Showing posts with label political conspiracy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label political conspiracy. Show all posts

Friday, February 08, 2008

POLICE TAKE NOTE: UMNO TO PLAY DANGEROUS GAME

UMNO is also preparing for a post-election debacle. If they lose their 2/3 majority or more, they may still embark on the same dirty tricks like the 'May 13' scenario, declaring an Emergency, suspending Parliament, and so on. The recent threat by the MCA at PJ Utara that the BN losing the elections may bring about the May 13 type situation was not an empty threat. They are really considering using such dirty tricks and playing such dangerous games. The police had better take note.

Malaysia Today.net
By Little Bird

I had an interesting chat with my UMNO colleagues recently. Some of them claim to be more connected. They said that when the Hindraf boys demonstrated at Batu Caves, the UMNO gangster network went into high alert.

At a hasty brain-storming session (well THEY think they have brains lah) the UMNO boys suggested to bring in the Pekida gangsters to stir up trouble and frighten the Indians. But police video footage of the Hindraf protesters showed some scary things for which the gutless UMNO boys have no stomach.

Unknown to many Malaysians, some Hindraf supporters were seen carrying cans of kerosene. The kerosene was meant to set themselves on fire. They were prepared to immolate themselves in public to protest the poor treatment they are getting. The police video also showed Hindraf protesters removing their shirts and standing bare-bodied in front of the police water cannons which were spraying chemical-laced irritants. They too were making plain that they could take the pain. Another scary clip showed one protester grabbing a policeman's truncheon and violently hitting himself on the head - to tell the policeman that he was not afraid of getting hit.

In short, the Indians were prepared to die. Not having any real stake in the country, they had nothing to lose. They were prepared to die. The Malays have a history of running amok when their rice bowl is threatened. But to their credit, the Malays have no history of seriously persecuting other people. Hence, the Indian grievances, when they are real, have an effect on UMNO. Unfortunately, it took the Indians 40 years to protest. As for Pekida, they are not real gangsters. They are just unemployed bums looking for easy money, second wives and having a good time. They are quite gutless, much like UMNO too.

Well the Hindraf protests have worked. At least, in public announcements, almost all the Hindraf demands have been ceded by the Government: scholarships for Indians, more university places for Indians, more Government jobs for Indians, etc. It is possible that the five jailed Hindraf leaders will also be released before the general elections.

The other bit of interesting news is that the UMNO boys I spoke to are NOT going to vote for the BN at this coming elections. They too are fed up with the imbecilic Prime Minister and his total lack of leadership skills. They too are afraid of his son-in-law who is fully in control of the father-in-law. And UMNO is aware that many people will be turning their backs on the party this time around.

UMNO is therefore preparing for the possibility that they may lose their 2/3 majority and more. They may be planning more dirty tricks to overcome the poor results at the polls. Rigging the postal votes may not be enough this time. The UMNO boys are talking of large scale rigging of election returns, more 'May 13' threats, and using more money to buy votes.

Another scenario is to 'do a Musharaf'. President Musharaf arrested and locked up over 5,000 opposition members, judges, lawyers, writers and others who were opposed to him. Pakistan goes to the polls with no more opposition. It may be too late to do this in Malaysia - if the elections are being held in March.

However, if the threats to release more secret videos appear real, Abdullah Badawi may be forced to delay the elections until next year. Then the UMNO boys will have more time to plan how to silence and remove the opposition. The use of the ISA then is not impossible. They may even want to shoot the birds.

But it is more likely that the elections will be held in March. UMNO is also preparing for a post-election debacle. If they lose their 2/3 majority or more, they may still embark on the same dirty tricks like the 'May 13' scenario, declaring an Emergency, suspending Parliament, and so on. The recent threat by the MCA at PJ Utara that the BN losing the elections may bring about the May 13 type situation was not an empty threat. They are really considering using such dirty tricks and playing such dangerous games. The police had better take note.

The protests by the Hindraf and to a certain extent the Bersih rally too have checkmated UMNO and the BN. They are now in a 'mati akal' situation. In 1969, the Malays were really poor and downtrodden, in their own land. To add insult to injury, the Malays were told to 'balik kampong'. That was when they ran amok and showed everyone who was in charge. For the past 38 years the Malays have been trying to turn the situation around. But maybe at the cost of repeating the same wrongs they suffered pre-1969.

We cannot tell the Indians and the Chinese to just 'balik kampong'. Something is bound to explode. Hindraf is just the beginning. This story, like this article, is not complete. Let's see what happens.

Saturday, November 10, 2007

Some UMNO Myths Young Malaysians Should Know About

by Fan Yew Teng

In the remaining months of the year in which we are celebrating the 50th anniversary of Merdeka and the 44th anniversary of the formation of Malaysia, and to reflect on the meaning of nationhood, it is perhaps important and necessary to examine some of the more persistent myths upon which Umno, the predominant party in the ruling coalition for the past 52 years, grew and deceived - and are still deceiving - the populace, particularly the Malays.

For a start, after 61 years, Umno is still unashamedly the political party which claims to unite and represent all the Malays. Hence, the misnomer the United Malays National Organisation, always in English, however much you might want to remind them of their claim to be champions of Bahasa Malaysia and Malay nationalism.

Most Malaysians who have been around for the past quarter of a century would very likely know or remember the interesting power struggles within Umno during the Mahathir years (1981 - 2003). The Mahathir - Tengku Razaleigh contest for the Umno presidency in 1987, which spilled over into the deregistration of Umno itself, the fights between Team A and Team B backed by the then ailing former primer ministers Tunku Abdul Rahman and Hussein Onn, the massive 'Operation Lalang' crackdown on dissidents, and the highly sensational and controversial sacking of the top judge, Lord President Tun Salleh Abbas. And then, 10 years later, Mahathir's sacking and subsequent arrest of the then deputy prime minister, Anwar Ibrahim.

However, up to this very day, many Malaysians in general and many Umno members and supporters in particular are woefully ignorant of the tensions and undercurrents among the earlier generation of Umno leaders.

One of the enduring myths that has dominated Umno all these years is that its founding fathers - or at least the early leaders - were all self sacrificing and had always put party unity - and by extension, national unity - before personal interests.

The truth, however, is more complicated.

May 1946. Umno is born, as a movement of many Malay organisations and groups against the Malayan Union, a constitutional arrangement created by the returned British colonial masters after the Second World War.

Dato Onn Jaafar of Johore became the man of the moment after the British decided to withdraw the Malayan Union scheme, to be later replaced by the Federation of Malaya constitutional arrangement. Umno, as a confederation of Malay organisations throughout Malaya and Singapore, was triumphant. But there were already problems of disunity.

As a matter in fact, even before Umno was established, Dato Onn had faced some hostility from some influential Malay leaders in his home state of Johore. There were some strong differences between Dato Onn and Dato Abdul Rahman bin Mohd Yasin, a pre war Johore Treasurer in regard to the behaviour of Sultan Ibrahim over the MacMichael Treaties (for the Malayan Union).

Dato Abdul Rahman and some other Malay leaders in Johore had thought that Dato Onn was being too kind towards the Sultan. His two sons, Sulaiman and Dr Ismail (later Tun Dr Ismail) had refused to join Umno until after Dato Onn's resignation as Umno president in 1951.

More serious was the withdrawal of the Persatuan Kebangsaan Melayu Malaya (PKMM), the Malay Nationalist Party, from the Umno confederation at the Umno meeting in Ipoh on 29 and 30 June, 1946. Ostensibly, the withdrawal was due to differences over the Umno flag. But, as Firdaus Haji Abdullah points out in his book Radical Malay Politics, "behind this issue, there were serious and substantive disagreements over policy."

The PKMM's proposal for the symbol was defeated by one vote. After a lengthy speech by Ahmad Boestamam, he and all other PKMM representatives and supporters walked out. The Malay left had broken ranks with Umno. At the same meeting, and for the same reason, the Persatuan Pekerja-Pekerja Junior Malaya also withdrew from Umno.

In mid 1947, when it was proposed to turn Umno into a political organisation and that affiliate member organisations should dissolve themselves and merge completely into Umno, the move was opposed by several organisations which, apart from the fear of losing their identity, were established long before Umno itself. Moreover, there were organisations whose leadership were drawn from the working class rather than the aristocracy and the English educated administrative group.

Thus, the Singapore Malay Association, the Sabak Bernam Malay Association and Saberkas of Kedah (which had some radical and 'socialist' orientation), chose to remain as associate member organisations only rather than dissolve themselves. The Perikatan Melayu Kelantan and the Kesatuan Melayu Johore withdrew completely from Umno.

More serious splits were to come.

In February 1950, mainly to draw away support from the Hizbul Muslimin, the Muslim Party formed during the second week of March 1948, UMNO formed a body within itself called the Persatuan Ulamak Sa-Malaya. Haji Ahmad Fuad, Dato Onn's friend, became the leader of this body.

(Consider for a moment the irony and hypocrisy of Umno leaders who now say that politics and religion shouldn't mix)

In June 1951, however, the Persatuan Ulamak Sa-Malaya teamed up with another Islamic group consisting of former adherents of the Hizbul Muslimin, at the former's meeting in Kepala Batas, Penang. At this moment, the Persatuan Ulamak Se-Malaya decided to change its name to Persatuan Islam Sa-Malaya,to be known in short as PAS.

Another shock was waiting for Umno. After Umno had rejected Dato Onn's proposal to open Umno to the non Malays and transform it into a Malayan political party, he resigned formally from Umno on 26 August, 1951. His position was taken over by Tunku Abdul Rahman, then an unknown deputy public prosecutor.

After Merdeka in 1957, the public perception of the Tunku as prime minister and Abdul Razak as his deputy was that their relationship was one of great harmony. Some even characterised it has a father and son kind of relationship. But it was only valid for a while.

For none other than the Tunku himself had exploded the myth that his relationship with Razak was as harmonious as commonly believed. Writing in the 29 August 1983 issue of The Star (and later reproduced in his book Contemporary Issues in Malaysian Politics), the Tunku related a telling incident in this vein: "Once at the Residency, Khalid Awang Osman, the former High Commissioner to India, mentioned in front of Tun Razak that he (Razak) would have to wait for a long time before he could become the Prime Minister. I could see the shocked surprise on the face of Tun Razak. As it happened, after that day I noticed his attitude took a change."

Well, well, from the horse's mouth, so to speak. The myth of an almost perfect political and working relationship was, well, just a myth. In an article published in The Star on 20 February 1978, the Tunku said that Asiaweek's M.G.G Pillai had alleged in the 17 February 1978 issue of that magazine that "many political figures still insist privately that the Tunku stepped down unwillingly in 1970 and that he was in fact pushed aside by Tun Abdul Razak."

The Tunku commented: "As regards the late Tun Razak pushing me aside, he made no attempt openly to do so but it must be admitted that he felt a bit small to be my deputy for so long, and being an ambitious man, he would no doubt have liked to take over as prime minister. Only those around him wanted to take over dramatically and with a blare of trumpets."

It may be true that Tun Razak made no attempt openly to push the Tunku aside. But did he make any attempt secretly to do so? And who were those around Razak?

Mahathir, Musa Hitam, Harun Idris, Syed Jaafar Albar? And some other Umno extremists or ultras?

It is interesting to note that the Tunku, in reference to what Khalid Awang Osman said, as mentioned earlier, had added: "I took the remarks as a joke, but soon after things began to happen."

What things began to happen?

Well, in an interview with Asiaweek, published on 10 May 1985, exactly 16 years to the day after the fateful general elections on 1969, the Tunku actually blamed Tun Razak and other colleagues for his political downfall. In relating the charged atmosphere just before the 1969 general elections, the Tunku said: "It started when one of them (alleged communists) was killed near the airport, and they asked for a funeral procession to bury the dead. I would never have allowed that. But I was not there. I was away campaigning. But my colleagues, who were trying to make trouble for me, gave permission, and so when the communists carried the body, they stopped at every corner to harangue the people, to curse the government, to curse me..."

Responding to further questioning, the Tunku actually said that "My deputy allowed it", meaning the procession.

To another question, the Tunku said: "I couldn't have stayed on. To stay, you have to be sure of the loyalty of your friends and colleagues. I wasn't sure. In fact I was very, ah, frustrated with the behaviour of some."

The Tunku had often said that he wanted to be the "happiest prime minister in the world" - but how could he be happy when some of his friends and colleagues wanted to stage a coup against him?,/div>
In order to get rid of the Tunku politically, some criminal elements and over ambitious leaders in Umno orchestrated the bloody May 13 Massacre which killed a few hundred Malaysians, maimed a few hundred more other Malaysians, burned down a few hundred shophouses and homes and looted some of them and burned scores of cars and other vehicles. All crimes against humanity.

No inquiry after 38 years. Who says law is law? Why then no rule of law as far as the May 13 Massacre is concerned? Why is this continued rape of law being allowed? In whose interests?

And what about other Umno crimes against humanity like the Memali Massacre in the mid 1980s? When will there be an accounting? Where is the transparency? And where is the much talked about integrity? Including the integrity of the law?

Friday, September 28, 2007

ACA questions PKR's Sivarasa on damning video clip

R. Manirajan and Llew-Ann Phang
The Sun

Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR) vice-president Sivarasa Rasiah was questioned for two hours by the Anti-Corruption Agency (ACA) today on the video recording of a telephone conversation between a senior lawyer and another person believed to be a senior ranking judge.


During the questioning, Sivarasa handed over a copy of the eight minute video clip and a transcript of the entire telephone conversation, including comments, to ACA investigating officer Thilagawathy Tambu.

After watching the recording together, Sivarasa was asked when PKR got hold of the DVD and who the source was.

"I told her whatever I knew, including the details of the entire 14-minute recording," Sivarasa said when met outside the ACA office here.

He said the full 14-minute recording could not be given to the ACA because the source believed that by doing so, his identity would be compromised.

"I told the ACA I can’t reveal my source and that is the same answer I will give you reporters. We can’t publicly disclose who the source is," Sivarasa said, adding that he himself knows and has met the source.

Sivarasa said the ACA had been informed that he and PKR adviser Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim have viewed the full video recording.

"The other part of the recording clearly shows Datuk V.K. Lingam (the senior lawyer in the video) telling the people in the room, after the telephone conversation, that he was speaking to (Chief Justice) Tun Ahmad Fairuz (Sheikh Abdul Halim)."

Sivarasa had last week lodged a report with the ACA over the revelations in the recording after it was made public in a press conference by Anwar.

Sivarasa also took to task Attorney-General Tan Sri Gani Patail for stating that the video recording did not show any criminal offence being committed.

"The ACA said they have a different view of the case."

Sivarasa said he suggested the ACA seek technical experts to verify the recording’s authenticity, and to check Lingam and Ahmad Fairuz’s handphone records in 2002 which was when the recording was made.

In a press conference at PKR’s headquarters in Kuala Lumpur earlier, Sivarasa said the party was willing to assist the Special Independent Investigation Panel, led by former Chief Justice of Malaya Tan Sri Haidar Mohd Noor, in its investigations into the video’s authenticity.

However, he said the full 14-minute video clip could only be screened with the source’s permission.

He also pointed out that the panel faced the challenge of not being able to summon witnesses or to provide protection for witnesses, adding that these were important for an effective investigation.

He said the panel’s terms of reference were also too limited because "the problem is bigger than that".

For example, Sivarasa said the current appointment of judges was problematic because the prime minister only had to consult with the Chief Justice and the Conference of Rulers before appointing a judge.

"With the video, we have exposed that the process is clearly tainted, with people like lawyers (meddling in these matters)," he added.

PKR secretary-general Tan Sri Abdul Khalid Ibrahim called on the Bar Council to press for investigation panel members to be selected through peer group selection to ensure check and balance.

"The selection of the panel was not done through a clear and transparent process," he said, noting that Haidar, for example, may have a conflict of interest because he was a trustee of the Perdana Leadership Foundation helmed by former premier Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad.



Related Articles:

Saturday, September 22, 2007

Malaysia's Currupt Legal System: CJ to step down?

MalaysiaKini.com Video footage


Click Video Link



Remove judge: Calls escalate for probe into Malaysian judicial fixing claims

(AFP) - Malaysia's opposition, rights groups and two prominent anti-corruption campaigners on Friday joined calls for a probe into allegations a lawyer "fixed" judicial appointments with a senior judge.

Former deputy premier Anwar Ibrahim unleashed a furore Wednesday by releasing a video clip that purportedly showed a well-connected lawyer telling a judge over the telephone that he would push his name forward for a senior appointment.

Param Cumaraswamy, a former United Nations special rapporteur on judicial independence and one-time head of Transparency International Malaysia, called on Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi to remove the judge for gross misconduct.

The video clip's contents "confirm the concerns expressed by many in the past on how our justice system has been manipulated by certain personalities," Param told reporters.

"It also confirms that there must be a sizeable number of litigants who must have been subjected to judicial injustice before Malaysian courts as a result of such manipulations."

Together with Abdul Aziz, also a former Transparency International president and a special advisor on ethics to former UN chief Kofi Annan, Param urged the prime minister to reform the judiciary.

Anwar said he believed the conversation, allegedly conducted in 2002, had affected the outcome of his treatment in the courts.

The ex-deputy was heir apparent to former prime minister Mahathir Mohamad until his sacking in 1998, when he was hit with sodomy and corruption charges that landed him in jail for six years.

The sodomy conviction was later overturned but the corruption verdict stands, barring Anwar from standing for public office until April 2008.

Human rights group Aliran called for an investigation into several legal cases where it said the presiding judges had leap-frogged more senior judges.

"All these cases only confirmed that the ugly hands of politics were pervasive in our system of justice which was manipulated as a political tool," Aliran president P. Ramakrishnan said in a statement.

Opposition Democratic Action Party leader Lim Kit Siang also pressed for the judge's suspension and a probe into the affair, saying it had triggered "a crisis of confidence in the independence, impartiality and integrity of the judiciary".

"Forty-eight hours have passed and neither ... had denied that there was such a telephone conversation between them, which would be the first reaction of anyone to a doctored video tape," Lim said.



Param Cumaraswamy and Tunku Abdul Aziz Press Conference

Click Video Link

Friday, September 21, 2007

CJ's 'judgment fixing' caught on tape


Click Video Link


ANWAR IBRAHIM PRESS CONFERENCE
REGARDING THE VIDEO FOOTAGE


Click Video Link