Boycott Mainstream Media?

Our one and only comparatively independent The Sun, is likely to be muted, just like the rest of the newspapers… or organs of propaganda. Was it 20 years ago, that The Star lost its independence with the removal of the columns ‘As I see it’ by Tunku and ‘Without fear or favour’ by Dr. Tan Chee Khoon? If you can’t beat them, buy them since our cronies are so rich and it is payback time.

I wonder what will happen to Nades and the rest of the award-winning investigative journalists? Vincent Tan was known to have made MGG Pillai a bankrupt for slander before he died a broken man but a fearless critic to the end. Money is power and in politics, money can buy power as most people have a price, if it is right.

With the impending General Elections, the national leaders are beginning to visit the various states. If only we can say, ‘No, thank you’ as it is costing at least hundreds of thousand ringgit per visit, not counting the loss in terms of ‘man-hours’ of civil servants who are obliged to make up the numbers to show that the national leader is well received. Soon after a so-called official visit, Najib visited the Umno operations centre, so convenient.

I still remember when Suhakam visited Perak a couple of years ago and it turned out to be a ‘accompany the Menteri Besar to welcome the Suhakam Commissioners’ where government officials from all over Perak were told to come and meet them at the grand State Assembly Building in Ipoh. I would have thought Suhakam was set up to deal with ordinary folks with problems involving breaches of human rights!

Yet, recently, the Chief Secretary told the civil servants not to get involved in politics (read opposition politics), just like students must not be involved unless to do with Umno, MCA or MIC.

It is nauseating to read news reports, and to watch national television news and documentary, all favourable to the ruling party – too good to be true. Having known their bias reports, we cannot help feeling cynical even if the report happens to be true!

Last night, watched TV and our PM was announcing to the civil servants of our high ratings overseas. Any praise is well received but any criticism has an agenda.

So when I read Bersih’s statement in Malaysia Today, I realise I am not alone:

State Media belongs to all Malaysians, not Barisan Nasional
Posted by Raja Petra
Monday, 28 January 2008


The Coalition for Clean and Fair Elections (BERSIH) stresses that all forms of state media, including RTM, belong to all Malaysians and is not the private property of Barisan Nasional.

BERSIH reminds Deputy Information Minister Datuk Ahmad Zahid Hamidi that 36% of the Malaysian electorate who voted for the Opposition in 2004 are taxpayers too and 36% of the operations cost of RTM is therefore funded by Opposition voters. This also means that 36% of Ahmad Zahid’s salary is paid for by these 36% Opposition voters who disagree with his political stand.

The Deputy Minister has insulted all Malaysians by condescendingly saying that the Ministry would study "whether allowing opposition leaders to campaign through RTM in the next general election will benefit the people", as reported by Bernama on 24 January 2008. Whether the Opposition or Barisan Nasional's campaign message will "benefit the people" is up to Malaysians and not the Ministry.

As the Malay saying goes, "berani kerana benar, takut kerana salah" (meaning “one is brave when right, and afraid when in the wrong”), if the Barisan Nasional is confident that their campaign message is more beneficiary to the people, why should its leaders be afraid of sharing the stage with Opposition leaders? Why should they deny voters the opportunity to make an informed decision?

PM Abdullah Badawi has been boasting to world leaders at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland about Malaysia’s successes. Has he no guts to face Anwar Ibrahim, Lim Kit Siang and Hadi Awang at home in a live televised debate during the elections?

BERSIH urges Deputy Minister Ahmad Zahid Hamidi to get his facts right. Opposition leaders from the three major opposition parties like Mustafa Kamil, Saifudin Nasution, Shamsul Iskandar, Dr Dzulkifli Ahmad, Husam Musa, Dr Lo'Lo’ Ghazali, Lim Guan Eng, Loke Siew Fook, Dr. Tan Seng Giaw, Teng Chang Khim (DAP) have all appeared on Debat Perdana. However, Opposition panelists tend to be unfairly treated on the show as they are often cut short in their presentations or when giving answers to the questions raised.

All BERSIH is asking for is to have RTM organize Debat Perdana-type programmes featuring contesting candidates during the election campaign period, along the lines of Australia's Leader Debate or American-style televised debates for presidential candidates.

BERSIH stresses that a level playing field – beginning with a respect for the boundary between the party and the state – is a basic and necessary condition for clean, free and fair elections.

Ahmad Zahid Hamidi's partisan comment clearly highlights the need for an Administrative Neutrality Act, which BERSIH has called for in addition to its short-term demands of the abolition of domestic postal voting, a thorough cleanup of the electoral roll, the use of indelible ink and equitable access to the media.

Issued by BERSIH steering committee members:
Wong Chin Huat - Chair, Writers Alliance for Media Independence (WAMI)
V. Gayathry - Executive Director, Centre for Independent Journalism (CIJ)

Bullshit! Reply to Kalimullah's hogwash

Kalimullah’s reference to the ‘tall poppy syndrome’ seems to have missed the point.. Why can’t he see the difference between success resulting from one’s own ability and success due to political support?

On Tony Fernandes, “He bought a bankrupt airline that no one wanted and turned it into one of the most successful low-cost carriers in the world. AirAsia is a globally known brand that has made Malaysia proud. But yet, there are detractors who claim Tony succeeded because of political support. Hogwash!”

With due respect to Tony and his ability as a CEO, in Malaysia, almost all big businesses require approval from the political leaders. The immediate reaction from some members of the public seems to suggest he is fronting some politicians or he has to make large contributions to ruling party without which, no way can he be allowed the leeway to do much with the airline. For a recent example, he is known to have complained bitterly about Singapore’s refusal to allow AirAsia landing rights. Yet, recently, there was approval – was it a coincidence or due to political connections, which made the difference in Singapore?

I wonder how much of ‘AirAsia is a globally known brand’ was due to advertising hype rather than profitability. Making use of advertisements in the right place like Manchester United created a lot of worldwide publicity, which any marketing man worth his salt would have thought of. Recently, he made a major blunder in betting wrongly on the price of oil, which showed he is only human after all.

During their heydays, who would have thought Halim Saad and ‘Midas’ Samsuddin could fail? While in business, one should be humble as there are many factors beyond our control. Those relying on political support are likely to face problems when there is none.

Just like gambling and share market speculation (short term), businesses depend to a certain extent on luck or whatever one might describe it. So long as you are still gambling or in business, you cannot claim success too soon as you can never tell what will happen next (in gambling) or in the economy within and without the country. My mother used to say ‘one should not boast that one has a good life until one is gone and it is best left to others to describe it’.

On Nasimuddin, “If the APs were removed tomorrow, Nasimuddin would still be successful because he has diversified into property development, livestock rearing, hotels and assembly and manufacturing of cars. His businesses are housed worldwide.”

So what? That does not explain why he should have been given the preferential treatment in the first place, to have unlimited (limited only by the demand for them) APs which could be sold for tens of thousand each. If I am not mistaken, while the ordinary person has to pay the duties on an imported vehicle before he can have it for sale, Naza is allowed to bring in the vehicles first and only need to pay when there was a firm sale. If this is true, isn’t this special favour due to political support?

If even the ex-PM complained specifically about the unfairness of the issuance of APs, there must be some truth in it. Since then, Nasimuddin decided to diversify into assembly of Kia vehicles and was given the approval despite the obvious protection given to Proton and Perodua by Tun. Again it was pretty obvious that had Tun remained as PM, Nasimuddin would not stand a chance. Wasn’t this political support, given by Pak Lah? While we can say with hindsight that he was brilliant in going into car assembly, it does not in any way refute the allegation of having made it with political support, does it? Having made hundreds of millions to start with, being able to diversify his businesses is not such an achievement to boast about.

Naza was lucky to have vain people with easy money from rent-seeking who were willing to pay exorbitant sums to be exclusive and be different. There is a joke among retirees and pensioners, that if an ordinary person were to be given a Ferrari with conditions like ‘to be maintained and used daily and road tax to be renewed upon expiry’ he would be made a bankrupt soon! With this in mind, one can imagine why rent-seekers require loads of cash to maintain their standard of living.

The public is still paying for the protection of our national cars. Besides having to pay higher prices for cars over the years, the AFTA effects meant those who owned any type of vehicles actually lost at least a few thousand each because of the reduction in new car prices which devalued all the existing cars. If Proton were to fail, can you imagine the billions wasted on propping up an inefficient manufacturer? Other than the North-South Expressway, I cannot think of another project, which burdened more people to benefit some.

Can Kalimullah claim that ECM Libra would have been able to take-over Avenue without political support? Can he claim that Bumiputra Commerce’s take-over of Southern Bank was without political arm-twisting?

I am sure fair-minded people are fed up of opportunists making use of nepotism and cronyism and it would be better if they just keep quiet instead of boasting about it.

I hope Malaysiakini in blogs would mention this posting so that our great Kalimullah would spot it.

Put your arm on my shoulder...

The Star, Jan 19, front page quoted Tun Eusoff Chin: “When the man puts his hand on your shoulder, you can’t simply shove it aside” yet the famous picture next to it shows his left hand on Lingam’s shoulder! So it looks more like Lingam unable to shove it aside instead!

Tun Dr. Mahathir has been known for his excellent memory and sharp mind, yet when questioned, he could not remember most details. We are fortunate that he was fit to be questioned after his recent operations and most people hope the RCI would unravel some truth, if not all. It was ironic that on the one hand, the Chairman asked people to come forward, yet Lingam’s brother, Karasu is not welcome!

Most people could not stand VK Lingam’s evasiveness to the last minute – what a contrast to his boastful, ‘I put him there’ – serves him right.

Whatever the outcome of the RCI, the display of the answers given to the questions by each, tells us much about a person’s character.

I can see clearly now...

the hype is gone. Imagine the catchy beat and tune of the song sung by Johnny Nash.

Thanks to the internet and online news portals like Malaysiakini and Malaysia Today, and numerous blogsites, the public is getting the true picture of how unfair our present political system is.

For every seat in parliament, on the average, the following number of Malaysians voted for each party:

GOVERNMENT PARTIES
UMNO - 22,782 voters
MCA - 34,652 voters
MIC - 24,616 voters

OPPOSITION PARTIES
DAP - 57,278 voters
PAS - 150,211 voters
PKR - 617,518 voters

(Testimony of the great work of art by our EC Chairman and his legacy for the past six General Elections and the coming Grand Finale)

According to the previous GE (2004):-

UMNO received 35.9% of the popular votes but has 109 parliamentary seats or almost 50% of all parliamentary seats. In total, Barisan received 63.8% of the popular votes but has 198 parliamentary seats or 90.4% of all parliamentary seats. The opposition received 36.2% of the popular votes but has only 20 parliamentary seats or 9% of all parliamentary seats.

The decision-making power process within our present cabinet (euphemised as ‘power sharing’) is as follows:-

1. UMNO not only controls the parliament via Barisan, it has allocated itself 24 cabinet positions or 71% of all cabinet positions.
2. MCA has 5 cabinet positions or 15% of the cabinet positions.
3. MIC has 1 cabinet position or 3 % of the cabinet positions.
4. Gerakan has 1 cabinet position or 3% of the cabinet positions.
5. Other component parties hold 3 cabinet positions or 8% of the cabinet positions.
6. The opposition with 36.2% of all the popular votes is not given a single cabinet position. (due to the ‘first past the post’ system which requires a free and fair election the lack of which the people in Bersih are complaining about)

"According to Nazri, the defective law minister, the majority of Malaysians, the likes of you and I, are responsible for this.

On 26th July, 2004, in a debate between Nazri and Yang Berkhidmat Lim Kit Siang entitled “ISA - Yes or No?”, Nazri said that the BN’s victory in every election was proof that the rakyat was saying ‘Yes’ to the ISA.

Read Lee Ban Chen’s take on the debate HERE .
You know what? I think Nazri is right.

Every Malaysian who has continued to vote in BN whilst there have been human beings detained at Kamunting, have been guilty of denying their fellow human beings the basic right of liberty and freedom; the right to be charged and to defend themselves at trial.

After Ops Lalang in 1987, we failed the detainees then by giving BN the vote in 1990.

Let’s not fail our 75 brothers and sisters now languishing in Kamunting.

Nazri says a vote for BN is a ‘Yes’ vote for the ISA.

Well, now vote ‘No’ for the ISA."

Excerpt from a Malaysiakini letter,

Kayveas dares attack Samy, not Rustam
Vijay Jan 15

"But where was this valiant streak when Malacca Menteri Besar Rustam Ali came a-calling at your own annual conference and in public, figuratively spat on PPP? You sat there and simply lapped up all that Rustam had to spew out. You did not even have the self-respect to at least walk out of the hall, let alone take Rustam on. Were you scared that such a demonstration of temerity against even an uncouth Umno Mat Rempit leader would be the death knell of your political career? When it comes to Umno, none of you in PPP, MIC, or MCA have the pluck to stand up. Instead, you grovel and continue to invite them. Oh, I forgot. To respond in like vein would not be in keeping with the Barisan Nasional ‘spirit’.Kayveas’ only consolation is perhaps that he is not alone in his shameless sycophancy. When Selangor Menteri Besar Mohd Khir Toyo attended a recent meeting with Hindu temple representatives to discuss the issue of temple demolitions, the committee - unbelievably - presented a shawl to him, a symbol of respect in the Indian culture."

Raja Petra is fond of saying that 191 division leaders of Umno decide who shall be PM and we know why PM has to treat them with velvet gloves.

There is talk that Khairy might stand in Putra Jaya (where the number of constituents is just over 5,000 and most of them are government servants who are known to follow orders), not only because it is physically nearer the PM’s office.

I summarise them as follows:-

A vote for BN is a vote for ISA
A vote for MCA, MIC, Gerakan, etc. is a vote for Umno
A vote for BN is a vote for Umno is a vote for status quo
A vote for Umno is a vote for Khairy as future PM…
scary isn’t it?

I think I am going crazy...

having been reading statements by our national leaders, who said one thing and doing the other, for more than 40 years (since I started reading our newspapers): “We are democratically elected…”; “We are fair and treat everyone equally…”; “We have religious freedom…”; “We have freedom of speech…” and so on.

Recent examples were by Najib, “Communal politics harmful” and we all know what he was famous for when he was Umno Youth Chief; and Sharizat, “And I would not tolerate sexist MPs in the same way I would not tolerate racist MPs.” The former is Deputy President of United Malay National Organisation while the latter Wanita Chief of the same political party, which leaders would remind us about their ‘ketuanan’ or supremacy and they have special rights and privileges which aspiring leaders have to champion if they want to move up.

Is it too much to ask of them to state the truth instead of being hypocrites and try to brainwash the people into thinking that everything is fair and square. Just tell us, “we have a different system of politics unlike those practised in the west”; “we are racists who do not treat everyone equally for the past 50 years and we intend to continue doing so”; “we do not practise religious freedom”; “we do not have freedom of speech”; and so on.

We are beginning to wonder if we are still sane because the leaders kept repeating things which are significantly different from what we are experiencing. Even the inflation rate is different – officially 2% while the people think it is at least 20%!