Mar 5, 2013

Sabah Sulu US PR - hopefully it was not true

In the coming General Election, condemning the Barisan Nasional (BN)  as “totally corrupt” would be the Pakatan Rakyat’s (PR) main line of attack. It will be used as a rallying cry to oust the incumbent. Corruption is undoubtedly a major challenge. There is elite corruption in both the public and private sectors. There is petty corruption within various strata of society.
It is because it is a challenge that the government recognises combating corruption as one of the seven National Key Result Areas (NKRAs). And since 2004 a number of significant measures have been implemented, among them the establishment of 14 special anti-corruption courts with the mandate to adjudicate all corruption cases within 12 months; the enactment of the Whistleblower Act; the signing of Corporate Integrity Pledges and
Integrity Pacts; and the acceptance of open tenders publicised through the media for procurement exercises thus enhancing transparency and accountability. The endorsement of Transparency International’s Election Integrity Pledge, an affirmation of the government’s commitment to electoral ethics, is the latest example of its present battle against corruption.
At the same time, there has been a marked increase in the number of arrests of those allegedly involved in corruption including former political leaders, highly placed public servants, and top-notch corporate figures. Givers as well as takers of bribes are now nabbed regularly. It is because of these sustained efforts that Michael Hershman, one of the founders of Transparency International observed in an article in the Huffington Post (June 22 2012) that Malaysia has a “comprehensive anti-corruption system.”
In this regard, it is worth noting that Malaysia’s fight against corruption has been going on for more than four decades. Malaysia is one of the first countries in the Global South to have established an anti-corruption agency and formulated an anti-corruption law way back in 1967.Even before 2004, a number of Federal Ministers, Mentris Besar and State Executive Councillors have been tried and convicted for corruption.
Nonetheless, as many of us have been arguing for some time now much more can be done to curb this social malaise. Apart from effective enforcement that metes out stern punishment to the wrongdoer regardless of his status, we should also address some of the underlying causes of corruption such as the widening gap between the “have-a-lot” and the “have-a-little” which engenders a widespread feeling of relative deprivation which in turn prompts people to justify their corrupt acts. To make it worse, elite opulence which has become more pronounced in our society in recent years also feeds into this vice. At the same time, both the government and the opposition should craft a mechanism for financing general elections which would eliminate donations from business entities.
The public financing of elections as a concept was accepted by the Dewan Rakyat in April 2012. Whatever new measures are adopted to combat corruption, Malaysians should not be duped into believing that changing the government of the day is THE solution. Other democracies in Asia have tried. In India the Indian National Congress was ousted through the ballot-box in the seventies on an anti-corruption, anti-authoritarianism wave; the people discovered soon afterwards that the successor government was incapable of curbing the scourge. Similarly, in Japan, the people have come to realise that getting rid of the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) and replacing it with some other party has not helped to minimise the prevalence of graft which is embedded to a large extent in the incestuous relationship between business and legislative politics.
There is a reason why regime change per se in most cases does not result in the eradication of corruption. Regime change revolves around political actors. Political actors are focused upon power. And power, as the ancient adage goes, corrupts.
Even in our country we have seen this happening with the opposition parties which are now in power in four states. Vociferous opponents of corruption for the longest time, these parties are now forced to grapple with allegations of shady contracts, zoning irregularities and questionable land deals. Their claim to integrity is being challenged by segments of their own constituencies.
Indeed, how can Pakatan Rakyat project itself as a champion of probity when it is led by a Machleon (a Machiavellian  Chameleon) with such a tarnished record  on issues of ethics? When he was in power — an overly ambitious Cabinet Minister — he was allegedly involved in money politics and cronyism on a massive scale. In his book, The Mahathir Legacy A Nation Divided, a Region at Risk (Allen & Unwin, 2003) Ian Stewart observes, “While Anwar’s followers — as witnessed by myself and other journalists — were handing out packets of money to acquire the support of UMNO division leaders in his 1993 campaign against Ghafar Baba, Anwar himself was winning over influential people in the party by promising positions in the administration he would form when he took over from Dr. Mahathir.” (page 23).
Pakatan supporters insist that Anwar has changed after his incarceration from 1998 to 2004 and now walks the straight and narrow. In other words, like Saul on the road to Damascus, Anwar on the road to Putrajaya has become a paragon of virtue. Really?  If that is so, how does one explain his September 16th saga in 2008 which was a blatant attempt to topple a legitimately elected government through the backdoor, employing allegedly unethical tactics? And what about the electoral fraud within his party, Parti Keadilan Rakyat, in 2010 or his approach to the recent defections of two Barisan Nasional leaders in Sabah to his side?
What this shows is that Anwar and Pakatan can lay no claim to the moral high ground in the battle against corruption. Voters should understand this. They should evaluate them for what they are and not be mesmerised by their words.
Dr. Chandra Muzaffar is President of JUST (The International Movement for a Just World) and has been a political commentator for more than four decades. 

The Australian reported in its article, “Xenophon deported by Malaysia,” that Australian Senator Nick Xenophon has been detained and then deported in Malaysia as part of an “unofficial parliamentary delegation to review the electoral system.”In reality, Senator Xenophon was part of a Western effort to assist Malaysia’s Wall Street-London backed opposition into power as part of a wider geopolitical strategy to align Southeast Asia against China’s emerging regional influence.
Confirming this, the Australian also reported that:
“He and other Australian MPs were to meet opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim, as well as Malaysia’s minister in charge of parliamentary affairs, Mohammed Nazri, and members of the group Bersih, the Coalition for Clean and Fair Elections.”
continue @

The History of “Pro-Democracy” Regime Change: In Bed With the NED. The National Evisceration of Democracy

This article was first published in 2001 by
There was good news recently in Washington. Six new directors joined the board of the US Government agency, the National Endowment for Democracy (NED). The six included such stalwart democrats like former NATO Supreme Commander Wesley “Demented Bomber” Clark, former Assistant Secretary of State Richard Holbrooke and Francis Fukuyama, who since his 1989 National Interest article “The End of History” has been ideologist-in-chief of post-Cold War neoconservatism.. Another new member is someone by the name of Julie Finley, described in the NED handout as “a prominent Republican Party activist who, as a Founder and Board Member of the US Committee on NATO, has worked actively on issues related to NATO expansion and the conflict in the Balkan region.” A NATO expansionist and a Balkan activist – it does not sound as if “democracy’ is high on her agenda. Last year we learned that upon her departure from Foggy Bottom, Madeleine “Hideous Harridan” Albright would become president of the National Democratic Institute, an organization the NED bankrolls.
Of the six, NED president Carl Gershman declared: “This group offers an incredible breadth of experience in foreign policy and American politics. We are incredibly fortunate that such a group of distinguished citizens will be supporting and helping to guide NED in its mission to promote democracy around the world.” We know the political creed of these “distinguished citizens”: They are all fanatically devoted to the following propositions: That the United States is the last stop on humanity’s historic journey. That the United States has the right, even the duty, to do whatever is necessary to persuade humanity of the truth of this insight. That through their lucrative business connections they intend to make a huge sum of money for themselves and their friends by promoting a US-sponsored “pro-business” and “pro-democracy” agenda. That whatever the United States does, no matter how barbaric.
continue @

Friday, 22 February 2013

sabah - a prized catch

By Gabungan Pribumi Prihatin Sabah (Coalition of Concerned Sabah Natives)
The incident involving a large group of Sulu warriors (Royal Army of Sulu) currently locked in a standoff with Malaysian authorities at Lahad Datu in Sabah is not merely about the Sultanate of Sulu enforcing its ancestral claims on Sabah.

Do not be misled as this current unfolding of events is the beginning of a much sinister ploy.

Sabah is ground zero in a conspiracy perpetrated by very powerful entities and the Filipino Muslims rebels currently at standoff with Malaysian authorities are merely pawns in a game where lives are ‘meant’ to be lost for a deceptive cause.

Claims that Sulu warriors landed in Sabah because the Sulu Sultanate was left out of the recent peace process brokered by Malaysia between Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) and the Philippines Government is NOT REALLY THE FACT!

The following are some facts and evidence that reveal why Sabah is Ground Zero

continue @ sabahgroundzero

Growing Questions Over Opposition “Abetting” Sulu Incursion
Sunday, 03 March 2013 
Troubling questions are being raised over a possible involvement of the Opposition behind the incursion by Sulu militants that has killed at least seven of our security forces. These questions were first raised by the Philippines' media and international news agency Reuters, and have been vehemently denied by PKR, but the doubts still linger.
A leading Philippines daily reported on Friday that Filipino intelligence sources had linked a Sabah politician allied to Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim as among the "external factors" responsible for instigating the Sulu Sultan to embark on this foolhardy mission to reclaim Sabah.

"These external factors are one small faction that is in it for the money, an anti-Aquino administration group, and the Malaysian political opposition," noted the Philippine Daily Inquirer.
Its report by journalist Nikko Dizon quoted sources who said these groups had taken advantage of the decision of the heirs of the Sulu sultanate, the Kirams, to pursue their old claim over Sabah.

continue @

For All of the above, hopefully it was not true..

Thanks for coming

Thanks for coming
Terima kasih sudi hadir

Tajuk - Title