22/12: Osama Found: Anti-Bush CIA agents back his return

Written by Kazi Mahmood

WorldFutures

The CIA operatives, some high ranking military officers and democratic institutions in the U.S.A. does not want another Bush in the White House after 2008. One way of doing so is to point on the failures of the Bush regimes in hunting Osama. They are pushing for a change of regime in Washington.

Pakistan’s President Parvez Musharraf, attempting to win back support from the White House, has for the first time identified an area where he thinks Osama bin Laden may be operating. This revelation may cost Musharraf his life since information gleaned from recent CIA news stories reveals that anti-Bush CIA agents may be behind the plan to bring Osama back in the limelight.

Musharraf explained that terrorism was a problem only in three areas: North and South Waziristan and Bajaur. This prompted the interviewer to ask if he thinks Osama bin Laden was hiding in this area.

“No, these are settled districts. He could be in Bajaur – this is the tribal agency bordering Kunar province, where there were no coalition forces in the past,” he said. “On the Afghan side – that’s in Afghanistan,” he added

“So you can go from one side to the other,” asked the interviewer.

“That’s a possibility,” said the president.

Musharraf however said that it was Afghanistan’s problem if Osama was on the other side of the border. One of the reasons for the 42 days of emergency rule in Pakistan was linked to the possible mounting of an operation by the CIA to capture Osama or Al Zawahiry but the plans went into water with the refusal of the ISI and of the CIA to comply.

The US military was not sent in to battle the group for fear of massive losses of American lives. The U.S. fears the presence of Osama and his group during battles as this had proven to be very tricky for the Americans in the past.

It is also clear that the Bush administration was not really informed of the reason for the Pakistani army’s constant failures to deal with militants in Waziristan. Bush was not informed of the suspected presence of Osama in the region too.

“Does your intelligence service know where Osama is?” he was asked. “Nobody knows,” said the president.

The truth of the matter is the Pakistan intelligence service known as the ISI is not stranger to the recent flow of video’s and audio tapes from the Osama Bin Laden group.

The Directorate for Inter-Services Intelligence (also Inter-Services Intelligence or ISI) is the largest and most powerful intelligence service in Pakistan. It is one of the three main branches of Pakistan's intelligence agencies.

They were behind the Taliban during the Russian invasion and occupation of Afghanistan in the 1980’s and played vital roles in helping the Taliban run Afghanistan after the retreat of the Russian forces from the Muslim country.

The Pakistani ISI is working closely with the CIA and the FBI to track down a number of suspected Muslim Mujahideen sought by the U.S.A. after 911. However, not all the suspects are arrested for the simple reason that the ISI either covers their tracks or tip them before any raids by the Americans.

The CIA is today a divided organization which is leaking secret reports and information to the U.S. press in a bid to undermine the current leadership of America. The first such act was the scandal that surrounded the revealing of the name of a covert CIA agent. It is an offence in America to reveal the identity of a covert agent, an affair that shook the Bush administration in 2006 and led to the Republican Party defeat in the 2006 Senate and Congress elections.

The scandal was leaked by Stephen Hadley, the White House national security adviser. Some anti-Bush agents of the CIA had their hands in the scandal as well as in the persistent reports that the CIA did not approve of the war against Iraq.

Working closely with the ISI of Pakistan, the CIA has finally located Osama Bin Laden but refused to leak the information to the Bush administration. In the event the information was given to the White House, there would have been a major war on the Pakistan-Afghanistan border to hunt and nab Osama.

The hunt was instead headed by the Pakistani army – pushed by the ISI to mount attacks in the northern region of Pakistan – with the primary aim of countering the Taliban. The secondary aim was to find Osama or Ayman Zawahiri, the second in command in the Osama group.

The release of the Iranian Nuclear report by the CIA – leaked to a prominent U.S. newspaper – was another coup in which the anti-establishment agents mounted their attacks against Bush. Bush was on the verge of giving in to pressure for a covert operation in Iran to demolish Iran’s nuclear facilities.

The operations were delayed after the release of the CIA report that Iran had effectively closed its nuclear weapons plans in 2003. This was a slap in Bush’s face as well as a set back for its plans to demonize Iran and attack its nuclear centers. The CIA agents effectively gave an unexpected victory to the Iranians.

This time they are seemingly interested in helping Osama air his grievances – with the help of Al-Jazeera (Osama may be interviewed soon by the Arab channel) and with some top American newspapers which are fed up with Bush’s rhetoric’s and anti-Democratic policies.

The CIA operatives, some high ranking military officers and democratic institutions in the U.S.A. does not want another Bush in the White House after 2008. One way of doing so is to point on the failures of the Bush regimes in hunting Osama. They are pushing for a change of regime in Washington.

Osama is accused by the Bush administration as the master mind of the 911 events. A USD25 million tag (increased to USD50 million this week) hangs over the head of Osama and the bounty goes to any one who can lead to his capture.

The CIA is also giving the Bush administration a field day with reports of torture tapes destroyed by the agency to evade criticism. Democrats and human rights groups have charged the spy agency of disposing of the videotapes showing harsh interrogations of two Al-Qaeda operatives to hide evidence of torture -- a charge the CIA denies.

The tapes reportedly show the operatives undergoing waterboarding, a technique widely regarded as torture. But Mukasey himself refused to brand the technique torture in Congressional hearings in October on his nomination to become attorney general.

On the other hand, Channel 4 News in the U.K. claimed that Osama Bin Laden is a fan of the British football club Arsenal. The story was reported by Simon Kuper who writes for the Financial Times.

According to Channel14 News, in early 1994 Osama bin Laden spent three months in London, where he visited supporters and bankers and went to four Arsenal games.

Before returning to Sudan a step ahead of being extradited to Saudi Arabia, he bought his sons gifts from the club's souvenir shop. Later he told friends he had never seen passion like that of football fans.

”Bin Laden's career exemplifies the nexus between terrorism and soccer. But his love of the game didn't stop him trying to blow up David Beckham at its biggest event.” Channel14 News said.

Found but not captured, Osama is free to deliver his anti-Bush speeches on Al-Jazeera and other networks as long as the CIA, the Pakistan’s ISI and the American military feels he should do so.

22/12: What about the Chinese? (Protests)

Street protests may just swing their support to ruling coalition

Leslie Lau

TODAYonline

THE recent spate of street protests may have affected Malaysia's international image to a certain extent. But at home, the protests could go some way in halting the Chinese community's slide in support for the ruling Barisan Nasional (BN).

In fact, the government may even gain a few votes from the community, which had been leaning towards the opposition in recent months.

One reason for this change of heart lies in the traditional conservative belief of the Chinese that such street protests are bad for business.

When a coalition of opposition and non-governmental organisations called Bersih organised a demonstration calling for free and fair elections last month, many Chinese stayed away from the city centre for fear of violence.

That same fear was borne out when Hindraf (Hindu Rights Action Force) led some 10,000 Indians onto the streets last month in protests against alleged racial discrimination that descended into chaotic clashes with riot police.

The Hindraf protests were given wider coverage on Mandarin television news broadcasts than on national Malay language bulletins that day - perhaps a sign that the authorities were sending a message to the Chinese community that BN stood for law and order while the opposition represented some form of anarchy.

It was particularly noticeable that in fact, the Chinese were conspicuous by their virtual absence from both protests.

Except for a few opposition activists, the two demonstrations were completely dominated by Malays, in the case of the Bersih rally, and Indians, in the Hindraf protests.

Madam F L Chen, a 50-something long-time resident of Petaling Jaya suburb, said she did not understand what the protests were all about.

"I could not go out that day to do any shopping. I just do not understand what the protesting was about," she told Weekend Extra.

When asked who she would vote for in the next election, Mdm Chen's response was telling: "I think BN has been doing an okay job. I do not know what the opposition is fighting for."

Her reaction is perhaps stereotypical of many Chinese Malaysians, who, while not happy with the government over a host of issues including perceived discrimination, will not vote opposition if there is a chance it will lead to instability.

One other reason for the lack of Chinese support for the Bersih and Hindraf rallies is perhaps the community just did not relate to the issues at hand.

In the case of Bersih, the rally for free and fair elections appeared to many Malaysians, if not just the Chinese, an abstract issue.

The rather exaggerated claims of "ethnic cleansing" and the ridiculous notion of a lawsuit against the British government demanding billions in compensation by Hindraf also clouded the real issue of perceived racial discrimination, which many Chinese would have had no qualms about protesting together with the Indian community.

"There is no doubt the Chinese are still not entirely happy with BN and Umno, and many are predicting a swing to the opposition.

"But the opposition has gotten itself involved in the recent protests which the Chinese do not support so we may have a chance to persuade the voters to change their minds and vote for MCA candidates," said a senior leader of the Malaysian Chinese Association (MCA), Umno's major partner in BN which stands to lose the most if the Chinese vote opposition.

Despite widespread discontent among the Chinese against the Malay-dominated BN government, the opposition has failed to capitalise fully.

The Chinese are unhappy over issues like the economy, particularly over the continuation of pro-bumiputera policies giving preferential treatment to Malays in business.

They are also angry at the rising crime rate, with many Chinese, who are generally wealthier than the other races, ending up as victims of robberies, snatch thefts and car-jackings.

Corruption is another major issue the Chinese are particularly concerned over as many in the community are businessmen who have to deal with graft on a routine basis with corrupt government officials.

None of these issues were addressed during the two recent rallies by Bersih and Hindraf, in what is probably the most telling explanation of why the Chinese did not support the protests.

The sheer lack of law and order was a massive turnoff for the Chinese, and newspaper photographs and television visuals of shops with their shutters down during the protests were scenes the community did not want to see.

Such an environment may help the MCA, which have been working hard over the past few months to regain lost support.

Senior party leaders have even been campaigning door-to-door in some areas.

"We need the public to understand our role in government. We are making such visits more frequently now," Ms Chew Mei Fun, an MCA legislator said in a local newspaper here recently, in reference to the party stepping up constituency visits.

An opinion poll conducted earlier this year showed that 60 per cent of the Chinese would vote opposition in the next general election, confirming the conventional wisdom that there was swing to the opposition.

But the political temperature among the Chinese community has come down quite a bit since the survey and Umno has also become less strident and confrontational with elections approaching.

While the Chinese are still not completely satisfied with how the government is handling the economy and issues like corruption and crime, the opposition has not offered much of a solution itself.

The recent clashes between protesters and the police were, in some ways, presenting the Chinese with a choice. And many may yet choose the devil they know and continue supporting BN if the ruling coalition plays its cards right in the next few months.

Leslie Lau has been reporting in Malaysia for more than 15 years. He has worked in regional and international newspapers and TV stations.

22/12: The HINDRAF issue is getting complicated for the ethnic Hindus and the Malaysia Govt.

M.S. Verma

MyNews.In

The arrest of HINDRAF members and the consequent developments

One can have an idea of acute pain, which the Indian Ethnic community in Malaysia has been bearing for a long period of time from this excerpt of a letter: We refer to the above critical matters in Malaysia but which generally gets the least attention locally even by the Opposition parties, NGO’s, the Malaysian Human Rights Commission and the media for this community is generally regarded as politically insignificant, do not draw local or international funding and are deemed not press worthy. To the contrary the Malaysian government has successfully projected itself to the world as a modern Islamic thinking country, which is not true.

This letter was written to British Prime Minister Gordon Brown by Hindu Rights Action force (HINDRAF) Legal Advisor Mr. P. Uthayakumar. One may wonder why this letter was written to British Prime Minister. The answer is because the ethnic minority Indians in Malaysia was brought into Malaysia by the British some 200 over years ago. Since independence in 1957, the Malaysian Indians have been a part of Malaysian community. But we must not forget that Malaysia is an Islamic nation.

The issue of the arrest of 24 HINDRAF members and the consequent developments can’t be viewed as a simple issue. On the one hand, the Malaysian Government’s inadequacy of not only the absence of appropriate laws to deal with such a situation but also of the power that it should have had resting with the police under the Police Act rendering it helpless and the underlying fear of the Ethnic Indians’ movement gathering momentum over a period of time following the impressive and unprecedented demonstration of a gathering comprising 20,000 people. On the other hand the genuine concern of the ethnic Indians suffering on account of indifference shown to them over a long period have complicated matters so much that no solution can be visualized in the near future.

Right now the Malaysian Government is in a jam. It finds itself unprepared to deal with the situation not only to the satisfaction of the Malaysian Ethnic Indians but also to the India and other Common Wealth countries so much so that the courts in Malaysia too would find it difficult to untangle the issue. From the prevailing circumstances even the lawyers fighting the case of HINDRAF members will have to scratch their heads a bit. Matters extending over a longer period are not easy to tackle. There are facts that have changed and re-changed umpteen times.

The Babari Masjid or the Ram Setu issues in back in India similar in nature too are not open to easy solutions. A lot of patience and the spirit of give and take are essential. Bertrand Russel has said, “For countries to enjoy liberty some liberty will have to be sacrificed.” But then there are always people who are seldom inclined to make sacrifice and budge from their stand. The matter of ethnic Indians in Malaysia is not one with a recent history. The mere reference to compensation from the British for the Indians being taken to Malaysia over 150 years ago adds to the complexity of the issue.

The demolition of a temple claimed by HINDRAF to have existed over 100 years would need a genuine verification of facts with reference to old records which may or may not be available. The government too will not be in a position to right away reject this claim and so too the courts. But whatever the circumstances, to a great extent the helplessness of the Malaysian Government are apparent. The people who are in the Government right now are in a pathetic predicament, caught up in a dilemma and would very much like to extricate themselves unscathed in the end. The members of HINDRAF too, it is hoped, know this fact and should not let any opportunity to slip away for finding a mutually agreed solution without either party having to lose face.

This is expected of all concerned with this ticklish issue. Overall the situation must not come to a point where this peace loving Indian community of Tamil origin may be forced to into terrorism as what has happened to the Sri Lankan Tamils. Let us hope for the best.

22/12: Double-tracking: stop the madness!

By: Kim Quek

The award of the RM12.5 billion contract to build the Ipoh – Padang Besar (Thai border) double-tracking railway is destined to create the most wasteful white elephant among the many white elephants already existing in this country.

This is crystal clear from a cursory glance at the current operation of the state-owned monopoly Keretapi Tanah Melayu Berhad (KTMB) or The Malayan Railways Ltd.

Traversing the Malaysian Peninsular with a network of 1,700 km of railways, KTMB only raked in RM288 million in transportation revenues in 2006, made up as follows:

Intercity services RM 71 million
Commuter services in Kuala Lumpur areas RM 85 million
Freight services RM 132 million
Total RM 288 million


Excluding the commuter services in the KL areas (175 km), from our calculations, the total pan-peninsular transportation revenue is RM 203 million, yielded by a network of 1,525 km of railways (1,700 – 175). Apportioning 30% of this total revenue to the Ipoh – Padang sector of 329 km (though this sector forms only 22% of the total linear length of 1,525 km), the corresponding revenue is RM60 million.

Granted that traffic volume will increase substantially after completion of the double-tracking project, but there is a limit to this increase. Assuming a generous revenue growth of 7 folds, future annual revenue for this sector will be RM 420 million – a mere 3.3% of the initial capital investment of RM12.5 billion.

Such meager revenues simply mean that due to its low usage, this project will not have any significant impact on the economy or on transportation in this sector after its completion.

On the other hand, let us pause for a moment to ponder over what this astronomical sum of public funds - RM12.5 billion - means to the people.

In the first place, it means every family in this country will have to shoulder an average burden of RM 2,500/-.

Then, if this money is spent for other purposes, the government can complete any one of the following feats:

- plant 1.2 million hectares of matured oil palm, which are capable of generating annual revenues of RM 10 billion (5 million tons of palm oil @ RM 2,000 per ton),or
- build 400,000 low cost housing units, which is capable of housing to 2 million have-nots, or
- establish 100 medium sized institutions of higher learning, capable of taking in 300,000 students for tertiary education, or
- build 1,200 km of expressways (equivalent to one more north-south expressway plus one more east-west highway).

The glaring contrast in returns between building the double-tracking project and any of the abovementioned alternative usages clearly indicates that this project is of very low priority at this stage of our development when the country is still short of funds to address many social-economic needs urgently. But our government has chosen to implement it, and worst, doing it in circumstances that are most deplorable.

First, there has never been a proper cost/benefit analysis. For a project that is labeled as the largest ever undertaken (when completed from north to south), this omission is shocking though perhaps understandable, as the cabinet should have been aware that the project proposition could not have survived the preliminary round of analysis.

Second, this project has never been properly discussed in the cabinet – not in Mahathir’s reign when the contract was first dubiously awarded to Gamuda Bhd – MMC Corp Bhd joint venture in Oct 2003 (but shelved in Dec 2003) (see note 1), nor during Abdullah’s premiership when it was revived in Mar 2007 (see note 2).

Third, it was the Cabinet Committee on Public Transport – not the Cabinet – which made the decision to revive the project and to award the contract to the same contractor in a subcommittee meeting held on 16 Mar 2007 chaired by Deputy Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak, who also made the announcement. That such an important project should have been left to Najib’s subcommittee to decide reflected Prime Minister Abdullah’s weak leadership as well as serious-flaw in the decision-making process of his government. One cannot help but ask: Did Najib usurp the authority of the Prime Minister and the cabinet?

Fourth, no open tender has been called for this project. Worst, the decision to award the contract to Gamuda – MMC was made even before prices were known to the government, thus weakening the latter’s bargaining position and throwing the door wide open for collusion and corruption. For a contract of this size, billions of ringgit could easily have been leaked, further burdening the taxpayers. What happened to Abdullah’s promises of open tender, transparency and accountability?

Fifth, it is most improper that the momentous announcement on the official award of this contract with a finalized price should have been left to the contractor, who also doubled up as the spokesman to speak in length to drum up the project’s economic justification, while the government was keeping completely mum? Is it any of the contractor’s business to justify public expenditure to the taxpayers? Shouldn’t that be the responsibility of cabinet ministers? Why have they hidden behind the contractor? Shouldn’t the ministers have appeared in full force to bask in the glory of launching of such a stupendous project, if they really believe it will yield handsome rewards to the people?

Noting the absurd return of this project in relation to its huge capital layout, a series of serious questions beg for answers.

Why did former premier Mahathir Mohammad push for the double-tracking project so urgently, to the extent of clandestinely issuing the letter of offer to Gamuda – MMC only days before he stepped down on 31 Oct 2003? The contract then was for the construction of both the northern Ipoh-Padang sector and the southern Seremban-Johor Bahru sector for a total contract sum of RM 14.5 billion.

Having rightly shelved the project by the new Abdullah cabinet in Dec 2003 due to its low priority, why was it revived in Mar 2007? What was the rationale for its revival? Who made the decision?

Finding no compelling economic or social rationale, what conclusion can we draw other than to attribute the motivation behind this project to the base human instinct of greed – both on the part of giver and recipient of the contract?


Note 1: The circumstances under which the double-tracking project was awarded in Oct 2003 (under Mahathir) and shelved in Dec 2003 (under Abdullah) were described in my article listed in Malaysiakini on 17.12.2003 under the title “Double tracking: government back on track”, and also published in my book “Where to, Malaysia?” as Article No. 71.

Note 2: I commented on the revival of the project in Mar 2007 in my article listed in Malsaysiakini on 19.03.2007 under the title “Najib runaway train or Pak Lah Express changes route?”.

22/12: ‘De-citizenise’ the HINDRAF leaders, is constitutional

The withdrawal of the charge ‘attempting murder of a policeman in duty’ against the “HINDRAF 31”, which lead to the acquittal of these 31 suspects on Monday, 17 December 2007 at the Shah Alam Sessions Court was really shameful and disgrace to the Attorney General’s Chambers.

This decision was made almost immediately after 13 ethnic Indian NGOs and defacto Indian community leader and MIC President Dato’ Seri S. Samy Vellu met the ‘Flip-Flop’ Prime Minister Dato’ Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi late last week.

Some people actually thought the charge of ‘attempting murder on a policeman’ was overkill, despite a life of a policeman on duty, to maintain order and public safety was grievously threatened by a mob of 31 people. Enough to allow some really opportunistically-bankrup-dinosaur-relic politician to demand that the Attorney General to apologise to the ‘HINDRAF 31’, despite that they were initially denied bail for the severity of the charge then ‘conveniently’ let of the hook with lightning speed because the ‘Flip-Flop’ Prime Minister ‘compassionately’ intervened into the legal process. This arrogantly ungrateful call shoul be seen as ‘adding insult to injury’.

21/12: GMI to hold solidarity vigil this weekend

Harakah English Section

The Abolish ISA Movement (GMI) will be holding a solidarity vigil at Independence Square (Dataran Merdeka) here at the heart of the city on Dec 22.

The announcement for the vigil was made during a peaceful assembly organized by a coalition of some 50 political parties and non-governmental organization at the National Human Rights Commission (Suhakam) building compound here.

Today's peaceful assembly among others called for Section 27 of the Police Act which required for a police permit to be obtained before any peaceful assembly could be held, to be repealed.

Among those present at today peaceful assembly which lasted for about an hour were Islamic Party of Malaysia (PAS) vice president Mohamad Sabu, treasurer Dr Hatta Ramli, research centre director Dr Dzulkifli Ahmad, Parti Sosialis Malaysia (PSM) pro-tem chairman Nasir Hashim, Democratic Action Party (DAP) central working committee member Ronnie Liu, and National Justice Party (PKR) vice president Sivarasa Rasiah.

No arrest

Some 300 participants were present at today assembly. Despite heavy police presence no arrest were made.

Met afterward, PAS women wing's chief Nuridah Salleh did not discount the possibility that the wing would make their present felt during the vigil to be held at 8pm on Dec 22.

The vigil is believed to be held to lend moral support to several Hindu Rights Action Force (Hindraf) leaders who were recently arrested and detained under the draconian act.

Despite local and international criticisms, Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Badawi recently invoked the use of the Internal Security Act (ISA) which provided for detention without trials for Hindraf leaders who organized a peaceful assembly on Nov 25.

20/12: Malaysia's Big Money Railroad Hustle

Posted by Kim Quek

The government revives a white elephant project for a politically connected construction firm

Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, who came to office vowing to stop a wide range of money-swallowing projects put in place by former Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad, has caved in to political pressure and reinstates several of them. Now, it appears he is restarting what may be the biggest of them all, a massively expensive rail project tied to a well-connected construction firm that seems to have little hope of recouping its investment.

The government has approved the no-bid contract with Gamuda-MMC for RM 12.5 billion (US$3.73 billion) to double-track the country’s main north-south railway line, a 329 km run from the central city of Ipoh to the Thai border. The MMC part of the consortium is a construction company backed by Syed Mokhtar Al-Bukhary, a long-time backer and fundraiser for UMNO, the largest party in the country’s ruling Barisan National coalition.

Malayan Railways Ltd serves the Malaysian Peninsula with a network of 1,700 km of railways, but it earned only RM 288 million in transportation revenues in 2006, made up as follows:

- Intercity services: RM 71 million
- Commuter services in Kuala Lumpur areas: RM 85 million
- Freight services RM 132 million
- Total: RM 288 million

Excluding the commuter services in Kuala Lumpur, the total transportation revenue is RM203 million from a network of 1,525 km of railways. Apportioning 30 percent of this revenue to the Ipoh-border sector — only 22 percent of the 1525 km network — the corresponding revenue is RM60 million.

Granted that traffic volume would increase substantially after completion of the double-tracking project, there is still a limit. Assuming generous seven-fold revenue growth, future annual revenue for this sector could — could be RM 420 million, just 3.3 percent of the initial capital investment of RM 12.5 billion. Such a meager return means that the project would have little significant impact on the economy or transportation in this sector after completion.

But every family in Malaysia would have to shoulder an average burden of RM 2,500 to pay for this folly. If this money were spent for other purposes, the government could complete any one of the following feats:

- Plant 1.2 million hectares of mature oil palm capable of generating annual revenues of RM 10 billion (5 million tons of palm oil @ RM 2,000 per ton), or
- Build 400,000 low cost housing units, capable of housing to 2 million people, or
- Establish 100 medium sized institutions of higher learning, capable of taking in 300,000 students for tertiary education, or
- Build 1,200 km of expressways.

The contrast in returns between the double-tracking project and any of the alternatives should indicate that this project is a very low priority. With the country still short of funds to address many social-economic needs, why do this? The circumstances are troubling.

First, there has never been a proper cost/benefit analysis. For a project this large this omission is shocking, but then the cabinet was likely aware that the proposition could not have survived even a preliminary round of analysis.

Second, the project has never been properly discussed in the cabinet – neither during Mahathir’s reign, when the contract was first dubiously awarded to Gamuda-MMC in October 2003 before being shelved in December 2003 after Mahathir left office, nor during Abdullah’s premiership when it was revived in March 2007.

Third, it was the Cabinet Committee on Public Transport – not the cabinet itself– which resurrected the project and awarded the contract to the same contractor in a subcommittee meeting held on March 16, 2007 chaired by Deputy Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak, who also made the announcement. That such an important project should have been left in the hands of Najib’s subcommittee reflects Abdullah’s weakness as well as a serious flaw in the decision-making process.

Fourth, no open tender was called. The decision to re-award the contract to Gamuda-MMC was made even before prices were known to the government, thus weakening the latter’s bargaining position and throwing the door wide open for collusion and corruption. What happened to Abdullah’s promises of open tenders, transparency and accountability?

Fifth, the announcement on the official award of this contract with a finalized price was left to the contractor, who also spoke at length on the project’s economic justification, while the government kept silent. Is it the contractor’s business to justify public expenditures? Shouldn’t that be the responsibility of cabinet ministers? Shouldn’t the ministers have appeared to bask in the glory of launching such a project?

Noting the minuscule projected return in relation to the huge capital layout, a series of questions beg for answers. Why did former premier Mahathir Mohammad push for the double-tracking project so urgently days before he stepped down on in October 2003? The contract then was for the construction of both the northern Ipoh-Padang sector and the southern Seremban-Johor Bahru sector for a total contract sum of RM 14.5 billion.

Having rightly shelved the project in December 2003 due to its low priority, why did Abdullah revived it in March 2007? Finding no compelling economic or social rationale, what conclusion can we draw other than to attribute the motivation to base greed – both on the part of the giver and the recipient of the contract?

20/12: Fruit from a poisonous tree will be poisonous

Posted By: Raja Petra

They say only Islam is good, all other religions are bad. And those with no religion whatsoever or atheists are even worse. But these people from the good religion want the government to do bad things. That is what troubles me to no end. How can a good religion make people want to be bad?


Malaysia can pride itself in knowing that regardless of what religious celebration it may be, its ethnic groups will come together as one to honour the event, the mainstream newspapers reported Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi as saying. Abdullah said religious festivals celebrated in Malaysia serve to bridge gaps and foster better ties among the multi-religious and multi-racial makeup of the country.

Malaysia, he said, was blessed, as the people not only had great respect for each other's religion, but also for the religious occasions that the different segments of society celebrated. Abdullah also said Malaysians never failed to display respect towards each other and it was customary for most to offer help and lend a hand during religious festivities, even to those outside their own race.

“A religious occasion, including Hari Raya, is a day when we seize the opportunity to visit our friends and strengthen our ties as true Malaysians. In our everyday lives, we prioritise aspects of goodwill and understanding towards each other, including on religious matters, which are deemed sensitive,” Abdullah said.

Have you noticed how politicians and religious people -- especially if they are politicians masquerading as religious people -- always say one thing to the non-Muslims and another to the Muslims? When the Indians and Chinese start showing signs of restlessness, they will talk about multi-racial, multi-cultural tolerance and all such crap. But to an all-Malay or all-Muslim audience, when they think that the non-Malays or non-Muslims are not within earshot, they will talk about the ‘enemies’ of the Malays and warn us that the kafir can’t be trusted and can’t be taken as our friend because they are the millennium-old enemies of Islam.

Thess public displays of keris-waving are small potatoes. The non-Malays were meant to see that. They knew the TV cameras were on and that what they said and did was being beamed live, straight into the living rooms of Malaysians. But what they talk behind closed doors would make even our First Prime Minister and Bapa Merdeka, Tunku Abdul Rahman, who in his days was accused of being a Chinese running dog who sold out the Malays, turn in his grave. Yes, the Tunku was ousted because he ‘gave in’ too much to the Chinese. But it was in the Tunku’s days that Malaysia was most peaceful, until someone came out with the ‘bright’ idea of how to unite the Malays under a common cause.

Can I be so bold as to say that in the Tunku’s days, the Malays were less religious? Not a single Malay senior government officer’s home did not have a bar, well-stocked with beer, brandy, whisky and wine that would make any pub turn green with envy. That was during the Merdeka era when you could admire the lovely legs of Malay women and when bare-back knee-length skirts were the ‘in’ thing. Miss Malaysia would be a sweet, young, Malay, lass in a bikini who would give the Chinese and Indian girls a run for their money -- until Pan-Asian girls appeared on the scene of course. Then we mixed-breed Eurasians beat the panties off the thoroughbreds. Hidup Pan-Asian!

Fifty years on and we celebrate our fiftieth anniversary of Merdeka. By now the Malays have become more religious. No longer will you find any bar in Malay homes. The army no longer toasts with wine but with syrup. And even then toasting, a western custom, is frowned upon. No longer can you get drunk with NAFI beer at fifty cents a can. You have to pay RM15 a glass at a pub and a crate of two dozen cans would be unaffordable for most Malaysians today.

But that is good. Malays have discarded their jahiliyah days or era of ignorance. Malays are now more Islamic. And Malays are told that we must not celebrate Christmas or wish the Chinese or Indians Kong Hee Fatt Choy or Happy Deepavali as this goes against Islamic teachings. Why, therefore, is Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi saying what he said, as reported by the mainstream media? Does he not know what he is saying goes against what Islam stands for, at least according to what the religious people tell us? Or is this a case of saying one thing to the non-Muslims and another to the Muslims? I suppose this is what politics is all about. You have to tailor your statements to suit the audience. And what Abdullah said was meant for the non-Malay ears, not for the Malays.

They say everyone goes through various stages of changes in their life and I suppose I am no exception. If I was asked to sum up my different stages of change, I would probably divide my life into three parts. The first part, the first 27 years of my life, would be what Malays (and Muslims as well) would call the jahil (ignorant) stage. That was when I did not pray, never for one minute stopped to think about God, drank beer, played Gin Rummy, and indulged in all form and manner of ‘sin’ that you can think of. Somehow, the consumption of pork was never one of those ‘sins’ though, for whatever reason I still can’t figure out until today.

When I touched 27 or 28, I suddenly ‘saw the light’ and became a ‘born-again’ Muslim. I used to jokingly tell my friends I was never born a Muslim but masuk Islam (converted to Islam) at the age of 27. From then on, I ‘fast-forward’ to catch up on all that I had missed the first 27 years of my life. I went to Mekah ten times or so, twice for the Haj and the rest for my Umrah (small Haj). I sat down and started reading the Quran and within a few weeks was able to rattle away like one who had learnt to read the Quran at the age of five. Even my Tok Guru was surprised. He said it normally take months or maybe even years for ‘old’ people whose brain had already beku (frozen) to read the Quran. I was able to do it in a matter of weeks. I bought the entire nine volumes of Hamka’s Quran translation and nine volumes of Hadith Bukhari plus Imam Ghazali’s kitab which I read over and over again until I was able to quote from memory.

That was all just before the Iranian Islamic Revolution and I was smitten. During my first trip to Mekah to perform the Haj, I joined an Iranian anti-Saudi demonstration and proudly carried a giant poster of Imam Khomeni high above my head. I wanted the Saudi government to be toppled and the two Holy cities of Mekah and Medina to be governed by an international Islamic coalition a la the Vatican City. I was slightly over 30 then and an Islamic revolutionary to the core.

I became the Chairman of our local mosque and set about ‘freeing’ all the mosques from government control. I helped raise funds to develop as many independent mosques as possible so that we could keep the Religious Department out of these mosques. Some of you probably remember the dua imam (two imams) episodes rampant in the State of Terengganu in those days. Datuk Yusof, the Terengganu head of the Special Branch (KCK), picked me up and brought me to meet the Terengganu Menteri Besar so that they could ‘rehabilitate’ me. They actually wanted to detain me under the Internal Security Act but there was this small complication concerning my father’s cousin (Emak Sepupu) who was the then Tengku Ampuan Terengganu. The Tengku Ampuan Terengganu was sister to the late Agong, the Sultan of Selangor, so they had to handle me with kid gloves.

Yes, I was a problem for Umno Terengganu and they would have liked to lock me away but my palace ‘immunity’ made this impossible. Anyway, eventually I left Terengganu and that sort of solved the whole thing. Five years later, Terengganu fell to the PAS-led opposition, so it really did not matter anymore, anyway.

That, in a nutshell, would be how I would describe the second 27 years of my life, phase two, and now I am in phase three, the third 27 years of my life. Of course, I really do not think I will live another 27 years or else I will live to a ripe old age of 81. No doubt Tun Dr Mahathir is still very much alive and kicking way past 81. But then Tun does not smoke, does not sleep at 3.00am, does not survive with a mere five hours sleep every night, is very careful with his diet, and much more. In short, I do everything opposite of what Tun does, so I do not hold the fallacy that I can live as long as he has thus far.

But that is not the issue. Whether phase three will be another 27 years like phases one and two is not what I want to talk about. What I do want to discuss is what I am going through in this phase three.

As I said, my first 27 years of phase one was the jahil period, and the second 27 years of what I call phase two, the Iranian Islamic Revolution period, my ‘enlightenment’ period. Phase three, however, appears to be my questioning and doubting period, which is giving rise to my disillusionment period.

I accept that I was like one of those lost sheep during phase one. Then I thought I had discovered the truth and saw the light in phase two. But now, in phase three, I am beginning to question this co-called truth. I am beginning to doubt that this was really the truth as I originally thought it was. I am beginning to become disillusioned with what I originally perceived as the truth.

Religion is supposed to be good, not only Islam, but any religion for that matter. And that is what I went through during phase two, discovering religion. But if religion is good, then why are religious people bad? Why is it when I meet unreligious people or atheists, I see good people? And why when I meet orthodox religious people, I see bad people? Yes, that is what has been nagging me in this phase three of my life. If religion is good, then religious people should be good and unreligious people or atheists should be bad. But why is it the other way around? And this does not apply to only Muslims.

I gave a talk to a group of pro-Abdullah Ahmad Badawi Umno people a few weeks ago. In that crowd was one whom I would classify as an ultra-religious person. When I pointed out that corruption is bad and that we must oppose it, he replied that corruption is okay. I then argued that Islam says that corruption is Riba’ (usury) and that there are 80 levels of Riba’ and that the sin for the lowest level is equivalent to the sin of sexual intercourse with one’s own parent. He agreed and said that this is actually one of the sayings (hadith) of the Prophet Muhammad.

I was flabbergasted. There I had before me a religious man. He was preaching to me and saying that the present secular system of government has to be rejected in favour of an Islamic system. He blames the ills facing this nation on the fact that we have turned our backs on Islam and chose instead a western secular system over the Islamic system as prescribed by the Prophet Muhammad. But corruption is okay, he argued.

If even just one Muslim were to leave Islam and become a Hindu, Christian or Buddhist, then it is the duty of all Muslims to violently oppose this. Apostasy is forbidden and the prescribed punishment is death. And Muslims must run riot on the streets and burn buildings and kill people if anyone tries to leave Islam. No Muslim worth his salt will disagree with this. This is not violence, this is not extremism, this is not a threat to national security; this is defending the dignity of Islam. But if you march peacefully to the Agong’s palace or to Parliament to hand over a Memorandum, this is not allowed. The police must arrest you, beat you up, and the leaders or organisers must be detained without trial under the Internal Security Act. This is what Islam asks us to do and is mandatory.

Ask any Malay-Muslim leader. Ask any imam in the mosque. Ask any Mufti. Ask any Religious Department official. Ask anyone from Pusat Islam. None will disagree that the peaceful marchers need to be dealt with harshly and detained without trial under the Internal Security Act. And none of these same people will disagree that apostates need to be dealt with harshly and rioting, and burning buildings, and killing people are necessary in defending the dignity of Islam.

Most of the police are Muslims, but they act violently towards peaceful marchers. Most of the government leaders are Muslims, but they act harshly towards peaceful marchers. And they say that they do this to preserve the peace, which is required by Islam. But if you ‘insult’ Islam or try to become an apostate, then you must accept the violent punishment. And this is not violence or harsh or a threat to national security. This is defending the dignity of Islam. And corruption is okay. Cheating in the elections is okay. Abuse of power and authority is okay. Wastage of public funds is okay. Denying you your fundamental rights is okay. Using the mainstream media to lie is okay. Threatening the non-Malays is okay. Persecution is okay. Detention without trial is okay. Assaulting detainees under police custody is okay. Just do not insult Islam or try to leave Islam. That is not okay and the use of violence to oppose this is also okay.

I see religious people and I see bad people. I see unreligious people and atheists and I see good people. How can religion be good if religious people are bad? How can religion be from God if the product of religion is bad people? Yes, that is what troubles me this third phase of the 27 years of my life.

The more people pray, the worse they become. People who never pray are wonderful people. How can this be? Police officers pray. Government leaders pray. But they are terrible people. There must be something terribly wrong with praying. Is religion merely a scam? How can religion be right when those who profess religion are so wrong?

Sure, I have heard the old argument time and time again. There is nothing wrong with religion. It is the people who are wrong for not following what the religion really teaches us. But why? That still does not explain it. Why is it people who are religious become so bad? Is religion not supposed to guide us to become good? If religion has failed to turn us into good people then surely religion and not people are what is wrong. There is another old saying: there is no such thing as bad students, only bad teachers. If students turn out bad then the teacher has to be blamed. In that case, would not this same argument apply? If religion has failed to educate us then the teacher and not the student has to be blamed.

Sigh….the third phase of my life, the third 27 years, is going to be very traumatic indeed. The first 27 years were easy. I just enjoyed my life. I lived for today and to hell with tomorrow. The second 27 years were also very satisfying. I lived for my religion. Everything I did I did for Islam. But this third 27 years is going to be an endless journey for me. And I may never reach my destination because I am not confident I will live another 27 years. I need to find out whether religions really exist or whether they are mere human inventions and old wives tales. Fruit from a poisonous tree will always be poisonous. It can never be any other way. And the fruit from a good religion must certainly be goodness. It can never be any other way. But that does not seem to be what is happening here.

Today, we are told that Muslims support detention without trial. Today, we are told that 1.5 million Malays from 395 Malay NGOs support the government in its use of the Internal Security Act against peaceful marchers. Many are angry that those 31 from HINDRAF are not going to be tried for attempted murder after all. They want blood. They want the blood of the BERSIH and HINDRAF marchers. They want the blood of those who merely exercised their God-given right of free expression. These 1.5 million Malays are followers of a good religion. They say only Islam is good, all other religions are bad. And those with no religion whatsoever or atheists are even worse. But these people from the good religion want the government to do bad things. That is what troubles me to no end. How can a good religion make people want to be bad?

19/12: Why were the charges dropped?

Nazry Bahrawi

TODAYonline

DAYS after invoking the controversial Internal Security Act (ISA) against five Hindraf (Hindu Rights Action Force) leaders in a show of might, Malaysia yesterday appeared to soften its stance when it dropped charges of attempted murder against 31 ethnic Indians for wounding a police officer during the group's protest at a Hindu temple last month.

The decision by Attorney-General (AG) Abdul Gani Patail was made three days after Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi met 16 Indian non-governmental organisations (NGOs) to hear their grievances.

While the NGOs welcomed the move, some political analysts saw it as a calculated attempt by the Prime Minister to give his reputation a boost following his decision to use the ISA against the Hindraf leaders.

Six of the 31 were released unconditionally, while the other 25 were charged with mischief and illegal assembly. They pleaded guilty and were released on bail of RM500 ($220) each, ahead of sentencing scheduled for Dec 27. The five Hindraf leaders remained in detention under the ISA.

While they have avoided the maximum possible jail term of 20 years for attempted murder, the 25 still face up to five years in prison and/or a fine for mischief while taking part in an unlawful assembly, as well as a jail term of up to one year and/or a fine of not more than RM10,000 for illegal assembly, Mr Ravi Neeko, the chairman of the Bar Council Legal Aid Centre in Kuala Lumpur told Today.

The sentences can run consecutively or concurrently.

Bar Council president Ambiga Sreenevasan, while welcoming the AG's decision, said it was regrettable that the 31 had to spend about 15 days in prison.

Underlining its belief that freedom of assembly is a constitutional right, the council had appointed 10 lawyers to represent the 31 individuals under its free legal aid scheme. They made a representation on Friday to the AG to have the charges reduced. Bar Council vice-president and one of the members of the legal team, Mr Ragunath Kesavan, said the AG had "responded positively".

Expressing joy over the development, Mr A Vaithilingam of Malaysian Hindu Sangam, the group that led the special meeting with Mr Abdullah, told Today: "To me, arresting people in a place of worship is not the right thing to do."

At the meeting with the Indian NGOs on Friday, Mr Abdullah promised he would urge the AG to review the charges. While acknowledging that the meeting was one of the factors that had affected the AG's decision, Mr Vaithilingam denied that there was a compromise between Mr Abdullah and the Indian NGOs over the charges.

He said: "We only spoke to the Prime Minister. Everything else was between the Prime Minister and the AG."

Mr Samy Vellu, the president of the Malaysian Indian Congress (MIC) – the main Indian party in the ruling Barisan Nasional - yesterday thanked Mr Abdullah and applauded the move to "lighten the burden of the families" of those imprisoned.

But Dr Ooi Kee Beng of the Institute of South-east Asian Studies said the reduced charges hinged more on the fact that the case "doesn't hold" in court.

He told Today: "To prove that 31 people tried to kill a policeman, how do you do that? To prove that two persons tried to do so would already be difficult."

Still, Dr Ooi said the move could be an attempt by Mr Abdullah to soften his political image. "Using the ISA damaged Mr Abdullah's reputation quite a bit," he said. "He might, over the next few days or weeks, try to appear merciful to tie in with his general reputation of being a soft, kind uncle."

In another development, two opposition leaders from Parti Keadilan Rakyat are suing the Malaysian government for RM4 million for "wrongful" arrest last Tuesday near Parliament House.

Keadilan's information chief Tian Chua, 43, and its Kota Raja division information chief Abdul Razak, 46, have named Inspector-General of Police Musa Hassan and the government as defendants in a suit filed in the Kuala Lumpur High Court yesterday.

They are also demanding compensation of RM20,000 for damage done to Mr Abdul Razak's car, as well as RM80 a day for the loss of use. "The suit is to preserve our good name and dignity," Mr Chua told reporters.

The two were among 26 individuals from Bersih - a coalition of five opposition groups and 67 NGOs seeking free and fair elections – arrested last Tuesday for defying an order against illegal assembly when they tried to submit a memorandum of protest against a Bill to raise the retirement age of election officials to Parliament.

19/12: The rule of law

BAR Council president Ambiga Sreenevasan may feel that the arrest of nine people, including four lawyers, in Kuala Lumpur on Sunday was "totally unnecessary and unfortunate". But the fact is that no arrests would have been made by the police if the unlawful marchers had responded to the warnings to disperse.

In the event, they paid no heed to the warnings, leaving the police little choice but to round them up and charge them with taking part in an illegal assembly. What was really regrettable was that some members of the legal fraternity had decided to go ahead with the march when the majority of the Bar Council - apparently after two days of debate - had voted to call it off.

What is even more disturbing is that the Bar Council chief has chosen to defend this act of defiance of the law of the land and the council's decision as an exercise of their right of assembly.

In the first place, freedom of assembly is not an absolute right. There are qualifying clauses to Article 10 of the Federal Constitution that place restrictions on this right in the interest of security, public order or morality. To assert that the requirement of a police permit is an "unnecessary fetter", or that it makes for a bad law, is no argument for breaking the law. Rather, this is an invitation to lawlessness.

In any event, the right solution to a bad law is to change it, not to break it. No one has the right to choose to comply only with those laws he likes and to violate those laws he dislikes. That's what it means to say that we live under the rule of law and that nobody is above it.

Laws shouldn't be broken just because they do not sit well with our sense of what is appropriate. If those getting hot under the collar about how unfair and unjust the curbs on freedom of assembly are, that is a matter for public debate, not a case for contravening the law.

Such a dialogue has been started by the Royal Police Commission with its proposal to give permits "as a matter of course", the Human Rights Commission of Malaysia with its recommendation to replace permits with "notifications", and Tun Musa Hitam with his thoughts on what needs to be done to make demonstrations orderly.

The Bar Council should continue to contribute to the debate on freedom of assembly rather than support lawyers who do not uphold the rule of law.

19/12: Race and the Poverty Gap

I have been traveling since last Friday. Internet access has not been a certainty and will continue to be irregular.

Being in new and different places is useful. It shows how different things could be, or how similar they are.

In Jakarta, the tower blocks reach out to the sky with the same ambition of the new projects being developed in Kuala Lumpur. They less successfully block out the squalor and poverty than ours. A small group of elites unthinkingly spend more on one meal out than most families earn in a month. They shop at designer shops that rival, or even beat, those in the best and most prestigious shopping localities in Kuala Lumpur. The elites, like those elsewhere, shape policy through their investments, their influence and support, hold their nation to ransom. The poverty gap widens every day and this is justified in the name of development and progress.

Much like it is in Malaysia.

This does not necessarily suggest a devious and sinister plan on the part of the administration. It could be simply a matter of perspective on what is needed, and as such what is expendable, for democracy. In Poland, the solidarity movement, spectacular for its validity and credibility, caved in to the free market, unleashing the beast, simply because the new democratically elected administration could not see any other option. More than 20 years later, there is a level of poverty and want in Poland that Lech Walesa possibly never saw as even a remote possibility as he pushed the movement forward. There is also unimaginable wealth.

I have increasingly found myself wondering what the guiding principles of the Malaysian administration policy on development and progress are. If there is such a policy in the first place. It sometimes feels as if there is none.

The 5 year Malaysia plans do not qualify as such, they do not allow us to understand the government's vision of where we will be in the next 30 years, other than in highly ambiguous and speculative terms. It is evident that there is a widening poverty gap, and the majority of the Malay community are falling victim to it as much as the other communities. From this, it appears that the societal safety net that a significant amount of tax goes to is not closely knit enough to prevent a significant number of Malaysians from falling through the gaps.

Leaving aside the extremist language of the HINDRAF campaign, the seemingly far fetched assertions of ethnic cleansing and state sponsored terrorism, this is what is being said: a significant number of the Indian community, predominantly tamils, are falling through the gaps into the poverty trap. In appreciating that many Malays have also fallen through the gaps into the same traps, we may be able to draw parallels and understand that racialist notions may not be the driving force behind what it is that ails Malaysia.

My sense is that it is the seeming absence of a coherent plan for sustainable and inclusive development. That is why many a Malaysian asks 'where will we be in 3o years?', 'will my children have a future in this country?'. These are questions that transcend racial boundaries. They are concerns that all of us share as we strive forward.

Malaysians are however fixated on race and religion, mainly because these are the staples of our public discourse. These are undermining, not only because they are divisive factors, but because they distract from the core issues. Insufficient attention is consequenty given to those aspects of our society that crucially require it. This is something that the Barisan Nasional has not let on that it understands. In this way, the pleas of the rakyat for accountability are not so much about a desire for a shift of power but rather an urgent call for more effective action on the part of the administration.

Many feel that time is running out. Oil reserves are depleting, there has been insufficient investment in human capital to allow us to reinvent ourselves effectively by break ing into new areas and seemingly increasing systemic corruption is a major deterrent for investment. Malaysia is fast losing ground, falling behind others of comparable development or potential as its ability to compete steadily dips.

There is no magic solution, a perfect answer.

At a forum earlier this year, I said that shifting leadership to the opposition - assuming that was practically possible - is not the answer. The opposition has no experience in governance. As much as some might say that the Barisan Nasional goverment could do things a lot better, a view I share, the BN government has an experience base of some 50 years to draw on. Solving the difficulties we are in calls for a greater commitment to fundamentals, an even greater willingness to account (as I understand things, this is the focal point of civil society efforts this year) and an understanding of the very real need to harness more effectively a collective viewpoint on development and progress.

19/12: When opportunity knocks, hang decency

I’ve known Mano of the Hindraf 5 fame for some time now. From what I know of the man, it is difficult to believe the justifications that are being proffered for the use of the ISA.

In fact, apart from Vasantha, all the others are known to me.

Uthayakumar and I have had our differences before on the language, tone and content of motions he has presented at numerous Bar AGMs on the Kg Medan issue.

And I have from the very outset voiced my reservations at the approach taken by Hindraf in addressing the issue of long marginalised and neglected Indians.

Yet, however disagreeable I have found the methods of the Hindraf leadership to be, I will unhesitatingly condemn the use of the ISA on the 5.

And on every other person who continues to be detained under this most oppressive law.

READ MORE HERE
http://harismibrahim.wordpress.com/2007/12/19/when-opportunity-knocks-hang-decency/

19/18: All that crap (Raja Petra)

On 10 November 2007, BERSIH organised its march to the Istana Negara. The New Straits Times reported that 4,000 people turned out that day. That same government-owned propaganda organ masquerading as a mainstream newspaper also reported the IGP as saying that 4,000 police personnel were mobilised that day. This would give us a ratio of one-to-one. But looking at the photographs in both the newspapers and on the internet it could clearly be seen that the yellow shirts swamped the red helmets. It would be impossible for the ratio to be one-to-one if the yellow practically buried the red.

According to the organisers, they estimated the crowd at about 50,000. And they estimated the crowd that was prevented from reaching the Istana Negara as roughly another 30,000. The intelligence agencies, however, have estimated the total crowd -- that which reached the Istana Negara plus that which was prevented from doing so -- at 138,000. So this is how far the estimates vary; from 4,000 by the New Straits Times to 138,000 by the intelligence agencies. Invariably, your guess is as good as mine on what the real figure should be -- but an educated guess of 80,000 would not be far off.

Then, on 25 November 2007, we had the HINDRAF march where, again, the crowd was estimated as between 5,000 to 30,000. From what I saw I would believe the 30,000 figure. And, again, it was estimated that about 20,000 were prevented from getting through. But what was interesting about the HINDRAF affair was not the size of the crowd but the events of the day plus the post-rally events that followed soon after that.

When the organisers realised that the police had cordoned the area surrounding the British High Commission and that there was no way they could get through, they decided to break up into a few groups, just like what BERSIH had done, and meet at various points, just like what BERSIH had done. Around midnight, they started moving into Batu Caves and by 2.00am the crowd began to build up. At 4.00am, the crowd had reached optimum level and the police pushed them back into the temple compound and locked the main gate.

The crowd was now trapped and there was no way it could launch the march to the British High Commission. Also, a march that far would take some time since Batu Caves is not quite near Jalan Ampang. It was apparent that all the crowd could do was to assemble and probably make some noise as a show of strength. The crowd was certainly not going anywhere.

At 4.20am, the police commenced firing tear gas and water cannons into the crowd. But the crowd was within the temple ground and trapped behind closed gates. No one was attempting to crash the gate or to start a march. What was the reason for shooting into the crowd? If the reason for opening fire was because they had assembled illegally, how was it possible for them to disperse when the police would not open the gate to allow them to leave the temple ground and go home? The crowd was assembled only because they had been pushed into the temple ground and the gate locked behind them thereby trapping them inside.

The police said that they did not open fire and shoot into the temple grounds. The photographs tell another story. And eyewitnesses said that the MIC Youth leaders were amongst the police and that it was they who gave the police the order to shoot. Yes, MIC Youth was there but they were mingling with the police, not with the crowd within the temple ground. Would the police have opened fire considering the crowd was already trapped inside and had nowhere to go if the MIC Youth had not given the order to do so?

The HINDRAF organisers had estimated a crowd of 10,000. Even they were surprised when the crowd ballooned to 30,000. Where did this additional 20,000 come from? And was it coincidental that the majority of the people were MIC members? Were these MIC people turncoats who had now abandoned MIC and were wholeheartedly behind HINDRAF? Or were they diehard MIC members who were sent to infiltrate the crowd to make up the numbers and give an impression that matters are more serious than what many imagine?

In short, how much of the HINDRAF rally of 25 November 2007 was for real and how much was staged? And if much of it was staged are the HINDRAF leaders and organisers aware that they had been set up? It appears that HINDRAF was played for a sucker and its leaders set up as fall guys.

This theory would be hard to prove if not for the Internal Security Act detentions of the five key players of HINDRAF. The ‘HINDRAF 5’ were detained under Section 8 of the Internal Security Act instead of the ‘normal’ Section 73. “What’s the difference?” you may ask.

Well, under Section 73, they would be detained by Bukit Aman or the Special Branch for at least 60 days where they would be subjected to around-the-clock interrogation, 24-7. The Special Branch ‘owns’ you for 60 days and they would spend the first 30 days interrogating you to find out who are behind you, where you get your funding from, who you are working with, your links inside and outside the country, your game-plan, your endgame, your strategies and objectives, your strengths and weaknesses, and much more. In short, they want to know everything and anything even down to how many strands of pubic hair you have. The second 30 days will then be spent ‘turning you over’. You will be shown how and where you have erred plus they will ‘help’ you ‘see the light’ and assist you in returning to the ‘right path’.

These 60 days will help Bukit Aman and the Special Branch determine if you are really dangerous and a threat to national security or whether you are just misguided and have unwittingly been used by certain people without you being aware of it. They will also determine whether you can be rehabilitated or have in fact already been rehabilitated within those 60 days and therefore can be safely released and allowed to go home. Only if they are confident that you are still a threat to national security or that you cannot be rehabilitated or that they would need more time to rehabilitate you would they further detain you under Section 8 of the Internal Security Act and send you to the Kamunting detention centre for an unspecified period of time. Seldom would they straight away detain you under Section 8 and send you to Kamunting without spending at least 60 days with you to probe what it is that makes you tick and how to make you ‘un-tick’.

Now, the HINDRAF 5 were not subjected to this 60 days interrogation and turning over process. Bukit Aman or the Special Branch did not get their hands on the HINDRAF 5. They were straight away detained under Section 8 -- which means the Special Branch could not touch them as they would now come under the Prisons Department and not Bukit Aman. The police detain you under Section 73. The Minister detains you under Section 8.

This is most puzzling indeed. Why did the police not detain the HINDRAF 5 under Section 73 of the Internal Security Act? Isn’t Bukit Aman or the Special Branch curious about who are behind HINDRAF? Isn’t Bukit Aman or the Special Branch curious about who are funding HINDRAF? Isn’t Bukit Aman or the Special Branch curious about whether the HINDRAF 5 are the real masterminds or merely the pawns of another higher power? Isn’t Bukit Aman or the Special Branch curious about whether HINDRAF has links with foreign terrorist groups like the Tamil Tigers? Isn’t Bukit Aman or the Special Branch curious the game-plan and endgame of HINDRAF? Isn’t Bukit Aman or the Special Branch curious about HINDRAF’s strategies, objectives, strengths and weaknesses? Umno says that Anwar Ibrahim is behind HINDRAF. Would Bukit Aman or the Special Branch not want to know whether this is true so that if it is true then Anwar too can be detained under the Internal Security Act? And how would they find out about all this if the HINDRAF 5 are detained under Section 8 instead of Section 73 of the Internal Security Act whereby the Prisons Department and not Bukit Aman has control over the Hindraf 5?

Yes, it appears like there are certain people who walk in the corridors of power who would like the secrets of HINDRAF to remain a secret. It appears like there are certain people who walk in the corridors of power who do not want Bukit Aman or the Special Branch to find out what HINDRAF is really all about. Bukit Aman and the Special Branch must be dying from curiosity. But they can’t do anything about it because the HINDRAF 5 comes under the Prisons Department and not Bukit Aman. And it was the Minister and not the police who detained the HINDRAF 5.

Umno says that HINDRAF is a threat to national security. Umno says that HINDRAF is anti-Malay and anti-Islam. Umno says that HINDRAF plans to organise an anti-Malay rally in Kampong Baru. Some of the HINDRAF people did in fact march through Kampong Baru on 25 November 2007. And the police opened fire on them and sent them running. Then the Malays in Kampong Baru opened the doors to their homes and invited the HINDRAF people in to take shelter from the police.

There was no Indian-Malay tension that day on 25 November 2007. The Malay police opened fire on the HINDRAF marchers and the Malays in Kampong Baru gave the Indians shelter. The so-called Indian-Malay racial tension is in the minds of the Umno people. And Umno is spreading rumours and circulating SMSess to give the impression that racial tensions are increasing and that there is a danger race riots will break out.

To further impress Malaysians that race riots are imminent they got this chap called Mohd Saiful Adil Daud to form DAMAI MALAYSIA, supposedly an amalgamation of 395 Malay NGOs with a combined membership of 1.5 million Malays. That is the biggest crap I have ever heard. You would be hard-pressed to find 39 Malay NGOs, let alone 395. And even then some of these so-called NGOs have less than a dozen members. Why did they not list down the names of these 395 Malay NGOs? They couldn’t because these NGOs do not exist. And certainly these 1.5 million members do not exist either.

Saiful is actually the runner of a well-known Malay gangster called Drs Suleiman a.k.a. Man Brandy. Man Brandy used to sell ganja around the Kampong Baru mosque area in the days before May 13. He then escaped to Indonesia when the police hunted him down for murder and that was where be bought his very impressive ‘Drs’ title. Later he came back to Malaysia and was made the Deputy Minister of Health after he won the Titiwangsa Parliament seat. It is a shame he did not legalise ganja and recommend it as a health weed when he was the Deputy Minister of Health. Now it is too late.

The mastermind behind DAMAI MALAYSIA is Mamak Rezal Merican Naina Merican of GPMS. Their job is to stir the Malays into a feeding frenzy like what Datuk Harun Idris did on 13 May 1969. Unfortunately the effort failed. The Malays today are not like the Malays of 1969 and it is not so easy to incite them into an anti-non-Malay frenzy like how they did on 13 May 1969. Even the rumours they spread and the SMSess they circulated did not work. And the so-called PEKIDA rally in Kampong Baru on Sunday, 16 December 2007, the supposedly prelude to May 13 II, did not happen as planned. Nobody turned up except for the truckloads of riot police and Special Branch officers who patrolled a deserted street. It reminds me of how they cordoned an empty Dataran Merdeka on 10 November 2007.

But there is something else that happened during this same period and which went unnoticed and unreported. On 10 December 2007, the Attorney-General wrote the Deputy Minister of Internal Security a letter asking him to release Goh Cheng Poh a.k.a ‘Tengku’ Goh from Restricted Residence. As reported earlier, Tengku Goh is number two to BK Tan, the head honcho of the organised crime syndicate that controls the drugs, prostitution, loan-sharking and illegal gambling network all over Malaysia. He also controls the police computerised information system.

The next day, Johari Baharum released Tengku Goh in spite of the fact he has in his possession half a dozen signed Affidavits and other damaging evidence which implicates top police personnel with having links with the underworld. Two of these Affidavits are in fact signed by the underworld figures themselves.

Johari’s action of releasing Tengku Goh has just hung the many police officers plus the Director of the Commercial Crime Division who were instrumental in detaining Tengku Goh. What Johari is ‘saying’ is that he agrees Tengku Goh is a victim of a mala fide detention and that all the allegations against the latter are false. This can only mean that the police are crooked while the so-called ‘crime boss’ is an innocent victim of trumped-up charges.

Yes, while the HINDRAF, PEKIDA and DAMAI MALAYSIA brouhaha kept us distracted, a crime boss is quietly released on the personal instruction of the Attorney-General. And the police officers who detained him are going to be crucified for ‘wrongfully’ detaining this crime boss. And the agency that has been tasked with fixing up the police officers is the Anti-Corruption Agency which is taking action against the police officers, not for the crime of corruption but for the ‘technical’ offence of wrongly filling in the forms. And the HINDRAF 5 are detained under Ministerial order under Section 8 and not Section 73 of the Internal Security Act so that the Special Branch and Bukit Aman can’t get their hands on them and interrogate them to get to the bottom of the whole thing.

Anyway, we have previously reported in great detail this whole affair of the links between the Royal Malaysian Police and the organised crime syndicate. The 11 earlier episodes can be read below -- so we really do not need to recap the events thus far. Suffice to say we conclude this Twelfth Episode the way we had forecasted -- and that is the boss of bosses of the underworld syndicate walks free. You can’t say that Malaysia Today lies or is wrong in its forecast, though this time around I wish we had been wrong.

All that crap we Malaysians are being fed with. I suppose Malaysians are so stupid they deserve this.

19/18: Samy Vellu happy murder bid charge against 31 dropped

The Star
MIC president Datuk Seri S. Samy Vellu has thanked Attorney-General Tan Sri Gani Patail for dropping the attempted murder charge against 31 people who were involved in the Hindraf illegal demonstration on Nov 25.

“I am very happy the courts freed some of the detainees of all charges while bail was given to the other detainees,” he said in a statement.

“He (Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi) has shown his caring nature and responsibility as a prime minister for all races,” he added.

Samy Vellu said the Barisan Nasional Government had shown sympathy towards the suffering and sadness of families of the detainees.

“The Government wants them to return to society and continue with their daily life as responsible and law-abiding citizens,” he said.

Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz welcomed the Attorney-General’s move to drop the charge against the protesters.

“We are not against Indians or after their blood but we are against any extremist, regardless of race,” he said when met at the Parliament lobby yesterday.

“They (protesters) have since come forward, and stated that they regretted their actions and would not participate in such activities in the future,” he said, adding that the Attorney-General had taken their appeals into consideration.

Several groups had appealed to the Attorney-General to drop the charge against the 31, who included students, farmers, drivers and odd-job workers.

Their parents, too, made tearful appeals for their release, claiming their children joined the rally without realising the consequences, were misled by Hindraf and hoodwinked into believing it was for a worthy cause.

Opposition Leader Lim Kit Siang also welcomed the Attorney-General’s move to drop the attempted murder charge but said he should have withdrawn all charges.

He also called on the Attorney-General and the Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Musa Hassan to substantiate or withdraw their allegations against Hindraf leaders of terrorist links.

18/12: Najib: Destructive elements cannot be allowed to prevail

The Star

The Government cannot allow “destructive elements” to jeopardise the racial unity which had been carefully nurtured by Malaysia’s founding fathers, said Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak.
He said this would be a betrayal to those who had helped to shape Malaysia into the prosperous and peaceful country it is today.

“Let us not sacrifice the efforts of our nation’s heroes,” he said before launching the Malaysian Youth Council’s inaugural Youth Sports and Culture Festival at Stadium Indera Mulia yesterday.

“If we do not come to a consensus, we will lose as a nation. We must defend this priceless legacy and show that we love our country,” he added.

Najib said organisations such as the MYC played a key role in awakening talents and nurturing future leaders among the young.

Through sports and other activities, youths of all ethnic groups would have the opportunity to interact with each other, said Najib.

“They would be able to see not their differences but the friendships they make,” he added.

Earlier, Perak Mentri Besar Datuk Seri Mohamad Tajol Rosli Ghazali said sports and cultural activities were important components in the lives of all youths.

“Sports knows no racial boundaries and instils the spirit of sportsmanship, while culture is the light that brings colour to civilisation,” he said.

Also present were Youth and Sports Minister Datuk Seri Azalina Othman Said, council president Datuk Shamsul Anuar Nasarah and other officials.

18/12: Najib: Destructive elements cannot be allowed to prevail

The Star

The Government cannot allow “destructive elements” to jeopardise the racial unity which had been carefully nurtured by Malaysia’s founding fathers, said Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak.
He said this would be a betrayal to those who had helped to shape Malaysia into the prosperous and peaceful country it is today.

“Let us not sacrifice the efforts of our nation’s heroes,” he said before launching the Malaysian Youth Council’s inaugural Youth Sports and Culture Festival at Stadium Indera Mulia yesterday.

“If we do not come to a consensus, we will lose as a nation. We must defend this priceless legacy and show that we love our country,” he added.

Najib said organisations such as the MYC played a key role in awakening talents and nurturing future leaders among the young.

Through sports and other activities, youths of all ethnic groups would have the opportunity to interact with each other, said Najib.

“They would be able to see not their differences but the friendships they make,” he added.

Earlier, Perak Mentri Besar Datuk Seri Mohamad Tajol Rosli Ghazali said sports and cultural activities were important components in the lives of all youths.

“Sports knows no racial boundaries and instils the spirit of sportsmanship, while culture is the light that brings colour to civilisation,” he said.

Also present were Youth and Sports Minister Datuk Seri Azalina Othman Said, council president Datuk Shamsul Anuar Nasarah and other officials.

18/12: I won’t disappoint the people

The Star

Support me and I will not disappoint you, said Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi.
He said the support of the people gave him a greater sense of responsibility to strive even harder to ensure prosperity, harmony and development without leaving out any group.

“When people express their support, I feel my responsibility is greater. I feel I have to have greater determination, have to work harder. I will not disappoint the people.

“I do not want to disappoint you. If I have to work hard, I will work hard for you and the future of the country,” Abdullah told 5,000 people at a dinner in Puchong Indah.

He said he was pleased that the majority of the people did not want any disturbance including street demonstrations to ruin their business and upset their daily life.

“I value the relationship among Malaysians. I value the multi-ethnicity in the country. This is what gives hope for the future of the country,” he said.

He said this factor was taken into consideration in Barisan Nasional which subscribed to solidarity, cooperation, consultation and consensus.

He said that at Cabinet-level, decisions were made on consensus and that if there was disagreement, the discussions would continue until everyone concurred.

“Only then, can we achieve progress,” he said.

Abdullah said he was happy to see people of the various communities mingling together without fear at the dinner, demonstrating that solidarity was at its best.

At another function in Kuala Selangor, Abdullah said he wanted to see Selangor, which has successfully developed its manufacturing and agriculture sectors, move into agro-based industries.

“It is time to look into ways to bring added value and profits from agricultural produce and this can be done by developing agro-based industries,” he said when visiting a smoked catfish plant yesterday.

He said he was happy that the plant helped save catfish breeders who were facing bleak prospects when oversupply caused catfish prices to plunge.

Abdullah commended the Selangor Government and Mentri Besar Datuk Seri Dr Mohamad Khir Toyo for looking into innovative farming and manufacturing methods.

“Whenever I ask him (Dr Khir) to do something his answer is always 'we will do it' and he has never disappointed me,” he said.

He added that smoked catfish production was one of the projects he had asked Dr Khir to look into.

Abdullah also called on farmers to stop depending solely on the sale of their raw produce and adopt innovative processing methods to add value and price to their goods.

“We have moved from traditional to modern farming and it is now time to head into ‘new farming’ with agro-based industries,” he said.

16/12: Government to arrest more people under ISA

The Government will soon invoke the Internal Security Act (ISA) on several other people who orchestrated or took part in illegal assemblies in the capital, said Deputy Internal Security Minister Datuk Mohd Johari Baharum.

He said all of them were involved in masterminding the unlawful gatherings with racial undertones.

“We already have their names and the police will soon arrest them,” he said after attending a meet-the-people session here yesterday.

Johari said the ISA would only be invoked if there were enough evidence of one’s involvement in activities that could threaten national security.

He said the five Hindraf leaders were detained under the ISA on Thursday because there was evidence of sedition and their involvement in activities that threatened national security. – Bernama

16/12: Talk of KL racial clashes 'just rumours'

Not true that Malays and Hindraf supporters are holding rallies: Abdullah

By Hazlin Hassan, Malaysia Correspondent
The Straits Times

MALAYSIA'S Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi has dismissed SMS messages about racial clashes as fear-inciting rumours.

He also refuted talk that Malays would be congregating today in Kampung Baru, a Malay enclave about 1km from the Petronas Twin Towers, while supporters of the Hindu Rights Action Force (Hindraf) would gather at the Batu Caves.

'They are mere rumours. The Malays have not said anything about holding any gathering tomorrow. As far as I know, there's none,' he said after chairing the Umno Supreme Council meeting here yesterday.

'Don't make up stories and scare people,' he said.

State news agency Bernama said rumours of racial unrest are being spread verbally, via SMS messages and on the Internet.

Datuk Seri Abdullah said the police would take appropriate action against those bent on undermining national security and harmony.

Earlier, Malaysia's police chief, Tan Sri Musa Hassan, warned that those behind the SMS rumours could be detained under the Internal Security Act (ISA).

'We have our intelligence and we are prepared,' he said.

The situation in Kampung Baru late yesterday appeared calm as people gathered for a late-night bite at popular food stalls.

A road block manned by about half a dozen policemen was spotted at a main road in Kampung Baru. Police road blocks are usually set up in areas around the Twin Towers but not in the Kampung Baru area.

Datuk Seri Abdullah said street demonstrations would not force the government into making changes.

Chairing the party's Supreme Council meeting on Friday, he stressed that policies which had been drafted or changed were done through proper channels.

He said this ensured that democracy in Malaysia remained intact and the people appreciated it.

The Prime Minister, who is also the Internal Security Minister, also said he had asked Attorney-General Abdul Gani Patail to consider the appeals by 31 people who took part in an illegal demonstration at the Batu Caves last month, and drop the attempted murder charges against them.

Datuk Seri Abdullah said he sympathised with them and believed that they were misled by the group behind the illegal assemblies on Nov 25.

Meanwhile, Deputy Prime Minister Najib Razak, told the United States to look at its own backyard first, when asked to comment on a US State Department demand that Malaysia give a fair trial to five Indian activists detained under the ISA.

'Can they give a fair trial to the detainees in Guantanamo Bay? We'll respond only if they do so,' Datuk Seri Najib told a press conference on Friday.

The detention camp at Guantanamo Bay holds people the US accuses of being terrorist operatives.

On Thursday, five key leaders of Hindraf, which organised a mass anti-government rally last month in Kuala Lumpur, were arrested under the ISA.

They were ordered to be detained for two years and taken to the Kamunting detention centre in Taiping, Perak.