Diam’s whorehouse Free Malaysia Today with damaged asshole political analyst Cheah See Kian and new media prostitute Alan Ting,

RELATED ARTICLE http://malaysiakita786.blogspot.com/2011/03/tun-daim-zainuddin-says-umno-political.html

Bring a smile to your own face. Go feed this dog.

Call it the Najib paradox: the strength of his coalition depends largely upon on how weak he is as Prime Minister. The glue holds because he has no power over his partners. One minister is caught with his hands in the cow till and shrugs off accusation with impunity; a second has no time for Cabinet meetings; a third dismisses a portfolio as people-centric as with Nor Mohamed Yakcop shameless lied about the RM600 million “bonus” for Umno divisions  line that it does not represent his true identity. All the Prime Minister can do is smile and carry on. The smile is wearing thin.

related article http://muslimmalaysia786.wordpress.com

/2012/02/24/nor-mohamed-yakcop-shameless-lied-about-the-rm600-million-bonus-for-umno-divisions/

Now, UMNO is in power because sabah and sarawak hold it up. Since power is central to
UMNO schemes for the present and future, all parties have, by mutual consent, eliminated accountability from the algebra of governance to create a semblance of stability. Temperament and tantrum can coexist with venality and incompetence.
The casualty is credibility: it began to creep away but the pace has gradually built up to a crawl. If Najib , whose own reputation remains more positive than that of his government, does not act soon, the pace will quicken to a trot and develop into an irreversible gallop.

Weakness is contagious. It tends to debilitate even those limbs of the body politic that are functioning normally.UMNO ministers have always known that they owe their jobs to party UMNO , but they showed the requisite deference to the PM duringCABINET METTING1 because they knew that Dr NAJIB’s image would be an asset on judgment day when the voter headed for the ballot box. This enormous streng mahathir admitted as much at his only press conference held, ironically, to project an image of control. Instead, he passed the baton when he said, in his typically honest manner, that he would make way for mahathir’s choice the moment he was asked to do so. Power is never stagnant. It either consolidates around the leader, or ebbs. Those with longer plans for the future than the Prime Minister are establishing individual markers at the cost of collective cohesion.
This is useful if you want to buy time, but not effective if you want to run a government.

Najib is burdened by a further paradox. He is presiding over not one but two coalitions. UMNO itself is the second coalition, a storehouse of multiple interests that requires dexterous management even during times of serenity. Personal feuds are only a part of the alternative story; there are genuine and strongly held differences over policy. This is healthy, up to a point; when that point comes, the leader must demand obedience to a government decision. An astute veteran like MAHATHIR would not have berated NAJIB as a misguided intellectual snob whose single idea was to shoot his way through the 1MALAYSIA, without tacit support from his party leader. The Prime Minister has imprisoned himself in the rather dubious proverb, that silence is golden. Silence is too aloof an option for democracy.

A helpless Prime Minister induces a hapless government. Drift, as the term indicates, is never in a hurry. A government can float a long way before someone realizes that it has lost direction. Drift does not threaten a government’s survival, but it saps the people’s patience.

The third paradox may seem puzzling but is easily comprehensible. It is always much more difficult to run a weak government than a strong one. The latter has a command structure, purpose and enough discipline to induce confidence in the ever-watchful voter. A weak government is great news for a newspaper, and even better fodder for television; but that is where its limited entertainment utility ceases. During his first THREE years,nAJIB was an anchor that was powerful enough to keep the ship steady through heavy turbulence in the final 12 months of its journey. Victory in 2013 could MAKE him master of a cruise liner. If, however, he continues to do nothing, he could become captain of a paper boat.

Former prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad said today certainleaders who are merely using their followers in the bid for the seat of power in Putrajaya will ultimately fail.“There are leaders in our country who create an organisation and have followers for the sake of using them to fulfill their ambitions, and some of these have a grand ambition of going to Putrajaya,” he said.These followers, Mahathir ( left ) added, are merely tools whose leader has no regard for their welfare except for his or her own position.“Even if they capture Putrajaya, these leaders will not last long, perhaps they will not even reach Putrajaya,” he said during a youth dialogue in Kuala Lumpur today.“They can go to Putrajaya (to attend the youth festival) outside, but not the building behind,” he quipped in a veiled reference to Pakatan Rakyat.Asked about the high number of youth leaders in Pakatan, compared with BN, Mahathir explained the problem was with leaders who were unwilling to step down.“I believe that talented youths should be given a chance, but unfortunately, after these youths are appointed and when they are no longer youths, they refuse to step down,” he said.Commenting on the opposition’s advocacy for a two-party system, the former premier said: “There is no system in the world that is not flawed.”Mahathir said while the system ensures a clear majority for one side, there are risks of MPs defecting when the majority is not large enough.“So, there are still weaknesses in a two-party system. Therefore the rakyat must be wise in giving sufficient support to the governing party,” he said.He said Malaysia has been able to develop well for over 50 years because of the government’s two-thirds majority.“With enough majority, there is no threat of the government falling, and therefore it can  make important decisions even if it is not liked by the majority of the rakyat or party members,” he said.

A people get the government “corrupt from head to toe” they deserve . But do we really deserve this government? The short answer: no. Do we have an alternative? In a democracy, there is always an alternative – and it need not be the UMNO or M.C.A. If BARISAN continuesto misgovern Malaysia, the search for that alternative will quicken.

One of the more reactionary Oxford colleges used to serve famously boring food to its undergraduates. There was no obvious reason for it. The college had plenty of money and the fellows – the academic staff – enjoyed a superb cellar and the ministrations of an excellent chef. One day a young student asked his tutor why he and his contemporaries had to put up with such needlessly monotonous and unappetising fare. “Oh, it’s very simple,” came the reply. “It’s to stop you complaining about anything important.”
But as well as the symbolic and emotional resources that Mahathir’s Perkasa is eager to exploit, offers something far more important to the defenders of the established order. Like the food given to the Malays, the Malay role continuing existence diverts attention away from more serious matters. Constitutional debate narrows down into a spat about whether or not to have an elected head of a political party.

The current constitution is a shambles that serves the interests of a relative handful of insiders. We have an unelected second chamber. The executive has wrapped its tentacles around the legislature and drained it of authority and independence. The financial interest has its own pocket borough in the shape of the Corporation of the City of kuala lumpur. The main avenues of information are silted up to the point where only a trickle of useful knowledge ever reaches the public Utusan. The Bank of Negara operates in a state of permanent ambiguity, nationally owned but operationally not independent.

A properly sovereign public would have to understand and control the systems of communication and credit. It would have to shape the productive economy to protect the freedom of the individual and to ensure an equality of participation in government. It would have to educate the young to prepare them for life as free citizens. Its citizens would have to exercise a permanent and jealous surveillance of the state.

A renovated free election programme that recognised this would unite anti-capitalists, environmental activists, and those who agitate for information freedom. It also stands a chance of winning popular support. A campaign to get rid of Mahathir, on the other hand, looks like precisely the right fight to pick.

Mahathir is not to everyone’s taste. Some find the continuity  not reassuring, while others are bored by him. It is a fairly minor matter, much like the quality of the food in a college refectory. AnwarIbrahim is someone who wishes to give substance to the idea of. This is a difficult task. It is not made easier by arguments about the palatability of our head of Government. If a true freedom is our goal, then let it be a REFORMASI

The story of UMNO’s relationship with big money and private enterprise sits fidgeting between these fragments of reality.  as a co-conspirator in large scale corruption are gradually overwhelming the idea of business as a critical source of growth for the country as a whole. The focus on a few who are really wealthy and their lifestyle makes the idea of business, on which a large part of Malaysia depends, seem like an elitist concern. The discourse around business blurs the seductive with the substantive and in doing so trivialises it. If business wants to betaken seriously, perhaps it is time for it to cut out the fluff.

 if indeed the story has a moral — is that the more we become the same, the more different we’d like to believe ourselves to be, a different slice of the same loaf of sliced bread. Which might explain why among us Kutchis kuch kuch hota hai when we get lumped together with A blitz in Malaysia Today to try and influence Malaysians not to vote for Anwar Ibrahim, along the lines of “even if I lose one eye, Anwar should lose both”.Driving a wedge between Khalid Ibrahim, and Anwar and Azmin. “Even if I lose GE 13, you (RPK) must help us (BUMNO/BN) get Selangor back”.. Set up by who? I was reliably informed (no SD) by Dr. Imelda Birkin Rosemajib when we last met, I forget when and where, that Raja Petra Kamaruddin’s gullibility had to be seen to be believed. There is a school of thought, and it’s not as far-fetched as it sounds, that it’s BUMNO/BN and Dr Imelda Birkin Rosemajib who are keeping RPK financed in UK, where he can do more damage to Pakatan (by the TV3 deal struck) than if he were physically in Kuala Lumpur.

If RPK is to be believed, people everywhere are falling over themselves making all sorts of confessions to him. Even Anwar:
“I can believe this because this was exactly what Anwar told me when we met in London in 2010. In fact, Anwar was even more blunt in his criticism of the Menteri Besar. He said that Khalid was stubborn and had a huge ego and would not ‘listen to advice’. My retort was: you created the monster so why can’t you just un-create what you created? (In fact, I wrote about this before)… Azmin Ali is up in arms. He is grumbling that Selangor Menteri Besar Tan Sri Khalid Ibrahim is bypassing the ‘correct channels’ in making decisions…”

And RPK is credible because? He  hobnobbed with the great MAHATHIR?

Does he not realise that in Today’s Malaysia, that’s a kiss of death?
Well, as each day passes by, it’s becoming painfully obvious that the deal RPK signed with includes: you needle me I greese you with Rosmah

Among the fundamental principles of any functioning justice system is the following: Don’t lie to a judge or falsify documents submitted to a court, or you will go to jail. Breaking an oath to tell the truth is perjury, and lying in official documents is both perjury and fraud.

These are serious criminal offenses, but apparently not if you are at the heart of America’s financial system. On the contrary, key individuals there appear to be well compensated for their crimes.

As Dennis Kelleher of Better Markets has argued, the recent so-called “robo-signing” settlement – in which five large banks “settled” their legal liability for carrying out fraudulent foreclosures on mortgages – is a complete sell-out to the financial industry.

First, there was no serious criminal prosecution – meaning that no one will be charged with a felony, and no one will go to jail. In terms of affecting executives’ incentives, this is the only thing that matters.

Even the terminology used to frame the discussion is wrong. Kelleher, an attorney with extensive experience in private practice and the public sector, tells it like it is: “‘robo-signing’ is massive, systematic, fraudulent, criminal conduct.” Alternatively, as he points out, we could just call it “lying, cheating, and stealing.”

Second, the civil penalties in this settlement – a form of fine – are minuscule relative to the size of the companies involved. As Shahien Nasiripour, one of the best reporters on this issue, dryly put it: “None of the five lenders have said they expect to incur a material charge due to the settlement.” In other words, from a corporate perspective, the penalty is a trifling affair.

The lack of transparency in last week’s settlement in court between former Malaysia Airlines System chairperson Tajuddin Ramli and government-linked corporations (GLCs) does not augur well for Malaysia’s standing, domestically and internationally.

Transparency International Malaysia chapter chairperson Paul Low (right) said the case indicated blatant abuses of power and a lack of prudence in the managing of the country’s finances, resulting in losses of public funds.

Low also warned that following the court settlement, Malaysia’s aspiration of having good governance has also come under scrutiny.

“His (Tajuddin’s) claim that the government (through the assurance given by the then Prime Minister and Minister of Finance) had indemnified him of any liability incurred in his purchase of the MAS shares from Bank Negara needed to be substantiated and disclosed by the institutions and the ministers concerned.

“We are extremely concerned as to the lack of public disclosure of the reasons for what seems to be a ‘arbitrary write-off’ of the RM589 million loan owed by Tajuddin relating to his purchase of MAS shares,” Low told Malaysiakini.

The Kuala Lumpur High Court had on December 7, 2009, ordered Tajuddin to pay RM589 million to Pengurusan Danaharta Nasional Bhd, which manages unpaid loans. The same court had earlier dismissed Tajuddin’s RM13 billion counter-claim.

Last Tuesday, Tajuddin withdrew his appeal against Danaharta and other GLCs over the High Court decision.

The same day, Tajuddin also withdrew his lawsuit against numerous other litigants, including Telekom Malaysia Bhd, Naluri Corporation, Celcom (M) Bhd, Atlan Holding Bhd and CIMB Group.

Petaling Jaya MP Tony Pua has claimed that according to his sources, the RM589 claim has been written off as part of the settlement.

Blatant abuse of power

Low said said the court settlement indicated a blatant abuse of power and a lack of prudence in the stewardship of the country’s finances, resulting in substantial losses of public funds. “In view of the inconsistencies , from the explanations of the personalities involved, a public clarification needs to be done by the government,” he said.

“As the case involves a public listed company and GLCs, the opaqueness of the settlement will not augur well for Malaysia’s standing in the investing community, domestically as well as internationally.It shows a lack of consistency and seriousness in tackling corruption (defined as the abuse of entrusted power for person gains) at the higher echelon of the administration.”

Low pointed out that Malaysia’s aspiration to become a high-income economy would be impaired if public administration continued to lack good governance, accountability and public disclosure.
Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad brushed off today Datuk Zaid Ibrahim’s call that he “write a book” on why Malaysia Airline System (MAS) was privatised to Tan Sri Tajuddin Ramli in 1994, saying he was not in charge of the loss-making national carrier.

“I’m not in charge of MAS, how can I write a book? I can make some comments, that’s all,” the former Prime Minister told reporters today.

Zaid, who was de facto Law Minister in 2008, wrote in his blog today that Dr Mahathir must explain by “writing (a book) that is believable, that at least reflects the true situation surrounding the MAS saga that has still not been resolved until today.”

Zaid, who resigned from UMNO in September 2008 to join PKR but is now estranged from Pakatan Rakyat (PR), has backed the opposition’s criticism of recent confidential out-of-court settlements between Tajuddin and several GLCs.

“Since the settlement was conducted in secret, allow me to guess the terms of the deal: Tajuddin was not required to pay a single sen to Danaharta or any of the GLCs; instead, the government will pay Tajuddin RM6.5 billion (or half of what he had claimed).

“Tajuddin will then be generous in his contributions to the party coffers for the upcoming general election,” he said.

Tajuddin’s settlement with Pengurusan Danaharta Bhd (Danaharta) on February 14 came after a lengthy legal dispute following a High Court decision in December 2009 ordering the ex-MAS chief to pay the state asset management manager RM589.14 million plus two per cent interest per year, backdated to January 1, 2006.

But Dr Mahathir, who was PM from 1981 to 2003, insisted today “the government is very sensitive to these things because it may affect the image of the government and the support in the next election.”

“If they have evidence that there was blatant abuse of power they can make a case for it,” he added.

Tajuddin, who was MAS chairman until 2001, was also a poster boy of former Finance Minister Tun Daim Zainuddin’s now discredited policy of nurturing a class of Malay corporate captains on government largesse during the Mahathir administration.

The case between Danaharta and Tajuddin arose after he executed a facility agreement on July 13, 1994 to borrow RM1.79 billion from a group of syndicated lenders to finance his purchase of a 32 per cent stake in MAS.

However, from 1994 to 1998 he failed to service the original loan, causing it to become a non-performing loan (NPL). In 1998, Danaharta acquired the NPL from the lenders but Tajuddin also failed to settle his debt to Danaharta until it was in default of RM1.41 billion as at October 8, 2001.

As part of a settlement agreement, Tajuddin was to pay RM942 million in four instalments over three years and that he was permitted to redeem his charged shares at a minimum price per share.

Tajuddin, however, defaulted in the payment of the quarterly interest payable under the settlement agreement and on April 27, 2002, the plaintiffs terminated the settlement agreement and demanded RM1.61 billion from him.

On April 29, 2002, Danaharta, together with its units Danaharta Urus Sdn Bhd and Danaharta Managers Sdn Bhd sold part of the charged shares consisting entirely of Technology Resources Industries (TRI) shares at RM2.75 per share, resulting in total proceeds of RM717.39 million.

As at December 31, 2005, the amount outstanding was RM589.14 million and on May 11, 2006, Danaharta and the subsidiaries commenced action to recover the money.

Tajuddin had alleged in his affidavit that it was Dr Mahathir and Daim who directed him in 1994 to buy a controlling stake in MAS to bail out the government.

Tajuddin claimed that his purchase was a forced “national service”, disguised as an arm’s length commercial deal, because the government wanted to appease the investment community and the public.

Dr Mahathir, however, denied in his autobiography published last March that he and Daim had forced Tajuddin to bail out MAS in 1994 for RM1.8 billion, claiming instead that Tajuddin was “elated” over his purchase.

Third, such fines are, in any case, paid by the companies’ shareholders, not by their executives or board members (all of whom carry insurance). In the rare cases in which fines have been levied on individuals, either their insurance policies picked up most of the bill, or the penalties were trivial relative to the cash compensation that they received while committing their crimes – or both.

As if all of this weren’t bad enough, the banks reportedly will be able to use government money to write down the value of mortgages, which amounts to subsidizing them to pay their own meaningless fines.

The Obama administration and its allies have worked hard to sell its roughly $20 billion settlement with the banks as one that will have a meaningful impact on the housing market. But nothing could be further from the truth. As Kelleher points out, the United States has “more than 10 million homes under water” (the outstanding mortgage exceeds the house’s value). “Twenty billion dollars doesn’t make a dent in that: one million homes at $20,000 loan forgiveness is it.”

In fact, the Obama administration’s settlement with the mortgage lenders is consistent with its track record on all of its policies related to the financial sector, which has been abysmal. But it is also puzzling. Why would the administration continue to bend over backwards to be lenient towards top bankers under these circumstances?

I honestly do not believe that the administration’s stance reflects any form of corruption – payments made to individuals or even to political campaigns. And, in this case, it does not even appear to reflect the lobbying power of big financial players. That power certainly explains why the Dodd-Frank financial reforms enacted in 2010 were not stronger, and why there is now so much opposition to effective implementation of that legislation (for example, there is currently a huge fight around the “Volcker rule,” which would limit proprietary trading by megabanks). But mortgage lenders’ criminal activities are another matter.

Indeed, at stake in the mortgage settlement are fundamental and systemic breaches of the rule of law – perjury and fraud on an economy-wide scale. The Justice Department has, without question, all of the power that it needs to prosecute these alleged crimes fully. And yet America’s top law-enforcement officials have consistently – and now completely – backed off.

The main motivation behind the administration’s indulgence of serious criminality evidently is fear of the consequences of taking tough action on individual bankers. And maybe officials are right to be afraid, given the massive size of the banks in question relative to the economy. In fact, those banks are bigger now than they were before the crisis, and, as James Kwak and I documented at length in our book 13 Bankers, they are much larger than they were 20 years ago.

Top bankers want to make a lot of money. They also want to stay out of prison. Political leaders can huff and puff as much as they want, but, without a credible threat of poverty and time behind bars, bankers have no reason to comply with the law. For them, it’s all about the trade – and you can be the sucker in public policy as easily as you can be the sucker in an individual loan agreement.

The message to bank executives today is simple: build your bank to be as big as possible – and then keep growing. If you manage to become big enough, you and your employees are not just too big to fail, but also too big to jail.The Obama administration has just made everyone else the sucker.
But happily ever after fails And we’ve been poisoned by these fairy tales -Bruce Hornsby and Don Henley
Even though I grew up in a community run by organized crime, the lines between what was legal and what was illegal were very clear.

Drug pushing was illegal. Loan sharking was illegal. Bribing politicians was illegal.

People did all three, but knew they could go to jail.

Things are different now.

My perception of drug pushers has always been of gun-toting street dealers and drug lords. In other words, characters right out of Scarface and New Jack City.

Now the way to get “the really good stuff” is to go to a pain management clinic. People spend a few minutes and lots of money to get a “physical.” They skip insurance and pay the clinic with cash or a credit card. The “medical staff” will then arrange for you to get you a large order of the highly addictive pain medicines prescribed by the clinic doc. You can often get the prescription filled right at the clinic.

It’s a great deal for the addict — one-stop shopping and no chance of being arrested for possession.

It’s not illegal if it was prescribed by a doctor.

It’s also a great way to die at a young age.

Several years ago, I set up a structured settlement and a trust for a young woman who had been in an accident. We tied up a large amount of money but I went along with giving her $10,000 to supposedly pay off her credit cards.

She took the $10,000 and bought methadone to party with her friends. She overdosed and died the same day I gave her the money.

28 years old.

It haunted me then and will haunt me forever.

It taught me never t to give a client that much cash and it taught me to hate pain management clinics.

Clinics are perfectly legal. In Kentucky, you don’t even have to be a doctor to own one. I suspect the legislature will fix that loophole. It’s hard to believe that a business handing out narcotics can be owned by non-medical people.

I’m not a lawyer, but would love to own a law firm. I’d like to own a plumbing contracting firm but not be a licensed plumber. I’d like to own a real estate firm but am not a licensed realtor.

None of those options are available to me. But owning a pain management clinic is.

I recently had surgery. I very much appreciate the good that pain medicines can do.

I understand that addicts are gaming the system. I took a friend in horrible pain on a midnight run to the emergency room. It was packed and we were there for two hours without seeing anyone past a triage nurse who barely spoke English. He obviously thought my friend was looking for a quick fix and wouldn’t allow us to see a medical professional.

We finally went to another emergency room and found a real doctor and real medicines. Two days later, that same hospital did major surgery on my friend.

I suspect a combination of political clout and big money has allowed the pain clinic system to operate for so long.

A similar story can be said for another illegal activity turned legitimate: payday lending.

A few years ago, I coined the phrase, “Legalized loan sharking” since it’s impossible for me to see how payday lenders differ from the loan sharks of my youth.

Unlike pain management clinics, my state legislature, like many others, has not been inclined to do anything to stop the payday lenders.

Gary Rivlin’s book, Broke USA, is a wonderful account of how big money is made in the poverty industry.

If you look at the political contributors’ list of any state (particularly my home state of Kentucky), you will see large contributions to elected officials being made by payday lenders.

You don’t see many contributions from the people who are receiving payday loans.

On one hand, I become horrified when I see how much money the payday lenders give in contributions.

On the other hand, I like knowing who is getting what and where that money is coming from.

The rise of the “super PAC” concept makes it harder to find that out. The United States Supreme Court gave the political process to Wall Street by allowing corporations to make unlimited campaign contributions.

If we want to occupy anywhere, the Supreme Court is a good place to start. A horrible, five-to-four decision could completely take government away from individuals.

There was a time when politicians were busted for accepting bribes. You rarely hear about it now.

RELATED ARTICLE http://suarakeadilanmalaysia.wordpress.com/2012/02/15/its-the-oldest-rule-in-the-book-but-now-is-the-oldest-profession-if-you-hold-public-o

Funneling money to campaigns via super PACs is so easy, why would a politician look for a bribe? All he has to do is buddy up to a corporation, do their bidding and have the corporation spend unlimited money on a campaign — which the candidate can then arrange to be paid out to friends, relatives and other front men to launder the money back into the politician’s pocket.

There was a time, not long ago, when corporate campaign contributing was a felony, with possible jail time. The late New York Yankees’ owner, George Steinbrenner, was convicted of a felony when Richard Nixon’s campaign shook him down for a corporate contribution in 1972.

But eventually the ANWAR lost  patience with  UMNO. Najib was speaking about the Umno’s crony agenda. Not the Malay agenda. For those reasons we must do the exact opposite. Deny these so-called Malay leaders a chance to concentrate power. It’s power which they shall apply to the misfortune of the majority of Malays and to

THE VERDICT WILL RESTORE SOME FAITH TO SUPPORTERS AND NEUTRALS ALIKE. IT WILL REPLENISH THE ENERGY LOST IN A MAN WHO HAD TO STAND TRIAL AGAINST ACCUSATIONS THAT HAS TARNISHED NOT ONLY HIS IMAGE BUT HIS FAMILY’S AS WELL. READMORENOT NAJIB IT IS MAHATHIR AND HIS CONSPIRATOR TEAM CAN MAHATIR UNDO TO RETURN ANWAR SELF-DIGNITY,HIS FAMILY DIGNITY

elated articlehttp://suarakeadilanmalaysia.wordpress.com/2012/01/10/najib-charge-mahathir-for-saying-how-dare-you-raid-my-seniors-officers-office/

Accusation is the easy exit route for UMNO. Introspection will take us back to the beginning. Betrayal is impossible without trust. We did not trust  to be honest. We trusted our political class, and it continues to search for new and inventive ways to betray us again. Datuk V.K. Lingam’s former secretary, G. Jayanti, exposed … Read more DID DATUK V.K. LINGAM WROTE AN ENTIRE LEGAL JUDGMENT THEN LEAK IT TO DATO’ MOHD.ARIFF SABRI BIN HJ. ABDUL TUN DAIM ZAINUDDIN’S HITMAN

 

Jimmy Breslin’s great book, How the Good Guys Finally Won: Notes from an Impeachment Summer, talked about how Nixon’s crew put the squeeze on Steinbrenner and others like him.

Imagine what the Watergate folks could do now? With Super PACs allowing corporations to give unlimited amounts to fund campaigns, the big corporations control the political process, particularly at the presidential level.

I use to give money to presidential campaigns. Why should I now? My $1000 will be a paltry sum besides the millions that Wall Street can funnel in, or the tens of millions casino owners can “donate.”

The big growth opportunities in the economy comes from taking something that everyone assumed was illegal and making it legal.

Why stop at drugs, loan sharking and influence peddling? I can see where a legalized “murder for hire” operation would have a market, too.

As a society, it would seem logical that we would want drug pushing, loan sharking and corporate influence peddling to stop.

At the very least, we could go back to making it against the law.

PIGS ARE THE MOST SHAMELESS ANIMAL ON THE FACE OF THE EARTH. IT IS THE ONLY ANIMAL THAT INVITES ITS FRIENDS TO HAVE SEX WITH ITS MATE. IN AMERICA, MOST PEOPLE CONSUME PORK. MANY TIMES AFTER DANCE PARTIES, THEY HAVE SWAPPING OF WIVES; I.E. MANY SAY “YOU SLEEP WITH MY W AND SOPHISTICATED. WHATEVER THEY DO, WE FOLLOW AFTER A FEW YEARS. ACCORDING TO AN ARTICLE IN ISLAND MAGAZINE, THIS PRACTICE OF SWAPPING WIVES HAS BECOME COMMON IN THE AFFLUENT CIRCLESIFE AND I WILL SLEEP WITH YOUR WIFE.” IF YOU EAT PIGS THEN YOU BEHAVE LIKE PIGS. WE INDIANS LOOK UPON AMERICA TO BE VERY ADVANCED

How does someone maintain a relationship with God when one describes one’s life as: dull, miserable, demeaning, undignified and intolerable? If one believes that God is all-loving and all powerful, how then can one turn to God for help?

So, can you stand being told you did wrong? Or, do you wait for life to teach you lessons?If you can divide people into categories based on behaviour, two types you may have come across are — those willing to admit mistakes, and those who refuse to acknowledge they went wrong.The first will readily agree RPK… will unleash his most poised weapon

READMOREhttp://suarakeadilanmalaysia.wordpress.com/2012/02/06/lets-finish-off-this-king-con-masterwordsmith-the-taxidrivers-cooperation-and-understanding-assuredly-yours/

related article http://suarakeadilanmalaysia.wordpress.com/2012/01/17/who-the-fuck-are-you-haramjada-mahathir-saiful-has-right-to-sell-his-juboq-sex-with-farah/

DID HE SAY IF BN CANNOT WIN, NOBODY CAN WIN?
READ AND ANALYSE THE LINE DEEPLY. HE HAS SAID SIMILAR SUBJECT PREVIOUSLY, NOT ONCE, TWICE BUT MANY… EVEN HE MENTIONED ‘CALAMITY’. VERY DEEP MEANING WITH WORST SCENARIO

Abraham Lincoln had this to say: “You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time.”

related article http://suarakeadilanmalaysia.wordpress.com/2012/01/02/blogger-raja-petra-kamaruddin-last-days-lasting-show-sing-a-song-of-sixpence/

Hussein abdul Hamid learn to fuck in mckk

RELATED ARTICLE WHO THE FUCK ARE YOU HARAMJADA HUSSEIN HAMID AKA STEADYAKU47 AND HIS DRINKING PARTNER RPK

Read more: http://themalay-chronicle.blogspot.com/2010/12/raja-petra-kamarudin-rest-of-iceberg.html#ixzz1nDVGevVb

IT WAS MERELY A THOUGHT, INITIALLY. THEN, LUCK BY CHANCE, MET SOMEBODY IN NEED OF IT. DESPERATELY. A FRIEND← UNMASKING RAJA PETRA KAMARUDIN THE SNITCH ALWAYS SUPPORT NAJIBROSMAPCO’S ONE MALAYSIA

HARIS IBRAHIM BRUTUS – THE MOST FAMOUS BACKSTABBER AT THE PEOPLE’S PARLIAMENT →

I AM A LITTLE BLIND, NO, TOTALLY BLIND WHEN IT COMES TO FRIENDS. THE REPERCUSSIONS ARE SEVERE. HEARTBREAK, FEELING FOOLISH, URGE TO KILL, YOU NAME, AND I HAVE GONE THROUGH IT ALL. STILL. NEVERTHELESS.← SIMON TEMPLAR GO FUCK BERNARD KHOO,HARRIS IBRAHIM AND RPK YOUR THIRD FORCE IS A SORE FAILURE.

SO, OF COURSE, I MADE THE OFFER. I REALLY DID! BUT I WAS NOT PREPARED FOR THIS!

← RAJA PETRA KAMARUDIN HAS LOST HIS MALAYSIAN CITIZENSHIP ,DIN MARICAN WAS KICKED OUT FROM P.K.R OFFICE

MY ROOTS ARE DEEP INSIDE. THE CRITICAL THINKING PART PROBABLY GETS INTO SHAPE AS YOU GROW, BUT INSTINCTS ARE GIVEN THE FORM OF VALUES ONLY BY YOUR SURROUNDINGS. I CAN VOUCH FOR THIS, BECAUSE MY PEOPLE AND MY PLACE HAVE DEFINED ONE PERSPECTIVE – YOU NEED TO IDENTIFY WITH EVERYTHING THAT IS HUMANE.

THE ENEMY WITHIN HARRIS IBRAHIM BRUTUS THE ENDHIRAN RPK & MAHATHIR’S WEAPONS OF MASS DESPERATION

Read more: http://themalay-chronicle.blogspot.com/2010/11/raja-petra-kamarudin-you-are-sour-grape.html#ixzz1nDYherqO

I have spent almost my whole life– 31 years– caring far too much about offending people, worrying if I’m cool enough for them, or asking myself if they are judging me.
I can’t take it anymore. It’s stupid, and it’s not good for my well being. It has made me a punching bag– a flighty, nervous wuss. But worse than that, it has made me someone who doesn’t take a stand for anything. It has made me someone who stood in the middle, far too often, and not where I cared to stand, for fear of alienating others. No more. Not today.Politicians never accuse you of ‘greed’ for wanting other people’s money — only for wanting to keep your own money.

Walking into the office of the ADUN (Member of the State Assembly) of Chempaka, Ampang
I found myself extremely upset going to ask for help for eye operation Submitted my letter from hospital that I must be admitted on 27 feb each when i ask them on my status they standed answer YB is very busy *Many of the deliberate con artists are the “true believers” of fanatical religious or political sects who actually accept the dogma that it is a mortal sin for you to take care of yourself and your family first and in any way exercise your right to the pursuit of happiness while their precious cause is in any way neglected, underfunded or even unaccepted.

If dancing has been described as the vertical expression of a horizontal desire, then there is a similar divergence between position and intention in politics. Subtle histrionics mix basic instinct with populist promise; rhetoric carries the message. The voter plays along, suspending disbelief en route to a polling booth.
Actors slip easily into politics because they have MBAs in the management of adulation. They have studied the arts of froth and the science of glamour, most notably the cruel fact that it has an early sell-by date.

*Many of the deliberate con artists are the “true believers” of fanatical religious or political sects who actually accept the dogma that it is a mortal sin for you to take care of yourself and your family first and in any way exercise your right to the pursuit of happiness while their precious cause is in any way neglected, underfunded or even unaccepted.

If dancing has been described as the vertical expression of a horizontal desire, then there is a similar divergence between position and intention in politics. Subtle histrionics mix basic instinct with populist promise; rhetoric carries the message. The voter plays along, suspending disbelief en route to a polling booth.
Actors slip easily into politics because they have MBAs in the management of adulation. They have studied the arts of froth and the science of glamour, most notably the cruel fact that it has an early sell-by date.

The main difference between Umno and PAS leaders is that unlike PAS, Umno does not have a proper understanding of the Quran, a PAS leader has charged.

Selangor PAS commissioner Dr Rani Othman (picture) said this is why the Umno leadership could not “comprehend” the co-operation between PAS, PKR and DAP despite all three Pakatan Rakyat (PR) parties having different principles and beliefs.

“What is the difference between PAS and Umno? Both of us wear the kopiah, baju Melayu, and we may even look the same.

“But the main difference is that we understand the Quran, and they do not,” Dr Rani told participants at a DAP fundraiser here last night.

He said many PAS lawmakers were doctors and professionals, but that was not the reason why they won in Election 2008.

“If we won because we are doctors, we should have won back in 2004. But we won because of your support,” he said.

“The relationship between PAS, DAP, and PKR is news to Umno because they do not understand Islam,” said Dr Rani.

Umno leaders and newspapers have often attacked the PR pact for having differing beliefs, especially the DAP which rejects the concept of hudud and an Islamic state while PAS supports it.

“Islam has never prohibited the Chinese, Indians from conducting religious activities,” said the Meru state assemblyman.

My friend tried his best to persuade the pharmacist, telling him they were in a remote area and it would be hard to find a female doctor, and that his mother, more than seventy years old, surely would not represent a sexual temptation to the pharmacist. Still, he refused to administer the insulin.

Another incident: A while back the newspaper Al Masry Al Youm published an article about hospitals in Ramadan where employees working in the intensive care, emergency and accident units left work after breaking their fast and wouldn’t return for two hours, so that they could say the taraweeh prayers in the mosque. They left their poor patients alone during this time. They considered performing the taraweeh prayers much more important than anything else, even the life of an innocent patient for whom they were responsible. The patients’ conditions might deteriorate and they might even die while the doctors and nurses worshiped in the mosque.

The same strange logic turned up this week in the Ministry of the Interior. For thirty years Hosni Mubarak used the police force as an instrument to suppress and humiliate Egyptians. Police officers tortured hundreds of thousands of Egyptians and took part in all the Mubarak regime’s dirty tricks — rigging elections, snooping on people’s private lives, fabricating charges and recruiting false witnesses against opponents of the regime. During and after the revolution many officers committed horrendous crimes against demonstrators, including sexual abuse, blinding them with shotguns and killing them with live ammunition. The revolution should have led to a purge and restructuring of the police force so that it could resume its natural role protecting people and respecting their rights, but the Military Council insisted on preserving the police force as it was, including the same senior officers who belonged to the Mubarak regime.

In the midst of this sorry state of affairs, dozens of officers emerged last week to announce that they would let their beards grow in line with the practice of the Prophet Muhammad. When the ministry told them that shaving had been the established practice in the police force since it was founded, they rose in revolt, insisting they had a right to grow beards. The problem here is not whether they should or should not shave their beards. Rather, what is strange and saddening is that these same officers have witnessed and may have taken part in horrible crimes against ordinary citizens. We never heard these pious officers object to these crimes — and now they announce their sacred campaign for the right to grow beards, as if religion ended with appearances, with no deeper significance.

Didn’t they see how their colleagues killed demonstrators and how innocent people were tortured in police stations and in State Security premises? In Egypt there are thousands of mosques that are, thank God, often so packed that often people spread mats outside and pray in the street. But does this admirable commitment to performing religious obligations affect the way Egyptians behave towards others? The answer is often no. There are many Egyptians who observe the superficial aspects of religion and pray regularly, but in their daily dealings are far from truthful and honest.

If the disconnect between belief and behavior were a matter of a few individuals, we would dismiss them as hypocrites. But when it afflicts broad segments of society, it constitutes a social phenomenon that has to be studied. These religious people who are interested in form rather than substance are not necessarily hypocrites or evil people. They are merely applying religion as they have been taught it. The reading of religion now prevalent in Egypt gives form priority over substance and is much more interested in forms of worship than in personal conduct. This version of Islam is not Egyptian. Real and honest moderate Egyptian Islam has receded in the face of Wahhabi Islam coming from Saudi Arabia and the Gulf countries.

For thirty years masses of oil money has been used to drown Egypt in Wahhabi ideas. The purpose of this support for the Wahhabi school of thought is basically political, in that the Saudi system of government depends on an alliance between the ruling family and the Wahhabi sheikhs. Hence spreading the Wahhabi ideology reinforces the political system in that country. At the same time millions of Egyptians have migrated to the Gulf seeking a livelihood and have then come back to Egypt full of Wahhabi ideas.

Egyptians go there and see a society different from Egyptian society. Men and women are completely segregated but rates of sexual harassment and rape are among the highest in the world. Alcohol is banned but many people drink in secret. The law does not apply to Princes, who can do what they like, confident that they are immune from punishment. Egyptians learn there that performing your prayers on time is not voluntary, as it is in Egypt, but a compulsory obligation and if you are late the police might arrest and harm you. They learn that if you are walking the street with your wife and her hair is accidentally uncovered, then a policeman may pounce on her, hit her with a stick and make her cover her head. Despite this strictness, many Egyptians are cheated financially by their Gulf sponsors, and when they submit legal complaints, rarely obtain what they are owed because the judicial system there favors locals over foreigners.

This disconnect between belief and behavior is a social malaise that has come to us from the oil countries and has spread like a plague, just as it has spread into Islamist groups. When the Egyptian revolution broke out most of those affiliated with the Islamist movement did not take part. The Muslim Brotherhood announced that they would not take part in the demonstrations but they joined the revolutionaries after the police withdrew (and to be fair, the young Muslim Brothers played a magnificent role defending the demonstrations during the Battle of the Camel). As for the Salafists, who are more numerous than the Brothers, they stood quite openly against the revolution. Their sheikhs in Egypt and Saudi Arabia issued fatwas that demonstrations are haram and that Muslims have a duty to obey a Muslim leader, even if he is unjust. They asserted that democracy is haram because it advocates government by the people, while they believe that God alone can rule, not mankind.

When the revolution succeeded in deposing Hosni Mubarak we found the Salafists suddenly changing their beliefs, forming parties and taking part in democracy, which had been haram a few days earlier. The Muslim Brotherhood and the Salafists made a deal with the Military Council in which the council would help them control Parliament in return for helping the council stay in power from behind the scenes. The Military Council set the rules for the elections to benefit these groups and the high electoral commission ignored the frauds they committed. Strict Muslims who get angry if they miss Friday prayers or if they see a woman dolled-up have no problem with the exploitation of voters’ poverty to buy their votes with cooking oil, sugar and meat.

In the end the Brotherhood and the Salafists won the majority of seats in Parliament through elections that may not have been rigged but were definitely not fair. Although we have reservations about the elections we have advocated supporting Parliament on the grounds that in the end it is the only elected body we can expect to protect the revolution and achieve the revolution’s objectives. But day after day we discover that the Parliament is incapable of standing up to the Military Council and that there are ‘red lines’ it does not dare to approach. The Members of Parliament have ignored the Military Council’s responsibility in the numerous.

The Parliament has become a debating platform, just a talk shop that does not lead to any useful or effective decisions. We have seen Members of Parliament in uproar, talking tough against the Minister of Supply because attacking him comes at no cost. But they are ultra-cautious when it comes to mentioning the Military Council, against whom they do not utter a word.

The disconnect between the form of religion and its substance appears in Parliament, where its members have done nothing to defend justice but have preoccupied themselves with inconsequential matters. Some refused to swear the constitutional oath without adding the word ‘sharia’ to it (as if the constitution had been written by the pagans of pre-Islamic Mecca). On another occasion, while policemen were hunting down demonstrators in the streets with shotguns and live ammunition, one member of Parliament gave the call to prayer inside the chamber in mid-session, which led to a long debate about whether it was right to give the call to prayer under the dome of the Parliament building. Another strange discussion arose when one Member, speaking metaphorically, said that “the government was not composed of angels”. Other members jumped up and strongly objected to the use of the term “angels” in any such figure of speech.

The Military Council, having succeeded in forming a pliant and conciliatory Parliament, is now preparing to carry out another step in its plan to control the government. With help from the Brothers and the Salafists, it is looking for a consensus president whom they could control. The Military Council has issued by decree a presidential election law that has no equal in the rest of the world. Under this law a supreme committee has been formed whose decisions cannot be challenged in any way. If you saw election tampering with your own eyes, recorded it and submitted the evidence to the committee, and the committee said there was no rigging, you would have no appeal, because the committee’s word is final, irreversible and incontestable. This denies Egyptians of basic right to appeal administrative decrees. But the pious Brothers do not see the importance of contest or appeal. On the contrary, they are helping the Military Council tighten its grip on Egypt.

True religion requires us to defend human values: truth, justice and freedom. This is the essence of religion and it is much more important than growing beards or giving the call to prayer in the Parliament chamber.

At a crossroads

Lack of morals – the real crises in Malaysia and money MONEY money Islam. Mufti have gone to jail While in terms of profit and loss “phony Islam theology”more important issue plaguing the nation is lack of moral Mufti and theological correctness an issue in a political campaign
the hallowed interpretive UMNO tradition Now, many of us notice that this “dominion” is an expression of humanity being created in “the image of God.” That framing seems to imply that human beings should show the same care for creation that the Creator does—respecting and conserving God-given balances and systems. As image-bearers of God, we should, for example, show foresight to conserve God-given resources to benefit future generations rather than grasping for the most profit in the least amount of time to benefit today’s one-percenters. (One might even argue that this approach is more truly and deeply conservative.)
Islam forbids a “jihad (struggle)” predicated on race, prominent Muslim scholar Mohd Asri Zainul Abidin has said amid controversy over yesterday’s call by the Perak Mufti for Malays to defend their race and rights to the land.
“Jihad against others in the name of race, is not Islam’s teaching,” the former Perlis Mufti said today in a statement in Bahasa Malaysia.

“No race can consider themselves ‘superior’ in the meaning of racial supremacy,” he stressed in an article titled, “Does Islam encourage racial fighting?”

Guess where in the world candidates for political office are pandering to religious conservatives, using religious imagery in political advertisement and participating in political forums in houses of worship? Where some voters are unwilling to support candidates because they do not belong to the majority faith, dismissing a candidate because they are women, and using religious purity as a litmus test for eligibility? If you said Iowa, USA you will be correct. Cairo, Egypt also qualifies as the correct answer.
The nexus between politics and religion has been on the rise globally for quite some time now. It is an irony that it is the religious right in each country that often expresses the most misgivings about the rise of the religious right in other countries. In America, Republican presidential candidates, with support from the religious right, are the most vocal in their criticism of Islamist politics. On the other hand, Islamists are quick to conflate American hegemony in their region with a war against Islam. The mutual paranoia is palpable.
Elections are underway in Egypt for a new parliament. Openly vying for seats are political parties from the puritanical Salafis, to the conservative Ikhwanis (Muslim Brotherhood) and a plethora of smaller secular groups. After the first round of voting it appears that the religious right, Salafis and the Brotherhood together, will have majority control of the parliament. Similar Islamist victories in Tunisia and Morocco portend an unmistakable trend of increased intertwining of religion and politics in the region.
A recent Pew Research Center poll showed that while a majority of Muslims prefer a significant role for Islam in their politics, substantive differences persist across regions. Majorities in Pakistan, Egypt, Jordan and Nigeria favor changing current laws to allow religiously sanctioned capital punishment for adultery, stealing and apostasy. In contrast, Muslims living under secular democracies in Turkey or Lebanon overwhelmingly reject fundamentalism and self-identify themselves as modernists, even when actively practicing their faith.
As politics face a rightward religious tug across the globe, it will be hasty to stereotype the trend. In the US, although the Christian right exerts an enormous influence in politics but the state remains neutral towards religion, the occasional display of Christmas trees in government buildings notwithstanding. Such institutional separation between state and religion is lacking across the Middle East, most disconcertingly in Saudi Arabia and Iran. Will the wave of popular opinions that favor a greater role for Islam in politics inevitably lead to a theocratization of the nascent Middle Eastern democracies? Chances are good that the new democracies in Tunisia or Egypt are unlikely to resemble Saudi Arabia or Iran, but neither will they be Jeffersonian.
Reformist scholars of Islam have asserted that Sharia ought not to be codified as state law. The reasons are tantalizingly simple. A state is a political institution, not a religious authority. A state has to be neutral and beneficial towards all its citizens, not just those who belong to the majority. The Muslim belief in the divineness of Sharia is obviously not shared by people of other faiths. Moreover, the interpretation of Sharia is a fallible human endeavor, often leading to conflicting juristic opinions, which then leaves unanswered the question of whose Islam should the state endorse.
While public policy may reflect the values of the citizenry, it should not be promulgated in the name of any one religion. Even when religious values inform a certain policy, the primary reason for enacting public policy must be secular. A wall separating religion from statecraft is good for both religion and state. Once a state begins to enforce the laws of any religion then the coercive power of the state becomes the primary factor in the determining how religion gets practiced. The state loses credibility and faith loses spirituality. The Quran unequivocally states that there is no compulsion in matters related to religion.
Even in the rough and tumble world of Middle Eastern politics there are faint signs of hope. The Islamist leaders in Tunisia have spoken about the secular democracy of Turkey as their aspiring model. A New York Times report quoted a conservative party leader in Egypt saying, “We don’t accept tyranny in the name of religion any more than we accept tyranny in the name of the military.” The yearning for freedom may ultimately overcome parochial religiosity in politics. From Iowa to Cairo, the world watches with trepidation.

While Asri did not name anyone in particular, his response today appears to dispute Tan Sri Harussani Zakaria message to Malay Muslims yesterday, urging them to defend their race and rights to the land, by saying the Prophet Muhammad also spoke about his race.

The Perak Mufti had said at the launch of former Selangor PAS chief Datuk Hasan Ali’s new Muslim organisation, Jati, that “it is compulsory for Malays to speak about this as this is a Malay country.”“Some people say we should not talk about Malays. They call us nationalists. But even the Prophet spoke about his race and tribe,” Harussani said in his speech.READMORE http://muslimmalaysia786.wordpress.com/centre-for-breakthrough-thinking-httpmuslimmalaysia786-wordpress-com

There was visible and audible euphoria at the UN General Assembly in September when you announced Palestine’s application for UN membership, at UNESCO’s Paris headquarters in October when Palestine was admitted as a member state and at UNESCO again in December when the Palestinian flag was formally raised in your presence (and mine).

Since then, nothing…

After months of hibernation, the Palestinian-Israeli conflict seems to be getting more attention of late. Despite the volatility of the situation in Syria and Egypt the most recent agreement reached in the Qatari capital received a lot of media attention. It also seems to have touched a number of political nerves, especially within the Hamas movement in Gaza.

While the agreement in Doha was not the first public display of reconciliation between leaders of the largest Palestinian factions, many felt that this time, the agreement was for real. Why?

To begin with the Doha agreement resolved a major obstacle that has been haunting both sides for months, namely, who will be the interim prime minister until elections take place. Previously, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and his Fateh Party had insisted on the need to keep Salam Fayyad as prime minister in order not to anger Western countries or Israel. Hamas had adamantly refused and the talks were deadlocked.

If Hamas didn’t accept Fayyad, who is not a member of Fateh, why would they accept Abbas, who is the leader of Fateh? Furthermore, why did Abbas himself agree even though he was reportedly nominated for this position before and had rejected it?

Abbas had announced months earlier that he is not planning to run in the upcomingpresidential elections. At the time, few took him seriously, but he has remained consistent in his determination not to run. Ironically his own movement keeps insisting on him being the only candidate while Hamas’s leader has also said he is not planning to run either.

By accepting the added position of prime minister for a short interim period in which a totally non-partisan government will be established to supervise elections, Abbas’ position is sealed. As much as they might think that he is the leader of their opponents, Hamas leaders know that it was under Abbas’ rule that the last elections took place. The 2006 elections in which pro-Hamas legislators won the majority of the seats of the Palestinian Legislative Council were declared by all to be free and fair.

But while Abbas’ role will ensure free elections this summer, other issues helped seal the most recent deal: money.

While the agreement between Hamas leader Khaled Mishaal and Abbas didn’t include any talk about money, most observers are certain that Qatar’s cash was a major reason for the agreement. Hamas, which has been distancing itself from the Bashar Assad government because of its violence against fellow Muslim Brotherhood activists in Syria, has found itself losing financial support from Syria’s major ally, Iran. Mashaal recently visited Jordan and has not returned to Syria since then. Without Iranian funding, running the Gaza Strip has become much more difficult.

Funding for the Ramallah-based Palestinian government has also been a problem of late. After the Palestinian leadership decided to go to the U.N. to seek recognition, U.S. and other Western funding has dried up leaving Arab funding as the only alternative. It was no coincidence this week that Arab foreign ministers meeting in Cairo pledged to provide the Palestinian Authority with an estimated $100 million a month to help it cover the cost of salaries both in the West Bank and Gaza.

However, it is unlikely that this amount, or even a fraction of it, will actually be transferred to the Palestinian Authority if the reconciliation is not carried out.

readmorehttp://muslimmalaysia786.wordpress.com/2012/02/22/pas-refuses-to-recognise-israel-a-letter-call-attention-to-datuk-nik-abdul-aziz-nik-mat-and-datuk-seri-anwar-i

PKR today lodged a report at the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (Penang branch) on what they described as the misappropiation of funds by the federal government to pay an extreme lobbyist to boost the country’s image overseas.

Balik Pulau PKR parliamentarian Yusmadi Yusoff, who lodged the report, claimed the government under ex-premier Dr Mahathir Mohamad had paid millions to a lobbyist in America to boost his image in the international arena since 2005.

He alleged that the government had engaged “extreme” lobbyist like Jack Abramoff (left), who has been found guilty of illegal activities, to prop-up Malaysia’s falling global reputation.
This problem is but one piece of the larger crisis facing America in 2012: the capture of government — and both major parties — by well-heeled special interests. While we would all like a simple fix, the reality is that the solution is more complex. We must advance a range of reforms: from limiting super PACS, campaign spending and contributions to requiring full transparency of all political spending, including think tanks like these. From blocking the “revolving door” of politicians and K Street, to fixing the gerrymandering of congressional districts. From increasing voter participation to fixing antiquated legislative and election rules like the filibuster and the electoral college.
Complex, yes, but a common sense reform agenda is emerging that must be foisted upon our nation’s leaders with the brute political cudgel of pure populism: the same kind that ushered in the greatest political triumphs dating back to the birth of the republic. No, America, our leaders will not fix this problem out of the goodness of their hearts. If we want the republic to survive and thrive, it’s up to us to force them.
Malaysian billionaires became rich because of the country’s policy and stability, said Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak today.
“I looked at yesterday’s newspapers… the list of Malaysian billionaires. I studied each one of them. Maybe some in this room today. Every one of them became rich because of our policy,” he said when opening the one-day “Malaysian Chinese at the Political Crossroads” conference jointly organised by the Asian Strategy and Leadership Institute and the MCA think-tank, Insap, here.
Najib said these billionaires either hold concessions or were in the right place and at the right time.
He said that the billionaires benefited from the stability of Malaysia and the government would continue to ensure growth and create more and more opportunities.
According to Najib, the Malaysian Chinese are more entrepreneurial compared to the Bumiputeras and the government would continue to make Malaysia a better place to do business.
“Even if they don’t get concessions, they have to be in the right place and at the right time. They benefited from our policy, they benefited from the fact that we give stability to this country.
“We will continue to ensure that the nation will grow and will create more and more opportunities,” he said.
Najib also said that the government would continue to listen to the problems of the Malaysian Chinese.
“We will make sure there are more opportunities for them to advance in this country,” he added. that is what he said but in realty
This week, climate blogs includingDeSmogBlog and ThinkProgress Greenuncovered a leaked document precious to public interest advocates: a confidential memo and fundraising plan from the “conservative” Heartland Institute that lists its corporate donors, as well as the group’s strategic plans.
Heartland is one of many so-called “conservative” think tanks that “promote[s] free-market solutions to social and economic problems.” The document exposes what everyone knows, but is rarely proven: that Heartland and other “free-market” think tanks are nothing but lobbying vehicles for the largest corporations and billionaires who own them. These groups were the lead actors in the D.C. dramas that killed consumer protections that could have prevented the banking crisis, the Gulf oil spill, tax breaks for millionaires, and countless other affronts against America’s middle class. They are the secret agents artfully promoting the agendas of Big Insurance, Big Pharma, Big Phone and Cable, and anyone else who ponies up the cash. The leaked documents even admit that Heartland’s funders “want project-specific proposals”
Real conservative Americans should be seriously pissed off about this. Think tanks like Heartland falsely brand themselves as conservative while blindly espousing a free market free for all that history proves — over and over and at extreme cost to society — as untenable: a fig leaf that covers their real goal of destroying any consumer protections that could hurt profitmaking and the consolidation of wealth into the hands of billionaires. Reporters and pundits hear this: they are corporate, not conservative think tanks.
Polls show that conservatives are already outraged at how Big Money buys laws and the politicians who vote for them. Conservatives should be equally outraged that these think tanks and corporate-pawn politicians who do their bidding are co-opting their conservative brand to undermine the public interest. A great video from the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) last week shows Tea Partiers and Occupiers agreeing that crony capitalism is the issue that unifies them.
In the big scheme of things, Heartland Institute is a small player, with an annual budget of just $6 million. Heritage Foundation rakes in $75 million a year to shill for corporations;American Enterprise Institute, around $30 million, and the list goes on. What the leaked documents prove is what everyone in Washington knows: most Washington think tanks are a who’s who of the major corporations that own American democracy. And they are the same corporations that are increasingly buying favor at liberal institutions like theNAACP and Sierra Club.

MAHATHIR-JACK ABRAMOFF LINK: REPORT MADE TO MACC

“But since the MACC can only begin to investigate when a report is lodged, it is my responsibility to make the report now,” he told reporters before going into the MACC office.

“This issue may not have received much attention here but it is well known in America,” he added. Yusmadi was referring to a June 22, 2006, report titled ‘Gimme Five: Investigation on Tribal Lobbying Matters’, commissioned by the US Senate Committee of Indian Affairs.

The 300-paged report focused on a two-year investigation into the affairs of Abramoff, who had pleaded guilty for defrauding a number of Native American tribes who had sought his services in establishing their gambling operations.

The probe resulted in the discovery of documents relating to the lobbyist’s work for the Malaysian government. It is believed that the payment – made to bogus think-tank American International Centre – by the Malaysian Embassy in Washington DC was for Abramoff’s services in organising a meeting with former US President George W. Bush in 2002.

In February, 2006, when questioned on the matter, Mahathir (with George W. Bush right) admitted that US$1.2 million was paid to organise the meeting but denied the money came from the Malaysian government.

“I understood some people paid a sum of money to lobbyists in America but I do not know who these people were and it was not the Malaysian government,” Mahathir was reported as saying in the media.

Renewed interest in the case comes in the wake of criticisms against Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim’s statement supporting Israel in a recent interview with Asian Wall Street Journal.

Anwar said his statement supporting the security of Israel is contingent on the creation of an independent Palestine state and respecting the rights of its people based on the two-state solution.

Anwar’s supporters have been going on a campaign to prove the Malaysian government’s hypocrisy in condemning the former when it has trade relations with Israel.

Malaysia’s foreign policies not strategic

Yusmadi urged the MACC to investigate the case, saying that it is understandable if the government seeks foreign advisors to advice it on policy matters. However, he added, in doing so, the Malaysian government should at no time seek advice through “illegal, dubious or criminal arrangements”.

He criticised the country’s foreign policies as lacking in strategy and attraction, saying they do not benefit Malaysians but was more towards foreigners. One of the reasons for this, he added, was due to the government’s lack of interest in empowering its own civil service.

“The country has been put in a contentious state due to our dis-empowered civil service, that we need to seek advice from foreigners.The country’s policies can only be attractive to all if we have competent officers, with good policies, come good reputation,” he added.

He noted that under current Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak (left), several overseas appointments – special envoys – have been made for BN leaders such as former MCA presidet Ong Ka Ting (China), former MIC president S. Samy Vellu (India) and former Rompin UMNO MP Jamaluddin Jarjis (the US).

“Rest assured that if Pakatan Rakyat takes over Putrajaya in the coming general election, we will abolish all these positions, which is a wastage of public funds,” he said.

Yusmadi was accompanied by pro-PKR NGO Jingga 13 who carried placards with photos of Mahathir and Bush, and carried them silently outside the MACC building before the report was lodged.

Penang Jingga 13 representative Amizuddin Amat urged the MACC to probe the matter “seriously, diligently, and courageously”. “If they fail to do so, we might have to make a trip to the US to see if we could dig up more details on this case,” he added.

Curtin University will soon be awarding their Honarary Doctorate to Froggy  Ibrahim Ali This doctorate must have been “arranged” by rosmah super cronyIbrahim Katak’s promises of love must have been balm to Rosmah’s battered soul

This is the story of a bridge, a note, and a great love. And though I may get tearful in its telling, I’ll assure you now that nobody jumps. We’re headed for a happy ending.

Our story begins with a boy, we’ll call him Tom, and a girl, we’ll call her Keya. As politically active Stanford undergrads, they could be found studying by day, debating by late-night, and generally rallying around a theme of make love, not war.

They first met while studying off-campus in Washington, DC. Instantly inseparable, they could be found interning by day, taking classes by night, and, after finding each other, living up to that same theme of make love, not war.

Their happy union was brief, however, and they were soon separated by an ocean as they pursued summer internships on separate continents, a distance remedied only by long, and expensive hours on the phone.

During which they talked mostly about nothing, a bit about that year’s World Cup, and repeatedly about the fact that Tom had never seen the Golden Gate bridge. They decided it would be their first destination when reunited.

When that anticipated day finally arrived Keya decided it would literally be their first destination. So, driving a red convertible, under a warm sun and a cool breeze, they made their way from the airport up the 101.

The bridge that day, as if expecting them, was in rare form, hugged spectacularly with a thick fog that crested like surf, rolling up from behind the hills, dissipating softly as it hit the bay. It was entrancing.

And after taking it all in, they took a short hike into the headlands, just as the sun was setting. And the air, thick with fog, was now amplifying the dying light, and they were enveloped in shocking shades of orange, then magenta, then violet.

And just as the color faded into night, Tom pulled Keya in close, and leaned over to her ear, and said to her then, as he has on so many occasions since: I’m bloody hungry darling, did you bring snacks?

And she hadn’t. But she had made a dinner reservation, so they headed to Sausalito, where they lucked out with a table by the window and all they could see was the San Francisco skyline, a rising moon over the bay, and each other.

And over the course this dinner they talked incessantly and ate and stole kisses. When time came for dessert Keya chose the chocolate cake and Tom got the swordfish. And eventually they emerged from their oblivion and looked around and realized they were the only ones left.

They had outlasted even their first waiter’s shift so they asked their second waiter, Ray, for the check. But Ray just stood there awkwardly. And finally said: this couple behind you (and they turned to look but of course there was no longer anyone there), this couple, said Ray, well, they thought you were nice. And they left you this. And he handed over the leather folder in which the bill usually arrives.

Inside was a note. And it read:

Dear Lovers,

Thank you for reminding us of what young, passionate love is all about.

We are 50+ but are still enjoying that same passion… and wish that you will too.

Always keep the light burning and keep communicating… and most of all — keep loving each other.

We have covered your bill for tonight. Enjoy… and pass it on — when you can.

Much love

And it was left unsigned.

To connect some obvious dots here — I am Keya, this tall british guy up front is Tom, the story of the bridge and the note turns 10 years old this year, we are still together and, in fact, now married. But…

Though we are the protagonists, it is the invisible couple who are this story’s leading man and lady. That night, a decade ago, Tom and I could never have known their words were prophetic.

We had faced no trials, knew nothing of each other’s flaws, had not withstood the tests that come only with time. What ignited that night was the expression of love by two nameless individuals.

So brimming with it they could not help but share, and so comfortable in it they could make an unforgettable gesture with ease, simplicity, and anonymous grace.

You see, the great love central to this story about which I promised I would tell was not ours. It was theirs.

The above story was told at Ignite Philly on February 16, 2012. Keya  a political matching website that works like “eHarmony” for elections — connecting you to your candidates based on what you believe, so you can vote your values all the way down your ballot. She loves: democracy, 

Perhaps, knowing full well that she is unpopular with the majority, Rosmah Mansor – the controversial wife of Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Razak – turned to the one of the sycophantic groups she knew would surely accept her – no, not MCA, MIC or Gerakan’s turn this time, but Perkasa!

Yes, Perkasa – Ibrahim Ali’s extremist political “gedebe” or gangster group.

Over the weekend, Ibrahim, the Perkasa president and also the independent Pasir Mas MP, sang praises of Rosmah, who of late has been the unfortunate target of a barrage of both local and overseas criticism and ridicule for receiving an honorary degree from Australia’s Curtin University.

Ibrahim’s promises of love must have been balm to Rosmah’s battered soul after the cross-border lynching for her Imelda Marcos-type of spending binge and alleged evil misdeeds.  Curtin too was savaged for its “unwise” decision and that was probably the kindest description from a student body and alumni that has threatened to call for a boycott if the doctorate was not withdrawn!

But the ‘unseeing’ Ibrahim Ali only took into account the factors that suited his purpose.

“We all know that Datin Seri Rosmah is not only the prime minister’s wife, but if we follow news reports, we see how active she is in carrying out her duties. We are in awe of her leadership,” he said. Ibrahim urged Rosmah to continue attending Perkasa functions if time permits, adding: “Thank you, Datin Seri. We all love you.”

Life in Malaysia has become really racially polarized

No doubt all three of the portly Ibrahim’s chins wobbled in unison as he emoted his feelings and those of the Perkasa group, which less than a year ago had threatened the Chinese community with physical harm if they took part in the July 9 Bersih rally for free and fair elections. Perkasa even advised them to “stock up” on food. What a fantastic range of emotions Perkasa and Ibrahim Ali are capable of – what marvelous actors and actresses they must be?

Sad to say, it is not so comical at all, and anything but love is in the air.

 

BACK IN 1994, THE THEN CHIEF MINISTER OF MALACCA, ABDUL RAHIM THAMBY CHIK, WAS REPORTED TO HAVE RAPED A 15-YEAR-OLD SCHOOLGIRL (UNDER MALAYSIAN LAW, SEX WITH A MINOR CONSTITUTES STATUTORY RAPE). LIM GUAN ENG, CURRENTLY THE CHIEF MINISTER OF PENANG AND THE THEN MP FOR KOTA MELAKA, SPOKE OUT AGAINST THE RAPE OF A MINOR AFTER THE GIRL’S GRANDMOTHER-CUM-GUARDIAN, WHO WAS ALSO LIM’S CONSTITUENT, TURNED TO HIM FOR HELP.

“There’s a hole in the bucket, dear rosmah dear Liza,” sang Rahim Thamby   many moons ago and those of us who grew up singing along, generally chorused, “Then fix it, dear  Rahim Thamby

, dear. Rahim Thamby  Fix it!” Right now, there is a gaping hole in the pussy bucket —but who’s going to fix it, dear rosmah dear rosmah? Not mahatir, for sure. He has finished ‘owning up’ , remember? As a bewildered and increasingly frustrated nation watches the muck flying around, there is disquiet building up within a certain section, which needs to be paid attention to… or else. Or else what, the cynics will ask. Or else the hole will get bigger and bigger and nobody will be able to fix it, till it’s too late. With all the leaks doing the rounds, it’s time to just say it out loud—UMNO is in a mess. A gigantic mess. And unless we acknowledge this nothing is likely to change in the near future.

Dari cerita orang yang rapat dengan Rahim Thamby Chik, sebelum Rosmah diperkenalkan kepada Najib beliau adalah kendak Rahim.  Rosmah berharap dapat kahwin dengan Rahim.  Rahim ini hebat orangnya dan bukan calang-calang lelaki.  Rosmah tidak dapat tundukkan Rahim.  Rahim lagi bijak darinya.  Rahim tahu Najib suka perempuan-prempuan seperti Rosmah.  Mereka satu kem.  Kem buaya darat.  Mengikut cerita kononnya dalam dia sudah jadi isteri Najib dia masih berjumpa Rahim.  Betul ke?  Kalau betul, jahat sungguh awak ni…

Untuk lepaskan dirinya dari Rosmah dia cepat-cepat paskan Rosmah kepada Najib.  Dia beri pengakuan kepada Rosmah, kalau dia baik dengan Najib dia boleh dapat kawasan balak.  Negeri Pahang banyak balak, Melaka tidak ada balak.

Rahim bukan mudah dikenakan orang.  Di Negeri Melaka ketika dia menjadi Ketua Menteri, dialah raja. Mengikut cerita orang-orang Melaka kononnya beliau pernah menghalau Pegawai-pegawai Majlis Ugama Melaka dan Polis dari bilik hotelnya di Hotel Ramada.  Mereka datang  menyerbu ke bilik hotel itu apabila terima laporan ada orang berkhalwat.  Apabila sampai ke bilik itu yang di dapati berkhalwat ialah Ketua Menteri Melaka sendiri Rahim Thamby Chik dengan seorang gadis jurujual.

Najib walaupun buaya besar seperti Rahim Thamby Chik, kena dengan Rosmah dia kalah dan terduduk.  Lupa diri, lupa anak bini.  Balak Pahang pun dia berikan kepada Rosmah.  Hotel Hyatt Kuantan menjadi tempat mereka berkendak tidak kira  siang atau malam  setiap kali Rosmah datang ke Kuantan.

Apabila Najib ke Kuala Lumpur mereka berkendak di Hotel Shangri-la kerana Najib tinggal di situ dan pejabat Rosmah di Bangunan SPK berhampiran dengan hotel itu.

Sejak dia mengadakan perhubungan sulit secara haram dengan Najib dia lupa terus kepada suami dan anak-anaknya.

Mengikut cerita orang, Rosmah, Najib dan Toh Puan Rahah masa pergi ke Mekkah kali kedua, mungkin untuk membuang dosa kononnya, semasa dia berjalan mengelilingi Kaabah, dikatakan terkena baling batu yang tidak tahu dari mana datangnya.