement released in the evening of Jan 5, Sidek defended the legality of the appointment with the claim that there was no legal requirement to consult or seek approval from the Sultan or the Selangor state government. He further revealed to the surprise of almost everyone that the federal Public Services Commission (PSC) did in fact consult the state government prior to the appointment, which contradicts claims to the contrary by the state government.
SIDEK'S LEGAL JUSTIFICATION
Sidek said Khusrin is a federal civil servant who comes under the jurisdiction of the federal Public Services Commission (PSC), and his appointment by PSC has complied with both the state and federal constitutions.
He said consultation or approval from the Sultan or the state government is not necessary because there is no such stipulation in the state constitution.
While I agree that the Sultan plays no role in this appointment constitutionally, the same cannot be said of the Menteri Besar.
The problem with Sidek is that his interpretation of the constitution is parochial, missing the wood for the tree.
Since by Sidek's own account, this is a case of seconding a federal officer to the state government, why should he have ignored Article 134 of the federal constitution which governs the secondment of officers from one governing body to another? Article 134 Clause 1 states:
"The Federation may, at the request of a State, local authority, or statutory authority of any organization, ….., second any member of its public services to the service of any State, authority or organization, as the case may be; and a State may, at the request of the Federation, another State, a local authority or a statutory authority or …….., second any member of its own public service to the service of the Federation, other State, authority or organization as the case may be."
We observe from this Clause that secondment of officers from one governing body to another can take place in a free-flow manner, without restriction, and that it takes place only when a party requests for it.
In the present case, Selangor is the principal party as well as the employer who needs to fill a vacancy, and it has the option to fill that vacancy from a source it chooses, which need not be a member from the PSC.
Did Selangor ask PSC to second an officer? The answer is no. Then why did PSC second an officer without being asked? Sidek must first answer this question.
The truth is that the state government had already started the process of selection and had narrowed down the candidates to a short-list of three which was sent to the Sultan for assent by mid-December. Menteri Besar Khalid Ibrahim was actually waiting for the palace feedback for him to forward the finalized candidate to PSC for making the formal appointment, when Sidek made the shocking announcement.
So the fact before us is that the Selangor government has decided to source its candidate from the pool of federal officers already serving in the state government, and in due course it would make its request to PSC upon finalizing the selection.
DEFECTIVE INTERPRETATION OF CONSTITUTION
Now, the crucial question: can PSC appoint the new state secretary even before receiving a request from the state government with due consideration to the fact that the appointee is detested as a political threat to the state government?
The answer must be a resounding no! It not only contravenes Article 134 which states that PSC can only act upon request, but it's an abominable act that defies all logic and decent values. Common sense tells us that such an appointment is an unworkable proposition that will jeopardize the functioning of the entire state government, since the head of the civil service is held with such serious misgivings by the state's political leadership. No wonder the entire Pakatan leadership has called this appointment an act of unabashed sabotage.
Sidek's contention that no consultation is needed due to the lack of such mention in Article 52 of the Selangor constitution is naïve and defective. Firstly, not all mandatory steps in a legal act are described in a constitution, which by its nature must be brief as it is an outline of fundamental principles. Secondly, a part of the constitution should not be read in isolation, without regards to the rest, in particular, without regards to the underlying spirit of the entire constitution upon which the law was written. The present legal case presented by Sidek is an excellent example of such immature reading of the law.
With regards to Sidek's surprise claim that PSC did in fact consult and seek approval from the state government in earlier correspondence, the first question that springs up in anyone's mind is: why the hell didn't he say so? If the Mentri Besar could react within hours (on Dec 27) that he had no knowledge of such appointment, why couldn't Sidek do the same? Sidek could have instantly doused the crisis by simply contacting the MB to work out a solution, which by common sense and by law, could not be anything else other than a candidate who is acceptable to the MB and who could work smoothly with the Selangor government.
Instead, the opposite was done to compound the crisis. Private secretary to the Sultan, Munir Bani, suddenly announced on Dec 30 that the new appointee would be sworn-in at the Palace on Jan 6. The dishonourable intention of such hurried arrangement is obvious when there is no apparent justification to rush through while the issue is still boiling, particularly when the contract with the outgoing state secretary ends only on Mar 30 (according to the MB's political secretary Faekah Husin).
Even now it is not too late for Sidek to undo the wrong that has been done to the government and people of Selangor, despite the swearing-in of Khusrin at the palace. All he needs to do is to contact the MB and agree on a candidate that, in the opinion of the reigning Selangor government, best serves the interests of the people. As for Khusrin, there are plenty of places he can be assigned to without causing distress to the Selangor government.
Posted: 05 Jan 2011 11:27 PM PST
The other day TV3 news was doing on-the-scene reporting on Nibong Tebal flood victims. Three or four different villagers were interviewed complaining about how the ADUN for their consituency didn't visit them in their misfortune. In fact, that was the headline in the bar at the bottom of the screen.
In case viewers didn't get the hint, at the end of the segment the newscasters stated with deliberation: "Untuk rekod, Nibong Tebal adalah di bawah PKR." (For the record, Nibong Tebal is under PKR.)
PKR being an Opposition party.
Shamelessly blatant much?
Posted: 06 Jan 2011 03:17 AM PST
A lot of people are disappointed with the outcome but a bigger number appear to have expected that the MACC would go scot free.
Logically, it is shocking that there could be absolutely no evidence of what had really happened.
In a tight-security place like the office of the Anti-Corruption Commission, it is a little hard to believe that there were no security cameras, no CCTVs that could have shed some light.
My deduction is, those cameras actually spell the truth in over a thousand words and could potentially seal the fate of the MACC and consequently the government.
So all that footage had to be disposed off before it got into the wrong hands. It is entirely possible that the CCTV cameras were dismantled and put away for good measure.
Even if there was no homicide, there was a lot of wrong being committed over an insignificant little "corruption" case that no one really knows about or cares.
Evidence from expert witnesses showed that Teoh had suffered a pre-fall injury on the neck, which could have caused the deprivation of oxygen to his brain, resulting in loss of consciousness or disorientation.
It begs the question: Who inflicted that pre-fall injury? And why? Is that standard operating procedure in a Malaysian interrogation?
And yet, the coroner said, "After evaluating the evidence of the pathologists, I find that there is no sufficient evidence to confirm beyond reasonable doubt that this pre-fall injury did in fact facilitate, result or contribute to Teoh's demise."
Perhaps there may indeed have been insufficient evidence.
But I think in the minds of most Malaysians, the fact that even the coroner was unable to absolve MACC from its pre-fall guilt speaks volumes.
Posted: 06 Jan 2011 03:01 AM PST
Malaysia remains a "flawed democracy" due to a "gradual erosion of civil liberties and political culture in the past year," according to the Economist Intelligence Unit's (EIU) 2010 democracy index.
The EIU reported a "slight deterioration" in democracy here, although it noted that "elections are generally free, and voters are not subject to serious intimidation."
Malaysia's aggregate score of 6.19 out of 10 was a drop of 0.17 from the previous index in 2008.
This resulted in an overall rank of 71st, down from 68th, out of 167 countries.
A lack of public confidence in the junior partners of the Barisan Nasional (BN) coalition persists and an increase in politicking by members of both BN and Pakatan Rakyat (PR) has served to further undermine faith in political parties, resulting in a score of 6.25 for political culture, the EIU reported.
It also warned that this was likely to continue as politicians prepared for an expected early general election this year.
Although Malaysia scored fairly well in terms of electoral process and pluralism (6.50) as well as the functioning of government (6.79), the EIU reported concerns over the restriction on civil liberties (5.88).
This was mainly due to the Internal Security Act (ISA), which allows for indefinite detention without trial, being used against opposition politicians and journalists.
It also cited problems related to censorship in print and broadcast media and the increase in charges filed against anti-government authors who operate online despite a government pledge not to interfere in electronic media.
Malaysia also managed only 5.56 in the political participation category.
The index describes a "flawed democracy" as having "free and fair elections and even if there are problems (such as infringements on media freedom), basic civil liberties will be respected. However, there are significant weaknesses in other aspects of democracy, including problems in governance, an underdeveloped political culture and low levels of political participation."
Topping the 2010 index was Norway with a 9.80 aggregate score while neighbours Thailand (6.55) and Indonesia (6.50) ranked above Malaysia in 57th and 60th respectively.
However, Malaysia edged the Philippines (6.12) which was 74th, and Singapore (5.89) which came in 82nd.
Courtesy of The Malaysian Insider
Posted: 06 Jan 2011 02:14 AM PST
I am referring to TEDTalks and to YouTube videos. I first heard about the web-video sites in 2008 when a good friend, a former school teacher, forwarded me a link to Sir Ken Robinson's talk on "Do Schools Kill Creativity?" That link led me to TEDTalks and YouTube. Since then, I've been 'home-schooled', learning directly from a host of experts happy to share their cutting-edge ideas.
Posted: 06 Jan 2011 01:21 AM PST
Political stability in Malaysia will come under moderate threat during the next five years as the Barisan Nasional (BN) coalition, which is tightly controlled by its largest component party, the United Malays National Organisation (UMNO), faces greater challenges to its grip on power. The March 2008 general election revealed that UMNO could no longer count on the strong support of the majority of Malays. However, the main opposition Pakatan Rakyat (PR) alliance will not be able to offer a sufficiently credible, stable alternative to the BN. Political intrigues within UMNO itself therefore constitute the biggest threat to political stability in Malaysia.
Since March 2008 the ability to make or break the BN has been in the hands of political parties from Sabah and Sarawak. BN legislators from the two states, which are located on the island of Borneo, number 52, thus making up over one-third of the BN's total of 137 members of parliament (MPs). The BN's Borneo power base is likely to be severely tested at the Sarawak state elections, which must be held by July 2011. Unresolved issues, such as illegal foreign immigration to Sabah, may cause the BN parties based in Borneo, or individual MPs from the island, to defect to the opposition or use the threat to do so to secure greater influence within the coalition in the run-up to the next general election. Moreover, the Borneo-based parties will become even more influential if MPs from the island retain their seats at the next election and a substantial number of BN legislators based in peninsular Malaysia lose theirs.
Although voters in the rural heartland of peninsular Malaysia continue to support UMNO, a significant number of better-educated, liberal middle-class Malays have deserted the ruling party in favour of the opposition. This shift in support away from UMNO could be further encouraged by the greater availability of uncensored information on Internet news sites and blogs. Given the Malaysian government's heavy censorship of the print media and broadcast services, the Internet will continue to be the main arena for the exposure of alleged government corruption and the political intrigues of individual MPs. Some conservative Malays have also voiced concerns over the government's plan to reform policies that favour bumiputera (ethnic Malays and other indigenous peoples), believing that the special rights accorded to them in the constitution may be rescinded.
UMNO's internal leadership elections, which have been postponed until 2012, could be a source of instability, particularly if the party fails to secure a resounding victory in the snap general election that may well be called in 2011. Under such circumstances there would be even greater resistance to economic reforms, undermining the credibility of the prime minister, Najib Razak, and potentially placing his position as president of UMNO—and hence his role as head of government—at risk. The most likely contender to become UMNO's next leader is the deputy prime minister, Muhyiddin Yassin.
The leader of the PR, Anwar Ibrahim, a former deputy prime minister, is likely to be convicted on a charge of sodomy in the coming months. Mr Anwar claims that the case against him is politically motivated. Without him, the ties that unite the disparate parties making up the PR—the reformist, multicultural Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR), the conservative, Islamist Parti Islam se-Malaysia (PAS) and the left-of-centre, predominantly ethnic-Chinese Democratic Action Party (DAP)—are likely to fray, while the process of choosing a new PR spokesman could deepen divisions within Mr Anwar's PKR party and also between the opposition coalition's members. Yet the likely sentencing of Mr Anwar to a prison term could also facilitate a realignment of the opposition and elements of the BN, thus offering an alternative to the current political groupings.
Outlook for 2011-15: Election watch
A general election has to be held every five years, and the next one must take place before April 2013. However, the Economist Intelligence Unit believes that a poll will be held sooner. Traditionally, the BN has preferred to call elections about a year before the end of its term of office, and this makes early 2012 a possible date for the next election. However, developments in recent months, such as the postponement of internal UMNO elections, suggest that BN may consider holding a snap poll in 2011. We still believe that Mr Najib will set a general election date after the Sarawak state election, which must be held by July 2011 and is the main event on the political calendar before the next national poll. The results of the Sarawak election will provide a good indication of the level of public support for the government and its reform plans. Recent by-elections suggest that the electorate—and especially non-Malay voters—have become much more volatile. The results of two by-elections in November 2010 point to a slight shift in non-Malay sentiment in favour of the BN, suggesting that the government's plans to reform policies favouring bumiputera has increased its appeal among ethnic minorities.
Posted: 06 Jan 2011 01:20 AM PST
wfol.tv who wrote in a local blog that the PAS should join the Barisan National (BN) instead of having one foot in opposition and the heart in the government, Anwar Ibrahim the Malaysian Opposition leader said the Umno was under pressure to have PAS on its side. Harakahdaily.net reported the Twitter comment by Anwar Ibrahim to our correspondent in an article today on their web portal in English.
Harakahdaily said the opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim (right) said UMNO was now being forced to seek cooperation with PAS due to desperation.
He was responding to an online comment suggesting that PAS should join the Barisan Nasional coalition, following PAS Murshidul Am Tuan Guru Nik Abdul Aziz Nik Mat's confirmation of reports that he had been instructed to be present at a palace dinner hosted by the Yang DiPertuan Agong on December 24 together with UMNO president Najib Razak, wrote Harakah.
"When UMNO finds itself stuck, they ask PAS for cooperation. Stop corruption, oppression and tyranny first," said Anwar in a Twitter posting to Peacemission66 on Twitter. Peacemission66 is the twitter ID used by correspondent in Riau, Indonesia.
Posted: 05 Jan 2011 11:15 PM PST
By the Administrator
Lim Guan Eng, the Chief Miniter of Penang, commended on the Penang Island Municipal Council's huge surplus of RM 35 million by 31 October last year. It was actually RM 70 million surplus by then, but an account of about half of it should be set aside for yet-to-claim expenditures, he said it in a speech over the swearing-in of MPPP's councillors for the year.
He also placed his confidence in Patahiyah bte Ismail, the Municipal President for her ability to keep the surplus for the Council.
Guan Eng also expected the Councillors to work hard with integrity and being down to earth to make Penang as an International City.
Earlier on, the Executive Councillor in charge of Local Governments Chow Kon Yeow empahsised that George Town Council was the earliast council in Malaysia which tasted its first election in 1851, full election in 1856, and was being granted a city status in 1957. The BN Federal Government scrapped the City status in the 1970's, and thus he wished that the whole Penang would be granted a City status by the City's 55 Anniversary next year.
Almost half of the Councillors are new faces for this 4th year of the People's Alliance administration in Penang, with NGO's elected councillors in the mist for the first time in history.
Also ttended the ceremony including the !st and 2nd Deputy Chief Ministesr of Penang Dato Mansor Othman and Dr. Ramasamy, the Ex-Co Members of Penang Abdul Malik bin Abul Kassim and Law Choo Kiang, and other dignatories. Below are some photos of the day :
Posted: 05 Jan 2011 11:31 PM PST
NOTA EDITOR: Alhamdulillah, Tulang Besi telah mendahului seruan Dr Halimah Ali dengan berdoa di hadapan Kaabah dan mencium Kaabah mendoakan bala diturunkan kepada Khusrin Munawi, Tan Sri Sidek Hassan, pegawai-pegawai Istana yang terlibat serta semua juak UMNO yang dibelakang percubaan sabotaj Kerajaan Negeri Selangor ini. Saya memohon kesemua ahli dan penyokong Pakatan Rakyat menganjurkan majlis solat hajat dan qunut nazilah bagi melindungi kerajaan Pakatan Rakyat Selangor serta memohon Allah SWT menurunkan bala yang teramat besar sama seperti bala yang Allah SWT turunkan kepada kaum Nabi Nuh dan kaum Nabi Saleh ke atas konspirator-konspirator ini.
Harap harap PAS Selangor tidak lah pula menyokong sama usaha UMNO dan Barisan Nasional ini.
Minta solat hajat, kami dah tak larat - Dr Halimah
Posted: 05 Jan 2011 10:59 PM PST
BETWEEN TWIN BROTHERS the Republican's Big Lie AND UMNO'S biggest lie
In 1968, 1,300 sanitation workers in Memphis went on strike. The Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. came to support them. That was where he lost his life. Eventually Memphis heard the grievances of its sanitation workers. And in subsequent years millions of public employees across the nation have benefited from the job protections they've earned.
But now the right is going after public employees.
Public servants are convenient scapegoats. Republicans would rather deflect attention from corporate executive pay that continues to rise as corporate profits soar, even as corporations refuse to hire more workers. They don't want stories about Wall Street bonuses, now higher than before taxpayers bailed out the Street. And they'd like to avoid a spotlight on the billions raked in by hedge-fund and private-equity managers whose income is treated as capital gains and subject to only a 15 percent tax, due to a loophole in the tax laws designed specifically for them.
It's far more convenient to go after people who are doing the public's work — sanitation workers, police officers, fire fighters, teachers, social workers, federal employees — to call them "faceless bureaucrats" and portray them as hooligans who are making off with your money and crippling federal and state budgets. The story fits better with the Republican's Big Lie that our problems are due to a government that's too big.
Above all, Republicans don't want to have to justify continued tax cuts for the rich. As quietly as possible, they want to make them permanent.
But the right's argument is shot-through with bad data, twisted evidence, and unsupported assertions.
They say public employees earn far more than private-sector workers. That's untrue when you take account of level of education. Matched by education, public sector workers actually earn less than their private-sector counterparts.
The Republican trick is to compare apples with oranges — the average wage of public employees with the average wage of all private-sector employees. But only 23 percent of private-sector employees have college degrees; 48 percent of government workers do. Teachers, social workers, public lawyers who bring companies to justice, government accountants who try to make sure money is spent as it should be — all need at least four years of college.
Compare apples to apples and and you'd see that over the last fifteen years the pay of public sector workers has dropped relative to private-sector employees with the same level of education. Public sector workers now earn 11 percent less than comparable workers in the private sector, and local workers 12 percent less. (Even if you include health and retirement benefits, government employees still earn less than their private-sector counterparts with similar educations.)
Here's another whopper. Republicans say public-sector pensions are crippling the nation. They say politicians have given in to the demands of public unions who want only to fatten their members' retirement benefits without the public noticing. They charge that public-employee pensions obligations are out of control.
Some reforms do need to be made. Loopholes that allow public sector workers to "spike" their final salaries in order to get higher annuities must be closed. And no retired public employee should be allowed to "double dip," collecting more than one public pension.
But these are the exceptions. Most public employees don't have generous pensions. After a career with annual pay averaging less than $45,000, the typical newly-retired public employee receives a pension of $19,000 a year. Few would call that overly generous.
And most of that $19,000 isn't even on taxpayers' shoulders. While they're working, most public employees contribute a portion of their salaries into their pension plans. Taxpayers are directly responsible for only about 14 percent of public retirement benefits. Remember also that many public workers aren't covered by Social Security, so the government isn't contributing 6.25 of their pay into the Social Security fund as private employers would.
Yes, there's cause for concern about unfunded pension liabilities in future years. They're way too big. But it's much the same in the private sector. The main reason for underfunded pensions in both public and private sectors is investment losses that occurred during the Great Recession. Before then, public pension funds had an average of 86 percent of all the assets they needed to pay future benefits — better than many private pension plans.
The solution is no less to slash public pensions than it is to slash private ones. It's for all employers to fully fund their pension plans.
The final Republican canard is that bargaining rights for public employees have caused state deficits to explode. In fact there's no relationship between states whose employees have bargaining rights and states with big deficits. Some states that deny their employees bargaining rights — Nevada, North Carolina, and Arizona, for example, are running giant deficits of over 30 percent of spending. Many that give employees bargaining rights — Massachusetts, New Mexico, and Montana — have small deficits of less than 10 percent.
Public employees should have the right to bargain for better wages and working conditions, just like all employees do. They shouldn't have the right to strike if striking would imperil the public, but they should at least have a voice. They often know more about whether public programs are working, or how to make them work better, than political appointees who hold their offices for only a few years.
Don't get me wrong. When times are tough, public employees should have to make the same sacrifices as everyone else. And they are right now. Pay has been frozen for federal workers, and for many state workers across the country as well.
But isn't it curious that when it comes to sacrifice, Republicans don't include the richest people in America? To the contrary, they insist the rich should sacrifice even less, enjoying even larger tax cuts that expand public-sector deficits. That means fewer public services, and even more pressure on the wages and benefits of public employees.
It's only average workers — both in the public and the private sectors — who are being called upon to sacrifice.
This is what the current Republican attack on public-sector workers is really all about. Their version of class warfare is to pit private-sector workers against public servants. They'd rather set average working people against one another — comparing one group's modest incomes and benefits with another group's modest incomes and benefits — than have Americans see that the top 1 percent is now raking in a bigger share of national income than at any time since 1928, and paying at a lower tax rate. And Republicans would rather you didn't know they want to cut taxes on the rich even more.
Khairy Jamaluddin's Leadership with no Inspiration Mahatir's UMNO finally shut door at his face
Umno Youth chief Khairy Jamaluddin originally mentioned not defending his seat in an interview with a newsportal last July.
When pressed for details, he clarified that he had only been "mulling the possibility and that he had yet to make a firm decision on the matter".
At the beginning of 2011 Khairy again raised speculation about leaving politics. However, this time, he confirmed that he was not going to defend his Rembau seat in the next general election and was considering a break from politics.
"Hope to help win more youth support for BN (Barisan Nasional) in 2011 & work hard preparing for elections. Then I'm taking a break from politics. Can't wait," Khairy wrote on Twitter.
When asked what he meant by a "break", he said, "I would like to 'stand down' as they say in the UK. A couple of things I'd like to do before it gets too late."
He replied that he was not sure how long he planned to be away from politics: "Indefinite. Not sure what I will be doing. A few things I want to do like go back to school."
This time around, we are made to believe that he is leaving the political arena for real. He says he will be on study leave.
Is he really as unpopular as is made out? There were reports that at the end of January 2010, there was a heated Umno Youth exco meeting during which an exco member asked Khairy to quit for being ineffective.
Or is he going because of his various run-ins with Najib? Khairy's friendship with Kalimullah Hassan who in turn was friendly with the Singapore government, in particular with Home Minister Wong Kan Seng, who is in charge of intelligence operations, was not welcome. Khairy is one Umno Youth chief who has not been 'rewarded' with a ministerial post.
Perhaps his exit from politics is a ruse to lull the opposition into a sense of security. Pakatan might think he is out of politics and be off their guard.
Or it could be a bizarre case of Khairy knowing that BN is not going to do well at the elections and so in order to be more welcoming to the next Pakatan government, has decided to leave politics now so he might get an invitation to join the new government later?
Khairy may tell people he is studying when in fact he is helping Najib's election campaign by gathering information about various people. The cover that he is no longer active in politics is the perfect opportunity to wreak maximum damge.
He can't be that sensitive about the revelations in Wikileaks about him. A Singaporean official told another US official: "The political knives will be out for Abdullah (Ahmad Badawi's) son-in-law, Khairy Jamaluddin, whom nobody likes because he got where he is through family ties…"
Or has Khairy got wind of a certain scandal that is about to be exposed? Documents made public by the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the US Department of Justice on Monday allege that French equipment supplier Alcatel paid bribes to employees of Telekom Malaysia Bhd (TM) in exchange for non-public information.
The SEC allege that Alcatel Malaysia's management consented to these payments and those who got the kickbacks were two consultants who received payments of US$200,000 and US$500,000 through US bank accounts purportedly for market research.
Because of the bribes, it claimed, Alcatel won a US$85mil contract. The contract is said to be for the deployment of equipment for Celcom's 3G rollout under phase 2 in 2006.
One of the consultants is allegedly Khairy.
So has Najib told Khairy to leave as he will attract adverse publicity for BN in the upcoming election? Najib wants a team free of graft. Is he afraid of more people being charged under his government?
Or did Khairy voluntarily leave and go abroad, so that 'papers' cannot be served on him when the law courts come to get him? Is he is trying to save many embarassed faces?
So which is it, did Khairy jump or was he pushed?
A leader is a person who inspires, by her actions, her followers to dream and do the impossible. A leader is a person who makes extraordinary things happen. A leader is a person who is very influential and has a high degree of influencing skills. A leader isinspiring by his thoughts, his deeds, his words, his actions. A leader by definition, makes things happen and does not stand by on the side while things happen.
Take any leader and you will see that this is so. If these things are not happening, then I would doubt very much if the said person is a leader.
A leader takes responsibility for the actions of the persons he supposedly leads. A leader does not say, "I don't know". The leader knows that the buck stops at him and takes full accountability for the same. Two examples from Indian history stand out in my mind.
Mahatma Gandhi (the original Gandhi) undertook a fast unto death after the Chauri Chaura incident. Why did he do that? It was because he felt (and this is important) he was culpable for his followers actions with resulted in the burning down of a police chowky and many deaths.
Lal Bahadur Shastri in 1956, offered his resignation after a railway accident at Mahbubnagar that led to 112 deaths. However, Nehru did not accept his resignation. Three months later, he resigned accepting moral and constitutional responsibility for a railway accident at Ariyalur in Tamil Nadu that resulted in 144 deaths. While speaking in the Parliament on the incident, the then Prime Minister, Jawaharlal Nehru, stated that he was accepting the resignation because it would set an example in constitutional propriety and not because Shastri was in any way responsible for the accident. Shastri's unprecedented gesture was greatly appreciated by the citizens.[Wiki entry, here]
Look at history and you will see that leaders rarely share credit for victories but share all the blame when anything goes wrong. And incidentally both these leaders are with the party that today heads the government.
Today the two people from this very same party who head the government - one official, one unofficial – are leaders of a different nature. One has no idea what is happening under his watch or atleast claims to have no knowledge of what is happening under his watch. He has the certificate of integrity provided by all concerned. And the person he reports to, unconstitutionally, has nothing to say, except take potshots
It beats me – a government that is reportedly the "most corrupt government ever to have ruled India" – its leaders should be accountable for it at the very least? Time after time the party has rewarded those who have indulged in corruption. Today it is Ashok Chavan who after being ousted from Chief Ministership is now eyeing the Rajya Sabha despite being in the limelight of the Adarsh scam. AndSuresh Kalmadi was busy enjoying yet another junketat tax payers expense – the very same taxpayers whose money he helped spend gainfully as part of our hosting the CWG games. And people by their very nature respond to incentives. And in this government, there is no incentive to stay away from corruption – indeed it is rewarded. And loyalty, surely, seems to matter more than corruption. Indeed, it is prized over ineffectiveness as well - see the curious case of Shivraj Patil. In my books, ifcorruption is overlooked it is because the money benefited in some way. After all there is no such thing as a free lunch is there?
Take any organization – if someone reports to a superior, the superior is accountable for all actions that is undertaken by the junior. Every single one. The superior cannot hide under, "I did not know" or "I was
I don't get it – how can the leaders (designated and quasi) of the government with the despicable "most corrupt government ever" tag be honest? It beats me. Can someone enlighten?
Posted: 05 Jan 2011 09:09 PM PST
Via Lawyers for Liberty –
NOTIFICATION OF EVENT: HANDING OVER OF A PROTEST MEMORANDUM TO THE IGP THIS SATURDAY (08.01.2011), 10.00am, BUKIT AMAN FEDERAL POLICE HQ (LAKE GARDEN ENTRANCE).
SHOCKING FAILURE BY POLICE TO INVESTIGATE OR TAKE ANY ACTION ON THE UNLAWFL KILLINGS BY POLICE AT GLENMARIE ON 13.11.2010 INCLUDING THE KILLING OF A 15 YEAR OLD
The quest for justice for the recent police shooting victims at Glenmarie continues due to police failure to investigate.
Lawyers for Liberty is gravely concerned over the shooting to death of three alleged suspects by police during the early hours of Saturday 13th November 2010 at Glenmarie, Selangor. The dead were Mohd Shamil Hafiz Shafie, 15, Mohd Khairul Nizam Tuah, 20, and Mohd Hanafi Omar, 22. Although the three victims did not have criminal records, acting Selangor police chief Datuk A.Thaiveegan has made the incredible claim that all the dead were "seasoned criminals".
Even after the shocking statistics of fatal police shootings that have risen 17 fold since 2001 was revealed in November 2010, the Police continue to act in blatant lawlessness as reflected in their failure to commence an independent and effective investigation in response to the police reports lodged by the victims' families on November 2010. The police failure to independently and effectively investigate the shooting demonstrates clearly the culture of impunity and lawlessness that is deeply woven into the practice of the Malaysian police force. This deafening silence poses irreversible threat to the lives and safety of the general public who is vulnerable to being victims of police shooting as a result of uninvestigated misuse of power which goes unpunished.
We call for an immediate independent and effective investigation into this latest shooting, with the findings made public.
WE FREE CITIZENS OF THIS NATION MUST MAKE A STAND AGAINST THE PREVAILING FATAL POLICE SHOOTINGS! JOIN US FOR THE HANDING OVER OF A PROTEST MEMORANDUM TO THE IGP THIS SATURDAY (08.01.2011), 10.00am BUKIT AMAN FEDERAL POLICE HQ (LAKE GARDEN ENTRANCE).
LAWYERS FOR LIBERTY (LFL)
|You are subscribed to email updates from ☪ Journal Sociopolitical Blogs |
To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now.
|Email delivery powered by Google|
|Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610|