Give Me one Reason Why I should March on the 9th of July ??

Actually I can give you more than one reason. But knowing that manyMalaysia Today readers tend to focus on the ‘wrong’ part of the article rather than what they should be focusing on (just read the comments to see what I mean) maybe I should focus on just one reason. That is easier for most of the smaller brains.

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Now, look at the chart above and tell me what you see. Yes, that’s right, Malaysian elections are won through gerrymandering.

Okay, in case you are not sure what you should be looking at, look at the figures under the column ‘GOVERNMENT’ and compare the % seats and % votes columns.

Can you see that in terms of votes the Alliance Party of 1959, 1964 and 1969 and Barisan Nasional since 1974 till 2008 never really did that well? The best was in fact during Abdullah Ahmad Badawi’s rule in 2004 when Barisan Nasional garnered 63.9% of the votes and again in 1995 (65.2%) just before the 1997 financial crisis and the 1998 political crisis that followed.

Nevertheless, even this did not give them two-thirds of the votes (66.67%).

The rest of the time, Barisan Nasional (or the Alliance Party) won only 50% to 60% of the votes (except in 1969 when they won less than 50%).

However, as you can see, it is seats and not votes which has been giving them the government time and time again. And, as I said, this is because of gerrymandering.

The Parliament seats vary from a mere 5,000 voters to over 100,000 voters. Invariably, all those ‘smaller’ seats are Barisan Nasional seats, in particular Umno, while the ‘bigger’ seats are those which Barisan Nasional has no hope of winning and which will certainly fall to the opposition.

Okay, to make you understand the issue better, it works like this. The opposition can win 100,000 votes and it will be just one seat. Barisan Nasional, on the other hand, also wins 100,000 votes but it will be two or three seats.

Now, that is why the opposition wins 50% of the votes but only 40% of the seats while Barisan Nasional’s 50% of the votes gives them 60% of the seats.

In short, dear readers, this means, based on the present system, the opposition will NEVER form the federal government because it will NEVER win more than 50% of the seats in Parliament (unless it can win more than 60% of the votes, which is quite impossible with that many phantom and postal votes floating around).

And this also means we need electoral reforms. We need a law passed that says the variance in Parliament seats should be plus-minus 20%. This means, if the benchmark for Parliament seats is, say, 50,000 voters, then the variance of 20% translates to 40,000-60,000 voters per seat (not 5,000-120,000 like now).

Only when this happens would the opposition have a fair shot at forming the next federal government. If not it will never happen (unless the opposition can garner more than 60% of the votes).

In some countries this is the law. Some countries make it law that the seats must be plus-minus 15%. In others it is plus-minus 20%. (In fact, in some countries the law says that not less than 30% of the candidates must be women). Only in Malaysia it is plus-minus 95% (gila babi sungguh).

So now you know why we need electoral reforms. And now you know why we need to march on 9th July 2011. And this is not about the opposition. It is not about Anwar Ibrahim either. It is about the rights of the people of one-man-one-vote.

If Malaysia had direct elections (like in the United States) to elect our Prime Minister, then Najib Tun Razak would never become the Prime Minister of Malaysia. Then, like in America, a non-white (in Malaysia’s case a non-Bumiputera) could become the Prime Minister.

Alas, in Malaysia we have a system that ensures the Prime Minister will always be someone from Umno and the government will always be an Umno-led coalition.

The next question would be: why bother to vote then?

Good question. I would urge you to vote so that we can see a strong opposition in Parliament and the emergence of a two-party system in Malaysia. That in itself is reason enough to vote. However, if we can see electoral reforms, then that is another matter. Then we can vote to see a change in federal government.

And that is why we need BERSIH and also why we need to support Datuk Ambiga Sreenevasan. Electoral reforms will never happen unless the people make it happen.

And ‘the people’ are you and I. We can’t depend on just the politicians.

Don’t forget, at one point of time many now in the opposition were once in the government (and many now in the government were once in the opposition). And when they were in the government did they push for electoral reforms? Or did they take advantage of the unfair system to hold on to power and only now that they are in the opposition they make so much noise about electoral reforms?

Trust me, if the opposition takes over the federal government they too would not want to change the system. They will maintain the present system to ensure they remain in power. Why change the present system to one that allows an easy change of government? And many in the opposition who were once in the government exploited the present system and did not utter a word of protest until they found themselves in the opposition.

Then only they bising tak habis-habis.

Is demonstrating part of Malay culture?

Is demonstrating part of Malay culture? Umno says no. Maybe it used to be no 500 years ago. But it became Malay culture back in 1946 when they opposed the Malay Union. And if not because of this demonstration there would not be an Umno around today. Umno was born against the backdrop of the 1946 demonstration. So a demonstration is the father of Umno.

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

SCENE ONE: British Malaya. Kampong Baharu, Kuala Lumpur. 1946.

Said: Assalamuailakum!

Rahman: Mualaikumsalam. Ah, Said, what brings you here? Come in.

Said: Ay Rahman, are you going to the demonstration tomorrow?

Rahman: Demonstration? What demonstration?

Said: We are getting together to demonstrate against the government. We are going to oppose the plan to set up the Malayan Union.

Rahman: But I thought the Malayan Union is a fait accompli. Haven’t the Rulers already endorsed it?

Said: Yes, but the Rulers were tricked by Sir Harold MacMichael. They did not know that the setting up of the Malayan Union will not only erode the powers of the Rulers but that of the Rakyat as well. So we are going to oppose it.

Rahman: But won’t that mean we shall also be demonstrating against the Rulers?

Said: No, we shall in fact be defending the powers of the Rulers. We are not trying to accuse the Rulers of selling out the Rakyat. We are taking the position that MacMichael tricked the Rulers. So the Rulers are as much victims as the Rakyat. Raja Uda, Datuk Panglima Gantang, Nik Kamil and Datuk Kamaruddin have already spoken to the Rulers and Their Highnesses have sanctioned the demonstration. The Istana is also sending representatives to join the demonstration. The Rulers are with us, Rahman.

Rahman: I’m not sure, Said. Demonstrating is not our Malay culture. And I am wary about opposing the government.

Said: Alamak, Rahman, we can no longer be feudalistic. All over the world the people are opposing their governments. Our neighbours Indonesia and the Philippines have already gained independence. India is soon going to be independent. And they are gaining independence because the Rakyat dared oppose the government. Malaya will never gain independence unless we dare oppose the government.

Rahman: But still, Said, demonstrations are a show of defiance and dissent. We Malays are not like that. Malays are a tolerant and subservient race. We never oppose the powers-that-be even if they are evil and unjust. That is not what Hang Tuah taught us.

Said: Rahman, Hang Tuah is outdated. That is something that is 500 years old. Today Malays must be like Hang Jebat.

Rahman: I am shocked that you say this, Said. Are you saying that Hang Jebat is the hero and not Hang Tuah?

Said: Exactly! Look, Rahman, tomorrow is going to be the beginning of the New Malay, the Melayu Baharu. Don’t you want to be a part of history? We are going to see history being made tomorrow. Do you want to just be a spectator and watch history being made rather than be a participant in the making of history?

Rahman: Said, I work for the government. You sell nasi lemak. You have nothing to worry about. I have to think of my job and my family.

Said: If we all just think of ourselves and not of the nation when is Malaya ever going to see self-rule? We all need to make sacrifices. I sell nasi lemak because I refuse to work for the government. I don’t recognise this government so how can I work for it? I choose to sell nasi lemak although I can take the easy way out and work for the government like you.

Rahman: You are different Said.

Said: What is so different between you and me? I also have a family to feed just like you. But I refuse to collaborate with the government. If I work for the government that means I agree with what the government is doing. I will never work for the government unless we first see a change of government. I would rather suffer and earn pittance by selling nasi lemak rather than live a comfortable life on a salary earned from a government I am opposed to.

Rahman: (sighs)…You are always the dissident, Said.

Said: That is because I am a Muslim, Rahman. But I follow the true principles of Islam. In Islam if we collaborate with evil then we are also evil. We must oppose evil, Rahman. That is what Islam asks us to do. If you are a true Muslim at least join us for the demonstration tomorrow. Maybe you are not yet ready to resign from your government post. Never mind. But at least oppose the government by joining us tomorrow. Be a true Muslim.

Rahman: Okaylah Said. You have convinced me. I will be there. And let whatever happens happen. If I get sacked from my post I will accept that as God’s will.

Said: Rahman, you will not regret it. Tomorrow is the beginning of Malay Nationalism. After this we need to talk to the Chinese and Indians to ask them to join us in the fight for Merdeka. We can’t do it on our own. We need the support of the Chinese and Indians as well. That has to come.

SCENE TWO: British Malaya. In front of the Majestic Hotel, Kuala Lumpur. 1946.

2011 Highlights That Subsidy Cuts Were Caused By The Failure Of BN To Control Spending And Cut Down Waste

Press Statement By Penang Chief Minister And DAP Secretary-General Lim Guan Eng In Kuala Lumpur On 15 June 2011.

RM13 Billion Additional Spending Or 8% Increase Over And Above 2011 Budget Of RM 163 Billion For Only First Half Of 2011 Highlights That Subsidy Cuts Were Caused By The Failure Of BN To Control Spending And Cut Down Waste.

The tabling of a Supplementary Supply Bill in Parliament yesterday seeking RM 13 billion of additional spending for only the first half of the year due or 8% increase over and above the 2011 Budget of RM 163 billion, highlights that subsidy cuts were caused by the failure of BN to control spending and cut down waste. The people are also paying the penalty for BN’s failure to control spending when drastic subsidy cuts of sugar, electricity, natural gas and diesel have not brought about any improvements in our budget deficit.

The biggest additional spending is to cover transfer payments of RM 6 billion under Treasury. The social sector accounted for the second largest quantum of RM3.62 billion.

Fishermen and consumers are asking the question why there is no improvement in government finances when they have to pay more now for diesel, sugar and other basic commodities. Has the government not said that subsidy cuts are necessary to cut down expenditures that the government can no longer afford?

The failure to make any cuts in gas subsidies from Petronas of RM19 billion yearly has only increased public unhappiness, when the greatest beneficiaries of these RM19 billion annual gas subsidies are Indpendent Power Producers(IPPs). Up to end 2010, Petronas has extended about RM 131.3 billion in gas subsidy to both the power and non-power sectors.

The greatest beneficiaries of the RM 131.3 billion gas subsidies are IPPs who also benefit from a guaranteed buyer through the compulsory Power Purchase Agreement signed by TNB. In 2009, TNB received RM 5.4 billion in gas subsidies, IPPs RM7.3 billion and the non-power sector RM6.8 billion.

Normally TNB would not be raising electricity tariffs with such huge subsidies. But the RM5.4 billion subsidies enjoyed by TNB were offset by being forced to purchase power they do not need at high prices that only profits IPPs, This has caused Malaysia to record a reserve margin that is the highest in the world of 52.6% in 2010.

A think-tank had estimated that IPPs would have to charge 80% higher than their Singapore counterparts if natural gas were sold to them at market rates, due to their bloated and inefficient cost structures. Research for Social Advancement (Refsa) estimated that local IPPs would need to raise their average prices 3 times from the present 25 sen/kWh to 74 sen/kWh if subsidies were removed. In comparison, Singapore power producers charge 41 sen/kWh.

Malaysia is having the worst of both worlds due to BN’s bad governance. By reducing subsidy, there are inflationary pressures causing prices to rise and hurting the poor. And yet subsidy cuts do not improve efficiency and competitiveness nor cut down budget expenditures as the IPPs are still allowed to enjoy gas subsidies. The only losers are 27 million ordinary consumers who are not IPPs. Perhaps BN needs a strong reminder whether it is the IPPs or ordinary Malaysians that determine the direction and destiny of the country.

LIM GUAN ENG

What Are The Cost Of Malaysia's Honour ??

Malaysian Insider
By Debra Chong
KUALA LUMPUR, Dec 2 – Twenty years ago today, Malaysia made a pact to put an end to an armed conflict that was costing incalculable damage to lives and the country’s economy.

The two-document deal, inked in a small hotel in Hatyai, bore the names of Malaysia’s highest-level government officials, their Thai counterparts and the leaders of the Communist Party of Malaya (CPM).

The first document, termed the “Agreement Between The Government Of Malaysia And The Communist Party Of Malaya To Terminate Hostilities” was signed by the then home affairs ministry’s secretary-general Datuk Wan Sidek Wan Abdul Rahman, chief of defence forces General Tan Sri Hashim Mohd Ali and police inspector-general (IGP) Tan Sri Haniff Omar (pic, right).

A second document, detailing the terms and conditions of the peace treaty, was signed by then deputy IGP Datuk Rahim Noor and the director of Special Branch (SB) Datuk Zulkifli Abdul Rahman on behalf of Malaysia and Chin Peng (pic, left), the CPM secretary-general, and central committee comrade, Rashid Maidin, on the same day and in front of the Thai government.

The three-way treaty, also known as the Hatyai Peace Accord, was met with international support then.

In a nutshell, the two countries agreed to stop hunting down CPM members, who had been waging a jungle war against the governments for over 40 years.

The guerrillas were allowed to settle down and live peacefully in a country of their choice and their slates wiped cleaned.

In return, they must dispose off their weapons and swear to be loyal to King and country and follow the rule of law.

But today, the Federal government has gone back on its word in its repeated refusal to allow Sitiawan-born Chin Peng to return home and, in the process, may have caused irrevocable damage to Malaysia’s reputation as a democratic country.

Article 3 on the one-page first document states: “Members of the Communist Party of Malaya and members of its disbanded armed units, who are of Malaysian origin and who wish to settle down in MALAYSIA, shall be allowed to do so in accordance with the laws of Malaysia.”

In the second document, the terms are laid out more clearly for those who want to live in Malaysia.

Ex-CPM members have a one-year grace period to decide where they want to live: in Malaysia, Thailand or elsewhere and arrangements shall be made to fulfil their wishes.

The Malaysian government is to supply the necessary identity cards to those who want to return; and shall replace the documents for those who lost theirs, after verification.

Chin Peng, who has since reclaimed his given birth name of Ong Boon Hua, had applied to return to Malaysia, which the IGP Haniff acknowledged in an NST report dated April 28, 1991.

“Chin Peng submitted his application quite late ... towards the end of the period,” the English daily quoted him saying then.

On Sept 9 that same year, NST reported then Special Branch director Datuk Zulkifli Abdul Rahman as saying Chin Peng’s application “was being processed” and would be given the same treatment as the rest, after announcing that the first batch of 13 ex-CPM members had returned home.

The next day, IGP Haniff was reported saying Chin Peng’s application was being “studied.”

In the end, the cops denied the communist leader had ever put in his application to return.

Chin Peng mooted a suit in 2005 that also failed when the Federal Court upheld two lower court judgments requiring him to produce his birth certificate to prove his citizenship claim, despite his argument that he had lost them during World War II when he left home to fight the Japanese army.

The Malaysian Insider recently received a bundle of documents from Chin Peng’s lawyers, including copies of declassified information, which showed the government flipping and flopping over his status in the years that followed the signing of the deal.

Among them were documents to support his claims to having been born here, such as his parents’ Malaysian citizenship papers, his mother’s Malaysian passport and his only son’s Malaysian birth certificate.

Testimonies from key players behind the peace treaties also revealed that it was the Malaysian government that made the overt gesture to extend the olive branch to the communists even though it knew it would face strong objections from the people, especially staffers from the security forces.

The story began in 1986, when Rahim Noor was appointed to head the Special Branch (SB), the covert operations branch of the police force.

It was he who came up with the idea to put an end to the protracted fight with the CPM through a peace treaty, even though he knew very well the sentiments of the people, the police and the army, who were the ones at the frontline and had been victims of the communists.

The CPM guerrilla movement was still strong then. Their jungle warfare tactics effectively prevented the government from developing the more rural areas, which Zainuddin Maidin noted in his book “Unsung Heroes” published by Utusan Publications & Distributors Sdn Bhd.

Zainuddin was at the time of the peace negotiations the Group Editor of Utusan Melayu, and one of several media bosses who was enlisted by Rahim to help soften opposition towards the government’s initiative for peace talks with the communist party.

The others were V.K. Chin from The Star, A. Kadir Jasin from NST and Bernama’s Abdul Rahman Sulaiman.

In his book, Zainuddin wrote: “According to the Special Branch’s estimates, it needed no less than one million ringgit to kill one communist terrorist, an amount which covered the cost of espionage and hunting down.”

Zainuddin said Rahim knew the risks he was taking but pushed for the talks because he felt the pros outweighed the cons.

Dr Mahathir Mohamad’s administration at that time was being challenged from within by Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah, which threatened the political stability of the Federal government.

Rahim was convinced that if the CPM could be persuaded to come to the table and agree to lay down their arms, the country would be “forever free” from communist militancy.

He proposed it to the PM and received Dr Mahathir’s full support to pursue the project, which was proven in an official letter addressed to him much later.

In a letter dated August 21, 1989, Dr Mahathir commended the cop who by then held the rank of deputy IGP for the “substantial progress made in the on-going negotiation with the CPM.”

Rahim could not have done it alone, of course. A couple of years earlier, he roped in the SB’s expert interrogator, Yau Kong Yew, who had successfully rehabilitated many CPM members and was on the verge of retiring from the force, to help bring Chin Peng to the table and talk peace.

The Thai government was also enlisted because they, too, were facing civil unrest in the southern states bordering Malaysia caused by rebels who were working with CPM’s 10th regiment to create a self-ruling Muslim state.

The three-way negotiations proper started in February 1989 and lasted all the way to November that year.

Minutes of the truce talks recorded in senior Thai army General Datuk Kitti Ratanachaya’s book, “The Communist Party of Malaya, Malaysia and Thailand: Truce Talks Ending The Armed Struggle of the Commumist Party of Malaya”, revealed the Malaysian government’s reasons for pushing the talks despite strong opposition from their countrymen.

Rahim, who played a key role as Malaysia’s chief negotiator, proposed that the signatories be civil servants and not politicians in order to “avoid undue adverse political repercussions”.

The present administration led by Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak appears to have been swayed by sentiment to keep the former Public Enemy No. 1 from stepping foot on Malaysian soil.

His deputy, Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin, has repeatedly echoed the misconceived view that “forgiveness” is a prerequisite to allowing the 85-year-old communist leader back. It is not.

It is also not known if the present leaders have read the two documents for themselves.

The government must keep in mind that it is bound by a contract, even if it was signed ages ago.

If it does not keep its part of the deal, it can only lead to one conclusion, which will have very far-reaching consequences on all future agreements.

Yang Memimpin dan Yang Di Pimpin

1. Pemimpin adalah orang yang memimpin sekumpulan orang yang dipimpin.



2. Apabila individu pemimpin itu sendiri perlu dipimpin secara berterusan dalam setiap keputusan kecil dan besar dalam kepimpinannya, status pemimpin yang ada pada individu tersebut pantas menjadi pertikaian.



3. Pemimpin yang dipimpin hanya wujud sebagai boneka birokrasi yang menyukarkan proses membuat keputusan dalam sistem kepimpinan. Manakan tidak, setiap maklumat yang diberikan kepadanya perlu disampaikan pula kepada individu yang memimpinnya untuk membuat keputusan; dan keputusan yang dibuat itu pula diberitahu kembali kepada pemimpin yang dipimpin ini untuk dilaksanakan sebagaimana yang diperintahkan.



4. Kewujudan boneka birokrasi seperti ini menyebabkan sistem kepimpinan menjadi tidak berkesan manakala sistem penyampaian (delivery system) menjadi teramat panjang lantas membuka ruang untuk berlakunya penyelewengan dan salah guna kuasa dikalangan kakitangan bawahannya.



5. Menteri Besar Perlis, Datuk Seri Md Isa Sabu, ialah salah satu contoh pemimpin yang dipimpin. Beliau dipimpin oleh Radzi Sheikh Ahmad yang dilantik sebagai Punahsihat 46% kepada Menteri Besar Perlis.



6. Natijah daripada wujudnya boneka birokrasi ini dalam tempoh yang panjang, begitu ramai kakitangan kanan dalam pentadbiran tidak lagi dapat dikawal untuk menyempurnakan aspirasi dan kehendak masyarakat di negeri Perlis.



Mengkritik Pemimpin Sendiri



7. Keikhlasan dalam perjuangan menuntut semua pejuang menyuarakan kebenaran walaupun pahit dengan melangkaui kepentingan diri.



8. Hatta, negarawan ulung seperti Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad sanggup menyuarakan kebanaran walaupun beliau akhirnya terpaksa dikeluarkan atau mengeluarkan diri daripada parti yang disayanginya.



9. Ketika menceritakan kembali buku kontroversi The Malay Dilemma, Tun Dr Mahathir menulis di dalam buku terbaru beliau A Doctor in The House,

“...he (Prime Minister Tunku Abdul Rahman) could not go on living on his past glories while the Malay future ever more bleak and uncertain. That was why we felt he should go; the question was, when would he?”. (page 237)

“beliau (Tunku) tidak boleh terus dibayangi oleh kejayaan beliau di masa lalu sementara masa depan orang Melayu menjadi lebih tertekan dan tidak menentu. Dengan sebab itu kami merasakan beliau patut berundur; tetapi persoalannya bila?”.



10. Walaupun sebahagian besar rakyat Perlis terpaksa akur dengan kehendak kuasa veto bahawa Md Isa Sabu ialah Menteri Besar mereka hari ini; namun rata-rata ahli dan penyokong UMNO tidak berupaya menerima beliau sebagai pemimpin mereka.



11. Dengan sebab yang demikian itu, rujukan terhadap seseorang individu sebagai “pemimpin” sewajarnya diperhalusi oleh sekalian rakyat dan pemimpin itu sendiri. Jangan lagi ada yang terus-terusan menipu diri sendiri untuk mengatakan yang hitam itu warnanya putih.



Mengundurkan Boneka Birokrasi



12. Individu yang memperoleh kuasa dengan rampasan secara veto dan kemudiannya menjadi boneka birokrasi yang merosakkan sistem tidak seharusnya dinobatkan sebagai “pemimpin”.



13. Jika dirujuk Tataetika Ahli UMNO, Pengerusi Perhubungan UMNO Perlis, Dato’ Seri Md Isa Sabu terang-terangan melanggar tatasusila sebagai ahli UMNO dari perenggan yang pertama lagi.









14. UNDUR! MD ISA UNDUR!

Malaysia and the IMF

Malaysia and the IMF




Below is the text of an address from Islamic Party Leader David Musa Pidcock published in Common Sense issue 30 (Spring 2000).

On 18 March 2000 the Spectator carried an article by its contributing editor Justin Marozzi under the headline "East Beats West" on "how Mahathir Mohamad rescued his country and made fools of the IMF" quoting him as saying: "I did it my way – and it worked".

The article showed how the Malaysian prime minister withstood the onslaught on the Asian economies and exposed the IMF as an extended arm of Western policy. Whilst we do not agree with the way the Malaysian government has treated its domestic opposition without the necessary regard for their dignity and the required differentiation between subversive elements and genuine critics, he must be recommended for standing up to a formidable enemy. The Spectator article prompted the following response from Islamic Party Leader David Musa Pidcock:

In response to your article "East Beats West", The Spectator 18/3/2000, how Mahathir Mohamad bucked the market, rescued his country and made fools of the IMF. It might be of interest for you to know that there was some western input into Dr. Mahathir's eastern thinking. The unsung western heroes include James Gibb-Stuart author of the Money Bomb and Hidden Menace; Kenneth C. Palmerton Vice Chairman of CCMJ – the Christian Council for Monetary Justice and an English convert Rupert Mohammed Rafiq an English banker, and other members of the Forum For Stable Currencies, which meets in the House of Lords every month. By following their good advice and the courage of his own convictions Dr. Mahathir has been able to demonstrate what many politicians know but, because of their cowardice in the face of the enemy, have failed to implement in the interest of the ones who voted for them - Brian Gould was one of the few who understood the solution and would have acted rightly - which is why he was prevented from becoming Leader or Chancellor of the Labour Party. What we have with Tony Blair and Incapability Brown are just Tories in sheep's clothing.

Dr. Mahathir's courageous actions conclusively prove that sovereign nations, however small, can and should always ignore the IMF, The World Bank, and anyone else who tries to impose such destructive monetary and economic restrictions on their countries, particularly when the medicine is rarely applied to the organisations making these harsh rules which claim that: there can be no gain without pain. An extract from an official report into the United Nations Monetary & Financial Conference at Bretton Woods is timeless. It was referred to in a speech to the House of Commons by Norman Smith, the member of parliament for Nottingham South, on Monday, the 20th of August, 1945, and accurately predicted that the IMF and the World Bank - which came out of Bretton Woods - "would POISON world harmony" which it undoubtedly has and yet they are still calling for more of the same.

Your "East Beats West" confirms what we have been advocating for many years together with many others going back as far back as the early 17th century. It was much of this information which we managed to convey in a series of letters, faxes and direct face to face contacts with Dr. Mahathir's advisors and his personal private secretaries leading up to my presenting him with a pack of info personally on the last day of the Langkawi Airshow in 1997. The material included - The Debt Virus; Abraham Lincoln's Monetary Declaration of 1864; David Riccardo's 1823 plan for the National Bank of England; James Gibb-Stuart's recommendations; and, amongst other things the final draft of Napoleon et'l Islam; which we published in Malaysia in 1999.

Dr. Mahathir has shown great courage in taking these steps knowing the fate that befell Abraham Lincoln and Napoleon when they, in turn, tried to buck their own particular markets. Lincoln's Greenback was an interest free alternative to the banker's monopoly money for which he was asked to pay 36% interest. By 1809, Napoleon had succeeded in abolishing usury in France with the co-operation of the Sanhedrin and was also calling for a Common European Currency to facilitate fair trade - a situation the City of London and the Bank of England still vehemently oppose - the Battle of Waterloo decided Europe's fate in favour of the fractional reserve system which has a natural propensity to self destruct and bring about war.

As for conspiracy theories, I think the conspiracy facts are much more interesting. Many were surprised by Al Gore's overt public support for Anwar Ibrahim. However, it is clear that his support was orchestrated by the IMF and Wall Street. What most of the Malaysians don't know is the fact that Anwar Ibrahim is a close friend and ally of Michael Camdessus, the Chairman of the IMF with whom he was co-authoring a book. Unfortunately for Anwar he forgot the maxim: If you sup with the devil you need an awfully long spoon. It is worth noting that Al Gore's daughter, who is also his main advisor, is married to Wall Street Banker, Paul Schiff. The Schiff's have a long track record of destabilizing and taking over governments. It was Jacob Schiff, who invited Trotsky to Wall Street in 1917 to put the finishing touches to the Bolshevik Revolution, which he also financed: so keep a keen eye on Gore, his daughter, and his son-in-law Paul Schiff - remember old habits die hard.

More good news, this time from Pakistan. Last week we met with Justice Muhammad Taqi Usmani, a Member of the Shariat Appellate Bench Supreme Court of Pakistan who, amongst other things, is Deputy Chairman of the Islamic Fiqh Academy (OIC) Jeddah, who informed us that they have issued their final judgement which is now binding on the government to Islamise the economy by June 2001. By the end of March, this year, all private transactions involving riba/interest will be outlawed. K.C. Palmerton and I went to Karachi last April and delivered similar materials to those provided to Dr. Mahathir. An American video "The Money Masters – A History of Capital Crimes" apparently proved decisive in their judgement, which now runs to some 1100 pages.

Dr. Mahathir "did it his way", which is also the way for all others to go. Perhaps a more suitable song title for Dr. Mahathir to have chosen would have been: "I Got By With A Little Help From My Friends."

Author: David Pidcock
Date Published: Spring 2000

OH MALAYS....

malays can actually be their own master if they are rsponsible, have good work ethics, free from corruption and abuse of power, good education and have dignity. Remember, we will not be the master of ourself and family if we are just an instrument for someone else. For example, when the malays get contracts and projects, we will always passed on to the experts in the chinese community who have the real knowledge. In the end, the practice of malay supremacy has led to the chinese being the masters. Surely, the chinese traders laugh at the malays because they realise that such malays have no self-worth, no dignity and are prepared to sell malay rights.

trust me, malays will only be respected when status and contracts are form their own effort and not because of their "cable" in the government.. we all know about this dont we? I know many malays who have success with their own efforts and sweat. i respect them for that. they shows the extraordinary capabilities that we, the malays once had. we conquer the tanah melayu, the sumatera and the borneo.. we also once had warriors who fights for their country and not for fame and name..

many of the malays nowadays also had gone overseas to find greater success..they are unafraid of fair and just competition. do malays, with the guarantees of article 153 of federal constitutions, still need further assistance from the government? I do feel that malays still need assistance but in context of providing safety net for the poor and needy. rejecting malay supremacy does not mean rejecting the privileges provided for by the law that is the back bone of the country. THE REAL QUESTION IS.. WHICH MALAY TRULY NEED ASSISTANCE?

the form and manner in which we help the malays is just as important so there are sufficient resources for all and not just SELECTED malays. this is important to reduce the current widespread discrimination and cronyism.

but.. deep in my heart.. the 30% bumiputra equity are extremely important for malays. i cant imagine the malays to challenge gov projects and contracts with the chinese. but till when we must be afraid? my sister are currently studying at MRSM kubang pasu.. recently, my mom attended her graduation day.. know what? the best student at that particular MRSM is a chinese girl came from a small village called kandang in malacca. the top 5 richest man in malaysia are all from different races than malays.. why? because we are less courageous than them.

my purpose to criticize the concept of malay suprmacy and the wrongly intrepeted NEP that was carried on after 1990, is to ensure that the policy to help bumiputras continues to succeed without upsetting or making it difficult for anyone else. From what i see, some umno leaders do not want the people, especially the malays to understand the difference between the policy and its implementation as one to benefit malays or to which benefits their cronies alone. they want to hide this from the public eye. in fact, we are the only country in the world where the majority race got privileges..

The Warisan Merdeka.. is it worth it?

Things are not looking good for the Prime Minister after presenting his 2011 budget. I wonder whether he walks through the budget with his consultants that prepared it or just simply read them without full understanding of it, in Parliament.

Take a look at the Prime Minister response to the great resistance of the 100-storey Warisan Merdeka tower.

Datuk Seri Najib Razak denied today that it was his idea to build the controversial 100-storey Warisan Merdeka tower in the heart of the capital, saying instead the project had been proposed by Permodalan Nasional Bhd (PNB).

There are so many flaws in this one sentence alone. Let me point them out to you.

a)How can he denied it when he already presented it in Parliament. It does not matter whose idea it was but as a leader he must be held responsible because he accepted it without any consultation with others. If he disagree with the proposal, why then he allocated a budget for it.

b)A project still under proposal means it has yet to be agreed or approved by the Government, so why allocate such a huge budget when the project may not be granted approval eventually. Thus, it means that the PM had accepted the proposal without consulting the public and his "People First" means nothing anymore.

c)Who owns Permodalan Nasional Bhd (PNB). This is what PNB is after paying a visit to it's website:

With fund under management totaling about RM150 billion, the PNB Group is the country's leading investment institution with a diversified portfolio of interests that include unit trusts, institution property trust, property management and asset management.

with it's board of trustees as follows:

Chairman
YAB Dato' Sri Mohd. Najib bin Tun Hj. Abdul Razak

Deputy Chairman
YAB Tan Sri Dato' Haji Muhyiddin bin Mohd. Yassin

Y.B. Dato' Mustapa bin Mohamed

Y.B. Dato' Seri Haji Ahmad Husni bin Mohamad Hanadzlah

YABhg Tun Ahmad Sarji bin Abdul Hamid

You can read more details at PNB website here but be warned, many links do not work.

Is PNB government owned or is it a private entity?

If it is government owned why the PM denied that it was his idea, basically if it is government owned then the PM should be consulted first and the public should be informed about it. The PM is the one to object or approve the project.

If it is a private entity which looks more like it, why the hell should public fund be used. PNB should arrange for their own financing if they think their proposal to develop this 100-storey tower can benefit everyone and that in turn means they can make profit out of it.

How can the PM denied that this was not his idea when he is the chairman of the board of trustees. Was he not informed about the proposal long before they decide to allocate the budget for it?

Coming to the 13th General Election. My observation is that its a touch and go situation for umno/bn and the PM knows very well.

Three States are on shaky ground, Perak, Johor and Negri Sembilan and more State seats may be lost in Trengganu, Sabah and Sarawak.

Umno/bn spent millions upon millions at every general election and this 13th GE is gonna cost them much more then usual. They have plenty of money but may not be enough for this 13th GE.

Najib needs to seek a new mandate to strengthen his grip on power knowing that failing to do so will be his downfall. There is a figure within his own party maneuvering to take control over his position.

The surprise which the PM mentioned when asked about the 13th GE, not too long ago, will be that this 13th GE will be for Parliamentary seats only and together with Sarawak state election.

The remaining 12 State assemblies will not be dissolved to allow him to concentrate on just the Parliamentary seats with sufficient funds to ward off the opposition onslaught.

by malaysia for all ( Richard Loh )

Summary and Highlights of Budget 2011

EPF relief scope extended but limit not increased

Existing EPF relief of maximum RM6,000 is extended to include employees’ contributions to Private Pension Fund (PPF) to be set up by the government in 2011. Employers are allowed for tax deductions for contributions made to the Private Pension Fund. In other word, apart from mandatory contribution to EPF, employees and employers (including self-employed) can now opt to make additional contributions to Private Pension Fund to be set up by the government.

This benefits the lower income group as most of the medium to high income group may already claiming up to the maximum relief of RM6,000 as the relief of RM6,000 is also include the life insurance premium, apart from employees’ own EFP contributions. For employers, this may open up an additional tax planning for tax deductions on such contributions to PPF while rewarding the employees or better structuring the staff remuneration package, as there is a cap allowed for tax deductions in respect of employers’ EPF contributions for staff. Presently, employer contributions to the approved schemes (eg. EPF) in excess of 19% of the employee’s remuneration will be disallowed as tax deductions. However, employer contributions to this new PPF will be allowed for tax deductions and will not count towards the 19% cap.

However, will the employers happy to subscribe to this new PPF? They can always increase the employer (portion) EPF contribution as long it is not exceeding the 19% tax deduction limit. The structure, investment policies as well as return to the new PPF are unknown, compared to the well-established EPF. For those employees who are already claimed at the maximum limit of RM6,000, would they willing to contribute to PPF, in additional to the current mandatory EPF contribution, which may reduce their disposable income but no tax efficiency will be achived as tax relief claimed may already at the maximum limit.

How this new PPF will benefit self-employed persons? If a person carried out a business under the sole proprietorship or partnership (referred to as “business” herewith), the EPF contributions made by the business are not allowed as tax deductions but instead the contributions will be added back and form part of the profit derived from the business by that person and assess for individual tax accordingly. With the introduction of new PPF, contributions made by the business will be allowed for tax deductions.

Parent medical relief scope extended but limit not increased

Current individual tax relief of up to RM5,000 for parents’ medical expenses be extended to cover expenses to care for parents. These expenses are for parents who suffer from diseases or with physical or mental disabilities and who need regular treatment certified by a qualified medical practitioner. This include treatment and care at home, day care centres or home care centres. Currently the tax relief of up to RM5,000 medical expenses for parents are for treatment in clinics and hospitals, treatment in nursing homes and dental treatment (exclude cosmetic dental treatment).

50% stamp duty exemption on housing S&P and loan agreements

First-time Malaysian citizen house buyers will be given stamp duty exemption of 50% on (1) instruments of transfer (i.e sale and purchase agreement) and (2) loan agreement on a residential house price not exceeding RM350,000 during 1 Jan 2011 to 31 Dec 2012. Residential property include a terrace house, condominium, apartment or flat. Question here is – would serviced apartments erected on commercial land be scope out?

Service tax increase to 6%

Service tax rate will be increased from 5% to 6% with effect from 1 Jan 2011. This will impact quite a number of service industry as well as individual consumptions. This may be a temporary measure to increase government revenue while pending the implementation of Goods and Services Tax (GST).

ASTRO monthly subscription fee will be increased with a service tax of 6% with effect from 1 Jan 2011. Service tax of 6% will be imposed on paid satellite broadcasting services in which this service was not subject to service tax previously.

The Budget is more focusing on a macro economy and it appears not too many announcements or tax proposals that are affecting the individuals and companies directly.

No new taxes were introduced. No new policies announced on tackling the speculative buying of real properties, in particular the loan to value cap ratio at 70% or 80%.

No tax reductions for individuals and corporate. There was no announcement on withholding tax on dividend income from Real Estate Investment Trust (REIT).

Nothing was announced on bonus for civil servants.

This Budget is very plain and there was not many tax changes or proposals.

FAKTA RMK-10 (YANG DIBENTANGKAN DI PARLIMEN OLEH PM)

KUALA LUMPUR: Rancangan Malaysia Ke-10 (RMK-10) yang dibentangkan oleh Perdana Menteri Datuk Seri Mohd Najib Tun Razak di Dewan Rakyat hari ini adalah rancangan pembangunan negara untuk tempoh lima tahun.

Pelaksanaan RMK-10 akan bermula dari tahun 2011-2015.

Intipati ucapan Perdana Menteri pada pembentangan RMK10 adalah bertemakan "Rancangan Kemakmuran Ekonomi dan Keadilan Sosial".

Ia dilihat amat kritikal bagi meneruskan kesinambungan prakarsa nasional ke arah merealisasikan Wawasan 2020 menjadi sebuah negara maju dan berpendapatan tinggi.

Berikut adalah fakta-fakta penting RMK-10:

* Memperuntukkan RM230 bilion bagi perbelanjaan pembangunan bagi tempoh lima tahun tersebut.

* Daripada jumlah itu, 55 peratus diagihkan kepada sektor ekonomi, 30 peratus kepada sektor sosial, 10 peratus kepada sektor keselamatan dan lima peratus untuk pentadbiran am.

* Laporan ekonomi itu bagi tempoh 2011-2015 setebal 449 muka surat untuk edisi Bahasa Melayu dan 429 muka surat bagi edisi Bahasa Inggeris, yang diterbitkan oleh Unit Perancang Ekonomi, Jabatan Perdana Menteri akan dijual pada berharga RM80.

* RMK-10 merupakan satu daripada empat tiang utama di bawah pentadbiran Najib. * Tiga lagi tiang tonggak itu ialah Gagasan 1Malaysia: Rakyat Didahulukan, Pencapaian Diutamakan; Program Transformasi Kerajaan (GTP) dan Model Baru Ekonomi (MBE).

* 10 PREMIS UTAMA RMK-10:

Pertama:- Memacu ekonomi domestik dengan kepekaan persekitaran luar negara.

Kedua: Memanfaatkan dan menuas faktor kepelbagaian etnik sebagai satu elemen kejayaan di arena antarabangsa.

Ketiga: Mentransformasi negara ke arah pendapatan tinggi menerusi pengkhususan.

Keempat: Menjayakan pertumbuhan diterajui oleh produktiviti dan inovasi.

Kelima: Memupuk, menarik dan mengekalkan modal insan unggul.

Keenam: Memastikan peluang yang saksama dan melindungi golongan mudah terjejas.

Ketujuh: Pertumbuhan bertumpu, pembangunan inklusif.

Kelapan: Menyokong perkongsian pintar yang efektif.

Kesembilan: Menghargai khazanah alam sekitar.

Kesepuluh: Kerajaan umpama syarikat yang berdaya saing.

* 5 TERAS STRATEGIK Pertama RMK-10:

Pertama: Menggubah falsafah dan pendekatan kerajaan ke arah mentransformasikan Malaysia dengan metodologi NKRA.

Kedua: Mewujudkan persekitaran kondusif bagi menggerakkan pertumbuhan ekonomi.

Ketiga: Menuju ke arah pembangunan sosioekonomi secara inklusif.

Keempat: Membangun dan mengekalkan modal insan bertaraf dunia.

Kelima: Mewujudkan persekitaran kondusif ke arah mempertingkatkan kualiti hidup.

* Peruntukan RMK-10 bagi infrastruktur bukan fizikal meningkat kepada 40 peratus, berbanding 21.8 peratus dalam RMK-9, tumpuan diberikan kepada program pembangunan kemahiran, aktiviti R&D dan modal teroka.

* Sebuah institusi perkhidmatan awam bertaraf dunia akan diwujudkan untuk meningkatkan keupayaan penjawat awam.

* Tumpuan kepada 12 Bidang Ekonomi Utama Negara (NKEA) akan diumumkan Oktober nanti iaitu:

(i) Minyak dan gas (ii) Minyak sawit dan produk berkaitan (iii) Perkhidmatan kewangan (iv) Pemborongan dan peruncitan (v) Pelancongan (vi) Teknologi Maklumat dan Komunikasi (ICT) (vii) Perkhidmatan Pendidikan (viii) Elektrik dan elektronik (ix) Perkhidmatan perniagaan (x) Penjagaan kesihatan swasta (xi) Pertanian (xii) Greater Kuala Lumpur

* Satu unit khas, iaitu Unit Transformasi Ekonomi, akan ditubuhkan untuk merancang, menyelaras pelaksanaan dan pembangunan NKEA.

* Suruhanjaya Persaingan dan Tribunal Rayuan akan ditubuhkan untuk memastikan pelaksanaan undang-undang lebih teratur dan berkesan.

* Kerajaan terus berusaha untuk meletakkan Malaysia di lima tangga terbaik negara paling kompetitif di dunia.

* 1MDB akan membangunkan projek strategik KL meliputi Lapangan Terbang TUDM Sg Besi dan KL International Financial District.

* RMK-10 juga akan memastikan sasaran ekuiti korporat sebanyak 30% untuk Bumiputera dikekalkan.

* Dana berjumlah RM20 bilion akan disediakan melalui Dana Mudahcara atau Facilitation Fund bagi memudahkan sektor swasta membiayai projek perkongsian awam-swasta.

* Melalui Dana Mudahcara, kerajaan anggar menarik pelaburan swasta sekurang-kurangnya RM200 bilion; Antara projek yang dipertimbangkan ialah penambakan tanah di Westport, Pelabuhan Klang, Pembangunan Malaysia Truly Asia Centre di Kuala Lumpur dan Taman Teknologi Tinggi Senai di Iskandar Malaysia, Johor.

* Sebuah unit khas ditubuhkan di bawah Jabatan Perdana Menteri bagi memandu dan mengarah keberkesanan sistem inovasi negara serta program pembangunan inovasi sedia ada.

* Pembiayaan kerajaan kepada syarikat modal teroka awam akan berbentuk ekuiti dan bukan pinjaman.

* Dana Inovasi Mudharabah (MIF) dengan peruntukan sebanyak RM500 juta akan diperkenal bagi menyediakan modal berisiko kepada syarikat modal teroka kerajaan.

* Dana Perkembangan Perniagaan dengan peruntukan permulaan sebanyak RM150 juta akan ditubuhkan bagi merapatkan jurang pembiayaan antara pengkomersilan peringkat awal dan pembiayaan modal teroka bagi produk berteknologi tinggi.

* Undang-undang kebankrapan akan dipermudah untuk menyokong budaya mengambil risiko terhitung, menghapuskan stigma kegagalan dan membenarkan usahawan berkaliber lagi wibawa yang gagal untuk kembali aktif.