1MDB scandal - Challenge the US Attorney General if you are innocent

The consequences of Justo’s leaks are still reverberating around the world. When the US Department of Justice laid out the case against 1MDB last week, it pulled no punches. “The Malaysian people were defrauded on an enormous scale,” said Andrew McCabe, the FBI’s deputy director. US officials told the Guardian that any party who wanted to contest the attorney general’s claim must file a response in a federal court within 60 days to answer the factual allegations. The Guardian 

Loretta Lynch the brave AG

Well the US officials' statement in The Guardian sounds very fair, clear and could easily be understood by a 10 year old kid. Those who are not happy with US attorney general Loretta Lynch could challenge her in a court of law. 

Claims of kleptocracy, money laundering, fraud and implied treason following the US Department of Justice / FBI's joint investigations on 1MDB-linked crimes could be contested in a court of law. 

To begin with Prime Minister Najib Razak, who is the thinly-veiled Malaysian Official 1, should instruct his lawyers to file a response in a federal court (I suppose in the US) within 60 days. 

You can file it on Monday without having to wait for another Tuesday, if you have anything factual to prove that Lynch is wrong.  

I'm sure Najib could seek help from the local Legal Aid Bureau or the Malaysian Bar Council if he feels that his lawyers are not competent enough to stand straight when facing Lynch the US Attorney General.

Malaysian Official 1, if you don't file a response just zip it. We have had enough of your shadow play and outright lies. 

Just to recap below are recordings of Lynch and her fellow investigators press conference during which the 1MDB-linked kleptocracy was unveiled, as the biggest in US history. Listen carefully to the choice of words used to explain the crimes against Malaysia and Malaysians.

Actually Rosmah Mansor's son Riza Aziz and his buddy Jho Low who were named in the DoJ civil suit together with another Arab conman could start filing their response at a federal court in the US if they still happen to be partying in the US. I'm not sure if you could file a response in a US court while drowning your sorrows in a fortified bungalow in KL. No harm trying though.

Riza the stepson 

p/s 

Just remember that Loretta is not Apandi Ali and Apandi Ali is not Loretta. Btw, how many Tuesdays are there in 60 days from the 20th of July?

1MDB - Where is the money ?

A scam by any other name is still a scam. A scum by any other name is still a scum, even if he happens to be the son of an illustrious former Prime Minister. 

Billions of ringgit in taxpayers money is certainly missing due to the scam of a scum and this has now been confirmed. 

Where is the money ? 

Who among the members of the current Malaysian Cabinet, do you believe, would pursue this matter of missing billions of ringgit? 

Not even one among the many Cabinet members dare speak out in the best interest of our nation and her people. Don't you wonder why the entire Cabinet appears to be deaf, dumb and blind? 

Would you vote for any of the current members of the Malaysian cabinet in the next elections? 

A coward by any other name is still a coward, even if you are a member of the Cabinet. 

p/s 

If something can corrupt you, you're corrupted already - Bob Marley

Endless possibilities in Malaysia

aPandi says Najib has done no wrong

Najib Razak, the scandal-ridden Malaysian Prime Minister has been cleared from any criminal wrongdoings and corrupt practices by none other than the Attorney General whom Najib appointed to replace the prematurely retired former AG Tan Sri Gani Patail.

All must be well and good in my country now. It must be. 

The Guardian reports HERE

The learned Attorney General has also been recently appointed to the board of Tabung Haji. Don't ask me if it is appropriate or even morally right for a serving AG to sit on the board of a national pilgrims fund. The AG may excuse himself if any legal cases against Tabung Haji passes before him but which position he chooses to excuse himself from could be a tough call. 

Could the Tabung Haji appointment be a pre-retirement golden handshake for possibly the shortest serving AG in our history? I don't know.

Whichever way this develops the right hand man would certainly strive to make sure that Tabung Haji doesn't go into a tail spin, as many depositors, including me, fear. 

Tabung Haji CEO Tan Sri Ismee has also come out with a convincing statement assuring depositors and Malaysians in general that all is well and good in Tabung Haji. It must be true. We must trust these guys. 

A long time journalist friend who was at the AG's press conference where aPandi read out a prepared text earlier today thinks she may have seen the soon to be 'promoted' Chief Commissioner of the Malaysian Anti Corruption Commission (MACC).

Is Tan Sri Abu Kassim Mohamed, the serving chief of the MACC, also looking at a pre-mature retirement like in the case of Gani Patail? That has been the talk, she quips.    

She says rumours has it that this guy from the AG's chambers helped clear up the '2.6b' and SRC mess and was promised the post in return for his professional favour in clearing the innocent Prime Minister from baseless slander. It was kind of a national service for 'DZ' the humble servant. 

Najib is innocent because he has returned the unused portion of the more than 2 billion ringgit to the Saudi family. Don't ask me who in the Saudi family donated and accepted back his/her money, I don't know. I don't think anybody knows for sure who that individual is, not even Najib. 

Even Deputy Prime Minister and Home Minister Datuk Seri Zahid Hamidi was a little confused if the Saudi royal family donor was an individual or a group of individuals. Maybe he is still confused.

Najib also don't know how 42 million ringgit landed in his personal account. He is innocent. The SRC guys who approved the 42 million ringgit transfer must have been intoxicated or outright out of their mind. It could have been just a naughty prank but Najib is believed to have issued cheques from his account without knowing he had billions in cash in his account. It's a bit confusing, I know, but Najib is innocent. 

Sarawak Report says Najib charged millions of ringgits in expenses and purchases to credit card/s issued to SRC. They even produced details including the alleged credit card numbers to prove their claim but it cannot be true because Najib is innocent. Apandi the learned former judge turned AG has clearly indicated that Najib has done no wrong. We must trust Apandi.

We must put our right and left hands together and clap because Najib has been cleared by Apandi Ali, who is also a newly appointed board member of Tabung Haji.

All must be well and good but is Apandi also looking at retirement?  If so who would be the next Attorney General? Here comes the next obedient servant of the ruler.

Oh Ya! Tan Sri Zeti of Bank Negara will also leave the scene sometime in March/April. Ismee Ismail of Tabung Haji is said to be among those in the running for the Governor's post. 

All must be well and good. 

After having managed Tabung Haji with such professionalism and ethics since their appointment I think both Ismee and Tabung Haji Chairman Datuk Seri Azeez Rahim qualify to run Bank Negara Malaysia next. We must trust these guys.

The possibilities are endless. 


p/s 

When good men and women do nothing, ... 

Letter from UIA, to the Prime Minister

Letter from the Union Internationale des Advocats (UIA) to the Prime Minister of Malaysia regarding the arrest of Matthias Chang

Paris, October 14, 2015

Y.A.B. Dato’ Sri Hj. Mohd Najib Bin Tun Haji Abdul Razak

Prime Minister of Malaysia

Office of the Prime Minister

Main Block, Perdana Putra Building

Federal Government Administrative Centre

62502 Putrajaya ‐ Malaysia

Transmitted by email and fax: ppm@pmo.gov.my

+60 (0)3 8888 3444 (2 pages)

Your Excellency, 

The UIA has been informed of the arrest, under the Security Offences (Special Measures) Act 2012 (“SOSMA”), of lawyer Matthias Chang, when he was at the police headquarters to visit one of his clients, Mr.Dato’ Paduka Khairuddin.

We were also informed that Matthias Chang and his client were brought to Magistrate Court of Kuala Lumpur, and both of them were then charged under Section 124L of the Penal Code for attempting to sabotage banking and financial services in the country.

We were alerted by the Malaysian Bar Association and its President, Mr. Steven Thiru, who reiterated the Bar's opposition to Chang's detention. According to Mr. Steven Thiru, Mr. Chang was cooperating with the investigations, although there is no basis to invoke SOSMA.  

We are extremely concerned by this situation, which seems to be the consequence of a misapplication of SOSMA. There is apparently no basis for invoking this anti‐terrorism law against a person willing to cooperate with the investigation.

Furthermore, we question the SOSMA provisions that have been widely criticized for violating the protection of fundamental human rightsin the name of nationalsecurity, notably because of the overly broad and often vague language in SOSMA and associated bills. The definition of “security offence,” for example, includes committing acts “prejudicial to national security and public safety,” thus rending the definition of who may be arrested under SOSMA too broad and inevitably leading to abusive arrest and detention.

The Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers, adopted by the Eighth United Nations Congress on the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders in 1990, explicitly establish the right of lawyers to be protected when performing their professional functions, including the right not to be harassed or prosecuted for their clients’ causes. [1]

The UIA considers that these UN Basic Principles have a normative value under customary international law and should be respected by Malaysia, which was present at the Congress and voted in favor of their adoption.

We thus respectfully call upon the Malaysian State to abide by its obligations in this regard. 

We also insist, along with the Malaysian Bar, that the State respect its obligation to respect the principle of legal professional privilege. This principle should remain inviolate and absolute.

We therefore support the Malaysian Bar in its demand  

‐  that the police recognize and respect the role and responsibilities of Matthias Chang as a lawyer,  

‐  that Matthias Chang be released immediately,  

‐ that the authorities should refrain from any action that is likely to harass, impede or obstruct him from performing his duties on behalf of his clients.  

We thank you for your attention to this important matter.

Respectfully yours, 

Miguel LOINAZ   

Président

President

Presidente

C.c.:

‐ Attorney General of Malaysia, Tan Sri Dato’ Sri Haji Mohamed Apandi bin Haji Ali

‐ Tan Sri Hasmy Agam, Chairperson, Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (SUHAKAM)

‐ The Malaysian Bar

Malaysian scandals from Australia

Australian police investigators sprung into action almost immediately when news of an alleged high level corruption ring involving locals and a few prominent Malaysians broke. 

We must salute the Australian police for their admirable professionalism and urgency in striving to nail the crooks, no matter who they are. 

This latest Australian episode gives us an inside to not only the level of professionalism but also the Australian authorities' strict adherence to the maxim 'not leaving any stone unturned in seeking truth'. 

Questions have now been raised if the Australian police had in fact notified their Malaysian counterparts before the scam was exposed by The Age newspaper. This is another affirmation that the Australian authorities are always 'on the ball'. 

I'm certain the relevant authorities on our side would be responding to the queries to avoid any allegation of attempts to sweep things under the carpet. 

Sweeping under the carpet? 

We must also take cognisance that one of our former UTK policeman who has a noose hanging over his head here for the murder of Mongolian model Altantuya Shaariibuu has been under the protection of Australian authorities since his arrest. 

It has been more than FIVE months since Sirul Azhar Umar was detained in Brisbane. In five months Sirul has met and spoke with countless Australian officers and some Malaysians.  

It was learned that the Australians have been moving the convicted murderer of Altantuya between a few detention centers and Australian intelligence units safe-houses for safety reasons, while regularly recording fresh inputs and statements. 

It seems an individual with the initial RB has been highlighted in some latest detailed statements. 

The investigators, it was learned, have also got hold of a few Statuory Declarations which were made in relation to the murder of Altantuya, including a sworn statement by a fugitive blogger that is said to have corroborated Sirul's statement. 

Legally, this is all hearsay.      

An exclusive video interview has also been recorded on Sirul's own request, says a Melbourne-based journalist who is currently pursuing the Australian culprits in the Mara-linked property scam.

Could we now expect the Australian media to come up with an expose of yet another long-running Malaysian scandal?

Lindsay Murdoch - South-East Asia correspondent for Fairfax Media

We must put an immediate stop to all such humiliation. We have #Nothing2Hide 

Guess its high time for Kuala Lumpur to put its foot down and demand Canberra to deport Sirul Azhar on the next available flight to Kuala Lumpur. 

Otherwise every convicted killer and conman would be making his/her way to Australia. 

Can you do that Mr Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak or are you too busy with the 1MDB scandal?

c.c 
Foreign Minister Datuk Seri Anifah Aman

p/s Fairfax Media investigated the Mara-linked scam for about six months before the expose and Fairfax Media's investigative journalists have been working on Sirul's case from day one of his arrest... or even before that.  

Eloquent silence?

Ex-Kita state chief lodges report against Gobind

'LEGAL NOTICE TO RoS': Failure to back up claim unbecoming of an MP, says Zamil

SUNGAI PETANI: FORMER Kedah Parti Kesejahteraan Insan Tanah Air (Kita) chairman Zamil Ibrahim yesterday lodged a   report against DAP national legal bureau chairman Gobind Singh Deo over the legal notice to the Registrar of Societies (RoS) issue.

Zamil urged the authorities to investigate Gobind's claim that the latter had submitted a legal notice to RoS last month.

He said Gobind's failure to provide evidence to support the claim, despite being pressured by many, suggested that he was not being upfront with the people.

Zamil said it was inappropriate and uncalled for, especially since Gobind was a member of parliament.

"As Puchong MP, Gobind represents the government to serve the people.

"Being a leader, he should not do anything that could tarnish the government's image," he said at the Kuala Muda district police headquarters here.

Zamil said the report should serve as a reminder to leaders from both sides of the political divide to not deceive the public for their personal or party's interest.

In George Town, non-governmental organisation Persatuan Kebajikan Insan Mulia chairman Aminah Abdullah challenged Gobind to produce the notice that he had allegedly sent to RoS.

In a statement on Jan 13, Gobind had said DAP would commence legal proceedings as a result of RoS' refusal to recognise DAP's new leadership, despite the re-election of its top office-bearers last year.

RoS had asked DAP's central executive committee (CEC) to refrain from making any decision until investigations into its polls were completed.

Gobind had argued that RoS had no legal basis to issue the order.

"This leaves DAP with no choice, but to go to court.

"DAP will seek a judicial pronouncement to this effect," he was reported to have said.

The party held a re-election in September last year after RoS demanded it, following a botched tallying process in its initial party polls in December 2012.

Gobind was quoted in a news portal as saying DAP had set a 14-day grace period for RoS to withdraw its decision to not recognise DAP's CEC that was elected in September or face the next course of action.

He said a lawyer's letter was sent to RoS on Dec 23. RoS denied receiving it.

But why is YB Gobind silent over this valid query? A police report has been lodged. 

I don't know if it was the lawyer cum DAP MP's blatant lie. If it was indeed a lie the Bar Council wouldn't be sitting still, would they? 

Where are the lawyers? 

p/s Pls reserve eloquent silence for politicians

Will you cry again Kit Siang?

Published: Tuesday July 30, 2013 MYT 6:12:00 PM
Updated: Tuesday July 30, 2013 MYT 6:23:42 PM

DAP to hold emergency CEC meeting following ROS announcement

BY EILEEN NG

PETALING JAYA: DAP will hold an emergency central executive committee (CEC) meeting Wednesday night to discuss its next course of action following the Registrar of Societies' (ROS) announcement that the party will need to conduct fresh polls.

In calling for all members and supporters to remain calm, secretary-general Lim Guan Eng maintained that the party had yet to be officially informed, either verbally or in writing, of the directive to hold fresh elections.

He said when national organising secretary Anthony Loke was informed that the letter supposed to convey the ROS decision was “not ready”.

“As this is a clear act of political vengeance and an illegal abuse of power, the DAP CEC shall consider all options as provided for under the Societies Act, after receiving the written directive from ROS,” said Lim in a statement.

ROS has been investigating complaints of electoral fraud in the DAP CEC election last December.

The issue cropped up when a recalculation revealed that Lim’s political secretary Zairil Khir Johari, who had initially received 305 votes, clinched 803 votes.

On Monday night, Home Minister Datuk Seri Ahmad Zahid Hamidi was quoted as saying that DAP needs to reconvene its internal elections. Lim said he was shocked at Ahmad Zahid’s pronouncement, and that DAP was never informed of the decision. - TheStar

The video clip below is of Lim Kit Siang's drama on last April 18, two days before nominations for the 13th GE. Watch carefully how the DAP de facto leader plays victim and even shed tears to demonise the Registrar of Societies and the Government. 

Kit Siang successfully fooled DAP members and the party's predominantly Chinese supporters into believing that the Government was hell bent on preventing DAP from using the ROCKET symbol in the last GE. 

Obviously we know now that it was a big load of BULLSHIT from Kit Siang and his secretary general son Lim Guan Eng.

The 'crying before the media at a press conference' stunt was nothing but sheer, shameless propaganda. The Rocket's own report (below), in particular the heading, clearly confirms the hidden agenda.

Let’s Translate Our Anger Into Votes

19 April, 2013

Print PDF

    

 

---

In the wake of the unprecedented move by the Registrar of Societies (ROS) not to recognize the DAP’s party leadership slate, DAP parliamentary Lim Kit Siang said it is a sad and ominous day for DAP and the nation.

“April 18, 2013 had been the most heart-rending day in my life, the day when the Registrar of Societies dispatched a letter to the DAP to knock out the Rocket symbol from the 13GE, with the Nomination Day less than 48 hours away, completely without any legal basis or plausible ground,” Lim said today in an emotional press conference

- See more at: http://www.therocket.com.my/en/lets-translate-our-anger-into-votes/#sthash.R5EbyhwI.dpuf






Now the RoS, or rather the Home Minister, has stated that DAP must conduct a re-election for its Central Executive Committee. 

Will Kit Siang shed his crocodile tears again or will his son take over the lead role from his daddy? 

What could be their excuse this time around since the GE is over and even DAP members and supporters know that Kit Siang LIED when he cried the last time. DAP did contest in the last GE with their red rocket logo.

Lets watch this political 'tear-jerker' drama unfold again, later tonight. 

p/s Who is this Father Augustus Chen?  .... and Guan Eng, could you please explain what you mean by 'political vengeance and an illegal abuse of power'(in The Star report above)? It sounds like MummyFoo's ranting to me.

Subversion of the subversives

Are they not subversives? 

How else do you term the bunch of people who do nothing but undermine the Government of the day through half truths, lies, deception and politics of hatred?

The latest revelation of the details of our Scorpene submarine deal, that reduced Suaram to a spineless political tool, is one classic example. That linking the late Altantuya to the submarine deal and then directly to the Prime Minister and his wife is more than sinister. It is, in my opinion, a clear cut act of subversion.

Not sinister, but deliberate attempts at stoking anger and hatred against the Government of the day by extensive fabrication and blatant lies. 

The facts state otherwise but the minds of the people have been poisoned for far too long. Propaganda was at its best but the messages were blatant lies. It is subversion. The damage is done.

See what Wikipedia says about SUBVERSION. 
Subversion
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is about the political concept of subversion. For other uses, see Subversion (disambiguation).

Subversion refers to an attempt to transform the established social order and its structures of power, authority, and hierarchy. Subversion (Latin subvertere: overthrow) refers to a process by which the values and principles of a system in place, are contradicted or reversed *. More specifically, subversion can be described as an attack on the public morale and, “the will to resist intervention are the products of combined political and social or class loyalties which are usually attached to national symbols. Following penetration, and parallel with the forced disintegration of political and social institutions of the state, these loyalties may be detached and transferred to the political or ideological cause of the aggressor.” [1] Subversion is used as a tool to achieve political goals because it generally carries less risk, cost, and difficulty as opposed to open belligerency. Furthermore, it is a relatively cheap form of warfare that does not require large amounts of training.[2] A subversive is something or someone carrying the potential for some degree of subversion. In this context, a "subversive" is sometimes called a "traitor" with respect to (and usually by) the government in power. Terrorist groups generally do not employ subversion as a tool to achieve their goals. Subversion is a manpower intensive strategy and many groups lack the manpower and political and social connections to carry out subversive activities.[3] However, actions taken by terrorists may have a subversive effect on society. Subversion can imply the use of insidious, dishonest, monetary, or violent methods to bring about such change. More HERE

The Government of the day must act, decisively against such new methods employed by subversive elements in the society. This is not politics and it is not healthy.

While the ghost of Altantuya is back to haunt those liars, we may also consider a more sober perspective to the loads of propaganda that followed the late Teoh Beng Hock's death. 

Who was Teoh Beng Hock and why was he being investigated by the MACC in the first place? 
Remember how those subversives were working round the clock undermining the Government? They even paraded TBH's family and his fiancee during political ceramahs and byelection campaigns. What was the purpose, motive or intention?

Who will deny that they were fanning anger and hatred against selected institutions and the Government of the day? 

This is not politics. Its not even clean. It is subversion.

...mmm possible

Korporat galak amalan sikap anarkis - Zainuddin Maidin

The last line of this article by former Utusan Malaysia chief, sums it all up. If you can't be of any help, just don't be a bloody burden. 

... and I wonder what the Prime Minister and Nazir Razak's brother Najib Razak has to say about Azran Osman Rani's 'act of bravery'...

PENGARAH Urusan Kumpulan dan Ketua Pegawai Eksekutif Kumpulan CIMB, Datuk Seri Nazir Razak telah memuji Ketua Pegawai Eksekutif AirAsia X Azran Osman Rani kerana pandangannya yang terus terang terhadap Utusan Malaysia dan Perkasa.

Katanya, sikap terus terang inilah yang menjadikan dia pemimpin besar dengan keupayaannya menunaikan tanggungjawabnya sebagai CEO AirAsia.

Menurut sebuah akhbar, Nazir ketika melancarkan prospektus AirAsia X kelmarin berkata, "sesetengah orang mungkin memikirkan Azran melampau dalam kata-katanya tetapi apakah yang dapat kita harapkan apabila kita mempunyai seorang pengerusi seperti Rafidah Aziz".

Saya tidak tahu dalam soal apakah yang dimaksudkan oleh Nazir sebagai sikap terus terang Azran. Adakah tanggapannya Utusan sebagai akhbar rasis kerana menyiarkan berita 'Apa Lagi Orang Cina Mahu' atau ugutannya untuk menarik iklan AirAsia daripada Utusan Malaysia.

Bagi saya, tanggapan Utusan sebagai rasis adalah subjektif. Ia bergantung kepada aliran pemikiran atau kecenderungan seseorang dan juga latar belakang pendidikannya, dan itu adalah hak masing-masing.

Tetapi yang saya rasa tidak wajar ialah sikap tidak toleransi Azran yang kerana tidak bersetuju dengan pendirian Utusan telah mengugut untuk menarik balik iklan AirAsia daripada Utusan kerana pendirian Utusan bertentangan dengan pemikirannya.

Sentimen dan prajudis telah mempengaruhi tindakannya.

Apakah ini sikap seorang yang terpelajar yang percaya pada kebebasan dan demokrasi, keterbukaan dan globalisasi? Apakah ini bukan merupakan penyalahgunaan kuasa atau tindakan yang tidak rasional?

Pada pandangan saya, oleh kerana Nazir menganggap Azran sebagai seorang pemimpin besar kerana tindakannya itu, maka bererti beliau merestukan amalan sikap anarkis CEO atau Ketua-ketua Pegawai Eksekutif dalam badan-badan korporat atau syarikat besar.

Dalam perkembangan kapitalisme Barat, korporat gergasi dan syarikat-syarikat perniagaan besar semakin berkuasa, malah melebihi kuasa kerajaan dan mengancam kebebasan media atau memperalatkan media dengan kuasa wang mereka.

Inilah kuasa yang tidak kelihatan kepada orang ramai, sebaliknya rakyat hanya nampak kuasa kerajaan yang menekan kebebasan media khususnya akhbar.

Berhubung dengan perkara ini, saya suka memetik sedikit daripada tulisan seorang penulis terkenal British, Anthony Sampson dalam bukunya The Essential Anatomy Of Britian-Democracy in Crisis.

Kata Sampson; "The link between newspapers and big business had a longer- term effect: for journalist have constrained from reporting or criticising the excesses of financial boom, by pressures from owners, advertisers and public relations men, who helped set the agenda of the business pages. Enterpreneurial owners naturally dislike the critical and investigative function of reporters".

Pandangan Sampson ini menepati pandangan bekas Perdana Menteri Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad dalam suatu jamuan makan malam Kesatuan Wartawan Kebangsaan Malaysia (NUJ) pada tahun 1990 yang mana beliau berkata, bukan sahaja kerajaan yang memberi kesan kepada kebebasan akhbar tetapi juga kepentingan perniagaan, pemilik, pengarah-pengarah dan juga kepentingan populariti.

Utusan sendiri tahu banyak hal yang negatif mengenai AirAsia telah disembunyikan bersama-sama dengan akhbar-akhbar lain demi kepentingan iklan atau wang daripadanya, tetapi nampaknya ini sahaja tidak cukup kepada Azran.

Beliau merasakan bahawa untuk Utusan mendapat iklan daripada AirAsia maka perlulah Utusan mengikuti kecenderungan sosial dan politiknya. Maka tekanan kewangan perlu dikenakan ke atas Utusan.

Tentulah semangat Azran bertambah tinggi dengan sokongan Nazir, adik kepada Perdana Menteri Malaysia yang tidak memahami krisis keyakinan yang sedang dihadapi oleh Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak dan juga UMNO.

Nazir tidak memahami bahawa tanpa sokongan daripada Utusan Malaysia memerangi anasir-anasir yang menghakiskan keyakinan kepada kerajaan, maka tidak mungkin UMNO akan dapat mengekalkan sokongan orang Melayu kepadanya yang menambahkan kerusi UMNO di Parlimen, menawan kembali negeri Kedah dan Perak dan menambah kerusi di Kelantan.

Barangkali Nazir memikirkan tanpa Utusan Malaysia menyerang balas terhadap sikap melampau orang Cina, maka Barisan Nasional akan mendapat sokongan orang Cina.

Sebenarnya Nazir menambah masalah yang dihadapi oleh Najib dan UMNO. 

- TAN SRI ZAINUDIN MAIDIN ialah Karyawan Tamu Institut Pemikiran Tun Dr. Mahathir, Universiti Utara Malaysia.

Don't follow the losers

They cry out aloud for democracy and transparency but have conveniently shied away from their war cry in their own party. 

PAS whose president wields a little or lesser power is dictated by a spiritual leader who often mistook himself for the Prophets. 

The unelected spiritual leader is the actual leader, not the elected President. Democracy has to be redefined to accommodate Pas... maybe.

DAP on the other hand has democracy etched in its name but in actual practice, as being continuously exposed by its former members and leaders, democracy appears like a corpse in DAP backyard.

The father and son political tyranny in DAP is an open secret. What is not so secret any longer is the way the Lim dynasty chokes dissent in DAP, even while screaming for a CAT administration here and there. 

By right the much disputed Dec 2012 DAP CEC election, where vote rigging and manipulation is suspected and alleged, ought to be held again. 

By right, by democratic norms, the party should call for a re-election of the CEC which appoints top party leaders including the powerful secretary general.

DAP members claim 750-odd eligible delegates were barred/not allowed to vote during the disputed CEC elections. They have also claimed that more than 500 phantom delegates could have voted to elect the 20 DAP CEC members in Dec 2012.

They suspect the 'inclusion' of Zairil Khir Johari was a fraudulent act, an afterthought engineered to please/hoodwink the Malays in DAP and those at large with blind hatred against the Government.

                                                                                            DaddyAnakParty? 

So, why is the popular secretary general who happens to be party supreme commander's son reluctant to call for a re-election of the CEC? Is DAP not a democratic party whose top most leaders are appointed by TWENTY members?

If you are appointed by only TWENTY members whose very own election is in dispute, you should shut the F up and mind the democracy in your party.

You certainly don't have the moral or political right to point fingers at others, more so at your opponents, when democracy in your party is on the dead bed.
PKR is a party for ONE man, led by ONE man and his wife, with ONE single objective... to be the Prime Minister of Malaysia. Everything else about PKR is bullshit.

Democracy is just another slogan for the Opposition parties in Malaysia. Its very similar to their version of transparency, anti-corruption, cronyism, nepotism and such.

I just hope those in Barisan Nasional won't emulate Pas, DAP and PKR, especially when its about democracy within the party.

Hidup Malaysia!

Did Anwar Ibrahim tell the truth?

BERNAMA Interview with Hamid Awaludin

Hamid Awaludin was Indonesian minister of law and human rights from 2004-2007 when Jusuf Kallawas vice president, and was Indonesian ambassador to Russia and Belarus from 2008-2011.

1.

Anwar Ibrahim claims it was Jusuf Kallawho approached him whereas JusufKalla said he was approached by Anwar. Which is true?

Hamid Awaludin:

I was present during Jusuf Kalla’s discussions with both Anwar and Najib. It was Jusuf Kalla who accepted Anwar’s request to mediate. He did not take theinitiative and approach Anwar. Jusuf Kalla does not have any political and economic interests in Malaysia.He is busy with his affairs in Indonesia. So why wouldhe take the initiative and approach Anwar? It isn’t logical.

Jusuf Kalla considers both Anwar and Najib as good friends. He wanted to help because they were competing fiercely with one another. That is how hesaw this.  

2.

Anwar claims there were several "preconditions" in the agreement eg.free elections, fair media, etc. Can you outline any preconditions?

Hamid Awaludin:

I am very sure that there were no preconditions discussed between Jusuf Kalla and Anwar. For me, adeal is a deal. And there was a deal that both parties – Anwar and Najib – agreed to.

Some people always try and find a loophole after the event, or an excuse not to deliver on their promise.Some people are different in character to others.

3.

Anwar now claims PM Najib didn't sign the agreement and it was therefore not valid. Jusuf Kalla says the PM did give his verbal agreement and therefore the deal was agreed by both parties, and was valid. Is Anwar correct or is JusufKalla?

Hamid Awaludin:

Anwar knew that Najib did not sign the agreement.Najib had very reasonable, political reasons for not signing the agreement and Anwar understood and accepted it.

But Najib gave his word that he would honour the agreement. He consented to the agreement. Basic morality teaches us that a man’s word is more important than his signature. And deeds are more important than any declaration. Najib delivered on his promise. He called for national reconciliation during hiselection result acceptance speech. Najib’s deeds matched his word.

4.

On Election Day, do you feel that the agreement was still in place? Had anything happened before Election Day to invalidate the agreement?

Hamid Awaludin:

I am very sure that nothing jeopardized the agreementin the run up to the election or on Election Day. The agreement still stood. Things changed after Najib was declared the winner. Even the day after Najib’s victory, I was personally optimistic that a deal is deal, and both sides would abide by the deal. But Anwar broke the deal. Perhaps he was unable to manage his followers,especially because the DAP had won more seats thanAnwar’s own party. Anwar found himself in a difficultposition. But a leader must lead, not be led.

5.

Do you and Jusuf Kalla feel Anwar broke the deal? If so, how?

Hamid Awaludin:

I feel that Anwar still does not accept political reality.Perhaps he has things he will not say because he doesn’t want to hurt people. I don’t know.

6.

Do you feel Anwar was/is sincere in wanting national reconciliation in Malaysia?

Hamid Awaludin:

I believed that Anwar had sincerity and I still hope hehas.

7.

Why do you think Anwar is behaving in the manner in which he is – denying the agreement, refusing to cede defeat andorganising protests across Malaysia?

Hamid Awaludin:

From the beginning, Anwar convinced himself that he would win the election. He had struggled for so longand he thought that this was the end of the struggle. He thought he would win the battle and defeat BarisanNasional. His belief was strengthened by opinion polls that were often in his favour. And each rally Anwarheld during the campaign attracted massive crowds. But in the end, the people’s choice is the ultimatefactor in a democracy.

Anwar believed he would win the election but he was afraid Najib would resist and not hand over power. So Anwar wanted insurance against this scenario. That is why he came up with the idea of the deal.

ENDS