Money politics and The Iban being manipulate by a plate of Ko Lok Mee!

Cheap Talks to End Money Politics

It was a noble statement by the Deputy Prime Minister. But no Malaysian would believe that he was serious. Money is the magical portion to high offices in BN-party elections. Without it, nothing moves.

The NST Online (25/11/2008) reported Deputy PM Datuk Seri Najib Razak as saying that money politics in UMNO cannot be eradicated overnight but the party will come up with measures to “stop the menace”.

It was honest of Najib to admit that there is money politics in UMNO. That credit must be given to him. When I said in the Dewan Undangan Negeri of Sarawak last year that there were money politics in the BN, the Sarawak Chief Minister, Taib Mahmud, stood to challenge me. Prove it, he yelled.

Malaysians ought to wonder whether Najib is prepared to admit that money politics is rampant in UMNO or in BN in general?Najib said it well that vote-buying in UMNO had to be fought with commitment and political will. But similar statements had been made by his predecessors. It costs nothing to recycle the same statements. For your ears only.

The truth of the matter is that UMNO is the most corrupt institution because of the power-play of money politics.

Now that Najib has spoken out against money politics and vote buying, has he the commitment and political will to stop it? Will he walk the talk, as Abdullah had put it? Malaysians will give a negative indictment.
Is Najib prepared to disclose how many UMNO leaders would be elected to high offices if they had conducted a clean Party election at the divisional levels? Without being in high Party posts, they cannot even become candidates in elections. Simply put, without money politics, many of them cannot even become Ministers.
The former PM, Mahathir, had criticized that Najib would find it difficult to stop money politics in UMNO when the latter became Prime Minister. It is the case of a kettle calling the pot black. Has Mahathir succeeded in reducing, not to say, eradicating money politics in UMNO/BN? Or, in the first place, had he the commitment?
Najib was beating around the bush in saying that the fight against money politics must be comprehensive and it is a process that will involve time. A school child will know that. Does it have to be a future PM to tell us that?

UMNO is facing a Party election in March 2009. So much money had been splashed around that it is hard not to be worried, even within the UMNO circles. The Disciplinary Board that was established in UMNO in 2000 had its hands full. It was simply ineffective to curb the rampant corrupt practices. The Anti-Corruption Agency (ACA) also has become involved, but the candidates would not care two hoots about that. Not many will get caught.
Najib seems quick to acknowledge the failed promises of money politics in the past and said, "We have to find new ways to reduce money politics in the party. We cannot allow this disease to spread as it would have negative implications on the Party."
He declined to elaborate on the measures. He better not elaborate. He has no answer.
Money politics is not confined to UMNO, of course. PBB President Taib Mahmud challenged me when I spoke about money politics in the Dewan Undangan Negeri of Sarawak. Does that mean that PBB is squeaky clean?

The Party in the Sarawak BN which will face Party election this year is the SUPP. From even the divisional levels, money politics is rampant. To start with, many candidates vying for top posts at the divisional levels had to pay annual subscription fees of the members. This is in order that these members could vote. Then, members were chauffeured to the voting centres. Accommodation and meals have to be arranged. On top of that, some “belanjar” has to be paid.

During one of those branch elections in Sibu, I observed that more than 2/3 of those members present to vote were Ibans. They were very happy to come from the kampong to vote, according to a menu! The Iban are so naive that they can easily be bought over by a plate of Ko Lok Mee! Would anyone from the incumbent and challenger groups deny this?

Delegates will assemble in Kuching next month. That assembly will not come cheap. Both the incumbent and challenger groups have to splash some magic portion in order to secure votes.
Recently I had a frank talk with some of the SUPP leaders who have booked their tickets to Kuching as delegates. I was told that the show of strength will not come cheap, even to the tune of millions. Their conclusion remains that money politics is so much in the blood of the BN that without the “$”, many of those delegates simply won't move.

We need a change for Malaysia!

Malaysians are beginning to have awareness that the government should be change to have a check and balance after 50 years of Independence. Let Najis call an election as soon as possible and we can throw this najis out of our country sooner and get a better government!

Malaysians 'boleh kah'?
KJ John Nov 11, 08 10:45am

"Change we can," said Barrack Obama. Change they can, and, I believe, change they will. He also said, "We are the change we want." And change they did, for only the second time in more than 200 years, Americans have taken the risk again in electing a young and unfamiliar non-pedigree for a president.

The first was John F Kennedy. But, my real question is can we, Malaysians who root for the American system to change, can we change? The US of A is truly a land of opportunities and a land of immigrants and therefore a melting pot of ethnicities and cultures.
It is also the land where the brilliance of individual freedom of expression and the audacity of hope is allowed, promoted and encouraged. But, what about us? Our mainstream says Malaysia boleh, but I ask, "Malaysians boleh kah?" Can we find the same audacity of hope?
Our land was also the land of many opportunities but this is today coloured by a policy of unequal opportunities. We are all migrants in one form or another, but too many of us deny our past.

As Lat’s cartoon in the New Straits Times on Nov 11 November illustrated, America will only be truly democratic and free if and when an American Indian Tribal leader becomes the president.
What about us then, when Umno still screams about Ketuanan Melayu?

We have much individual freedom but too much is still resident on the state defining the freedom of both individuals and groups. Therefore, when it is inconvenient, a journalist, a politician, and a blogger are thrown into jail for all the wrong motives and political reasons.
Now, even the court has agreed with this. But, appeal we must because Malaysia Boleh! Because, we think we can still ‘fix’ the judiciary! Too late, I say, too late! Change has begun in the world, and we will not be spared.

New faces bring hope

But, Malaysians, we first need real freedom in our hearts at an individual and personal level. We need the true freedoms of a real democracy without fear of a ‘father-figure’ overseeing our political citizenship and defining our Malaysian-ness.
Therefore we all have to learn from the American experience of the march for freedom. Someone said, "Because Rosetta Parks refused to get up from her seat in the bus, Martin Luther King started walking the march to freedom and emancipation of the blacks.
"And because Martin Luther King walked for freedom, today Barack Obama could run for the President."

There is always individual freedom given by God but the limits are too often defined by the state and power systems and we, the people, collude with fear in our hearts. But what these power-brokers do not understand is that the world has changed.
The Berlin Wall has collapsed, the international trade system does not work anymore, the military complex is not supreme anymore after 911, and even the financial markets are no more secure after the current financial tsunami.
The state therefore cannot dictate what is and what is not. Neither does the market govern. The information and technology revolution is what enabled Barack Obama to win.
His entire campaign was based on the network organisation structure of the whole world and not the traditional pyramidal structure of the older world order of either parties; whether Democratic or Republican.

In Malaysia, we adopted the internet reality almost more than 12 years ago with the launch of the Multimedia Super Corridor (MSC) but even then, with Mahathir Mohamad at the helm, we did not find the political will to recognise and address the real issues connected with it.
March 8 was, therefore, a hint of the political tsunami heading our way. This was expanded and repeated at Permatang Pauh. But, even after seven months, our so-called leaders of government, are still in denial as their ‘has-beens’ are fighting to run their respective parties.
I am saddened by the state of the nation today, if Umno elections are anything to go by. Fortunately they are not. Just look at Parliament and see the quality of dialogue provided by the opposition. There I see hope. But we need more of such people.
They said the Internet will never be censored when the MSC was launched, but then such freedom is curtailed when the truth becomes inconvenient. They say one thing but often do the other.

Listen up, fellow Malaysians!
Politicians promote integrity but do not understand that it involves the gap between one’s talk and walk. Therefore, can we really change?
President Elect Barack Obama said, "I'm asking you to believe. Not just in my ability to bring about real change in Washington ... I'm asking you to believe in yours."
Are Malaysians listening to these sage words? "You must be the change you want", said Mahatma Gandhi. Can Malaysians listen and hear? I am not addressing or talking about the older and failed model of Malaysia boleh.
Malaysia boleh meant the public and co-operating private sectors closing one eye to wrong-doings and breaking laws at their whims and fancies and it meant lawyers writing judgments for corrupt judges.
But, back to Malaysians, can we change? Can we say enough is enough; we are tired of such corrupt leadership which lacks integrity and we can change? Can we say this? Why not? Fear in our hearts?
Was it fear which drove Martin Luther King? Or, Rosetta Parks, or even President Elect Barack Obama? No, it was courage of their own and personal convictions. We do have our own Martin Luther Kings, but what we need really need are the Rosetta Parks who simply decide enough is enough, "I aint gonna move!"
What will it take, Malaysia? Does Raja Petra Kamarudin have to go back to jail? Must more journalists who write the truth go to jail before you find the courage to say enough is enough?
Come on Malaysians! We can only change when each of us say that change we can, and change we must. Only then will change come to Malaysia. May God help us change.

A bloody murderer and a big lier!

A murderer who claims that he is not involve and the deputy prime minister and wife are not involve too! If he know so much, he must be the mastermind of the murder of Altantuya!

Now he try to run away to UK to hide from the media and people of Malaysia using the money he corrupted from government!

Police Diraja Malaysia Umpama Anjing Dibela UMNO!

PDRM or Police Malaysia is acting like the dog being controlled by the UMNO. They will selectively catch any dessident of the present UMNO bully and then prosecute them in court controlled by the UMNO judges!

A shame for all Malaysian........where is the real Police for the people?

The most notorious SAMSENG in Malaysia!

The most ulgy looking samseng in Malaysia...Buang and Tiong! Shame on them!

Biro Tatanegara tempat menyebar kebencian kaum secara besar-besaran!

Biro Tatanegara memang merupakan tempat meyemarakan kebencian antara kaum di Malaysia. Saya pernah dengar dengan telinga saya sendiri seorang pegawai kerajaan kanan berbangsa Cina dicabar bahawa peniaga Cina sanggup membunuh ayahnya sendiri untuk mendapat harta oleh seorang pegawai BTN yang memaksa pegawai tersebut menjawab ya dikalangan peserta pelbagai kaum. Ini sungguh menyedihkan kerana niat buruk BTN untuk menyebar perkauman dan kebencian antara kaum.


Ketua Pemuda PAS, Salahuddin Ayub mendedahkan beliau mendengar sendiri penceramah dalam latihan Biro Tatanegara (BTN) memfitnahkan Presiden PAS, Datuk Seri Tuan Guru Haji Abdul Hadi Awang sebagai anasir subversif dan pengkhianat negara.

"Ketika sedang berlangsung salah satu ceramah semasa latihan tersebut, salah seorang pesertanya diam-diam menelefon saya dengan telefon mudah alihnya dan membiarkan talian tidak dimatikan untuk membolehkan saya mendengar ceramah itu.

"Saya mendengar sendiri penceramahnya menuduh Tuan Guru, (Datuk Seri) Anwar (Ibrahim) dan (Lim) Kit Siang sebagai sebagai anasir subversif dan pengkhianat negara," kata beliau.
Baru-baru ini ketika berucap dalam Dewan Rakyat, Ahli Parlimen Kubang Kerian itu mengulangi pendedahan mengenai perkara itu setelah beberapa kali mendedahkannya.

"Nama Yang Berhormat Permatang Pauh (Anwar), nama Yang Berhormat Ipoh Timur (Lim), nama Yang Berhormat Marang (Tuan Guru Presiden PAS), nama saya dianggap sebagai subversif, pengkhianat negara. Orang merbahaya kepada negara.
"Jadi saya tidak faham mengapa ini boleh berlaku di samping fakta-fakta yang lain kalau saya dedahkan tentang ada modul yang mengapi-apikan perkauman dalam negara kita ini. Inikah dia negara yang kita hendak bina?" kata Salahuddin.
Beliau mengingatkan, negara ini akan runtuh jika isu-isu perkauman terus diapi-apikan termasuk di dalam BTN.
"Dalam diri saya ini Tuan Pengerusi separuh Cina separuh Melayu. Bangsa apa saya ini? Yang Berhormat Pokok Sena (Mahfuz Omar) bapa Pakistan, mak Melayu.
"Jadi kalau kita hendak bermain di atas premis ini kita mengambil BTN ini untuk tujuan ini, saya rasa negara kita akan runtuh.
"Negara kita akan hancur. Negara kita akan menghadapi suatu zaman yang cukup gelap. Kita mereput, kita rotten to the core," katanya. Ketika itu, beberapa ahli Parlimen menyampuk dengan kata-kata "hapuskan!" dan "bubarkan (BTN)!".

Wong Soon Koh..is a Foochow disgrace....a traitor to Chinese in Sarawak!

Read about the bully Wong Soon Koh.....He thinks he will be in power for life! I believe his family will be cursed for his sin against the people of Sarawak and Chinese as a whole!

DUN Diary - I am SuspendedPosted by Wong Ho Leng on November 10, 2008 at 07:10:24:
DUN Diary: Day 6
Sad Day, but what a shock! Or may be not. I was suspended from the DUN!
Dominique, while attempting to say what ought to be said, was suspended too. We were almost named by the Speaker, meaning, it could be worse than suspension.
(1) Motion to refer me to Committee of PrivilegesWe were at the Dewan early. It was past 9a.m., when we saw the Dewan staff distributing a motion to be moved by Soon Koh. The Ministerial Motion reads:
“Whereas on the 3rd day of November 2008, being the first day of the Second Meeting of the Third Session of this Dewan, the Honourable Member for Bukit Assek, during proceedings of the Committee of the Whole House to consider, inter alia, Command Paper No.5 of 2008 read together with Supplementary Supply (2008) Bill 2008, uttered the following words on three (3) occasions, viz.:-
“… it will be very irresponsible of a Minister to ask this Dewan to rubberstamp without debate or amendment with a huge sum being camouflaged in the Supplementary Supply Bill …” as appeared on page 8 of the Hansard dated 3rd November 2008;
and
“Do not help hide a fact. RM900 million is camouflaged …”
and
“Do not hide them just because it is a Supplementary Supply, don’t seen it, it is possible to hide them, camouflaging it” as appeared on page 9 of the Hansard.
“Whereas by the said words the Honourable Member for Bukit Assek has imputed onto the Honourable Minister for Finance II and Honourable Member for Bawang Assan an improper motive to conceal or hide an expenditure item of RM900m for which approval of the Dewan is sought, so as to deceive this Dewan into approving that expenditure item.
“Whereas by the use of the said words, the Honourable Member for Bukit Assek has committed a breach of privilege by violating S.O.32(6) of the Dewan’s Standing Orders.
“And whereas despite various opportunities being accorded to the Honourable Member for Bukit Assek to withdraw the words complained of, he has stated that he would not do so.
“And whereas the Speaker has, on the 7th day of November 2008, directed that in the circumstances, a motion be moved in this Dewan to refer the Honourable Member for Bukit Assek to the Committee of Privileges.
“Wherefore I hereby move that the Honourable Member for Bukit Assek be referred to the Committee of Privileges for that Committee to investigate into this matter and make its report to the Dewan for such action as the Dewan may deem fit to take against the Honourable Member for Bukit Assek”.
The Speaker asked me to state my defence, but I was very quickly shot down without even being allowed to go into the merit of the Defence. Worst, I was chased out for saying that the Speaker was reading a ruling, being a text pre-written by someone.
I had a few things to say of the Motion:
Firstly, reading the penultimate paragraph of the Motion, I cannot help but see that Soon Koh was suggesting that the Motion was moved NOT in his own volition, but at the direction, behest or prompting of the Speaker. That should not be allowed. A Minister’s Motion, like any other Motions to be moved in the House, must not be moved at the behest of anybody.
Secondly, in order for this Motion to be moved, it must first satisfy the threshold that a privilege has been breached. While on this, the Speaker was quick to say that I had breached the 2nd limb of Standing Order 32(6). That 2nd limb says that no member is allowed to make allegation against another member which he is not prepared to substantiate. Clearly the Speaker was wrong. I alerted his attention to the Minister’s Motion which said that the only ground against me was that I was imputing improper motive to the Minister. The Speaker was obviously upset that I had corrected him on that.
Thirdly, Standing Orders 73(3)(c) stipulates that any complaint on breach of privilege must be raised at the earliest opportunity. My words were spoken in the Dewan on Monday, 3rd Nov., in the presence of both Soon Koh and the Chief Minister as the Ministers of Finance and all cabinet Ministers and other members. Nobody had objected to my using the word “camouflage”. Were they sleeping or their English simply could not pass? The Motion was moved only today though Soon Koh did say on 4th Nov Borneo Post that he was not happy with the word “camouflage”. He should not have slept on it. It was not what he said outside the Dewan that matters but that he must complain, should he feel the word be in breach of privilege, to the Speaker at the earliest opportunity. I asked for the Speaker’s ruling whether he, and he alone, was satisfied about this threshold. The Speaker did not rule, asking me to proceed and that he would rule later.
I have no doubt that the thresholds were not satisfied. Nowhere in any Parliament in the Commonwealth would this delay not be regarded as contumelious.
In any event, I was not wrong in using the word “camouflage”. If I had to withdraw that word, it would mean that any negative comment on the Government and administration will also not be permitted. For instance, in future we may be forced to withdraw words such as “corruption”, “abuse of power”, “unfair”, “dishonest” upon threat of a Motion?As I was proceeding in my speech, I saw a Dewan staff/orderly walked up the steps to pass a piece of paper to the Speaker. It was a white piece of paper with red words written in rather big fonts. That piece of paper came from behind the roll of seats behind Violet. That is to say, the 3rd roll from my seat.
In explaining my stance on the Motion, I referred to the wording in the Supplementary Supply Bill and re-alert the Dewan to the fact that that Bill was to authorize “out of the Consolidated Fund for the service of the year 2008 of a sum not exceeding RM921,517,361 for expenditure on the various services specified in the Schedule not provided for or not fully provided for by the Supply (2008) Ordinance, 2007”.
It was in that context that I had said the sum of RM900 million was camouflaged in the Supplementary Supply Bill which must be passed without debate or amendment. The Supplementary Supply Bill is always meant to look for money which had been expended but not or not fully provided for.
The Speaker ordered me to stop, saying he had heard this last Friday.
But how could I be denied my right to defend? Whatever that was said by me last Friday was in respect of another Motion, which was a general Motion for observing decorum in the Dewan.
This is a specific motion to “do” me! I am certainly entitled to defend. There was this challenge to my elected office.
Dominique rose to say that I was entitled to defend but the Speaker proceeded to read “his ruling”. Dominique rightly complained that the Speaker was reading from a written text. Incensed, the Speaker ordered him, “OUT” and gestured the Sergeant at Arms to remove Dominique.
As the Speaker was making a ruling on whether the Motion satisfied the threshold that the complaint was raised at the earliest opportunity, there is no reason for the Speaker to read the ruling from ready-written text! God is my witness as to what might have happened.
I rose to say that the Speaker should not read his ruling from the text that was written for him. Was the Motion too late or mala fide? The Speaker ought to have answered it in the Dewan in promptu. How could he anticipate that I would raise the complaint? If he had anticipated and written his ruling, it would simply mean that he would not have considered my grounds in raising the complaint in the Dewan.
Incensed by my query, the Speaker ordered me “Out” too. Since I was the one who was the subject of the Ministerial Motion, the Speaker could have explained how the ruling came to be written, or what was it that he received from the Orderly, if not the text from which he read. How could he order me out so summarily?
As the Sergeant at Arms moved close to me, I told him not to touch me. If I had to, I would walk myself. I had wanted to remove my belongings, including the Hansard and notebook computer, but then I walked out myself without them.
The reason is simple. I was merely ordered “OUT”. There was no order that after I went out, I could not come back in. In his haste to order me and Dominique “out”, the Speaker had not been specific.
After about 20 minutes of Press Conference, I walked in to the Dewan. The Speaker interrupted the Minister’s Reply to say that I was ordered “out” for the whole day. You had not ordered that before, I replied. “That was understood”, he said.
How can that “OUT” order be synonymous with suspension for the whole day?
The Speaker was prepared to “name” me unless I removed myself. The same warning was given to Dominique. By naming, it means that we could be suspended from service for the duration of this meeting or even next meeting.
I moved off, having lost faith in the House.
I am hurt by the actions against me, but I am not prepared to cry for my fate. I would be back tomorrow. But I wanted to ask, where is conscience? Sad if conscience has been eaten by the wolves.
I requested my colleagues to stay back in the Dewan and seek clarifications if Awang Tengah’s reply on land problems was wanting. I had spoken at length on the New Land Policy in my speech. I felt painful that I had lost my opportunity to ask Awang Tengah the tons of questions which had welled up in my head.
At lunch time, my colleagues told me that there was not much in Awang Tengah’s Reply. So, what has happened to those land problems? The SUPP had said that they would bring the land problems for discussion in the Dewan. There was no such Motion from the best of the SUPP, Soon Koh. But there was only this Motion to silence the Opposition.
(2) Couplet for Soon Koh
Chong, Chin Sing and I had a meeting and supper together last night. Chin Sing, as the Whip of the DAP in Dewan, had SMSed to all colleagues requesting them to get ready their debate speeches in support of me.
Tze Fui quickly purchased a placard and calligraph the following couplet:
有權有勢留一線權勢用盡禍將至
Translation:
While in power, do not abuseDoom befalls when power is gone
Tze Fui said that she wanted to present the couplet to Soon Koh when she presented her speech in opposition to Soon Koh’s Motion.
No speech was allowed from them. I had not even been allowed to speak the full length in my own defence.
During the press conference called by Soon Koh, Tze Fui and Violet presented the couplet to Soon Koh, who, smilingly accepted, but only to see him shredding it right in the presence of reporters. Childish, isn’t it?
As the Dewan went into tea break, Soon Koh did an about-turn. He had “repaired” the shredded placard by gluing the pieces. In return, he wanted to present to Violet and Tze Fui a couplet in reply which reads:
話到嘴邊留一半高枕無憂無禍害
Translation:
Say only half the words you wanted to saySleep high and tight to avoid harm
Violet and Tze Fui rejected the presentation but agreed to take a picture with Soon Koh with the couplet. In the process, the reporters pointed out to Soon Koh a word that was wrongly written. Yeah. Not because he was a headmaster or now a Minister. All people are susceptible to making mistakes. But has he made a mistake in referring me to the Committee of Privileges? The people will give the verdict later.
This couplet has no meaning. As elected representatives, we should not refrain from speaking the whole truth, without fear or favour, for the people, especially for those who are oppressed. We should not fear those in power. Shutting our mouths may ensure us peace, but the people will wail in despair. Only apple polishers and dishonest politicians would speak half truth so that they can keep their office.
(3) Forced Holiday
It is a forced holiday to me. Sad, isn’t it? I have never liked holiday.

Pak Habislah.....caught sleeping...!

See how our Prime Minister sleep!

http://www.kennysia.com/archives/2008/11/look_its_the_pr.php

I take US 200 years to have a black president...How long would it take for Malaysia to be free from UMNO...200years or 50 years?

Malaysian should be united to kick UMNO out of the political arena! Najis Tun Razak will definitely screw up Malaysia economy!

The devil's pedigree!! Mahathir........The Bush of Malaysia!

Mukhriz is like George W Bush that bring disaster to US and he will bring disaster to Malaysia!

Feudalism: The son also rises

Helen Ang Oct 30, 08 11:29am

The forthcoming Umno elections will see Najib Razak, son of Malaysia’s second prime minister a shoo-in for party president. Hishamuddin Hussein, son of the country’s third PM, will snag his vice-presidential seat. Mukhriz Mahathir and Khairy Jamaluddin, son and son-in-law respectively of the 4th and 5th PMs are facing off for Youth chief.
MCPX
'Takkan Melayu hilang di dunia', it is said. But judging from the proliferation of these scions of political dynasties, other Malays without the requisite patronage seem to have ‘menghilang’ (disappeared).

Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah has yet to obtain a single nomination to contest the president post. Malaysia would have been a far, far better place today if Ku Li had been Umno president (Dr Mahathir Mohamad fended off his challenge by a highly dubious 43-vote margin in 1987), and by default, our prime minister.

But more seriously, Ku Li possesses budi bahasa (or courtesy) which the Malay race values so highly, and a quality Mahathir patently lacks. His blog Che Det spews venom like a mighty geyser and encapsulates perfectly Dr M’s jeering voice and sneering tone.

Blogging on the Permatang Pauh by-election, Mahathir was incapable of graciousness and refused to credit Anwar Ibrahim his success. He was adamant that Anwar’s victory was simply an anti-Abdullah backlash. This particular posting attracted 1,211 reader comments — a strong chorus singing to the tune that Mahathir is infallibly correct, correct, correct.

If 'Melayu mudah lupa', not so Dr M, and this possibly because he is more Melayu than your quintessential Malay. He cannot forget his vendetta against Anwar whom he humiliated with the sodomy trial that outraged Malaysians.

“What provoked outrage were the seemingly untrammelled powers of the prime minister, the dubious role of the judiciary and the blatant bias of the press. Mr Anwar served six years in prison before the sodomy (but not corruption) verdict was overturned in court. Yet perhaps the biggest victim of the episode was Dr Mahathir’s legacy.” [The Economist, July 3, 2008]

Return of Mahathir era

Mahathir has left as his legacy the herd of white elephants — Putrajaya, F1 circuit and the (almost) crooked half-bridge. He also left Malaysia his children, both biological and the products of Mahathirism. One reader at The People’s Parliament, Steven Tan, alluded to Dr M as the gardener who planted the seeds of racial polarisation that have grown into trees and how Dr M keeps fertilizing and watering them daily.

I would extend Tan’s description of ‘poisoned fruit’ to the toxic Che Det. Dr M in his blog is as vile as he has always been in his public pronouncements.

He calls Anwar 'the wily master of spin'. On Aug 21, Dr M blogged: “It is time the so-called intellectuals realise they were being duped by the Master of Spin, the pious Muslim who is also the bosom pal of Paul Wolfowitz, the neo-con Jew, the killer of Muslims, the supporter of Hindraf and of the Chinese schools etc. etc.”

It’s perhaps somewhat true that the blunt Mahathir had not needed to do any spinning as the media, his daughter and their sycophants did the work for him. So alright, Mahathir did not spin but he steamrolled. Then about two years or so ago, the mainstream media put him in the freezer, ironically making the ex-premier a victim of the very press structure of ampu-bodek (brownnosing, but in this instance sucking up to Abdullah) he himself had entrenched previously.

His spell out in the cold propelled Dr M into cyberspace, and 'Why don't I do something' (Sept 3 Che Det posting) gives his motives for blogging. The prolific Che Det is really deserving of mention in the ubiquitous Malaysia Book of Records. In a matter of six months, the blog notched nine million hits, and averages 400-800 comments per posting.

A Che Det reader ‘jamilmalik’ commended Mahathir on Monday, cheering “Always read ur [your] blog. Keep it up. However, I hope ur son will be the next ketua pemuda umno and some time in future our PM.”

With the imminent exit of Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, Dr M has returned to the public eye with a vengeance and Mukhriz romped home on nominations, sidelining Khairy. Pundits are saying the Khairy-Mukhriz skirmish is but a proxy battle for their fathers. This sudden elevation of a politically untested Mukhriz is read as a reassertion of Mahathirism.

Like father, like children

Umno insiders and Dr M fans have dizzy logic which is hard for outsiders to comprehend.

In the Aug 21 posting titled ‘2008 general election’, Dr M claimed: “Umno, MCA, Gerakan, MIC were all still there although they were somewhat different, being led at the local and national level by grasping politicians concerned with holding posts which gave them opportunities to enrich themselves, getting JPs (Justice of Peace), Datuk-ship, Tan Sri-ship and other ships, kissing the PM's hand in order to win his favour.”

It is truly amazing what Dr M deigns to criticise of Abdullah but what’s most amazing is that all these years the mainstream media never called his bluff.

Instead recently Dr M ranted that “newspapers and mainstream TV will spin on the Permatang Pauh by-election to warm the cockles of Dato Seri Abdullah and other Umno leaders’ hearts”. That coming from him of all people is, needless to say, rich.

Surely feudalism is alive and kicking as evidenced by the daily obeisance paid to Dr M. Just click at random on any posting in his blog, and the comments template is “You, sir, are the most brilliant politician Malaysia has ever been blessed with".

An interesting cross-pollination occurs in his daughter’s blog, attracting a similar groupie base both for herself and dad. A comment by ‘Salim’ went: “If I know it [Dr M’s birthday] is today I would have taken leave to celebrate the man I admire. Oh god. Please let him know me and my whole family LOVE HIM SOOOOOO MUCH. Malaysia may not get the luck for another man like him for the next hundred years. Love Dr M” — carried in Marina Mahathir’s blog. Most likely post by his power crazy sons or daughter!

If you thought blogosphere was all pro-opposition, you’re dead wrong. BigDog (nickname of a popular bilingual blogger) for instance, reports on Mukhriz extensively. On March 3, during the election campaign, BigDog posted: “Today, some top bloggers drove down to Alor Setar to cover on BN’s P005 Jerlun candidate Dato’ Mukhriz Mahathir. Leading is his own sister, Datin Paduka Marina Mahathir.” He leave behind a trail of shit just like himself!

Now who says Marina stays virtuously above the political fray?

On July 5, Mukhriz turned up at Bloghouse for a bloggers’ gathering. It was a star-studded Saturday night attended by MP bloggers, corporate figures and celebrities (Erra Fazira and her hubby who is Suria FM boss rolled in on a Harley). The hangers- on gravitated to fellow blogger Marina like bees to a honeypot. Blogosphere is not exempt from feudalistic homage either.

On July 8, commentator Thor wrote in The People’s Parliament: “The fact is, she [Marina] is where she is because she is her father’s daughter. Do you honestly think anyone — The Star, the MSM — would be interested in what she has to say and put her prominently in the limelight if she didn’t bear her father’s name?”

Thor added: “Let’s not kid ourselves. There is a certain kind of feudal mentality, certainly during her father’s time, that has benefitted her.”

What is frightening though is the clamour now for her father’s time to be restored.

Under the vacillating leadership of Abdullah, the centre did not hold and things fell apart. Brainwashed by decades of Mahathirism — dad’s sledgehammer approach and the Marina brand of apologia (as purveyed by her column publisher The Star) — Malaysians bought into the indoctrination.

Only feudalists would think their strongman’s return is the key to re-stabilising Malaysia in our current upheaval. It’s sad how the serfs have been so schooled in fear and to short-term thinking that they, of their own freewill, choose to bow to authoritarianism.