Archive for the ‘UMNO’ Category

Mathematics, Malaysian-style

June 28, 2007

From a Malaysian… 

Mathematics, Malaysian-style

I find it most alarming that Malaysian schools teach our children the
wrong things. I mean: can the children really apply what they are
taught in school later in life? For example, can you imagine a mathematics
question in a recent examination as follows?
“If an egg costs fifty Sen, and if you buy one-eighth of the egg, how
much would you have to pay?”
 Who in heaven’s name will want to buy one-eighth of an egg? The shopkeeper will probably think you are crazy and he will be equally stupid to break the egg and measure one-eighth for you. Yet, this is how they structure the questions in Malaysian schools. Why not pose questions that would be more useful later in life when you go out into the world to earn your living?To help Malaysia’s Ministry of Education bet to face the realities of life, we are suggesting some questions they could use in our classrooms. QUESTION 1

If you drive from Kuala Lumpur to Penang along the PLUS Highway and there are four speed traps along the way, and if each speed trap would cost you RM300.00 in fines, how much in fines would you accumulate by the time you reach Penang?

ANSWER (Choose one)

1. I would not suffer any fines as the oncoming cars would flash their headlights and I would slow down before coming to the speed trap. 2. I would only need to pay a total of RM80.00 as I would pay a RM20.00 bribe at each speed trap.
3. I would not be stopped as I am an UMNO Wakil Rakyat so I am exempted from speed traps.
QUESTION 2If your Bumiputera company is awarded a RM150 million government contract, and you make a 20% profit, how much profit would be at the end of the contract period?

ANSWER (Choose one)

1. I will not be making a 20% profit as I would have to pay the Minister 10% and UMNO 5%.
2. I would make 30% profit, which is the progress payment I receive,
after which I will abandon the project and let the government call for
 a re-tender.
3. My company will not make any profit at all as I will siphon out all
the profits and show a loss to avoid paying corporate tax.


If the ruling party obtained 54% of the popular votes the last
election and won 151 or 80% of the seats, and if it saw an increase of
10% in votes this election, how many more seats would it gain?

ANSWER (Choose one)

1. The ruling party will not show a 10% increase in votes, as it will  stuff the ballot box with another 20% to give it a 30% vote increase.
2. The ruling party will win all the newly created seats in the delineation exercise recently done.
3. The ruling party has already decided it will win 90% of the seats and the votes have nothing to do with it.


If the national petroleum company, Petronas, pays a 5% royalty to
Terengganu State and if the amount paid is RM800,000,000 per year,
how much should Petronas have in the bank accumulated over the last 25

ANSWER (Choose one)

1. Nobody is supposed to know as Petronas need not show its accounts to
anyone except the Prime Minister and this information comes under the Official Secrets Act.
2. Petronas earns only 50% of its petroleum revenue from Terengganu so
Petronas’ total income accumulated in the banks over 25 years should be
RM800 billion.
3. Petronas has nothing accumulated in the bank as all the money has
spent bailing out companies and finance mega projects.


No charges against ‘racist’ Umno delegates

June 28, 2007
07年6月28日 傍晚7:09 Malaysiakini











巫统管理委员会曾经针对此事,传召3名代表问话,即巫青团执委阿兹米达因(Azimi Daim)、玻璃市州代表哈欣苏布(Hashim Subuh)和马六甲代表哈斯诺(Hasnoor Sidang Husin)调查。









‘Racist’ Umno delegates not charged
Bede Hong
Jun 28, 07 6:43pm
No Umno member has yet to be brought to court as a result of making racist speeches at the ruling party’s general assembly meeting last November.In a written reply to Karpal Singh (DAP – Bukit Gelugor), Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Nazri Aziz said decision to charge was the Attorney-General’s (AG) prerogative.A total of five police reports were received by the police on speeches by several delegates that were alleged to contain seditious elements.Nazri reported that the police have investigated the matter under Section 4(1)(b) of the Sedition Act.

“The investigation has been completed by the police and its findings have been submitted to the Attorney-General for consideration,” he said.

Nazri added that the decision to charge or otherwise is made solely be the AG.

“There is no interference by the Prime Minister (Abdullah Ahmad Badawi),” he added.

‘Bathe in blood’

The annual general meeting, which was telecast live, saw several prominent delegates being accused of racism after they declared that Umno members would ‘bathe in blood’ to defend Malay interest.

“Umno is willing to risk lives and bathe in blood in defence of race and religion,” Malacca delegate Hasnoor Sidang Hussein had told some 3,000 delegates during the gathering.

“Please don’t test the Malays; they know amok. We don’t want to reach that level,” said another delegate Mohamed Rahmat.

In response, the Opposition had called for the AG to charge the speakers for making seditious remarks.

Later, Deputy Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak said BN components should not overact, saying the speakers were inexperienced when debating sensitive racial issues.

Nazri’s behavior pathetic and roudy:Positive thinking doctor

June 26, 2007

Dear Malaysian,


I refer to the debate in parliament between Minister in the Prime Minister’s department Nazri and YB Lim Kit Siang on the subject of corruption. 


I had the occasion of sighting the video clip of this debate and to my dismay and disbelief  I found the Minister’s behaviour and performance absolutely pathetic and roudy as if he was in the company of some disorderly school children. This was how he addressed the members of the Yang Berhormats from the opposition party in Parliament.  He called them Ai! Ai! Rambut puteh! Rambut puteh!Bodoh! Bodoh! Bodoh! My college children had the misfortune of seeing the video clip and they themselves were shocked and asked me if this is how MP’s behave and act in parliament.


Now, Nazri, you must listen to me now and here. You have brought absolute ridicule to the Malaysian Parliament. You behaved as if you were a thug representing a group of unruly gangsters. To begin with, where are your manners? You called YB Lim Kit Siang ‘ bodoh bodoh bodoh,’ etc. Is that how you show respect to a senior, both in terms of age and someone who is one of the senior most politicians in Parliament ? Remember, he is also the head of the opposition in the Malaysian parliament.

Doesn’t that mean anything to you? 

Next, is that how you address Yang Berhormats in Parliament by calling them ‘rambut puteh’ and Ai! Ai! Ai! I call you ‘kurang ajar’ totally unfit to occupy the august house of the Malaysian Parliament. I feel sorry for you but you certainly reflect that of someone who is a badly brought up child either in your own home or in your school. Perhaps your teachers have failed to give you any moral training. 


I cannot imagine the taxes I pay is being used to maintain characters like you. Frankly, you were merely throwing tantrums around in the august House and to all the other elected law makers in the country and forgive me for my language but you appeared to me as if you were just admitted to the psychiatric ward with a mental disturbance with your laughter and giggles while debating.  You were not debating but you were merely yelling   You  kept saying ‘ikut pandangan saya’ there is no corruption. Your debate had no substance nor any form of logic to back your arguments. Is this how you participate in a debate? 

Secondary school children from  an average  school  in Malaysia can do better than you. I for one would not give you even 1 out of 10 in the form of markings.


What irritates me even further is that I have been told you are a law graduate. If that is so the case then I wonder what training you received in law school. It certainly does speak badly of your alma mater. If this is how you perform in court as a lawyer then I doubt you can win even a single case in court.


May I now ask you this. Is it your failure in your legal profession that prompted you to take a shot in politics? My God! Miss Molly! You seem to be wrecking this profession too. The profession of politics !! Remember, the profession of politics just like any other must be treated with decorum and decency. If the people that make up the profession acts with impunity, bad behaviour and devoid of any sensible and rational thinking then the profession would soon be dumped as a piece of rubbish. Then I would not want my money to be used to maintain such rubbish.


Now, I do not know whether you have reached a point of ‘beyond redemption’. This is for you to answer.


Having said what I wanted to say, but the responsibility now definitely rests in the hands of the Prime Minister. The PM must take the bull by the horns and carefully select every potential candidate to stand for elections. He must make a check list for himself. Every candidate must be fully scrutinized for his character of conduct, educational background, intellectual  excellence, family background, value for human dignity,  good mannerisms, innate desire to serve the public, plural racial spirit, and of course the ability to understand the complexities of legal enactments. They must be made subject to strict code of ethics in Parliament whether from the ruling party or from the opposition. There should be no room for prejudice or favouritism.


Finally, the Speaker of the Parliament session must be someone who can maintain the decency and respect in the conduct of the parliament debates.


Positive thinking doctor

You behaved as if you were a thug representing a group of unruly GANGSTERS.

Next, is that how you address Yang Berhormats in Parliament by calling them ‘rambut puteh’ and Ai! Ai! Ai! I call you ‘kurang ajar’ totally unfit to occupy the august house of the Malaysian Parliament.

This is not the first time he did something like that. This is what we call the “Stupid! Stupid! Stupid!” incident.

Recognise his face first. Recognise the Man of “Many Calls”.

Picture link:…

Remember these?
1) The “Racist! Racist! Racist!” incident.

3 links:………

2) The “Jantan” incident


I think if Nazri is “Jantan” he should fire Dr M instead of the other way round since it is Nazri himself who is not pleased.

3) The “Amok” incident.

Link: http://www.westernresistanc…

The only thing he hasn’t done is to lift up the keris, wave it around while repeating the words from item 1 to 3 plus the word “Stupid! Stupid! Stupid!”

Has anyone seen Monty Python?



Razak’s role in May 13 questioned by Tunku

June 16, 2007
How many of us agree with Najib’s assessment of his late father? I do not agree. Razak was not loyal to Tunku. His role in May 13 was highly questionable. Many believed Harun was taking the cues from him.

‘He lived and died for the people’

Bede Hong
Jun 15, 07 6:52pm

Two months shy of Malaysia’s golden anniversary, Umno decides to honour the late Tun Abdul Razak in a lavish seminar at the Sime Darby convention centre in Kuala Lumpur today.

The country’s second prime minister was described as a “loyal man” who did not turn dictator when he could.

His son, and present deputy prime minister, Najib Abdul Razak, said his father was the inspiration to public service.

“He is the main source of my motivation to work hard for the people,” he told an audience of 200 Umno members and academicians.

“As stationery was hard to come by then, he used to learn mathematics by doing the problems on the sand,” added the deputy premier, who described his father as a hard worker who performed well academically.

Razak, who died in 1976 after serving as prime minister for two terms, attended the Kuala Kangsar Malay College and Raffles College in Singapore. He later completed his law degree in Lincon’s Inn in London.

Najib quoted former economic planning unit director Thong Yaw Hong as saying that his father had “lived and died for the people.”

He also quoted Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi as saying to him, “You are his biological son but I’m his political son.”

Not power crazy

“Tun could have continued running (Majlis Gerakan Negara) Mageran for as long as he wished. But he was not power crazy,” said Najib.

After the 1969 riots, Razak had chaired the National Operations Council and the country’s de-facto administrative body (Mageran). The country was in a state of emergency until 1971.

“There are many examples around the world where there are leaders whose total power is unquestioned, where leaders try to hold on to that power.

“However, Tun regarded the Mageran directorship as a heavy responsibility. He believed in the principles of democracy and did not want to be regarded as a dictator. That is why Tun returned administration of the country to the people and parliamentary democracy,” said Najib.

“Although Tun was regarded as someone who could take over the leadership from Tunku (Abdul Rahman) earlier, on the urging of some parties, he remained a loyal person.

“He said, ‘I would never allow myself to do this. This is not the Malay way. If we are the second man, we have to play our role as the second man,” he said.

Ill intentions

Najib also listed out the social institutions and agencies his father had created: Felda, Petronas, Mara, Tabung Haji, Mida, MIDF, MISC, Fama, Pernas, UDA, LPN, LPP, Felcra, Risda, Bank Bumiputera, Bank Pertanian, UKM, ITM, Bernama, the Islamic Centre, the Bumiputera Economic Congress and the state development body.

Razak also created the Rukun Negara which spells out the social contract for Malaysians, which includes the protection of the special rights of the Malays.

He also helped draft the New Economic Policy (NEP), a race-based affirmative action that sought to raise rural Malays out of poverty.

Also present at the seminar were Umno Youth chief Hishammuddin Hussein and his deputy Khairy Jamaluddin.

In his speech, Khairy attacked the detractors of Barisan Nasional (BN).

“Now there are some people in society that are too clever, they think BN is not relevant anymore because it was created by ethnic-based political parties. Some of them aspire to distort history, to review dark parts of history, that we try to forget.

“They don’t have any basis for their allegations and they have ill intentions. They want to point fingers and put responsibilities on innocent parties,” he said.

May 13 and a comment by Dr Collin Abraham

May 30, 2007
“Within two days the membership of the Council was announced but perhaps one of the greatest political tactical errors was the MCA’s decision not to accept any cabinet posts. While it was understandable that the party should abdicate from its traditional partnership with Umno in the Alliance, (because of the massive defeat of its candidates in the general election), withdrawal meant that Umno had a free hand to push ahead the bumiputera position in the New Economic Policy without Chinese opposition.” Dr Collin Abraham

 May 13 and beyond (Pt 1)

Dr Collin Abraham
May 28, 07 12:06pm
The May 13th race riots cannot be understood as an isolated event but as the cumulative convergence of historically determined disruptive political and social forces that were perpetuated and developed over a period of time.These involved contributory and precipitating causes that have to do with the acquisition, discrimination and abuse of political power, and which came to a head in the post-independence period.Indeed, in place of nation-building efforts, there was already the breakdown of law and order in Kuala Lumpur, such that May 13th itself has even been described at least by one observer as a “blessing in disguise” because it finally resulted in the lawless situation in Kuala Lumpur being brought under control. (Raja Petra: Malaysia Today, April 9, 2007). 

The contributory causes need to be recognised. First, the root cause can be traced to the Federation of Malaya Agreement itself, the first piece of post-war legislation promulgated by the British colonial government which failed to provide any semblance of political stability because the constitutional status of the different racial groups was not negotiated in consultation with the legitimate representatives of the respective communities.

The innate characteristic of powerlessness was thereby initiated and allowed to be perpetuated right into the post-colonial period. The two groups most representative of the Malays, the Nationalist Party and the Islamic factions walked out of Umno and the Communist Party of Malaya (CPM) which was the only party with predominant Chinese membership (that collaborated with the British in Force 136) was not invited to participate in the negotiations. Therefore it was the elitist Umno members’ interests that were promoted in the Agreement which was unrealistically (and of course conveniently) considered by the British as representing the Malay community as a whole.

But this was an erroneous perspective. The Malay rakyat that had hitherto been politically dormant under the feudal system in the pre-colonial period had become strongly nationalistic, first because of the defeat of the British by the Japanese and then by the promise the latter to give the Malays political independence. It an be asserted that it was this nationalistic fervour, and not Umno membership as such, that enabled the mass protest against the Malayan Union proposals. Indeed it can also be argued that it was this same national consciousness that forced the resignation of Onn Jaafar when he proposed opening Umno membership to non-Malays.

The possibility of losing political power to the Chinese was the other main concern of the rakyat which was also the fear of the Malay elite, but there was the other additional reason that the latter feared the Chinese were likely to encroach on their economic interests ( with British backing). But at the same time the elite groups also needed the Malay grassroots for political support to politically keep the Chinese at bay.

Therefore it would not be difficult in the situation of the victory parade after the 1969 general election where Chinese opposition parties were claiming to have defeated the Alliance and would “take over the government” for both groups to react fiercely particularly because the threat of the Chinese taking political power seemed to be becoming a reality.

Malay case

It must be emphasised that this nationalist consciousness could be expected to have become reinforced and heightened by the fact the Malay working class, the peasantry, other low income groups as well as the lower middle class had yet to see any appreciable improvement in their social life since Merdeka, and yet the Chinese immigrants were now threatening to take over the government.

The call for the Malay youth therefore to attend the post-election rally, also from other parts of the country as well, was also intended as a demonstration against Umno leadership itself for allowing this static economic situation to continue. Therefore it would be expected that the gathering at the home of the Selangor Mentri Besar would also have included representatives of lower-middle class Malays as well as others acting as youth leaders.

A defining question in the collaboration and first coming together of Umno and MCA in the Alliance party to contest the KL municipal elections is nothing more than a case of false consciousness. It needs to be strongly emphasised that this so-called political accommodation was essentially a ‘fluke’ shot in the political arena. It was totally devoid of any notions of political theory or ideology. But it was conveniently accepted as a sufficient condition to work for political independence because it was intended to maintain the status quo and therefore serve the common interests of the British, the Malay ruling class, and the Chinese business class.

The Alliance party therefore ensured that the unequal and discriminatory colonial social structure was maintained at the expense of egalitarian policies for Malay rakyat and the Chinese working classes. Put simply it was a case of ‘each man for himself and God for all’ and it follows that the election process that offered the only known hope of effecting a change to bring about a more caring society for all had become a farce.

Chinese case

The situation of the working class Chinese community was also one of a continuous struggle to survive. Emerging from what is perhaps the most exploitative system of indentured labour in Malaya recorded in documentary evidence as the ‘pig trade’ and subjected to ‘vice’ items to earn revenue by the colonial government through opium, alcohol, gambling and prostitution, a small proportion managed to set them selves up as independent workers in the tin industry and related occupations subsequently. But with increasing population and denied access to land they turned to wage employment and pressed for better working conditions through trades unions. However because the unions had the support of the CPM they were suppressed and declared illegal. Moreover because of this and the lack of jobs for the Chinese educated many joined the CPM because they had to fight to survive.

What the Chinese lacked most was political power. Persuaded by the colonial government, their businessmen organised themselves to protect their economic interests, so from its very inception the MCA was a political party representing the towkay class. It is important to recognise that while the fledging party could have worked to build up the party and provide political and economic support for the Chinese community as a whole, the leaders instead chose to forge links with the Malay ruling class and thereby develop mutually beneficial interests as a class.

The Chinese providing the economic support to the Alliance Party through the provision of huge funds for election purposes and economic representation in their larger business consortiums for the Umno elite, and in return seeking political legitimacy through representation of more parliamentary seats of the Alliance party. Their indifference to the Chinese community is evidenced by one of the most ‘outrageous’ scenarios of MCA indifference in the failure to present the Chinese Memorandum to the British Government at the Mederka Conference to demand a place in the independent Malaya. The Chinese interests therefore were not presented to the British government. Instead according to a statement attributed to Tunku Abdul Rahman the Memorandum was thrown into the wastepaper basket!

What this means is that literally the ‘mass’ of Chinese were automatically alienated from the political process from Day 1 and therefore sought political representation through opposition parties such as the Labour Front and the DAP. In fact it can be argued that in effect the reduction of political power of the Alliance in the 1969 election was because of the rejection of MCA candidates by the Chinese. Because the opposition parties were ‘outside’ the normal conservative value system of being subservient to the political status quo as in the MCA the Chinese members were therefore free to express political dissent with regard to their marginalised political status with a minimum of restraint in the opposition parties

To add to this was the confidence they had gained from the entry of the Peoples’ Action Party (PAP) of Singapore into the Malaysian political arena. The demand by PAP leader Lee Kuan Yew for a Malaysian Malaysia provided added emphasis to these Chinese to back the opposition parties with confidence and a sense of legitimacy. To them, Malaya belonged to all and as Malays are not necessarily the only indigenous community, they must necessarily accept the Chinese as equals in a power-sharing government.

1969 general election

On the eve of the 1969 polls and against this background there was the question of granting a police permit for a large funeral procession to go through the town centre for an opposition party (Labour Party) member who had been shot by the police. There are some conflicting accounts about the decision to grant this permit. Tunku Abdul Rahman told me that he was against a permit being issued because of the highly charged political climate.

But according to the Tunku the permit was finally issued by Abdul Razak Hussein (photo) when the latter was acting prime minister (after the Tunku had returned to his home town in Kedah for the weekend).Apparently pressure by Dr David Tan of the Labour Party convinced Razak that there was no legitimate reason why a permit should be withheld.

In one of the two long interviews I had with Tunku Abdul Rahman in Penang, (while 1 was teaching a race relations course at USM), the Tunku attached great importance to the funeral procession that was held on the eve of the general election. It was his strongly held view that this funeral procession sowed the seeds for the May 13th riots. The shooting of a Chinese opposition party member by a Malay policeman just days before the election, and the funeral procession being allowed to go through the KL town centre was, to the Tunku, a recipe for trouble.

According to the Tunku however, the decision to overrule him and grant the permit also had a personal dimension. He explained that while he was aware of a move by certain Umno leadership for him to step down as prime minister, no one had actually approached him to do so. He therefore felt that the permit approval against his earlier decision amounted to open criticism that he was no longer in touch with reality and should therefore resign.

There was also increasing concern among the Umno leadership at this time that certain MCA officials (and some Chinese businessmen as well) were moving in the inner circles among the Tunku’s close associates. Although it was agreed that this was purely in his private capacity it might nonetheless compromise the Tunku’s position as prime minister.

Read Part 2 here.

May 13 and beyond (Pt 2)
Dr Collin Abraham
May 29, 07 11:29am
It is clear that the 1969 election results and victory parade were the two main precipitating factors leading to the race riots. It must be recognised at the outset that these were distinctly separate events and it is important to distinguish between the two.In fact because the resulting race riots were the direct outcome of the aftermath of the victory parade itself, they will not be taken up for analysis here except to reiterate that the level of racial insults and threats to continued Malay government seen during the election campaign had in fact become too extreme even to mention.

The years of being in the political wilderness, and the expected revolution of rising expectations resulting in the revolution of rising frustrations, had taken their toll. 

Once the spark of the fuse had been lit all hell broke loose and the only steps that could be taken were to try to bring the law and order situation back under control. For example at the height of the riots, Ismail Mohd Ali recorded that Abdul Razak Hussein (photo) wanted to drive down to the epicentre in his official car and directly call on the rioters to stop the bloodshed. Ismail’s response to Razak was simple and effective: “They will probably tear you to pieces.”

(It might not be out of place to seek a word of clarification as to whether the riots could be strictly termed as ‘race’ riots. Had they really been so, they would have spread to rural areas as well and Chinese shopkeepers and others in small-scale business scattered around the kampongs would have been massacred.)

In retrospect, the 1969 election campaign itself was the writing on the wall that there could be some racial trouble because of the strong ‘anti-racial’ tone of the entire campaign that according to Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah also extended to the candidates from PAS and Umno itself. And yet there were no attempts either by the Alliance government or the police to take pre-emptive steps to maintain law and order.

Undue delay

Even when the election results showed that the Umno-dominated Alliance had in fact suffered a major setback when it lost the two-thirds parliamentary majority that it had enjoyed since the inception of democracy, there seemed a lack of preparedness for any likely adverse outcomes.

Indeed, even with the opposition’s victory celebrations over the gain of Penang and Kelantan and when Perak and Selangor were on the brink of falling into their hands, and with Chinese and Indian demonstrators calling on the Malays to quit Kuala Lumpur, leaving the seat of government to the opposition, there is little evidence of police preparedness to face a deteriorating law and order situation.

The seriousness of the situation might be gauged from the following statement: “For the first 24 hour period, sections of the police force simply became demoralised due to the impact of widespread violence and the regular police forces are a key element in maintaining any long range security in this country.” (17th May 1969, Confidential to FCO, cited in Kua Kia Soong, May 13th p50)

As regards the tragic aftermath of the riots in terms of the deaths, casualties and untold suffering and misery of the victims there is little doubt that it was worse because of the undue delay on the part of the authorities to deal with the situation. The fact was that the political leaders were caught by surprise and hence even after three days of rioting there was still no directive from the government to the army to move in to control the situation. Neither were the army chiefs of staff able to initiate action on their own volition.

Indeed, in an informal discussion with one of the generals summoned by Razak and questioned as to why the army was failing to take prompt action, he was astonished to be told that the army was waiting for instructions!

It would seem very strange that such senior military officers who would have probably have been trained overseas including top British military institutions failed to grasp the seriousness of the law and order situation and to have acted accordingly. When I probed the matter further, the general‘s response was that the army was waiting for the police to withdraw from the scene so that it could be free to take such action it thought fit. It was only after Razak signed a directive that the army finally moved in.

There is no question therefore that the earlier colonial government, and the entire Alliance government should be held accountable for this tragic situation where ordinary law-abiding men, women and children were hounded like animals and died like dogs in the streets through no fault of their own.

It can be seen from the above analysis that the entire elite ruling class of both races were more concerned about maintaining their cosy neo-colonial status quo after independence while being themselves protected by the Anglo-Malaysian defence treaty against foreign aggression. This is all the more incriminating considering that that in my recent book I argued that neither Umno nor the MCA had a popular mandate to take over the Government from the British at the time of independence. (‘The Finest Hour”)

MCA pullout

The question of the establishment of the National Operations Council (NOC) must also be recognised. Whatever else may be said about the usurpation of democratic powers by the military it must nonetheless be conceded that the law and order had been brought under control and the political situation was in hand.

Particularly to those with first-hand experience of the lawlessness in parts of KL controlled by gangsters and secret societies prior to the elections, and especially to those who saw their relatives being suddenly massacred and they themselves severely injured or being forced to become refugees, the NOC might be said to be a blessing in disguise.

Within two days the membership of the Council was announced but perhaps one of the greatest political tactical errors was the MCA’s decision not to accept any cabinet posts. While it was understandable that the party should abdicate from its traditional partnership with Umno in the Alliance, (because of the massive defeat of its candidates in the general election), withdrawal meant that Umno had a free hand to push ahead the bumiputera position in the New Economic Policy without Chinese opposition.

But the fact remains that while there was no policy to enhance a multiracial society under colonialism, indeed policies such as divide and rule were designed to ensure that integration did not take place. But even after Independence the continuation of political parties based on race essentially perpetuated the divisiveness of society along racial lines rather than to work towards integration.

It should be clear to readers therefore that our entire society in on a fault line and therefore we have no option but to get off it as soon as possible. With respect, it happens that both my recent books ‘The Naked Social Order’ and ‘The Finest Hour’ provide discussion and analysis on these vital questions and it is my considered opinion therefore that we need to reject the post-colonial social structure in its entirety once and for all and to seek an alternative model if we are to avoid racial conflicts in the future.

Westports questionable land deal: Chan Kong Choy must explain

May 29, 2007
Is buying land with public fund at a price more than double  the market value a crime?

Transport Minister Chan Kong Choy must explain. Others who must also explain incl former Transport Minister Ling Liong Sik, the two former PKA chairman Ting Chew Beh and Yap Pian Hon and Umno Sementa state assemblyman Rahman Palil and Westports chairman Gnalingam.


■日期/May 28, 2007   ■时间/08:10:43 pm
■新闻/家国风云   ■作者/merdekareview 陈慧思
【本刊陈慧思撰述】自2006年投入运作迄今,雪兰莪州巴生的马来西亚西港私人有限公司(Westports Malaysia Sdn. Bhd,简称“西港公司”)负债近马币十亿元。在该公司执行主席贾纳林甘忙于解释欠债原由之际,一笔高达马币18亿元的购地支出,仍有待西港、前交通部长林良实、港务局及反贪污局予以人民一个明确的交待。民主行动党非政府组织局主任刘天球(左图)曾在2004年就西港的一项土地交易向皇家警察的商业罪案调查组报案,质疑这宗交易是否牵涉贪污及失信问题。可是迄今,反贪污局仍没有任何交待及相应行动;当时的交通部长林良实也不曾回应此事。刘天球接受《独立新闻在线》电访时透露,当林良实于2003年退任之后,他查悉林任期内曾批准交通部属下的港务局(Part Klang Authority)以马币十亿元购买一幅一千亩的土地,发展巴生港口自由贸易区(Port Klang Free Zone)。当时,刘天球的报案书指出,上述土地交易数额高达马币十亿元,平均每英亩100万元,每平方公尺约马币25元,比市价高出44%。为此他质疑,此项交易是否牵涉贪污问题。刘天球指出:“我曾向地产界人士了解,他们认为,当时西港的土地市价约每平方公尺14元。换言之,港务局收购的价格比市价高出了44%!”




刘天球从《海峡时报》的财经新闻获知,该占地一千亩的土地以马币18亿1000万元成交,比当时他从《太阳报》(The Sun)所获知的数额还要高出8亿元;为此,原拟就西港的债务问题报案的他说:“我更有理由报案了!”

《独立新闻在线》发现,若以一千英亩18亿1000万元计算,该地段的价格高达每平方公尺41元55分,比市价高出两倍!根据《海峡时报》报道,国家稽查局甚至形容该土地是“以特别价格计算”(calculated on a special-value basis)。

此外,《海峡时报》的报道指出,巴生港务局是从一家名叫“Kuala Dimensi”的公司手中购入该片土地。根据公司注册资料,Kuala Dimensi私人有限公司四名董事当中的两名董事都是国阵领袖,其一为国阵民进党民都鲁区国会议员张庆信,另一名则是自2004年出任巫统总财政阿都阿欣(Abdul Azim Mohd Zabidi)。






交通部署下的巴生港务局是巴生北港和西港的管理机构,惟港务局已将位于美丽岛(Pulau Indah)的西港的操作和营运部份已经私营化。西港公司目前以特许经营者的身份负责西港的操作和营运。



此外,《马来西亚前锋报》(Utusan Malaysia)新闻网今年5月15日的一则报道揭露,西港公司欠下港务局十亿元的债务,相信正在寻求新加坡港务局(Port of Singapore Authority)的“协助”,以解决该公司的债务问题。

西港公司执行主席贾纳林甘(G. Gnanalingam,右图)最近与新加坡港务局执行主席Eddie Tan的会面,被视为西港或转手新港务局的先兆。



他说:“还没有缴还给巴生港务局的余额不属于贷款,却是可以在30年被清还的租约(perjanjian penyewaan)。因此,西港没有面对财务问题。”他指出,在过去的五年中,该公司大部份的发展皆由内部基金及出租公司器材支撑。

根据公司注册资料,西港控股(Westports Holding)是西港公司的大股东;西港公司董事贾纳林甘通过Redzai建筑公司(Syarikat Pembinaan Redzai)掌握西港控股的50%股份、香港首富李嘉诚则透过Hutchinson港口码头(Hutchinson Ports Terminal)掌握30%股份、国库控股(Khazanah Holdings Bhd)则拥有10%股份。

Dinner: Reclaim PJ Parliamentary and State seats

May 28, 2007

Congratulations to the PJ Action Team for the successful dinner held in Sg Way (Seri Setia) a while ago.

Sec Gen Lim Guan Eng and deputy sec gen Chong Eng came all the way from Bukit Mertajam and Kota Melaka respectively to give the potential candidates in PJ their greatest support.

Other speakers tonight include Lau Weng San (PJ Action Team Chairman), Ean Yong Hian Wah (Selangor state chairman), Liew Ching Tong ( DAPSY leader), Thomas Goh ( PJ Action Team Treasurer), Tony Pua ( Economic Advisor to Sec Gen DAP), Rama ( Chairman of Kg Tun Razak ).

In my speech, I criticised the MCA local elected reps for not helping the residents and villagers. I also explained what has happened to my OSA case ( no fruther development) and the compensation I won from the case against the former IGP some six months ago was still not paid to me.

I did an opinion poll on the spot and to our delight, majority of the supporters said Yes to opposition cooperation; only 3 persons said No. I have no time to ask them why but I did use the opportunity to explain why we should get the opposition parties to work together.

In my speech, I explained why DAP leaders believe that the coming GE will fall in November this year ( NOV 25, to be more precise) or latest by March 2008. 

I also expressed my deep regret that the voters who lived in Jalan 4 and Jalan 18, Sg Way were fooled by Chew Mei Fun and Dr Wong Sai Hau in the 2004 GE. They were promised land titles immediately after the GE but guess what, their homes were all demolished by the authority in 2006. Both Chew and Wong did not even give it a fight. Not only that, they even failed to get the rightful compensation for many of them: No monthly rental subsidy of RM120 per family. No transport/ moving cost subsidy. No homes for second family…

But it’s too late for the residents who have trusted Chew and Wong. Chew has even gotten a promotion after the 2004 GE. There’s nothing the villagers can do except for voting against the two in the coming general elections.

Other speaker touched on issues such as mother tongue education, quality of tertiary education, freedom of religion, the importance of voters registration, rampant corruption and abuse of powers, increasing crime rates in PJ and Selangor, the restructuring of police force to fight crimes, the reasons for strengthening the DAP and other opposition parties, the NEP and income divide, the sexist Umno MPs ( we played the video clips of the relevant Parliamentary seating) and what should we expect  from a state assemblyman and Member of Parliament.

Everyone in the audience agrees with DAP speakers that Malaysia is not a better place to live after Abdullah has taken over from Dr Mahathir. We were all greatly disappoineted with the performance of Abdullah Ahmad Badawi.

The questionable Westports RM1 billion land deal

May 27, 2007

Press statement:

Westports RM1 billion land deal: Why still no answer after police report made in December 2004?

/ Ronnie Liu

I read with great interest an Utusan Online article titled “ Jaminan Westports melegakan?” written by AINUL ASNIERA AHSAN (

Korporat&pg=ko_03.htm ) dated May 15 2007.

The article revealed that Westports is now burdened with a liability of no less than RM1 billion… 

“Westports yang menyaksikan pelabuhannya mencatat pertumbuhan dua angka yang tekal sejak mula beroperasi pada tahun 1996, dilaporkan kini mempunyai liabiliti yang sangat besar dan angka didakwa mencecah RM1 bilion dengan Lembaga Pelabuhan Klang.   Hutang tertunggak daripada sewa operasi Westports di kawasan pesisir pantai dipercayai gagal dilunaskan sejak ia mula beroperasi 10 tahun lalu.” It appears that another major bailout (with taxpayers’ money, of course) is inevitable. The article also reported that the Executive Chairman of Westports
Malaysia (Westports), Tan Sri G. Gnanalingam has given the assurance that Westports will not be sold to PSA International of Singapore.  
Currently, Hutchison Ports Terminal, a company owned by
Hong Kong tycoon Li Ka Shing, owns 30% of Westports. Gnalingam owns 50% through Syarikat Pembinaan Redzai and Khazanah Holdings holds 10%. Gnalingam claims that the authority has set a ceiling of 30% equity on ownership of ports for foreign companies. 
(The 30% equity sold to Li Ka Shing was completed when Ling Liong Sik was still the Transport Minister. The sale worth some RM400 million was initially rejected by Daim Zainuddin on question of procedures but went through nevertheless after some special arrangement between Daim and Ling. Gnalingam happens to be a good buddy of Ling.) I have made a police report on the scandalous Westports RM1 billion land deal in December 2004, urging the police to instigate MCA leaders like Ling Liong Sik, Chan Kong Choy, Yap Pian Hon and Umno leader Rahman Palil (Sementa State Assemblyman).  More than two years have passed but nothing has come out of my police report. But now we were told that both the Westports and PKA were in deep financial problems. In fact, PKA is said to have incurred some RM3 billion in debts!  

In my statement dated Monday, 20 Dec 2004, I said that “following my police report made on Sunday in Petaling Jaya to initiate an investigation on Port Klang Authority Chairman Datuk Yap Pian Hon and both the current and former Transport Ministers, many have asked me about the real market value of the said 1,000 acres which cost PKA a hefty RM1 billion. This means that PKA paid RM1 million per acre for the said land.

To answer such question, one must bear in mind that this piece of land is near the Westports , which is basically not a busy commercial area bustling with activities by any standard. Some of the people I know in the property industry told me that the current market value of the land here should not be priced more than RM14 psf. But the PKA scandalously paid no less than RM25 psf! That means the PKA had paid a price that was 44% higher than the market value, which works out to be a hefty RM 440 million!

One expert claims that if the PKA really needs such a piece of land for development, it can even reclaim from the sea and probably cost much lower with the availability of modern day technology.

When the PKA Chairman Yap Pian Hon was asked by one journalist after the DAP press conference on last Saturday, he claims that he knows nothing about the deal, which was done 2 to 3 years ago, and that the piece of land would be turned into a ‘comprehensive’ commercial project. He did not disclose any details except for saying that the Transport Minister Datuk Chan Kong Choy will make an announcement on the plan ‘some time in the near future.’
If Yap ‘s story could be trusted, then both the current and former Transport Ministers must come forward with a good explanation for transparency and accountability of people’s funds. Yap also failed to explain why PKA went into business beyond its statutory role (giving out loans to private companies) and yet to collect the overdue payment.”We want Ling Liong Sik, Chan Kong Choy, Yap Pian Hon and Rahman Palil to come clean on the land deal. All of them owe Malaysians a good explanation. “ Friday, 25 May 2007 / Ronnie Liu Tian Khiew DAP CEC member and NGO bureau chief 

KJ attacked Tony Pua and DAP

May 24, 2007

LATEST!!! TP has challeged  KJ for a public debate on next Wednesday at the KL Selangor Chinese Assembly Hall . Would he man enuf to do it or again  ‘chicken out’ like before (on the issue of Merdeka history)? Keep your fingers crossed.


Two years ago, Khairy Jamaluddin attacked me and the DAP over an article I wrote on the history of Merdeka (The real fighters of Merdeka).The attack over the media (plus three police reports lodged against me)lasted for about two weeks. The whole thing cooled down because he did not accept an open debate from me. 

He’s now ‘at it’ again. The ‘victim’ this time is Tony Pua. Too bad. This guy from Oxford was being literal; he does not seems to understand what is ‘figure of speech’…

From Malaysiakini…

Utusan Malaysiareported that Umno Youth Khairy Jamaluddin had called on DAP leader Tony Pua to apologise for saying that the civil service is the dumping ground for unemployed Malays. Pua’s comment was reported in malaysiakini yesterday. He said that the statement is an insult to the country’s one million civil servants.

And this was the article in Malaysiakini that ‘upset’ KJ…

Civil service getting too fat
May 22, 07 5:44pm
The substantial pay hike for government servants, the first of such increases since 1992, has underscored another major problem – our bloated civil service.“The civil service has been expanding rapidly since the 1990s and the growth accelerated under the current prime minister,” said opposition politician Tony Pua, who welcomed the long-overdue pay rise which was announced yesterday.“In 1990, the federal government had 773,997 employees; by the year 2000, there were 894,788 on the payroll, a significant increase of 15.6%.“However, since then, the civil service employment has accelerated by another 210,000 personnel, marking a 23.5% increase over the past six years alone,” said Pua, who is DAP economic advisor.According to Pua, one of the key objectives under the privatisation programmes launched by the then prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad was to reduce the civil service numbers to just above 500,000.“Hence, it could be verily argued that the privatisation exercise by the government was a failure in maintaining a lean and efficient government for the civil service is today more than double its intended size.”Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi announced yesterday that all civil servants and security forces will get a pay rise of between 7.5% and 42%. Meanwhile, the cost of living allowance has been increased by 100%.As a result of the pay hike, which will take effect on July 1, the government will have to allocate an additional RM8 billion in its budget beginning next year.Pua said the government will also have to find RM4 billion for the pay increase for the second half of this year as this was not previously budgeted.This raises questions if the targeted deficit of 3.4% of GDP for 2007 can be achieved, said Pua.

“The RM8 billion increase also marks a permanent 7.1% increase on the government’s annual operating expenditure.”

Trim the service

Pua blamed the government’s failure to trim the civil service on the policy of making the “civil service the dumping ground for the politically sensitive constituency of unemployed Malay graduates”.

Last year, Deputy Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak has urged government agencies to speed up the recruitment of graduates to fill some 30,000 vacancies in the civil service.

Pua called on the government to take the “painful but very important step” of slashing the civil service sector into a leaner and more efficient “machine”.

“The increase in pay will be a waste of public funds, if the move is not accompanied by a corresponding increase in civil service productivity.”

Meanwhile, DAP secretary-general Lim Guan Eng lamented that despite the hefty 35% increase, the lowest basic salary in the civil service is RM649, which is still below the poverty line of RM691 per month.

Lim suggested that the minimal basic wage for civil servants and pensions be fixed at above RM700 instead.

“The salary of the highest-ranked civil servant in Malaysia is 19.5 times more than his or her lowest-ranked colleague – amongst the worst in the world.

“Salaries of the lower levels must be increased dramatically if the government wants to bridge the salary differential to make it fairer and more equal to civil servants.”

After reading the article, one would understand that his target was the Abdullah’s administration and not the civil service. What DAP was saying is clear and simple: the civil service is getting too ‘fat’. Here again, we were not saying that the civil servants are ‘fat’. But then again, this guy from Oxford may not have an Oxford Dictionary.

Meanwhile, the most famous SIL of our land  is under attack by his own party comrade from Rembau, Negri Sembilan.

(Also from Malaysiakini…)

Quit Rembau Umno Youth, Khairy told
Fauwaz Abdul Aziz
May 24, 07 5:14pm
Khairy Jamaluddin is being urged to step down as Negeri Sembilan’s Rembau Umno Youth division chief for allegedly caving into pressure from ‘outsiders’.According to Rembau exco member Azman Mat Shah, Khairy failed to stand up for his division’s choice of delegates to the party’s upcoming annual general meeting (AGM).He alleged that Khairy, who is also Umno Youth deputy chief, acquiesced to pressure from Abdul Ghani Hassan – the brother of Negeri Sembilan Menteri Besar Mohamad Hassan.Abdul Ghani had allegedly over-ridden the Rembau Umno Youth division’s choice of delegates to the AGM which was made on May 13.In their place, he added, Abdul Ghani had ‘appointed’ his own preferred delegates.Azman said instead of upholding the independence of the Umno Youth wing and challenging the interference, Khairy had purportedly given his backing to Abdul Ghani.“If Khairy cannot uphold our independence from outsiders (to the wing) such as Abdul Ghani, how can we expect him to stand up to opposition parties or challenges from foreign powers?” he said when contacted.

“In such a case, Khairy is not qualified to lead even this division of Rembau,” he added.

Abdul Ghani responds

Contacted later, Abdul Ghani dismissed the allegations.

“Allegations are allegations, which anybody can make. There is no interference. No such thing. We’re all Umno members,” he said when contacted.

“I’ve known Azman for some time now. Let’s just say that all’s not quite right with that boy,” he added without elaborating.

Khairy, who is also Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi’s son-in-law, could not be reached for comments.

Meanwhile, Azman said following Khairy’s failure to respond to numerous attempts to talk to him on the matter, the Seliau Youth branch – which Azman heads – has drafted a resolution calling for Khairy to step down.

He said the resolution will be presented to Umno Youth chief Hishammuddin Hussien on Monday.

According to Azman, two other Youth branches in Rembau will be making identical resolutions and submitting them soon to the movement’s leadership.

Aware of the risks

Questioning Khairy’s standing and authority, Azman said he had not earned his stripes to throw his weight around in such a manner.

“There is no benchmark that Khairy has set in Rembau that he can boast of. The only thing he has done is his efforts for the Halal Hub industry.

“He may be the prime minister’s son-in-law and the deputy chief of the movement, but that doesn’t mean he can do this. Umno Youth is not for the son or son-in-law of anyone to treat the movement as he sees fit,” he added.

Azman said he is aware of the risks involved in openly criticising Khairy.

“If this causes my political death, so be it. But it has to be said that we are disappointed in the way he has cast us aside.

“There are many more issues we have with Khairy but we will raise these later when the time is right,” he added.

Tomorrow, Tony will hold a press conference together with DAP Sec-Gen Lim Guan Eng on the matter. Watch this blog for further development.

KeADILan Vs Umno

May 22, 2007

Parti KeADILan Rakyat (PKR) will be holding its national congress and election in Seremban from Friday to Sunday this week. The party’s 1,800 delegates will elect its President and 20 supreme council members to lead the party as well as facing the coming general elections.

Time and again, those who were critical about PKR have said that this is a party for Anwar Ibrahim. Nothing more, nothing less. And that was said at the time Anwar was still in jail. And what would they say now that Anwar is running for the presidency and very likely to be elected (unless sabotaged by the Registrar of Societies)?

We would know better what PKR would lead to after Anwar has taken over the party leadership from Wan Azizah.

Before that, let’s examine what Anwar has been saying in terms of national policies, versus Umno.

PKR under Anwar  Vs Umno under Abdullah

Multi-racialism Vs Ketuanan Melayu (Malay Supremacy)

No to NEP   Vs Yes to NEP (New Economic Policy)

Freedom of Religion Vs Islam supremacy in the name of Islam ‘Hadhari’

Multi-culturalism Vs Dominance of Malay culture

Promote mother tongue education Vs  Suppress mother tongue education

Freedom of Information Vs Control of Information

I for one believe that Umno is corrupt to the core and ‘condemned beyond repair’. No one should harbour any hope to change Umno from within or without. It’s time to dump Umno into the South China Sea, the sooner the better.

I hope the summary above would help bloggers to understand why KPR deserves the support of all Malaysians. 

We hope PKR will grow from strength to strength under the stewardship of Anwar Ibrahim.