Where is the Spirit of Merdeka?

[In anticipation of "Merdeka" Day, I'd like to rehash one of my earliest articles- first published here on 23/01/2007 (see archives) - long before the formation of Pakatan Rakyat.
The question of a PAS vote and an Islamic state was also being hotly debated in MT back then.
This was also published in Malaysia Today, and the title was actually given by RPK. It has been edited a little (in Arial font at the end) so as to be a little more relevant in today's context.]

It is common knowledge that the Utopian Malaysia does not and will never exist.

The best that we can do is to be aware, voice out where we can be heard, and hope that whatever that is mentioned is worth something towards development of new ideas in nation building. The Malaysia as we know it today, isn't what was envisioned by the those who hoped for nationhood during “Merdeka”.

The spirit of Merdeka has been subverted by racists and the religious zealots over the years, and has been replaced by chauvinism – racial and religious. It all somehow points to the political “coup” that was engineered during the events that led to the May 13, 1969.

So we had a much publicized "social contract", wherein the people themselves didn't know the cancer that was prescribed as a medicine, which was to cure all the ills within. Unfortunately, we are a society so paralyzed by symptomatic solutions one has to wonder whether we will learn anything from this mindless atrocity.
What we have now is an idea that has been entrenched so deep in the psyche - that to remove this “cancer” called the New Economic Policy would be, akin to killing the “goose that lays the golden eggs” for the beneficiaries. The beneficiary has become a hideously obese and grotesque, addict of a monster, who cannot live without his crutch and his regular “fix”. If he doesn't get his fix he would gnaw on his fingers till he bleeds, rave and rant, and wave his little weapon with threats against all those who try to help.

He does not see or understand reason.
His perception and values have become so twisted , that he does not recognize himself when he looks in the mirror. He chooses to destroy his reflection by destroying the mirror , as he says that it is only an illusion – “it isn't and will never be real”. The only good that sees, are ways to satisfy his gluttony and cravings. To justify him, the audience of unthinking little monsters applaud. All who choose to disagree, are said to be “biting the hand that fed them”.

The very hideous cancer that is destroying the nation as a whole, has become a symbol of pride and arrogance, for a political agenda so consumed by itself. To abide by the contract, to the advocates, mean defeat and shame - not honour. They have failed so miserably to even convince themselves that they are on the right track, that they look for scapegoats all around them.

Having failed in its shortcut to an economic miracle, the advocates of the system (clamouring for issues and a new agenda to perpetuate their greed and envy) now choose to preach intolerance, “arabization”, and religiosity in the name of God, to further isolate, and “drug into a stupor” a beautiful people that was once open to change.
Even if we aren't too accurate in our assessment, much of what that has been passed off for Islamization by the govt was nothing more than frothy God-talk - mindless, thoughtless, and in its exploitation of people, heartless.
The “one-upmanship” practiced by the various institutions that espouse religious chauvinism, is in fact a pathetic display of their failures and insecurities.

They need to feel that they are “winning” and wish to gloat about their “success” in being the defenders of their misplaced priorities - while hiding the enemies within, behind a cloak (turban or beard, too) of religiosity.

Then again there are those who see the folly of race/ religion politics, but intend to oppose the system by simply voting for an opposition who are themselves part of this system of apartheid, by virtue of the racial make-up of their membership. They, the people, vote because they think it makes difference, when in fact, these votes are only perpetuating the system by lending it legitimacy.

All political parties in Malaysia are race based. Most hide behind the façade of a non racist constitution. At least the original members of the Alliance aren't hiding and make no apologies about that fact ..... in fact, they don't apologize for anything when flaunting their agenda of greed and robbery.

Dear Sir- lets call a spade, a spade.
Malaysia is a one party state. UMNO.
PAS is out of the equation by virtue of its religious/political convictions.
DAP is glaringly Chinese. PKR - no agenda or alternative “formula”.
All are Lame ducks.

The rest (read component parties of BN) are in it for their share/spoils in the grand scheme of things, and to bow before the almighty powers. There can only be one kind of a viable opposition – one that is truly multi-racial in its membership. One that espouses universal values. One that is led by a Malay majority. In the Malaysian political landscape, these criteria are sorely lacking.

Politicians today, seek convenient excuses to perpetuate the status quo of racist politics - they blame the people for this, when it is they who have created this predicament. They forget that they as leaders, should be playing the music which the people dance to. They choose ignore the fact that it is their job to lead, and not be led by the mindless mob, in a siege-mindset.
Although the ruling party is actually aware of this, faced with the "ideological frankensteins" it has nurtured for 50 years, it is powerless to reinvent itself - and find itself being led by unthinking extremists bent on creating a fascist state. PAS on the opposition front is faced with the same predicament where its conservatives (under the Hadi-Nasha leadership) - who seek refuge in religious orthodoxy - are concerned. They both appear to advocate a confrontational approach in dealing with those outside their fold - and so, breed much resentment and uncertainty among the rakyat.

As such, Malaysia today is a nation that has lost its conscience.
Lets hope that the soul still lives.

cruzinthots.blogspot.com

I'd pick the Devil I know .....

========================================
Today's Islamic fundamentalism is also a cover for political motifs.
We should not overlook the political motifs we encounter
in forms of religious fanaticism.
-Jurgen Habermas
========================================

During the last elections, we had the religious right in this country agreeing to tone down their religious big0try and rhetoric - in the interest of gaining votes for power. They stopped asking for an Islamic State.

Reassurances were given by the leaders of PAS, DAP and PKR, which culminated in the signing of The People's Declaration which lacked of explicit statement on this matter (of the Islamic State). The issue of the PAS vote was written in I did mention this in the comments section of MalaysiaToday when it was revealed that - however, the comment wasn't given heed.

Back in 21/11/2007 when I wrote The PAS factor - A Viable Alternative?, (which was published in MalaysiaToday), I had posed a few questions as follows, (to which there was no real reply):-

PAS,
-Don't you realize that your policies are 'exclusivistic'?
-Don't you realize that you are the ones keeping BN in power?
-That you are instrumental to their existence?
-That you complement their intentions?
-How many of you actually understand and are tolerant of the sentiments, culture, religions and lifestyle of the Kufr? (By this I do not mean the 'negligible' Kelantan, Terengganu, Kedah, Perlis and Pahang populace).
-Do you intend to start policies of Islamic this and Islamic that?
-Do you plan to impose nationwide dress code and gender segregation should you gain power?
-Would you endeavour to abolish "immoral" entertainment outlets?
-What about education? Wanna promote madrasahs?
-Take a good look at your policies and ask yourselves - Are you the Trojan Horse party?

Despite the lack of response, I agreed to give PAS the benefit of doubt and lend them my support (no matter how insignificant it may be) with the formation of Pakatan Rakyat. This was simply in the interest of helping the reform process required to save the nation. It was no means an endorsement of PAS's "fundamentalist" ideas of repression and bigotry.
However, events of late indicate that they are (or at least they have within their fold) Trojan Horses, who serve to prop-up Umno.

The following was a comment I left on Merdeka? What Merdeka? on People's Parliament:-
"“1-Black Merdeka” it is, Haris.
However, this “Merdeka”, I declare that I’m willing to vote Umno/BN to let Malaysia be damned if our PR (PAS, mainly) and Umno reps cannot get their act together to accept the fact that we are a SECULAR Democracy.
If the mullahs of PAS/Umno cannot be silenced, and are too powerful for our chickenshit reps who don’t have the courage to openly declare that we are a secular Democracy, then so be it- let Malaysia be damned with the (Umno or PAS) Taliban-Calibans!
I am so sick of these moronic bigots ….."

*******************************************
"Those who would give up essential liberty,
to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
- Benjamin Franklin (1706 - 1790), Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759
*******************************************

Upon gaining power however, PAS appears to have let power get the better of them, and have started imposing its will upon its electorate and sabotaging the ideals for which Pakatan Rakyat stands for, and umwittingly (or by design) playing to Umno's tune.
Of late, through Hassan Ali, Nasharuddin, Nasruddin (and maybe others as well, like Zul Nordin of PKT), they have started once again calling for the imposition of "Islamic" values upon a people who are unwilling to accept them. They conveniently tell non-Muslims "not to interfere" in matters that "don't concern them" - while they hold their Muslim brothers hostage to edicts pronounced by clerics. They are quick to claim that "Islam is under attack" by secularists, while they disregard the fact that we have become far more "Islamic" than what we were for the last century or so. (Well, Umno does the very same thing .., but at least they understand the virtues of secularism.)
It reminds me of what Hitler's Reichsmarshall Hermann Goering said - that "people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. This is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and attack the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger". This approach of PAS, I'm certain, will rip to shreds, the fabric of the nation, which depends on its secular nature as envisioned by the founders to remain progressive and competitive.

The anxiety among the electorate of the Islamists subverting our Secular Democracy, and betraying the Federal Constitution as seen in other countries, is very real. Despite their "PAS for All" slogan and the non-Muslim votes that have given them much power - I sincerely hope that they do not forget that they are for now, just being given the benefit of doubt, pending reform of the BN.

The saddest part of it all, is the fact that nobody dares to silence them - neither the PR nor BN. The rational Muslim whimpers and whispers, when faced with these wannabe godmen who shout out loud at them, with their "wisdom". Meanwhile, the non-Muslim leader simply remains silent because they don't with to provoke the "rage-boys". (Read Haris Ibrahim's "Who is MB of Selangor? Hassan or Khalid?") This is simply because they are plain CHICKEN -they FEAR being labeled as "unIslamic", "anti-Islam" or even being accused of being a "secularist"(so now that has become a four-letter word!!) and whatever else is seen as the usual Islamic bogeyman.

Taking that into consideration, barring the possibility of a real reform in the attitudes of the leadership of PAS or its withdrawal/expulsion from the Pakatan Rakyat pact - I'm prepared to give my vote back to Umno, and let Malaysia be damned if it loses its civil liberties and secular nature. I would rather have Malaysia sink into corruption with UMNO with our secular nature intact, rather than live with the theocratic "cavemen" of the "Talibans". At least the descent with Umno wouldn't be as steep.
It's just the lesser of two evils - should the two remain the only choices left ......

========================================
"So this is how liberty dies-
With thunderous applause."
-'Senator Amidala', Star Wars: Revenge of the Sith (2005)
====================================

cruzinthots.blogspot.com

The "Secular" Controversy

***********************************
"Had Allah willed He could have made you all one community? But He made you as you are (diverse) as a test. So vie one with another in good works. Unto Allah you will all return, and He will then inform you of the meaning of differences within you."
[Quran 5:48].

"Many of our perceptions are distorted by our prejudices, particularly if we perceive those prejudices to be convictions".
- Ravi Zacharias

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

There is this constant "threat" of a spiritual war - at least in their minds.
In their fervour, the "religious right" never tire of debating on these matters.
These "necessary wars" go on ad infinatum, ad nauseaum, so as to keep the "fire of God" burning in the hearts of men.
Of late there have been a few articles published in Malaysia Today, catering to this debate - controversies starting with the Hijab, scarf, "sexy" school uniforms , and then the question of the "secular state".

Let us take the Malaysian political climate into consideration.
Here is a "Pakatan" at it's infancy (not a formal coalition, in the real sense of the word - they don't even have a common symbol or identity as yet) that is trying to achieve a paradigm shift in our political structure.
There are two stumbling blocks for this pact, towards achieving unity in purpose.
One is the question of "the secular state" - a tussle between the staunchly "secularist" DAP, and PAS - which is passionate about being Islamic.
The other is that of the agent provocateur on the sidelines who needs to dismantle this "pact", so as to perpetuate their racist/ religious hegemony in the interests of the "putra elite".

The debate about "Islamic State/ values" is the perfect tool to drive a wedge between the parties mentioned above, and have no doubt in my mind that it would be used to the hilt by the agent provocateurs to achieve their goals. Is it possible that more of these controversies would be highlighted by the Putra-philes so as to jeopardize the "uneasy pact" of the "Pakatan Rakyat"?.

Anyway, although the "secular" spirit has been articulated in general in our constitution without specifically stating it, many have failed to understand and accept this fact. To many a staunch Muslim, "Secular" is a "four-letter-word" - at least, as they understand it.

The argument often brought about is that the Malaysian Federal Constitution does not say that Malaysia is a secular state. Those who espouse this argument, need to understand why the constitution is worded in such a way.
Allow me to quote from The Australian Achievement: From Bondage To Freedom by Dr. Mark Cooray
"The rule of law requires both citizens and governments to be subject to known and standing laws. The supremacy of law also requires generality in the law. This principle is a further development of the principle of equality before the law. Laws should not be made in respect of particular persons. As Dicey postulated, the rule of law presupposes the absence of wide discretionary authority in the rulers, so that they cannot make their own laws but must govern according to the established laws. Those laws ought not to be too easily changeable. Stable laws are a prerequisite of the certainty and confidence which form an essential part of individual freedom and security. Therefore, laws ought to be rooted in moral principles, which cannot be achieved if they are framed in too detailed a manner."

For one thing, DAP needs to articulate what it means to be a "Secular State". They need to be able to articulate their ideas, so as not to alarm the "religious".
They need to be able to convince PAS and Islamists alike, that "secularism" isn't the "dirty word in Islam" (a popular notion in the Islamist's camp), that it is made out to be. For this to happen, DAP definitely needs to understand and relate to the philosophical basis of "secular humanism", Islam & the "Islamic politician's" psyche better, instead of simply "defining the constitution" and harping on the "secular state" rhetoric.
They need to have a think-tank who can articulate the idea that Islam is compatible with "secular humanism", as opposed to the stereotype perceptions.

There is a belief among the religious that "secular humanism" is "anti-God".Myths are created towards propagating these ideas while the achievements of "secularists" are conveniently ignored or belittled.

The advocates of theocracies need to understand that-
"Humanists are staunch supporters of freedom of religion, belief, and conscience, as laid out in both the U.S. Constitution and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. These rights protect the freedom of religious belief equally with the freedom of nonreligious belief, the freedom of religion equally with the freedom from religion.
Secular humanists would actually oppose advocacy of their worldview by schools or the government because that would violate the neutrality of a secular society, and the rights of religious believers. Secular humanists believe that a healthy society supports a variety of worldviews, just as it supports a variety of political parties. They also believe that religious and philosophical views should be every bit as open to debate and discussion as political beliefs." -10 Myths About Secular Humanism

PAS on the other hand, needs to articulate their ideas on an "Islamic State" better.
One that can be inclusive in its ideas based on "Universal Values" (which are incidently, very Islamic), by not espousing arbitrary repressive laws that belonged to a different time, age and culture, which are supposedly "Islamic". They should understand that resigning one's fate to "God-ordained" laws without sufficient intellectual debate or consensus, isn't an option in this era of ICT.

It is ironic that there are many prominent Islamic thinkers who believe that the philosophical/moral/ethical premises of the Constitution of USA is far more "Islamic" and superior than that of many a "chest-thumping Muslim" nation of the OIC - and rightfully so, too.
Academic debate on these matters at our hallowed halls of educational excellence is however, quite constipated at best (and we have the HP6 ideologues of our nation to thank for that) - usually dwelling on "accepted ideals".
These topics are deemed too "sensitive" - just as mentioning "May 13" was, not so long ago (unless it was to threaten for votes, of course). Our leaders believe that the masses are simply incapable of civilized conduct, and would foam at their mouths with the first mention of any misconception.

PAS should be aware that the lack of open inter-faith dialogue and exagerated sensitivities help "those with vested interests", in demonizing PAS in the eyes of the non-Muslims. It aids them further, should the masses remain in ignorance and get emotional in response to perceived insults, without rationally addressing their fears and insecurities.
It is a formula for governance that has worked well over the centuries for the despotic regimes of theocracies, monarchies and many a pseudo-democracy or socialist state.
Therefore, one would do well to pay heed to what Voltaire meant when he said :-
“So long as the people do not care to exercise their freedom, those who wish to tyrannise will do so; for tyrants are active and ardent, and will devote themselves in the name of any number of gods, religious and otherwise, to put shackles upon sleeping men.”

Therefore, what matters isn't really the populist rhetoric of politicians advocating "virtuous" systems of governance (based on debatable ideas deemed "holy"), but the well defined and thought out set of progressive values and ideas that allow for freedom and embraces humanity as a whole, in all its diversity.

===================================

"It will not do to cling to the cause and wish the result away.
Reality does not play mind games.
What is more, to anesthetize the mind in order to abort what comes to birth
when wrong ideas are conceived and borne in the womb of culture,
will only kill the very life-giving force of the nation that nurtures the idea."
-Ravi Zacharias

=================================

cruzinthots.blogspot.com

DEWAN DISPATCHES: Karpal Singh is King of the 'Damn'

By : Azmi Anshar

DEWAN RAKYAT, Feb 26, 2009:

CAN anyone recall the last time the damn word “celaka” was uttered torrentially in the House during a full-blown debate, hurled in the august hall like the worst acid rain beating down on an unsuspecting parched earth? Thank Karpal Singh (DAP-Bukit Gelugor) for having the brass and the crass to wax lyrical on such a taboo word and for reminding us that “celaka” can now be applied as part of a viable political lexicon.

That Karpal was possessed to disgorge the word in such unconstrained panache is understandable: he had been on the receiving end of a vile, violent threat to his life. Two bullets sent to anonymously to him would have triggered a maddening reaction from anyone but for the Tiger of Jelutong, it was an extreme warning against his earnestness to file for legal action against the Sultan of Perak for controversially instructing Nizar Jamaluddin to vacate the Perak Menteri Besar’s post and appointing Dr Zambry Kadir, thus reinstating the toppled BN State Government.

That and the temerity of Umno Youth members to demonstrate in the proximity of his Penang law firm and home, and the deluge of police reports lodged against him for his allegedly “treasonous” insouciance, treason being the operative word pounded unrestrainedly by his enemies.

It was as if Karpal had deliberately set himself up as a sitting duck, an easy to sight moving target that even the most insignificant Barisan Nasional politician can aim and fire at will, and still hit the target. But the difference between Karpal and these political pass-by shooters is that he had never shorn his ageless Teflon body armour that casually deflects bombs, bullets, arrows, knives and the occasional stabs in the back.

Like all seasoned, been there, done that politicians, and that includes his compatriot Lim Kit Siang, his nemesis Dr Mahathir Mohamad, his one-time nemesis-turned-compatriot-turned dubious nemesis Anwar Ibrahim, controversy is a golden badge of honour worn with defiance, aggression and a measure of theatrics to create a wow factor. Karpal will be the first to admit this, seeing that he practically wrote the book on how to play up a glorious scene in Parliament, lap it up and earn Brownie points over the other side.
Give Karpal an inch and he will improvise: the lump is cultivated into a clump and before you know it, the inch swells into a monumental issue, chewable, biteable and serviceable to any political issues of the moment. The incredible aspect of Karpal’s extemporised design is that it steamrolls ruthlessly over friend and foe alike, as demonstrated by his flabbergasting rant against Anwar, Kit and Lim Guan Eng, whom he emphatically blamed for the collapse of the PR Perak Government.

Debating the Royal Address while garrisoning accusations that he committed treason, Karpal was in an impossibly uncompromising disposition, taking on detractors like a Jet Li character “kungfuing” his way out of a pack of snarling attackers. Inside the House, Karpal’s an old hand in verbal hand-to-hand combat, seeing it needed a posse of BN MPs to pounce on his querulous charge that an Umno Youth member was responsible for sending the live bullets to him.

"Where did the celaka (damn) Pemuda Umno fellow get the bullets?" he bellowed as Puad Zakarshi (BN-Batu Pahat), Ismail Mohamed Said (BN-Kuala Krau) and Abdul Rahman Dahlan (BN-Kota Belud) leapt from their seats to demand an instant retraction, which Karpal sidestepped momentarily by cloyingly stating that he was “not accusing anyone in particular.”

By this time Karpal had the a sizeable number of BN MPs lapping up on his stage play as more demanded that he retract the damn word. "It is unparliamentary language. He should retract it," insisted Rahman, whose riposte was justified, being the Umno Youth secretary that at that point of time had to defend the wing’s honour.

By this time, Deputy Speaker Datuk Wan Junaidi Tuanku Jaafar had enough of Karpal’s theatrics, first appealing to the statesman in Karpal not to spew the word again but when that wasn’t effective, threw the full weight of the chair by ordering Karpal, which the MP agreed though not without a stinging parting salvo. "Okay, okay I will retract, but that does not change anything about Umno Youth."

Before that moment of unhinging came to pass, Karpal threw tempting morsels of political double-speak on his radioactive remarks that Anwar was unfit to lead Pakatan Rakyat and should step down. "I don't have any misunderstanding with him,” was Karpal’s whimsical overture. “I accept him as a leader of Pakatan.”

That won’t do, the chorus of BN backbenchers counterstroked and plangently called on Karpal to clarify his “misleading” apologia, to which he must have smiled enigmatically as a quick response but a second later, he returned to character in his huff and gruff intonation. “That is none of your business," he dismissed the pack.

Karpal’s theatrics would have the usual repercussion - indignant protests, demands for his head to roll and so forth - but never physical violence. It changed today after the DAP chairman was confronted by a mob Selangor Umno Youth members at the Parliament tower block then degenerated into a shouting match and culminated in a scuffle with the MP for Segambut Lim Lip Eng having his shirt tugged.

As soon as Karpal arrived for the afternoon session, the Umno Youth mob started heckling him over his “damn” reference to the wing. Karpal's aide immediately summoned help and several DAP members turn up and the potential for a really ugly incident was forthcoming.

Parliament security officers quickly summoned police help and Karpal was safely wheeled under heavy escort to the lobby. BN Backbenchers chief Datuk Seri Tiong King Sing quickly condemned the marauders and complained of the slack security. "This is not the way. In politics there are bound to be people who provoke. We have to accept that this part and parcel of politics," he said in Karpal’s defence.

But the attack gave Karpal even more fodder to play with: inside the House later, Karpal and several DAP members questioned how the pre-meditated way the mob confronted Karpal, beseeching Speaker Tan Sri Pandikar Amin Mulia to act agai8nst the perpetrators. "I am disabled but not intimidated by this,” Karpal declared in his usual bravado but he being him, Karpal still made a meal out of the torrid incident. “The police were there and they just watched,” he charged.

Umno Youth deputy chief Khairy Jamaluddin, while regretting the incident and promising to investigate, challenged Karpal to back his allegation with proof in 24 hours or be considered a liar. Mukhriz Mahathir, Khairy’s rival for the Umno Youth chief’s post in next month’s party elections, proposed that Karpal be charged with sedition for questioning the sultan besides chiding him for stating that “Singh is King”. "He does not respect our rulers," Mukhriz charged in a statement.

Karpal can be a tacky one at playing delightful mind games with this crowd, MPs and Umno Youth mob. That Anwar apologia was a 180-degree swing from his angry outburst denouncing the Opposition Leader to a pulp, done in the full light of media scrutiny. Is this his way of playing the paradoxical game?

If one is to consider the deception technique of throwing wolves off the scent, Karpal’s sudden vindication of Anwar, the ‘damn’ utterance and the pointed accusation that an Umno Youth member was the anonymous bullets’ sender may be the flimflammery needed to deflect the marauders as he buys time to plan and execute the legal action against Sultan Azlan Shah. Or maybe that too is another of his famed flimflammery?

Perak DAP says snap polls the only way out

By Shannon Teoh

KUALA LUMPUR, Feb 19 — Perak DAP chief Datuk Ngeh Koo Ham has repeated the call to dissolve the state assembly and have snap elections to find a clear solution to the continuing constitutional crisis in the state.

This comes despite the fact that Speaker V. Sivakumar, who is also the DAP assemblyman for Tronoh, suspended Perak Menteri Besar Datuk Dr Zambry Abdul Kadir and his six exco members yesterday for 18 months and a year respectively.

The move would give Pakatan Rakyat a majority in the assembly should it choose to table a no-confidence vote in Zambry, although Sivakumar's powers as speaker and as chairman of the rights and privileges committee are being questioned.

As such, Ngeh told The Malaysian Insider today, the best solution to the impasse is to have snap polls.

"I call for snap elections to be held immediately to solve the present crisis which will have a negative impact on the people of Perak if prolonged especially in view of the current economic crisis," he said.

Although this implies that he is not confident that Sivakumar's decision would be upheld, Ngeh added that the decision of the speaker and the committee "was based on constitutional provisions and must be respected".

"We see now how the constitution protects us from any party who grabs power unconstitutionally, illegally and undemocratically," he added.

Barisan Nasional chairman-elect Datuk Seri Najib Razak had masterminded a Feb 5 takeover of the state which saw four assemblymen pulling out of PR and effectively joining BN.

Lack of faith disturbing? — The Malaysian Insider

FEB 19 — Sometimes the best explanations are the simplest ones. Princess Diana died because her driver was drunk and going too fast. The Twin Towers were hit by Islamic terrorists, not CIA agents. The continued success of Simon Cowell and the Osbourne family is, indeed, one of the harbingers of the apocalypse.

To this list, we can add the reason Manchester United will, in all likelihood, move five points clear of Liverpool at the top of the Premier League table by beating Fulham.

They have a better team. Now this may come as a surprise to those still looking for clues to account for the change in the balance of power this season. In recent months, many otherwise rational people have become convinced that Liverpool have frittered away supremacy in the title race based on a combination of rogue and random factors.

Mind games played by Sir Alex Ferguson, the fractious contract negotiations of Rafael Benitez, boardroom unrest at Anfield or any number of peripheral events are believed to have inspired Manchester United to claw away at Liverpool's lead. This is good news for analysts, commentators and headline-writers, who have had, as The Flintstones theme tune puts it, a gay old time.

Without wishing to spoil the fun, however, it is more straightforward than that. Take the best Manchester United XI and the best Liverpool XI and put them together: how many of Benitez's team would get into Ferguson's? Not many. And that is why the championship is again heading for Old Trafford.

By my reckoning, maximum four, minimum two. Split the difference, call it three. Whichever way, there is nothing here to suggest that Liverpool can get the better of Manchester United this season, or next, without substantial upgrading in the summer.

Using it, Liverpool would be placed above Chelsea, although not by a huge distance. Manchester United, by contrast, would dominate Chelsea with just one player (Frank Lampard) or a generous three (Lampard plus Jose Bosingwa and Ashley Cole) getting into Ferguson's current team.

Assessment is made on form this season, not reputation. So while there may have been a time when Jose Reina, Liverpool's goalkeeper, would have shaded it from Edwin van der Sar, in goal for Manchester United, it is not right now when the Dutchman has beaten a long-standing British record for minutes without conceding a league goal, and is closing in on the 1,390- minute European record set by Dany Verlinden of Club Brugge in Belgium in 1990.

Javier Mascherano is another who would have walked into the holding midfield role at any club last season, but he has been a disappointment this year, perhaps as a result of his exertions for Argentina during the Olympics.

That leaves Fernando Torres and Steven Gerrard as the two Liverpool players who would definitely be accommodated in the Manchester United team while, on a good day, one of Xabi Alonso or Mascherano could make the defensive midfield and an out-of-position Jamie Carragher would contend at full back.

Benitez's penchant for drama has drawn understandably negative comment as Liverpool's grip on the prize has weakened, but he cannot be held solely responsible. His squad deficiencies are being exposed just as Manchester United's strength in depth is at its most apparent.

Arsene Wenger, the Arsenal manager, had it right. Asked about the mind games that famously denied Newcastle United the title in 1996, he replied that Newcastle's defence, not Kevin Keegan's outburst on Sky TV, determined the final placings. Logical explanations get you nowhere in the pantomime that is the Premier League, though, so instead we waste valuable time analysing pronouncements from Old Trafford, and their effect, at the expense of crediting what is arguably the finest squad of footballers assembled by an English club.

There has never been a group like the one at Manchester United. Gary Neville versus Wes Brown versus Rafael da Silva, and that is just for the right back spot. Wayne Rooney versus Dimitar Berbatov versus Carlos Tevez versus Cristiano Ronaldo. Yet we ignore this and become distracted by Rafa's rant.

There are similarities with the collapse of England's cricket team in Jamaica two weeks ago, in that several small factors might have made an impact on the cohesion of the team, but none were actually in the middle with bat in hand.

So Benitez does not get on with Rick Parry, the chief executive? Big deal.

Jimmy Greaves, in wonderfully flippant mode, summed up the inconsequence of departmental relationships on the dressing room, by recalling his time at Tottenham Hotspur. “Most of us didn't like Bill Nicholson, and Bill Nicholson didn't like us,” he said. “In fact, the only thing we all agreed on was that we couldn't stand the board of directors.”

Benitez's distance from Parry and George Gillett, one half of the partnership of American owners, may be a problem for the long-term stability of the club and could be very damaging in the summer if he leaves, but it should not be, here and now, an issue for the playing staff. Nor should Benitez's feelings about Ferguson's influence on English football have an effect.

That press conference tirade is often cited as explanation for Liverpool's reversal of fortune, but what would the fall-out be anyway? That Liverpool players rally around Benitez in the desire to stick one up United? They seem to have had that motivation for some while, judging by Mascherano's furious display at Old Trafford last season.

The idea that Benitez's claims put pressure on his players is also ridiculous; as if there were previously no pressure on a Liverpool team with an opportunity to win its first title in the modern era. Had Benitez taken a vow of silence until the end of the season, the tension at Anfield would still be oppressively thick.

The reality is that Liverpool are going up against a colossal group of players at United and no team, not even the lavishly-assembled Chelsea, can live with them right now. They have a unique multiplicity, so even the understudies of understudies would get into many good teams (as Mikael Silvestre did at Arsenal this season).

It is in many ways the perfect squad, because it also provides for the future in players such as Ben Foster, the reserve goalkeeper, and Jonny Evans, who has fitted in magnificently at centre half in the absence of Rio Ferdinand this season.

It is a sign of United's power that they could play an unconventional central midfield of Ryan Giggs and Darren Fletcher against Chelsea and still win comfortably. On another day it might be Michael Carrick and Anderson or Paul Scholes. If Benitez had United's squad he could rant at or fall out with who he liked: he would still win the league, as United almost certainly will.

Now combine the two teams, starting at the back. Both have good keepers, but there can be no argument that a man who has gone 1,212 minutes without conceding a league goal is among the players of the season. Van der Sar, therefore, gets the nod over Reina. He has been on a roll since emerging victorious from the penalty shoot-out at the Champions League final last season.

United have three strong right backs and the only alternative would be to overlook them all for Carragher, Benitez's defensive rock, out of position in a role he has occupied in key matches in Europe. This would be appealing because, to put it bluntly, he is not getting into this team at centre half.

Those positions are reserved for Ferdinand and Nemanja Vidic, an early contender for Footballer of the Year. Ferdinand's appearances through the season have been restricted by injury, but Vidic has been a constant and as a partnership they have now surpassed John Terry and Ricardo Carvalho of Chelsea.

At left back, United's Patrice Evra is the best in the country at the moment, ahead of Ashley Cole, of Chelsea.

Midfield brings another Manchester United landslide with Gerrard the only Liverpool player in a four that would comprise Ronaldo, Fletcher and Giggs. Torres would be the goalscoring spearhead, but his partner would be Rooney. Final total: Manchester United 8, Liverpool 3. And one of Liverpool's three gets in with a shoe-horn.

Despite the excellent job done by Roy Hodgson, Manchester United should beat Fulham and, at that moment, a daunting lead will open up. Liverpool still have to go to Old Trafford, so the battle is not over, but the biggest shock of the season would be if United threw it away from here.

If that were the case, there genuinely would be need for an investigation — into whether Ronaldo's heart was still in Manchester, whether Berbatov's arrival had unsettled the team, if Ferguson was correct in his treatment of Tevez.

Were Manchester United to blow it, we would all be looking behind the story for clues. It is easier to work out what has gone wrong at Liverpool, though: the answer is right there, on the teamsheet. — The Daily Mail

Was this the future of Umno? — Leslie Lau

FEB 18 — At best last night's televised debate between the three Umno Youth chief candidates confirmed what an increasing number of Malaysians think of Umno — that its leaders are out of touch, arrogant, hypocritical.

Worst still, it showed the appeal to the Umno ground of particularly racist views.

At one stage Datuk Seri Dr Mohd Khir Toyo appeared to be even suggesting that it was blasphemous for the government to consider non-Malays on the same standing as Malays.

Malays, he argued, had a special position under the federal constitution. Likewise Islam and as such it could not be placed on the same standing as non-Islamic religions.

Even when the moderator pointed out to Dr Khir that he was one of the leaders in Umno and Barisan Nasional that lost an entire state to the Pakatan Rakyat, he argued that it was because his party was not Islamic enough and did not champion the Malays enough.

Never once did Dr Khir acknowledge the public perception of corruption and arrogance in his government when he was Selangor menteri besar.

To their credit, the other two candidates — Khairy Jamaluddin and Datuk Mukhriz Mahathir — appeared a little uncomfortable with some of Dr Khir's remarks.

Mukhriz appeared to be way out of his league during the debate, and looked like he did not really want to be there.

From his responses — that he was very proud of his father — it was clear that what he was trying to offer Malaysians nostalgic for his father's strong leadership a return to Mahathirism.

Mukhriz offered support for Dr Khir's assertion that the government has been slow in invoking the Internal Security Act on DAP politician Karpal Singh over his threat to sue the Perak Sultan.

He also voiced support for a continuation of the policy to teach science and mathematics in English, which was one of the last major policies introduced by his father.

But among the three men it was probably only Khairy who attempted to project a more centrist view.

The current deputy Youth chief played it safe when it came to the issue of affirmative action policies — he was for such policies to continue — but he avoided the vitriolics of the other two men when it came to the use of the ISA.

He also pointed out that the upcoming power transition from his father-in-law Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi to Datuk Seri Najib Razak would be meaningless without reform.

Compared to Dr Khir's conservative bordering on extremist views, Khairy's message was probably the most palatable of the three candidates (Mukhriz was almost not there).

He appeared to be saying sorry on behalf of his father-in-law when he acknowledged the failure to deliver the reforms promised in 2004 led to BN and Umno's disastrous performance in last year's general election.

But the fact that the moderator Dr Agus Yusof pointed out to some ironic applause from the audience that Khairy was also seen to be a liability which contributed to BN's results, suggests Malaysians remain quite sceptical and cynical about what the deputy Youth chief had to say.

If the audience reactions were anything to go by Dr Khir probably won the debate.

If the audience reactions are a reflection of the views of Umno members, Dr Khir will probably become the next Umno Youth chief.

And if that happens, it will probably see a more nationalist Umno emerging, and one which is opposed to reforms and changes, and one which will lead a more hardline government.

Leslie Lau is consultant editor to The Malaysian Insider.

POLITICAL TSUNAMIS,SCANDALS, MARRIGES...AND THE DIVORCES OF 2008

Oleh: Noor Hasilah Ismail

The curtains of 2008 have started to close in, marking the end of a most colourful year for Malaysians.

Not only have our celebrities filled us up with tales of marital joys and sorrows, but so have our political leaders - whom if I may say so – kept us up even more, with some unbelievably sensational events of the year.

The whole spectrum of relationships seem to have been laid out in the vast political landscape for us all to witness – 'marriages', 'divorces', even "reconciliations", in addition to scandals and incidences of "infidelity".

To top it all – a political tsunami which left many shocked, but many more delighted.

January – the first shock of the year for Malaysians – news of the involvement of a senior political figure in a sex video hit the headlines. Datuk Dr Chua Soi Lek had to offer his hand of 'divorce' to MCA.

February – VK Lingam's scandalous hearing became the main news when his former secretary Jayanthi, 45, claimed she was locked in all night in 1994 with two other secretaries to type the judgement of a civil suit involving Tan Sri Vincent Tan.

March – The infamous political tsunami – when the "threesome" or "madu tiga" PR of DAP-PKR-PAS coalition rolled over five states in a single Malaysian-style tidal wave. In this 12th. General Election (PRU-12), BN's loss of Penang, Selangor, Perak, Kedah, and Kelantan, also resulted in the loss of their two-third majority in Dewan Rakyat. The former corporate figure, Tan Sri Abdul Khalid Ibrahim (PKR) was elected Menteri Besar Selangor, while DAP's Head Secretary Lim Guan Eng replaced Tan Sri Dr Koh Tsu Koon in Penang. As for Perak – the new Menteri Besar is now Datuk Mohamad Nizar of PAS.

April – First "divorce" of the year? Director of JAIP, Datuk Jamry Sury, was told to leave house by the new Perak Menteri Besar for allegedly not giving the necessary co-operation with the state government. Within 24 hours Datuk Jamry was asked to provide his leadership services in another 'house', among other state departments. April also saw the PM announcing the factors leading to BN's failure to maintain its two-thirds majority, and losing in Kedah and Perak. Acts of sabotage by UMNO members against candidates in 14 Parliamentary and 22 state constituencies led to the major losses.

May – PM again made the headlines – accepting former PKR Youth Head – Mohamad Ezam Mohd. Nor – into UMNO (which he left in 1999.) May also witnessed heated arguments on "Ketuanan Melayu" (Malay rights issue) between the opposition and BN MPs in Dewan Rakyat. This escalated during the wrapping up of the debate by the Minister of Unity, Culture, Arts, and Heritage, Datuk Mohd Shafie. The Deputy Speaker, Datuk Ronald Kiandee, finally was forced to postpone sitting until the following day.

June – Malaysians were again in for another shock when the former assistant to Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, Mohd. Saiful Bukhari bin Azlan made a police report that he had been sodomised by Anwar, under force, several times. Anwar then issued a media statement denying the allegation.

July – Agendadaily created history when it successfully organised the Debate between the Minister of Information Datuk Shabery Cheek and Anwar Ibrahim on the petrol increase issue. This was aired live on RTM. Although he was seen to have been halted several times in this battle of professional arguments, Shabery was praised for his courage to debate against Anwar. In comparison to other BN politicians who had proven to be much braver arguing behind the scenes, Shabery had been quite "promising."

August – The June main story continued with Anwar's former Assistant Mohd. Saiful Bukhari swearing in a mosque to support his claim of having been sodomised unwillingly by Anwar. However this did not stop Anwar from winning the by-election in Permatang Pauh with 31,195 votes.

September – UMNO Supreme Council "divorced" Bukit Bendera's UMNO Division Head, Datuk Ahmad Ismail for three years for inciting controversial racial issues through a statement he had made earlier.

October – The arrest under ISA of Teresa Kok and Sin Chew journalist Tan Hoong Cheng fuelled another bomb of anger from the opposition and created a media frenzy.

November – Another political tsunami - this time among the female political leaders of UMNO. Datuk Kamilia Ibrahim announced she would be contesting for the Wanita's Head post. This led to Datuk Shahrizat Jalil deciding to contest against Tan Sri Rafidah Aziz. In the same month, a Seremban division UMNO meeting held at Tuanku Jaafar Golf Club turned violent when members started punching each other immediately after the Division Head, Datuk Ishak Ismail ended his speech. Two women were injured.

December – Another "divorce" happened in UMNO. Datuk Zaid Ibrahim, former Minister in the PM Department was sacked after several of his actions were found to have gone against party ethics. One of them was attending an opposition party gathering. UMNO Supreme Council also suspended the membership of Head of Petaling division, Datuk Zahar Hashim for three years, for making a statement criticising the party. Another UMNO Division Head, Datuk Ahmad Lebai Sudin of Pokok Sena, also had his membership suspended - for two years - by the UMNO Disciplinary Board. He was found to have sabotaged the party in the last GE in March. Another member of that same division, Halimah Hanafi also had her membership suspended for two years for having made a false report. Just last week, Datuk Zahar, who had not been satisfied with the action taken against him, took the decision to "seek the hand" of the opposition party, PKR.

In UMNO Batu Division, the crisis that had been dragging on for almost two months was finally resolved on December 29 when its new division head was appointed. A former committee member, Yahya Mat Ghani won in the selection crisis, against the then incumbent Datuk Mohd. Yusoff Hamid by a majority of 136 votes. The latter only obtained two miserable votes. What an end to a year of much political tidal waves!

4 YEARS AFTER THE ASIAN TSUNAMI

LAM TUTUI (Indonesia) - WHEN the deadly waters of the Asian tsunami smashed into this fishing village in Indonesia's Aceh province four years ago, not one house was left standing. Now there are too many of them.

Recovery has been uneven in the dozen countries hit by the 2004 Indian Ocean disaster, which killed more than 220,000 people. While some communities have rebounded and flourished on a multibillion dollar outpouring of aid, others have languished.

In Lam Tutui, 54-year-old villager Keuchik Baharuddin recalled how he heard the monkeys in the trees screaming wildly before the tsunami hit, killing his wife and all five of his children.

'I saw our village had been levelled to the ground,' he said.

One of only 75 people from the village of 545 to survive, Mr Baharuddin has rebuilt a semblance of his old life in a gleaming new village, marrying a tsunami widow who has just given birth to a baby son.

So many houses have been built with aid that survivors are now making money on the side by renting them to tenants while other houses sit empty, he said.

In Aceh, which along with nearby Nias island was the region worst hit by the disaster, with at least 168,000 killed, reconstruction has been a qualified success.

Authorities have spent around US$6.7 billion (S$9.67 billion) of the roughly US$7.2 billion in aid pledged by donors, building nearly 125,000 houses and infrastructure from schools to roads and bridges, according to Indonesia's Aceh-Nias reconstruction agency (BRR).

The BRR, which is set to wind up its mandate overseeing the local and international aid effort next April, has been praised for getting the job done with little of the corruption that routinely infects Indonesian government projects.

The recovery has also been aided by peace forged between the separatist Free Aceh Movement (GAM) and the Indonesian government in the wake of the tsunami's devastation, ending a three-decade civil war that claimed 15,000 lives.

Concerns now are that as reconstruction ends - and the sugar-rush of foreign money dries up - Aceh will return to misery, and possible instability.

Unemployment, currently around 10 percent, is expected to rise and the economy to slow as the BRR wraps up its work, said Aceh Governor Irwandi Yusuf, a former GAM fighter allowed into politics as part of the peace deal.

'I never dreamed that we would be able to remove all Acehnese from hell and bring them to heaven. I just wanted to try to remove them from hell,' he said.

There are also fears unemployment among ex-fighters, currently estimated at around 20 per cent, could lead to a rise in violent crime or clashes during elections in April.

Adding to potential woes is the fact that while aid has transformed the tsunami-hit coast, those living in inland areas devastated by the civil war have been left out, BRR head Kunturo Mangkusubroto said.

'The rural economy on the coastline that was hit by the tsunami is back, I can say that with full confidence. The rural economy in the hinterland that was affected by the conflict is not back,' he said.

While the tsunami helped end a war in Aceh, the fog of Sri Lanka's dragging war with Tamil separatists has hampered efforts to rebuild devastated parts of the nation. Around 31,000 people died in the tsunami in Sri Lanka and around 10,000 still live in temporary camps.

The state auditor general in 2005 said only 13.5 per cent of the US$1.16 billion committed to assist victims had been spent. There have been no government audits released since then.

Waste and bureaucratic bungling was underscored in October when the government destroyed more than five tonnes of rice and lentils donated by the World Food Programme for tsunami victims, as it rotted before distribution.

Mismanagement has also tainted the much smaller aid effort in Malaysia, which lost 68 people in the disaster and where government auditors have found mishandling of aid money that ended up in shoddy houses or fishing boats unsuitable for local waters.

In Thailand, where 5,400 people were killed - half of them foreign holidaymakers - tourism has bounced back, only to be buffeted by ongoing political turmoil.

The recent closure of airports in the southern province of Phuket and the capital Bangkok by anti-government protesters has led to a dip in arrivals, saidMr Yiamsuriya Palusuk, the governor of Phangnga province, one of five Thai provinces hit by the tsunami. -- AFP

THE AUTOMATIC GOVERNMENT

Posted by Dr. Mahathir Mohamad

1. I came home from Yemen on Thursday, Dec 25th. It was Christmas Day and offices were closed. I was tired and appreciated the holiday. I was too tired to visit Christian friends even. I merely wished them Merry Christmas and Happy New Year, via my blog.

2. The next day I went to work. Kuala Lumpur was quite empty. Then I realised that many, including Government servants had decided to take Friday off, so that they could have a really long holiday because Saturday and Sunday would be weekends and as a bonus Monday would also be a holiday being the 1st of the Muslim New Year. Five days holiday. We can go round the world in that time.

3. But after Monday holiday, workers in the public and private sectors can take time off for two days until Jan 1st when we will have another holiday. If we are smart we can actually have eight days holiday. Time to fly two times round the world.

4. What about work? Not to worry. During that time the Government and the private companies will be on automatic. Aircraft can fly on auto-pilot safely. We are on the ground. We will not crash.

5. It shows that we really don't need a Government. It will just coast along even if no one is steering it. That is how good we have become at governing.

6. I am sorry for the poor policemen and other staff who have to be on duty during the holidays.

7. Have a nice holiday - or is it "holidays".

Statement on the Israeli Invasion of Gaza

By

Dr. Mahathir Mohamad

The Kuala Lumpur Foundation to Criminalise War is shocked and angered over the Israeli invasion of Gaza since Saturday 27 December 2008. Our hearts go to the people of Gaza in this time of great distress.

We call upon the international community to immediately act in concert to call upon Israel to stop the bombing of Gaza and the slaughter of innocent lives forthwith. We support the call by the United Nations for an immediate ceasefire and an end to all military operations to facilitate relief work and delivery of humanitarian aid to the people of Gaza.

The Foundation also calls upon the governments of the United States, Britain and other major powers to put necessary pressure on Tel Aviv to stop the inhuman slaughter of Palestinian men, women and children in Gaza with bombs and other weapons.


DR MAHATHIR BIN MOHAMAD

Chairman

Kuala Lumpur Foundation To Criminalise War

Open Letter to Barack Hussein Obama President-elect of the United States of America

By

Dr. Mahathir Mohamad

Dear Mr. President,

I did not vote for you in the Presidential Election because I am Malaysian.

But I consider myself one of your constituents because what you do or say will affect me and my country as well.

I welcome your promise to change. Certainly your country, the United States of America need a lot of changes.

That is because America and Americans have become the best hated people in the world. Even Europeans dislike your arrogance. Yet you were once admired and liked because you freed a lot of countries from conquest and subjugation.

It is the custom on New Year's day for people to make resolutions. You must have listed your good resolutions already. But may I politely suggest that you also resolve to do the following in pursuit of Change.

1) Stop killing people. The United States is too fond of killing people in order to achieve its objectives. You call it war, but today's wars are not about professional soldiers fighting and killing each other. It is about killing people, ordinary innocent people by the hundreds of thousands. Whole countries will be devastated.

War is primitive, the cavemen's way of dealing with a problem. Stop your arms build up and your planning for future wars.

2) Stop indiscriminate support of Israeli killers with your money and your weapons. The planes and the bombs killing the people of Gaza are from you.

3) Stop applying sanctions against countries which cannot do the same against you.

In Iraq your sanctions killed 500,000 children through depriving them of medicine and food. Others were born deformed.

What have you achieved with this cruelty? Nothing except the hatred of the victims and right-thinking people.

4) Stop your scientists and researchers from inventing new and more diabolical weapons to kill more people more efficiently.

5) Stop your arms manufacturers from producing them. Stop your sales of arms to the world. It is blood money that you earn. It is un-Christian.

6) Stop trying to democratize all the countries of the world. Democracy may work for the United States but it does not always work for other countries.

Don't kill people because they are not democratic. Your crusade to democratize countries has killed more people than the authoritarian Governments which you overthrew. And you have not succeeded anyway.

7) Stop the casinos which you call financial institutions. Stop hedge funds, derivatives and currency trading. Stop banks from lending non-existent money by the billions.

Regulate and supervise your banks. Jail the miscreants who made profits from abusing the system.

8) Sign the Kyoto Protocol and other international agreements.

9) Show respect for the United Nations.

I have many other resolutions for change which I think you should consider and undertake.

But I think you have enough on your plate for this 2009th year of the Christian Era.

If you can do only a few of what I suggest you will be remembered by the world as a great leader. Then the United States will again be the most admired nation. Your embassies will be able to take down the high fences and razor-wire coils that surround them.

May I wish you a Happy New Year and a great Presidency.

Yours Sincerely,

Dr Mahathir bin Mohamad

(Former Prime Minister of Malaysia)

Tee Keat strengthens grip on MCA with changes at The Star

By Leslie Lau

Consultant Editor

KUALA LUMPUR, Jan 2 – The end is near for Datuk Steven Tan, the man who turned The Star into a local media giant, after it was announced today that he would relinquish in six months his position as executive deputy chairman of the newspaper group.

Tan’s retirement was announced in a filing to Bursa Malaysia today, in what will be seen as a move by MCA president Datuk Seri Ong Tee Keat to strengthen his grip on the party, which controls The Star.

However, the retirement of Tan, who has been a steady hand at the helm of The Star since the 1980s and who took the company from an also-ran to become Malaysia’s most profitable newspaper, could spook the stock market and fund managers.

The move is seen as an attempt by Ong, who was voted in as MCA president last October, to replace – in the party and its assets – those who are seen as close to former president Tun Dr Ling Liong Sik.

According to the company’s announcement, Tan will remain a non-executive director of the public-listed company, Star Publications (Malaysia) Berhad.

While no announcement was made about who his replacement would be, The Malaysian Insider understands that Datuk Clement Hii, who is chief executive officer of education group SEG International and a close friend of the party president, will be appointed to the board of the company but it is not clear if he will take over Tan’s position.

It is understood that Hii will become Ong’s point man on the board to help the MCA president direct policy in the newspaper.

Before SEG International, Hii, 49, had also worked as a journalist and was once the Chief Editor of The Borneo Post in Sarawak.

Speaking to reporters after chairing his party’s presidential council meeting, Ong declined to comment on the changes in the newspaper publisher.

Tan retired as The Star’s group managing director last June and was succeeded by Datin Linda Ngiam. It is still unclear whether Ngiam, a protege of Tan, will get to keep her job.

Negri Ruler to be elected from the Four Princes

BERNAMA

KUALA PILAH, SUN:

The new Yang Dipertuan Besar of Negeri Sembilan will be elected among “Putera Yang Empat” (the Four Princes), said specialist consultant on Adat Pepatih custom Datuk Seri Maharaja Khalid Bonget.

The four princes are the Tunku Besar of Seri Menanti Tunku Mukhriz Ibni Almarhum Tuanku Munawir, Tunku Laxamana Tunku Naquiyuddin Ibni Almarhum Tuanku Ja’afar, Tunku Muda of Serting Tunku Imran Ibni Almarhum Tuanku Ja’afar and Tuanku Panglima Besar Tunku Nazaruddin Ibni Almarhum Tuanku Ja’afar.

“The election process involves Undang Yang Empat (the four Undangs),” said the 69-year-old Khalid whose official title is Tiang Kerajaan to the Yang Dipertuan Besar.

He said the Datuk-Datuk Lembaga Yang Empat of Luak Ulu Muar — Datuk Paduka Besar, Datuk Seri Maharaja, Datuk Senara Muda and Datuk Orang Kaya Bongsu — had informed the four Undangs and the Tunku Besar of Tampin on the demise of Tuanku Ja’afar ibni Almarhum Tuanku Abdul Rahman.

“The four Undangs and the Tunku Besar of Tampin will then pay their respects to the late ruler. After that, they will hold a conference behind closed doors to elect the new Yang Dipertuan Besar,” he said.
The conference was scheduled to be held at 3pm at Istana Besar Seri Menanti and Tuanku Ja’afar’s successor is expected to be announced later today or before the funeral tomorrow.

Tunku Mukhriz is the new Negri Ruler

By : DARSHINI BALAN

Tunku Mukhriz Tuanku Munawir, 59, is today proclaimed the 11th Yang DiPertuan Besar Negeri Sembilan succeeding Tuanku Ja'afar Tuanku Abdul Rahman who passed away on Saturday.

The proclamation ceremony, which was held at the Balairong Seri, Istana Besar Seri Menanti, was conducted by Undang Luak Sungai Ujong Datuk Klana Petra Datuk Mubarak Dohak. The proclamation was carried 'live' by Radio Televisyen Malaysia (RTM).

Malaysia Today interviews the Home Minister

Today, Malaysia Today interviews the Home Minister to get his take on a range of issues that have been the bone of contention with most Malaysians. This article is of course just a satire and any similarities with persons still alive, already dead, or about to die is purely coincidental.

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Malaysia Today: YB, thank you for agreeing to an interview with Malaysia Today’s No Holds Barred column.

Yang Berhormat: Thank you for inviting me. It is very seldom that the alternative media would interview a member of the Cabinet so that we can set the record straight and correct the lies and wrong perception about the government, which are spread by the alternative media. Normally, the alternative media just reports rumours without obtaining the government’s side of the story. I congratulate the alternative media for becoming more mature in giving the government space to inform the public of the truth.

But before we start, I would like to offer my condolence to the Indian government on the recent tragedy in Mumbai. I thank God that Malaysia does not suffer such acts of terrorism, primarily because we have the Internal Security Act, which allows us to detain terrorist before they can cause any harm to society. This shows that the Internal Security Act has been very successful in maintaining law and order and in safeguarding the security of this country.

MT: Since you have brought up the matter of the ISA, YB, can we start by talking about that?

YB: Sure.

MT: The people criticise the ISA and…….

YB: Which people? The alternative media always talks about ‘the people’. But which people are you talking about?

MT: Well, I suppose the civil society movements and human rights movements.

YB: These people are in the minority. The majority of the people voted for the government. So this means the majority support the ISA. If not they would not have voted for the government. It is the majority that counts, not the minority. We can’t make laws or abolish laws just for the sake of the minority. We must do what the majority wants. The ISA is to prevent terrorism. If, in 2001, the US also had the ISA, their Twin Towers would still be standing. Malaysia’s Twin Towers is still standing because of the ISA.

MT: But the ISA is not used against terrorists. The government has always said that Malaysia does not have any terrorists. The ISA is used to deny the people freedom of speech.

YB: There is still freedom of speech in Malaysia. Who says that there is no freedom of speech?

MT: It is not freedom of speech which does not exist in Malaysia. It is freedom after speech.

YB: That is different. Then you can’t say that there is no freedom of speech in Malaysia. There is freedom of speech. Of course, if you say the wrong things, then you run the risk of being detained under the ISA. Berani cakap, berani tanggunglah!

MT: Okay, then what would you regard as ‘saying the wrong things’?

YB: Well, like inciting the people to hate the government or saying something that may start racial problems.

MT: But we already have so many other laws like the Sedition Act, Criminal Defamation, PPPA, and so on, to charge those who may have broken the law. Why the need to detain them under the ISA? Just charge them in court.

YB: That would not be so easy. We will need evidence to charge them in court. Without evidence how to charge them?

MT: But how do you know all those people who the government has detained under the ISA have committed a crime? Is it not possible they are all innocent?

YB: No, we have evidence. That is why we detained them.

MT: But if you have evidence then why not use this evidence to charge them?

YB: I already said there is not enough evidence to charge them.

MT: But there is enough evidence to detain them?

YB: Yes. The evidence is enough to detain them, only not enough to charge them.

MT: But when you sign the Detention Order you must first see all the evidence. Is this not so?

YB: That is true. Only when I am satisfied there is enough evidence will I sign the Detention Order.

MT: But you still feel that the evidence, though sufficient to detain them, is not sufficient enough to charge them.

YB: That is correct. But the detainee still has a chance to appear before the Advisory Board within three months to argue his case. If the Advisory Board is of the opinion that the detainee is innocent then he will be released. So we are quite fair.

MT: Have many people been released through the recommendations of the Advisory Board so far?

YB: Well, not many…..maybe none so far. But this only means we were not wrong in detaining them. If not, surely the Advisory Board would have recommended their release.

MT: But there have been reports that, from time to time, the Advisory Board has recommended the release of some detainees. However, the Home Minister has always overruled their recommendations.

YB: Yes, that is true. This is because the Advisory Board was mistaken and we did not agree with their recommendations. So we overruled them.

MT: This would mean the Advisory Board is a lame duck and has no power. It is the Home Minister who has the final say. Would this not be so?

YB: That is not true. The Advisory Board does have power.

MT: Power to do what?

YB: Power to recommend the release of the detainee.

MT: But the Minister does not follow their recommendation and overrules them. The Minister has the final say.

YB: But this does not mean the Advisory Board does not have power.

MT: If you say so YB. Okay, can we now talk about the Umno party elections and the numerous complaints about corruption in the party?

YB: What corruption are you talking about? There is no corruption in Umno.

MT: But the mainstream media has been reporting the many complaints of money politics.

YB: That is money politics, not corruption.

MT: Is there a difference?

YB: Of course there is. Corruption is when you pay to get something. Money politics is not corruption.

MT: What would you call money politics then?

YB: Money politics is……..well, money politics.

MT: And that is not corruption?

YB: Of course not.

MT: Okay, whatever. Now, on the matter of race relations, don’t you think that Malaysia is very dangerously being pushed to the brink of racial problems?

YB: That is why we have so many times said that the opposition is stirring the sentiments of the many races.

MT: But it is not the opposition that is doing this.

YB: Then who?

MT: Umno.

YB: Umno is a responsible party. We do not play the race card. It is the opposition that is doing this.

MT: In what way is the opposition doing this?

YB: They are asking for the government to abolish Ketuanan Melayu and the NEP. This makes the Malays angry and may cause the Malays to mengamuk. The opposition should stop all this nonsense before the peace and harmony of this country is compromised.

MT: But is it not time we treat all Malaysians equal and no longer treat one race as having more privileges than others?

YB: Aiyah, how can! That is the kind of talk that makes the Malays angry. It is dangerous to suggest such things. We must maintain the harmony between the many races and not say things like that.

MT: But what gives one race the right to have more privileges than others?

YB: That was the agreement when we gained Merdeka in 1957. How can we go back on what was agreed?

MT: What agreement?

YB: The Social Contract that was agreed by the Malays, Chinese and Indians.

MT: Many say that the Social Contract does not exist. Have you ever seen it? Can Malaysians see a copy?

YB: It was not a written contract. It was a verbal contract.

MT: When was it made and under want circumstances was it made?

YB: It was agreed upon when Umno, MCA and MIC jointly negotiated for Merdeka from the British.

MT: And what were the terms of the contract?

YB: That Malay would be the National Language and Islam the official religion plus the Malays would be accorded special rights and privileges such as certain quotas in the civil service and in educational institutions.

MT: But has this not since been amended many times in breach of the original Social Contract?

YB: No! In what way has it changed? Everything still remains the same.

MT: The government imposes new rules such as companies must be 100% Bumiputera before they can get import permits or APs and 30% of houses built must be sold to Bumiputeras according to the land area and so on. This was not part of the so-called Social Contract agreed by Umno, MCA and MIC before Merdeka. They are new rules made up as we went along.

YB: True. But the non-Malays accepted them.

MT: How do you know they accepted them?

YB: Because they continued to vote for the government. If they did not agree then they would not have voted for the government.

MT: But they did not vote for the government. 49% of the Malays and more than 80% of the Chinese and Indians did not vote for the government in the last general election. This means they do not agree with the government policies.

YB: But we still won more than 60% of the Parliament seats.

MT: That is only because of Gerrymandering. Malay majority seats like Putrajaya, where the voters are 98% Malay, have only 5,000 voters while seats that are 80% or more non-Malay have 120,000 voters or more. That is why the government still won and not because the majority voted for it.

YB: That is beside the point. We still can’t deny the fact that we won 140 seats and the opposition won only 82 seats.

MT: Yes, but if the votes were evenly divided between constituencies with a variation of plus-minus 20% the government would have fallen by now. It is only through Gerrymandering that the government managed to hold on to power.

YB: That is your opinion. It does not mean it is true.

MT: Thank you, YB, for the interview. I am sure you have helped enlighten Malaysians with your view of things.

YB: Thank you. I hope I have managed to rebut the opposition lies and propaganda and I look forward to similar sessions in future where the government can be given an opportunity to set the record straight.

To the Empire They Go

A Kadir Jasin


IT’S good that the Malaysian Hindus have brought their alleged marginalisation to the Queen of England because their plight, as they have alleged, started with the semi-slavery of the indentured Indian workers by the British Empire.

Portraying the Malays as lazy natives and condemning them to the subsistence economy of the villages and shoreline, the British imported en-masse indentured workers from India and China.

Thanks to them, the British successfully mined tin and gold to pave the Streets of London. Leveled the lush rain forests to plant rubber that they stole from Brazil, tea and later oil palms.

When the Communists started to attack their plantations and tin mines, they recruited the lazy Malays and told them of patriotism and the evil of communism and the danger of Chinese dominance.

They Malays love their Tanah Melayu (the land of the Malays). They become soldiers, auxiliary policemen and plantation guards to ward off the marauding Communist terrorists.

They sacrificed their lives to protect their English Tuans and Mems. They kept the Tuans’ Chinese amahs, Malay drivers and Indian gardeners safe. And not to mention the thousands of indentured Indian and Chinese workers in the plantations, tin and gold mines, small towns and kongsis.

Then, in 1957, the Tuans left. For some reasons, they forgot to send back to China and India or bring with them to old England the millions of indentured Chinese and Indian workers.

Instead, the Tuans told the lazy but kindhearted Malays, led by a prince no less, that they could have their independence on condition that they accord citizenship to the Chinese and Indians who choose to stay put.

Overnight, the Persekutuan Tanah Melayu aka the Federation of Malaya embraced one million Chinese and Indian immigrants.

A full 50 years ago later, the descendants of the Malaysianised indentured Indian immigrants sprang into action under the banner of the now banned Hindu Rights Action Front (Hindraf) with a massive protest in Kuala Lumpur in November 2007 and suit in an English Court alleging marginalisation, injustice and the whole works.

On Dec. 8, according to Malaysiakini news portal reported that their “representatives” led by a Malaysian Chinese woman identified as Tricia Yeoh, the director of the Centre for Public Policy Studies at the Asian Strategy and Leadership Institute (Asli) appeared before the House of Lords in London to brief Sandip Verma, the Conservative party’s Shadow Minister of Education.

They Malaysiakini quoted Yeoh as saying that “a full revamp of economic policy is urgently required to address the problems of the marginalised Indian community in Malaysia.”

So, thanks to the outlawed Hindraf and its supporters, we, the Malaysians --- the Melayu, Iban, Kadazan, Cina, India and a host of other ethnic peoples --- will have to endure the scrutiny and examination by the likes of Baroness Sandip Verma, who, according to Wikipedia, was born in Punjab in 1959 and moved to England when she was a year old.

She is a businesswoman and member of the House of Lords and the Opposition Whip and Spokesperson for Education and Skills and Health.

I do not know what the Malaysian Chinese are having in mind. I can’t imagine them making a beeline to London or complaining to the Chinese government.

But according to Press reports, the Jiao Zong (United Chinese School Teachers’ Association) had threatened “mammoth demo” should the government decide to continue the policy of teaching of mathematics and science in English.

The association, according to its president Ong Chiaw Chuan, sees the policy as “the greatest threat to Chinese education.”

So, here we are, another day in multi-racial Malaysia. But a piece of chapati and a cup of teh si kosong keep me happy.

The Scribe A Kadir Jasin

WANITA UMNO : THE WIND OF CHANGE IS BLOWING

BY:NOOR HASILAH ISMAIL

Datuk Seri Shahrizat Abdul Jalil’s decision to contest Tan Sri Rafidah Aziz for the Wanita UMNO top post, March next year, came as no surprise to me.

But, some quarters may wonder, why only now? Why didn’t she do it earlier? Was it because she was pushed too far?

Or was it a carefully planned strategy all along?

Before the announcement, Shahrizat were called names and some Wanita members even laughed at the possibility of her going against Rafidah, as they claimed and assumed that she just wouldn’t dare. “She doesn’t have fighting spirit. She is afraid to take risk. She is so scared of Rafidah, bla, bla, bla.”

As I see it, Shahrizat was holding to the belief that patience and perseverance will ensure success. While the public had interpreted her silence as an act of “fear”, Shahrizat was perhaps, waiting for the perfect timing. The more patient she is, the more she understands the tricks of the opponent and her supporters.

Some observers may look upon Shahrizat as the underdog, but Shahrizat is no bimbo! Hey, she was a lawyer and a magistrate! From the beginning, although Shahrizat had said she would abide the transition plan, she was already signaling her plans by allowing nominations of her for the chief post.

I believe Shahrizat knows too well not to fight fire with fire as it will usually end up with ashes.

As a former lawyer, she knows that the key to success is patience. You get chicken by hatching the egg, not by smashing it. Shahrizat also knows too well that anger can be a destructive. So, she lets Rafidah do that part (continuously vexing her anger publicly).

Let me borrow some quotes from Jill Devine, author of a motivational book, Timing is Everything.

“It's true that what you sow you reap but what we forget is that there's supposed to be a space between sowing and reaping: it is not an instant process. If you try to reap in the wrong season, you reap frustration. If you try to reap in the wrong season, you do NOT get what you expect and you don't reap what you sowed. It's for this reason most ancient religious texts speak of everything having an order and a season.

Don't mistake delay for denial by life. Timing is everything - for this reason, patience is a vital ingredient in success planning. Patience will give you keys to the kingdom!”

Shahrizat has been the deputy of Wanita UMNO for eight donkey years. As the saying goes – Rome was not built in a day! Do you think that all these while, Shahrizat has been spending her time knitting blouses while listening to Rafidah’s naggings and letting the old lady running things her own way?

As for Rafidah, the iron lady should know to quit while she is still at the top, and now is the right time to do so. As a minister, I can’t deny that she has done well. But as Wanita leader, what has she done to increase the representation of Wanita UMNO in the cabinet?

Rafidah has been in power since 1984, except for one term when she lost to Datuk Seri Dr. Siti Zaharah Sulaiman in 1996. She came back stronger the following term, and put an end to Zaharah’s political career. But Rafidah is 65 now, and not getting any younger. This is the era of the new millennium. Today’s women know what they want.

In The Sunday Star, dated 23 November, Rafidah were quoted as saying “She (Shahrizat) can’t even win a parliamentary seat, how can she hope to lead Wanita UMNO”.

I feel that the comment is unfair.

Shahrizat lost the parliamentary seat because the votes were decided by the people of Lembah Pantai, consisting of supporters from various parties. Her opponent, Nurul Izzah Anwar won mainly because of the Anwar factor, protest votes from the community who were angry at BN and young voters who wanted to see change. In this case, Shahrizat was a victim of circumstances.

The battle for the top post in Wanita UMNO is a different game. The votes of who will lead the party will be decided by Wanita UMNO members only, who mostly are above 40 years old. Get the drift?

In the same paper, Rafidah were also quoted as admitting that she had told Shahrizat several times that they (Rafidah & Shahrizat) will discuss together who should be appointed the administrative posts and who would be in the Exco.

Hold on! Who does Wanita UMNO belongs to? Who decide the leaders? Rafidah’s statement sounded as if the party is or has been practicing a different kind of system, which is akin to the feudal system (where a leader has control over several “excos” or delegates, etcetra, etcetra…)

Now is the time for Wanita UMNO to stop bitching. It’s the time for soul-searching and preparing the party for the future challenges. Wanita UMNO members have to ask themselves this question - Would you prefer to continue wearing the shoes that you have been wearing for ages, or would you like to try the one pair of shoes that you have bought a long time ago that you kept safely in your cupboard because it’s too nice and expensive?

Wanita UMNO should give Shahrizat a chance to show what she can do in three years. If she delivers, well, that’s good. If otherwise, they can always call back Makcik Rafidah (I am sure she will be ever so willing) or find a new leader? Well, you have tolerated Rafidah for 24 years, so, what is giving three years to Shahrizat?

As for Shahrizat, now is not the time to be nice anymore. It’s the perfect time for her to come out from Rafidah’s shadows, keeping in mind that, by challenging the iron lady, she has also angered Rafidah’s supporters. So, Shahrizat, keep your friends close, but your enemies closer.

As for Datuk Kamilia Ibrahim, who has won the number two post uncontested, she should be smart enough to influence her supporters, who they should support, for the future of Wanita UMNO, and for her own sake.