(The Star) - State Opposition leader Datuk Azhar Ibrahim (BN-Penaga) shocked pressmen and visitors to the assembly when he took a swipe at an English daily reporter, saying the paper was not even good enough to wipe his buttocks.
As he said this, he gestured to his buttocks.
Azhar’s outburst came after he accused the daily of making up a quote from him in an article published Tuesday.
“I never spoke to any reporter from that daily,” he said, before angrily demanding that the reporter identify himself.
State Assembly Speaker Datuk Abdul Halim Hussain then warned Azhar against addressing the media while the reporter looked stunned and confused as he had not quoted Azhar in the story.
The incident was sparked by Seri Delima assemblyman R.S.N. Rayer who accused Azhar of condoning a protest by Barisan Nasional Youth members at the state assembly building on Monday.
Azhar initially laughed off the matter by brushing off Rayer as a “joker” but got agitated when Rayer lambasted him for his alleged comments that he purportedly approved of the incident.
The exchange between the two dragged on for more than half-an-hour with insults like “gangster”, “cartoon (character)” and “old man” hurled in the house.
Later, during the lunch break, Azhar told reporters that he had gone through the paper’s report and found that his name had not been mentioned.
“I said those remarks because Rayer stated that I endorsed the protest and made a statement (claiming so) in the daily.
“He did not say ‘Barisan Nasional leaders’ (as was stated in the story) — he said ‘Opposition Leader’ which is me.
“Whatever said in the chambers has to be true. You cannot lie in there, so I believed him,” he said.
He added it was now Rayer’s duty to retract his statement in the chambers.
“If he retracts (his statement), I will retract (my statement) as well.
“My comments were not extreme. Imagine how I felt at that moment thinking the reporter had quoted me without interviewing me? Of course I was angry,” he said.
esday, 01 December 2009 A judge rules the opposition leader must face trial sometime after January 25 on perversion charges
Kuala Lumpur High Court Judge Mohamad Zabidin Mohd Diah ruled Tuesday as expected that Anwar Ibrahim must stand trial in January on charges that the opposition leader had consensual sex with a former male aide in June of 2008.
It is the second time the 62-yar-old Anwar has faced sexual perversion charges in a case that is as much a trial of the Malaysian judicial system. He was jailed for six years in 1999 on charges of sodomizing his driver in a trial that was widely condemned as trumped up, with the prosecution changing both the date and the location where the offense occurred. He was repeatedly beaten in prison and showed up for trial with a black eye and bruises on his arms and today continues to suffer from back problems from the beatings.
Similar objections of falsification of evidence have been raised to the current affair by human rights organizations, which charge the trial is a bid to once again derail Anwar's political career. Sodomy is a crime punishable by up to 20 years imprisonment and caning. Anwar led the Pakatan Rakyat opposition coalition to unprecedented political gains in March 2008 elections that broke the ruling Barisan Nasional coalition's 50-year two thirds majority in the Malaysian parliament.
Raja Petra Kamaruddin, the editor of the popular internet political blog Malaysia Today, has repeatedly tied the youth, Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan, to Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak, who was deputy prime minister when the charges and was named prime minister in April. He and other critics have also repeatedly tied Najib to the murder of Altantuya Shaariibuu, a Mongolian translator who was murdered in October of 2006.
However, the government legal apparatus has carefully avoided attempting to discern any connection between Najib and the murder, despite the fact that two of his elite bodyguards were convicted of killing the woman. Altantuya was picked up by the two bodyguards on orders of his chief of staff but neither Najib nor the chief of staff was ever questioned or asked to be witnesses in the trial.
Anwar has been attempting to delay the current trial or have it dismissed for months. He and his lawyers allege they have not been given access to evidence held by the prosecution that they claim would prove he is not guilty of the crime. He has repeatedly accused the Attorney General's office of bringing the charges against him as part of a political conspiracy
"We're quite in a quagmire," Sankara Nair, Anwar's lawyer, told reporters. "How can we craft our defence unless we have all our data?"
"I didn't expect anything different," Anwar told reporters after the judge's verdict. "The manner in which the case is proceeding seems worrying. I think we are in for a tough battle but we have compelling arguments. We have facts."
Both government and private doctors filed reports saying they had found no evidence of forced penetration of the former aide, Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan, who was 23 at the time of the alleged offense. The prosecution, however, allege that they have additional evidence.
In particular, Dr Mohamad Osman examined Saiful at Hospital Pusrawi Sdn Bhd in Kuala Lumpur on June 28 of 2008 after he had gone to the hospital to complain about pain he said he was suffering in his anus. He allegedly told hospital personnel he had been assaulted by a "very important person." Osman filed a report saying he found no evidence of penetration or scarring that would have occurred from forcible entry. The physician suggested that the youth obtain another diagnosis at a government hospital, where doctors also refused to confirm a diagnosis of sodomy. Nonetheless, Saiful filed the assault report at a nearby police kiosk four hours later.
After Osman made the report indicating no sexual assault had taken place, police picked up the doctor and detained him to attempt to persuade him to change his diagnosis, according to the website Malaysia Today. In a telephone interview with Asia Sentinel, Deputy Inspector General of Police Ismail Omar confirmed that Dr Mohamad had been questioned, but said he had never been detained.
There have been other inconsistencies. The prosecution ultimately charged the opposition leader with consensual sex of a perverted nature rather than forcible sodomy, raising the question why Saiful hadn't been charged as well.
Anwar, formerly the deputy prime minister and finance minister, broke with Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad amid the 1997-1998 Asian Financial Crisis and ultimately led tens of thousands of people in opposition to government policies before being arrested and charged with corruption and perversion.
In the 1999 case, the Committee on the Human Rights of Parliamentarians in Geneva,Switzerland, charged that "There are reportedly serious inconsistencies in the different testimonies given by the key witnesses. One of the senior police officers whom Mr. Ibrahim allegedly directed to have statements withdrawn, when called by the prosecution, produced a report he had written to Prime Minister Mahathir in 1997, stating that the sexual allegations were groundless and "deliberately created" as part of a conspiracy. In early January 1999, the government chemist who had conducted DNA tests of stains on a mattress conceded that the stains could have been planted by police and that the tests could not warrant a conviction, The senior lawyer from the Attorney General's Chambers added that it had more such forensic and oral evidence to support the sodomy charge."
Opposition leader | People’s Justice Party | Malaysia
Two decades ago, it would have been impossible to imagine Anwar pulling together rural Malays, ethnic Indians and Chinese, and Islamists into a coherent political bloc. Back then, Anwar was deputy prime minister in a de facto single-party state that espoused preferential treatment for ethnic Malays. It was a policy that Anwar had pushed from his days as a youth leader right up until 1997, when he denounced his patron, then-Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad, for corruption. He would spend the next six years in solitary confinement on trumped-up charges for that political betrayal. And he would leave jail in 2004 with a bold message for change in a country now at the forefront of the struggle for democracy in the Muslim world. Today, Anwar’s political career is blossoming, despite a new, politically motivated indictment. Abroad, he has become an outspoken advocate of religious tolerance.
He sat down with Foreign Policy to talk about his big ideas:
On Muslim countries and the West: You can’t just erase a period of imperialism and colonialism. You can’t erase the fault lines, the bad policies, the failed policies, the war in Iraq, and support for dictators. That to me is the reality. But what is the problem? When you … apportion the blame only to the West or the United States. They want to deflect from the issue of repression, endemic corruption, and destruction of the institutions of governance.
On his time in prison: I spent a lot of time reading. I decided to focus on the great works and the classics. Friends from around the world were sending books, but it takes months for [the prison] to vet them. There came a book on the Green Revolution at that time. The officer said, “Anything revolution — out!” even though it was about agriculture. But the books kept coming. The officers were not even graduates, and [the books] were in English. They would say, “Anwar, out of 10 books, can you send back one?” So I would select something I had already read or something I was not interested in and say, “We should reject this.”
On politics: Of course, you simplify the arguments [for politics], but the central thesis remains constant. People say, “Anwar, you are opportunistic. How can you talk about Islam and the Quran here, and then you talk about Shakespeare and quote Jefferson or Edmund Burke?” I say, it depends on the audience. You can’t talk about Edmund Burke in some remote village in Afghanistan. Then you go to Kuala Lumpur and you quote T.S. Eliot. If I quote the Quran all the time to a group of lawyers, [they will think] I am a mullah from somewhere!
A total of 304,358 Malaysians left the country between March last year and August this year for better education, career and business prospects, Deputy Foreign Minister A Kohilan Pillay told Parliament yesterday. This is a big leap from 139,696 Malaysians who migrated to other countries in 2007.
This works out to some 630 Malaysians leaving the country every day.
Can Malaysia afford such a continuing brain drain?
This is a big vote of no confidence not only in the Abdullah premiership but also in the present Najib administration.
In Singapore last month, the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak said the Malaysian Government is reaching out to Malaysians abroad to help promote the country.
It is a most extraordinary way of reaching out to Malaysians abroad by persisting with political, economic, educational and nation-building policies which strengthen the push-factors and expedite the brain drain from Malaysia.
I’m no economist, but isn’t one of the reasons a GST is a bad idea the fact that it burdens everyone without regard to their economic standing?
Thus, the poor would have to pay the same percentage GST as rich people.
I suppose this is like the issue of petrol subsidies. The way BN was handling it last year meant that the increased burden was shared ‘equally’ by rich and poor alike.
I imagine that a more (pakatan? :P) rakyat-centric economic policy would be one where the poor don’t have to bear even more economic burdens than the ones they are already struggling to deal with.
But perhaps Najib and his filthy rich cronies aren’t too keen about pulling their weight in the nation’s economy.
Ingat gambar ini, aksi membakar salinan dokumen rasuah yang mengakibatkan che'GuBard 'hendak' disaman JAS kerana mencemarkan alam. sila klik sini dan sila klik sini untuk membaca lanjut.
Ini gambar semalam Umno demo depan Dewan DUN Pulau Pinang, sama juga bakar tapi mana JAS.....Polis pun di lihat memberikan ruang dan kerjasama bagus sepanjang demo termasuk demo di Kota Bharu.... kalau che'GuBard kata ada yang jadi kuda Bn depa marah tapi.... iskh iskh...
Pada3 Disember 2009, akan diadakan Himpunan bersama Solidariti Anak Muda (SAMM) dan Solidariti Mahasiswa Malaysia (SMM) menghantar laporan rasmi ke Jabatan Siasatan Jenayah Perdagangan PDRM, 9.00 pagi, berkumpul depan pintu utama i/pejabat PDRM Bukit Aman (kaw. letak kereta Tasik Perdana, KL) harap Polis dapat beri kerjasama ..... tapi JAS tak payah 'standby' sebab kali ini tak ada bakar-bakar.... hahahaha.....
Apapun cheGuBard sokong kebebasan berhimpun dan menyatakan pendapat secara terbuka, cuma harap polis boleh bertindak berdasarkan undang - undang dan prinsip hak asasi bukan umpama kaldai yang ikut tuan mana yang bagi makan......
Humanitarian groups have criticised overcrowded and insanitary conditions in the camps [AFP]
More than 120,000 Tamil civilians held in state-run detention camps in Sri Lanka are to be allowed to leave the facilities and return home, the government has said.
Restrictions on the Tamils, who have remained in the camps since the government's victory over separatist Tamil Tiger fighters earlier in the year, will be lifted on Tuesday, officials said.
"There will be no restrictions on displaced people from December 1," N Thirugnanasampanther, a government civil servant in Vavuniya, was quoted by the AFP news agency as saying.
"They have to inform the army post they are leaving and can come and go as they wish."
The Tamils have been held in the heavily-guarded camps in Vavuniya district, 260km north of Colombo, since the government defeated the Tamil Tigers in May, ending the island's long-running civil war.
About 128,000 men, women and children displaced by the conflict are thought to be in the camps.
Difficult task
An initial group of around 40,000 Tamil detainees were released from the camp in late October.
But despite Tuesday's opening of the camps, many detainees are expected to face a difficult task returning to their home villages in areas still littered with mines and other dangerous leftovers from the war.
Thirugnanasampanther said efforts to resettle the detainees were continuing as quickly as possible, with authorities stepping up mine clearing work in the former combat zone.
International pressure has been growing on the Sri Lankan government to free the Tamil detainees from the camps.
Human rights have condemned the detention as an illegal form of collective punishment for Tamils following the government's victory in the war.
The government however has said it needs to screen the detainees to weed out former fighters who may be hiding among them.
'Security concerns remain'
Gordon Weiss, UN spokesman for Sri Lanka, told Al Jazeera: "It represents a big step from six weeks ago when there was a quarter of a million people in the camps and no movement at all.
"Security concerns still remain and people are not leaving the area particularly ... for a number of reasons - their homes have been destroyed or the areas have mines. So many are confined to the Buna area.
"It is a relatively short period after a 30-year war so the government is not about to lower its security posture."
Rights groups and the United Nations have also criticised conditions in the camps, saying many detainees have been forced to live in poor, overcrowded and insanitary conditions that are breeding grounds for disease.
The Sri Lankan government has promised to close the camps by the end of January.
Letter to Prime Minister and Minister of Housing and Local Government dated on 1/12/2009
YAB/YB
Re: Indian mini market denied licence. (Tip of iceberg of Indians denied licences).
We refer to the above matter where Mr.G.Subramaniam, a longstanding and dying breed of Indian mini market owner at Jalan Besar, Lanchang, Pahang was denied his right to continue with his 26 year old mini market business, by being denied his license. (The Star 25/11/09 at page N4). Even the Indian MIC ADUN for Sabai meeting the President of the Temerloh Municipal Council did not work (NST 28/11/09 at page N22). The President refuses to take the instructions of this ADUN boss because the boss is an Indian. This is a fact and reality even at the lowest levels of government administration in Malaysia. Even though Mr.G Subramaniam had his license for 25 years because he is abusinessman of old. Almost all the current generation Indians have been denied not only mini market but the various licenses to do business.
Over the years we have received thousands of complaints from the Malaysian Indians who have been denied licenses to do even petty trading vis a vis denied business opportunities. In the 2010 Budget RM 8.8 Billion has been allocated for the small and Medium Scale( SME) Entrepreneurs to benefit 46,000 SMEs,’ and RM 200 Million for Tekun small business loans (NST and Star Headlines 23/10/09).
But let alone these loans even the basic license to do business has been denied. To the contrary thousands of illegal immigrants especially Indonesiansand Rohingya, Muslim Myanmars and Bangladeshis are allowed to trade and do business freely for exampleat the Pasar Borong Selayang, Kerinchi food stalls, in numerous fruit and food stalls in pasar malams etc nationwide.
Article 8 of the Federal Constitution provides for equality before the law and the Malaysian Indians in particular should not be excluded from the National mainstream development of Malaysia. We note that there are almost zero Indians owned outlets, for example Petronas , Shell, Esso Stations, KFC, Mc Donalds, A & W outlets, low rentals Highway Rest area food tidbit and fruit stalls and the various Municipal Council Mara, UDA etc food court and other shop lots nationwide.
The mid-term review of the Ninth Malaysia Plan reports the creation of 67,533 new (Malay/Muslim) entrepreneurs, 10,618 micro, small and medium sized (Malay/Muslim) industries, upgraded, 24,449 micro businesses (UM 26/6/08 at page 20)
But almost all of the deserving Indians have been excluded. Why exclude the Indians in especially these areas of the national mainstream development of Malaysia?
The crime and gangsterism problem among the Indians can be drastically brought down if only if the Indians are also given the very same business opportunities like the Malay Muslims.
Shooting dead suspected Indian criminals is not the answer. Giving them these business opportunities as given to the Malay Muslims is the answer and certainly the way forward. We are saddened that even after 52 years of independence and Malaysia having developed so well to the point of having the world’s tallest twin towers, and a black Obama being elected the President of the world’s most powerful country, we are still plagued by racism and religious extremism at every level of society.
We hereby urge your good self to direct the Lanchang Municipal Council to issue the yearly renewed Mini Market license to the aforementioned Mr. G. Subramaniam backdated from 2005 to 2009 and continuing indefinitely thereafter.
We urge your good self to issue a directive to especially all the City, Municipal and Local Councils and all other government business regulating authorities to stop their direct and indirect discriminatory practices against in particular the deserving Malaysian Indians but to grant them the necessary licenses and permits and facilitate their businesses accordingly.
Through these columns I intend to present a picture of the marginalization of the Indian poor in Malaysia and also try and put forth a coherent explanation of how it happened. I am going to do this in several parts. I am doing this to break the myth that what has happened to the Indian poor in the country is inevitable. That it all happened because they lack values, they lack religion, they watch too much Astro, they are basicaly violent and such other myths as our current day theoreticians both within the community as outside the community will have us believe.
Here is the first part.
First some basic information that will help us understand the story that will be presented a little better.
Basic data of Malaysia
Population by ethnic group Malaysia, 2010
Total
Malay
Other Bumiputera
Chinese
Indian
Others
26,784,965
14,749,378
3,197,993
6,520,559
1,969,343
347,692
100%
55.1%
12%
24.3%
7.4%
1.2%
As can be seen from this data Indians form 7.4% of the total population of Malaysia in a census projection from the Department of Statistics, Government of Malaysia. The Indians are a minority group, a distinct minority group.
During the period since the Independence of the per capita Gross Domestic Product ( GDP), an indicator of the economic progress and status of a country – just like your salary, rose from about RM 2500 per year in 1960 to RM15,000 in 2008. Quite a performance. The economy changed from being primarily a commodity producing & agricultural economy (like production of rubber and palm oil) to a manufacturing orientated economy. See table below:
% of GDP
1960
2008
Agriculture
40
9.7
Manufacturing
9
44.6
The Indians were largely involved in the rubber plantations as tappers in a relatively modern form of agricultural production at the inception of the nation. Though it is not food, that was produced, it was a cash crop and it was grown – so we call it agriculture. Since then there has been a tremendous shift in the structure of the economy. The plantation economy slowly gave way to an industrial economy. Factories started to replace the rubber estates as the main feature of the economy.
While this was happening Malaysian politics also went through significant change. The 4 key phases in the development of the politics are the period 1957 – 1969, 1969 – 1981. 1981 -2004, 2004 - 2008. Each of these phases is characterized by key historical phenomena that both chronicles what has happened in Malysian politics as well as explain how it all happened.
While these were occurring, the Indian population, a minority to start with, coupled with the fact that they were in the lowest rung of Malaysian society experienced significant outward push from the mainstream of all these developments –economic, political and social.
The Indians have not benefited in equal measures as the other communities in spite of the rapid economic development that the country experienced in this period. In these columns I will try to set out the various forms of the push out or marginalization that the Indian poor faced in these various phases and why this has happened. Essentailly we all know what has happened - but we know them as sporadic and separate events. What I will attempt to do is to connect all these events, join the dots so to speak, and draw a big picture for you all to see - hopefully making the truth clearer.
But first let me start with what marginalization means:
In sociology, marginalisation is the social process of becoming or being made marginal - to be sent to the fringes, out of the mainstream; or to confine to a lower social standing. make seem unimportant “the marginalization of the underclass” is a clear example. In its most extreme form, marginalization can exterminate groups.
Many communities experience marginalization. As a result of marginalization, communities have lost their land, were forced into destitute areas, lost their traditional sources of income, and were excluded from the labour market. Additionally, communities have lost their culture and values and lost their rights in society .
Today the Malaysian Indian community is marginalized from Malaysian society as a result of the development of practices, policies and programs that only meet the needs of the power elite but not the needs of the marginalized Indian poor. This marginalization is also significantly connected to the power elite maintaining and enforcing ways by which we think and talk about things. The way we have been conditioned by the information trickling to us, or by way people talk around us, we may even have difficulty acknowledging that marginalization has occurred to the Indian community in Malaysia.
This is my task, to make it very clear, what has happened and why it has happened.
The marginalizationexperienced by the Indians in Malaysia is multifaceted. Specifically they can be categorized into:
1) Economic marginalization
To be denied opportunities for participating productively in the economic development of the nation. To have been pushed out of the mainstream of economic development.
2) Political marginalization
To be denied equal opportunity to participate in the decision making processes relating to allocation of the national resource or the social and economic development of the community. Political clout taken away by virtue of the political processes of the country. In the process losing political rights as a citizen and as a minority community.
3) Social marginalization
To be cast aside socially as the dreg with the social stereotypes as labourers, drunks, untrustworthy individuals, black and smelly fellows, dependent and always complaining to name a few of the stereotypes usually associated with being Indian poor in Malaysia. The result of all this is the blocking of the Indian poor from developing pride as worthy individuals, and as a community of poor being denied the opportunities for practicing and developing the salient culture of the Indians.
I will discuss each of these aspects of marginalization in the subsequent parts. I will also discuss the sociological basis of all of this. I will try to break the stereotyped explanations offered for the state of the Indian community and show how through the progress of the development of Malaysian society, this outcome has occcurred. It has nothing to do with the Indianness in all of us – as current discourse will have us believe. It has only to do with the political economy of the country.
We have let the Indians in Malaysia suffer for too long. We ought to have a programme of affirmative action in place. We ought to have a sound programme for alleviation of poverty for the Indians and radically improve their conditions through political action, education and cultural preservation. We ought to extract the enabling aspects of culture though and perhaps reconstruct the our understanding of the relationship between culture and human progress.
I am happy to read of the achievement of our Malaysian children in their struggle through the rigour of Malaysian education system and through the sometimes excruciating circumstances in life. Indeed they are the cream of Malaysian's aspiring Bumiputera class of aspiring intellectuals who ought to be "offered" places in Malaysia's top schools.
CONGRATULATIONS to the children, their parents, and their teachers.
I think MRSM system, well-equipped with excellent facilities and faculty should be able to meet the needs of these children.
I have a few suggestions that need to be attended to, namely:
2. Get the school counselor to help with the process
3. Monitor the application by following up with the Bahagian Pelajaran Menengah.
4. Write to the Chairman of MARA insisting how these children will excel in the MRSM system 5. Seek information on the quota allowed for 'non-Bumiputra' children and ask for the rationale. 6. Request for the statistics of the number of non-Bumiputra students who gained admission to MRSM since 1972, the year MRSM was established.
I believe MARA, a progressive governmental body, should be able to provide you and your organization with the relevant information to move forward.
I wish you all the best and congratulations to the higher achievers too. I am also sharing a piece I wrote on the plight of those who need to be rehumanizaed.
No MRSM for 817 flying colours and cream of Tamil school pupils.
The headlines in all there Tamil dailies today 20/11/2009 scream and boast of 817 Tamil school pupils having scored 7As’. So did the Malay Mail sub headlines today “Flying colors” (Malay Mail 20/11/2009 at page 9) with a group of cheering high achieving Indian students in colour photo. New Straits Times sub headlines “ Tamil schools do well” (NST 20/11/2009 at page 13) and also in the Malay newspapers.
The No 1 UMNO Mandore party screams even louder but is unable to deliver or secure them places in the scores of elite MSRM and fully residential schools. We note that another leading UMNO mandore NGO also screams credit but diverts away from the next forward moving step ie place for these 817 Tamil school pupils in the said MRSM and fully residential schools. But what all these newspapers do not report is that all these 817 7As’ scoring Tamil school pupils are excluded to the fully residential elite schools Maktab Rendah Sains Mara (MRSM) throughout the country.
We note that there are 6, 000 places in 54 (Utusan Malaysia 8/11/2008 at page 12) fully residential schools and another 5, 100 places in Maktab Rendah Sains Mara (MRSM) colleges (Utusan Malaysia 19/11/2008 at page 10). But we are not aware of single Indian pupil in any of the aforesaid colleges and schools. Of course UMNO some years ago claimed that there are 10% non Malays in MSRM. But the name list of this 10% has never been made public because UMNO expects us to believe them. No more though after the 25th November 2007 Hindraf Rally! In any event why not publish the names and I/C numbers in the Education Ministry Website if it indeed is the truth. Why is there no transparency?
Article 8 of the same provides for the equal protection under the law.
This our request is in compliance with Article 8 and 12 of the Federal Coctitution which provides that:
Article 8
Equality
1) All persons are equal before the law and entitled to the equal protection of the law.
Article 12
Rights in respect of education
1) Without prejudice to the generality of Article 8, there shall be no discrimination against any citizen on the grounds only of religion, race, descent or place of birth –
(a) in the administration of any educational institution maintained by
by a public authority, and in particular, the admission of pupils or students or the payment of fees; or
(b) in providing out of the funds of a public authority financial aid for the
maintenance or education of pupils or students in any educational institution(weather or not maintained by public authority and whether within or outside the Federation ).
This has been UMNO’s 52 year old rule through their Indian political and NGO mandores to keep the Malaysian Indians out of the Nation mainstream education system vis a vis the National Mainstream Development of Malaysia.
These UMNO mandore Indian political parties and NGOs’ get to make something for themselves in return for doing the “perfect” mandore job of highlighting, amplifying and creating a (false) feel good feeling and all round One Malaysia happiness in especially the Tamil newspapers, Tamil Radio and Tamil TV news propaganda. (Note the extensive coverage hereinbelow) and also in the other UMNO controlled print and electronic media.
In the end the Indians have degenerated out of the National mainstream development of Malaysia and thus the critical Indian problems today.
The economic anarchy of capitalist society as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of the evil. We see before us a huge community of producers the members of which are unceasingly striving to deprive each other of the fruits of their collective labour - not by force, but on the whole in faithful compliance with legally established rules. - Albert Einstein in ‘Why Socialism?’ (1949)
What do I think of Western civilisation? I think it would be a very good idea. - Mohandas K Gandhi
Will Queen Elizabeth II of England pay for the 150-year suffering of Indian Malaysians? How would reparations be addressed in an age in which we are still mystified by newer forms of colonialism - the English Premier League, Malaysian Eton-clones, Oxbridge education, and British rock musicians such as the guitarist-astrophysicist Dr Brian May of the better-than-the-Beatles rock group Queen (and recently appointed chancellor of a Liverpool university)?
Who in British Malaya collaborated with the British East India company in facilitating the globalised system of indentured slavery? Will the current government now pay attention to the 50-year problems of Indian Malaysians?
We need to untangle this ideological mess and listen to the pulse of the nation. We are hyperventilating from the ills of a 50-year indentured self-designed pathological system of discriminatory servitude of the mind and body, fashioned after the style of colonialism.
We need a crash course in the history of reparation, slavery, and the declaration universal human rights. We need to understand the style of British colonialism as it collaborated with the local power elites of any colony it buried its tentacles in and sucked dry the blood, sweat and tears of the natives it dehumanised and sub-humanised.
We need to calculate how much the imperialists and the local chieftains gained from the trafficking of human labour - across time and space and throughout history.
In short, we need to educate ourselves on the anatomy, chemistry, anthropology and post-structurality of old and newer forms of imperialism. British imperialism has successfully structured a profitable system of the servitude of the body, mind and soul and has transferred this ideology onto the natives wishing to be "more British than their brown skins can handle".
We need to encourage our children to read about the system of indentured slavery - of thekangchuandkanganiand how the Malays were also relegated to becoming ‘reluctant’ producers of the colonial economy. The Malays’ reluctance led to the British designation "lazy native".
We need to also learn from the Orang Asli and the natives of each state and how their philosophy of developmentalism is more advanced that the programmes prescribed under the successive five-year Malaysia Plans. A philosophy of development that respects and is symbiotic with Nature is certainly more appropriate for cultural dignity that the one to which we have been subjected; one that exploits human beings and destroys the environment under the guise of ‘progress’.
Caged construction
Our history lessons mask the larger issue of traditional, modern and corporate control of the means of production of Malaya. We see the issue of race being played up from time immemorial; issue of convenience and necessity to the sustenance of the status quo and the proliferation of modern local oligopoly and plutocracy.
Our history classes have failed our generation that is in need of the bigger picture; ones that will allow us to see what is outside of our caged construction of historicising. Our historians, from the court propagandist Tun Sri Lanang to our modern historians written under the mental surveillance of the ruling parties, have not been true to the demand of the production of knowledge based on social and humanistic dimensions of factualising historical accounts.
We need to study the political-economy of the rubber and canning industry and the relationship between the British and the American empire as industrialisation began to take off.
The Indians in Malaysia have all the right to ask for reparation and even most importantly they have the rights as rightful citizens of Malaysia to demand for equality and equal opportunity as such accorded to the ‘bumiputera’. Every Malaysian must be given such rights.
Failure to do so we will all be guilty of practising neo-colonialism and we will one day be faced with similar issue of reparation; this time marginalised Malaysians against the independent government of Malaysia. How are we going to peacefully correct the imbalances if we do not learn from the history of international slavery, labour migration and human labour trafficking that, in the case of Hindraf, involved millions of Tamils from Tamil Nadu province? I once wrote a piece calling for all of us tohelpthe least privileged of our fellow Malaysians - the Indians. The piece called for the leaders to stop fighting and to help each other as well.
I wrote a passage on the need to help each other in the spirit of selflessness and collaboration: “It is time for the other races to engage in serious and sinceregotong-royongto help the poorest of the poor among the Indians. It is time that we become possessed with a new spirit of multi-cultural marhaenism. The great Indonesian leader Ahmed Soekarno popularised the concept of marhaenism as an antidote to the ideological battle against materialism, colonialism, dependency and imperialism. The thought that the top 10 percent of the richest Malaysians are earning more than 20 times compared to the 90 percent of the population is terrifying. What has become of this nation that promised a just distribution of wealth at the onset of Independence?"
Not a Hindu problem
Now we have a better scenario - we have the rights group that is beginning to pull together,-close ranks and demand for their basic human rights that have been denied. Not only their rights to be accorded places of worship and economic justice, but also the rights to look at history and ourselves and interrogate what actually happened and who actually was responsible for the misery, desolation and sustained abject poverty to which they have been subjected.
It is not a Hindu problem - it is universal problem that cuts across race and religion. If we believe in what religion has taught us about human dignity and the brotherhood and sisterhood of humanity, we will all be speaking in one voice rallying for those who demand for their rights to live with dignity.
In Hindraf, I believe there are Hindus, Muslims, Christians, Catholics, atheists, Buddhists, Sikhs, Bahais, Jains, etc rallying for the cause. In other words there are human beings speaking up for peace and social justice. It is the right of every Malaysian to lend support to their demands.
We have let the Indians in Malaysia suffer for too long. We ought to have a programme of affirmative action in place. We ought to have a sound programme for alleviation of poverty for the Indians and radically improve their conditions through political action, education and cultural preservation. We ought to extract the enabling aspects of culture though and perhaps reconstruct the our understanding of the relationship between culture and human progress.
But can the current political paradigm engineer a solution to the problems of the Malaysian Indians, as long as politics - after 50 years - is still British colonialist-imperialist-oppressive in nature? We have evolved into a sophisticated politically racist nation, hiding our discriminatory policies with the use of language that rationalises what the British imperialists brutally did in the open.
But our arguments cannot hold water any loner. Things are falling apart - deconstructed. The waves of demands, the frequency of rallies and the excavating of issues drawn from the archaeology of our fossilised arrogant knowledge - all these are symptoms of deconstructionism in our body politics. It is like the violent vomit of a rehabilitating cocaine addict undergoing treatment in a Buddhist monastery somewhere in northern Thailand.
We cannot continue to alienate each other through arguments on a ‘social contract’ that is alien from perhaps what Jean Jacques Rousseau wrote about some 300 years ago - a philosophy that inspired the founding of America, a nation of immigrants constantly struggling (albeit imperfectly) to meet the standards requirements of equality, equity and equal opportunity especially in education.
How do we come together, as Malaysians, as neo-bumiputeras free from false political-economic and ideological dichotomies of Malays versus non-Malays, bumi versus non-bumi and craft a better way of looking at our political, economic, social, cultural, psychological and spiritual destiny - so that we may continue to survive as a species for the next 50 years?
As a privileged Malaysian whose mother tongue is the Malay language and as one designated as a bumiputera, I want to see the false dichotomies destroyed and a new sense of social order emerging, based on a more just form of linguistic play designed as a new Merdeka game plan.
Think Malaysian - we do not have anything to lose except our mental chains. We have a lot to gain in seeing the oppressed be freed from the burden of history; one that is based on the march of materialism. We are essentially social beings, as Einstein would emphasise. Our economic design must address the socialism of existence.
Let us restructure of policies to help the Indian Malaysians - they are our lawful citizens speaking up for their fundamental rights. Let us help restructure the lives of the poor before they restructure the lives of the rich.
KUALA LUMPUR, Dec 1 — Exactly like 10 years ago Opposition Leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim today failed to escape trial for sodomy.
High Court judge Datuk Mohamad Zabidin Mohd Diah here tossed out the PKR adviser's bid to strike out the sodomy charge against him and fixed the trial to be from January 25 to February 25 next year.
The judge said that the High Court has “inherent powers” to set aside the charge against Anwar but ruled that the latter must prove his claims of bad intent and political conspiracy on the part of the Attorney-General's office.
Zabidin added that it was up to the prosecution to decide how they wanted to prove penetration occurred.
The 62-year-old grandfather stands accused of sodomy for the second time in his life; this time, it is with a former male aide, Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan, 24.
Anwar's defence lawyers had earlier argued that the charge was a baseless political conspiracy because several government and private doctors had in their reports not found any signs of forced penetration on Mohd Saiful.
But the public prosecutor, led by Solicitor General II Datuk Yusof Zainal Abiden, had last week claimed they had extra medical evidence to show Mohd Saiful had been sexually involved with his ex-boss.
Yusof drew the court's attention to a government-run Hospital Kuala Lumpur (HKL) report which noted finding “a mixture of male DNA from two individuals” through a swabbing of Mohd Saiful's anus.
The senior lawyer from the Attorney General's Chambers added that it had more such forensic and oral evidence to support the sodomy charge.
Anwar was arrested and subsequently charged with committing sex against the order of nature on August 7 last year, just before he bounced back into Parliament after taking back his old Permatang Pauh
seat in a by-election.
The former deputy prime minister had spent six years behind bars for the crime a decade ago before the conviction was reversed.
Despite having assembled some of the finest legal eagles in the city, such as Raja Aziz Addruse, 73, to challenge this second charge against him, Anwar failed to stop the case before it goes to trial.
If the ambitious Anwar is found guilty and convicted this time, he may spend up to 20 years behind bars, which would really snuff out his bid to take over Putrajaya with political allies DAP and PAS.
Anwar will appeal against the High Court's rebuff at the Court of Appeal in Putrajaya tomorrow, his lawyer, Sankara Nair, told reporters later.
“We're quite in a quagmire,” Nair said, looking disturbed.
“How can we craft our defence unless we have all our data?” he added, noting that the High Court judge had chosen to brush aside the defence team's request to stay the trial until the Federal Court had disposed
of Anwar's related appeal to get extra evidence he claims is key to proving he is innocent.
Sankara said that a normal appeal takes about two months to be heard.
He was also upset that Zabidin had ticked off Karpal's call to push the trial to a later date.
Sankara said Anwar's chosen lead counsel, Raja Aziz Addruse, is currently abroad and was only due to return in February.
Sankara added that the defence may also try to rope in the Federal Court to stay the start of trial if their appeal for more proof is not heard before Jan 25.
Anwar himself was highly disgusted by Zabidin's ruling.
The federal lawmaker pointed out that the High Court judge had earlier noted an accused person's fundamental rights to fully defend himself under Malaysian law, but appeared to be pedalling backwards when he fixed trial to start despite knowing of the pending appeal.
“The judge should at least respect his own decision and allow our appeal at the Federal Court,” Anwar told reporters outside the courtroom later, surrounded by his wife and supporters.
“This is the first case in the history of modern times that you prefer a charge of sexual abuse ignoring medical evidence with a conclusive finding of no trace of penetration,” the Permatang Pauh MP pounded.
Anwar continued hitting out against Zabidin, noting the judge had showed a tendency to “protect the prosecution” and repeated his allegation that the present team of lawyers from the Attorney General's Chambers, especially the Solicitor General II who is heading the charge, was involved in cooking up sodomy evidence in Sodomy I involving Anwar's Indonesian adopted brother Sukma Darmawan.
Anwar foresees a “very tough battle” ahead but stressed that he is prepared to fight the sodomy charge to the bitter end “because we have compelling arguments and facts”.
KUALA LUMPUR, Dec 1 — A group calling itself Jemaah Prihatin Rakyat Kelantan is planning a protest against Datuk Nik Abdul Aziz Nik Mat (left) this morning outside the Kelantan state secretariat in Kota Baru.
A text message calling all Umno members to join in the protest at 10am today, began circulating yesterday.
But a Kelantan Umno Youth official told The Malaysian Insider the protest was an initiative by the NGO and not the party.
The group also planned to hand over a memorandum to the Kelantan mentri besar for allegedly praying for the destruction of Umno and the party president Datuk Seri Najib Razak after the federal government refused to pay oil royalty to the state government. It also wants Nik Aziz who became the mentri besar in 1990 to step down immediately.
The PAS spiritual adviser when delivering the Eid sermon last Friday had prayed for the Najib’s administration to honour state’s right to five percent of the petroleum extracted off its shore.
Nik Aziz also said that he would pray for the demise of Najib and Umno if the Federal government refuses to pay the oil royalty.
Since last weekend, Nik Aziz has been under criticism from Umno and religious scholars linked to the party for the controversial prayer.
The prayer has become the latest instrument used by the state opposition to undermine Nik Aziz’s leadership.
Today, the Umno-owned Utusan Malaysia front-paged a report calling for Nik Aziz’s resignation for allegedly causing uneasiness among the Muslim community.
Nik Aziz has been bogged down by accusations of cronyism and corruption since early this month over the controversial appointment of his son-in-law Ariffahmi Abdul Rahmad as the CEO of Kelantan Mentri Besar Corporation (PMBK) and for receiving sponsorship to perform the pilgrimage in Mecca from a businessman.
He has cancelled the religious trip and ordered his son-in-law to leave the state investment arm following pressure from party leaders and the public.
The various issues surrounding the Kelantan administration had started a debate on succession plan by state PAS leaders.
REPORT ON PROPOSALS FOR FAMILY LAW REFORM TROUBLING
The Malaysian Consultative Council of Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Sikhism and Taoism is very concerned about the comments by Senior Federal Counsel Mohamad Naser Disa, as reported in the Sun newspaper of 25.11.2009, relating to proposed amendments to the Law Reform (Marriage and Divorce) Act 1976 dealing with the situation where one spouse in a non Muslim marriage converts to Islam.
If the comments accurately reflect the proposed amendments, it shows that the gross injustices currently being committed against non Muslim spouses (mostly wives) by their husbands who convert to Islam, by the Syariah Courts and Syariah authorities, and by the civil courts will continue.
The comments also show clearly the skewered method of approaching these amendments taken by the Federal Government and the Attorney General’s Chambers: the people who are suffering are the non Muslim family members of the convert, especially mothers who are unable to see their children or to expose their children to their own faith. Yet, from the reported comments of the Senior Federal Counsel, the Federal Government seems to mainly be concerned that a man who converts to Islam is being “cruelly treated” because he cannot break his previous marriage contract and get a divorce.
Conversion cannot be used to evade one’s previous obligations
Whilst a person’s right to profess a religion of his choice is inviolate, no one should be permitted to use the fact of his conversion to evade his obligations to his family. The State, however, cannot use this excuse to restrict the fundamental liberty of a person to profess and practise any religion. Importantly, Islam and Islamic law cannot be imposed on a non Muslim who is guaranteed the right to profess and practice his or her own faith in peace and harmony under our Federal Constitution.
The MCCBCHST is gravely concerned that the proposals will indirectly result in Islamic law being forced on non Muslim spouses, especially wives. One example is the reported proposal to limit maintenance payments to his former wife by the husband who is now Muslim to only 3 months. This is the position in Islamic law. But, the non Muslim wife contracted her marriage under the Law Reform (Marriage and Divorce) Act 1976 which provides that a husband must pay maintenance to his former wife until she remarries or dies.
Why is it that the Muslim convert is allowed to avoid his obligations under his previous contract of marriage merely because of his conversion? We are very concerned that rogue husbands will abuse the system, and convert to Islam as an easy excuse to get out of his marital obligations.
Children and the cabinet decision
There must be a clear statement, both in the relevant Syariah legislation and in other legislation, providing that
A child under the age of 18 cannot be converted to Islam without the permission of both parents
In any event, that child should have the right to choose his or her own religion upon reaching the age of majority
This was promised by the Cabinet in its decision on 22nd April 2009 based on reports in the newspapers at that time. Sadly, the current proposals do not reflect that promise.
Syariah interference with non Muslims must stop
Another glaring omission in the briefing by the Senior Federal Counsel is the lack of any proposal for the inclusion of a clear prohibition on the Syariah courts and Syariah authorities from making orders, decisions and taking any action whatsoever in respect of children born to parents who were originally non Muslim.
We strongly object to any attempts to make laws applicable to persons professing other faiths “Syariah compliant”. In our respectful view, Syariah law should only apply to persons professing Islam, and should not jeopardize or affect in any way the rights, privileges and liabilities of persons who do not profess Islam.
MCCBCHST Proposals
The MCCBCHST has previously come up with comprehensive proposals for law reforms, which we have submitted to the Attorney General’s Chambers. We have previously published the general principles which should guide those proposals in our Note of Protest dated June 2007 entitled “Unity Threatened by Continuing Infringements of Religious Freedom”. We have constantly reiterated in our meetings with the authorities and other stakeholders that the predominant principles governing any proposal for law reform must be as follows:-
Parliament in respect of the Federal Territories and State Legislative Assemblies should pass state laws limiting the jurisdiction of the Syariah Courts and prohibiting Syariah Courts from interfering in matters involving the rights of persons professing faiths other than Islam and giving persons who do not profess Islam an explicit right to seek redress in the civil High Courts if Syariah courts interfere in a non Muslim’s rights.
Any marriage that is solemnised under the civil law and all matters pertaining to it (e.g. marriage, inheritance, custody, religious status of minors, etc) should be under the jurisdiction of the civil courts, and should be subject to the civil law.
The civil courts must be the final arbiter as long as one party involved in a legal entanglement is not a person professing the religion of Islam.
A child cannot be converted to Islam except if both parents agree. Even then, that child must have the right to choose his or her own religion when reaching the age of majority.
Any person who has reached the age of majority has the absolute right to choose the religion of his choice. The law must ensure that any such conversion to another religion does not prejudice that person’s family. Any law on conversion must permit reversion to one’s original faith with equal facility.
With respect, the MCCBCHST proposals in the main will be fair to both the spouse converting to Islam and the spouse who does not. We have not made outlandish proposals nor have we asked for more than what non Muslim spouses should be entitled to under a law that is fair and just. We therefore urge the Federal Government, and all State governments, to immediately implement the MCCBCHST proposals in the respective laws.
As always, the MCCBHST is ready and willing to assist the relevant authorities in reaching a just solution to this problem.
Chin Peng arriving at a hotel in Haadyai for a press conference
MORE puzzling than the Malaysian government's current myopic reaction against the idea of Chin Peng's return is the sketchy outline of events soon after the Haadyai Peace Accords. The peace treaty was signed on 2 Dec 1989 to end hostilities between Malaysia and the Communist Party of Malaya (CPM).
If Chin Peng's version of events is to be believed, it would appear that he was played out, and quite soon after the ink had dried on the peace agreement.
The government's defiance of the signed agreement today is unsurprising given the political climate. But did Malaysian officials, in the early years after the peace accords were signed, intentionally cause delays in order to frustrate Chin Peng's attempts to return?
Chin Peng now believes he was "tricked" and "played" by the Malaysian government, as he tells Malaysian journalists from the Chinese-language media and The Nut Graph at a press session in Haadyai on 27 Nov 2009. The press conference was called in conjunction with the 20th anniversary commemoration of the peace accord. Chin Peng now lives in Bangkok.
Making peace
When asked why he thought the government signed the peace accords at all if it had no intention of letting him return, Chin Peng, who is no stranger to betrayal, offers a pragmatic view.
"The scenario then forced the government to sign the agreement with us. If they had been unwilling, they would have felt alienated by the people. We were also faced with the same situation," the former CPM secretary-general, whose real name is Ong Boon Hua, tells reporters.
A young Chin Peng (Courtesy of Farish Noor)The decades in between the first failed peace attempt in Baling, 1955, and the Haadyai accords in 1989 was a time of flux for world communism. These global events affected CPM's own direction, Chin Peng recalls in his memoirs Alias Chin Peng: My Side of History, published in 2003.
In the later 1980s before Haadyai, Thailand also initiated peace negotiations with the CPM, which was hiding in its southern jungles. Chin Peng recalls that the Thai overtures were coordinated with similar advances for peace from Malaysia. He mentions then Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad authorising Malaysian Special Branch contact with CPM representatives for exploratory talks.
Eventually, there were five rounds of private negotiations between CPM and Malaysia, with the Thais as mediators. Chin Peng notes that significantly, during the negotiations, CPM's role was recognised in the independence struggle leading to Merdeka.
Stalling return?
After the peace accords were signed, Chin Peng says he applied in late 1990 to return to Malaysia, but the application was rejected in December 1991.
Former Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Norian Mai has a different version. He recently told The Star that during the resettlement process in the three years after the peace accords were signed, Chin Peng never stated his intention to return to Malaysia.
Yet, the Home Ministry has also accused Chin Peng of failing to attend a resettlement interview that was fixed for 31 Oct 1992.
Chin Peng now says he "suspects", although he does not dare to accuse the Malaysian government outright, of intentionally reneging on the agreement. "I don't dare to assume that it was intentional ... [Whether] it happened in 1992 or much earlier, I can't remember exactly. I think I was being tricked to go for an interview. They asked me to go to this place, and then the government side didn't turn up. Then they asked me to go to another place ... from one place to another. As far as I can remember, I was being played by them," he tells reporters in Haadyai.
At 85 and of poor health, Chin Peng admits to having a patchy memory. He cannot recall dates of the supposed interview with Special Branch. He speaks slowly with long pauses, as if trying to jog his memory.
But he says he kept to the deadline to inform the Malaysian authorities of his intention to return. Under Article 5 of the administrative agreement of the peace accords, CPM members seeking resettlement in Malaysia had one year from the date of the signing of the agreement to notify the Malaysian authorities.
Chin Peng personally wrote to then Prime Minister Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi on 14 June 2004 to state that he had met the notification deadline. "It is a matter of record that in 1990 I applied under the guarantees of the Peace Accords to resettle in Malaysia. I had sought direction from the Haadyai-based Special Branch officer handling resettlement matters, and was specifically advised to wait in Haadyai for a call to be interviewed. This call never materialised. Subsequently, I received a letter stating my application had been rejected on grounds that I had failed to present myself to an interview."
The letter to Abdullah never received a response. It is among the correspondence by Chin Peng, his lawyers and the government tendered in court during the hearing for his 2005 application to be permitted to enter and live in Malaysia.
Government fudging
His memoirsChin Peng was to be stood up a second time. In his memoirs, he tells of an offer by a Special Branch officer in Yala in 1999 to "apply for a sightseeing tour". Chin Peng agreed to the offer and expressed wishes to pay homage at the graves of his grandfather, parents and siblings at a Chinese cemetery located near Sitiawan, where he was born in 1924.
He continues in his book: "For some reason or other, things have not worked out yet. It has been a frustrating wait."
Chin Peng and his lawyers followed up on the offer with a series of letters, even disclosing travel arrangements, in 2003 and 2004. Two letters were by Chin Peng directly to Abdullah in his capacity both as premier and as then home affairs minister. Other letters were by his lawyers to former Inspector-General of Police Datuk Seri Mohd Bakri Omar and then Home Affairs Ministry secretary-general Tan Sri Abdul Aziz Mohd Yusof, who is today the Election Commission chairperson.
On 25 Oct 2004, Abdul Aziz wrote to Chin Peng's lawyers a letter, without explanation, that their client's request to enter Malaysia was rejected. Chin Peng then began turning to the courts. He lost his final bid in the Federal Court on 30 April 2009.
In the light of these letters, the remarks by Deputy Home Minister Datuk Wira Abu Seman Yusop in June 2009 should be evaluated for accuracy. Abu Seman claims that Chin Peng never resubmitted an application after failing to attend the 31 Oct 1992 interview, and thus violated conditions of the peace deal.
The paper trail of letters culminating in the rejection letter of 25 Oct 2004 suggests otherwise.
Another remark that warrants scrutiny is Deputy Defence Minister Datuk Dr Abdul Latiff Ahmad's statement that it was the CPM, and not Chin Peng himself, which had disarmed, according to conditions under the peace accords.
Explaining in Parliament why Chin Peng was still listed as an enemy of the country, Abdul Latiff was quoted by Bernama: "This is because during the signing of the peace accord with the CPM in 1989, he did not sign the agreement to lay down arms. Only the CPM agreed to do so and not Chin Peng."
Considering that Chin Peng's signature and party position as secretary-general are recorded at the end of the peace accords documents, one wonders what Abdul Latiff means.
A copy of the 1989 administrative agreement to end hostilities signed by Chin Peng on behalf of CPM, together with then Inspector General of Police Tan Sri Rahim Noor's signature
No regrets
Terrorist to some and freedom fighter to others, Chin Peng seems to care little of how history will remember him. He remains convicted of the CPM's struggle, which, from his perspective, was to free Malaya from colonialists, whether Japanese or British. It wasn't an "emergency", it was a war, he declares in his book. As for the armed struggle after independence in 1957, CPM considered that to be a "false" independence by the British.
"It would be arrogant of me to say how I hope history will judge me. It should be left to the people of Malaysia to decide on what I have done with my life," he tells reporters in Haadyai.
"In politics, we all have our own stand. Those who hate me will certainly not want me to return. But whether they like me or not, I think there is no reason for them to oppose my wanting to pay respects to my ancestors in Sitiawan."
He says he would choose the same path of armed struggles against the colonialists if time were turned back. But he adds: "If we had thought that there would be another way at the time, we would have chosen it."
He remains steadfast in the belief that communist principles can form an egalitarian society with the freedom of self-determination. "I have never wavered in my communist belief. Any movement that can bring change to the world will have to face obstacles. This is nothing strange," Chin Peng tells the press.
Hu Jintao (kremlin.ru; source: Wiki commons) On the visit by Chinese President Hu Jintao to Malaysia, he says, "It is a good thing for China and Malaysia to establish friendly relations."
Determined to return
Chin Peng says he has no regrets except for one: that he was "fooled" into thinking he could resettle in Malaysia. He returns to the topic of going back to Sitiawan repeatedly throughout the press conference, chuckling resignedly at times and even managing to smile.
"I have reluctantly accepted [that I will not be allowed into Malaysia]. It is my fate. But I will still push the government to accept me. I am getting older and older and I want to set foot on my hometown. And if they want to arrest me, let them arrest me, banish me.
"I will try to go back to the land of my birth. I will try every way. Smuggle in also can. I don't know if I will succeed, but I want to try."
Perhaps, just as strong as Chin Peng's desire to return home, is his desire to know that he has dealt with honest men. Mahathir, under whose administration the peace deal was signed, now sides with the political status quo not to let Chin Peng return. Former IGP Tun Haniff Omar now considers Chin Peng to have no legal standing in his 2005 suit against the government for defamation, citing the CPM's illegal status. Yet, it was Haniff who signed on behalf of Malaysia in the 1989 agreement to end hostilities.
In his 14 June 2004 letter to Prime Minister Abdullah, Chin Peng wrote: "I also wish to be reassured, before it is too late, that my signing of the Peace Accords on [2 Dec1989] was not a futile exercise. I still wish to believe that solemn undertakings expressed by Malaysia in international agreements are readily recognised as pledges of honour to be respected and that the injustice done to my 1990 application was a misdeed limited in its culpability."
They are not doing this with East- timor delegates but it is just piece of low class mentality that they want to show other. This country will appear as Pakistan , Sudan and Somalia one day.
A judge rules the opposition leader must face trial sometime after January 25 on perversion charges 
We need a crash course in the history of reparation, slavery, and the declaration universal human rights. We need to understand the style of British colonialism as it collaborated with the local power elites of any colony it buried its tentacles in and sucked dry the blood, sweat and tears of the natives it dehumanised and sub-humanised.
The Indians in Malaysia have all the right to ask for reparation and even most importantly they have the rights as rightful citizens of Malaysia to demand for equality and equal opportunity as such accorded to the ‘bumiputera’. Every Malaysian must be given such rights.
In Hindraf, I believe there are Hindus, Muslims, Christians, Catholics, atheists, Buddhists, Sikhs, Bahais, Jains, etc rallying for the cause. In other words there are human beings speaking up for peace and social justice. It is the right of every Malaysian to lend support to their demands.
But our arguments cannot hold water any loner. Things are falling apart - deconstructed. The waves of demands, the frequency of rallies and the excavating of issues drawn from the archaeology of our fossilised arrogant knowledge - all these are symptoms of deconstructionism in our body politics. It is like the violent vomit of a rehabilitating cocaine addict undergoing treatment in a Buddhist monastery somewhere in northern Thailand.
Think Malaysian - we do not have anything to lose except our mental chains. We have a lot to gain in seeing the oppressed be freed from the burden of history; one that is based on the march of materialism. We are essentially social beings, as Einstein would emphasise. Our economic design must address the socialism of existence.
By Adib Zalkapli - The Malaysian Insider
