There was saying - discretion is a better part of valor - meaning that sometimes, it is better not to do anything lest your usual valor will invite more trouble from the opposition. In the political arena, sometimes it is necessary to maintain silence lest you give ammunition for the opposition to hit left and right for nothing.
There's still the need for the opposition parties to grow up, be more mature in and playing smart, not charging into battle with the assumption that a win is guaranteed. Didn't Sun Tzu mentioned emphasized about playing smart lest you fall into the hands of the old man who is well versed in our Malaysian politics?
Winning the war is not about winning every battle. Sometimes, losing a battle is deliberate way and decision taken before heading for the win. Likewise if the present opposition wants to take over Putrajaya.
With many people, mostly from DAP and PAS talking all sorts of things here and there, they conveniently placed themselves and providing the opposition hands ammunition to attack them with their lies and manipulation. Why do you think Utusan and those UMNO-associated media people keep saying things that the opposition say that they are lying about?
Even doing this discretion means being silent of who and where would you place until at the very last minute. Do you ever wonder why I have not been writing things lately, or why I see the same bunch of people commenting often at Malaysia Today? True, I may have write once a while there, but it's merely to say yes or drop by a greeting or two, but the saying goes that a real smart person don't always talk much but goes to the point, keeping it plain and simple. Talk is cheap right?
When I read about the ANAK-led Felda demo today in Semarak, I mused that there are a few number in Felda that has started to realize that it would be disastrous to do the listing at the stock market (FGVH in this case). At least it's a little footstep towards mental revolution. Everyone should have the freedom of thought and reasoning, not to follow things so blindly.
A little just a week ago, the Malaysian launch of Iphone 5 happened at Capsquare KL. By the time the weekend was over, there were thousands of people lining up to get the phone. Maybe it was the last minute lucrative offers by Maxis for existing customers that actually got more people interested to get their hands on even a single set of the phone. This of course was the reason I happened to take the advantage of getting one. It's much lighter anyways.
People who had booked their sets and plans ahead before the launch are able to get their hands first. I was informed that there were 45 people who have been lining up like mad since the afternoon all the way until midnight there. But foregoing dinner at the usual time in exchange for donuts and cups of hot beverages surely made the 5 hours waiting time worth it. I thought it was putting my name and coming on Sunday to collect initially, until I came across the barricade.
Not even 9 pm, and the crowd is building all the way to the end!
There's paperwork to be done and that's part 1.
You've got paperwork to attend to and there's Maxis staff crew helping you out in filling the particulars and giving you the SIM card that you hold until you collect your handset. The cool thing is that you can carry your settings that you've backup for your previous phone and just carry over to your new unit once you've got your thing.
If you look at the pic above, you'd see that it's a mad queue at the barricade while some people would bring donuts and tea over. At least, this helps to put my cold down for a moment, for I was sneezing at times. Plus, there's a recharging station on the other side. But the crowd control still remains mediocre.
One more hour to go!!!!!
There's crew from TV3 and 8TV covering the event, coupled with a few online TV content and radio stations like ERA, HITz.FM and even MyFM covering the event as well. People in the crowd were randomly questioned about waiting time and their feelings towards getting their new iPhone 5. Emceeing the event was NTV7's Will Quah ad 8TV's Julie Woon (Quickie TV).
Will Quah and Julie Woon
And yes, I was randomly interviewed by her at around 10+ pm. Next thing I never knew that just after midnight, my mum called me asking, "Son, were you on TV?".
"Am I?"
Then I realized that I was on air for a moment when asked the question on how long I've been waiting.
Seconds to launch!!!
At the stroke of midnight, there's the customary launch pleasantries and there's a queue number that you need to take. Including the first 45 people who have been given the privilege to line up first, I guess that I must be around the first 200 to get the phones. Can you imagine yourself being among the red carpet while you are being filmed by the TV crew when you're attending a gala premiere? Except that you are dressing lavishly like a Hollywood celebrity...lol.
Smile, you're on candid camera!
You got to wait for the number. And when it came to my turn, there's some confusion over the paperwork. Apparently there are some who are not aware of the last minute offer that Maxis throws out their special offer for their existing customers. There's a 10 minute delay for me before grabbing it. They do have an counter where they help to setup the set for you and some accessories where you should get a screen protector before leaving.
And when I was done with the whole thing...you can still see plenty of people lining up there. And there's of course sneaking for some free dinner provided by Modestos for the corporate clientele in an another lounge - more comfy and it's air conditioned there.
1. I felt that after reading reports about the Singapore Parliament Speaker resigning over infidelity (read here), a senior citizen Lynas activist who was arrested for calling for Adnan Yaakob to resign (read Malaysiakini report here), how most Japanese politicians would resign over admission of improper conduct as well as how our own Home Minister refuses to quit after it is proven to have be in improper conduct over handling his duties, it might worth to comment and make inferences over why most Malaysian politicians simply won't quit if there is sufficient evidence and substantial, corroborated witness testimony implying of that politician.
2. My reasoning over that subject is mainly due to three main factors.
a) Fear fall of dignity and capitulation
b) Cut off from lucrative monies
c) Society / people perception over the person
The first two are inter-connected for sure.
3. I had always wanted to answer this question by my own words and view that I often tried asking some of my Malay friends about "dignity", or why people are unwilling to quit. I get a mixed bag of answers usually. But the starting point about the this question would be that we need to go back to the origins of the race (root Austronesian) and the culture that you've to understand that well. If we examine the political scenario of our present running coalition government (BN) over the last 30 years or so, we have noticed that as with the Cold War mentality, they do not take dissidence quite well and it's worse than it was before the Mahathir years (1981-2003).
Note: The Tun Razak years (1970-1976) were less severe as it with the Hussein Onn years (notable instances during that time including where "King Ghaz" as Home Minister signing quite a number of detention orders against dissidents)
The book
"Mental Revolution" (Revolusi Mental) written by 14 intellectuals
within the UMNO organization, in 1971 summarizes that the Malay society
is characterized in general as not honest with themselves; blaming
others except their own faults; being fatalists, which makes them less
keen on making efforts; lack the courage to fight truth. This has been
largely resulted from exploitation from other communities and the prolonged effect of the English colonization of Malaya. The characteristics
mentioned there also similar to our present trait of some of the politicians, not
just BN but some of them within the present federal opposition. (some of the excerpts / descriptions were from the book The Myth of The Lazy Native by the late Syed Hussein AlAtas)
4. I often look at the question above in analogy with the Provisional IRA wing in Ireland in the years prior to the Good Friday agreement in 1998. Like them, many of them believe that should something that goes against their stance, or a setback, (their way of showing their stance is like forcing it on your throat) many think of it as capitulation to the enemy.
In our local context, ask ourselves why the Home Ministry that simply seizes books / magazines that do not conform to their defined way standards (read here) or simply summons editors of newspapers that publishes articles that reveals a chink in their armor. But look at what it has gotten them into in the long run? Complacency.
5. On the individual level, I surmise that it is their fear and paranoia over self-dignity that will be gone, the moment if they caught with their pants down. How can we explain based on the famous unpublished stories that:
a) A famous politician was caught for proximity in Port Dickson in 2006 with a famous local artiste.
b) A minister famously assaulted a man for his affair with the minister's daughter who was or on the verge of divorce. Police report was made but no action taken.
c) The Jamaluddin Jarjis case in April 2008 at Havana Club, Hotel Meridien? (Read here, Malay version)
6. Yes everyone fears of their dignity stripped completely if caught. But having observed the similar cases of politicians found to be in misconduct in Japan, China and in much more matured thinking nations, there is no need to fear, for every person still has a small ounce of dignity having hitting the rock bottom moment. When reaching that moment, there is an ample time for a person to step away and the plenty of opportunities to rebuild his image, but outside of the circle of influence they used to be.
7. Haven't we noticed that in most religion books that humans are taught of mercy, compassion, love thyself and thy neighbor? Indirectly it also means that every human being should at least have a small ounce of dignity in themselves no matter what really happened to them, good or bad.
8. In related to the first factor, the money factor also plays part of it. Being a politician, a Parliamentarian earns around RM 10K per month (including extra benefits). It goes higher if you are a minister and so forth. If you are also part of the board of directors in a company, you earn more. On rock bottom moment, you lose everything, for you are pushed to resign. From that on, it's back to square one, but the problem would be where to start over again and doing outside your usual circle.
This is arguably the two main reason on the individual level why our politicians are unlikely to quit, except if going for retirement of course.
9. The last factor is also attributed to our current society structure. I once recalled what Raja Petra said about the Malays usually indulge with gossip more than their non-Malay counterparts whereas non-Malays can take insults on religion or others in a pinch of salt. How can we explain why when Chua Soi Lek resigned as the minister or when he came back as the MCA president in the party elections that the number of Malaysians would question that matter is less? On the contrary, when any thing comes to Malay politicans e.g like Anwar alleged to have commit infidelity, Mat Sabu talks about Mat Indera, Nazri's son in misconduct this and there, people from both sides start hitting that person as if flogging a dead horse. Although I hate to delve into this point, but it is necessary to say that this external factor also plays part on the problem above.
Some people within UMNO think that Najib is weak and incapable of running the election war room. As the result, they had to bring in the casino owner by the name of Mahathir Mohamad to run the show. The election intelligence reports sounds grim that they need to use tricks to shore more Malay votes for the party to remain running the government.
The billion dollar casino in downtown KL had to invest at least $730 million up to the maximum of $1.7 billion as I was told a year ago in the upcoming general elections and handout monies to appease people - ranging from fence sitters to old rural folks and those first-time voters. From my observation of the recent UM survey about BN still having a 5% advantage, it looks likely that the ruling party is taking advantage of the fence and first timers naivetivity over the present and masked developments in this nation to shore up support.
Many are still not aware that the short term measures will not last that long and many are still unaware of more dangers lying ahead from the so called white collar thirds that have been running the state for the last 55 years and counting. The survey from UM points out that most of the Malays surveyed still are concerned over the race and religion issues that has been embedded in their minds compared to their other Malaysian counterparts who are worried over corruption and lack of economical progress.
Running along the race and religion cards that the casino and it's subsidiary agency Perkasa, the owner is concerned that if they lose a lot of money in their card game in the next two to three months, the casino would go bust as well as it's junkies who are associated with that turf. Plus the owner's plan to put his young son on the road to replace him would end in tatters. Sadly many do not know of the real plan apart from constantly fingering and cussing Anwar Ibrahim all day long.
I have read some negative commentary about changing government by mostly the naive and the conservative Malay folks everywhere and even if I decided not to reply to anything, they have shown to me the exact traits of a lazy native - complacent, slack, always faulting others sans themselves and admitting defeat before the start of a match / battle. Seems to me that they never bothered about the real costs apart from being busy bodies. Maybe I would write a sales letter style post next round.
The worst case scenario for that casino is to lose as high as 1.1 billion dollars in bets if the results style is the complete reverse of what happened in 2008. The base scenario would be that would lose half of the investment money but yet see a chance to make trouble in a thin majority PR led govt.
Some people said that the owner had gone senile lately based on the comments at the RCI Sabah... could it be that the signs of death are knocking on his door then?
The Chinese have already made it clear that they are going to make the casino bleed. Indian take is still fluid while the Malay cash still at 50/50. In anyways, the house of cards in KL is going to be a place whether people want to cash out or cash in at the price of their dignity.
I do not how Bernama reporters or people from government count the numbers of people who were in the anti-Lynas walk to Merdeka Square last night. They claim to say only 2000.
But apparently, the numbers speak for themselves. At first it was around 5000, but around the evening, the numbers swelled to around 10 times Bernama claims to be.
Maybe one picture alone seems to say that the news agency lied.
To cover the shade of the government who is getting embarrassed by this demonstration, complaints by those who disagreed have been amplified and exaggerated.
In the last few months, I have been proposing that we should push for the agency to start revealing names of reporters who have been writing the material. The main reason is to also put them to show responsibility of their writings just as what these other ministers and political rats have been hounding at us to take responsibly on our writings.
Associated Press have already done so by putting (for example): Reporting by..."reporter A, reporter B..." Additional editing by "editor A, editor B". Why can't they be doing it? Are they doing it in secrecy?
A week ago, the DAP's UBAH truck made its appearance in the PJ Civic Hall, with Tony Pua being the last speaker. The reason I went there was to see how many times Tony would whack that boy by the name of Chua Tee Yong.
To ensure that I can accurately reproduce what Tony tried to say on that night, I recorded the entire 43 minute speech onto my phone. Later on, a video recorded by Mediarakyat also matched my recording as well. At that time, the announcement by the state government to reveal the white paper on Talam seems to increased my enthusiasm on seeing a throwing tantrum kind of reaction by the spoiled kid by the name of Chua Tee Yong.
Here are the instances where the spoiled kid was referred to in Tony Pua's talk in Petaling Jaya last week.
1. This has been verified after that boy keep making noise (13:40)
2. So there is no need for that Tan Sri....err Datuk Chua Tee Yong to debate (14:09)
3. (14:17) I want to ask in return, comparing to Barisan Nasional, Datuk Chua Tee Yong himself. He's the deputy minister of agriculture. Agriculture look after what? Look after cows everyone know.
4. (14.33) I want to ask this deputy minister who took so much time visiting hills and lakes of Selangor to criticize this transaction with Talam. Has he ever been to the NFC farm to count the cows there int that farm? He never responded because I know he has never been into that farm.
5. (15:07) I want to ask Datuk Chua Tee Yong who has been critical in that debt collection in Selangor whether he is able to give the people of Malaysia the assurance that he would be able to collect every single cents of the 250 million soft loan extended to Sharizat's family so that the people will not lose a single cents. Can he? Up to today satu suara pun tak ada.
Of course I am not surprised by it. Selangor chief minister Khalid Ibrahim disclosed the details of the white paper at the state assembly yesterday, and declared the issue not closed. And then Free Malaysia Today, like I predicted, reported that Tee Yong refused to accept the entire case is closed and still wants to keep slugging on with the Talam case.
“But I will first wait for him [Khalid] to finish what he says. It’s
not fair that I criticise now, because then he will suddenly add
additional information to the White Paper to rebut my points,” he said.
“If the White Paper is for all the people to understand the Talam Corp issue, then it would be complete with all the points.
“Yet there are still questions, so let him reveal all the remaining
information on Talam Corp before I make further criticism,” he added.
“This MB is always flip-flopping. Before, he said he would respond in the Dewan Rakyat, but he never did.
“He also once said he would never entertain or respond to MCA. But then they had a roadshow to explain Talam.
“So considering he always changes his mind, I will allow him to
finish what he says first before I raise more questions,” said Chua.
Over to you Tony, I would really like you to keep slugging out with that "boy who make noise" as you called.
The religion issue is a topic and subject that I often refused to talk as it made me feel uncomfortable. However, the recent apostasy matter that was brought up following Nurul Izzah's comments has got me wanted to say this for the last time, and hopefully I would not want to talk about it down the road again ever.
Until today, my observation is that many of those who scream apostasy never even bothered to answer the two main questions:
1. What really make people decide to leave their faiths behind?
2. What is the desired punishment that these people want if a person is found to leaving their faith?
Ibrahim, Zul, Hasan and even the clerics in the UMNO organization has never even bothered to answer Question 2 but simply waving threats all around.
As for Question 1, there answers are mostly found through self-discovery and emotional perception. It cannot be answered by others except themselves. It is somewhat a cliche to by some people to accuse Western influence as the reason behind it. That, I do not think so.
There are some people who may realized or witnessed how a religion is being misused for the purposes of a select few that many repeated deny that it is a lie whereas there are tons of evidence to support that. There are some who have felt that the limitation of tenets imposed (though irrelevant at the modern age) has given the restriction for them to think and act, but want to do things while still remain in the boundaries of what is defined as good conduct and behavior that each religion would demand of. There are also some people who claimed to say that they have experienced a calling and epiphany to move from one faith to another for a better good.
There have been fictional material that illustrates a man's transition as the result of experience and epiphany. As an example, one of literature's famous swords and sorcery fictional characters, Drizzt Do'urden's decision to leave a faith and religion was the result of the emotional trauma experienced first hand and self-realization that the religion that he was in his formative years was more or less of committing atrocities for lust and chaos. As the result, he pursued - the Melikki - and in the centuries after the events, he admitted that he has felt the unusual peace and enlightenment that has never felt otherwise - without compulsion, but with curiosity and the desire to get out of the evil that could consume him.
The European history of how religion has been successfully been separated out of secular law is the reason why I would write to answer this problem in Malaysia. You've got to acknowledge that when England's Act of Supremacy was introduced in 1534, England has already successfully kept the religion factor out whenever laws are implemented. Europe will only wake up in another 265-270 years later during the Napoleonic Wars. In short, socially speaking we are 200 years behind Europe in society progress that even Pak Lah admitted before, first world facilities third world mentality.
I often held high regard to people like Henry II and Kemal Ataturk simply because they are in believe that religious interference into the administration of law of their respective countries would make the national progress (economical and social aspect) mundane just because mixing that odd aspect into it. The U.S law doesn't contain any religious aspects included in its laws. Some viewed that Ataturk, branded an apostate by many narrow-minded Muslims, eventually succeeded to the point that those who screamed suddenly went quiet over it. Ultimately, who's in the wrong anyway?
Say if I am asked to become the interim Prime Minister of Malaysia due to some unusual circumstance, I would definitely would put a stop on religious interference once and for all with a stroke of the pen. Of course, there are people including those right-wingers would definitely say, "Ini orang cina ini tak hormat Islam...bla bla bla.." I mean come on, you are impeding people's potential to progress, you are walking one step backwards, you don't want people to be smart, but then despite religious interference, there's still plenty of untackled social problems. Hey...the constitution is silent on who can be PM, right? Perlembagaan tak ada kata siapa mesti jadi PM kan - only who commands the confidence of the majority of the MPs, betul? Everyday we see those who scream all this murtad thing riding on a big limo like a rich man - isn't this contrasting to your own statement indicating that the person is holier than thou? If that is the case, may I suggest that you migrate to those countries like Saudi Arabia if you think you are great? Didn't someone said before that Western countries though they are not
Muslim majority but yet do things that are Islamic? If a man steals
bread to feed his daughter and both of them are poor shouldn't we be
helping them?
In this topic, my main argument is from the perspective of secular view and being a person who doesn't put stock into religion like other people do. Who knows, I might do better than Najib or Pak Lah combined supposed if I am PM. The gist of what I am saying is, too much inteference tends to make things very very messy and as a person who thinks that religious freedom is for all, a person's self-identity and his / her believes is between themselves and God with nobody having the right to force or interfere, Hotel California style.
I always wanted and was certain from the beginning that Barack Obama would win the recently concluded elections simply because of a few main reasons: he fights for the middle-class Americans and even pushes for the healthcare reform bill. There's a certain understanding from the people that a Democrat party-originated president will have a hard time to reverse the policies undertaken by the Republican Bush administration. Secondly, with the narrow aversion of the Senate and House's deadlock over the national debt matter last year, many people would not want to have someone like Romney that would make people suffer while reducing the tax for the wealthy.
Some people, even Warren Buffett thinks that people amass too much wealth but yet don't contribute much back to the nation in the period where things are so tough economically is somewhat greedy - an opinion that Obama doesn't hide by pointing to the elite at Wall Street as "the fat cat bankers". Many don't take kindly to him because he signed the Dodd-Frank Act. Add in the Massachusetts' Elizabeth Warren (who pushed for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau) - the rich end of the people layer will be very much angry, while those in the lower and middle would say at least it's better.
Many including overseas partners rather prefer Obama in dealing the foreign policy. In the final round of debate between Romney and him, Obama's way of addressing the matter was very much more careful - even if there's rivalry with other nations compared to what Romney would do - more hawkish stance, given of his Mormon background. This of course is what Netahanyu would want - given of Israel itching to start a war with Iran over oil and nukes. The kind of thought by Romney nerved a lot of people. Any person would imagine how Romney would deal with the Chinese in a slam bang manner.
Facing the fiscal cliff due in January, there is a necessity of the U.S to cut expenditure on defense and the timetable of withdrawal from Iraq and Afghanistan needs to be accelerated, for a daily upkeep is around to the tune of $1 billion. Romney is not very keen on upscale cuts on that matter and this would put more trouble in addition to the $600 billion automatic cuts in January 2013. The contest is also seen as perceiving who is digging the bigger hole and sinking faster.
Wall Street on Wednesday took a big dip, and then it continued on Thursday only to parred its losses on Friday. The real pain is that Wall Street bet on the wrong horse - obviously as part of the extreme capitalist agenda and lost painfully - the Dow and S&P 500 drop between 300-400 points respectively.
The other interesting thing about that day was the Senate seat contest in Connecticut between Democrat's Chris Murphy against former WWE chairman Linda McMahon (Republic). Linda spent about $50 million of her fortune to campaign and win a ticket to the Senate - 5 times more than the amount of Murphy's expenditure. $100 million in two campaigns for McMahon but yet lost on both occasions. Arguably, the main reason why Murphy won against her was because of insights of those who worked under her describing her behavior in running the company. This senatorial seat contest was interesting because it points out that not even the amount of money can guarantee a politician a ticket to the Senate.
The closing speech by Murphy was also a turning point:
"I've spent my life running to people to help them and Linda McMahon has
spent her life running over people to help herself, that's the contrast
in this election. And so, whether it is the difference on taxes or
Medicare or social security, whether it is the difference on fighting
for manufacturers, standing up for women's health, whether it's the
difference in terms of how Linda McMahon and I have prioritised the time
we've spent on this Earth, we've got a story to tell over the next
day.... We will prove over the course of the next thirty hours that Connecticut is not for sale."
The re-election campaign would definitely provide some allegories to the Malaysian political context. Just like Obama's win, when Barisan lost more than they thought, the KLSE plunged 10% and trading got suspended on 9 March 2008. Quite similar of betting that the customary 2/3rds are there, but this time round, it didn't happen. Many are uncertain whether a change or government or a setback would affect the 5-year term policy making which they are used to.
As an allegory to the Murphy vs McMahon campaign, Barisan's war chest is estimated to amount to approximately RM 1.7 billion - no doubt from collective contributions by top national conglomerates and GLCs. If you visit a place where ceramahs by the non-Barisan parties, people would give donations with amounts more or less a fragment of the total money.
Let's say we use the maximum tune of RM 1.7 billion:
222 Parliament Seats X $200K campaign per seat = $44.4 million
505 State Seats X $100K campaign per seat = $50.5 million
The actual cost of campaigning for each coalition in total for any GE is actually close to $100 million. By spending $1.7 billion in total, even Barisan can't even stand and abide by their own election terms and regulations set by their unofficial component party, the Election Commission. So the remaining $1.6 billion is more or less used as "instant noodle" projects such as the road-tarring to Kuala Sepetang during the Bukit Gantang by-election (yes, I went ahead before the Special Bunch camped there in 2009.)
There is a different feeling when forking out the money vs big corporation contribution in donating to the election fund for a coalition to contest in an election.
If we look at the map indicating states where Obama and Romney won, the parts that Romney win (in the early run of the count) would be those in the almost middle part of America including Alaska. When examining each of the state that are under the Romney count, you would notice that the pattern is somewhat similar to our rural area count (e.g Nebraska, Kansas, Oklahoma). However it is important to note that the voter mindset of the voter there is not the same as Malaysia and the voting system is not the same, so it can't be taken entirely to say what happens in America is the same as in Malaysia. The gist from the two things above is that
a) those who are savvy will not want to have a government that keeps spending bottomless.
b) if you are a tax payer person, you feel the real pinch compared to those who are excluded (i.e those earning under RM 2500, the elderly, the retirees)
c) no matter how much you splash out to people, it doesn't guarantee you to be a MP or an ADUN.
In spite of those things many say that the GE 13 is the proper contest atmosphere it would be - a very tense thing on the national scale that is equivalent to a final of a football contest. The exception is that one side will attempt to rig the game to the favor, while the other tries to show that they can do the job in a very proper manner - if they are given the mandate to do so.
Sometime back, I figured that I would say "I told you so" over the AES (Automated Enforcement System) issue that most Barisan Nasional MPs would certainly scream about then making a U-turn later on. When it was mooted in about 1-2 years ago many of them, without thinking deep further except from the nutshell / surface would scream yes and gave the one common answer of why the need of having AES. And then when the negative buzz over the system goes over and over the top, those politicians, whose mouth is faster than the brain would then say - stop the press / hold the implementation. When Khairy Jamaluddin and Bung Mokhtar started coming out - from their own turf to say that AES should be put on hold, I knew that these bunch of people have already eaten a half-baked cake and made a bad mistake.
Many have said that the system was too rushed, and there's a perception of how hidden costs or the timetable of implementation as well as how the government brushes (bulldozes) through the system without a thorough check and stakeholder consultation has given to the fact that not many people are well receptive to the system. I am actually fine to the system, particularly for the red light camera part but the major parts of the system that I am not very well receptive of and this brought a interesting thought - something that it was well ignored around 2002.
Unrealistic Speed Limits
Recently, the KASE (Kempen Saman Anti-Ekor) highlighted a case where a speed camera is placed on a road with the limit of 30 km/h. Many believed that having an absurd and illogical limit there is what will irked a lot of road users. The present road limits on the road is more or less outdated. Contrary to what many people generally think about speed limits, this short FAQ seems to speak otherwise than what MIROS said. For example:
"Inappropriately established speed limits cause drivers to take all
traffic signals less seriously. The brochure also points out that
unrealistic speed limits create two groups of drivers. Those that try to
obey the limit and those that drive at a speed they feel is safe and
reasonable. This causes dangerous differences in speed. "
The subsequent questions actually depict the scenario and on the road emotions of many road users:
(note: taken from National Motorist Association, U.S.A)
Q. Isn't slower always safer? A. No, federal and
state studies have consistently shown that the drivers most likely to
get into accidents in traffic are those traveling significantly below
the average speed. According to research, those driving 10 mph slower than the prevailing speed are more
likely to be involved in an accident. That means that if the average
speed on an interstate is 70 mph, the person traveling at 60 mph is more
likely to be involved in an accident than someone going 70 or even 80
mph.
Q. Wouldn't everyone drive faster if the speed limit was raised?
A. No, the majority of drivers will not go faster than what they feel
is comfortable and safe regardless of the speed limit. For example, an
18-month study following an increase in the speed limit along the New
York Thruway from 55 to 65 mph, determined that the average speed of
traffic, 68 mph, remained the same. Even a national study conducted by
Federal Highway Administration also concluded that raising or lowering
the speed limit had practically no effect on actual travel speeds.
Q. Don't higher speed limits cause more accidents and traffic fatalities?
A. No, if a speed limit is raised to actually reflect real travel
speeds, the new higher limit will make the roads safer. When the
majority of traffic is traveling at the same speed, traffic flow
improves, and there are fewer accidents. Speed alone is rarely the cause
of accidents. Differences in speed are the main problem. Reasonable
speed limits help traffic to flow at a safer, more uniform pace.
Q. Aren't most traffic accidents caused by speeding?
A. No, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA)
claims that 30 percent of all fatal accidents are "speed related," but
even this is misleading. This means that in less than a third of the
cases, one of the drivers involved in the accident was "assumed" to be
exceeding the posted limit. It does not mean that speeding caused the
accident. Research conducted by the Florida Department of Transportation
showed that the percentage of accidents actually caused by speeding is
very low, 2.2 percent.
Q. Aren't our roads more dangerous than ever before?
A. No, our nation's fatality rate (deaths per 100 million vehicle miles
traveled) is the lowest it has ever been. The total number of
fatalities has also stayed relatively stable for several years. They do
occasionally increase, but given that our population and the distance
the average person drives are also increasing, this is not surprising,
nor is it cause for alarm.
Q. If nobody follows the speed limit, why does it matter that they are underposted?
A. According to a speed-limit brochure published in conjunction with
the Michigan State Patrol, inappropriately established speed limits
cause drivers to take all traffic signals less seriously. The brochure
also points out that unrealistic speed limits create two groups of
drivers. Those that try to obey the limit and those that drive at a
speed they feel is safe and reasonable. This causes dangerous
differences in speed.
In actual truth, because of the improved car technology over the last 25 years, the car performance of newer vehicles are far better and has better safety standards than the models made prior to that period. This doesn't match with the present speed limits on most roads which are still using the outdated vehicle count percentile data as in the early 90s. Highways for example in France is now allowed up to 130 km/h while in Germany, each lane is designated a minimum limit that has to be followed in each lane, so as to give those who in fast the priority.
Use of the 85th percentile speed concept is based on the fact that:
the large majority of drivers:
are reasonable and prudent
do not want to have a crash
desire to reach their destination in the shortest possible
time
a speed at or below which 85 percent of people drive at
any given location under good weather and visibility conditions
may be considered as the maximum safe speed for that location.
Sometime in 2002, the timing of raising speed limits was ignored, and even until today with the calculation not up to date. In fact most ministers are wrong in determining it because the driving is not experienced first hand by themselves but instead their chauffeurs do the driving instead. The perception of being a passenger vs being a driver behind the wheel differs much. For example, the passenger may say that the driver is veering too much on the left, even touching the boundary line of the emergency lane whereas in contrary the driver says otherwise.
A gist in that measurement is that it has be done on a very frequent basis.
The other part is about how the system would affect the existing equipment being used. As examples, there's still the existing red light camera that uses film to capture images and the mobile speed detection devise that is being used by traffic police (not JPJ) people that it creates confusion over who is actually doing the system or shall we say that the usage is being overlapped by the two parties.
However, the attitude of those politicians whose haste to have things bulldozed for nothing should be blasted on stage.
It's already three weeks that I have not written anything in here. I have been in a roller coaster state (emotionally up and down) that I didn't have the feeling to write the things in mind. In fact this has been one of those things that I've tried to say. Given of the MCA chest-thumping antics yesterday, I am certain that I am not afraid and certain that hudud implementation won't be happening in decades to come or not at all. It's just the same thing as UMNO would tell the Malays as this as the boogeymen to the Chinese.
Apart from that issue above that the MCA (Porn Star and co) keeps screaming about, they don't really talk substance such as governance. All the time they talked about defending the Chinese - but against who really? Communism is no longer in Malaysia for many decades. World War II was over for close to 70 years - so absolutely nothing but to scare people out of the blue. So I heard that when MCA decides to follow suit as UMNO of sacking alleged party saboteurs in the general election, it gives the same body language as with UMNO: they are not confident of their own party members.
The porn star by the name of Chua Soi Lek and his entourage of stooges remains ridiculed, while they keep flogging the dead horse because even if they talk about the dangers or so, they are actually and will still remain stooges of the big brother lynchpin of UMNO. Given of the Chua's relationship with Muhyiddin being boss-bagmen since the latter's days as Johor MB, it is no doubt that this eventually be what will it be even if the Chinese were swayed by tempting words to support them.
But that thing above is not important and I just want to get straight to the point that nobody has to be afraid of their boogeyman talk of hudud thing.
By virtue, any amendment to the Federal Constitution requires 148 parliamentarians (out of 222) to say yes to a motion of amendment. However, for cases involving religion and royalty matters specified in the constitution, the number of yes hands is not 148 - but 168!
In other words for special matters, 75% majority is required in the house. But this is only the first hurdle in amendment. Based on probability, it is not likely to happen. Even if PAS and UMNO MPs were to jointly agree to that, the number of Malay MPs from across the board can hardly touch 148 of them if they are to change Common Law to Islamic Shariah law. If you are to do a national level referendum, many people including Malay folk themselves do not seem agreeable to using Shariah law in entire national scale.
Suppose if the motion overcomes the first hurdle, the second hurdle requires that the motion must be eventually agreed by the council of rulers. (Majlis Raja-Raja Melayu). From the way it goes, they too are unlikely to agree to the idea taken into consideration that there are 11.5 million non-Muslim Malaysians young to old age that are living in this country.
Some of us brought up this matter in a casual manner with other MCA members (sans top brass) that if a person is well familiar with the Federal constitution, the dream of implementing hudud in the nationwide scale is mathematically impossible. By action it is quite tough to do whereas claiming by mouth seems to say otherwise.
So therefore, people simply don't need to worry of having that for this might not happen maybe in the next 3-4 decades to come. In other words, MCA simply talks trash on the hudud, just like telling ghost stories to people who are naive.
This is what I've written for the last two years, on this very day because this coincide with the premiere of Mozart's The Magic Flute. Last year I wrote about:
The Queen of the Night - a representation of obscurantism
, in other words, the practice of deliberately preventing the facts
or the full details of some matter from becoming known. This is
ironically what is happening right now, where people are denied the
knowledge of what they want to know. Instead, they were threatened with
a charge of the Official Secrets Act if information is to be revealed.
And this is why many people to this day has either no clue or they
acted foolishly without the proper and sufficient knowledge. The
aristocracy's obscurantism of the social problem's is the main factor
the start of the French Revolution.
I also put in the Three Ladies as the agents of the Queen:
The three ladies of the
Queen - Represents the agents that will carry out her order. The
mainstream media has been ordered to do a smear campaign of Bersih. The
main goal is simple: manufacturing consent, to create a consent among
the simpleton minded (those like Papageno) that Bersih is a no good
thing, without presenting the reasons why Bersih would do such thing.
They would also twist to include statements from leaders who are opposed
to the idea of clean elections.
I've also included a video clip of the opera's famous aria, "Hell's Vengeance Boils In My Heart"
As most of you are not aware, today and this year marks the 220th anniversary of the opera.
It was first debuted on 30 September 1791, just two months before Mozart's untimely death.
The
problem right now is that fear and threats are spread around, yet
people remain ignorant. The character of Papageno is an allegory to such
attitude. I wrote:
Papageno
- Tamino's companion, Papageno represents the foolish and the error of
the people. These people are mainly simpletons, those who do not
really bother about enlightenment and wisdom but just food, drink and
companionship. In Act II Scene 5, the priests scolded Papageno because
he will never know the enlightened bliss of the gods, but instead
Papageno said, there are many unenlightened but happy. This is the
danger of being susceptible to the danger of superstition and
groundless fears.
How can we overcome such fear
mongering like "eradicated rights" that people from UMNO and some NGOs
would say that? It's from proper and right knowledge, enlightenment and
not to be a lazy native. We too should start believe that such things
spread actually do not exist. It is meant to scare people of going out
of the shell and exploring the unexplored.
The plot of the opera is somewhat a metaphor of the mankind's
progression from naive to enlightened being. To refuse such
enlightenment is a one step backwards.
Just before Bersih 2.0, I've broken down the list of characters and its representations:
Sarastro - a representation of
the enlightened sovereign who rules according to principles based on
reason, wisdom, and nature. The complete anti-thesis of the Queen of the
Night. He reveals that she attempts to bewilder people with
superstition and groundless fears. The first model that serves the
influence of the character was Holy Roman Emperor Joseph II - an
ultimately flawed figure despite his attempt on using the principles
above.
Pamina - daughter of
the Queen of the Night, representing people. Sarastro refused to let her
return to her mother because she was not properly guided. As what
Mozart and Schikander put in - the people must be guided proper, even if
there are mistakes apart.
Tamino - the main protagonist -
representing the trials that mankind must go through. At the start of
the second act, Sarastro declared that Pamina must be guided by man,
Tamino represents the trials that Pamina will faced or in other way
round, the people.
Papageno - Tamino's companion,
Papageno represents the foolish and the error of the people. These
people are mainly simpletons, those who do not really bother about
enlightenment and wisdom but just food, drink and companionship. In Act
II Scene 5, the priests scolded Papageno because he will never know the
enlightened bliss of the gods, but instead Papageno said, there are many
unenlightened but happy. This is the danger of being susceptible to the
danger of superstition and groundless fears.
The are three famous numbers for this opera:
1. Hell's Vengeance Boils In My Heart
- The most difficult aria, performed by the Queen of the Night. She
orders Pamina to kill Sarastro, or risks being disowned in pain by the
mother. The pitch notation of this aria can reach up to F6. A few
sopranos could perform at such degree, and currently the modern day
soprano that could perform that is Diana Damrau.
2. A Girl Or Young Woman
- Papageno's number representing his desire for a young woman as a
wife, but it is already that he refuses enlightenment, as mentioned at
the start of Act II.
3. Papapapa duet - Papageno and
Papagena stammer at each other that they started to warm up and
eventually got their wish of love.
The storyline or whatsoever is
not quite important. The metaphor of the story is. Looking back at the
story, and coupled of what is happening right now, it is clear that the
government's paranoia over the matter of people demanding for fair and
clear elections is akin to what the Queen of The Night would exhort to
do. The police, and some ministers like Hishamuddin Hussein are like the
Queen's three ladies, doing her bidding. They would harass people,
simply arresting people, do all the silly things instead of catching the
real scum out on the streets.
It's the government's paranoia -
the fear of losing power, to divert the internal fighting among
themselves, and all the things that are considered to be a bane as well
as how the society will go against them prompted them to be in such
obscurantism.
The mainstream media, like one
of the three ladies have been on the smearing Bersih campaign. The main
goal is obviously to manufacture consent among the audience,
particularly simpletons and those in the rural land area. They are the
ones ignorant or do not have alternative access to other channels.
Manufacturing consent is one of the things the acclaimed Noam Chomsky
spoke about in several of his books. I am very critical on the attitude
of many Papagenos online. I have seen many people who seem to be very
ignorant of those and have yet to understand the realities of the
fragile present election system. Many claimed that Bersih is opposition.
On the contrary no. It is natural for them to support for they have
been victims of fraud. The instance of fraud in Sarawak or Hulu Selangor
is the case in point.
Monostatos is the big henchman of the Queen of the Night. Perkasa can the example
Obviously, Pamina is
representing the people themselves and the actions of trial and error
will determine whether she would either go back to her mother or follow
the guidance of Sarastro and the marriage of trial / Tamino.
The problem with Malaysia is
there are lack of enlightened leaders to lead the way. By the antics of
how they deal, Najib and his most team of ministers are mere showman,
but not with people with quality. They could have handled the situation
well, give Bersih 3 hours for the day and solving the problem.
Unfortunately, because of paranoia, they decided to play hard. Can Anwar
be under the group of enlightened leaders like Sarastro? No, given of
the present skeletons in his closet.
The Saturday's rally will be a
trial that Malaysians who have realized the importance of fair playing
field of the election game that will determine the outcome in
generations to come. It will be one step towards enlightenment or one
step backwards to obscurantism as what the present government of the day
is advocating, by playing dirty. And it has already attracted an
international audience, with human rights groups in particular paying
attention.
I am certain that the
Vatican and London is also watching as Najib will be visiting these
places from tomorrow and next week. Many said that Najib is a laughing
stock now given of his handling of the situation. I bet it would be.
-------------------------------
Any one of you who have listened to that famous aria would notice some similarity to what Najib talks below. They should also reveal who in the agency that wrote it. :
KUALA LUMPUR: Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak today urged Malaysians
to be wary of the opposition’s three main “weapons” which were
condemning, instigating and making all sorts of promises in trying woo
the people.
“They must condemn (the government), they must knock you (government)
down. After that, they must instigate (the people) and then they will
promise. Like I said, they’ll promise the sun, the moon, and even the
galaxy,” he said when opening Gerakan’s 41st National Delegates
Conference here.
Najib, who is also Barisan Nasional (BN) chairman, said the people
should ponder about the sweet promises made by the Pakatan Rakyat
opposition coalition which in the end were actually nothing more than
venomous poison for them.
“Is it really something good for the people or will it lead to some
catastrophic outcome for the nation. This is something the people must
think about, because to become the opposition, the arsenal is three
things — condemn, instigate, promise,” stressed Najib.
Najib said that to be a credible opposition in a parliamentary
democracy, a few fundamental conditions must be fulfilled, one of which
is having a common symbol.
“In other words, you must register as a party. But Pakatan Rakyat is
not registered as a common party nor do they have a common symbol,”
Najib said.
The prime minister pointed out BN had been using a common symbol, with electoral candidates contesting under the BN banner.
“We go and face the people as BN, but the opposition will go to the people with different faces.
“Symbol not the same …we are not sure whether they will table a
common manifesto ,” he said, noting that squabbles over (the
implementation of) hudud (Syariah laws) among the opposition pact had
been conducted openly.
Unfulfilled promises
Najib said this demonstrated that they did not have a common position
and common policy on how this country was going to be administered.
He also took a swipe at the opposition’s failure in unveiling its ‘shadow cabinet’.
Najib said the country should not be governed by the opposition pact who kept on making unfulfilled promises.
He noted that 75 per cent of promises in PKR-led Selangor, remained
unfulfilled while the BN had to step in to resolve the Kampung Buah Pala
(eviction of villagers) issue in DAP-dominated Penang.
The prime minister also said that a leader must be fair and just,
traits which had apparently escaped an opposition leader when he tried
to deprive a competent senior state Education official from being
promoted in Penang some time ago because he was a non-Malay.
“When I checked on it, I took a risk. He was the deputy prime
minister, I was the Education Minister…I said no, that man must be given
the Pengarah Pelajaran (atate education director) post. And I was
prepared to face the consequences because of principle. A leader must be
fair and just,” he said.
Touching on the 2013 Budget he tabled on Friday, Najib said the
underlying philosophy in its preparation was that the people must come
first and all steps taken were for them.
“This budget is about the people as well as about moving the economy.
You can’t just talk about the rakyat (people) without moving the
economy, without attracting foreign investment, domestic investment,
innovation and productivity.
“There are 111 initiatives or touch points in Budget 2013. Read them one by one,” he said.
1. This is more or less a dilemma issue that I want to point out. Where I want to place this is somewhere between Raja Petra's recent sarcastic posting entitled "Cina Sudah Kurang Ajar! Dah Lupa 13 Mei?" and my friend Haris' posting entitled "Fear Mongering, RPK Style". The two main interesting points to be summarized here are:
a) For the former, it is a response from someone using the yardstick that freedom of speech is absolute, no holds barred, with no tolerance line / borders defined. With that scenario - what would be the response to a picture depicting a man stamping on a picture of Najib.
b) For the latter, it is about not needing racial tones and imagery, but based on past experiences / encounters instead, it is that a real multi-racial community can come out to fight oppression and bring down a government that seems to no longer cares for the real welfare of the nation and plunging the country into the abyss of no recovery - despite repeated self-denials - in a real democratic way and a level playing field without bias from any agency.
2. Nobody wants and likes a confrontation anyhow. Recently Najib declared in Johor that it is taboo for the opposition to take over Putrajaya. It already violated his own tenets of 1Malaysia -as he is the imam of that school of thought. This statement also reflects what I have mentioned several times that UMNO has the same mentality of the Provisional IRA (Irish Republican Army). I have also noted that for them, a loss, even a setback is considered a "capitulation" to the enemy - hence the statement above.
To Pakatan Rakyat,
this may just be about winning or losing an election. To Umno, it is
about the life and death of Barisan Nasional. Pakatan Rakyat can lose
the election and still continue to exist as an opposition grouping.
Barisan Nasional cannot lose the election and continue to exist as an
opposition coalition. Barisan Nasional would be hit with a double
whammy. Death will follow its defeat, a danger that Pakatan Rakyat does
not face.
3. Most of us admit that it is high time to change the government despite repeated warnings to change and no improvement, instead it gets worse and the attitude of the present government of the day still remains in the same, thinking that they are losing their Godsend right. As in talking about with the next general election, any coalition that needs to win well (simple or with 2/3rds majority) will need achieve the following factors - as acknowledged by many including political analysts:
a) Malay votes
b) Sabah and Sarawak's 56 Parliament seats on the platter.
4. The first part is easier to achieve in Peninsular Malaysia. This is because if the main lynchpin is weak, BN's partners in Sabah and Sarawak may choose to declare themselves out of the fold and be independent - thus the kingmaker role - or joining the other coalition; something that some people might not be happy with. From what I was told that "the joining the other coalition" option is a possibility that should not be discounted.
5. Malay votes is 50-50 since Anwar's sacking and jailing since 1999. As a few friends observed, a 5-10 percent swing (at least) can give Anwar's coalition a simple majority in Parliament. Remember that the minority votes alone will not be enough to decide the outcome. A bone of contention that is to be a problem is the matter called the Malay Mindset.
6. However, we have bigger problems as where the country will be heading. Another Greece scenario will happen in Malaysia since the debt + hidden has already hit more than half trillion ringgit - disregarding the amount on investment and the amount of income that comes in. Roubini - a.k.a. Dr. Doom - has foresee that 2013 is an economic storm that it will be quite hard to get out.
7. Unfortunately there's still a majority of people have yet to realize of the set of problems in front of us. They still support the same party who many are angered over the amount of plundering, corruption and crimes that they have committed against the country. Indeed as what Datuk Sakmongkol recently said, a mental revolution is necessary. In my view, the real problem is how to empower the other Malays who are still in the traditional mindset - as what a friend of mine Aspan recently said - the conventional believe is that UMNO is everything, for if that particular organization falls, the Malays will be extinct. In actual it doesn't actually happen. That claim is ex nihilo - out of nothing just to scare the shit out of people.
8. My dilemma is on how Malaysia can stop the rot and plunging further as well as the need to catch up with their other emerging neighboring countries. The major stumbling block is the mindset of the majority. I still find that there are still many who are afraid to move in what Zaid Ibrahim said "ready to abandon “the path chosen for them by Umno for the last 55 years” and seek other answers to the problems they face".
9. Looking at Greece, I see a hard lesson dished out and deserved for those people. If Malaysia suffers the similar fate later, only then the people would then realize, but too late to avoid troubles and despair - that is if the ruling coalition at the time of disaster still remains BN - this is based on the observations of many political analysts that they will still win but with a smaller majority.
10. One way that can be done - a.l.a reverse psychology style - is shake them and insult them to wake them up. We understand that many are still hesitant and unwilling to change. Yes, I agree, that the ABU (Anything But UMNO) is needed to be brought inroads but examining the problem right now, as what Aspan said:
Pertamanya, Melayu mesti menyokong
UMNO bulat-bulat dan jangan mengambil kira samada UMNO itu jujur atau tidak. Mereka
menganggap Melayu mesti dipenjara dan diberi makan sikit-sikit untuk mengelak
orang Melayu dari berfikir dan bertindak mengikut kehendak zaman dan waktunya.
Kalau pemimpin rasuah ditabur benih-benih nilai yang membunuh orang Melayu
sendiri seperti ada sesetengah Melayu yang berkata, “kalau Melayu rasuah itu
Melayu, orang Melayu juga yang kaya. Apa yang hendak dicemburukan?”
Apa sahaja yang pemimpin mereka
buat jangan dipersoalkan. Yang Melayu mesti lakukan ialah menyokong sahaja dan
jangan berbuat apa-apa. Terima sahaja
bantuan rakyat 1Malaysia (BRIM) dan bersyukurlah sampai mati. Terima sahaja
bantuan dua batang gigi palsu dan terus mengundi UMNO sampai mati. Itu adalah
sifat berterima kasih. Kalau tidak menyokong UMNO pulangkan balik gigi palsu
itu kepada kerajaan.
11. I have the same sentiment and feeling above. I have recently asked a few friends on whether telling this whole thing to the Malay community would get the effect intended. I was met with a not advisable answer because that the target audience, some, would be wondering why a Chinese man start talking issues like this to them? In other words, it means they might not get the point intended to be addressed or they would say "who is this guy talking to anyway?"
12. As a side note, Simpang Pulai assemblyman Chan Ming Kai was also told the same answer before. This means that it will be up to the more intellectual, liberal minded Malay friends to empower their own people to wake up before it is too late. Recent commentary written by Datuk Sak and Aspan have also exactly pointed out what is necessary to be addressed to the Malay community. I have also seen tweets of perverted logic that some people, including those lower level people from UMNO that talks things that doesn't make sense. My only feeling and impression about that problem is that "sampai kiamat masih jadi bodoh"!
In November 1955, Kim Philby was famously accused of being a double-agent for the Russians that he repeatedly denied his involvement in a press conference.
The famous spoken line was: "I was never a communist."
However, his flight to Russia was only confirmed in July 1963. Read more about him here.
What does it mean is that a person / party attempts vehemently to deny his involvement in activities outside his scope and abuse of power. However, the party / person could not hide his mischief.
The bottom line is - there are some agencies who claimed to be independent of political inteference but likewise the pictures and attachments seems to say otherwise. It already proves that they are indirectly tools of the trade for a political organization.
Forget about the whining of police investigating those in the Barisan fold more slowly vs very fast at those accused from the Opposition. That has need not to be repeated here.
Remember this at the CCM building in KL Sentral?
This is the excerpt of the letter that was sent to the UIA university in regards to the campus polls - removing and replacing a vice rector.
So it seems that there will be attempts to pry into the privacy of voters of those who voted against Pro-Aspirasi. Those who do so could find themselves preferentially discriminated in other ways, not in direct intimidation anyways.
On 8 September, Muhyiddin warns its own party members that they would face the sack if sabotaging their own members. Excerpt from Bernama:
“If they (Umno leaders and members) resort to sabotage in the next
general election, we will sack them from the party. We do not need such
people, sorry.
“The (Umno) president (Datuk Seri Najib Razak) has agreed. We don’t need people who want to sabotage candidates. If the candidates lose, we
will also lose,” he said.
The statement that would implied by Muhyiddin would be that "we will track your vote" one way another via any means. Civil servants have been blackmailed and threatened with a sack for not voting in the way of the ruling political organizations. The fear of this has to be overcome.
The Election Commission was quite fast in coming out a statement of condemning people stamping on Najib's face. However they are silent when there is talk of people urinating at opposition leaders e.g Nik Aziz and Guan Eng.
Voters Overseas have already had enough of the EC and asked them to resign.
The conclusion is that government agencies are already indirect lap dog and component parties of Barisan Nasional, the ruling political organization. There is not likely going to be serious electoral reforms at what Bersih wants not to mentioned what is recommended by the PSC committee last year.
Initial intelligence reports by the Special Branch speaks of grim results for BN. It's like knocking at Death's door. To delay or cheat death - it would mean cheating and intimidating other parties. Incidentally, do you remember how Putrajaya parliamentary seat was won last round? Same thing.
At the expense of possible intimidation and discrimination by them, throwing them out of the government next round would actually make things status quo. Things would be put back in order so actually it's more of a setback. People will need to shed that old style feudal mentality. That's all that is to solve the problem.
Today, Suaram is likely to face charges from six organizations with the worst case being declared an illegal organization.
The pressure to charge them comes from pro-Malay groups like JMM and Perkasa.
All of course are affiliated with UMNO. Like a casino UMNO has bankrolled them in a high stakes poker game - with the goal of bleeding (not physically) SUARAM to its throes of abyss. But for a motive I am unable to comprehend they seem to turn a blind eye on the corruption activities committed by those in their league - e.g NFC (one of the statements that Tony Pua has raised in response to today's events).
Even the CCM - just as what the police did to a girl who surrendered over the stamping of Najib's pictures, this similar thing is done. A messages is out to send chill to shivers by the Malay organization. So it paints the picture that they are merely pawns for a political organization, not an actual government agency that knows no allegiance to any political parties.
From my understanding, in Bolehland, you need to prove your innocence instead of innocent until guilty. Also, as far as I can recall, NGOs receive funding as a token of support from any parties who have and share a same view as the goals of an NGO. That is a norm. Nothing more. If that is the case, then the plan to charge is done in a bad faith.
It's going to be a tough for Suaram - unless they have a good bluff or a very very good hand in poker. A good hand in poker is producing evidence that will be cleared out. A good bluff would be arguments that say that "nothing related to that".
Imagine Suaram playing poker with several opponents (Malay NGOs) with the croupier being the AG chambers and the judiciary, with the venue being played is Casino UMNO? And in the game of high-stakes poker, the winner will take the money that is staked at the pot.
But you have a turf where other players have scratch-one-another-balls connection.
You have a possible card dealer that always deal a losing hand to one player but not to the other. The other players however are expendable.
Silence is deafening as the saying goes. I have never said anything about nor get involved with Suaram until when this recent episode got out. There are arguably too many parties in both camps so, I would want to see how the chips fall, and the slug match between Ayah Dafi & Co. vs NGOs turn out.
As a side note, how many of you really like Ayah Dafi anyhow?
