Mahathir squandered RM100 bil

Mahathir squandered RM100 bil, says new book

From Malaysiakini

Malaysia has squandered an estimated RM100 billion on financial scandals under the 22-year rule of Dr Mahathir Mohamad, according to a new book about the former prime minister.

According to Barry Wain, author of the soon-to-be launched ‘Malaysian Maverick: Mahathir Mohamad in Turbulent Times’, direct financial losses amounted to about RM50 billion.

This doubled once the invisible costs, such as unrecorded write-offs, were taken into account. The RM100 billion total loss was equivalent to US$40 billion at then prevailing exchange rates.

Barry, who is a former editor of the Asian Wall Street Journal, says most of the scams, which included a government attempt to manipulate the international tin price and gambling by Bank Negara on global currency markets, occurred in the 1980s.

‘Malaysian Maverick’ is the first independent, full-length study of Mahathir, who retired in 2003 after more than two decades as premier. The book will be published globally next week by Palgrave Macmillan.

Wain writes that the Mahathir administration, which took office in 1981 with the slogan, “clean, efficient, trustworthy”, was almost immediately embroiled in financial scandals that “exploded with startling regularity”.

By the early 1990s, he says, cynics remarked that it had been “a good decade for bad behaviour, or a bad decade for good behaviour”.

Secret military deal with US

The book also reveals that:

• Mahathir, despite his nationalistic rants, signed a secret security agreement with the United States in 1984 that gave the Americans access to a jungle warfare training school in Johor and allowed them to set up a small-ship repair facility at Lumut and a plant in Kuala Lumpur to repair C-130 Hercules transport aircraft.

• Mahathir used a secret fund of his ruling Umno to turn the party into a vast conglomerate with investments that spanned almost the entire economy.

• Mahathir’s Umno financed its new Putra World Trade Centre headquarters in Kuala Lumpur partly with taxpayers money, by forcing state-owned banks to write off at least RM140 million in interest on Umno loans.

Wain, who is now a writer-in-residence at the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies in Singapore, however credits Mahathir with engineering the country’s economic transformation, deepening industrialisation and expanding Malaysia’s middle class.

But Mahathir had undermined state institutions, permitted the spread of corruption and failed to provide for Malaysia’s future leadership, he says.

Related Article:

Do you know that:

Last year, Petronas gained a total pre-tax profit of RM86.8 billion and so far, it has earned about RM600 billion. As the surge of international oil prices, it’s profits will as well substantially grow. But the government has reduced fuel subsidies by a wide margin, turning Malaysia into one of the world’s most expensive oil price oil-producing countries. It makes the people wonder where the huge profit of Petronas has gone?

Former Work Minister Datuk Seri S. Samy Vellu said in the Parliament last year that the government has compensated a total of RM38.5 billion to 20 highway companies. Also, as the government has stopped building the Scenic Bridge in Johor, it has to compensate RM300 million construction cost to the bridge contractor. Isn’t the spending of such huge amount a waste?

Former Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim revealed that the Central Bank has lost RM30 billion in foreign exchange trading in the 1990s. Who was the manipulator behind it? (Second Finance Minister was in charge of Bank Negara’s Forex trading at that time)

Malaysia Airlines was said to have suffered losses every year. But why to spend RM1.55 million to buy three paintings to decorate its chairman’s office? And why to spend RM7,525 per day to recruit a foreign senior general manager?

Proton Holdings bought a 57.75% stake in MV Agusta for €70 million but sold it at €1 (RM4.50) a year later, causing Proton to lose €75.99 million (RM 348 million)?

Other excesses and wastages:

1. The Bank Bumiputra twin scandals in the early 1980s saw US$1 billion (RM3.2 billion in 2008 ringgit)

2. The Maminco attempt to corner the world tin market in the 1980s is believed to have cost some US$500 million. (RM1.6 billion)

3. Betting in foreign exchange futures cost Bank Negara Malaysia RM30 billion in the 1990s.

4. Perwaja Steel resulted in losses of US$800 million (RM2.56 billion). Eric Chia, was charged with corruption for allegedly steering US$20 million (RM64 million) to a Hong Kong-based company

5. Use of RM10 billion public funds in the Valuecap Sdn. Bhd. operation to shore up the stock market

6. Banking scandal of RM700 million losses in Bank Islam

7. The sale of M.V. Agusta by Proton for one Euro making a loss of €75.99 million (RM 348 million)

8. Wang Ehsan from oil royalty on Terengganu RM7.4 billion from 2004 – 2007

9. For the past 10 years since Philharmonic Orchestra was established, this orchestra has swallowed a total of RM500 million

10. In Advisors Fees, Mahathir was paid RM180,000, Shahrizat Abdul Jalil (women and social development affairs) RM404,726 and Abdul Hamid Othman (religious) RM549,675 per annum

11. The government has spent a total of RM3.2 billion in teaching Maths and Science in English over the past five years. Out of the amount, the government paid a whopping RM2.21 billion for the purchase of information and computer technology (ICT) equipments which it is unable to give a breakdown.

12. The commission paid for purchase of jets and submarines to two private companies Perimeker Sdn Bhd and IMT Defence Sdn Bhd amounted to RM910 million.

13. RM300 million to compensate Gerbang Perdana for the RM1.1 billion “Crooked Scenic Half-Bridge”

14. RM1.3 billion have been wasted building the white elephant Customs, Immigration and Quarantine (CIQ) facilities on cancellation of the Malaysia-Singapore scenic bridge

15. RM 100 million on renovation of Parliament building and leaks

16. National Astronaut Programme – RM 40 million

17. National Service Training Programme – yearly an estimate of RM 500 million

18. Eye on Malaysia – RM 30 million and another RM5.7 million of free ticket

19. RM 4.63 billion, ’soft-loan’ to PKFZ

20. RM 2.4 million on indelible ink

21. Samy announced in September 2006 that the government paid compensation amounting to RM 38.5 billion to the highway companies. RM 380 million windfalls for 9 toll concessionaires earned solely from the toll hike in 2008 alone.

22. RM32 million timber export kickbacks involving companies connected to Sarawak Chief Minister and his family.

Bailouts -
23. Two bailouts of Malaysia Airline System RM7.9 billion

24. Putra transport system, which cost RM4.486 billion

25. STAR-LRT bailout costing RM3.256 billion

26. National Sewerage System costing RM192.54 million

27. Seremban-Port Dickson Highway costing RM142 million

28. Kuching Prison costing RM135 million

29. Kajian Makanan dan Gunaan Orang Islam costing RM8.3 million.

30. Le Tour de Langkawi costing RM 3.5 Million

31. Wholesale distribution of tens of millions of shares in Bursa Malaysia under guise of NEP to cronies, children and relatives of BN leaders and Ministers worth billions of ringgits.

32. APs scandal had been going on year-after-year going back for more than three decades, involving a total mind-boggling sum of tens of billions of ringgits

33. Alienation of tens of thousands of hectares of commercial lands and forestry concessions to children and relatives of BN leaders and Ministers worth tens of billions of ringgits

34. Travel around Malaysia and see for yourself how many white elephants like majestic arches, roads paved with fanciful bricks, designer lamp posts, clock towers, Municipal Council buildings that looks more like Istanas, extravagant places of worship, refurbishment of residences of VIPs, abandoned or under-utilised government sports complexes and buildings, etc! Combined they could easily amount to the hundreds of billions of ringgits!

35. Wastages and forward trading of Petronas oil in the 1990s based on the low price of oil then. Since the accounts of Petronas are for the eyes of Prime Minister only, we have absolutely no idea of the amount. Whatever amount, you bet it is COLLOSSAL!

In Time Asia magazine issue on March 15 2004, South East Asian economist at Morgan Stanley in Singapore Daniel Lian, figures “that the country may have lost as much as U$$100 billion (RM320 billion) since the early 1980s to corruption.” Mind you, this is only corruption and it does not include wastages!

All the rakyat’s hard earned money down the drain and they have the audacity to raise fuel prices and asking the people to change their lifestyles.

---

Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)

• Mahathir Book Too Hot for Malaysian Authorities
• Book Review: Malaysian Maverick: Mahathir Mohamad in Turbulent Times
• Singular Malaysia is an ongoing project that started in 1957, not this year.
• Mahathir Squandered RM100 Billion During 22 Years, Says New Book!

This entry was posted on Wednesday, November 25th, 2009 at 9:58 am and is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

1. dreamlady Says:
   November 25, 2009 at 10:54 am | Reply

   I could only sum Mahathir up as the mother of all crooks!!

2. Alan Goh Says:
   November 25, 2009 at 11:01 am | Reply

   Mr.Barry Wain,you failed to mention that in 1988
   Dr.Mahathir screwed up the Judiciary by sacking the
   Lord President,Tun Salleh Abbas.As a result,we have
   this joker lawyer,V.K.Lingam of the now famous quote,
   it looks like me,it sounds like me but not me.And Correct,Correct,Correct over the appointment of
   Lord President post,mind you.

   What about Malaysia educational system,Dr.Mahathir
   did away with English and replaced it with Bahasa
   Malaysia.Only after the end of his 22 yrs tenure as PM did he realised that Malaysia education is a total
   failure and tried replacing English as a compulsory
   subject for maths and science.Mr.Barry Wain,you only
   mentioned the financial loss caused by Dr.Mahathir.What about the judiciary,educational etc.etc.When once Malaysia,a country rich in resources,whose currency was RM0-90cts to Singapore
   $1/-in the sixties, is now the opposite,RM2.45 to S$1-00 all these are the legacies of the great Dr.Mahathir.

http://bangmalaysia.wordpress.com/2009/11/25/mahathir-squandered-rm100-bil-says-new-book/

Mahathir Book Too Hot for Malaysian Authorities

Mahathir Book Too Hot for Malaysian Authorities

Written by John Berthelsen

Thursday, 17 December 2009

Customs sits on a controversial new biography of the former prime minister Malaysian customs authorities have been holding up delivery of 800 copies of an authoritative new biography of former Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad for the past three weeks at the Port Klang customs office. The book, “Malaysian Maverick: Mahathir Mohamad in Turbulent Times,” written by former Asian Wall Street Journal Managing Editor Barry Wain, is a warts-and-all, critical but fair account of Mahathir’s 22 years in power. It is certain to become an essential study for scholars seeking to understand the onetime premier’s reign and its consequences. But maybe not in Malaysia itself unless the locals buy through Barns & Noble (available Jan. 10) or Amazon (Jan. 5) for US$60.75. Reports of the book have created considerable stir in Malaysia after the popular Malaysiakini news website ran reports of it along with a review first published in Asia Sentinel. The book will probably turn up on bookshelves eventually, said one Malaysian source. “There are lots of books on the shelves that are critical of Dr Mahathir. It might be some of his allies that stopped it. But everybody knows about it, it’s just they’re waiting for a hard copy.” Foreign published books air-freighted into Malaysia often go through customs without being checked, or with only a cursory check at the airport. Books sent by ship or by land from Singapore are often stopped for inspection, however, which can mean customs officers spending weeks reading the material. Sometimes they just sit on the book, leaving the publisher with little option but to withdraw it or be faced with being hit with storage charges, leaving the book effectively banned without the government having to face criticism for formally banning it. The reform organization Aliran said the holdup of the books ” is nothing short of crude and reckless censorship, although indirect, the effect is the same. It very undemocratically denies Malaysians reading material that should be made freely available to all and sundry. This book is of particular interest to citizens who are appalled by the disclosure that under Mahathir RM100 billion could have been squandered. They have been waiting anxiously to find out how this atrocity involving a mammoth, mind-boggling amount could have happened without anybody commenting on this extravagance.” The book tells the story of an essentially pragmatic man who managed the always-fraught balance between the country’s races, particularly the Malays and Chinese, relatively well although the New Economic Policy which he inherited from his predecessor, an affirmative action program for the majority race was deeply flawed, creating an entitlement mentality among Malays that largely failed to uplift them economically despite all efforts. Nonetheless, Mahathir, Wain wrote, “wasted no time in transforming Malaysia in line with his vision of a modern, industrialized nation, setting the goal of becoming fully developed by 2020.” Rubber, palm oil and tin, the mainstays of the economy, Wain wrote, gave way to the production of manufactured goods and embraced a high-tech future, making Malaysia one of the developing world’s most successful countries. Mahathir, he said, “relentlessly badgered, berated and browbeat Malaysians, especially Malays, to shape up and convert his dreams into reality. If necessary, he would crucify opponents, sacrifice allies and tolerate monumental institutional and social abuses to advance his project.” Unfortunately that also produced some excesses that the country could take decades to correct. By Wain’s reckoning, the country wasted as much as RM100 billion (US$40 billion at exchange rates at the time) on grandiose projects such as the Perwaja steel plant, which lost an estimated US$800 million and whose executive director, Eric Chia, was charged with embezzling large amounts of money. Chia, however, was freed by a Malaysian judiciary system that Mahathir had basically gutted and rebuilt to serve the interests of the state. Wain writes about Mahathir’s relationship with Daim Zainuddin, the onetime finance minister who dismissed concerns about the commingling of his public and private interests, among a wide range of cronies who ultimately became a rentier class that did huge damage to the country’s coffers. He could be stridently anti-western, breaking with the UK dramatically by establishing a “Buy British Last” program that only ended when Margaret Thatcher, then the iron prime minister of Britain, made a trip to meet with Mahathir himself. Nonetheless, Wain writes, Mahathir’s anti-west rhetoric of the 1980s and 1990s, though reminiscent of the first generation of developing world leaders feeling their way out from under the yoke of colonialism, “was accompanied by a diametrically opposite view of economics. Although a strident nationalist, he was pragmatic and favored the market system that brought prosperity to the industrialized nations.” Like Lee Kuan Yew in Singapore and Indonesia’s Suharto, “Dr Mahathir integrated his country deeply with the Western economies and achieved an enviable development record.” Wain wrote that during a visit to Washington DC in which Mahathir met President Ronald Reagan, Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger and others, he secretly launched an innocuous sounding Bilateral Training and Consultation Treaty, which Wain described as a series of working groups for exercises, intelligence sharing, logistical support and general security issues. In the meantime, Mahathir continued display a public antipathy on general principles at the Americans while his jungle was crawling with US troops quietly training for jungle warfare. (On Dec. 16, Mahathir slammed what he described as Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak’s change in Malaysia’s foreign policy to back the United States in a recent flap over an International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) resolution criticising Iran for its nuclear program.) That’s all good. But Wain’s exhaustive reprise of the Bumiputra Malaysia Finance scandal of the early 1980s, for instance, in which as much as US$1 billion disappeared from the Hong Kong arm of the government-owned Bank Bumiputra Malaysia, ill-starred forays into currency manipulation by Bank Negara, the country’s central bank, which cost billions, the attempt directed by Mahathir to attempt to corner the tin market in the early 1980s, and other huge missteps apparently didn’t set will with the government’s current leaders. Wain’s book remains on the loading docks, awaiting a decision to deliver it. But for readers who buy Kindle or another electronic reader, it’s easy to get.

http://bangmalaysia.wordpress.com/2009/12/17/mahathir-book-too-hot-for-malaysian-authorities/

Book Review: Malaysian Maverick: Mahathir Mohamad in Turbulent Times

Book Review: Malaysian Maverick: Mahathir Mohamad in Turbulent Times

Written by John Berthelsen

Friday, 04 December 2009

by Barry Wain. Palgrave Macmillan, 363pp. Available through Amazon, US$60.75. Available for Pre-order, to be released Jan 5. In 1984 or 1985, when I was an Asian Wall Street Journal correspondent in Malaysia, an acquaintance called me and said he had seen a US Army 2-1/2 ton truck, known as a “deuce-and-a-half,” filled with US military personnel in jungle gear on a back road outside of Kuala Lumpur. Since Malaysia and the United States were hardly close friends at that point, I immediately went to the US Embassy in KL and asked what the US soldiers were doing there. I received blank stares. Similar requests to the Malaysian Ministry of Defense brought the same response. After a few days of chasing the story, I concluded that my acquaintance must have been seeing things and dropped it. It turns out he wasn’t seeing things after all. In a new book, “Malaysian Maverick: Mahathir Mohamad in Turbulent Times,” launched Dec. 4 in Asia, former Asian Wall Street Journal editor Barry Wain solved the mystery. In 1984, during a visit to Washington DC in which Mahathir met President Ronald Reagan, Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger and others, he secretly launched an innocuous sounding Bilateral Training and Consultation Treaty, which Wain described as a series of working groups for exercises, intelligence sharing, logistical support and general security issues. In the meantime, Mahathir continued display a public antipathy on general principles at the Americans while his jungle was crawling with US troops quietly training for jungle warfare. That ability to work both sides of the street was a Mahathir characteristic. In his foreword, Wain, in what is hoped to be a definitive history of the former prime minister’s life and career, writes that “while [Mahathir] has been a public figure in Malaysia for half a century and well known abroad for almost as long, he has presented himself as a bundle of contradictions: a Malay champion who was the Malays’ fiercest critic and an ally of Chinese-Malaysian businessmen; a tireless campaigner against Western economic domination who assiduously courted American and European capitalists; a blunt, combative individual who extolled the virtues of consensual Asian values.” Wain was granted access to the former premier for a series of exhaustive interviews. It may well be the most definitive picture painted of Mahathir to date, and certainly is even-handed. Wain, now a writer in residence at the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies in Singapore, is by no means a Mahathir sycophant. Advance publicity for the book has dwelt on an assertion by Wain that Mahathir may well have wasted or burned up as much as RM100 billion (US$29.6 billion) on grandiose projects and the corruption that that the projects engendered as he sought to turn Malaysia into an industrialized state. Although some in Malaysia have said the figure is too high, it seems about accurate, considering such ill-advised projects as a national car, the Proton, which still continues to bleed money and cost vastly more in opportunity costs for Malaysian citizens forced to buy any other make at huge markups behind tariff walls. In addition, while Thailand in particular became a regional center for car manufacture and for spares, Malaysia, handicapped by its national car policy, was left out. Almost at the start of the book, Wain encapsulates the former premier so well that it bears repeating here: Mahathir, he writes, “had an all-consuming desire to turn Malaysia into a modern, industrialized nation commanding worldwide respect. Dr Mahathir’s decision to direct the ruling party into business in a major way while the government practiced affirmative action, changed the nature of the party and accelerated the spread of corruption. One manifestation was the eruption of successive financial scandals, massive by any standards, which nevertheless left Dr Mahathir unfazed and unapologetic.” That pretty much was the story of Malaysia for the 22 years that Mahathir was in charge. There is no evidence that Mahathir himself was ever involved in corruption. Once, as Ferdinand Marcos was losing his grip on the Philippines, Mahathir pointed out to a group of reporters that he was conveyed around in a long black Daimler – the same model as the British ambassador used – that the Istana where he lived was a huge mansion, that he had everything he needed. Why, he asked, was there any need to take money from corruption? Nonetheless, in his drive to foster a Malay entrepreneurial class, he allowed those around him to pillage the national treasury almost at will, which carried over into Umno after he had left office and which blights the country to this day. Wain follows intricate trails through much of this, ranging from the attempt, okayed by Mahathir, to attempt to rescue Bumiputra Malaysia Finance in the early 1980s which turned into what at the time was the world’s biggest banking scandal. In the final analysis, much as Lee Kuan Yew down the road in Singapore strove to create a nation in his own image and largely succeeded, so did Mahathir. Both nations are flawed – Singapore in its mixture of technological and social prowess and draconian ruthlessness against an independent press or opposition, Malaysia with its iconic twin towers and its other attributes colored by a deepening culture of corruption that has continued well beyond his reign, which ended in 2002. Mahathir must bear the blame for much of this, in particular his destruction of an independent judiciary, as Wain writes, to further his aims. Mahathir, as the former premier said in the conversation over his mansion and his car, had everything including, one suspects, a fully-developed sense of injustice. He appears to this day to continue to resent much of the west, particularly the British. Wain writes exhaustively of Mahathir’s deep antagonism over both British elitism during the colonial days and the disdain of his fellow Malays (Mahathir’s parentage is partly Indian Muslim on his father’s side), especially the Malay royalty. That antagonism against the British has been a hallmark of his career – from the time he instituted the “Buy British Last” policy for the Malaysian government as prime minister to the present day. Robert Mugabe, in disgrace across much of the world for the way his policies have destroyed what was one of the richest countries in Africa, remains in Mahathir’s good graces. Asked recently why that was, an aide told me Mugabe had driven the British out of Zimbabwe and was continuing to drive out white farmers to this day, although he was replacing them with people who knew nothing of farming. That expropriation of vast tracts of white-owned land might have destroyed Zimbabwe’s agricultural production. But, the aide said, “He got the Brits out.” For anybody wishing to understand Mahathir and the nation he transformed, Wain’s book is going to be a must – but bring spectacles. The tiny type and gray typeface make it a difficult read. And a disclaimer: Wain was once my boss.

http://bangmalaysia.wordpress.com/2009/12/05/book-review-malaysian-maverick-mahathir-mohamad-in-turbulent-times/

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Mahathir Squandered RM100 Billion During 22 Years, Says New Book!

Malaysia has squandered an estimated RM100 billion on financial scandals under the 22-year rule of Dr Mahathir Mohamad, according to a new book about the former prime minister.

According to Barry Wain, author of the soon-to-be launched ‘Malaysian Maverick: Mahathir Mohamad in Turbulent Times’, direct financial losses amounted to about RM50 billion.

This doubled once the invisible costs, such as unrecorded write-offs, were taken into account. The RM100 billion total loss was equivalent to US$40 billion at then prevailing exchange rates.

Barry, who is a former editor of the Asian Wall Street Journal, says most of the scams, which included a government attempt to manipulate the international tin price and gambling by Bank Negara on global currency markets, occurred in the 1980s.

‘Malaysian Maverick’ is the first independent, full-length study of Mahathir, who retired in 2003 after more than two decades as premier. The book will be published globally next week by Palgrave Macmillan.

Wain writes that the Mahathir administration, which took office in 1981 with the slogan, “clean, efficient, trustworthy”, was almost immediately embroiled in financial scandals that “exploded with startling regularity”.

By the early 1990s, he says, cynics remarked that it had been “a good decade for bad behaviour, or a bad decade for good behaviour”.

http://maidoali.wordpress.com/2009/11/25/mahathir-squandered-rm100-billion-during-22-years-says-new-book/

Press self-censorship in Malaysia: a case study

Press self-censorship in Malaysia: a case study

NO HOLDS BARRED

Wednesday, 24 February 2010 Super Admin

Aiyoh! Do all Chinese prostitute themselves like this? I hope not or else this country is doomed. Hmm…what did that special officer to Prime Minister Najib say in the 1Malaysia seminar in Melaka: all Chinese came to this country as prostitutes? Well, at least The Star and its owners, MCA, did. And they are still prostituting themselves.

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

No offence meant

It has been brought to our attention that a commentary piece in The Star headlined “Persuasion, not compulsion” on the recent caning of three women for syariah offences has offended certain quarters.

We would like to categorically state that there was no intention to insult or offend Muslims with the article by managing editor P. Gunasegaram that was published last Friday.

The Star sincerely apologises to those who were offended by the content of the article.

As a newspaper that bills itself as The People’s Paper, we strive to serve all our readers’ interests and are mindful of the need to be sensitive to their beliefs.

The Star, 24 February 2010

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

Muslims instruct goodness and rule out evil as to Allah's command to "command what is right and forbid what is wrong" (Surah Luqman, verse 17)

There is no compulsion where deen is concerned. Right guidance has become clearly distinct from error. Anyone who rejects false deities and believes in Allah has grasped the Firmest Handhold, which will never give way. Allah is All-Hearing, All-Knowing. (Surah al-Baqara, verse 256)

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

Based on the Deen-i Islam, the very first requirement from humans is their sincerity, their ikhlas, their inner honesty, cordiality, so that whatever they perform should be as they wished from inside; and that they must never act for show-off and hypocrisy. The very first thing that Islam disapproves is hypocrisy (the state of a munafiq), that is, acting outward in dishonesty for a purpose, while the inner beliefs contradict with outward actions. For example, performing Salaat or fasting or wearing head-cover because of being forced to, without an inner warm reception, never make someone a believer. On the contrary, it turns a person into a munafiq, i.e., hypocrite.

If someone had at least some faith (iman) in spite of not being able to fulfil some practices, he is at least not an unbeliever. But if we force someone to take some unwilled actions, and if he performs those actions under our pressuring, then we will be pushing that person into hypocrisy and have undergone the responsibility of his misbehaviour.

UP TO DATE UNDERSTANDING OF ISLAM by Ahmed Hulus

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

Actually, after writing about issues involving Islam the last two days I thought I would give this subject a rest. But when I saw what The Star published today I just can’t help myself but, yet again, flog this dead horse, so to speak.

The Star did not mention the real reason why they published that apology above but it does not take a genius to figure out why they did so -- because, as usual, they received a phone call from the ministry that decides at the end of the year whether their newspaper licence should be renewed or not.

That’s right. Your newspaper permit is renewable annually and there has been many an occasion when the ministry holds back the renewal if they consider that newspaper too much of a problem.

Furthermore, the newspaper owners or editors would constantly be summoned to the ministry to be given a piece of the government’s mind. Some newspapers have to make almost weekly visits to the ministry to get a scolding.

This is how censorship is imposed in Malaysia. No doubt the government will claim that Malaysian newspapers, in their wisdom, practice self-censorship. But when they chop your cock off how else to lead your life other than by being a celibate? (Celibacy means to abstain from sex in case some of you do not know that).

The Star was propagating persuasion as opposed to compulsion. I have always said you can’t legislate conduct. You need to educate people. So what The Star said was basically the same thing. Teach them. Don’t force them. And if after teaching them they still don’t follow then there must be something wrong with the education system.

Islam says that you must propagate amar maaruf, nahi munkar. See Surah Luqman, verse 17 above. The Penang Chief Minister, Lim Guan Eng, has used this phrase before -- amar maaruf, nahi munkar -- and the Umno boys got very upset. They feel it is wrong for Guan Eng to use Arabic words and quotes from the Quran.

That is stupid. The Quran was revealed to all mankind as a message to all mankind, not just to Muslims. So how can it be wrong for Guan Eng to quote from the Quran in Arabic? This is how narrow-minded Umno people are. They should be proud that Guan Eng saw fit to quote the Quran. I am delighted that there are at least some things in the Quran a non-Muslim like Guan Eng finds worthy to quote from.

And see what Surah al-Baqara, verse 256 says -- there is no compulsion in Islam. Is this not what The Star said? And is this not what the Quan also says? So why was The Star made to apologise for saying this? Is not what The Star said a quote right out from the Quran?

Aiyah! Sometimes I feel so disgusted I just don’t see any point in talking about it.

And why should there be no compulsion? Why should we educate and not legislate? Why should we not force people? Well, Ahmed Hulus explained this in his opinion above. If you force people then they do it because they are being forced to do so and not because they believe that this is the right thing to do. In other words, they are not sincere in doing it and this would make them a hypocrite. So compulsion breeds hypocrisy.

If you force someone to go to the mosque to pray and if he would be sent to jail if he does not, then certainly he would go to the mosque to pray. But he is doing it only to avoid jail and not because he believes that going to the mosque to pray is the right thing to do. He in fact does not even believe in your God. But he goes to the mosque anyway while his heart is not in the ritual he has to perform in the mosque.

I suppose this will be just like how a prostitute earns her living. She opens her legs for you because she needs the money. It is not about love. She does not enjoy the sex with you. She is hoping you will get it over and done with quickly so that she can get out of there.

And would not those who are forced to perform certain things for profit, or abstain from certain things because they are afraid of the punishment, be no better than prostitutes -- religious prostitutes? It is something they do because they have no other choice. It is not something they do because they believe in it.

This is the height of hypocrisy.

And this makes The Star a prostitute as well. They do things according to what they are paid to do and not because they believe it is the right thing to do. They do what is necessary to be able to stay in business and make money and not because they want to fulfil a community service. Profit above the nation, that is The Star’s motto, not The People’s Paper, as they claim.

Aiyoh! Do all Chinese prostitute themselves like this? I hope not or else this country is doomed. Hmm…what did that special officer to Prime Minister Najib say in the 1Malaysia seminar in Melaka: all Chinese came to this country as prostitutes? Well, at least The Star and its owners, MCA, did. And they are still prostituting themselves.

The Star was right the first time around -- persuasion, not compulsion. And by apologising for saying the right thing because they want to please the government in the interest of profit makes The Star a prostitute.

Self-censorship my foot.

http://www.malaysia-today.net/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=30340:press-self-censorship-in-malaysia-a-case-study&catid=20:no-holds-barred&Itemid=100087

xxxxxxxxxxxx

毫不留情：大马的自我审查制度（个案研究）

哎哟！华人都是这样把自己当成娼妓的吗？我希望不是，要不然这个国家就完蛋了。嗯……首相纳吉的特别事务官在马六甲的『一个大马』讲座会中说了些什麽呢：所有来到这个国家的华人都是妓女？这样噢，至少《星报》和它的持有人马华就是如此，到了现在他们还自甘当婊子。

没有冒犯的用意

在《星报》评论中一篇名为【信念，不是义务】（Persuasion, not compulsion）的文章中引起了我们的注意，这篇文章提到，最近使用回教法对妇女进行鞭刑冒犯了部分人士。

我们明确的注明我们没有企图让上周五，由主编P.古纳社加兰（P. Gunasegaram）撰写的这篇文章冒犯穆斯林。

《星报》对此文造成那些被冒犯的人表示真诚的歉意。

作为一家标榜为『人民的报章』的报纸，我们努力服务我们所有的读者的利益，同时会留意所需的，对他人信仰的敏感度。

《星报》2010年2月24日

××××××××××××××××××××××××

我的孩子啊！你应当谨守拜功，应当劝善戒恶，应当忍受患难，这确是应该决心做的事情。（三十一章【鲁格曼】第十七条）

对於宗教，绝无强迫，因为正邪确已分明了，谁不信恶魔而信真主，谁确已把握住。坚实的，绝不断折的把柄，真主是全聪的，是全知的。（第二章【黄牛】第二五六条）

××××××××××××××××××××××××

根 据伊斯兰的『教门』（Deen-i 或称 Deen），人类最首要的是他们的真诚心，他们的真心（ikhlas），他们内在的诚意、真挚，居于此点，无论他们所做的事，应该出自于内在的希望；而他 们永远都不该有炫耀和虚伪的举止。伊斯兰教所反对的首件事即是『穆纳菲格』（伪信者，munafiq），即是，因为某个目的而做出放荡的外表，而内在的信 仰与外在的行为起着冲突。比方说，因为被强迫下进行『萨拉』（Salaat，狭义上指祈祷）或禁食，或穿戴头巾，而没有内在的热情的认知，这将永远也不会 使一个人成为信徒。反而，它把一个人变成了『穆纳菲格』，也即是伪信者。

如果一个人至少有少许的信仰（伊曼，iman），尽管无法符合部分宗教上的落实，他至少不是个『不信教者』。因为如果我们强迫某个人做出一些他不愿意的行为，而如果他在我们的压力下进行这些行为，那我们将把这个人推向虚伪，并承担了他做坏事的责任。

阿末胡鲁斯（Ahmed Hulus）作品《对伊斯兰教的最新认识》（UP TO DATE UNDERSTANDING OF ISLAM）

××××××××××××××××××××××××

其实，在两天前我写了有关回教的课题后，我以为可以暂时搁下，可是当我看到《星报》今天发表的启示后，我欲罢不能，只好老调重题，再来谈一谈。

《星报》没有说明他们发表上述这篇道歉启示的真正原因，可是也无需天才才能理解为何他们要这样做——因为，照惯例，他们收到了一通来自那个决定他们的报章出版准证到了年尾会不会被更新的部门的电话。

这就对了！你的报章出版准证需要每年更新，有好多情况下，部门会吊销准证的更新，如果他们觉得这家报章有太多问题。

在加上，报章持有人或主编会不断的被传召去部门问话，以让政府安心。一些报章几乎需要每周向部门报到，还被臭骂一顿。

这就是大马施加的审查机制。怪不得政府的脑袋中会声称，大马报章实行自我审查（self-censorship）。然而，当他们断了你的根后，除了去当日月神教的教主，你还能干嘛？

《星 报》宣扬的是『信念』（persuasion），反对『义务』（compulsion）。我说了好多次，你不能立法钳制言行，你必须教育人民。因此，《星 报》所说的基本上就是同样的道理。教导他们，不是强迫他们。而教导他们后，他们还是不能跟随，那这个教育系统就真的出了问题了。

伊斯兰教 说，你必须宣扬『amar maaruf, nahi munkar』（捍卫真理，对抗邪恶，或称『止恶扬善』），请参看上述《可兰经》三十一章【鲁格曼】第十七条。槟城首席部长林冠英曾经引用过这句话 『amar maaruf, nahi munkar』，巫统那帮小子非常生气，他们觉得林冠英引用来自《可兰经》的阿拉伯语是错的。

这真是愚蠢，《可兰经》向世人揭示的讯息是给全人类的，而不止是穆斯林。那林冠英引用《可兰经》中的阿拉伯语有何错咎？这就是巫统人狭隘的思想，他们应该对林冠英引用《可兰经》而感到骄傲才对，对于非穆斯林身份的林冠英觉得《可兰经》有些东西可以引用，我感到非常欣喜。

请参看《可兰经》第二章【黄牛】第二五六条——在伊斯兰教中并没有所谓的义务。《星报》难道有说错吗？难道这不就是《可兰经》所说的吗？那为何《星报》要为此道歉？《星报》所引用了，直接来自于《可兰经》，不是吗？

哎呀！有时我感到很厌恶，我觉得没有必要再谈论这件事。

为 何不该有义务呢？为何我们应该教育，而不是立法限制呢？为何我们不该强迫人民呢？阿末胡鲁斯已经在上述他的见解中解释了。如果你强迫人民，那他们会照做是 因为他们是被逼的，而不是因为他们相信这是件正确的事。另个说法，他们不是真诚的在做，而这让他们成为伪信者。因此，义务助长伪信。

如果你强迫某人到回教堂祈祷，而如果他入狱，可是他不从，那很肯定的他将会去回教堂祈祷。可是，他这样做是因为为了避免入狱，因为他相信到回教堂祈祷是正确的。实际上他甚至不信你的神，可是他无论如何都会到回教堂，而在回教堂祈祷时，他心不在焉。

我认为这就像是妓女的生活，她张开双腿因为她需要钱，而不是因为爱。她不是在与你享受性爱，她只希望你尽快完事，好让她能够离开。

那些因为利益而被迫进行某些事情的人，或是为了避免某些事物因为他们害怕惩罚的人，不是和妓女——宗教界的妓女没两样吗？这就是他们的所作所为，因为他们别无他法，这不是他们可以做到的，因为他们不信神。

这就是伪信的最高点。

而这也让《星报》成为一名娼妓。他们那人钱财，替人消灾，而不是因为他们相信这是个正确的事。他们想尽办法来维持他们的生意和赚钱，而不是因为他们想要满足社群的服务。利润摆第一，人民靠边站，这就是《星报》的座右铭，而不是他们声称的『人民的报章』。

哎哟！华人都是这样把自己当成娼妓的吗？我希望不是，要不然这个国家就完蛋了。嗯……首相纳吉的特别事务官在马六甲的『一个大马』讲座会中说了些什麽呢：所有来到这个国家的华人都是妓女？这样噢，至少《星报》和它的持有人马华就是如此，到了现在他们还自甘当婊子。

《星报》是对的，这是头一遭——『信念，而不是义务』，可是，却为正确的事而做出道歉，因为他们想要取悦政府，换取盈利的利益，这使得《星报》成了婊子。

『自我审查』？去死吧！

出处∶Malaysia Today
原题∶No Holds Barred∶Press self-censorship in Malaysia: a case study
作者　　∶拉惹柏特拉
发表日期∶24-02-10
翻译　　∶西西留

国阵体系改革的旧酒新瓶

国阵体系改革的旧酒新瓶

有道是历史是人类的借镜，从历史可以吸取教训，令我们本身更强大。可惜的是这个金科玉律并没有被政治人物彻底的了解和掌握。

国阵这次由巫统副主席希山慕丁统领的修改章程小组已经放话出来，会简化程序，让倾向国阵的个人、政党和非政府组织更容易纳入国阵的体系当中。当然这一切的改变，都是因为308和选票。这种变相的扩张，和513过后联盟过渡为国阵的模式几乎一模一样。只不过老子未竟之工，由儿子来完成。

这一次扩张的目标，主要是架空成员党原本就所剩不多的影响力，把它转移到巫统，并通过新吸纳的尾巴组织来争取308时所失去的选票。目标应该是土著权威组织（PERKASA），人民力量党，甚至之前纳吉大力拉拢的华总、商联会等华团组织。这是一石二鸟之计。通过拉拢这些非政府组织，可以避免他们在外和国阵抬杠，也可以争取更多的选票（实质效果有待观察）。诸如PERKASA这种激进的组织，既可以在国阵框架内控制他们的意识形态，在必要时，更可以让他们打前锋，在各种议题上让他们做第一线打手。

至于华团等，这也是一种消音策略，更是高明的分拆手段。想一想如果几个主要华团成为亲国阵的臂膀，或者被国阵委任出任主要官职（如；内阁部长），那么这肯定是华裔非政府组织严重分裂的开始。原本就关系和作风都不太相符的董教总、商联会、华总等以后更加不可能合作。想当年80年代华小高职事件时华团都同仇敌忾的精诚合作将绝种了。

所谓的非政府组织，成为国阵的臂膀后，就变成党不党，团不团，简直里外不是人，并且将丧失社会公信力，党团组织加入国阵之前，真的要三思啊。

一 个以联盟为名，但是行集权政党之实的执政联盟，在加入更多的政党和非政府组织，或者是直接招收党员过后，依然没有改变巫统一党独大，增进民主的现象。其因 在于这个“政党”并没有举行选举，也没有任何管道让党员（盟党的党员，或者是直属党员）来决定他们的领导人。有的只是肯定由巫统担任主席、署理主席、总秘 书和总财政的架构，和美其名协商的最高理事会会议，以及行分而治之的国阵精神 。

在这里，有必要解释一下何谓国阵精神 ， 那就是各成员党（或者相关组织）依然只能协调（负责也说不上，因为没有实权）相关族群的事务，并由巫统拍板，做最后的决定！在扩大并招收新成员后，现有的 成员党的力量会被更严重的分薄。无论是一党（组织）一票投票决定，或者在会议上讨论，都显得人丁单薄，形势的天枰不免更严重的倾斜。

如果我们说中国共产党在各个大学、公会、团体、军队等都设有党委组织以便可以置控制权于党委书记之下，那国阵在纳入非政府组织等过后，肯定比共产党更胜一筹。中共还说每十年会彻底更换中国权力核心领导人 – 中共政治局常委，国阵的领导人一不好就是终身制的。由此可见，国阵比共产党更伟大，更独裁！

国阵成员党没有在历史中吸取教训，那就是咎由自取，没得怨天，不能赖人。前路如何，就留四个字 – 好自为之!

http://www.malaysianmirror.com/cn/homedetail/45-2009-08-03-04-46-20/6191-2010-02-25-06-08-58

Monday, February 22, 2010

国阵成员党的紧箍咒

二零一零年二月二十四日 下午二时五十五分

文：黄子豪

国阵近来已经把修改章程事项提上日程。这一次修改章程暂时还看不到其中心概念，但令人感到纳闷的是，国阵成员党几乎对修改章程的事项都不太知晓。在媒体上各成员党领导人依然保持缄默，一副事不关己，己不劳心的模样。

这 其实并不让人感到意外。在国阵的制度里，成员党先天性已经注定成为附庸或更贴切的形容 – 尾巴党，只能摇尾乞怜。这是人为的问题，也是制度的弊病。一般上联盟组成的政府，称之为联合政府（coalition government）。联合政府的出现通常是因为单一政党无法取得过半议席，而必须和其他政党结盟组阁。这种情形之下，联合内阁代表的是各方（或者各族 群、各阶层）的利益。所推行的政策必须符合大多数人的利益。各盟党扮演的角色和贡献的议席显得举足轻重，而拥有充足的谈判筹码。

国 阵组成的多党政府则和联合政府概念完全相反。经过了五十年的演变，国阵已经由巫统彻底的主导。可笑的是，这并不是巫统的政治人物有过人的政治手腕，而是成 员党本身的问题。成员党中的马华是一个不能在华裔居多的选区胜选的华基政党，国大党标榜着维护印度人的利益，但是现实生活中这些印裔领袖任由印度人自生自 灭，自己过着骄奢淫逸的生活。种族政党本身不能赢得本身族群的选票，这绝对是致命伤。所以巫统让给他们、马来人居多的混合选区就变成了救命的稻草。可以想 象这些丧失了本身核心价值的政党一旦离开巫统，就会面临灭顶之灾。

小 党在联合政府最有力的武器，本来就是在政策不符合本身所代表的利益时进行倒阁或退出联合政府，这样就必须重选。最近，荷兰的联合政府，就因为由于未能就是 否延长荷兰军队驻阿富汗期限达成一致，工党因此退出联合政府，造成联合政府垮台。但国阵的小党连议席都必须等待人家施舍时，政党本身还有多大的能力来议政 呢？更遑论退出联盟。联合政府的本质也就丧失了。

到最后巫统一党独大，独自垄断政经大权。至于是巫统的霸权造成成员党的疲弱还是倒反呢？反正不太重要，这已经是先有鸡还是鸡蛋的问题，

从 体制的角度来探讨，国阵是一个拥有超过十个政党的联盟，但是操作方式和一个政党没有分别。原因就是国阵以联盟之名，行集权政党之实。国阵拥有本身的最高理 事会作为最高机制处理联盟事务。但是这个最高理事会的主席、署理主席、总秘书和总财政都由巫统垄断。各党之间并不是平起平坐的。这和一般上联盟的最高理事 会高职或秘书处是轮任或推选出来有很大的分别。这是国阵成员党的紧箍咒 – 既不能离开联盟，也没有门路爬到国阵内的高职，变成有义务，没权利，变相的附庸。

如果未来国阵成员党依然想要立足，就必须趁这个机会，争取回本身所应该扮演的角色，改变现有的困境。时间并不会等待迟钝的从政者。改变与否，就争这次了。

http://www.kwongwah.com.my/news/2010/02/24/28.html

Posted by Tze Howe, 9W2THO at 10:09 PM 0 comments

http://thooi.blogspot.com/2010/02/blog-post_24.html

3 弹巫统执政精英政治焦土战

3 弹巫统执政精英政治焦土战

先谈起小弟先后在再探巫统执政精英的政治焦土战略以及大马版政治焦土战一直不断炮轰的所谓“巫统-国阵精英利益集团”。

而今不止香港的亚洲政经风险评估顾问公司（Political Economic Risk Consultancy，PERC）以及前民政党智囊的时评人邱继玶也一针见血地点出，这少数的巫统，甚至是皇室的“精英”，不惜一切保住其权利，以在经营的就是一种家族的霸业。 但小弟看法，这利益集团人士不止是他们而已，还包含一些国阵成员如马华、国大党和砂州土保党等，还有其他种族资本家、企业精英、权贵及势力人士等。因此就 首相纳吉早前表示在最近的国阵最高理事会已经决定重新检讨其章程，其中包括简化入党程序，让亲国阵的个人、非政府组织或政党获得国阵会员籍。相信巫统有意 愿，这项提议不难在今年年尾举行国阵大会通过。

表面上，吸收新的国阵成员（个人、非政府组织或政党），可以吸引更多选民支持。一般大家相 信的这些政党组织，包括爱国党（Parti Cinta Malaysia）、印度人前进阵线（IPF)、大马人民力量党（Makal Sakti）以及右翼的大马土著权威组织（Perkasa）将会被招入国阵的大家庭。除此之外，预料这项方案也能容纳一些在国阵或民联被排挤人士，比如在 人民进步党的领导斗争中被革职后仍然是副部长的姆汝基亚（T. Murugiah)上议员、范清渊和刚刚成为独立议员的峇央峇鲁国会议员再林等。

非 常明显的，巫统幕后操盘玩家的 Game Plan是只要能够维持一个以巫统为中心下，进行任何形式的捣乱收编和汰旧迎新一些过气衰落的社会代表力量（即成员党）都在所不惜。在棋盘中，国阵只是个 载体，只要不影响巫统，我国任何政治力量都可以“乱！乱！乱！”，好比马华民政乱，那华裔部长给华总也可以。

这种民粹主义谋略，主要是借助对国内其他政治力量内外煽风点火，相互斗臭的局势，把选民们弄得团团转，让选民们陷入“天下乌鸦一般黑”，又或者是“两个烂苹果选其一” 的残局把选民们弄得团团转至厌恶政治，而最后获利的还是巫统-国阵精英利益集团。

正当国阵与民联各政党忙于政党问题之时，巫统便可以借机杀入马来腹地，高唱“马来人大团结”。长远策略来看，只要一旦巫统在下一届大选能够成功稳住马来票，最后巫统还是个大赢家，权力将更为独大。

良 好施政的意义是回到政策的根本，何谓“什么是消费税GST”、“你的能源政策（油价电费）是如何？”、“石油税如何分配”、“司法能否公正独立”。选民 们，我们可以厌恶政治，但是当政治搞上你的荷包。我们必须冷静地听其言，什么是真正的一个马来西亚，还是电台电视台的宣传歌曲？什么是班达马兰新村新年大 团拜？

我们更必须张大眼睛地观其行，是“rakyat didahulukan, pencapaian diutamakan”，还是继续的维护利益集团（权贵、精英、资本家、高级官僚、势力人士等），让他们建立保有垄断（Monopoly）+寡头 （Oligopoly）+寻租（Rent Seeking）+政府补贴（看看我们政府对大道及粮米食糖的补贴）的企业皇朝，以榨取你我甚至下一代的福祉。

308后，大马面对一个全新的局面，是迈向更进步又还是国家改革难产，记得这不是国阵还是民联的改革而已，是个属于大马国民上上下下以及我们下一代的改革，这得考验我们作为选民的智慧。

Posted by 剑逸 at 下午3:01

http://kctengon-line.blogspot.com/2010/02/3.html



xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

大马版的政治焦土战！？！

台湾在陈水扁时期，蓝绿双方以相互斗臭的手段打过一时期的政治泥巴战。而后期扁家政治献金案更是使蓝营绿营双方几乎陷入政治焦土战当中。

看回最近马来西亚国内的政治发展，似乎幕后操盘的玩家在积极部署一场政治焦土战。所谓的政治焦土战既是一种“宁为玉粹，也不为瓦全”的民粹主义谋略，主要是借助对手相互斗臭的局势，让选民们弄得团团转，让选民们陷入“天下乌鸦一般黑”，又或者是“两个烂苹果选其一” 的残局， 把选民们弄得团团转至厌恶政治，而最后获利的还是幕后操盘家（权贵、精英、资本家、势力人士等）。

看看这边厢，张庆信先后以政治献金以及坐“霸王机”追击马华老顶翁总，又再以政治献金突击马华妇女组周美芬，下来不知什么时候会火烧马青仔还未知。接着又搞个什么民进党（砂州那个民进党，不是台湾阿扁那个民进党）东渡。似乎在与马华公会当权派（翁派）在玩着政治焦土战。

另一边厢，反贪委员会针对雪州民联政府，先向赵明福，而后雪州刘天球助理黄传好等人士，接连追击火箭议员选区拨款到黑社会疑云，搞得局势没完没了的。

相信印度同胞方面，大家已经一清二楚了吧！随着兴权会份子的释放，社团注册局最近发挥光速的效率，接连的让好多个印基政党，看的大家黑黑一片的，眼花缭乱。

由以上各项线索中，大家是否看到一些什么脉络呢？308后，大马面对一个全新的局面，是迈向更进步又还是国家改革（记得这不是国阵还是民联的改革而已，是个属于大马国民上上下下的改革）难产，就得考验我们人民的智慧。

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

两只大白象的缠斗，一个马来西亚

纠缠多时的 PKFZ 弊案像一部香港长篇连续集一般，由掀开弊案开始，到君子翁大义灭亲公布报告…… “唐山大兄“ 出场 ……到后来君子翁 vs 老林对战，男/难主角还是君子翁。

演变至今天，由开始大家以为是 “君子“ 与 “唐山大兄“ 隔空交火， 那里知道 “唐山大兄“ 来个大翻身，把 “君子“ 打下陷入泥巴战里。 加上渐渐曝光的 “君子“ 包机疑云，PKFZ 弊案可谓是我国史无前例的横跨海陆空的弊案，似乎是没完没了的。

正当大家在关注两只大白象的缠斗的戏码当儿，别台上角色精彩的演技所迷惑，幕后人员（污桶、经济部及财政部高官）还没有出场。这绝对是一个马来西亚的弊案，不是两只大白象的缠斗。

Posted by 剑逸 at 上午10:55

http://kctengon-line.blogspot.com/2009/08/blog-post.html


xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

再探巫统执政精英的政治焦土战略

小弟在之前的大马版政治焦土战已经提到巫统幕后操盘玩家正在积极部署仿效台湾陈水扁，以挑起蓝绿双方以相互斗臭的政治焦土战略。

如 今，巫统幕后操盘玩家似乎更高招，想把除了巫统以外的所有政党甚至团体都卷入政治泥沼其中。依着“宁为玉粹，也不为瓦全”的民粹主义谋略，主要是借助各政 党内外着火，相互斗臭的局势下，选民们只会弄得团团转，陷入“天下乌鸦一般黑”，又或者是“两个烂苹果选其一” 的残局。幕后操盘家相信只要选民们一旦觉得“天下乌鸦一般黑” 及厌恶政治，而最后获利的肯定是巫统（熟悉的政权总比生疏的政权来得安心）

看看这边厢，马华厨房出了个“蕹菜加料为主菜，加味米粉为配料乱炒锅”，又来国会泗加亭议员呛声马华翁君子与民政许后主，同时也以释放兴权会份子打乱印基选票。

另一边厢，除了还是对青蛙议员下手之外，反贪委员会MACC继续针对雪州民联政府向议员助理黄传好等人士下手（顺手拖着几个国阵人士）。更有一些脉络显示，巫统幕后部署回教党内的路线之争。

正当国阵与民联各政党忙于政党问题之时，巫统更可以借机深入马来腹地，大唱“马来人大团结”。选民们请冷静一点，看看2010年财政预算案加上新国家汽车政策，是真正的“以民为先，绩效为主”的吗？

良 好施政的意义是回到政策的根本，何谓“抽信用卡服务税可以减少滥用信用卡”、“是保护国产车，还是在保护朋党企业 ，如Puspakom” 、“随着赛莫达崛起成为 新一代糖王，大马粮米食糖市场机制走向何方”。

选 民们，我们可以厌恶政治，但是政治在搞上你的荷包。我们必须冷静地听其言，是真正的一个 马来西亚，还是电台电视台的宣传歌曲？我们更必须张大眼睛地观其行，是“rakyat didahulukan, pencapaian diutamakan”，还是继续的维护利益集团（权贵、精英、资本家、高级官僚、势力人士等），让他们建立垄断（Monopoly）+寡头 （Oligopoly）+寻租（Rent Seeking）+政府补贴（看看我们政府对大道及粮米食糖的补贴）的企业皇朝，以榨取你我甚至下一代的福祉。

308后，大马面对一个全新的局面，是迈向更进步又还是国家改革难产，记得这不是国阵还是民联的改革而已，是个属于大马国民上上下下以及我们下一代的改革，这得考验我们作为选民的智慧。

Posted by 剑逸 at 下午1:49

http://kctengon-line.blogspot.com/2009/11/blog-post.html

Paul Martin- Speak Out For Anwar Ibrahim

Paul Martin- Speak Out For Anwar Ibrahim

From The Globe And Mail

Anwar Ibrahim is a former deputy prime minister of Malaysia. After having differences of opinion with prime minister Mahathir Mohamad in 1998, he was removed from office, charged with sodomy and corruption – charges condemned worldwide as an attempt to remove him from politics – and imprisoned for six years. After his release in 2004, he became the leader of a coalition of opposition parties that is successfully challenging the ruling coalition’s power. Mr. Anwar has now been charged again with sodomy, a charge that has again been condemned worldwide.

I have known Mr. Anwar well since the period when we each served as finance ministers for our respective countries. He is deeply committed to democracy, justice and the rule of law. And I have watched with horror how he has been treated in Malaysia because of that commitment. His initial imprisonment was seen worldwide as politically motivated. Amnesty International regarded him as a prisoner of conscience, jailed for the non-violent expression of his political opinion. After his release in 2004, he redoubled his campaign, attracting thousands to his public rallies, with the result that the historic 2008 election returned an unprecedented number of opposition candidates to Parliament. He now poses a threat to the government in the next national elections, expected in 2013 – the real reason for the latest charge.

His trial, which began Feb. 2, is widely seen as not meeting international standards for a fair trial. The former Anwar political aide who is making the sodomy accusation was reportedly seen with leading ruling coalition figures prior to the filing of the charge; Mr. Anwar’s lawyers have been denied access to vital prosecution documents; and the trial has been transferred to a higher court whose judges are seen as linked to the ruling coalition’s main party. It is small wonder that Michael Danby, chair of Australia’s parliamentary subcommittee on foreign affairs, has charged that Malaysia’s legal system is being manipulated to drive Mr. Anwar out of politics. Mr. Danby has said that Asian democrats were “flabbergasted” by the charges and that “everyone in Malaysia, and everyone in the international legal community, knows that Anwar is innocent of these charges.”

The presence of so many foreign embassies attending Mr. Anwar’s show trial is a clear expression of international concern. This is an issue on which the world must speak out.

If his country is to take its place among the progressive nations of the world, it is crucial that the politically motivated charge against Mr. Anwar be dropped and that he be free to pursue his vision of a democratic Malaysia, properly respectful of human rights and international law.

Paul Martin is former prime minister of Canada.

国阵成员党的紧箍咒

国阵成员党的紧箍咒

Ooi Tze Howe 2月25日 晚上 8点18分

国阵近来已经把修改章程事项提上日程。这一次修改章程暂时还看不到其中心概念，但令人感到纳闷的是，国阵成员党几乎对修改章程的事项都不太知晓。在媒体上各成员党领导人依然保持缄默，一副事不关己，己不劳心的模样。

这 其实并不让人感到意外。在国阵的制度里，成员党先天性已经注定成为附庸或更贴切的形容—尾巴党，只能摇尾乞怜。这是人为的问题，也是制度的弊病。一般上联 盟组成的政府，称之为联合政府（coalition government）。联合政府的出现通常是因为单一政党无法取得过半议席，而必须和其他政党结盟组阁。这种情形之下，联合内阁代表的是各方（或者各族 群、各阶层）的利益。所推行的政策必须符合大多数人的利益。各盟党扮演的角色和贡献的议席显得举足轻重，而拥有充足的谈判筹码。

国阵组成 的多党政府则和联合政府概念完全相反。经过了五十年的演变，国阵已经由巫统彻底的主导。可笑的是，这并不是巫统的政治人物有过人的政治手腕，而是成员党本 身的问题。成员党中的马华是一个不能在华裔居多的选区胜选的华基政党，国大党标榜着维护印度人的利益，但是现实生活中这些印裔领袖任由印度人自生自灭，自 己过着骄奢淫逸的生活。种族政党本身不能赢得本身族群的选票，这绝对是致命伤。所以巫统让给他们、马来人居多的混合选区就变成了救命的稻草。可以想象这些 丧失了本身核心价值的政党一旦离开巫统，就会面临灭顶之灾。

小党在联合政府最有力的武器，本来就是在政策不符合本身所代表的利益时进行倒 阁或退出联合政府，这样就必须重选。最近，荷兰的联合政府，就因为由于未能就是否延长荷兰军队驻阿富汗期限达成一致，工党因此退出联合政府，造成联合政府 垮台。但国阵的小党连议席都必须等待人家施舍时，政党本身还有多大的能力来议政呢？更遑论退出联盟。联合政府的本质也就丧失了。

到最后巫统一党独大，独自垄断政经大权。至于是巫统的霸权造成成员党的疲弱还是倒反呢？反正不太重要，这已经是先有鸡还是鸡蛋的问题，

从 体制的角度来探讨，国阵是一个拥有超过十个政党的联盟，但是操作方式和一个政党没有分别。原因就是国阵以联盟之名，行集权政党之实。国阵拥有本身的最高理 事会作为最高机制处理联盟事务。但是这个最高理事会的主席、署理主席、总秘书和总财政都由巫统垄断。各党之间并不是平起平坐的。这和一般上联盟的最高理事 会高职或秘书处是轮任或推选出来有很大的分别。这是国阵成员党的紧箍咒——既不能离开联盟，也没有门路爬到国阵内的高职，变成有义务，没权力，变相的附 庸。

如果未来国阵成员党依然想要立足，就必须趁这个机会，争取回本身所应该扮演的角色，改变现有的困境。时间并不会等待迟钝的从政者。改变与否，就争这次了。

注：作者部落格http://thooi.blogspot.com

安华索肛交案证物希望破灭 联邦法院拒绝检讨本身裁决

安华索肛交案证物希望破灭
联邦法院拒绝检讨本身裁决

2月25日 上午 11点02分

国会反对党领袖安华要求联邦法院，检讨法院本身驳回他在肛交案开审前向控方索取13项文件和证物的裁决，已经在今早遭驳回。换言之，安华已经耗尽法律途径，仍然无法索取控方的肛交案证物。

法院三司今午一致裁决，基于《联邦法院第137条文》没有赋予法院自动检讨本身裁决的权力，而驳回安华的申请。

法院表示，他们不适宜检讨这宗已由其他法院法官审结的案件。

这项司法检讨案件是由法院三司审理，即法官祖基菲里（Zulkefli Ahmad Makinuddin）、莫哈末卡查里（Mohd Ghazali Mohd Yusoff）和贺礼里亚（ Heliliah Mohd Yusof）。

迟开审错失盘问赛夫良机

较早前，安华代表律师卡巴星在陈词时，对法院迟至今日才审理这项申请大表不满，因为辩方至今仍未取得证物，进而错失盘问本案受害者赛夫的良机。

卡巴星也在庭上投诉，辩方直到今日仍未获得完整的证人名单，并高呼这完全违反了公平审讯的保证。

卡巴星表示，安华肛交案已经开审，但是法院却迟至今日才审理他们要求检讨索取证物的裁决，令辩方无法取得一些在交替盘问赛夫时可能派上用场的文件。

肛交案审讯变“埋伏式审讯”

他说，控方扣押案件的文件，导致安华获得公平审讯的权利遭到剥夺，这也使到有关审讯变成一种“埋伏式审讯”。

他质问，就连安华专程请来的两位澳洲专家和一位印度专家，也不被允许观看证物，难道这公平吗？

律政司指法院已做最终裁决

由于法院早前已经本案的陈词，因此法官祖基菲里质疑，如今法院三司是否有权检讨本身早前的裁决。

但是卡巴星却表示，由于肛交案已经开审，但是辩方却仍未获得文件，因此此案出现明显的不公正，所以法院当然可以检讨裁决。

不过，第二律政司莫哈末尤索夫(Mohd Yusof Zainal Abiden)却不认同卡巴星的说法。他说，由于法院早前已经做出最终的裁决，因此没有权利检讨本身的裁决。

他指出，任何人企图质疑法院的最终裁决，即是滥用司法程序。

尤索夫说，就连美国最高法院也没有如此的权利进行检讨。

他指出，基于法院其他法官已经审理此案，因此法院不应该准许第二次上诉，所以检讨的申请不应该被理会。

华府游说论坛突改闭门举行 黄朱强及再林竟然参与其盛

独家报道

人民公正党实权领袖安华肛交案开审以来，国际舆论反应强烈，美国及澳洲议员纷纷施压撤销案件或敦促我国司法体制秉公审理。为此国阵政府不惜派遣三名高官，千里迢迢前往美国首都华盛顿的智库举行论坛发表演讲，向美国官员、外交官、活跃分子及旅美的国人，亲自汇报我国的施政及司法体制，以尝试化解压力。

这支三人代表团是由首相署部长纳兹里、总检察长阿都干尼和前首席大法官兼反贪污咨询理事会主席阿都哈密，至于我国驻美国大使贾玛鲁丁也参与这场由保守派策略和国际研究中心（Centre for Strategic & International Studies，CSIS）所主办的“马来西亚的施政和法治”论坛。

邀请函原本注明为公开论坛

虽然这场论坛在上周所发出的邀请函，注明是一场公开论坛，不过在昨日举行时，却临阵改为闭门方式进行。原订发表演讲的总检察长阿都干尼及阿都哈密也双双宣告缺席，仅靠纳兹里一人撑完全场，并由贾玛鲁丁陪伴出席。

此外，一批我国国会议员也受邀参与齐盛，其中最令人感到意外的是公正党的旺沙玛朱国会议员黄朱强，及已经宣布退出公正党成为独立议员的峇央峇鲁国会议员再林（右图右），竟然也名列代表团，出现在论坛的会场。

其余参与游说团的国会议员包括副议长罗纳建迪、巴西沙叻国会议员达祖丁阿都拉曼。

毫无意外，出席这场论坛的美国听众及媒体，最有兴趣了解马来西亚政府面对安华肛交案的处理手法，所以他们对负责检控事务的总检察长阿都干尼临阵缺席，以及主办单位以闭门方式进行这场论坛的做法，大失所望。

智库顾问阻止当今记者拍摄

在论坛开始之前，策略和国际研究中心东南亚活动总监兼高级顾问恩内斯特鲍尔（Ernest Bower）就率先阻止《当今大马》记者拍摄活动的情况。

尽管记者指称邀请函并没有表明论坛是闭门进行，但是鲍尔却否认说，这对策略和国际研究中心的活动来说是相当正常。

前美大使：闭门进行不寻常

不过，身为参与者的前美国驻马大使约翰马洛特（John R Malott，左图）却告诉《当今大马》，有关论坛是他在华盛顿参加的论坛当中，“最奇怪“的一场。

“我认为以闭门方式进行论坛是不寻常的事情。这对一个华盛顿智库来说是非常罕见的。”

“这场论坛非常奇怪，因为它原本有三名主讲人。但最终只有一个人即纳兹里部长现身。阿都干尼却没有来。”

马洛特表示原本希望阿都干尼能够亲自出席，因为他有数个关于安华案控方的行事的问题要提问。

他指出，我国法律规定控方应该提供重要的证据给辩方辩护，但是他们却拒绝这么做。

“正当他们收起用来作辩护的重要资料，他们要怎么说服我们？美国根本没有这样的问题，这肯定很难说服我们，认为这次的审讯是公平的。”

告诫记者别写阿拉课题回应

纳兹里在长达40分钟的演讲中谈论大马法律促进良好管治的课题，以及他怎么协助草拟国家廉正大蓝图、设立反贪污委员会，以及其他反贪的机制。

NONE纳兹里（左图）也欢迎首相纳吉承诺铲除贪污，并促进良好管治。他补充说，如果纳吉干预反贪会，那么他将会辞职。

在问答环节开始前，国际特赦组织代表古玛（T Kumar）挺身敦促主办当局，开放活动让媒体采访。

身为国际特赦组织亚太宣扬主任的古玛强调，“这才是正确的做法”。

尽管纳兹里也同意开放采访，但鲍尔还是坚持答“不”，并表示不会改变本身原先的决定。

纳兹里接着即面对出席者有关安华肛交案、内安法令，以及“阿拉”字眼争议的提问。

在回答“阿拉”字眼争议的问题前，他也告诫《当今大马》记者，勿报道他的回答。

在纳兹里回答三道问题后，鲍尔就快速终结长达20分钟的问答环节。他声称，大马代表团还需要赶赴其他的活动。

柏特拉讽刺游说团使命失败

针对纳兹里在华盛顿的演讲，目前流亡海外的部落客拉惹柏特拉，也在其《今日马来西亚》网站以“人在现场”的方式做出报道。

他讥讽纳兹里的演讲非常学术性和沉闷，根本没有实质的内容，“就连（在旁的美国大使）贾马鲁丁（右上图）都宁愿看报纸”。

赛夫丁：黄朱强参与很正常

NONE另一方面，针对隶属公正党的黄朱强（左图左）也跟随我国政府的游说团，出席纳兹里演讲的问题，该党总秘书赛夫丁却回应说，这是正常不过的举动。

“我不认为这事情奇怪，因为国会议员跟随代表团是非常普通的事情，不管是来自反对党还是执政党。事实上，我上次去日本，是与议长班迪卡和其他国阵后座议员同行。”

“我们无法阻止策略和国际研究中心邀请我们（的议员），也没有资格来阻止有关活动。但是，我们对有关演讲的确是有本身的立场。然而，议员的参与并不违反民联的立场。”

安华一举戳破国阵鸡奸案迷思 “就算囚禁我也难阻改朝换代”

自嘲半只脚已再度踏入牢房的国会在野党领袖安华今日向国阵政府发出强烈的警告，不管他是否会因为肛交案而被定罪入牢，人民都会在下一届大选中改朝换代换政府。

“我要警告巫统、国阵、纳吉和他的妻子，他们不应误以为当我被监禁后，选民将回流。”

他表示，人民已对巫统主导的中央政府忍无可忍，且准备投选民联取而代之。唯独国阵存有一种假幻觉认为，一旦他第二度肛交案入狱，人民将重投国阵怀抱。

安华是今天在威省与槟岛出席槟州副议长陈福良和峇都茅区州议员阿都马列（Abdul Malik）的新春团拜时，二度如此表示。槟首长林冠英也参与这两场团拜。

纳吉马哈迪亲人登富翁榜

安华在威省表示，民联领袖造访的每个地区人民，都准备摒弃巫统与国阵，因为他们早对国阵的贪污腐败失去信心。猖獗的贪污情况，更令大马经济下滑，纵使是在东南亚也落在人后。

“我们在经济成长和竞争上，早被抛在新加坡，泰国，印尼甚至是越南的后头。我国仅被胜过缅甸和津巴布伟。”

安华在峇都茅演讲时则不忘揶揄，巫统自称捍卫马来人，但在富翁榜上出现的面孔却是纳吉的兄弟与马哈迪的儿子。

“他们也可以收买人，连我的朋友都可以收买。但一个人被收买，上万人将支持我们的斗争。”

巫统对槟州马来人没贡献

也是槟城子民的安华更质问，巫统到底拥有什么道德基础，来质疑林冠英对马来人社群贡献不足。

“巫统自独立至上届大选失去政权期间，到底替槟城马来人做了什么？巫统对槟城的贡献，都是在我担任部长时展开，我准备与任何人就此对质。”

他批评，槟州巫统领袖现仅懂得借公众利益之名自肥，而公正党则会充当槟政府与行动党秘书长林冠英的后盾，兑现惠及人民的政策。

在赞扬林冠英的表现之余，安华表示槟州对他本人及民联极为重要，因此需在下届大选中再度取胜，甚至是扫光每一个议席。

借用阿拉风波先知诞博乱

安华更表示，国阵尝试借阿拉字眼风波及回教先知诞辰游行，在下层人民之间制造混乱，以便上层精英及既得利益份子可坐享其成。

他提醒，心存不满者可向政府投诉与反映，但绝对不可散播仇恨。

“你要林冠英在槟州执政两年内做所有东西，也是不可能的事。但别担心，下一个回合我们夺取中央政权。”

林冠英致辞时表示，民联执政两年成功在预算案中转亏为盈，以拨出更多款项给贫苦人民和各阶层人士，明显与国阵有别。此外，他更誓言绝不向违反良好施政的人士妥协。

“或许因为我坐经济仓，替政府省钱，因此才被陈智铭批评没有水准。”

慕尤丁成为马哈迪遗产监护人 林吉祥质疑他是否效忠于纳吉

民主行动党国会领袖兼怡保东区国会议员林吉祥今日挑出副首相慕尤丁上任以来的种种保守言论，并质疑这位已经崛起成为“马哈迪遗产监护人”的巫统署理主席，究竟效忠前首相马哈迪抑或现任首相纳吉。

他指出，在阿都拉当首相时，曾试图与“马哈迪遗产”（Mahathir legacy）划清界线及调整它，但不敢真正的瓦解它，它却令阿都拉这名倒霉的首相，很快就不光彩地被拉下台。

“纳吉与阿都拉之间至今的最大差别是，他们对马哈迪遗产的立场。在阿都拉当首相时，内阁部长们对有关问题的立场默不作声，但在纳吉上台后，副首相慕尤丁崛起为马哈迪遗产的监护人！”

慕尤丁距首相职仅咫尺之遥

因此，林吉祥认为，慕尤丁言行显得重要，不仅因为后者是一个与首相职位有咫尺之遥的人，而是因为他是马哈迪遗产的代理人，而马哈迪无疑又是我国史上最有权势的前首相。

他也回顾慕尤丁在过去几个月来的言论：

—“慕尤丁说，回教鞭刑很轻”（2月19日）；
—“副首相说，吉祥不了解三权分立”（2月19日）；
—“慕尤丁称槟城不支持回教徒目标”（2月12日）；
—“慕尤丁说PERC报告胡说八道”（2月11日）；
—“慕尤丁要民联在霹雳无条件合作”（2月11日）；
—“副首相说，不需要跨宗教委员会”（1月30日）；
—“慕尤丁驳斥人权监督报告”（1月22日）；
—“慕尤丁：阿拉课题非政治”（1月16日）；
—“慕尤丁：将来不再有阿拉争议”（1月14）；
—“慕尤丁说指马哈迪是种族主义者过于偏激，坚持国家干训局是好的”（11月26日）；
—“副首相驳斥干训局课程洗脑指控”（11月26日）；
—“慕尤丁警告马来民族叛徒”（8月10日）；及
—“慕尤丁－华人对国阵忘恩负义”（4月13日）。

为纳西尔“外来者”论说好话

林吉祥质问，慕尤丁对纳吉的“一个大马”概念的真正信念是什么？

“他甚至在纳吉的资深助理纳西尔沙发指华印裔是外来者，以及印度人来马当乞丐，华人女性是妓女时，还替纳西尔讲好话，指他一时失言，以及巫统执行秘书阿都拉勿本月初在伦敦巫统俱乐部上发表种族偏激言伦被揭发时，他完全不出声。”

他说，当被询及像大马土著权威组织(PERKASA)这种非政府组织是否将被接纳为国阵的成员，以容纳非政府组织及对国阵友好团体来达致扩张目标时，慕尤丁含糊其辞即可见一斑。

他指出，PERKASA完全否定纳吉的“一个大马”概念及马哈迪在2020年宏愿下“马来西亚国族”概念，但还是获得马哈迪的支持。这名前首相已表示认同PERKASA，而说它在马来社会中日益受欢迎，是因为巫统看起来无能保护他们的权益。

他表示，在马华、民政党、国大党及东马国阵成员党能在原则上同意，容纳包括PERKASA在内的非政府组织之下，他们的元老级领袖表示失望是可以理解的， 如民政党前主席林敬益日前表示“民政党永远夺不回槟州政权”，反映出在巫统的死不悔改政治霸权下，其他国阵成员党已被不可救药的边缘化。

促慕尤丁宣布是否纳吉左右手

因此，林吉祥敦促慕尤丁宣布，到底他是纳吉的左右手，还是纳吉政府中的马哈迪左右手？

“在纳吉与马哈迪之间出现任何重大歧异的重要关头时，身为在纳吉政府中的马哈迪遗产监护人与代理人的慕尤丁，会效忠谁？”

“譬如，马哈迪公开宣称，他不知道纳吉的‘一个大马’概念是指什么。马哈迪没支持纳吉的‘一个大马’，但却亳无犹疑的祝福PERKASA。慕尤丁支持纳吉的‘一个大马’，还是马哈迪的不支持与不祝福‘一个大马’的立场？”

“慕尤丁是否支持纳吉的一个大马口号与概念的考验也许是，他是否支持成立一个以反对党为首的一个大马政府转型计划路线图国会遴选委员会。”

遭内安令扣留逾月仍不准会律师 人权组织促警方公布扣留者身份

尽管十数名被指涉及国际恐怖组织的人士，于上个月遭内安法令逮捕，但是至今却未被允许会晤律师。两名代表律师今日在人权组织的陪同下，到武吉阿曼警察总部要求会晤这些被扣者，同样遭到拒绝。

据悉，至今仅有一部分被扣者获准会晤家属，但是未被允许会见律师。

有鉴于此，大马人民之声（Suaram）和废除内安法令联盟（GMI）今日上午11点前往武吉阿曼警察总部提呈备忘录向警方施压，并要求让律师会见被扣者。

不过，警方公关部代表莫哈末扎基（Mohamad Zaki）在接领备忘录后，却不允许律师与被扣者见面。在人民之声、废除内安法令联盟及律师的敦促下，扎基表示会马上将备忘录成交给总警长，并尽快地安排律师与被扣者会面，不过他并没有给予明确的日期。

“我们会尽快，但今天不可能让你们（律师）与被扣者见面，（会面日期）最快可能安排在明天，或是一个星期之内。”

今日到武吉阿曼提呈备忘录的7个人，包括废除内安法令联盟主席赛依布拉欣、秘书娜里妮（Nalini Elumlai）、委员阿丽莎、隆雪华青理事郑屹强和两名律师。

【点击观看短片】

被扣33天无法获法律援助

警方于上月21日援引内安法令逮捕涉及国际恐怖组织的人士，并将其中十数人扣留迄今已经33天，但他们依然无法获得与律师会面。

但是，目前政府与废除内安法令联盟对被扣者的数目各执一词，内政部长希山慕丁日前声称，仅有10人于上月在内安法令下被扣留；但是，率先揭发这项最新扣留行动的 废除内安法令联盟却坚称，政府曾在上个月援引内安法令逮捕约50人。

废除内安法令联盟主席赛依布拉欣（Syed Ibrahim Syed Noh）炮轰警方办事不力，并质疑警方有意不让被扣者获得法律援助。

“他们是在内安法令第78条文下被扣留的，最长的扣留期限是60天，但如今已经超过30天了，被扣者依然无法会见律师。”

“律师可能需要和被扣者会见多几次，也需要时间为案件做准备，他们这么拖下去，是不是打算直接将被扣者送去甘文丁？”

因此，该联盟强烈要求警方与内政部允许所有被扣者能够与家属及律师会面，“不这么做的话，是违反了公平原则以及违反国际惯例的！”

律师曾致函警方无下文

欲前往会见被扣者不遂的律师丹尼尔阿尔伯特（Daniel Albert）也希望，被扣者能尽早获得法律援助。

“他们需要法律援助，他们有权力与律师会面，我希望警方尽快安排会面，让我们了解他们的情况。”

他表示，律师楼曾于两周前就发出正式函件催促警方让律师与被扣者早日会面，但警方却不重视此事，仅与律师展开一次非正式会谈，却没有下文。

申请人身保护令下月审

另一名律师沙礼占（Syahredzan Johan）也说，他们已经向吉隆坡高庭申请人身保护令，此案定于3月10日聆审。

“我们获悉，当局计划遣送数名外国扣留者回国，因此我们提出这项申请。”

“我们也要确保他们获得健康、食物和福利的保障。”

吁内政部透露详细资讯

除了要求警方批准被扣者会晤律师，废除内安法令联盟同时也要求警方及内政部透明的公布所有被扣者的资讯，包括准确人数、身份及被扣的具体原因。

该联盟也表示，这50人中已有38人被释放，但仍然有12人被扣，而且他们只知晓其中9人的身份，另外3人却音讯全无。

对此，赛依布拉欣要求希山慕丁给予解释，“现在有很多资讯让人混淆，到底是10人还是12人被扣，有关单位应该将确实的情况告诉公众，而不是保持缄默。”

他也表示，废除内安法令联盟是从被释放出来的人士获知尚有12人被扣留，而且其中3人身份尚未被确认。

“我们对这3人感到非常担忧，不仅仅我们无法确认他们的身份，他们的家人可能都不知道他们去了哪里。他们的父母，或是伴侣、孩子可能甚至不知道该联络谁来处理这项事情。”

案情严重公众需了解

赛依布拉欣也呼吁内政部公布这些人被内安法令扣留的具体原因，而非笼统且含糊的“涉及国际恐怖组织”。

“他们到底犯了什么错？内政部需要给予具体的说法，并且公布于大众知道。”

“据我们了解，这些人当中有人被指教导别人怎么制造炸弹，这是非常严重的，因此内政部应该在这个课题上给公众一个更明确的解释。”

驳斥联邦政府石油收入广告 姑里：合约没有三海里限制

驳斥联邦政府石油收入广告
姑里：合约没有三海里限制


继联邦政府于昨日在各大马来报章刊登全版广告（右图），解释为何吉兰丹州政府无权获得5%的石油收入，来反驳巫统话望生国会议员东姑拉沙里的论点后，后者今日不甘示弱，措辞强烈炮轰政府的论点不是“愚蠢”就是“欺骗”，并批评巫统已乖离该党先贤的领导。

拉沙里今日发表文告指出，无论岸上或岸外所发现的石油与天然气，不管是在3海里以内或以外，有关州属都有权获得5%的石油收入。

他是回应联邦政府在广告中的论点，即石油或天然气必须是在有关州属的领海内，该州属才能享有石油收入，而领海的计算方式则是根据《1969年紧急状态（必需权力）法令》，即有关州属沿岸的3海里范围。

就是不在领海内才要立法保障

拉沙里解释说，当初本身与第二任首相敦拉萨在成立国油时，清楚了解有关州属的领海内都没有油田，因此敦拉萨才指示他草拟《石油发展法令》，以确保吉兰丹、登嘉楼，以及可能的彭亨和柔佛，都能从5%的收入中受益。

“敦拉萨这么做是要建设国家，希望比较贫穷，而且马来人占多数的东海岸州属，可以直接从岸外油田获益。我草拟《石油发展法令》就是要反映这股希望。”

因此，他表示，无论油田距离有关州属多远，州政府都有权利获得5%的石油收入。

若无权为何登仍获石油收入？

这名前财政部长也不忘反问联邦政府的矛盾论点，因为若对方的论点成立，这意味着登嘉楼、沙巴与砂拉越也无权获得石油收入，但是国油却在一直在支付石油收入给三州政府。

“在去年，根据其年度报告，国油支付62亿令吉的石油收入，其中30亿令吉给登嘉楼、23亿令吉给砂拉越，以及9亿令吉给沙巴。”

“人们会奇怪为何国油支付这些收入，因为这些州属的油田都在3海里之外。”

因此，拉沙里（右图）指出，联邦政府以丹州油田在3海里之外为借口，来剥夺该州的石油收入，是“一种对智慧的羞辱”。

联邦政府的广告曾解释，砂沙两州是凭着它们在1963年加入马来西亚时所获得的特权，而享有5%的石油收入。不过广告并没有解释为何登州也能获得石油收入。

现任巫统领导羞辱敦拉萨遗产

拉沙里进一步增加火力炮轰，联邦政府发动的宣传攻势，无论是在学校分发传单或以纳税人的金钱在报章刊登广告，“都显示联邦政府不是愚蠢就是欺骗”。

这名巫统元老也抨击，坚持丹州不应享有石油收入的丹州巫统，不仅剥夺人民的权益，更是侮辱已故敦拉萨（左图）的遗产。

“这标志着巫统已严重乖离轨道，巫统的领导层，尤其是吉兰丹巫统，尽最大的努力剥夺当初巫统政府为丹州人民所确定下来的主权。”

拉沙里警告，这并非一项政党政治或个人意见分歧的课题，而是联邦政府公然违反合约与国会法令，同时破坏州属主权、削弱国会民主制度的行为。

广告挖出10年前遭扭曲谈话

另外，针对广告指拉沙里出尔反尔，曾公开指登州政府无权获得石油收入，之后又改口的指控，拉沙里澄清那是他在10年前遭政府媒体扭曲其谈话。

“如果我们可以相信政府媒体，那我已在一场大选中前夕，佩戴卡达山头饰改教为基督教徒了。为何政府要依靠10年前的扭曲谈话？现今我们都有自己的部落格。”

他反驳说，当时自己身为国阵后座议员，大力反对联邦政府插手阻止国油支付石油收入给登州，以及尝试把石油收入改为慈善拨款（wang ihsan）的举动。

“在登州政府起诉联邦政府索取石油收入的官司中，（前最高法院院长）敦沙列阿巴斯和我自荐成为登州政府的证人。”

他也指出，在2000年至2009年之间，联邦政府通过慈善拨款的管道，发出158亿令吉给予应有既得利益，与联邦政府有关系的政府机构，他们并非《石油发展法令》里阐明的合法石油收入接收者。

“这笔款项的成果是季候风杯风帆赛、一个不可能祈祷的水晶回教堂、一个漏水的游泳池、一道坍塌的桥梁和一间坍塌的体育馆，虽然联邦政府以登州人民的名义指出数百亿令吉，但是登州人民依然贫穷。”

HANYA AHLI UMNO DAN KERABAT JKKK DAPAT PANGSAPURI PULAU DUYONG

HANYA AHLI UMNO DAN KERABAT JKKK DAPAT PANGSAPURI PULAU DUYONG

Written by Wartawan Buletin
Friday, 31 July 2009 00:43

KUALA TERENGGANU – Satu laporan telah dibuat kepada Suruhanjaya Pencegahan Rasuah Malaysia (SPRM) berkaitan pembahagian pangsapuri mampu milik Pulau Duyong, dekat sini.



Ketua Angkatan Muda Keadilan (AMK) Terengganu, Cikgu Fariz Musa berkata laporan dibuat berdasarkan dokumen yang dihantar kepadanya oleh pihak yang tidak diketahui.

Menurutnya, setelah beliau meneliti isi dokumen itu, beliau dapati telah berlaku ketidakadilan dan penyelewengan oleh pihak Jawatankuasa Kemajuan dan Keselamatan Kampung (JKKK) dan Cawangan UMNO Pulau Duyong.


”Saya dapati terdapat 3 dokumen, sepucuk surat, satu lampiran senarai nama penyewa-penyewa dan satu lampiran senarai penama-penama yang sepatunya tidak layak,

”surat tersebut memohon saya bertindak isu berkaitan penyelewengan tersebut,”kata Fariz dalam sidang media yang diadakan di hadapan pejabat SPRM, Tingkat 11, Wisma Persekutuan, semalam.

Beliau berharap pihak SPRM dapat mengambil tindakan dan menyelesaikan kes tersebut yang melibatkan dua blok bangunan yang telah diagihkan kepada 90 orang.



Katanya dokumen lampiran tersebut memperincikan sebab mengapa penerima tidak layak menyewa pangsapuri itu.

”(sebagai contoh rumah) J-3-4 dimana pemilik tersebut adalah merupakan ayah kepada pengerusi JKKK Duyong Kelab Aya,

”dimana beliau sebagai pengerusi JKKK telah memberikan rumah tersebut kepada ayahnya dan (sedangkan) ayahnya telah memiliki rumah (lain),

”dalam masa yang sama rumah itu tidak didiami oleh ayahnya, (sebaliknya) didiami oleh anaknya (pengerusi JKKK tersebut,”jelasnya.

Katanya, dalam dokumen tersebut juga menyatakan, ramai penerima pangsapuri itu mempunyai hubungan dengan JKKK dan beberapa cawangan UMNO di Pulau Duyong.

Oleh itu katanya, beliau melihat pengagihan pangsapuri mampu milik itu telah berlaku penyelewengan dan ketidakadilan.

”Pengagihan pangsapuri mampu milik Pulau Duyong ini telah berlaku penyelewengan dan ketidakadilan,

”sebab itu kami, pada hari ini mengambil tindakan untuk membuat laporan SPRM dan meminta pihak SPRM mengambil tindakan tegas untuk menyiasat,”tegasnya.

Dalam masa yang sama, beliau turut meminta supaya siasatan dibuat terhadap pembahagian Blok yang baru diedarkan pada hari ini.

Dibawah di lampirkan dokumen-dokumen tersebut;










-BuletinOnline-


http://mforum5.cari.com.my/viewthread.php?tid=429610&extra=page%3D1