masterwordsmith-unplugged

The Malaysian Tax Authority is  blacklisting people from travelling overseas with
effect from 25 Aug 2014 at all entry/exit points throughout the country; even if
your outstanding tax due is less than RM100 or if you have failed to submit your tax
returns.

If you intend to travel overseas including Sabah/Sarawak, please check below.

Type your IC number without space.  It will save you time, frustration and
embarrassment.

http://sspi2.imi.gov.my/

Happy Merdeka! To celebrate 57 years of independence, I am sharing this post to remind us that along the nation-building journey, some have developed characteristic forms of truly Malaysian English. :-) Thanks to A.S. for sharing this list.

Who says our English is teruk? Just read below - Ours is simple, short, concise, straight-to-the-point, effective etc.
British English vs. Malaysian English

WHEN GIVING A CUSTOMER BAD NEWS
Britons: I'm sorry, sir, but we don't seem to have the sweater you want in your size, but if you give me a moment, I can call the other outlets for you.
Malaysians: No stock.

RETURNING A CALL
Britons: Hello, this is John Smith. Did anyone call for me a few moments ago?
Malaysians: Hello, who call?

ASKING SOMEONE TO MAKE WAY
Britons: Excuse me, I would like to get by. Would you please make way?
Malaysians: S-kiew me.

WHEN SOMEONE OFFERS TO PAY
Britons: Hey! Put your wallet away, this drink is on me.
Malaysians: No need lah. 

WHEN ASKING FOR PERMISSION
Britons: Excuse me, but do you think it would be possible for me to enter through this door?
Malaysians: (pointing at the door) Can ah? 

WHEN ENTERTAINING
Britons: Please make yourself right at home.
Malaysians: No need shy shy one lah!

WHEN DOUBTING SOMEONE
Britons: I don't recall you giving me the money.
Malaysians: Where got? 

WHEN DECLINING AN OFFER
Britons: I would prefer not to do that, if you don't mind.
Malaysians: Don't want lah. 

IN DISAGREEING ON A TOPIC OF DISCUSSION
Britons: Err...Tom, I have to stop you there. I understand where you're coming from, but I really have to disagree with what you said about the issue.
Malaysians: You mad ah? 

WHEN ASKING SOMEONE TO LOWER THEIR VOICE.
Britons: Excuse me, but could you please lower your voice? I'm trying to concentrate over here.
Malaysians: Shut up lah!

WHEN ASKING SOMEONE IF HE/SHE KNOWS YOU.
Britons: Excuse me, but I noticed you staring at me for sometime. Do I know you?
Malaysians: See what, see what?

WHEN ASSESSING A TIGHT SITUATION.
Britons: We seem to be in a bit of a predicament at the moment..
Malaysians: Die lah!! 

WHEN TRYING TO FIND OUT WHAT HAD HAPPENED
Britons: Will someone tell me what has just happened?
Malaysians: What happened ah? Why like that one lah?

WHEN SOMEONE DID SOMETHING WRONG
Britons: This isn't the way to do it. Here, let me show you.
Malaysians: Like that also don't know how to do! 

WHEN ONE IS ANGRY
Britons: Would you mind not disturbing me?
Malaysians: Celaka you!

So which would you prefer? :-)

Have a wonderful Merdeka Day!

According to a new report published by the United Nations Sustainable Development Solutions Network, the happiest people in the world live in Northern Europe,

The World Happiness Report 2013 found Denmark to be the happiest country in the world, with its relatively close neighbours: Norway, Switzerland, Netherlands and Sweden making up the top five.

Malaysia is ranked at no. 56.

According to the report, 75% of differences in happiness could be due to:

• GDP per capita
• years of healthy life expectancy
• having someone to count on
• perception of corruption
• prevalence of generosity 
• and perceived freedom to make life choices.

CLICK HERE for more.

Bridget Welsh is an Associate Professor in Political Science at Singapore Management University. She is committed to engagement, fostering mutual understanding and empowerment. Based in Southeast Asia, she is committed to changing the world one day at a time through her public engagement, teaching and research. (Source: Her Blog)

This morning, I came across her latest article posted in Today AT THIS LINK. True to the title of the post, Welsh maintains a positive outlook to the coalition and chose not to highlight the many issues at stake today. I am posting it just in case some of you might have missed it...

What's keeping Malaysia's Opposition together? Written by Bridget Welsh 

What keeps the Malaysian opposition Pakatan Rakyat (People's Alliance) together? The quick answer often given is the common search of political power.

While power frames the relationships between three disparate political parties - Islamist PAS, secular-committed Democratic Action Party and the umbrella reform-oriented PKR of Mr Anwar Ibrahim - it is not the glue of the opposition alliance. Were this the case, PAS would have left the coalition when UMNO floated the offer of joining the government in 2008 and intense jockeying took place within PAS.

The answer lies in the three parties' shared moral compact. Pakatan Rakyat is an alliance of profoundly different backgrounds, with secularists, theocrats, conservatives and progressives working together. In a world wracked with tensions over religion and misunderstandings, Malaysia's opposition stands out in bucking international trends of difference.

CORRUPTION IN EVERYDAY LIFE
Three common principles bind the Opposition together. The first is deep concern with endemic corruption.


CLICK HERE for the rest of the article.

The origins and obligations of Sharia law

Sharia is the body of Islamic religious law based on the Qu'ran and the words and actions of the prophet Mohammed and his followers.

In the West, Sharia has become synonymous with the brutal punishments meted out in Islamic states, but the majority of laws are to do with everyday issues, ranging from personal hygiene to banking.

Hard line Muslim leaders claim that Sharia is eternal and can never be changed, while moderates argue that it is not a strict set of laws but should be open to interpretation.

Sunni and Shia Muslims follow different schools of thought in interpreting the Sharia laws, but all Muslims are required to live according to Sharia wherever they are.

Islamic countries such as Saudi Arabia and Iran have implemented Sharia as the legal system of the country, but in Britain it has no legal standing, despite the introduction of Sharia-compliant banking and food.

Examples of obligatory laws

• Earnings must be lawfully obtained

• Food must be halal

• Personal hygiene must be of a very high standard

• Couples must have a full bath in flowing water after intercourse

• The body must be covered modestly

• Prayers must be said five times a day

• Believers must fast during Ramadan


By Clare Dwyer Hogg and Jonathan Wynne-Jones, The Telegraph

*******************************************
Sharia is an Arabic word meaning "the right path". The Sharia comes from the Qu'ran, the sacred book of Islam, which Muslims consider the actual word of God. The Sharia also stems from the Prophet Muhammad's teachings and interpretations of those teachings by certain Muslim legal scholars.

Muslims believe that Allah (God) revealed his true will to Muhammad, who then passed on Allah's commands to humans in the Koran.

Since the Sharia originated from Allah, Muslims consider it sacred. Between the seventh century when Muhammad died and the 10th century, many Islamic legal scholars attempted to interpret the Sharia and to adapt it to the expanding Muslim Empire.

The classic Sharia of the 10th century represented an important part of Islam's golden age. From that time, the Sharia has continued to be reinterpreted and adapted to changing circumstances and new issues. In the modern era, the influences of Western colonialism generated efforts to codify it.

Following Muhammad's death in A.D. 632, companions of the Prophet ruled Arabia for about 30 years. These political-religious rulers, called Caliphs, continued to develop Islamic law with their own pronouncements and decisions. The first Caliphs also conquered territories outside Arabia including Iraq, Syria, Palestine, Persia, and Egypt.

Islamic law grew along with the expanding Muslim Empire. The Umayyad dynasty Caliphs, who took control of the empire in 661, extended Islam into India, Northwest Africa, and Spain. The Umayyads appointed Islamic judges, kadis, to decide cases involving Muslims. (Non-Muslims kept their own legal system.) Knowledgeable about the Koran and the teachings of Muhammad, kadis decided cases in all areas of the law.

Following a period of revolts and civil war, the Umayyads were overthrown in 750 and replaced by the Abbasid dynasty. During the 500-year rule of the Abbasids, the Sharia reached its full development.

Under their absolute rule, the Abbasids transferred substantial areas of criminal law from the kadis to the government. The kadis continued to handle cases involving religious, family, property, and commercial law.

The Abbasids encouraged legal scholars to debate the Sharia vigorously. One group held that only the divinely inspired Koran and teachings of the Prophet Muhammad should make up the Sharia. A rival group, however, argued that the Sharia should also include the reasoned opinions of qualified legal scholars. Different legal systems began to develop in different provinces.

From this very brief history of the Islamic empire and the development of the Sharia, some scholars argue that the Sharia evolved over time and transformed to meet the needs to society during their respective times. In other words, the Shariah was not static but dynamic.

Other scholars argue that the Sharia was already present during the time of the Prophet and was already fully developed by the time the Prophet died. In other words, this was what was laid down by the Prophet and merely continued after the Prophet died (meaning, the Sharia did not evolve or transform over time). This argument is to support the theory that the Sharia came from God and was not ‘invented’ by man over hundreds of years following the death of the Prophet.

In an attempt to reconcile the rival groups, a brilliant legal scholar named Shafiee systematized and developed what were called the "roots of the law". Shafiee argued that in solving a legal question, the kadi or government judge should first consult the Koran. If the answer were not clear there, the judge should refer to the authentic sayings and decisions of Muhammad. If the answer continued to elude the judge, he should then look to the consensus of Muslim legal scholars on the matter. Still failing to find a solution, the judge could form his own answer by analogy from "the precedent nearest in resemblance and most appropriate" to the case at hand.

There are five laws under the Sharia law. Basically, these are:

1. ibadah (ritual worship)
2. mu'amalat (transactions and contracts)
3. adab (morals and manners),
4. i'tiqadat (beliefs)
5. 'uqubat (punishments).

There are three categories of crimes in Sharia law. These are:


1. qisas
2. hudud
3. tazir.

Qisas involves personal injury and has several categories: intentional murder (first-degree), quasi-intentional murder (second-degree), unintentional murder (manslaughter), intentional battery, and unintentional battery.

A qisas offense is treated as a civil case rather than an actual criminal case. If the accused party is found guilty, the victim (or in death, victim's family) determines the punishment, choosing either retribution (qesas-e-nafs), which means execution in the case of intentional murder, imprisonment, and in some cases of intentional battery, the amputation of the limb that was lost; or compensation (diyya) for the loss of life/limb/injury.

The sharia judge (or, in modern sharia systems like those of Iran or Iraq, the state) can convict for and legally punish only qesas crimes on his own authority. However, the state itself may prosecute for crimes committed alongside the qisas offense. If the victim's family pardons the criminal, in addition to the sharia punishment he would normally receive a tazir prison sentence (such as ten to twenty years in prison) for crimes such as "intentional loss of life", "tazir assault and battery" "disturbance of the peace", and so forth.

The second category of crimes is hudud (or hadd). Hudud crimes are crimes whose penalties were laid down by the Qu'ran and are considered to be "crimes against God". The hudud crimes are:

1. adultery (zina), which includes adultery, fornication, incest/pedophilia, rape, and pimping
2. apostasy/blasphemy
3. defamation (meaning false accusation of any of these things)
4. sodomy/lesbianism (or sodomy rape)
5. theft
6. use of intoxicants (alcohol/drug use)
7. "waging war against God and society" (rebellion)

Hudud, therefore, is merely one part of the very broad laws that come under the Islamic Sharia. However, this appears to be the only focus for debate, in particular in Malaysia.

Thus, the current brouhaha about Hudud is only a small part of a very vast Sharia system. In reality, we already have the Shariah in Malaysia. The only thing we do NOT have yet is the Hudud part of Sharia.

Upon closer inspection, the ISA is worse than Hudud. Under the ISA you can be detained BEFORE you commit a crime. That is why the ISA is called a 'preventive law'. Under the Shariah you CAN'T be punished for a crime you have not committed yet. The Sedition Act, Criminal Defamation, etc. are more draconian than Hudud by far.

If we compare apples to apples, there are many elements of the Sharia which are fairer than common laws, and vice versa of course. So we can't say Hudud is better or common law is better. It all depends on specifics. Maybe the one bone of contention is the punishment for theft (hand cutting). If we resolve that one needling issue then the rest is not that much an issue.

Are we opposed to Hudud because it is 'ISLAMIC LAW" OR BECAUSE IT IS UNJUST?

What if it was not called Hudud or Sharia but called 'Common Law'? Would it be acceptable then? For instance, if the Parliament amends laws that decree the punishment for the crime of corruption is firing squad (like China) but it is not called Shariah/Hudud would that be acceptable?

What if Parliament passed a law that the punishment for rape is castration? But this is NOT Islamic law and the word Hudud would not appear. Would many support it then? I would!

Can we disagree that rapists and murderers should not be punished? In fact, many feel Hudud is not even severe enough and they want it more severe. What many do not realise is that the hand cutting punishment is not an automatic thing. The criminal must first be assessed as to why he or she stole. And if it is because of poverty, then instead of cutting off the thief's hand, he or she has to be put under welfare and be taken care of by the state. In fact, the head of the welfare department instead would be punished for neglecting the poor and destitute that resulted in them having to steal to survive.

The issue is the word ISLAM in that law of Hudud, which, as you can see, is a SMALL part of the Sharia.

So what is really happening in the debate? Is hudud being used again by DSAI to curry favor with PAS and as a leverage against DAP to bargain for seat allocation? He expresses his PERSONAL opinion, and then claims he will consult PKR on it later (read more here).

We cannot afford to be battling on such issues and lose sight of the REAL BATTLE before us - winning the next GE! Politics and religion do not mix. Religion should not be used as a subject for political debates or policy decisions. Nip the problem in the bud before this issue brings about the downfall of PR! Let's keep our focus and fight the real enemy!

I suppose, this is Malaysia for you. Malaysians would debate till the cows come home about the Internal Security Act (ISA) whereas the ISA is just one small part of many things that is wrong with the Malaysian justice system and the Malaysian judiciary.

Written by Raja Petra Kamarudin and Masterwordsmith

*This post was written as a result of a discussion on hudud via Skype chat on 23rd September from 5pm to 7.30pm. Masterwordsmith acknowledges with grateful thanks the guidance and input of RPK on this topic. 
___________________
Further reading:
 
1. Stoning Women to Death in Iran and Afghanistan


2. RAINY DAY WOMEN in THE STONE AGE

The following is Part III of Tunku Abdul Rahman's article on  Malaysia: Key Area in Southeast Asia (Part 1) by Tunku Abdul Rahman which was written in 1965. Part I was posted at this link a few hours ago. Part II was posted here.

Malaysia: Key Area in Southeast Asia (Part III) by Tunku Abdul Rahman

III

However, Malaysia is not an introspective country. We have opened our doors and windows wide to observe and share in the affairs of the world. In fact, Malaysia was one of the first states in Southeast Asia to do so. Having experienced the menace of international Communism and overcome it, we are particularly sensitive to its threats elsewhere and have never hesitated to take a positive stand when necessary.

Malaya was among the first to condemn Communist China's blatant invasion of Tibet and the subjugation of that ill-fated nation. Again, when the Communist Chinese pressed on further and treacherously attacked their sympathetic neighbor, India, I was the first to condemn their aggression unreservedly, as I happened to arrive in Calcutta the day it began; and during my tour of India in that month of October 1962, I exposed the Chinese motives behind aggression. On my return to Singapore in November, I stated that in the event of a declaration of war between India and China, Malaya would give India "all-out support." Soon afterwards I launched a public campaign, the "Save Democracy Fund," which raised more than one million dollars to help India defend herself against Chinese aggression.

Malaysia has been a member of the United Nations since 1957, and in all that time a major plank of her foreign policy platform has been, and is still, unwavering support for the world body. We place great value on the spirit of the Charter and understand that acceptance of it entails both duties and responsibilities. Our armed forces were among the first to reach the Congo, and their conduct there won high praise for the United Nations as well as the lasting friendship of the people of the area.

Malaysia has also made constructive efforts in regional cooperation. Although we did not participate in the Bandung Conference, as we were not then independent, we have expressed the spirit of Bandung in the conduct of our foreign policy. We are very conscious of brotherhood with the Afro- Asian nations. We feel at one with them in campaigning against colonialism, apartheid, disease, hunger and human misery. As far as apartheid is concerned, I have actively condemned this evil violation of human rights. Like our brothers in Afro-Asia we have always stressed the imperative need for a world where laws prevail against racial or religious discrimination. We also championed Algeria's right to freedom. We expressed our belief that Southern Rhodesia should be independent only when African peoples have the unrestricted right to vote and we have deplored Portuguese colonialism in both Africa and Asia.

Our special interest in economic progress and development of the region of Southeast Asia is particularly illustrated by the founding of the Association of Southeast Asia (A.S.A.) which I first projected in Manila in 1960. The founder members-the Philippines, Thailand and Malaya-established A.S.A. in 1961 to promote economic, social and cultural coöperation. Indonesia was invited also but rejected A.S.A. as being a tool of American imperialism, ignoring the fact that all the work, effort, ideas and goals of A.S.A. had sprung entirely from the energies and beliefs of the three countries concerned. In declining to join, Indonesia broke the solemn undertaking given at the Bandung Conference to create an organization for intraregional economic coöperation. Nevertheless, Thailand, the Philippines and Malaya went right ahead, meeting in Bangkok and Kuala Lumpur and Manila in 1961, 1962 and 1963, laying the groundwork for A.S.A. However, with the unfortunate decision of the Philippines to defer recognition of Malaysia after its formation in 1963, A.S.A. suffered a temporary setback. We nevertheless have strong hopes that A.S.A. will be revived, as its secretariats still survive. Our faith in A.S.A. reflects our belief that we can come to terms with the Philippines, which we have always regarded as a country that has done much for the cause of democracy in this part of the world. I feel that the present impasse between the Philippines and Malaysia can be resolved. Although we have no formal diplomatic relations at present, it is our objective to hasten the day when the friendly ties we still feel for one another can be resumed and enhanced.

Malaysia is a practical working democracy, and as such its very existence and success are a positive challenge to any further progress by Communism in Southeast Asia. The Communists consider us an obstacle to be reckoned with in their grand design to subject all Asia to their influence. Obviously Malaysia from their point of view has to be "crushed." The Communists were quick to seize the opportunity to implement this "crushing" vicariously through Indonesia, a country with which we had always felt close fraternity and whose own bid for independence earned our sympathy and support.

Unfortunately, neither President Sukarno nor the Indonesian Army, the only two forces capable of asserting themselves against the Communists, did anything effective to check the rapid expansion of Communism in Indonesia. In fact, President Sukarno seems to have encouraged the dramatic growth of Communism there, and this has been augmented by the widespread starvation, corruption and administrative incompetence, combining to create a mood of cynicism and despair. Meanwhile, the Communists champion causes which they can represent to the people as nationalist and revolutionary. Each day brings evidence of their further entrenchment, as their leaders assume leading positions and their policies are allowed free expression. We cannot ignore the fact that the Indonesian Communist Party is the third largest in the world and closely collaborates with Peking. We in Malaysia have been made well aware by actual aggression, infiltration, subversion and sabotage of the Communist determination to bring about the extinction of our country. However, with the help of our allies and the sympathy and support of nations which deplore aggression and espouse peace, we are confident of our ability to contain this threat to our existence which emanates from Indonesia.

We look northward in Asia with equal anxiety. We see the unscrupulous advantage the Communists have taken of small and weak states, most of whom have shaken off the burden of colonialism only to fall under the spell of Communism. Viet Nam, in particular, has caused us great concern, as we have watched the familiar Communist pattern being re-enacted by the Hanoi Government, using the usual methods of infiltration, subversion and open aggression against South Viet Nam, making a mockery of the Geneva Agreement of 1954. I recall that the very first foreign country I visited after becoming Prime Minister of newly independent Malaya was South Viet Nam in January 1958. I declared then that the Communist aggression taking place both in Malaya and in South Viet Nam was rightly the concern of the whole free world, and that our two countries were fighting in the front line of the battle for freedom. In 1960, I did what I could to help South Viet Nam in its struggle against Communism. All the guns and ammunition and vehicles which had become surplus to us as the result of the ending of our own emergency I had shipped to Saigon. We started our own aid program, quietly and without publicity, to train some thousands of Vietnamese in either jungle warfare or police administration; and we are continuing to do so today.

The long history of aggressive action by North Viet Nam and its intensifications of hostilities in recent months more than justify the firm stand taken by the United States. We in Malaysia fully support Washington's actions. Past experience has clearly shown that the Communists will back down whenever they are faced with determined and definite opposition. Cuba, the Berlin Blockade and the incidents in the Tongkin Gulf, each of which Malaysia completely supported at the time, are testimony to this. We cannot, however, ignore the fear felt by many nations that the war in Viet Nam may escalate into such proportions that an ultimate peaceful solution becomes impossible. We therefore welcome President Johnson's statement that the United States is ready to negotiate without any precondition. His proposal for a massive aid program to Southeast Asia clearly shows that the United States is seeking neither political nor military conquest, but desires only an honorable settlement of the Vietnamese problem.

From our own experience it is our belief, however, that the final answer in Viet Nam does not lie in either arms or economic aid but in the hearts and minds of the people. The present state of affairs in South Viet Nam is due to a lack of ideological response to an ideological challenge. Political instability in Saigon has drawn attention away from the basic principles of freedom for which South Viet Nam has been fighting. The Republic of Viet Nam must be given time to reconsolidate itself on these principles and its people must have an opportunity to understand that democracy is worth fighting and dying for. In the long run, the present military involvement by the United States can only be temporary; but it will provide that essential time. In our view it is imperative that the United States does not retire from the scene; such action would create an ideological vacuum which only the Communists would exploit.

To me the United States does not represent merely a power as such, even though she is undoubtedly the most powerful nation in the world. Rather the United States represents the living ideal of democracy. I remember that Madame Pandit, who was then President of the U.N. General Assembly, said during a visit to Singapore that what the free world most needed were thousands and thousands of people willing to preach and practice democracy with fervor and faith and when necessary to fight for it. In other words, democracy must be an ideology. It is worth noting that the Communist states never represent themselves so much as powers but as proponents of an ideology, although it is true that the current dispute between the Soviet Union and China has done much to dispel this image.

The whole history of our years of independence, leading into the creation of Malaysia, is living evidence that democracy can succeed in molding an Asian nation along lines of economic achievement and stability. It is true that we have been forced to ensure our security against Indonesia's present hostility by an alliance with such friendly nations as the United Kingdom, Australia and New Zealand. That alliance is made of our own choice. All free nations have the sovereign right to choose their friends and to enter into any agreement which they feel may be necessary for their security. Further, our defense agreement with the United Kingdom which dates back to 1957 has enabled us to make far more rapid progress in every field of development because we have not had to spend vast sums on our armed forces. Communist-inspired propaganda from Indonesia cries out hysterically that our defense agreement represents neo-colonialism. Any nation which has suffered the threat of aggression knows that protection is a matter of necessity and that immediate help is welcome from whichever quarter it comes. We in Malaysia have always had faith in our friends; and now that our need is critical they have rallied to our side as true friends should. In spite of Indonesia's endeavors to obscure the truth with a screen of groundless accusations, Afro-Asia has come to understand that we in Malaysia have no choice but to turn to the friends we trust to help us when we are being not only threatened but actually invaded by a neighbor nation possessing armed forces 20 times the size of ours. To ask us to give up the British bases is tantamount to asking us to disarm in the face of a strong enemy buildup. It would be sheer folly for us to give up the bases. To do so would be to commit suicide. Needless to say, we shall welcome defense assistance from African, Asian or other countries.

It is with some satisfaction that we can say that except for one minor attack, every Indonesian assault against us has been defeated. We have seen to it that the complete record of Indonesian incursions is in the hands of the Security Council. The whole world knows that Indonesia is guilty of aggression and that Malayasia has not fired one bullet outside its borders.

Malaysia is in a unique position in many ways, belonging as it does to the brotherhood of Afro-Asian nations as well as being a member of the Commonwealth. As a mainly Muslim country we have intimate links and understanding with the Arab world. We are friends with all nations in Asia, Indonesia and the Communist countries excepted. Last but not least, we have proven that the principles of democracy have valid application to the problems that face developing countries. We cannot and do not aspire to rely on the might of arms to promote our future hopes, preferring to live in peace and friendship with all, especially our neighbors. We have not received or requested any part of the vast quantities of aid which the United States has so freely and generously given to most of the free world. We have always preferred to pay our own way, and we continue to do so. We believe that by making a success of our own democracy, relying on our own efforts, combined with the advantages of our strategic position and economic importance, we are able to exercise influence, even as a small nation, that is far-reaching and effective.

China's emergence as a powerful military force, expressing the most militant form of Communism, has made the problem of survival for all the countries of Southeast Asia extremely acute. So far, pro-Peking forces are militarily active only in Viet Nam, Laos and Indonesia; but knowing the nature of Communism, we can expect further aggression to take place. In this situation we have no time for philosophical resignation, nor do we have any respect for attitudes of despair shown by some countries that it is only a matter of time before this region of Southeast Asia becomes enveloped in the embrace of Red China. Our role, we feel, is not only to dispel unwarranted pessimism but to reaffirm by our own example and policy that democracy is a better answer to the social and economic problems of this vital region than Communism can ever be.

In Russia, the most advanced nation in the Communist world, economic well- being has provoked a search for the liberties which had been lost because the leaders believed them to be incompatible with rapid development. Why should Asian nations allow themselves to be attracted to the alluring prospects of economic advancement claimed by Communists when it means the unnecessary surrender of their liberties? Asian nations can see for themselves the remarkable resurgence of Japan through the spirit of free enterprise and democracy. Even a small country like ours has been able, under the aegis of democracy, to achieve success without the sacrifices which Communism demands. By comparison, North Viet Nam and North Korea expose the myth of supposing that Communism is a guaranteed solution to the problems presented by economic immaturity.

The achievement of Asian unity is a challenge. If affairs continue to deteriorate as at present we face the specter of another world war. Europe has been the source of past world wars; I hope Asia will never have this hateful privilege. Obviously all the Asian countries cannot come together now, but those which are sincere Asians at heart can respond to proper leadership when it appears. I feel that such leadership may well be provided by Japan.

We in Malaysia see our role as one of contributing to the stability of Southeast Asia through social and economic progress, by carrying out a policy of good will and coöperation and by firmly adhering to the free world and strongly supporting the United Nations. We shall continue doing everything we can to promote the cause of democracy and the achievement of peace.

The following is Part II of Tunku Abdul Rahman's article on  Malaysia: Key Area in Southeast Asia (Part 1) by Tunku Abdul Rahman which was written in 1965. Part I was posted at this link a few hours ago and Part III can be read HERE.

Malaysia: Key Area in Southeast Asia (Part 1I) by Tunku Abdul Rahman

Part II

In the past two years of Malaysian independence we have maintained and upheld the practice and principles of democracy. All Malaysians have come to feel they have a part to play and a responsibility to share in the national well-being. The reasons for our success can be found in the Malaysian Constitution, in which all the fundamental freedoms-such as equality, freedom of speech and freedom of association-are protected. One typical section of the Constitution reads, "All persons are equal before the law and are entitled to the equal protection of the law." Another states, "There shall be no discrimination against citizens on the grounds only of religion, race, descent or place of birth in any law." Although Islam is the official religion of Malaysia, every Malaysian has the right to practice the creed of his own choice.

The Constitution also provides for parity among the various racial groups. It was obviously necessary in the general interest to do away with economic and educational handicaps affecting the Malays and other indigenous peoples. By common consent, scholarships and opportunities were made more readily available to the indigenous peoples, the least advanced group economically, to provide an incentive for personal achievement. They were also given easier access into government service. Our aim to establish a system of parity, not only politically but economically, would leave no one out or unable to compete in the forward march of the new Malaysia. The omissions of the past have to be rectified in the cause of future progress.

An American magazine recently stated that Malaysia was a democracy in all respects save one, meaning the "special privileges for the Malays." I must point out that although the Constitution provides for a special position for the indigenous peoples at present, it also provides for periodic review of the position when necessary. Ultimately the time will come when it will be possible by legislative action to amend the Constitution because this special position will no longer be needed.

There are still some persons, however, who wish to upset this carefully planned system of ensuring that all races have a fair share in economic progress. They are out of touch with general feeling and reveal a sorry lack of understanding of the importance of good will and coöperation in a multiracial nation. It would be foolish, however, to hasten the day of revision of these constitutional rights prematurely; to do so would defeat the whole purpose of this particular aspect of our economic planning.

Any nation which is an association of states with a federal structure has problems between the central and state governments. One has only to look at the United States or Canada or Australia to realize that even after years of federation such problems do arise. Fortunately for Malaysia, our Constitution has drawn on the experience of other federated nations, and in addition the eleven states of the former Federation of Malaya had had six successful years of working under the federal system.

The Alliance Party is in power in all the states of Malaysia except Kelantan and Singapore. The Pan-Malayan Islamic Party is in control in Kelantan, and has been since 1959. For four years they showed reluctance to coöperate with the Federal Government, but in the past year or so they have come to realize that their state was falling behind in the general march of progress. Today they are coöperating closely with the Alliance Government and the results are already becoming evident.

The state of Singapore is under the control of another opposition group, the People's Action Party, led by its Premier, Mr. Lee Kuan Yew. Singapore has had no previous experience of working in a federal nation, and due to the fact of being the "New York" of Malaysia it probably feels that its position is far more important than that of the rest of Malaysia. Some of the state's leaders do not realize the great benefit Singapore is already enjoying as a result of being part of Malaysia, and are rather inclined to attribute the successes to themselves. They are quick to criticize the central government at every opportunity, principally because their own state government is run by an opposition party. This seems to arouse undue apprehension in the minds of some foreign observers, who shake their heads and talk pessimistically about the future of Malaysia. Oddly enough, some of these critics come from federal nations themselves. I myself have no doubt that as Singapore continues to make further progress in Malaysia and adapts itself more readily through experience and understanding of the coöperation necessary in a federal structure, these pangs of local pride and wishes for dominance will slowly pass away. Federation cannot work on the basis of only taking but not giving. The national interest must be the prime over-all concern. The progress of Singapore is important to Malaysia, but by the same token, the progress of Malaysia is equally vital to Singapore. I am confident that whatever little differences exist at present between the central government and the state government will work out satisfactorily.

Every developing nation has its problems, but few have tackled them more constructively than has Malaysia. Great developments have occurred in the rural sector of our economy. Industrialization is making rapid progress. New construction can be seen everywhere-roads, dams, schools, hospitals, universities, office buildings, national institutions, housing, mosques, churches and temples, and, most strikingly, new industrial estates. Development of electric power already exceeds requirements, with practical plans already being made for years ahead. New wharves are going up in the ports, new airports are being completed. Malaysia possesses one of the finest systems of telecommunications this side of Europe. In every field- industrial, commercial, agricultural, educational, social-striking progress is visible.

Malaysia has the second highest standard of living in the East, following only that of Japan. Its economy is sound and stable. Its foreign exchange and reserves total $1 billion. New investment, both local and foreign, is pouring in. Hardly a day goes by without the opening of some new factory or the announcement of some new company. The total volume of trade expands with every passing year. All these achievements are due to a healthy spirit of free enterprise and the successful working of our democracy owing to the tolerance, good will and efforts of our people of many racial origins.


Read Part III here.

I have the utmost respect for our first Prime Minister - Tunku Abdul Rahman Putra Al-Haj ibni Almarhum Sultan Abdul Hamid Halim Shah, AC, CH (February 8, 1903 – December 6, 1990) who was Chief Minister of the Federation of Malaya from 1955, and the country's first Prime Minister from independence in 1957. He remained as the Prime Minister after Sabah, Sarawak, and Singapore joined the federation in 1963 to form Malaysia. He is widely known simply as "Tunku" or "The Tunku" (a princely title in Malaysia) and also called Bapa Kemerdekaan (Father of Independence) or Bapa Malaysia (Father of Malaysia). You can read more about him at this link.

In the light of the recent furore over history - and what is or is not history, I thought I'd repost the following article written by Tunku Abdul Rahman in 1965. As it is a very long article, it will be published in three parts. Part 2 will be posted at 12 midnight and part 3 at 6.15a.m. tomorrow.

Malaysia: Key Area in Southeast Asia (Part 1) by Tunku Abdul Rahman

If one studies the map of Southeast Asia it is clear at once that Malaysia is the natural focus of the whole region. It is the only country that is both part of mainland Asia and at the same time part of the vast archipelago stretching westward from the Philippines and New Guinea to Sumatra. Thus Malaysia is not only a bridge between continental and island Asia but also the gateway between the China Sea and the Indian Ocean. By virtue of this position Malaysia is of vital importance to both Southeast Asia and the world. Add to this the fact that although Malaysia is a small nation of only 10,000,000 people, its economic significance is out of all proportion to its size and population. It is the world's leading producer of both natural rubber and tin. For this reason, if none other, the peace and prosperity, security and stability of Malaysia are of key concern both regionally and internationally.

To understand the evolution of Malaysia as a free nation and the spirit of national unity that inspires and guides the ideals and outlook of this country of many races, creeds and cultures, we must glance briefly at postwar history. The peoples of Malaya, Singapore and Borneo endured in common privation and suffering during the Japanese Occupation. When the war ended the nine states of mainland Malaya and Sarawak were British Protectorates; the islands of Singapore and Penang and the Malacca area were Crown Colonies; and North Borneo (as Sabah was then known) was the domain of a chartered company. Constitutional changes were inevitable, especially in view of the rising wave of liberation which began to sweep across Asia. Within three years the nine Malay states together with Penang and Malacca merged into the Federation of Malaya but still under the British rule. This was the first time in the history of the Malay peninsula that all these states had achieved a common central government. In the meantime, both Sabah and Sarawak became Crown Colonies, and Singapore began to take its first step towards internal self-government.

The Federation of Malaya Agreement was signed in February 1948 in Kuala Lumpur. Within four months the Malayan Communist Party launched an armed revolt to secure power. Communist terrorism erupted all over Malaya; the country came under a state of national Emergency, which was destined to last for another 12 years. Communist terrorism reached its climax in 1951 with the assassination of the British High Commissioner, Sir Henry Gurney. Field-Marshal Sir Gerald Templer who succeeded him managed to make considerable inroads into the Communist strength. Much, however, remained to be done, the situation being so dangerous that it seemed the Communists would be able to hold out indefinitely.

With the growth of nationalism the desire for independence had already developed in Malaya to such a pitch that unless this fervor was released and expressed in terms of democracy, Communism, with its strong anticolonial overtone, would triumph and all hopes for freedom and independence would be lost.

The British Colonial Secretary, Mr. Lennox Boyd, visited Kuala Lumpur in 1955. As leader of the Alliance Party, I had talks with him and informed him that no amount of British arms would by itself ever rid Malaya of the menace of Communism. The solution could not come about by military means alone; it was essential to win the minds and hearts of the people, to satisfy their aspirations, and thus draw them away from the enticements of Communism, which uses freedom and independence as its battle cry. The people of Malaya, I said, wanted independence for their own country; if this could be achieved, they would be responsible for the fight against Communism, and they would win. Any delay in achieving independence could only benefit the Communists, as Communism thrived and flourished on colonialism.

In order to test the genuineness of the people's aspirations for independence, I said, we must have national elections on the issue; and if the Alliance Party won, immediate negotiations would be carried out with the British Government for Malaya's independence. We swept to victory, winning 51 out of 52 seats contested, and I became the Chief Minister and Minister for Home Affairs.

The first important thing I did was to arrange a talk with the Communist leader, Chin Peng, which was held on December 28, 1955, The result of that talk showed clearly that the intention of the Communists was not to liberate Malaya but to subject it completely to Communist domination. Therefore I did not hesitate to tell the people that independence could be achieved only by them and through democratic means.

It is worthy of note that from the time negotiations for independence for Malaya were initiated, the support given by elements of the civilian population to the Communist terrorists rapidly began to decrease, with the result that the police and the security forces found their tasks of subduing the Communists made much easier. What had seemed to be overwhelmingly difficult for the British, the people of Malaya, inspired and encouraged by the prospect of independence, and later by its actual achievement, were able to accomplish. On July 31, 1960, the Emergency was declared over and ended. The Malayan people had now a free hand to concentrate their energies and resources on the task of nation-building.

While the Malayan people grew prosperous and happy with their nationhood, the fact could not be ignored that Communism remained the prime menace to the peace of Asia. We had successfully overcome the internal threat of Communism in Malaya, but we were only too well aware of its insidious growth in neighboring areas. I noticed particularly, with growing and grave concern, the increasing influence of Communism in the British territories of Singapore, Sabah, Brunei and Sarawak. The same pattern of Communist exploitation of anticolonial feelings that we had experienced in Malaya was taking place in those areas. I felt that time was running out, and that the Communist menace had to be swiftly met, otherwise free Malaya would once again be in danger. Therefore, in May 1961 first announced my hope that the formation of Malaysia would enable the peoples of these states to achieve the independence they desired and at the same time put an end to colonialism in their part of the world.

The announcement had electrifying results. For the next two years the prospect of Malaysia was a daily subject of debate and discussion, and during this time negotiations took place among leaders of all the states concerned and with the British. With the exception of Brunei, all the states of Malaya joined Singapore, Sabah and Sarawak in a conviction that Malaysia was their future destiny. The achievement of union in September 1963 was an outstanding testimony to the will and wish of the peoples of the new nation to stand united, to achieve progress and prosperity, and to resist together the Communist bid for power.

To be continued....

Many historians would probably not only have turned in their graves, but would have miraculously risen from the dead had they read Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad's statement here that said Malaysian history as currently taught in schools was inaccurate. The rationale he gave was that "it failed to provide proper context of the country’s fight for independence".

Having worked hard to achieve an A1 for my History @ MCE level, I feel deeply shocked that the former PM said:

“Many from the younger generation do not understand history and the origin of the nation, as there were attempts to alter historical facts into fantasy.”

What???

Born on 10th July 1925, TDM was Malaysia's longest serving Prime Minister having served 22 years from 1981 to 2003. With a political career that spanned almost 40 years, he never said anything about this, especially since he was Minister of Education from 1974-1978. If he truly has the welfare of the nation and the perspective of the 'younger generation' at heart, why did he keep quiet when he had the political platform to do it then? Why is he making such a serious allegation that puts many into a quandary with regards to their credibility and expertise after EIGHT YEARS of retirement? Did he only JUST see the 'light'? Why now?

Is TDM thus questioning the effectiveness of the Ministry of Education and all the past Ministers of Education including:

TDM himself who was Minister of Education 1974-1978 (Read this)
Y.B. Tan Sri Musa Bin Hitam (1978-1981)
Y.B. Tan Sri Amar Dr.Sulaiman Bin Hj.Daud (1981-1984)
Y.A.B. Dato Seri Abdullah Bin Hj.Ahmad Badawi (1984-1986)
Y.B. Dato' Seri Anwar Bin Ibrahim (1986-1991)
Y.B. Tan Sri Amar Dr.Sulaiman Bin Hj.Daud (1991-1995)
Y.A.B Dato' Sri Mohd. Najib Bin Tun Abdul Razak (1995-1999)
Y.B. Tan Sri Dato' Seri Musa Bin Mohammad (1999-2004)
Y.B. Dato' Sri Hishamuddin bin Tun Hussein (2004-2009)
Y.A.B Tan Sri Dato' Haji Muhyiddin bin Mohd Yassin (2009 - kini) (Source: This site)

With his latest outburst, he has practically rewritten history that we have learnt. It is His Story!

Does this mean famous historians, textbook writers, history majors in universities, teaching staff at universities/schools/colleges and higher institutions of learning including students, graduates etc have to UNLEARN everything that they have learnt/written or studied because this 'fantasy' was only highlighted NOW?

And it has taken Dr Mahathir THIRTY-SEVEN YEARS to highlight this 'fantasy' issue.

Who is the one living in a world of  'fantasy'  all this while?

The Malaysian Insider report also stated that "National Professors’ Council (MPN) has taken the debate further by claiming that Malaya, the precursor to Malaysia, was never colonised by the British Empire and had merely been a protectorate."

The report also stated that Higher Education Minister Datuk Seri Mohd Khaled Nordin said the current History syllabus in schools was in need of review. Why?

According to TDM, “The government needs to focus on what really transpired so that writings on the country's history would not be influenced by current political interests... History is all about what had happened, and we cannot change that... whatever happened in the past, had happened."

By that measure, is he questioning the credibility and veracity of the works of Frank Swettenham, Joginder Singh Jessy, DJ Tate, D.G.E. Hall and other notable historians who have written history books which have been the syllabus for Malaysian schools for decades?

The fact that the years after the Japanese surrendered, the British Military administration ruled Malaya proves that it was a British and not Malayan government. Whose face is on the following stamp? I rest my case.

So what is it that really needs to be changed? Change is IMPERATIVE! Let's make it happen at the next GE!!

Recommended reading:

1. "Britain is distorting history" - an excellent satirical piece by RPK that highlights the levity and ludicrousness of TDM's statement!

2. Dr Mahathir: History Subject in Schools Not Accurate

According to its official website, The Global Competitiveness Report 2011-2012 continues to stand out as one of the world's most comprehensive and respected assessment of countries' competitiveness. Produced in collaboration with leading academics and a global network of research institutes, the Report provides users with a comprehensive assessment of their strengths and weaknesses related to national competitiveness using the Global Competitiveness Index as the main methodology.

Apart from providing statistical data,  the index also features data from the Executive Opinion Survey carried out by the World Economic Forum. The 2011 Survey captures the perceptions of over 13,000 business leaders from the featured 142 economies.

The full version of the Report can be read online at THIS LINK.

This year, Switzerland tops the overall rankings in The Global Competitiveness Report 2011-2012. Singapore overtakes Sweden for second position. Northern and Western European countries dominate the top 10 with Sweden (3rd), Finland (4th), Germany (6th), the Netherlands (7th), Denmark (8th) and the United Kingdom (10th). Japan remains the second-ranked Asian economy at 9th place, despite falling three places since last year.

The statistics show that even though advanced economies have stagnated in competitiveness over the past seven years, the performance of many emerging markets has improved leading to more stable growth and in tandem with the shift in economic activity from advanced to emerging economies. Key findings from the report can be viewed HERE.

The latest Global Competitiveness Report this year shows that Malaysia has  improved  by five places among 183 countries.

Last year, Malaysia was in the 26th spot but now, it is in the 21st spot  having scored an overall 5.08 out of the maximum seven points for “improvements across the board”. Its previous score was 4.88.

In the area of financial market development, Malaysia is also ranked third among the world's economies - trailing behind Singapore and Hong Kong. In the  highly efficient goods market, Malaysia is in 15th place.

In the Asean region, Malaysia has been gauged as the second most competitive economy and sixth among Asia-Pacific economies.

The report also stated that Malaysia's progress had been particularly noteworthy under the forum's pillars on institutions and macroeconomics as well as in several measures of market efficiency.

If you scrutinize the report for the section on Malaysia (Section 2.1, page 248), the population of Malaysia is listed as 27.9 million with a GDP of USD238 billion and a per capita GDP of USD 8423.

According to the report, the most problematic factors for doing business include:

• Inefficient government bureaucracy
• Access to financing
• Restrictive labor regulations
• Corruption
• Inadequately educated workforce
• Policy instability
• Poor work ethic in national labor force
• Inadequate supply of infrastructure
• Inflation
• Foreign currency regulations
• Crime and theft
• Tax rates
• Government instability/coups
• Tax regulations
• Poor public health

The above results were from a survey whereby from a list of 15 factors, respondents were asked to select the five most problematic for doing business in their country and to rank them between 1 (most problematic) and 5. The bars in the figure show the responses weighted according to their rankings.

For Malaysia, significant findings I selected are as follows:

• public trust of politicians Position # 25/142
• Irregular payments and bribes Position # 43/142
• Judicial independence Position # 43/142
• Wastefulness of government spending Position 54/142

Malaysia's rankings in this report show that our government must improve its structures and practices as soon as possible to see how new networks and technologies can be leveraged to improve our performance and capacity to be more competitive.

Despite running a budget deficit of about five per cent of gross domestic product.Malaysia's macroeconomic situation has improved markedly over the past year to reach 29th place.

Whilst it may dream of becoming an innovation-driven country, Malaysia will need to improve its performance in education and technological adoption by both businesses and the population at large. Areas of need that can be see in the report would be in higher education and training (38th). Our country must improve access to education as the report showed low enrolment rates of 69 per cent (101st) and 36 per cent (66th) for secondary and tertiary education respectively.

It would be seriously myopic to just centre on the improved overall position to # 12. Despite whatever challenges, it is clear that the government must adapt to the many changing environments and evolve to be better than its neighbours.

Expectations are high but so far, even if there is KPI, performance is still below expectations. Greater value and output is needed in both the private and public sectors for maximum value and output.

For sure, there is a lot that needs to be done, especially in the fourth (Health and Primary education) and fifth pillar where there is plenty of room for improvement.

And who will take responsibility in making sure that our rankings for next year will be even better (without unnecessary expenditure on new organizations/bodies)?

The ninth of July has come and gone. Malaysians have been awed by the unexpected and unabashed display of courage in the face of challenges. Whilst some deny it was a success and even downplayed the figures and played up the roles of others, I believe the social networks and youtube videos speak nothing but the truth. True victory lies in inspiring courage in others too. Today, tens of thousands created history in their show of unity and dogged determination for clean and fair elections. The world has seen the outpouring of strength of character and fortitude of Malaysians who braved barriers, rain, tear gas and all kinds of hindrances to voice the cry from our hearts.

To all those who were there at the rally, thank you for being there for the rest of us who wanted to go but could not. Some of us were with you in spirit and in our hearts. Because of you and your outward show of courage, in being victorious, you have inspired us beyond imagination.

As for those of you who were there, your presence there has give us the hope and vanquished any doubt or feelings of defeat. You have encouraged us with your courage and and filled the hearts of many with the hope that TOGETHER, we will achieve something better.

Thank you all!!!

The sight of so many Malaysians who came together regardless of class, creed or color is one of the most beautiful moments in history. Walking hand in hand, running for cover with hearts entwined in one hope - simply magnificient.

Thank you all, brave Malaysians, who were there for the rally in Malaysia and in other parts of the world. Thank you for standing in solidarity with us.

That day will come soon - the day when we can see a better nation for all to have a place in the sun - to live, grow and thrive.

According to Benedict (Anderson, Benedict. 1991. Imagined Communities), a nation is defined as a group of people who share culture, ethnic origin and language, often possessing or seeking its own independent government. Some argue that a nation is different from a country in that a country is the land that belongs to a nation, and from a state in that a state we form the government of the nation and country.



There is a lot of dispute about nationality and race because some argue that we should regard ourselves as Malaysians rather than to our respective races if we truly want to bring the 1Malaysia concept to succeed for the sake of national unity and nation-building objectives. Nationality and race are two separate concepts. Nationality is the status of belonging to a particular nation, whether by birth or naturalization. According to Abizadeh, Arash (2001)in "Ethnicity, Race, and a Possible Humanity", race refers to the classification of humans into populations or groups based on various factors such as culture, language, social practice or heritable characteristics. As a biological term, race describes genetically divergent populations of humans that can be marked by common phenotypic and genotypic traits - categorizations which are often used in forensic anthropology analyzing skeletal remains, biomedical research, and race-based medicine as argued HERE.

Many researchers and experts such as the few who wrote "Conceptualizing human variation". in Nature Genetics race, however, has no official biological taxonomic significance — all humans belong to the same hominid subspecies, Homo sapiens sapiens. Nor is there scientific basis for any racial or ethnic hierarchy.

After 53 years of existence, are we more united than we were forty years ago/ thirty years ago, or when our country wass at the point of achieving independence or are we more divided?

Despite more than half a century, why are political parties still along communal lines?

That is something I cannot understand.

In the Barisan Nasional Coalition, despite whatever proclaimations made, the truth remains that the component parties are divided along racial/ethnic lines with a few exceptions. It is the same with Pakatan Rakyat.

When can we truly see beyond the color, class and creed of our fellow countrymen to truly live together in harmony in one nation?

It is most disheartening when we see political rhetoric about how much has been achieved. Yes, there has been some achievement but ultimately, we have to come up close and personal with the situation and acknowledge the situation and not runa way from reality.

It is saddening that even murders can be politicized, not forgetting police investigations. Educational institutions are not spared and even the entertainment industry has been indirectly embroiled because of one person. There have been so many episodes occurring of late that it leaves a very bad taste in our mouth.

On National Day this year, some how the gaiety was not really in the air. In the past, I could see many flags flying from the mast or from office buildings and homes. Cars could be seen sporting flags from their side mirrors etc.

And this year?

What about Malaysia Day this year? Official speeches that were reported in MSM showed how much some are not ready or willing to face the harsh reality of our sad scenario.

Many are hurting but there are those who have the 'ability' to say that all is well. Is it?

It has to come from the top. When politicians stop hitting out at each other or at other groups and start making concrete statements about where we are heading as a nation, perhaps then the ambiance might be different.

The time has come for youth of today to prepare themselves for leadership positions in the future. I cannot imagine what sort of nation this will be if we continue to sustain a status quo that is bent on accenting differences without a real passion from their heart for breeding unity and concrete steps to bring development to our country.

So much has to be done in many areas of our country but some leaders idea of national development is securing their seats or securing a bigger majority in the next GE. How many people are really interested in caring for the rakyat?

We have heard from both sides of the divide about how much they want to do for the people. Let's see more action, achievements and appraisals by the people for their accomplishments, if any. And it must go beyond dishing out $$ or organizing functions.

Some areas of concern would be:

*Education
*Environment
*Economy - endless needs here
*Elderly
*Ethnic Minorities and NCR issues
*Development of many rural areas in so many areas of concern
*Infrastructure
*Investments
*Security
*Level of Corruption
*Democratic Principles etc

Of late, there have been so many issues of differences which I do not want to list again. We can recite them with eyes closed and I am sure MANY Malaysians are sick and tired, some maybe even numbed by facts, figures, statements.

Nothing seems to shock us anymore.

One begins to question, what are our politicians doing? It is time they look less at their internal elections and more to the next GE (think PKR) and inter-party (too many to list) and intra-party conflicts (Gerakan). Truly, with such divisive chasms that are forcing many apart, the time has come to bring people together.

And it has to begin with trust.

We need people with ethics, integrity, drive and accountability. Tragically, those with such qualities are the targets of merciless attacks to bring them down. Please stop all this and think of the people, of this country.

So, are we a nation in every sense of the word? Can we truly say we are 1Malaysia? It's really up to the political leaders to set the mood for change for the better. And I hope they will do so as soon as possible.

I have a dream...of a better Malaysia and I hope idealistic as it may sound, I will see it within my lifetime - that there will be political parties in the future that offer candidates based on their qualities, qualifications, abilities and not on race- who will put Malaysians first.

What makes us a nation? What do you think are the hindrances in our way and how can these be overcome? Do leave a comment to share your views. Thanks. Have a pleasant evening.

Always, RAKYAT FIRST!

It took a passage of 47 years for Malaysia Day (September 16th) to get its due recognition. East Malaysians have been celebrating it more than those from the Peninsula because they achieved independence on that day. It was only in October last year when our PM announced that September 16 was to be a public holiday w.e.f. 2010.

Now why is it so important? Malaysia Day is held on September 16 every year to commemorate the establishment of the Malaysian federation on the same date in 1963.

According to Wikipedia:

It marked the joining together of Malaya, North Borneo, Sarawak, and Singapore to form Malaysia. The formation of the new federation was planned to occur on June 1, 1963, but was later postponed to August 31, 1963, in order to coincide with the sixth Hari Merdeka.

Several issues related to the Indonesian and the Filipino objection to the formation of Malaysia delayed the declaration to September 16 of the same year. The postponement was also done to allow the United Nations team time to conduct referendums in North Borneo (now Sabah) and Sarawak regarding the two states participation in a new federation.

The formation of Malaysia was made possible through the introduction of the Malaysia Bill to the Malayan Parliament on July 9, 1963, and consent from the Yang di-Pertuan Agong on August 29, 1963.

Prior to the formation of Malaysia, Singapore and North Borneo unilaterally declared independence from the United Kingdom on August 31, 1963, thus coinciding with the sixth anniversary of the Malayan independence.

I was still toddling around when that historical event occurred and it was only a few years later when I understood what it all meant, thanks to the patriotic songs that were played over RTM then.

G. Manimaran reported HERE that in an unprecedented move, Datuk Seri Najib Razak is taking two independent MPs to the United States next week, while ordering fellow Barisan Nasional (BN) lawmakers to stay behind and ensure all government bills are approved in the current parliamentary sitting.

I am sure many of you would have guessed who are the two lucky ones who are going on the trip. Yes! You are right! They are none other than former PKR lawmakers Bayan Baru MP Datuk Seri Zahrain Hashim and Kulim-Bandar Baharu MP Zulkifli Noordin. Information Minsiter Datuk Seri Rais Yatim and Malaysian ambassador to the US, Datuk Seri Jamaluddin Jarjis will also be in the team. Rais is deputising for Foreign Minister Datuk Seri Anifah Aman.

They will be in Washington as part of the Malaysia-United States Caucus to be launched by the PM next Wednesday. The prime minister is scheduled to meet US President Barack Obama at the sidelines of a nuclear non-proliferation convention while in Washington.

Such a move shows that our PM is taking a very cautious move as he experienced the near-defeat of the Budget 2010 proposals last December in the Dewan Rakyat where BN holds a simple majority of 137 MPs over Pakatan Rakyat’s (PR) 78 lawmakers.

Apparently, some were initially on the Washington trip but have been instructed to stay back and attend Parliament daily. Interestingly, due to strong BN attendance in Parliament yesterday, the BN defeated a surprise PR motion to refer Pasir Salak MP Datuk Tajuddin Abdul Rahman to the Rights and Privileges Committee after he claimed DAP secretary-general and Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng had sold state secrets to Singapore.

In a twist, BN used its superior numbers to refer Pokok Sena MP Datuk Mahfuz Omar to the same committee for linking Umno to the government’s public relations consultancy APCO — which PR de facto leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim had linked to a former Israeli regime.

According to The Malaysian Insider, "the highly-charged parliamentary sitting has forced BN to ensure that all its MPs, including veterans such as former prime minister Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, Tan Sri Rafidah Aziz and Tan Sri Syed Hamid Albar, turn up for crucial votes to approve all government bills and supplementary supply bills."

This morning, thestar announced today that Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak announced that the Hulu Selangor parliamentary by-election will be contested by the MIC because the seat belonged to the party.

Excerpt from the report:

However, he said that as Barisan Nasional chairman, he retained the right to decide who the candidate should be “because I want the coalition to win.”

He said camaraderie among Barisan component parties was upheld in determining which party should contest the by-election on April 25, adding that Umno, MCA, Gerakan, PPP and other Barisan component parties would give their full backing to the chosen candidate.

“If we lose, it’s not the MIC that loses but the Barisan. If we win, both the MIC and Barisan win,’’ the Prime Minister told the Selangor Barisan Nasional convention here yesterday....

“As chairman of Selangor BN and the Selangor Umno liaison committee, I have to ensure that the Barisan wins in Hulu Selangor,” he declared.

Najib said he believed the rejection of the Barisan in Selangor at the 2008 general election was only temporary .

“It was not that the people preferred the Opposition but they wanted the Barisan to change,’’ he said adding that the Hulu Selangor by-election provided a platform for Barisan to regain its position in the state.

Clearly, the outlook is more exciting for all parties concerned as our PM means serious business. So what will happen next? Your guess is as good as mine.

Do leave a comment to share your thoughts/views. Thanks. As always, here's wishing you a wonderful day!

I wonder why DSAI seems to be throwing caution to the wind in the way he is challenging the Parliament to suspend him. I appreciate his gung-ho and courageous attitude but I do worry what will happen in the event that he IS really suspended. Things are heating up and PR certainly cannot afford further dents in its image or line of defense.



Consider the following exerpt from The Malaysian Insider HERE:

In a fiery speech at Kampung Sungai Tengi here last night, the Permatang Pauh MP continued his attack on the government’s purported link to Israel through international public relations firm APCO, adding that aside from outright denial, Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak had never answered to the allegations.

“These are same people who govern us, who preach to us that the rights of the Malays and the Muslims must be protected. Najib is not brave enough to answer to this.

“I am willing to volunteer myself — you continue to support Israel, you suspend me from Parliament. Suspend me, three months, six months, a year, I do not know.

“God willing, let the people decide for themselves,” he said.

Anwar condemned the BN administration for its willingness to seek advice from a company linked to “the murder of the Muslims in Palestine”.

“Apco is led by these people and Najib is seeking advice from them.

“I revealed the names of APCO’s leaders but they claimed I was wrong.

“I showed the agreement signed between Apco and Israel and still they denied.

“These people are advising Najib on strategic communication, on reform initiatives, on his New Economic Model, his education policies — all this, Apco carries out,” he continued. CLICK HERE to read more.

In another report by Malaysiakini HERE:

The federal government has confirmed that the Dewan Rakyat speaker has been notified that it intends to table a motion to refer Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim to the Rights and Privileges Committee.

"I have delivered the notice (to the speaker), just now," Minister in the Prime Minister's department Nazri Abdul Aziz (left), told reporters this morning.

He said if found guilty, the committee can either recommend that Anwar be given a warning or face suspension.

Nazri said the government will table the motion on April 22, which is incidently the last day of the Dewan Rakyat sitting and three days before the Hulu Selangor by-election, in which Anwar's PKR would be participating in.

In response to this, Anwar on March 30 produced documents to the Dewan Rakyat which allegedly proved the Apco-Israel-Malaysia link but failed to impress Nazri.

In a related development, Batu MP Tian Chua submmited a notice to the Speaker to state that he would table a motion urging the federal government to terminate Apco's services.

"I move that the Malaysian Parliament urge the government to immediately rescind its agreement with Apco Worldwide Sdn Bhd and stop all cooperation with it, for it is a threat to national security and infringes upon our sovereignty," read the notice.

CLICK HERE to read more.

I certainly hope that DSAI will not pay the price for speaking up. Another report HERE says that he is scared. Is he?

Whatever the case, recent events seem to indicate that the other side is stepping up efforts to improve its image in view of the imminent Hulu Selangor by-election. There is a lot of public relations strategy going on as can be seen by today's headlines for some newspaper stories such as:

Hisham concerned about security for by-election - the first paragraph itself has contradictions

Lies against 1Malaysia due to greater acceptance : PM

Najib the transformer - This headline could have a double entendre :-)

Raise productivity for better wages, civil servants told

And the list goes on.

As always, I hope that PR will reconsider it public relations & communication strategy so that it does not face any backlash.

If not, it seems that the other side may be getting closer and closer....

When in fact, PR hopes to move closer and closer to Putrajaya. At this point of time, they cannot afford any slip-ups or hiccups now! In the words of Elvis, it's now or never!

Do leave a comment to share your thoughts or views. My apologies for this late post cos I was shopping for a new template and have just given my other blog Motion of my Thoughts a makeover. Check it out if you have time! Thanks. Have a great day!
___________________