SABAHANS AND SARAWAKIANS: ANOTHER 55 YEARS WAIT BE PATIENT TILL WE LOOT YOU DRY

Democracy has been repeatedly raped and now she has become their mistress, and we the people have become her pimps, because we don’t have the guts nor the gumption due to our impotency, which is genetically ingrained in our DNA, to elect responsible and accountable leaders in our nation. Anwar’s life has been encircled in courts and no one in the political history of Malaysia has gone through what Anwar has.He has suffered all this while not because he has done wrong, but because he has differed with his former boss, Mahathir, on matters of opinion.never did like DSAI (Anwar) before but with the constant harassment and embarrassment that he and his family had to go through, I couldn’t help but feel sorry for him.Previously, I would have never voted for DSAI but now, if he were to contest in my constituency, my family and I will definitely vote for him. All the constant harassment should have changed him to become a better man and he will now feel what the man in the street is going through.BN, keep on harassing DSAI and he is going to get more votes, if not sympathy votes. Indeed, a lot of my friends feel the same way.The government abused the judicial process to tie Anwar up in court. It has time and again chosen to oppress opposition figures with selective prosecutions.It has also failed in many cases to ensure that corrupt and criminal acts are brought to justice, resulting in the people having a poor opinion of our once respected judiciary
For the unfairness in treatment, Mahathir has to bear the brunt of the blame. Nothing in this world can justify the kind of ill-treatment Anwar has to endure for a great part of his life.On the other hand, it also reflects the kind of character of the person responsible for it. judge Mohamad Zabidin Mohd Diah followed his conscience by putting fear of God in his mind when delivering his final judgment.For this, he will be definitely rewarded by God in this life and hereafter. The people and the world know that our judiciary at the apex level lives in fear or bias.

Queen’s Counsel and author Mark Trowell describes what he saw in his book, but in a false democracy like Malaysia the head of government is like a dictator and he can get the judiciary to dance to his tune. All that transpired was just a charade to fool the world and the public.

The unfair manner in which the trial was initially conducted indicated that Najib, like Dr Mahathir Mohamad, was going to imprison Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim.

The not-guilty verdict is a reflection of Najib’s well-known vacillating and indecisive character because he must have been unsure on what to do until the last moment.

In the end, he decided that it was better for him to keep Anwar out of prison as it probably dawned on him that when Mahathir pulled the same stunt, he was punished by the Malay electorate but was saved by the Chinese vote.

Now if he were to send Anwar to prison again, the Malays may react in the same way. But as the Chinese support for BN has drastically dwindled, it could result in BN’s defeat at the coming polls.

Considering that facts are always true, it’s surprising how often they can deceive us.

That’s why all the fighting between the presidential campaigns over the facts and whether they’re being manipulated to mislead is much, much more than just petty politics. Thankfully, at least for the moment, we’ve come light-years from being trapped in a fiction that “fair and balanced” is the best way to cover all the serious issues of the day. (Remember the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth saga and how little time the news media spent trying to find out what John Kerry really did in Vietnam?)

Sometimes there is a right answer, and we need people in the media to have the courage to call some balls and strikes as our leaders and those around them are throwing fastballs and curves at us. And it looks like we do. after Anwar was sacked from his last post as deputy prime minister and simultaneously expelled from Umno, his life does not revolve around politics but around Malaysian courts.

For the last 20 years, much of the courts’ time has been channeled into hearing sodomy charges against him, thanks to Mahathir, who has effectively taught Malaysian children as young as four years old all about sodomy.

IS THIS THE MAN UMNO WANTS TO MAKE PM? SMART ANSWERS PLEASE

Posted by suarakeadilanmalaysia on September 1, 2012 · Leave a Comment (Edit)

Narendra Modi’s alleged culpability in the post-Godhra riots was in the news again (albeit indirectly) yesterday when the special court pronounced Dr Maya Kodnani – a former minister of the BJP government in Gujarat – guilty of murder and criminal conspiracy. Those of us who lived in Gujarat at the time of the Godhra riots always knew of the complicity of the Gujarat government in fanning the riots. With every new judgment, that fact is getting established ever more clearly. Supporters of Modi call him a decisive man….on that fateful day, he had perhaps decided how it would end. Now this man wants to be the PM of India. Now he wants the cauldron of hatred and venom that he has brewed to flow over to the rest of the country.

Datuk Seri Najib Razak today accused Pakatan Rakyat (PR) of attempting to replace the national flag and warned of many more undesirable changes, including to the royal institution, should the opposition bloc gain control of Putrajaya.

The prime minister was weighing in on the uproar over the appearance of several alternative flag designs sporting the familiar crescent moon and 14-pointed star during the countdown to the country’s 55th National Day at Merdeka Square in Kuala Lumpur last Thursday night.

“They want to change everything… they even want to change our flag.

“There are many things they want to do but cannot because control of Putrajaya is in our hands,” said Najib (picture), who heads the Barisan Nasional (BN) ruling coalition, alluding to his political foes.

However, PKR — one of the three parties that make up the PR pact — has denied having a hand behind any bid to replace the Jalur Gemilang, and denounced the attempt as an “irresponsible” act.

“Whatever actions that try to give impressions that are not positive, we will certainly not give any encouragement, and strongly reject,” the opposition party’s deputy president Azmin Ali told reporters earlier this morning.

Najib also castigated the PR-led Selangor government for shutting out the state Ruler from its official National Day celebrations at Dataran Shah Alam last Thursday, suggesting that it placed greater importance on its economic adviser Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim than the monarch.

Kelantan Umno chairman Datuk Seri Mustapa Mohamed today warned of a possible attempt by certain quarters to turn Malaysia into a republic.

“Certain quarters seem to be a little too extreme, to the extent of wanting to amend the Federal Constitution and the national flag,” he said.

“This shows that they may want to turn Malaysia into a republic,” Mustapa(picture) said at the opening the Pengkalan Chepa Umno division delegates meeting and the Aidilfitri open house of the Pengkalan Chepa parliamentary constituency here.

The meeting was opened by Home Minister and Umno vice-president Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein.

Mustapa called on the people to defend the essence of independence achieved 55 years ago to ensure that the country remained stable.

This was necessary when there existed elements in the country trying to destroy the prevailing harmony, he said.

Mustapa, who is the international trade and industry minister, called on Malaysians to reject a “fatwa” (edict) issued by certain politicians allowing religion to be set aside in garnering political support.

“Their edict says participation in demonstrations is obligatory. That is wrong. Just imagine if there is bloodshed during an illegal gathering. What will happen?” he asked.

“The question of disrespecting the Selangor Sultan does not surprise us… they show more respect to their economic adviser who has no locus standi,” he said, pouring scorn on his political nemesis’ specially-created position within the state government.

“His Royal Highness is the symbol to the state that we must respect,” he said, adding that the Selangor Sultan was a symbol of the state’s sovereignty and unity and should be accorded the highest level of respect.

Najib said his BN coalition will ensure it retains power at the next general election.

“We will ensure Putrajaya remains BN’s,” he said.

Najib had earlier today told Umno members at a conference in Putrajaya to set up a political wall and blunt the opposition’s juggernaut in the 13th general election that must be called by next April when the BN’s mandate expires.

Political rivalry between the BN and PR blocs has intensified in recent days as the window for the next polls narrows in a race that could see a regime change in Malaysia for the first time in 55 years.

It all started during the primaries when Governor Romney said ”I like to fire people,” and both Democrats and Republican rivals jumped all over him. But almost immediately some in the media — including some commentators otherwise critical of Mr. Romney – pointed out that he was talking about making sure people could switch their health insurance by “firing” one company and “hiring” another when their current provider wasn’t getting the job done. Who could object to that?

Then President Obama this summer said “you didn’t build that,” and some of Mr. Romney’s supporters found it proof positive that Mr. Obama doesn’t respect private business. As with Mr. Romney’s talk about firing people, there wasn’t any question that Mr. Obama had said what he’d said; the question was what he’d meant. Was it that people hadn’t really built their businesses? Or was it that they hadn’t built the roads and bridges and infrastructure that supported those businesses? Once again, there were those in themainstream media who stepped in promptly, took a hard look, and concluded the president had been talking about the infrastructure, not the businesses.

But all of this was just the warm-up for the main truth-telling tussles of the summer. Historian, author, and Harvard Professor Niall Ferguson wrote a provocative cover storyfor Newsweek/Daily Beast on the eve of the Republican Convention laying out all the reasons Mr. Obama didn’t deserve to be re-elected because, among other things, he’d breached his promises about what he’d do for the economy. Almost immediately, people like Paul Krugman and James Fallows had at Professor Ferguson. As with the quotes from President Obama and Governor Romney, the issue wasn’t whether what Ferguson had written was literally true. Projections do show the costs of health care rising, but that isn’t the same as a breached promise not to let them increase the deficit unless you ignore the revenues that are also part of the same projections. Yes, we’ve lost 4.3 million jobs since January 2008 — but the president didn’t take office until January 2009, and it hardly seems fair to hold him responsible for job losses during the last year of George W. Bush’s presidency. Ferguson came back hard against all his critics. And, once again, he didn’t deny the truth of what they said, but essentially argued it was all beside the point. (As something of a fan of Ferguson’s other work, I’ll read what he writes a lot more carefully in the future.)

Then we came to Representative Paul Ryan’s speech last week to the Republican Convention. Like Ferguson, Mr. Ryan took President Obama to task and gave numbers and names. But also like Ferguson, he was met almost immediately with a flurry of challengesto how he was using the facts. It’s true that President Obama had held out hope to an auto plant in Mr. Ryan’s hometown that government assistance would save it, only to see the plant close. But the decision to close the plant came before Mr. Obama took office, while President George W. Bush was still in charge (something Mr. Ryan didn’t mention). And it’s true that President Obama didn’t embrace the recommendations of the Bowles-Simpson commission that he put together. But Representative Ryan was a member of the commission who voted against its recommendations, so it’s hard to see where he has the standing to criticize the president on this score.

Some people call this a period “post-truth” or worry that all the partisanship will distract the voters from focusing too closely on facts used to mislead. But whatever it all means, at least we have some media focused on what’s true and what’s not — and we’re seeing that “technically true” most often is neither technical nor true. Whether all this leads to our being better informed or whether people simply turn away saying “they all do it” is up to us.

by Hazlan Zakaria (09-06-12)@www.malaysiakini.com

The people of Sabah and Sarawak must be patient to wait for natural resources to be extracted and foreign investments to materialise before experiencing the same tempo of development as those in the Peninsula.

This was said by former  Prime Minister Dr Mahathir Mohamed when fielding questions in a meet and greet session with government retirees and NGOs in Bangsar, Kuala Lumpur today.”In truth, I think that the development of Sabah and Sarawak has outstripped the Peninsula. Sarawak has the highest foreign direct investment and Sabah has the largest reserves of petroleum in the country.”Just be patient and wait for the resources to be extracted and soon your earnings (and development) will increase,” he continued.He was answering a question from a Sabahan who wondered why after 55 years of voting BN and having contributed a lot to the coalition’s electoral victories, Sabah and Sarawak are still considerably backward in terms of development compared to the frenetic pace seen in the peninsula.

‘Devil’ remark just an analogyMahathir also hit out at those who made much ado about his ‘Devil they know” remark.”Those comments can only come from those who do not understand… It is an English saying.”

He explained that it is an anology that uses the devil to explain that people are often better off depending on someone they are familiar with, rather than trusting an unknown and untested party.The saying, countered Mahathir, has nothing to do with the devil per se. He was asked on comments from certain quarters who want him to recant his words and repent to God for talking about associating with the devil.

Barack Obama, the US president, has made his argument for re-election in a high-profile closing act at the Democratic National Convention (DNC), spelling out his plans to revitalise the stumbling economy.

Obama stepped into a cacophonous sports arena in Charlotte, North Carolina, on Thursday, facing a task daunting even for a man who made his name with the power of rhetoric.

“I won’t pretend the path I’m offering is quick or easy,” Obama said in his speech accepting the nomination.

“I never have. You didn’t elect me to tell you what you wanted to hear. You elected me to tell you the truth.”

And the truth is, “It will take more than a few years for us to solve challenges that have built up over decades”, Obama said.
The speech represented Obama’s best chance to frame the contest as a choice about the country and economy they want to live in – rather than the referendum on his record preferred by Romney.

There is a sense that Obama will try to fill the vacuum left by Romney’s humanising, yet largely policy-free oration last week at the Republican convention in Florida.

“On Thursday night, I will offer what I believe is a better path forward – a path that will create good jobs and strengthen our middle class and grow our economy,” Obama told a crowd in Virginia on Monday.

Obama castigated Romney for insulting top ally Britain on Thursday and said he was not ready for international diplomacy.

“You might not be ready for diplomacy with Beijing if you can’t visit the Olympics without insulting our closest ally,” Obama said in a pitch to American voters as he accepted the Democratic Party’s presidential nomination.

Bill Schneider, a political analyst, told Al Jazeera that the Democratic candidate was using the same strategy that helped lead him to victory in 2008, with a sharper edge.

“[Obama] is reviving the strategy of ‘hope and change’, but he’s also depicting the Republicans as far more dangerous than they were before.”

Foreign policy

Obama trumpeted his own foreign policy and national security successes as he launched a blistering attack on his opponent in November, trying to persuade American voters he was the only candidate suitable of being commander-in-chief.

“In a world of new threats and new challenges, you can choose leadership that has been tested and proven,” he said.

“Four years ago, I promised to end the war in Iraq. We did. I promised to refocus on the terrorists who actually attacked us on 9/11. We have,” he said.

“I promised to refocus on the terrorists who actually attacked us on 9/11. We have. We’ve blunted the Taliban’s momentum in Afghanistan, and in 2014, our longest war will be over.

“A new tower rises above the New York skyline, al-Qaeda is on the path to defeat, and Osama bin Laden is dead.”

Obama contrasted his sterling record with that of an opponent he portrayed as clearly not ready for the Oval Office.

“My opponent and his running mate are new to foreign policy, but from all that we’ve seen and heard, they want to take us back to an era of blustering and blundering that cost America so dearly,” he said.

“After all, you don’t call Russia our number one enemy – and not al-Qaeda – unless you’re still stuck in a Cold War time warp,” he said to raucous cheering from a convention hall in North Carolina packed with party faithful.

“My opponent said it was ‘tragic’ to end the war in Iraq, and he won’t tell us how he’ll end the war in Afghanistan,” he said. “I have, and I will.”

The Olympics barb was particularly scathing, coming after Romney arrived in London for the Olympics in July and promptly questioned the preparations, suggesting that the host nation might not be fully behind the Games.

‘Fairy dust’ economics

Obama renewed his call for tax increases on the rich to fund investment in education, new green energy jobs and tax breaks for firms that bring jobs back home from abroad.
In-depth coverage of the US presidential election
He attacked Republicans for killing his $400bn job-creating package and accused Romney of plotting the restoration of “trickle down, fairy dust” economics.

“This speech is going to reflect a leader who has great confidence in this country and a clear sense of what we need to do to continue to repair the damage that was done by the recession and to reclaim the economic security that so many Americans have lost,” David Axelrod, Obama’s senior adviser, said ahead of the president’s appearance.

Former President Bill Clinton got the ball rolling for Obama on Wednesday night.

“The Republican argument against the President’s re-election was pretty simple: We left him a total mess, he hasn’t finished cleaning it up yet, so fire him and put us back in,” Clinton said.

David Plouffe, a senior White House adviser, earlier told a US news programme that he expected the race to remain “tight as a tick” until election day on November 6.

These must be the worst of times for the PM. I&B minister Ambika Soni has called on the Washington Post to apologise for a critical article on the PM (this one). The newspaper clarifies no such apology has been issued, although it has published a minor correction regarding attribution of quotes. The surprising aspect of the episode is why an article about the PM in foreign media should elicit such a strong reaction from the government. Perhaps the answer is that the PM’s assiduously built image as a reformer, an intellectual leader and a technocrat owed a great deal to its endorsement the foreign press. India’s rapprochement with the US was also driven by the PM, against opposition from political quarters at home. That sections of the American press are now questioning his record, may cut close to the bone.

But the Washington Post article simply echoes what Indian media has been highlighting for quite some time now – the PM’s passive and inarticulate response to pressing problems at home, ranging from corruption to mishandling of the economy (when the latter was supposed to be his strong point); his clout within the administration being far surpassed by that of Congress chief Sonia Gandhi. In the interests of fairness we must note that a thin-skinned response to criticism is not a monopoly of the Congress or the UPA – the erstwhile NDA government flew into a much greater rage when Time magazine published a scathing piece titled ”Asleep at the Wheel”, on then prime minister AB Vajpayee. The resonance with today’s situation is uncanny – Singh too is being accused of being asleep at the wheel, too old and tired to deal with the country’s pressing problems. But to the PMO’s credit, after the initial kerfuffle it has subsequently clarified that it doesn’t want to complain about criticism of the government, which is a journalist’s right.

Considerable evidence has now emerged that Singh in his 1991 avatar was enabled to be a reformer by the solid backing provided by then PM Narasimha Rao, whose role in the 1991 reforms has tended to be underestimated. In his current UPA avatar Singh has hewed close to party boss Sonia Gandhi, whose basic instincts are socialistic. In Vajpayee’s time, he was described as being a mukhauta or mask for the RSS. Singh has now emerged as a mukhauta for varying dispensations.

Alas, the stress on redistribution alone – while ignoring the job of growing the pie that can be redistributed – suffers from some drawbacks, all of which are showing up palpably in the economy now. One, given India’s current GDP per capita, all one manages to do is redistribute poverty. Two, if one relies on the current bureaucratic machinery and patronage-based mechanisms to redistribute, this process is horribly inefficient and corrupt. The fellows tasked with dividing up the pie for redistribution end up devouring most of the pie themselves. Few of the intended benefits actually reach the poor. On the other hand, haemorrhaging fiscal deficits contribute to persistent inflation which punishes the poor (and angers a lot of other people besides). Today, redistribution itself is in need of being redistributed.