Subhanallah....
Ku Li layak bercakap mengenai perkara ini sebab beliau merupakan pengasas & president pertama Petronas. Tapi sayang, nak lead caucus kena kacau pulak dengan Wak Sembab Muhyidin. Terpaksa pulak guna platform lain.
Komen saya, apa nak jadi dengan masa depan anak - anak kita?
Free Malaysia Today
Sat, Dec 12, 2009
National
KUALA LUMPUR: Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah (picture) today painted a bleak future for Malaysia under the Barisan Nasional government, saying it had squandered the nation’s oil wealth to the tune of billions of ringgit.
The former Finance Minister said Petronas’s oil profits had been used “to bail out failing companies, buy arms, build grandiose cities amidst cleared palm oil estates.”
“Instead of helping eradicate poverty in the poorest states, our oil wealth came to be channeled into our political and politically-linked class,” the first Petronas chief and former Umno vice president said in a speech at the Young Corporate Malaysians Summit.
He said Petronas money had been used as a slush fund to prop up authoritarian rule, to corrupt the entire political and business elite and to erode constitutional democracy.
The Gua Musang MP told the conference that Petronas had contributed 40 percent to the national budget over the years.
But such a great reliance on oil income was getting untenable, he said. “The oil that was meant to spur our transition to a more humane, educated society has instead become a narcotic that provides economic quick fixes and hollow symbols such as the Petronas Towers.”
He said the future for Malaysians looks bleak with the government seeking to broaden the tax base by introducing a goods and services tax (GST), requiring Malaysians to pay an additional tax on top of income tax.
Malaysia is now caught in a middle-income trap, stuck in the pattern of easy growth from low-value-added manufacturing and component assembly and unable to make the leap to a knowledge-intensive economy, Tengku Razaleigh added.
Following is the text of his speech:
In a speech I made in April this year, I spoke of where we stand in our developmental path and what I felt we must do to move forward.
I need to revisit that argument in order to develop it further.We are stagnating. The signs of a low-growth economy are all around us. Wages are stagnant and the cost of living is rising.
We have not made much progress in becoming a knowledge and services based economy.
According to the World Bank, Malaysia’s share of GDP contributed by services was 46.2 percent in 1987. Ten years later, that share had grown by a mere 0.2 percent.
Between 1994 and 2007, real wages grew by 2.6 percent in the domestic sector and by 2.8 percent in the export sector, which is to say, they were flat over that 13-year period.
Meanwhile, our talent scenario is an example of perverse selection at its most ruinous. We are failing to retain our own young talent, people like yourselves, let alone attract international talent to relocate here, while we have had a massive influx of unskilled foreign labour. They now make up 30 to 40 percent of our workforce.
Alone in East Asia, the number of expatriate professionals here has decreased. Alone in East Asia, private sector wage increases follow government sector increases, instead of the other way around. We are losing doctors and scientists and have become Southeast Asia’s haven for low-cost labour.
I said that we are in a middle-income trap, stuck in the pattern of easy growth from low-value-added manufacturing and component assembly and unable to make the leap to a knowledge-intensive economy.
Regional competitors with larger, cheaper – and dare I say – hungrier labour forces have emerged. China and India have risen as both lower cost and higher technology producers, and with giant domestic markets.
The manufacturing sector which propelled the growth we enjoyed in the 90s is being hollowed out. There is no going back, there is no staying where we are, and we do not have a map for the way forward.
I am glad that the characterisation of Malaysia as being in a ‘middle-income-trap’ has been taken up by the government, and that the need for an economic story, or strategy, for Malaysia is now recognised.
We stand in particular need of such a model because we are a smallish economy. We cannot be good at everything, and we don’t have to be.
We need only make some reasonable bets in identifying and developing a focused set of growth drivers. It is not difficult to see what the elements of such a growth strategy might be. Whatever we come up with should build on our natural strengths, and our strengths include the following:
+ We are located at the crossroads of Asia, geographically and culturally, sitting alongside the most important oil route in the world.
+ We have large Muslim, Chinese and Indian populations that connect us to the three fastest growing places in the world today.
+ We have some of the largest and oldest rainforests in the world, a treasure house of bio-diversity when the greatest threat facing mankind as a whole now is ecological destruction, and the greatest technological advances are likely to come from bioscience.
+ We have the English language, a common law system, parliamentary democracy, good schools, an independent civil service and good infrastructure.
These advantages, however, are declining. Our cultural diversity is in danger of coming apart in bigotry, our rainforests are being logged out and planted over, our social and political institutions are decaying. I have spoken at length on different occasions about the causes and consequences of institutional decline. The decline in our society, and indeed in our natural environment, originates in a decline in our basic institutions.
The link between these is corruption. The destruction of our ecosystem, for example, is made possible by corrupt officials and business people. The uncontrolled influx of unskilled labour is a direct result of corruption.
These are problems we need to be aware of before we speak glibly about coming up with new strategies and new economic models. We need to understand where we are, and how we have gone wrong, before we can set things right.
You are young, well-educated Malaysians. Many among you have left for other shores. Record numbers of Malaysians, of all races, work abroad or have emigrated. Among these are some of our best people. They sense the stagnation I described.
There is a certain lack of energy, ingenuity and “hunger” in the climate of this country that young people are most sensitive to. In the globalised job market, young people instinctively leave the less simulating and creative environments for those that have a spark to them.
How did we lose our spark as a nation?
We have a political economy marked by dependence on easy options and easy wealth. Like personal dependencies, these bad habits provide temporary comfort but discourage the growth of creativity and resilience.
I mentioned our dependence on low-cost foreign labour.
The other dependence is something I played a part in making possible. This is a story I want to leave with you to ponder in your deliberations today.
Our nation is blessed with a modest quantity of oil reserves. As a young nation coming to terms with this natural bounty in the early 70s, our primary thought was to conserve that oil.
That is why, when Petronas was formed, we instituted the Petroleum Development Council. Its function was to advise the prime minister on how to conserve that oil and use it judiciously for national development. We knew our reserves would not last long.
We saw our oil reserves as an unearned bounty that would provide the money for modernisation and technology. We saw our oil within a developmental perspective. Our struggle then was to make the leap from an economy based on commodities and low-cost assembly and manufacturing to a more diverse economy based on high income jobs.
Aware that we had an insufficient tax base to make the capital investments needed to make the leap, we planned to apply oil royalties to what you would call today strategic investments in human capital.
Whatever money left after making cash payments, allocations for development funds, etc, was to be placed in a Heritage Fund for the future. The Heritage Fund was for education and social enrichment.
In working out the distribution of oil between the states, who had sovereign rights over it, and the federal government, we were guided by concerns for equity between all Malaysians, a concern to develop the poorer states (who also happened to be the oil rich states) and a concern for inter-generational equity. That oil was for special development purposes and it was not just meant for our generation.
Sabah and Sarawak joined Malaya to form Malaysia because of the promise of development funds. Yet today, despite their massive resources, they are some of our poorest states.
Instead of being our ace up the sleeve, however, our oil wealth became in effect a swag of money used to fund the government’s operational expenditure, to bail out failing companies, buy arms, build grandiose cities amidst cleared palm oil estates.
Instead of helping eradicate poverty in the poorest states, our oil wealth came to be channeled into the overseas bank accounts of our political and politically-linked class.
Instead of being the patrimony of all Malaysians, and for our children, it is used as a giant slush fund that has propped up authoritarian rule, eroded constitutional democracy and corrupted our entire political and business elite.
Our oil receipts, instead of being applied in the manner we planned upon the formation of Petronas, that is, according to its original developmental purpose, became a fund for the whims and fancy of whoever ran the country, without any accountability.
The oil that was meant to spur our transition to a more humane, educated society has instead become a narcotic that provides economic quick fixes and hollow symbols such as the Petronas towers.
Our oil wealth was meant to help us foster Malaysians capable of building the Twin Towers than hire foreigners to build them, a practice in which we preceded Dubai. I would rather have good government than grand government buildings filled with a demoralised civil service.
It is no wonder that we are no longer productive, no longer using our ingenuity to devise ways to improve ourselves and leap forward.
Malaysia is now an “oil cursed” country. We managed to arrive at this despite not having a lot of oil.
When I started Petronas in 1974, I did not realise I would see the day when I would wish we had not uncovered this bounty.
The story I have told is a reminder of the scale of the challenge of development. My generation of young people faced this challenge in the 60s and 70s. You face it now. The story tells us that development is about far more than picking strategies out of a box.
You have kindly invited me to address a seminar on strategies for reinventing and liberalising Malaysia’s economy. But the story of our squandered oil wealth reminds us that it was not for want of resources or strategies that we floundered.
Our failure has been political and moral. We have allowed greed and resentment to drive our politics and looked the other way or even gone along while public assets have been stolen in broad daylight.
I encourage you to take up the cause of national development with the ingenuity that earlier generations of Malaysians brought to this task, but the beginning of our journey must be a return to the basics of public life: the rule of law, honesty, truth-telling and the keeping of promises.
The Malaysia we need to recover is one that was founded on laws and led with integrity. With the hindsight of history we know such things are fragile and can be overturned in one generation, forgotten the next.
Without a living foundation in the basics, you might sense an air of unreality around our talk of reinventing ourselves, coming up with “a new economic model” and liberalising our economy.
So before we can reinvent ourselves, we need to reclaim our nation. That larger community, bound by laws, democratic and constitutional, is the context of economic progress, it is the context in which young people find hope, think generous thoughts and create tomorrow.
Sunday, December 13, 2009
Friday, December 11, 2009
ISU YB NGAR KOR MING
Putar belit media masa Malaysia kini, macam mana kita nak percaya dengan media akhbar perdana Malaysia kini, banyak sangat manipulasinya. Betul jugak kata DSAI, propaganda media BN makin menjadi jadi...
Cuba baca komen YM Zul Noordin MP Kulim seperti yg tercatit dibawah.
Salam 2 all.Saya telah membaca lapuran berkaitan kenyataan YB Ngar Kor Ming (DAP-Taiping) yang didakwa mempertikai peruntukkan yang diberikan untuk pembinaan 611 buah masjid-masjid di Malaysia bagi tempoh daripada 2000-2008.
Saya dapati kenyataan beliau tidak saperti yang digambarkan oleh akhbar-akhbar.
Apa yang beliau katakan ialah mengapa peruntukkan untuk pembinaan rumah 'ibadah bukan Islam terlalu kecil berbanding dengan peruntukkan yang diberi untuk pembinaan masjid.
Pada saya tidak ada salahnya beliau sebagai seorang bukan Islam menanyakan soalan tersebut.
Beliau sama sekali tidak menolak hakikat bahawa Perlembagaan Persekutuan memberikan tanggungjawab kepada Kerajaan Persekutuan untuk membantu dan memberi peruntukkan membina pusat-pusat dan institusi-institusi Islam saperti sekolah agama dan masjid.
Malahan YB Ngar Kor Ming dan lain-lain pemimpin DAP menyedari dan menginsafi bahawa hak umat Islam menurut Perlembagaan Persekutuan adalah dijamin dan mesti dihormati.
Bagi maksud itulah suatu kerangka kerjasama dan persefahaman Pakatan Rakyat telah diisytiharkan dan ditandatangani oleh YB Dato Seri Anwar, YB Dato Seri Hj Hadi Awang dan YB Lim Kit Siang yang terang-terang menyebut bahawa kesemua komponen Pakatan Rakyat menghormati hak dan keistimewaan umat Islam saperti yang diperuntukkan dibawah Perlembagaan.
Saya percaya kenyataan YB Nga telah diputarbelitkan oleh pihak-pihak tertentu untuk agenda politik sempit bersifat chauvinistik perkauman.Malahan kita sebagai umat Islam sepatutnya menghormati hak penganut agama lain untuk rumah 'ibadat mereka.
Saya tidak nampak dimana salahnya mereka meminta sedikit bantuan untuk pembinaan rumah 'ibadat mereka.
Dibawah konsep daulah Islamiyyah, kita akan mera'ikan dan menghormati keperluan dan kebajikan golongan kafir dhimmi.Ianya berbeza kalau DAP mempertikaikan hak umat Islam dan tanggungjawab Kerajaan Persekutuan memberikan bantuan dan peruntukkan kepada umat Islam sebagaimana yang diberikan dibawah Perlembagaan.
Kalau itu berlaku, maka mereka akan termasuk golongan harbi. Dan kalau itu berlaku, saya akan menjadi orang pertama mengutuk mereka sekeras-kerasnya tanpa sebarang keraguan.
Dan sudah pasti saya akan ambil tindakan lebih jelas terhadap mereka.Tetapi bukan itu apa yang berlaku dalam kes ini.
YB Nga cuma meminta bantuan dan peruntukkan bagi pembinaan rumah 'ibadat bukan Islam. Beliau tidak mempertikaikan hak umat Islam membina masjid! Walaupun tidak menjadi tanggungjawab Kerajaan menurut Perlembagaan dan undang-undang negara, namun kalau kita ada lebihan peruntukkan apa salahnya membantu mereka.
Selagi pembinaannya tidak menganggu umat Islam saperti apa yang berlaku di Seksyen 23 Shah Alam, saya kira kita patut pertimbangkan. Kalau ada kita bagi sedikit bantuan, kalau tidak ada kita kata sahaja tidak ada..habis cerita.
Cuba bandingkan itu dengan tindakan orang Melayu sendiri yang menjual tanah rezab Masjid kepada syarikat bukan Islam saperti yang dilakukan oleh Majlis Agama Islam Wilayah di Sri Hartamas, Danau Kota dan lain-lain!
Cuba bandingkan dengan sikap orang melayu yang menarik balik peruntukkan Sekolah Agama Rakyat sehingga menyebabkan banyak SAR yang hari ini lumpoh, lesu dan ada yang terus hilang ghaibul ghuyub! Bagaimana pula dengan perangai orang melayu yang mematikan institusi masjid dan mimbar dengan menyekat aktiviti 'ilmu dan da'wah di surau dan masjid?
Bagaimana pula sikap kita orang melayu dengan kenyataan yang dibuat oleh Parti Gerakan dalam konvensyen PGRM di Ipoh pada 08 Dis lepas yang mempertikaikan usaha kita untuk memartabatkan Islam, malahan mendesak supaya negara ini mengamalkan 'amalan sekular yang sebenarnya! Kita tidak lupa inilah parti yang sama yang menyatakan orang Melayu adalah pendatang dalam negerinya sendiri!
Dan saya tidak lihat akhbar atau pemimpin melayu mengkritik Parti Gerakan, atau mengambil tindakan tegas terhadap PGRM, Malahan semasa saya bangkitkan isu penjualan tanah-tanah masjid di Kuala Lumpur oleh MAIWP ini, tiada seorang pun wakil rakyat melayu yang bangun menyokong atau membantu saya.
Mereka diam sahaja seribu bahasa!Sebenarnya penghinaan terhadap agama Islam dan institusi Islam dalam negara ini banyak berlaku ditangan orang melayu sendiri. Kalau kafir yang buat kita sedia maklum memang itu kerja dia.
Tapi kalau melayu yang buat, apa label yang kita nak bagi..pengkhianat?munafik?Sebab itu saya menyeru kaum saya bangsa melayu supaya sedar dan insaflah kita, bahawa nasib masadepan bangsa kita terletak kepada Islam.
Kembali lah kita kepada ajaran Islam yang sebenar menurut Al Quran dan Sunnah Rasul, bersama kita menggembeling tenaga menyeru manusia kepada yang ma'ruf, dan mencegah kemungkaran, dan beriman kita dengan sebenar iman kepada ALLAH, nescaya kita akan dipelihara oleh ALLAH dan dimuliakan manusia insyallah.
Wassalam.
Zulkifli Bin NoordinKhamis22 Zulhijjah 143010 Disember 2009
Cuba baca komen YM Zul Noordin MP Kulim seperti yg tercatit dibawah.
Salam 2 all.Saya telah membaca lapuran berkaitan kenyataan YB Ngar Kor Ming (DAP-Taiping) yang didakwa mempertikai peruntukkan yang diberikan untuk pembinaan 611 buah masjid-masjid di Malaysia bagi tempoh daripada 2000-2008.
Saya dapati kenyataan beliau tidak saperti yang digambarkan oleh akhbar-akhbar.
Apa yang beliau katakan ialah mengapa peruntukkan untuk pembinaan rumah 'ibadah bukan Islam terlalu kecil berbanding dengan peruntukkan yang diberi untuk pembinaan masjid.
Pada saya tidak ada salahnya beliau sebagai seorang bukan Islam menanyakan soalan tersebut.
Beliau sama sekali tidak menolak hakikat bahawa Perlembagaan Persekutuan memberikan tanggungjawab kepada Kerajaan Persekutuan untuk membantu dan memberi peruntukkan membina pusat-pusat dan institusi-institusi Islam saperti sekolah agama dan masjid.
Malahan YB Ngar Kor Ming dan lain-lain pemimpin DAP menyedari dan menginsafi bahawa hak umat Islam menurut Perlembagaan Persekutuan adalah dijamin dan mesti dihormati.
Bagi maksud itulah suatu kerangka kerjasama dan persefahaman Pakatan Rakyat telah diisytiharkan dan ditandatangani oleh YB Dato Seri Anwar, YB Dato Seri Hj Hadi Awang dan YB Lim Kit Siang yang terang-terang menyebut bahawa kesemua komponen Pakatan Rakyat menghormati hak dan keistimewaan umat Islam saperti yang diperuntukkan dibawah Perlembagaan.
Saya percaya kenyataan YB Nga telah diputarbelitkan oleh pihak-pihak tertentu untuk agenda politik sempit bersifat chauvinistik perkauman.Malahan kita sebagai umat Islam sepatutnya menghormati hak penganut agama lain untuk rumah 'ibadat mereka.
Saya tidak nampak dimana salahnya mereka meminta sedikit bantuan untuk pembinaan rumah 'ibadat mereka.
Dibawah konsep daulah Islamiyyah, kita akan mera'ikan dan menghormati keperluan dan kebajikan golongan kafir dhimmi.Ianya berbeza kalau DAP mempertikaikan hak umat Islam dan tanggungjawab Kerajaan Persekutuan memberikan bantuan dan peruntukkan kepada umat Islam sebagaimana yang diberikan dibawah Perlembagaan.
Kalau itu berlaku, maka mereka akan termasuk golongan harbi. Dan kalau itu berlaku, saya akan menjadi orang pertama mengutuk mereka sekeras-kerasnya tanpa sebarang keraguan.
Dan sudah pasti saya akan ambil tindakan lebih jelas terhadap mereka.Tetapi bukan itu apa yang berlaku dalam kes ini.
YB Nga cuma meminta bantuan dan peruntukkan bagi pembinaan rumah 'ibadat bukan Islam. Beliau tidak mempertikaikan hak umat Islam membina masjid! Walaupun tidak menjadi tanggungjawab Kerajaan menurut Perlembagaan dan undang-undang negara, namun kalau kita ada lebihan peruntukkan apa salahnya membantu mereka.
Selagi pembinaannya tidak menganggu umat Islam saperti apa yang berlaku di Seksyen 23 Shah Alam, saya kira kita patut pertimbangkan. Kalau ada kita bagi sedikit bantuan, kalau tidak ada kita kata sahaja tidak ada..habis cerita.
Cuba bandingkan itu dengan tindakan orang Melayu sendiri yang menjual tanah rezab Masjid kepada syarikat bukan Islam saperti yang dilakukan oleh Majlis Agama Islam Wilayah di Sri Hartamas, Danau Kota dan lain-lain!
Cuba bandingkan dengan sikap orang melayu yang menarik balik peruntukkan Sekolah Agama Rakyat sehingga menyebabkan banyak SAR yang hari ini lumpoh, lesu dan ada yang terus hilang ghaibul ghuyub! Bagaimana pula dengan perangai orang melayu yang mematikan institusi masjid dan mimbar dengan menyekat aktiviti 'ilmu dan da'wah di surau dan masjid?
Bagaimana pula sikap kita orang melayu dengan kenyataan yang dibuat oleh Parti Gerakan dalam konvensyen PGRM di Ipoh pada 08 Dis lepas yang mempertikaikan usaha kita untuk memartabatkan Islam, malahan mendesak supaya negara ini mengamalkan 'amalan sekular yang sebenarnya! Kita tidak lupa inilah parti yang sama yang menyatakan orang Melayu adalah pendatang dalam negerinya sendiri!
Dan saya tidak lihat akhbar atau pemimpin melayu mengkritik Parti Gerakan, atau mengambil tindakan tegas terhadap PGRM, Malahan semasa saya bangkitkan isu penjualan tanah-tanah masjid di Kuala Lumpur oleh MAIWP ini, tiada seorang pun wakil rakyat melayu yang bangun menyokong atau membantu saya.
Mereka diam sahaja seribu bahasa!Sebenarnya penghinaan terhadap agama Islam dan institusi Islam dalam negara ini banyak berlaku ditangan orang melayu sendiri. Kalau kafir yang buat kita sedia maklum memang itu kerja dia.
Tapi kalau melayu yang buat, apa label yang kita nak bagi..pengkhianat?munafik?Sebab itu saya menyeru kaum saya bangsa melayu supaya sedar dan insaflah kita, bahawa nasib masadepan bangsa kita terletak kepada Islam.
Kembali lah kita kepada ajaran Islam yang sebenar menurut Al Quran dan Sunnah Rasul, bersama kita menggembeling tenaga menyeru manusia kepada yang ma'ruf, dan mencegah kemungkaran, dan beriman kita dengan sebenar iman kepada ALLAH, nescaya kita akan dipelihara oleh ALLAH dan dimuliakan manusia insyallah.
Wassalam.
Zulkifli Bin NoordinKhamis22 Zulhijjah 143010 Disember 2009
Dagestani pilgrims’ journey of faith real test of patience
renung baik baik.....
Most of us may not know the existence of Dagestan, a republic in the Russian Federation.
Dagestani pilgrims’ journey of faith real test of patienceBadea Abu Al-Naja
MAKKAH: Haj 2009 may have come and gone, but for Abdul Fattah Dove, a 30-year-old pilgrim from the Republic of Dagestan in the Russian Federation, this journey will remain in his memory for the rest of his life.
Dove said his journey to Makkah took him a month because his car was old and unreliable. He said it took him years to save up the money for the most affordable Haj visa, the one that doesn’t come with transportation, room and board.
“I refused to marry so as not to lose anything of the amount of money I had collected,” he said.
Dove said when he reached Makkah, he sought shelter in the city’s Kudai district where many of the pilgrims from the Russian Federation stay.
“I lived at the water-distribution station there,” he said. “The hospitable Saudi citizens supplied us with food throughout our stay.”
Dove, who was preparing to leave for home recently, was overjoyed that he had finally come to Saudi Arabia and performed Haj.
“I have realized my dream,” he said. “I can now marry.”
Abdul Aziz Yuv, 32, said many pilgrims from Dagestan and other places in the Russian Federation are faced with Haj-tour fees of up to $10,000, a princely sum for most people.
“I cannot afford to pay such a big amount of money, so I agreed with a number of other pilgrims from my country to pay only the minimum charge of the Haj visa and to do all other things on our own, including transport, accommodation and food,” he said.
Yuv said his group crossed Azerbaijan and Iran in a rickety bus. The trip took three weeks. It took Yuv six years to save the money needed for the journey he considered urgent, because “you never know when you are going to die.”
“I brought a small tent, which I erected near the water distribution station with other pilgrims from Russian countries. The moment we arrived, Saudi citizens started supplying us with large quantities of food on a daily basis,” he said.
Aminu Kuv, a 75-year-old Dagestani pilgrim, said it took him 30 years as a farmer to save the money to perform Haj. “One of my relatives had an old minibus,” he said. “All seven of us got into this minibus and reached Makkah after a month.”
Kuv said he brought with him some Russian products, including electric tools, knives and photographic equipment to sell during the Haj to help cover the cost of the pilgrimage.
Commenting on the phenomenon of pilgrims going to extreme lengths to be able to come to Haj, Sheikh Muhammad Al-Suhaili, the imam of Princess Sheikha Mosque in Makkah, said though these people were not obliged to do the Haj considering their financially inability, their insistence to come to Makkah is evidence of their strong convictions and faith.
“I often tell the story of a young man from Chechnya who walked from his home to Saudi Arabia,” he said. The imam recalled that the young man also walked from Makkah to Madinah to pay homage to the Prophet (peace be upon him) and pray at his mosque.
“Islam does not ask people to save money throughout their lives in order to be able to do the Haj or walk all the distance from their countries to Makkah, but when these people watch pilgrims doing tawaf (circumambulation of the Kaaba) or standing at Mount Arafat they feel such a yearning that they sacrifice to come,” he said.
4 YEARS IN JAIL FOR THE RAPE THAT NEVER HAPPEN
Macam ada persamaan pula dengan kes Saiful keatas Dato' Sri Anwar Ibrahim. Apa - apa pun kita tunggu masa perbicaraan nanti.
A man behind bars for nearly four years for a gang rape that never happened was cleared Thursday after his accuser admitted she lied to make her friends feel sorry for her.
William McCaffrey hugged his lawyer after the same judge who had sentenced him to 20 years in prison threw out the case and apologised.
"I've been waiting for this for a long time," the soft-spoken McCaffrey, 32, said outside a Manhattan court. "I'm just glad it's over."
New DNA tests played a part, but his exoneration largely hinged on his accuser's recantation - a rarity after rape convictions, the head of a national prosecutors' group said.
McCaffrey hugged his lawyer after the judge who sentenced him to 20 years threw out the case and apologised State Supreme Court Justice Richard Carruthers called the case "a catastrophe" for both the criminal justice system and McCaffrey, who was in jail or prison from his 2005 arrest to his release on $5,000 bail in September.
"I convey to you my personal regrets for having participated, though unknowingly, in the injustice," said Carruthers, who had called the purported attack "disgusting" during McCaffrey's 2006 sentencing.
Biurny Peguero, then 22, originally said three men, led by McCaffrey, raped her at knifepoint after luring her into their car after a night out in 2005.
McCaffrey said she had agreed to go with them to a party, and they dropped her off unharmed after she changed her mind.
Peguero told her story to a grand jury, took the stand again McCaffery's trial and said at his 2006 sentencing that the "tragedy changed my life forever."
He was convicted of charges including rape and kidnapping and got a 20-year prison term. No one else was convicted.
Defense lawyer Glenn A. Garber of the Exoneration Initiative, a New York-based group that provides free legal help challenging convictions, later persuaded prosecutors to use new technology to retest DNA samples from an apparent bite mark on Peguero's arm.
The initial tests were inconclusive. The new ones showed the genetic material not only wasn't McCaffrey's but came from at least two women, apparently friends of Peguero's who fought with her.
Separately, Peguero confessed her lie to a priest and then to authorities this year.
She claimed she was raped because she wanted her friends "to feel badly" for her, and then was afraid to back down from her story as the case continued, prosecutors said in court filings this fall.
Biurny Peguero admitted the lie and has pleaded guilty to perjury
She thought McCaffrey ultimately would be acquitted because of a lack of other evidence, prosecutors said.
"People, you know, can manipulate the system, and this woman did in this case," Manhattan District Attorney Robert Morgenthau said Thursday while discussing an unrelated case with reporters. "But she's paying a price for it."
Peguero, who now uses the name Biurny Gonzalez, pleaded guilty Monday to perjury.
The mother of two - the youngest born last month _ could face up to seven years in prison at her sentencing, set for February.Her lawyer, Paul Callan, said she was "very, very happy" about McCaffrey's vindication.
"My client has been working diligently over the last seven months to see that this day would come," he said.
Statistics on the prevalence of recanted rape allegations vary widely, but most unravel before anyone is convicted, said Scott Burns, the executive director of the National District Attorneys Association and the former DA of southwest Utah's Iron County.
Law enforcement officials and women's advocates have striven for decades to ensure sexual assault allegations are taken seriously, "so it's extremely damaging when this happens," Burns said.-AP
Tuesday, December 1, 2009
THE QUESTION : DO FORMATIONS HAVE TO BE SYMMETRICAL?
England ni negara yang mempelopori sukan bolasepak. Marketing sukan ini cukup bagus. 5 billion umat manusia tonton BPL setiap minggu. Tapi sayang, diperingkat antarabangsa, team England ini dimata saya dikira sebagai overatted. Tidak bagus mana pun pemainnya. Glamour dan kaya raya mungkin.
Menjuarai Piala Dunia 1966 pun tidak diiktiraf oleh kebanyakkan negara. Gol ketiga yang menjadi kontroversi sehingga kini. Mungkin tahun depan ada harapan kot sebab Capello mengemudi pasukan.
Sekiranya team England ini tidak layak ke Piala Dunia ataupun Kejohanan Negara Eropah, alamat rugilah penganjur temasya. Marketing jatuh.
Pada saya, favourite team tetap Samba Brazil & Germany. Spain & France? antara favourite shj, nak menang susah kecuali France. Mungkin melalui konspirasi diantara Sepp Blatter dengan Platini. Tengok sudah isu Handball Henry baru - baru ini.
Guardian Unlimited : England's lack of a natural left-winger is often seen to be their weakness, but Fabio Capello has turned it into an advantage
The England coach, Fabio Capello, has found a way to combine Steven Gerrard and Wayne Rooney to potentially useful effect.
England, we keep being told – and the criticism was particularly in vogue after the defeat to Brazil in Qatar, as though a defeat for a side missing 16 potential members of next summer's World Cup squad invalidated two years of progress under Fabio Capello – do not have width on their left side.
They don't, and it doesn't matter. When Capello protests against such designations as 4-4-2 or 4-2-3-1, it is presumably these tiresome arguments he is looking to avoid. Formations are useful, but crude, tools to give a general idea of shape, more relevant to those of us describing the game than those playing it. They are not Platonic ideals to which sides should attempt to live up. To insist that a side playing what we, for instance, call 4-2-3-1, must have a winger on each side is to allow the cart to drive the horse.
England in the World Cup qualifiers found a highly effective way of playing, so effective that they scored six more goals in European qualifying than any other nation (and before anybody argues they had an easy group, remember that no other European group featured three teams who had played at the 2006 World Cup; and that no side had ever beaten Croatia in a competitive fixture in Zagreb until Capello's England went there and shattered their self-belief with a 4-1 win). Just because that way of playing doesn't conveniently fit any default template does not diminish it; in fact, if anything, it may give it greater validity by making it harder to combat.
The Scottish way
Asymmetry has always been part of the game. The earliest extant description of a formation describes how England lined up against Scotland in the first international in 1872. According to notes made by Charles Alcock, the secretary of the FA, England's team was made up of a "goal", a "three-quarter back", a "half-back", a "fly-kick", four players listed simply as "middle", two as "left side" and one as "right side", which sounds like a lop-sided 1-2-7.
The 1-2-7 seems to have been standard, but we have no way of knowing whether it was usual to overload the left. It may be simply that those were the players available to make the long journey from London to Glasgow. Or the shape may reflect the early style of play. Football at the time – at least until Scotland showcased passing in that match – was based on head-down dribbling, with the occasional long ball to clear the lines (hence the "fly-kick"). Assuming a preponderance of right-footers, it may be that they were more effective cutting in from the left towards goal, and it similarly is logical to assume that the natural trajectory for a right-footed fly-kick would be to send the ball on a diagonal towards the left side.
Either way, Scotland held England 0-0, their concern over England's weight advantage leading them to adopt a 2-2-6 and pass the ball to keep it away from their larger opponents. That style slowly spread, and as 2-2-6 became 2-3-5, symmetry ruled, at least in terms of how newspapers presented formations. That changed with the alteration of the offside law in 1925 so that only two defensive players rather than three were needed to play a forward onside, as teams began to withdraw their centre-half into the back-line to give added defensive solidity.
It soon became apparent that that left a side short in midfield, and so, at Arsenal, Charlie Buchan, an inside-right, dropped deep to provide cover; that unbalanced the team, though, and in time the inside-left also dropped, creating the symmetrical 3-2-2-3 or W-M.
The Brazilian re-emergence
The W-M gradually spread through Europe, but it was after it had been exported to Brazil that asymmetry became formalised in a formation for the first time. It was taken across the Atlantic in 1937 by Dori Kurschner, a Jewish former Hungary international fleeing anti-Semitism in his homeland. He became coach of Flamengo, but lasted only a year as players, fans and journalists derided his supposedly defensive approach. Kurschner had replaced Flávio Costa, who stayed on as his assistant, and undermined his boss at every turn, taking advantage of his lack of Portuguese and mocking the new system.
When Kurschner was sacked, Costa was reappointed. By then, he had become a convert to the W-M, but having spent 12 months sneering at it, he couldn't admit as much. Instead he came up with what he insisted was a new formation, the diagonal, in which the central square of the W-M was tipped to become a rhombus, with one of the wing-halves slightly deeper than the other, and one of the inside-forwards slightly advanced.
There were those, such as the Portugal coach Cândido de Oliveria, who dismissed the diagonal as nothing more than a repackaging of the W-M, but perhaps it is fairer to say that Costa formalised an unspoken process that was inherent in the W-M. One inside-forward would always be more creative than the other; one half-back more defensive.
At Arsenal in the 1930s, as their former centre-half Bernard Joy explains in Soccer Tactics, the left-half Wilf Copping played deep, with the right-half Jack Crayston given more freedom. When the Wolves and England captain of the late 40s and early 50s, Billy Wright, who could also operate as a centre-half, played as a half-back, did he not play deeper than Billy Crook or Jimmy Dickinson?
Similarly, it was usual – perhaps giving credence to theories linking left-sidedness with creativity – for the inside-left to be more attacking than the inside-right, which is why the No10 rather than the No8 became lionised as the playmaker.
Costa also, whether consciously or not, began the evolution to 4-2-4, his defensive half-back eventually became a second centre-back, and the advanced inside-forward a second striker. Symmetry, briefly, returned, as Brazil won the World Cup in 1958, but by 1962, as others aped their 4-2-4 system, Brazil had moved on, using Mario Zagallo as a shuttling winger-cum-wide-midfielder on the left while Garrincha played as a more orthodox winger on the right: 4-2-4 had become an asymmetric 4-3-3.
Only when Alf Ramsey and Viktor Maslov did away with wingers altogether in the mid-60s did symmetry return, but for another two decades it was still common in those nations where a back-four was usual for one of the wide midfielders to be more attacking than the other. An extreme example came at Newcastle in the early 1980s as they played a 4-3-2 plus Chris Waddle operating on whichever flank he felt featured the weaker full-back.
Intriguingly, away at Chelsea this season, Manchester United played with what was essentially a midfield diamond, with Wayne Rooney as a lone central forward and Antonio Valencia wide on the right, a conscious asymmetry presumably designed to pen Ashley Cole back, a system more defensive in nature but essentially similar to that used by Brazil (and strangely similar to the way Argentina played in the 1966 World Cup, where Luis Artime was the lone centre-forward, and Oscar Más an isolated left-winger). The possibilities of asymmetry are still being explored in the modern game.
The Italian embrace
As the W-M was superseded, football tended to follow one of two paths: there was the Russo-Brazilian, flat back-four model; or there was the Swiss-Italian libero model. Catenaccio abandoned symmetry early.
Helenio Herrera's Internazionale featured, in Giacinto Facchetti, a marauding left-back, who was accommodated by having the nominal right-back, Tarcisio Burgnich, tuck in to become a de facto right-sided centre-back. The space he left at right-back was then covered by Jair, the right-winger, chugging back when necessary to cover as a tornante – a returner. The tornante itself can be seen as a development of something that had been characteristic of football in Argentina since the late 1940s and River Plate's La Máquina side.
River's left-winger, Félix Loustau, became known as ventilador-wing (fan-wing) because his back-tracking gave air to the midfield. The centre-half and left-half could then shuffle right, which in turn allowed the nominal right-half Norberto Yácono to take on a man-marking role, tailing the opponent's most creative player (typically the inside-left), secure in the knowledge he would not be leaving a hole on the right side of midfield. The issue was less symmetry than balance.
Gradually Inter's system became formalised and developed into il gioco all'Italiano. "It was effective for a while," said Ludovico Maradei, a former chief football writer of La Gazzetta dello Sport, "and, by the late 1970s and early 1980s everybody in Italy was playing it. But that became its undoing. Everybody had the same system and it was rigidly reflected in the numbers players wore. The No9 was the centre-forward, 11 was the second striker who always attacked from the left, 7 the tornante on the right, 4 the deep-lying central midfielder, 10 the more attacking central midfielder and 8 the link-man, usually on the centre left, leaving space for 3, the left-back, to push on. Everyone marked man-to-man so it was all very predictable. 2 on 11, 3 on 7, 4 on 10, 5 on 9, 6 was the sweeper, 7 on 3, 8 on 8, 10 on 4, 9 on 5 and 11 on 2."
In other words, asymmetries matched, every system mapping neatly on to the one it was pitted against. The problem came when it met an incongruent asymmetry, as was exposed in Juventus's defeat to Hamburg in the 1983 European Cup final. Hamburg played with two forwards: a figurehead in Horst Hrubesch, with the Dane Lars Bastrup usually playing off him to the left. That suited Giovanni Trapattoni's Juventus, because it meant Bastrup could be marked by the right-back Claudio Gentile, while the left-back Antonio Cabrini would be free to attack.
Realising that, the Hamburg coach Ernst Happel switched Bastrup to the right, putting him up against Cabrini. Trapattoni, sticking with the man-to-man system, moved Gentile across to the left to mark Bastrup.
That, of course, left a hole on the right, which Marco Tardelli was supposed to drop back from midfield and fill. In practice, though, Tardelli was both neutered as an attacking force and failed adequately to cover the gap, through which Felix Magath ran to score the only goal of the game.
Symmetry does not equal balance
And that, really, is the advantage of asymmetry; it presents sides with unfamiliar and unpredictable problems. It also takes account of players' individual characteristics. There is something very reductive about the English convention of simply referring to players by position, so that players as dissimilar as Ronaldinho and Steve Stone can both be described as wingers. Other cultures – or certainly those of Italy and Argentina – seem to have a far richer vocabulary with which to describe players, which in turn perhaps leads to greater tactical sophistication as it becomes immediately obvious that setting up a team is not about drilling 10 round holes and hammering pegs into them whatever their shape.
Perhaps that is why it took an Italian to set England up in a coherent way. Capello is not hindered by the dogma that players must play in their best positions, because he does not see players simply as positions (at times it almost feels as though England is stuck in the early 1950s and the days of a selection committee who couldn't conceive of anything beyond a W-M and mechanically voted on who the best left-winger was, who the best left-half was, and gave next to no thought to how they might actually work together).
The thought that Steven Gerrard must play in his natural position through the middle (as though you could somehow pack him and Wayne Rooney into the same space and somehow make twice the impact) isn't a distraction because Gerrard to him is less a central midfielder than a bundle of attributes. Playing him to the left of Rooney allows him into cut in on to his stronger right foot, often arriving late into the penalty area and making him difficult to pick up. Given Rooney has a natural leftward drift, that creates an intriguing interplay that is difficult for defenders to counter.
Attacking width on that flank is provided by Ashley Cole who, as he proved against Arsenal on Sunday, is once again one of the most potent attacking full-backs in the world now that he has been let off the leash by Carlo Ancelotti. Add in Frank Lampard coming from a deeper left-centre position, and England have a diverse range of options from the left, with the more orthodox width of a Theo Walcott or Aaron Lennon on the right.
Perhaps you could quibble that it would be better if, rather than Glen Johnson, England had a more defensively minded right-back, given the lack of cover Walcott or Lennon will provide (although Johnson overlapping as Walcott cuts infield is an attractive prospect), and that in an ideal world Gareth Barry would be right-footed to complement Lampard and cover Johnson's surges. And it would be nice if Emile Heskey, as well as creating space, which he does superbly, could hit a barn door – but those are the sort of flaws that are inevitable in international football, where squads are given not constructed.
England at last have a coherent model of play. That it is not symmetrical is irrelevant; far more important is that it is balanced.
Monday, November 30, 2009
SOROS REPLY TO MAHATHIR
This was published some years back during the economic crisis, where Mahathir condemned Soros. Soros replied but this was not published by our main medias.
Now read for yourself how Soros answered Dr. M.Subject: The Corruption Of Mahahir as published in the Bangkok Post
Taxpayers and voters were made to pay for his visionionary expenses enriching selected vendors along the way all paid by taxpayer or rakyat's moneyThe Corruption Of Mahahir SOROS REPLY TO MAHATHIR. Adapted from Bangkok Post (Not published locally)I have always said Dr Mahathir is a menace to his own people...
Now only you can see the effects of his foolishness when the ringgit has halved its value overnight and your economy goes kaput. Single handedly you have caused hardship to millions of your own people.
You have built useless mega projects at tremendous cost to the country.The telecoms tower in Kuala Lumpur and the highest building in the world show how stupid you are. Not only does it cause massive traffic jam, it has totally no purpose. If you need high ground for telecoms antennae a nearby mountain is there for free.This tower has no purpose from the ground up to 300 metres. The satelites make this totally unneccesary..
A fool and his money are soon parted. The only thing is you are the fool and the money belongs to Malaysians. You make 20% in every project, you have real estate in Japan and billions of shares corruptly acquired.Your 3 sons are worth 8 billion US$. Where do they get this money? Of course, corruption.
You are known as the Marcos of Malaysia, having enriched yourself to the tune of billions.You dare to shed crocodile tears during UMNO delegates meeting about the ills of corruption. Yet you are the most corrupt of all the prime ministers before you. A thief is crying thief and hopes people look the other way. Who dares to say anything when the chief is caught with his hands in the candy jar?
You said wisdom is not the monopoly of the West. So is foolishness. You have more foolishness than most people would believe. Billions are used to build two high rise Petronas buildings that benefit nobody. It now stands tall, a symbol of stupidity and irresponsibility.Instead they just add on to traffic jam.
What is this reclamation of 10 islands off Kedah? Totally absurb and stupid. Of course your benefit is 20%. And the bridge across from Malacca to Sumatra across international waters? Why not build a bridge to the moon? I am sure you still can get your 20%. You called me a Moron . How can a Moron make so much money..
By allowing short selling and borrowing millions of share from your banks we fund managers made millions out of your inexperience and poor regulations. You lose all Malaysians' money, therefore you are the Moron ... Now you know too late and start crying over spilt milk.
In Australia you are known as the recalcitrant ego maniac; in UK the corrupt bastard because of your stupid purchase of our movie studio and the 290 million ringgit Lotus racing car plant and the shady Pergau dam loans from the UK . They are useless to us and you still want to buy them.
What about buying British reject submarines through your agent, of course. The agent/ broker is designed to make millions out of Malaysian government. Your purchase of our battleships is at least 50% more than others are paying. Your purchase of 9 hospitals from UK lock, stock and barrel does not support your local architects or your industry and the British send you obsolete medical equipment. The design is atrocious, one end to the other is half a kilometer and there is no CT-scan, an absolute necessity.
In the Uk your face appears in no less than 17 newspapers as a corrupt dictator.
In Malaysia you are known as the (IBM) International Big Mouth.
In Japan they call him the 'smallest one' (brain size).
In Pacific island the Santa Claus (giving advice left and right).
In South America they call him the parrot (he talks a lot but does not know what it is about).
In Manila the living Marcos.
In Malaysia they are spending millions to lure tourists and you talk rubbish scaring every foreigner away. "When he is dumb he is doubted a fool, when he opens his mouth it removes all doubt."
While I agree the West does not have the monopoly to wisdom, your actions are not the wisest either.
Your EAEC has totally no support even in Asean. Your South-South dialogue mets with the same fate and what is this I hear of the Bridge from Malaysia to Indonesia covering 20 miles across International shipping lanes?
How crazy can one get?Even the Japanese don't have the money. This world's stupidity seems to be concentrated in one man's mind - yours.
The multimedia super corridor - MSC -. Well in USA its most stupid concept because we Americans, would have thought of it light years before. Even if it makes money, we can copy this concept can't we?Why do you want to spend your hard-earned money doing questionable projects?
It will be like the Bakun project. Abandoned fund wasted and another white elephant. I always say politicians should not be involved in business. Your ministers are also businessmen and almost every official is enriching himself.
Look at Rafidah Aziz, selling thousands of Approved Permits (APs) for cars each worth 20-30 thousand Malaysian dollars. Why not your government sells them and makes the money? She has acquired millions of shares meant for bumis for free before she agrees to list them.
Look at your Selangor Chief Minister collecting millions for approving high rise buildings from businessman. He is worth a few billions. Unfortunately he was caught with a few millions pocket money in Australia .
Every Chief Minister is awarding useless projects to his cronies then collecting secret pay offs on the side.The Land development Boards and the Economic Development Boards are used to bailout any loses suffered by politicians. The profits they keep, the loses they force the Government bodies to absorb.
How can your poor ever close the gap when every good deal is snatched by your politicians? How can your country get out of poverty if all the billions of corruption money is taken out of the country?
Look at the Sarawak Chief Minister selling billions worth of timber concessions under the table; selling every piece of state land to businessman without tender; using his own companies to obtain lucrative government contracts; selling approval signatures for a fee 'you pay I approve'.
He has 8 billion US > stashed overseas. Thousands of acres of land are given to one or two companies while thousands of poor people still live in cardboard makeshift homes; have no water and shit into the river..
Thousands of acres of land are sold to companies for plantations while the native don't have even one acre to their name. He is selling sand near the beaches to one company for earth filling and then ask the government to spend millions to protect the coastline when erosion occurs.
He lost 300 millions of the sarawak government money trying to make computer chips. He has built a port in Northern Sarawak town in water so shallow it needs dredging every year.
The Prime Minister built highways without tender, your cronies get the deal and the price double..
Your Langkawi airport runway is built is double the cost by your own company Ekran.The Malaysian nation has lost at least 30 billions during your last 10 years of corrupt rule.
One billion lost from the purchase of phantom skyhawk war planes nobody has ever seen (are they still in the Nevada desert USA ?). 3 billion lost from the London tin scandal (you thought you could corner the London tin market without knowing the Americans have a stockpile!
Stupidity at its best. 6 billion Perwaja steel mill where nobody even know where the money goes, 3 billion bank Bumiputra scandal where George Tan bribed all the bank officials to lend him the money..
6 billion forex lost by Bank Negara (the fool and his money are soon parted) and 6 billion to build three of the world’s tallest buildings (built by Japanese and Koreans and furniture imported from France - not Malaysia ) and 1 billion lost from purchase of British warship including fees paid to the broker and under the table...
Add the 10 billion you stole and 5 billion taken by Ministers.
In the 1997 the World Journalists meeting voted Dr Mahathir the Prime Minister of the Decade.
It sounded strange to everybody until it was revealed those who voted against are threatened by IRD officers and with losing their jobs.
In New York the United Nations 1997 meeting, the most corrupt Prime Minister of the decade is President Suharto and second Dr Mahathir (Actually Dr Mahathir should take first place but bribed the Indonesian to take honour of Number One.There are Fifty thousand of your university students not given places in Malaysia but are good enough for places overseas resulting in billion of dollars lost.
The British and the Australians are thinking how stupid. Your best students are sent overseas raising their standards while as in most countries the best are kept in local universities and the rejects sent overseas..
A university student in Hong Kong is much more prestigeous than any Australian counterpart.. You have been colonised by the British so long you cannot even educate your own people. Look at Hong Kong or Singapore , less than 5% study overseas. All the money saved. Your country could save billions if every student overseas is recalled to a local university, and at the same time raising your own standards.Your people are still without shoes, without land to farm, without homes, bathing in rivers shitting in hole in the ground, without water and electricity.
Your cities are concrete jungles without greenery and open spaces. Your KL is jammed with traffic. Yet you still keep on building high rises. You should come down from the clouds and stop daydreaming and firmly plant your feet in the ground.
Your schools are cramped 500 students to an acre and thousands of acres are given free to some politician who leaves them idle. Your parks are being taken by politicians to build shophouses and every cabinet minister is a landgrabbing businessman who build roads onlyto their cronies' land.
The Malaysians' Prayer"Ya Allah, we thank you for your gifts of timber, oil and grain. But then the devil sent us corrupt Mahathir without a Brain And look we are back to square one again So just take Dr Mahathir back to Hell And we will be alive and well.
"In China people have been shot for embezzling one thousand dollars. With 8 billion you have stolen therefore you would be shot 80 thousand times.. Now you are leading an anti-corruption campaign.
We all know what you should do. Look yourself in the mirror. You see the crooked you.. Then use your left hand and handcuff your right hand.
You have put the opposition leader and his son in jail when they said in parliament you are the richest PM in the world.
And his colleague Mr Karpal Singh too for 2 years.
So I get a reward or bribe if I now say you are the poorest PM in this world?
Your 3 sons are sitting in the board of directors of more than 200 companies. They must have been educated in Harvard school of business and obtained distintions? Or is it "you don't know me, you don't do business in Malaysia ” law that applies.
Billions of ringgit of Employee's Provident Funds and public Petronas funds are used to bail out your sons who make losses investing in every venture you thought you could make money. How unethical and corrupt.
Every one of your politicians are sitting on the boards of tens of companies making thousands without any effort, lending their VIP names to borrow millions from local banks without collateral..Now these have become non performing loans.
Now you want 20 million Malaysians to sacrifice for the folly of ONE man? Why not the fool resign and admit he wasted and took most of the money. I could teach you how to put your economy on track but first you must apologize to the Jews and the Malaysian people as well.
'SOROS'
Now read for yourself how Soros answered Dr. M.Subject: The Corruption Of Mahahir as published in the Bangkok Post
Taxpayers and voters were made to pay for his visionionary expenses enriching selected vendors along the way all paid by taxpayer or rakyat's moneyThe Corruption Of Mahahir SOROS REPLY TO MAHATHIR. Adapted from Bangkok Post (Not published locally)I have always said Dr Mahathir is a menace to his own people...
Now only you can see the effects of his foolishness when the ringgit has halved its value overnight and your economy goes kaput. Single handedly you have caused hardship to millions of your own people.
You have built useless mega projects at tremendous cost to the country.The telecoms tower in Kuala Lumpur and the highest building in the world show how stupid you are. Not only does it cause massive traffic jam, it has totally no purpose. If you need high ground for telecoms antennae a nearby mountain is there for free.This tower has no purpose from the ground up to 300 metres. The satelites make this totally unneccesary..
A fool and his money are soon parted. The only thing is you are the fool and the money belongs to Malaysians. You make 20% in every project, you have real estate in Japan and billions of shares corruptly acquired.Your 3 sons are worth 8 billion US$. Where do they get this money? Of course, corruption.
You are known as the Marcos of Malaysia, having enriched yourself to the tune of billions.You dare to shed crocodile tears during UMNO delegates meeting about the ills of corruption. Yet you are the most corrupt of all the prime ministers before you. A thief is crying thief and hopes people look the other way. Who dares to say anything when the chief is caught with his hands in the candy jar?
You said wisdom is not the monopoly of the West. So is foolishness. You have more foolishness than most people would believe. Billions are used to build two high rise Petronas buildings that benefit nobody. It now stands tall, a symbol of stupidity and irresponsibility.Instead they just add on to traffic jam.
What is this reclamation of 10 islands off Kedah? Totally absurb and stupid. Of course your benefit is 20%. And the bridge across from Malacca to Sumatra across international waters? Why not build a bridge to the moon? I am sure you still can get your 20%. You called me a Moron . How can a Moron make so much money..
By allowing short selling and borrowing millions of share from your banks we fund managers made millions out of your inexperience and poor regulations. You lose all Malaysians' money, therefore you are the Moron ... Now you know too late and start crying over spilt milk.
In Australia you are known as the recalcitrant ego maniac; in UK the corrupt bastard because of your stupid purchase of our movie studio and the 290 million ringgit Lotus racing car plant and the shady Pergau dam loans from the UK . They are useless to us and you still want to buy them.
What about buying British reject submarines through your agent, of course. The agent/ broker is designed to make millions out of Malaysian government. Your purchase of our battleships is at least 50% more than others are paying. Your purchase of 9 hospitals from UK lock, stock and barrel does not support your local architects or your industry and the British send you obsolete medical equipment. The design is atrocious, one end to the other is half a kilometer and there is no CT-scan, an absolute necessity.
In the Uk your face appears in no less than 17 newspapers as a corrupt dictator.
In Malaysia you are known as the (IBM) International Big Mouth.
In Japan they call him the 'smallest one' (brain size).
In Pacific island the Santa Claus (giving advice left and right).
In South America they call him the parrot (he talks a lot but does not know what it is about).
In Manila the living Marcos.
In Malaysia they are spending millions to lure tourists and you talk rubbish scaring every foreigner away. "When he is dumb he is doubted a fool, when he opens his mouth it removes all doubt."
While I agree the West does not have the monopoly to wisdom, your actions are not the wisest either.
Your EAEC has totally no support even in Asean. Your South-South dialogue mets with the same fate and what is this I hear of the Bridge from Malaysia to Indonesia covering 20 miles across International shipping lanes?
How crazy can one get?Even the Japanese don't have the money. This world's stupidity seems to be concentrated in one man's mind - yours.
The multimedia super corridor - MSC -. Well in USA its most stupid concept because we Americans, would have thought of it light years before. Even if it makes money, we can copy this concept can't we?Why do you want to spend your hard-earned money doing questionable projects?
It will be like the Bakun project. Abandoned fund wasted and another white elephant. I always say politicians should not be involved in business. Your ministers are also businessmen and almost every official is enriching himself.
Look at Rafidah Aziz, selling thousands of Approved Permits (APs) for cars each worth 20-30 thousand Malaysian dollars. Why not your government sells them and makes the money? She has acquired millions of shares meant for bumis for free before she agrees to list them.
Look at your Selangor Chief Minister collecting millions for approving high rise buildings from businessman. He is worth a few billions. Unfortunately he was caught with a few millions pocket money in Australia .
Every Chief Minister is awarding useless projects to his cronies then collecting secret pay offs on the side.The Land development Boards and the Economic Development Boards are used to bailout any loses suffered by politicians. The profits they keep, the loses they force the Government bodies to absorb.
How can your poor ever close the gap when every good deal is snatched by your politicians? How can your country get out of poverty if all the billions of corruption money is taken out of the country?
Look at the Sarawak Chief Minister selling billions worth of timber concessions under the table; selling every piece of state land to businessman without tender; using his own companies to obtain lucrative government contracts; selling approval signatures for a fee 'you pay I approve'.
He has 8 billion US > stashed overseas. Thousands of acres of land are given to one or two companies while thousands of poor people still live in cardboard makeshift homes; have no water and shit into the river..
Thousands of acres of land are sold to companies for plantations while the native don't have even one acre to their name. He is selling sand near the beaches to one company for earth filling and then ask the government to spend millions to protect the coastline when erosion occurs.
He lost 300 millions of the sarawak government money trying to make computer chips. He has built a port in Northern Sarawak town in water so shallow it needs dredging every year.
The Prime Minister built highways without tender, your cronies get the deal and the price double..
Your Langkawi airport runway is built is double the cost by your own company Ekran.The Malaysian nation has lost at least 30 billions during your last 10 years of corrupt rule.
One billion lost from the purchase of phantom skyhawk war planes nobody has ever seen (are they still in the Nevada desert USA ?). 3 billion lost from the London tin scandal (you thought you could corner the London tin market without knowing the Americans have a stockpile!
Stupidity at its best. 6 billion Perwaja steel mill where nobody even know where the money goes, 3 billion bank Bumiputra scandal where George Tan bribed all the bank officials to lend him the money..
6 billion forex lost by Bank Negara (the fool and his money are soon parted) and 6 billion to build three of the world’s tallest buildings (built by Japanese and Koreans and furniture imported from France - not Malaysia ) and 1 billion lost from purchase of British warship including fees paid to the broker and under the table...
Add the 10 billion you stole and 5 billion taken by Ministers.
In the 1997 the World Journalists meeting voted Dr Mahathir the Prime Minister of the Decade.
It sounded strange to everybody until it was revealed those who voted against are threatened by IRD officers and with losing their jobs.
In New York the United Nations 1997 meeting, the most corrupt Prime Minister of the decade is President Suharto and second Dr Mahathir (Actually Dr Mahathir should take first place but bribed the Indonesian to take honour of Number One.There are Fifty thousand of your university students not given places in Malaysia but are good enough for places overseas resulting in billion of dollars lost.
The British and the Australians are thinking how stupid. Your best students are sent overseas raising their standards while as in most countries the best are kept in local universities and the rejects sent overseas..
A university student in Hong Kong is much more prestigeous than any Australian counterpart.. You have been colonised by the British so long you cannot even educate your own people. Look at Hong Kong or Singapore , less than 5% study overseas. All the money saved. Your country could save billions if every student overseas is recalled to a local university, and at the same time raising your own standards.Your people are still without shoes, without land to farm, without homes, bathing in rivers shitting in hole in the ground, without water and electricity.
Your cities are concrete jungles without greenery and open spaces. Your KL is jammed with traffic. Yet you still keep on building high rises. You should come down from the clouds and stop daydreaming and firmly plant your feet in the ground.
Your schools are cramped 500 students to an acre and thousands of acres are given free to some politician who leaves them idle. Your parks are being taken by politicians to build shophouses and every cabinet minister is a landgrabbing businessman who build roads onlyto their cronies' land.
The Malaysians' Prayer"Ya Allah, we thank you for your gifts of timber, oil and grain. But then the devil sent us corrupt Mahathir without a Brain And look we are back to square one again So just take Dr Mahathir back to Hell And we will be alive and well.
"In China people have been shot for embezzling one thousand dollars. With 8 billion you have stolen therefore you would be shot 80 thousand times.. Now you are leading an anti-corruption campaign.
We all know what you should do. Look yourself in the mirror. You see the crooked you.. Then use your left hand and handcuff your right hand.
You have put the opposition leader and his son in jail when they said in parliament you are the richest PM in the world.
And his colleague Mr Karpal Singh too for 2 years.
So I get a reward or bribe if I now say you are the poorest PM in this world?
Your 3 sons are sitting in the board of directors of more than 200 companies. They must have been educated in Harvard school of business and obtained distintions? Or is it "you don't know me, you don't do business in Malaysia ” law that applies.
Billions of ringgit of Employee's Provident Funds and public Petronas funds are used to bail out your sons who make losses investing in every venture you thought you could make money. How unethical and corrupt.
Every one of your politicians are sitting on the boards of tens of companies making thousands without any effort, lending their VIP names to borrow millions from local banks without collateral..Now these have become non performing loans.
Now you want 20 million Malaysians to sacrifice for the folly of ONE man? Why not the fool resign and admit he wasted and took most of the money. I could teach you how to put your economy on track but first you must apologize to the Jews and the Malaysian people as well.
'SOROS'
Wednesday, November 25, 2009
DR.M : YUO KILLED DEMOCRACY IN MALAYSIA :
Artikel menarik ini diambil dari portal Malaysia Kini. Ini pandangan dan komen rakyat tentang permasaalahan yg sedang berlaku sekarang ini hasil daripada legacy Uncle Det.
'That is your legacy You silenced the voices of dissent in no uncertain terms. And in the end, the monsters your created devoured you in the process.'Dr M on democracy and sore losers
Suhaimi Said: Dr Mahathir Mohamad, I remember you as a dictator. Hundreds of people were detained under ISA during your rule. So don't talk about democracy. I was a victim of your dictatorship.
Equaliser: Dr Mahathir, you killed democracy in Malaysia - that is your legacy. We don't need people like you anymore in this blessed country. You are a Malay nationalist, that's all. You didn't serve all of Malaysia's people, which include the Chinese, Indians, and other ethnic groups.
A statesman is one who has served his country's people well and promoted democratic values and principles within government institutions and society as whole. You silenced voices of dissent in no uncertain terms.
And in the end, the monsters your created devoured you in the process.Yes, you created monsters greedy for money and power, and who were willing to use any means necessary to acquire them. This country has failed to serve all its people and continues to do so. Y
ou began the trend of money politics and this is the result of your actions.Just watch the news daily and you can see how lop-sided the coverage is in favour of the ruling party, and this right in front of our very own eyes.
If only all Malaysians would open their eyes and ears to see and listen, they would know what to do come the 13th general election.
Kris: It has been estimated that during Mahathir's premiership, the amount of taxpayers' money allegedly misused by him and his cronies was in the region of hundreds of billions.
To carry out this, he completely destroyed the judiciary and the enforcement agencies by replacing the honest top officials in these agencies with tainted officials who could be blackmailed into doing his bidding.
By having these people under his thumb and by controlling the media and the civil service, he ensured that he literally had dictatorial powers. To make sure that all the crooked deals that he made were not known to the public, he enacted laws like the Official Secrets Act.
In short, he was a premier who manipulated the democratic system to give himself dictatorial powers. That is why it is extremely disgusting to hear this man pontificating on democracy or corruption.
Playfair: It is sad but not surprising that Dr Mahathir continues to peddle half-truths to justify his opinions. He reduces democracy to a one-dimensional event - elections - and fails to refer to other equally important elements that constitute the package called democracy.
He speaks of "sore losers", but what about the 'tyranny of the majority' (which he should be all too familiar with)?
A system cultivated and nourished through dubious means and made legal through a two-thirds majority and then used to subvert national institutions to do the bidding of the majority - sore losers are nothing compared to this tyranny.
Asian values were promoted as an ideology to restrict mass political participation, good governance, transparency and accountability.
The sacking of Anwar Ibrahim could not have been more un-Asian, not to mention un-Islamic, un-Malay and un-Malaysian (if Umno will allow the use of such a term).Please keep speaking, sir, so that we can find out how you worked your way to remain in power for so long.
TC88: Talk about sore losers. Mahathir is probably a hypocrite. When Umno was declared illegal and Mahathir's position as its leader and prime minister was sorely threatened, he sacked the then Lord President and the five Supreme Court (now called the Federal Court) judges when he knew the verdict was not going to be in his favour.
Dr Mahathir, you destroyed the very fabric of Malaysia's public institutions, its constitution, the judiciary, the enforcement agencies like the police, attorney-general, and the then ACA
This has been highlighted by Ku Li (Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah) in his speeches. Please do the honourable thing and retire, and just keep quiet like your anointed successor, Pak Lah (Abdullah Ahmad Badawi), the Father of Malaysia's Conscience.
'That is your legacy You silenced the voices of dissent in no uncertain terms. And in the end, the monsters your created devoured you in the process.'Dr M on democracy and sore losers
Suhaimi Said: Dr Mahathir Mohamad, I remember you as a dictator. Hundreds of people were detained under ISA during your rule. So don't talk about democracy. I was a victim of your dictatorship.
Equaliser: Dr Mahathir, you killed democracy in Malaysia - that is your legacy. We don't need people like you anymore in this blessed country. You are a Malay nationalist, that's all. You didn't serve all of Malaysia's people, which include the Chinese, Indians, and other ethnic groups.
A statesman is one who has served his country's people well and promoted democratic values and principles within government institutions and society as whole. You silenced voices of dissent in no uncertain terms.
And in the end, the monsters your created devoured you in the process.Yes, you created monsters greedy for money and power, and who were willing to use any means necessary to acquire them. This country has failed to serve all its people and continues to do so. Y
ou began the trend of money politics and this is the result of your actions.Just watch the news daily and you can see how lop-sided the coverage is in favour of the ruling party, and this right in front of our very own eyes.
If only all Malaysians would open their eyes and ears to see and listen, they would know what to do come the 13th general election.
Kris: It has been estimated that during Mahathir's premiership, the amount of taxpayers' money allegedly misused by him and his cronies was in the region of hundreds of billions.
To carry out this, he completely destroyed the judiciary and the enforcement agencies by replacing the honest top officials in these agencies with tainted officials who could be blackmailed into doing his bidding.
By having these people under his thumb and by controlling the media and the civil service, he ensured that he literally had dictatorial powers. To make sure that all the crooked deals that he made were not known to the public, he enacted laws like the Official Secrets Act.
In short, he was a premier who manipulated the democratic system to give himself dictatorial powers. That is why it is extremely disgusting to hear this man pontificating on democracy or corruption.
Playfair: It is sad but not surprising that Dr Mahathir continues to peddle half-truths to justify his opinions. He reduces democracy to a one-dimensional event - elections - and fails to refer to other equally important elements that constitute the package called democracy.
He speaks of "sore losers", but what about the 'tyranny of the majority' (which he should be all too familiar with)?
A system cultivated and nourished through dubious means and made legal through a two-thirds majority and then used to subvert national institutions to do the bidding of the majority - sore losers are nothing compared to this tyranny.
Asian values were promoted as an ideology to restrict mass political participation, good governance, transparency and accountability.
The sacking of Anwar Ibrahim could not have been more un-Asian, not to mention un-Islamic, un-Malay and un-Malaysian (if Umno will allow the use of such a term).Please keep speaking, sir, so that we can find out how you worked your way to remain in power for so long.
TC88: Talk about sore losers. Mahathir is probably a hypocrite. When Umno was declared illegal and Mahathir's position as its leader and prime minister was sorely threatened, he sacked the then Lord President and the five Supreme Court (now called the Federal Court) judges when he knew the verdict was not going to be in his favour.
Dr Mahathir, you destroyed the very fabric of Malaysia's public institutions, its constitution, the judiciary, the enforcement agencies like the police, attorney-general, and the then ACA
This has been highlighted by Ku Li (Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah) in his speeches. Please do the honourable thing and retire, and just keep quiet like your anointed successor, Pak Lah (Abdullah Ahmad Badawi), the Father of Malaysia's Conscience.
KISAH PENDAYUNG SAMPAN
Suatu hari, seorang Professor yang sedang membuat kajian tentang lautan menumpang sebuah sampan. Pendayung sampan itu seorang tua yang begitu pendiam. Professor memang mencari pendayung sampan yang pendiam agar tidak banyak bertanya ketika dia sedang membuat kajian.Dengan begitu tekun Professor itu membuat kajian. Di-ambilnya sedikit air laut dengan tabung uji kemudian digoyang-goyangselepas itu dia menulis sesuatu di dalam buku. Berjam-jam lamanya Professor itu membuat kajian dengan tekun sekali. Pendayung sampan itu mendongak ke langit. Berdasarkan pengalamannya dia berkata di dalam hati; "Hmm. Hari nak hujan."
"OK, semua sudah siap, mari kita balik ke darat", kata Professor itu.
Pendayung sampan itu akur dan mula memusingkan sampannya ke arah pantai. Hanya dalam perjalanan pulang itu barulah Professor itu menegur pendayung sampan.
"Kamu dah lama kerja mendayung sampan?" Tanya Professor itu.
"Hampir semur hidup saya", Jawab pendayung sampan itu dgn ringkas.
"Seumur hidup kamu?" Tanya Professor itu lagi. "Ya".
"Jadi kamu tak tahu perkara-perkara lain selain dari mendayung sampan?" Tanya Professor itu.
Pendayung sampan itu hanya menggelengkan kepalanya. Masih tidak berpuas hati, Professor itu bertanya lagi, "Kamu tahu geografi?"
Pendayung sampan itu menggelengkan kepala.
"Kalau macam ni, kamu dah kehilangan 25 peratus dari usia kamu."
Kata Professor itu lagi, "Kamu tahu biologi?"
Pendayung sampan itu menggelengkan kepala.
"Kasihan. Kamu dah kehilangan 50 peratus usia kamu. Kamu tahu fizik?" Professor itu masih lagi bertanya.
Seperti tadi, pendayung sampan itu hanya menggelengkan kepala.
"Kalau begini, kasihan, kamu sudah kehilangan 75 peratus dari usia kamu.Malang sungguh nasib kamu, semuanya tak tahu.Seluruh usia kamu dihabiskan sebagai pendayung sampan." Kata Professor itu dengan nada mengejek dan angkuh. Pendayung sampan itu hanya berdiam diri.
Selang beberapa minit kemudian, tiba-tiba hujan turun. Tiba-tiba saja datang ombak besar. Sampan itu dilambung ombak besar dan terbalik.Professor dan pendayung sampan terpelanting. Sempat pula pendayung sampan itu bertanya;
"Kamu tahu berenang?"
Professor itu menggelengkan kepala.
"Kalau macam ini, kamu dah kehilangan 100 peratus nyawa kamu." Kata pendayung sampan itu sambil berenang menuju ke pantai.
Moral of the Story:
Dalam hidup ini IQ yang tinggi belum tentu boleh menjamin kehidupan. Tak guna kalau kita pandai dan tahu banyak perkara jika tak tahu perkara-perkara penting dalam hidup.
Adakalanya orang yang kita sangka bodoh itu rupanya lebih berjaya dari kita. Dia mungkin bodoh dalam bidang yang tidak ada kena mengena dengan kerjayanya, tetapi 'MASTER' dalam bidang yang diceburi. Hidup ini singkat. Jadi, tanyalah pada diri sendiri,untuk apakah ilmu yg dikumpulkan jika bukan untuk digunakan dan boleh digunakan?
Hikmat Inspirasi:
Kepuasan itu terletak pada usaha bukannya pada pencapaian. Usaha sempurna adalah kemenangan.-/zai6973.blogspot
"OK, semua sudah siap, mari kita balik ke darat", kata Professor itu.
Pendayung sampan itu akur dan mula memusingkan sampannya ke arah pantai. Hanya dalam perjalanan pulang itu barulah Professor itu menegur pendayung sampan.
"Kamu dah lama kerja mendayung sampan?" Tanya Professor itu.
"Hampir semur hidup saya", Jawab pendayung sampan itu dgn ringkas.
"Seumur hidup kamu?" Tanya Professor itu lagi. "Ya".
"Jadi kamu tak tahu perkara-perkara lain selain dari mendayung sampan?" Tanya Professor itu.
Pendayung sampan itu hanya menggelengkan kepalanya. Masih tidak berpuas hati, Professor itu bertanya lagi, "Kamu tahu geografi?"
Pendayung sampan itu menggelengkan kepala.
"Kalau macam ni, kamu dah kehilangan 25 peratus dari usia kamu."
Kata Professor itu lagi, "Kamu tahu biologi?"
Pendayung sampan itu menggelengkan kepala.
"Kasihan. Kamu dah kehilangan 50 peratus usia kamu. Kamu tahu fizik?" Professor itu masih lagi bertanya.
Seperti tadi, pendayung sampan itu hanya menggelengkan kepala.
"Kalau begini, kasihan, kamu sudah kehilangan 75 peratus dari usia kamu.Malang sungguh nasib kamu, semuanya tak tahu.Seluruh usia kamu dihabiskan sebagai pendayung sampan." Kata Professor itu dengan nada mengejek dan angkuh. Pendayung sampan itu hanya berdiam diri.
Selang beberapa minit kemudian, tiba-tiba hujan turun. Tiba-tiba saja datang ombak besar. Sampan itu dilambung ombak besar dan terbalik.Professor dan pendayung sampan terpelanting. Sempat pula pendayung sampan itu bertanya;
"Kamu tahu berenang?"
Professor itu menggelengkan kepala.
"Kalau macam ini, kamu dah kehilangan 100 peratus nyawa kamu." Kata pendayung sampan itu sambil berenang menuju ke pantai.
Moral of the Story:
Dalam hidup ini IQ yang tinggi belum tentu boleh menjamin kehidupan. Tak guna kalau kita pandai dan tahu banyak perkara jika tak tahu perkara-perkara penting dalam hidup.
Adakalanya orang yang kita sangka bodoh itu rupanya lebih berjaya dari kita. Dia mungkin bodoh dalam bidang yang tidak ada kena mengena dengan kerjayanya, tetapi 'MASTER' dalam bidang yang diceburi. Hidup ini singkat. Jadi, tanyalah pada diri sendiri,untuk apakah ilmu yg dikumpulkan jika bukan untuk digunakan dan boleh digunakan?
Hikmat Inspirasi:
Kepuasan itu terletak pada usaha bukannya pada pencapaian. Usaha sempurna adalah kemenangan.-/zai6973.blogspot
THE REAL MAHATHIR MOHAMAD AS SEEN BY BARRY WAIN : Din Merican
The real Mahathir laid bare for Malaysians and UMNO: Siti Hasmah says “he belongs to the people“ at a cost of RM100 billion
Malaysia has squandered an estimated RM100 billion on financial scandals under the 22-year rule of Dr Mahathir Mohamad, according to a new book about the former prime minister.
According to Barry Wain, author of the soon-to-be launched ‘Malaysian Maverick: Mahathir Mohamad in Turbulent Times’, direct financial losses amounted to about RM50 billion.
This doubled once the invisible costs, such as unrecorded write-offs, were taken into account. The RM100 billion total loss was equivalent to US$40 billion at then prevailing exchange rates.
Barry, who is a former editor of the Asian Wall Street Journal, says most of the scams, which included a government attempt to manipulate the international tin price and gambling by Bank Negara on global currency markets, occurred in the 1980s.
‘Malaysian Maverick’ is the first independent, full-length study of Mahathir, who retired in 2003 after more than two decades as premier. The book will be published globally next week by Palgrave Macmillan.
Wain writes that the Mahathir administration, which took office in 1981 with the slogan, “clean, efficient, trustworthy”, was almost immediately embroiled in financial scandals that “exploded with startling regularity”.
By the early 1990s, he says, cynics remarked that it had been “a good decade for bad behaviour, or a bad decade for good behaviour”.
Secret military deal with US
The book also reveals that:
Mahathir, despite his nationalistic rants, signed a secret security agreement with the United States in 1984 that gave the Americans access to a jungle warfare training school in Johor and allowed them to set up a small-ship repair facility at Lumut and a plant in Kuala Lumpur to repair C-130 Hercules transport aircraft.
Mahathir used a secret fund of his ruling UMNO to turn the party into a vast conglomerate with investments that spanned almost the entire economy.
Mahathir’s UMNO financed its new Putra World Trade Centre headquarters in Kuala Lumpur partly with taxpayers money, by forcing state-owned banks to write off at least RM140 million in interest on UMNO loans.
Wain, who is now a writer-in-residence at the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies in Singapore, however credits Mahathir with engineering the country’s economic transformation, deepening industrialisation and expanding Malaysia’s middle class.
But Mahathir had undermined state institutions, permitted the spread of corruption and failed to provide for Malaysia’s future leadership, he says.
Friday, November 20, 2009
CHANGELING : A Real True Story
Ulasan Faisal Tehrani.......Korupsi
SEBUAH kisah benar lakonan Angelina Jolie & John Markovitch.10 Mac 1928 apabila Christine bangun pagi dengan janji untuk membawa anaknya menonton filem, dia menerima panggilan untuk menggantikan tempat seorang rakan sekerja yang sedang sakit. Meski hari tersebut adalah hari cutinya, Christine berlepas ke tempat kerja sebagai seorang ketua operator penuh dedikasi, dan pulang dalam keadaan lewat. Dia mendapati Walter, buah hatinya tidak ada di rumah seperti biasa. Malah tiada di mana-mana. Walter Collins segera dilaporkan sebagai kanak-kanak hilang. Maka bermulalah penderitaan seorang ibu yang menanti sesuatu yang tidak kunjung tiba.
Filem arahan Clint Eastwood ini tidak terlalu berminat menyelami perasaan Christine sebagai seorang ibu yang penuh emosi meskipun Angelina Jolie yang memeran watak Christine dengan penuh luar biasa sekali melakonkan watak seorang ibu yang tertekan jiwa seraya berdepan dengan trauma kehilangan anak lelakinya.
Fokus utama Changeling jauh lebih bersifat politik. Ia bercita-cita besar untuk membongkar korupsi pihak berkuasa Los Angelas pada waktu itu.Kehebatan Changeling terletak pada tiga lapis tema yang berselirat.
Pertama, kisah kehancuran hati seorang ibu mendepani realiti kehilangan anaknya.
Kedua, sebuah filem tentang kejahatan pihak berkuasa polis Los Angelas yang bukan menangkap penjenayah tetapi sebaliknya melindungi penjenayah.
Ketiga, kisah suspen bagaimana pembunuh bersiri kanak-kanak yang dipercayai menculik Walter dihadapkan ke muka pengadilan lalu menerima hukuman gantung sampai mati.
Changeling yang terbit tahun 2008, menyorot seorang ibu yang lurus dan naif. Sebagai warga kota yang jujur dan baik, Christine mempercayai sepenuh hatinya bahawa pihak polis sedang dan akan melakukan yang terbaik untuk mencari anaknya yang hilang.
Tetapi Christine tersilap. Pihak polis sedang mendapat keuntungan dengan berlagak sebagai polis. Kuasa yang ada di tangan polis membolehkan mereka melakukan apa sahaja terhadap sesiapa sahaja.
Di Los Angelas waktu itu, polis adalah raja sarang pelacuran, raja penyeludupan senjata, raja samseng dan pembunuhan malah raja sekian banyak sindiket.Plot berubah menjadi bahagian yang paling menakutkan. Walter Collins dipulangkan.
Tetapi igauan buruk yang baharu menjelma dalam hidup Christine. Dia seorang ibu yang amat mengenal anaknya Walter. Budak lelaki yang dipulangkan oleh pihak polis bukanlah anaknya tetapi seorang anak hilang yang lain.
Demi memperbaiki imej, polis Los Angelas telah mengajar anak tersebut untuk mengaku sebagai Walter Collins dan disiapkan jejeran media dan wartawan untuk menunjukkan betapa cekapnya pihak berkuasa.Christine bertegas budak yang didatangkan oleh pihak polis bukan anaknya. Ia menjadi lebih jelas apabila anak tersebut dilihat berkhatan, dan ketinggiannya tidak mencapai ketinggian Walter yang kerap diukur oleh Christine.
Menyedari ada sesuatu yang tidak kena, Christine mulai melawan arus. Pihak polis yang merasakan Christine kini di pihak yang bersiap untuk mencemar ‘nama baik’ mereka bakal bertindak lebih ganas. Christine didekati oleh seorang paderi, Gustav Brigleb agamawan yang mengisytiharkan perang moral ke atas pihak polis yang ganas dan melakukan jenayah terancang.
Pertama kali, Christine menolak untuk ‘berjuang bersamanya’. Christine hanya mahu anaknya pulang. Bukan terlibat dalam sebuah gerakan politik. Akan tetapi plot yang lebih mengejutkan menerjah. Pihak polis yang rasa terancam dengan suara-suara keras Christine membuat pilihan untuk mengisytiharkan Christine sebagai gila dan dia dihantar ke wad gila. Christine terkejut mendapati pesakit jiwa yang terkumpul di dalam hospital terasing tersebut ialah mangsa keganasan polis.
Ada di antaranya dihantar ke neraka itu semata-mata kerana tidak mahu meniduri pegawai polis tertentu. Ada yang dihantar ke tempat tersebut kerana mengingkari suami mereka, juga pegawai polis.Kekuatan filem ini ialah permainan plot dan sub-plotnya yang baik. Sebab dan akibat terjalin dengan baik meski ia bergerak lambat dan setingkat demi setingkat suspen atau ketegangan dibina. Perjuangan Christine kini bukan lagi mencari anak yang hilang semata-mata tetapi ialah melawan korupsi pihak polis dan ia dilakukan tanpa mengalah dan berundur.
Suku akhir filem ini memaparkan pula bahagian memualkan di mana penculik dan pembunuh bersiri kanak-kanak yang bertanggungjawab menculik Walter ditahan. Ia disulam dengan adegan polis termasuk ketuanya dihadapkan ke tribunal ala-ala inkues terbuka.Apakah lagi yang menarik pada Changeling?
Filem ini, Changeling mempaparkan sisi politik seorang agamawan, iaitu turun ke padang menyelesaikan masalah masyarakat. Gereja dijadikan titik pusat perlawanan menentang korupsi sehingga di akhirnya sebahagian besar masyarakat ikut keluar berdemonstrasi menunjuk rasa terhadap ketidakadilan pihak berkuasa. Kepimpinan agama seperti ini yang begitu teguh dan berani melawan ahli-ahli politik korup sering mendapat tempat dalam sejarah. Dalam skala yang lebih besar dan berpengaruh pada tahun 1979 misalnya, Imam Khomeini menjadi pemimpin agama yang bangkit menentang penindasan, ketidakadilan dan korupsi penguasa.
Rakyat yang terkesan oleh keganasan polis rahsia Savak ikut bersama dengan beliau. Changeling dikuatkan oleh lakonan bintang-bintang terkemuka Hollywood antara lain Angelina Jolie, John Malkovich dan Jeffrey Donovan. Ia menerima pencalonan Oscar untuk kategori sinematografi dan penataan seni. Jolie sendiri dicalonkan untuk kategori pelakon wanita terbaik.Changeling adalah satu lagi tanda dalam sinema moden.
Sekiranya filem Malaysia berminat untuk meninggalkan tanda di peringkat antarabangsa, filem yang berani seperti ini harus dihasilkan. Pelbagai korupsi yang pernah menjadi skandal dalam politik negara wajar difilemkan. Isu skandal BMF, Perwaja, reformasi tahun 1997, tragedi Memali, pembunuhan Altantuya Shaaribu, kes liwat Saiful Bukhari Azlan atau kematian misteri Teoh Beng Hock memberikan bumbu cerita yang bertenaga.Filem dengan sisi muluk dan molek pihak berkuasa ala Gerak Khas hanya meninggalkan citra propaganda. Kausaliti dengan niat propaganda sering diabaikan di peringkat internasional. Malah cepat kita lupakan.Tetapi adakah karyawan Malaysia yang berani?
Tersiar di Siasah edisi 15-21 November. Dilarang menerbit kembali atau memindah ubah.
SEBUAH kisah benar lakonan Angelina Jolie & John Markovitch.10 Mac 1928 apabila Christine bangun pagi dengan janji untuk membawa anaknya menonton filem, dia menerima panggilan untuk menggantikan tempat seorang rakan sekerja yang sedang sakit. Meski hari tersebut adalah hari cutinya, Christine berlepas ke tempat kerja sebagai seorang ketua operator penuh dedikasi, dan pulang dalam keadaan lewat. Dia mendapati Walter, buah hatinya tidak ada di rumah seperti biasa. Malah tiada di mana-mana. Walter Collins segera dilaporkan sebagai kanak-kanak hilang. Maka bermulalah penderitaan seorang ibu yang menanti sesuatu yang tidak kunjung tiba.
Filem arahan Clint Eastwood ini tidak terlalu berminat menyelami perasaan Christine sebagai seorang ibu yang penuh emosi meskipun Angelina Jolie yang memeran watak Christine dengan penuh luar biasa sekali melakonkan watak seorang ibu yang tertekan jiwa seraya berdepan dengan trauma kehilangan anak lelakinya.
Fokus utama Changeling jauh lebih bersifat politik. Ia bercita-cita besar untuk membongkar korupsi pihak berkuasa Los Angelas pada waktu itu.Kehebatan Changeling terletak pada tiga lapis tema yang berselirat.
Pertama, kisah kehancuran hati seorang ibu mendepani realiti kehilangan anaknya.
Kedua, sebuah filem tentang kejahatan pihak berkuasa polis Los Angelas yang bukan menangkap penjenayah tetapi sebaliknya melindungi penjenayah.
Ketiga, kisah suspen bagaimana pembunuh bersiri kanak-kanak yang dipercayai menculik Walter dihadapkan ke muka pengadilan lalu menerima hukuman gantung sampai mati.
Changeling yang terbit tahun 2008, menyorot seorang ibu yang lurus dan naif. Sebagai warga kota yang jujur dan baik, Christine mempercayai sepenuh hatinya bahawa pihak polis sedang dan akan melakukan yang terbaik untuk mencari anaknya yang hilang.
Tetapi Christine tersilap. Pihak polis sedang mendapat keuntungan dengan berlagak sebagai polis. Kuasa yang ada di tangan polis membolehkan mereka melakukan apa sahaja terhadap sesiapa sahaja.
Di Los Angelas waktu itu, polis adalah raja sarang pelacuran, raja penyeludupan senjata, raja samseng dan pembunuhan malah raja sekian banyak sindiket.Plot berubah menjadi bahagian yang paling menakutkan. Walter Collins dipulangkan.
Tetapi igauan buruk yang baharu menjelma dalam hidup Christine. Dia seorang ibu yang amat mengenal anaknya Walter. Budak lelaki yang dipulangkan oleh pihak polis bukanlah anaknya tetapi seorang anak hilang yang lain.
Demi memperbaiki imej, polis Los Angelas telah mengajar anak tersebut untuk mengaku sebagai Walter Collins dan disiapkan jejeran media dan wartawan untuk menunjukkan betapa cekapnya pihak berkuasa.Christine bertegas budak yang didatangkan oleh pihak polis bukan anaknya. Ia menjadi lebih jelas apabila anak tersebut dilihat berkhatan, dan ketinggiannya tidak mencapai ketinggian Walter yang kerap diukur oleh Christine.
Menyedari ada sesuatu yang tidak kena, Christine mulai melawan arus. Pihak polis yang merasakan Christine kini di pihak yang bersiap untuk mencemar ‘nama baik’ mereka bakal bertindak lebih ganas. Christine didekati oleh seorang paderi, Gustav Brigleb agamawan yang mengisytiharkan perang moral ke atas pihak polis yang ganas dan melakukan jenayah terancang.
Pertama kali, Christine menolak untuk ‘berjuang bersamanya’. Christine hanya mahu anaknya pulang. Bukan terlibat dalam sebuah gerakan politik. Akan tetapi plot yang lebih mengejutkan menerjah. Pihak polis yang rasa terancam dengan suara-suara keras Christine membuat pilihan untuk mengisytiharkan Christine sebagai gila dan dia dihantar ke wad gila. Christine terkejut mendapati pesakit jiwa yang terkumpul di dalam hospital terasing tersebut ialah mangsa keganasan polis.
Ada di antaranya dihantar ke neraka itu semata-mata kerana tidak mahu meniduri pegawai polis tertentu. Ada yang dihantar ke tempat tersebut kerana mengingkari suami mereka, juga pegawai polis.Kekuatan filem ini ialah permainan plot dan sub-plotnya yang baik. Sebab dan akibat terjalin dengan baik meski ia bergerak lambat dan setingkat demi setingkat suspen atau ketegangan dibina. Perjuangan Christine kini bukan lagi mencari anak yang hilang semata-mata tetapi ialah melawan korupsi pihak polis dan ia dilakukan tanpa mengalah dan berundur.
Suku akhir filem ini memaparkan pula bahagian memualkan di mana penculik dan pembunuh bersiri kanak-kanak yang bertanggungjawab menculik Walter ditahan. Ia disulam dengan adegan polis termasuk ketuanya dihadapkan ke tribunal ala-ala inkues terbuka.Apakah lagi yang menarik pada Changeling?
Filem ini, Changeling mempaparkan sisi politik seorang agamawan, iaitu turun ke padang menyelesaikan masalah masyarakat. Gereja dijadikan titik pusat perlawanan menentang korupsi sehingga di akhirnya sebahagian besar masyarakat ikut keluar berdemonstrasi menunjuk rasa terhadap ketidakadilan pihak berkuasa. Kepimpinan agama seperti ini yang begitu teguh dan berani melawan ahli-ahli politik korup sering mendapat tempat dalam sejarah. Dalam skala yang lebih besar dan berpengaruh pada tahun 1979 misalnya, Imam Khomeini menjadi pemimpin agama yang bangkit menentang penindasan, ketidakadilan dan korupsi penguasa.
Rakyat yang terkesan oleh keganasan polis rahsia Savak ikut bersama dengan beliau. Changeling dikuatkan oleh lakonan bintang-bintang terkemuka Hollywood antara lain Angelina Jolie, John Malkovich dan Jeffrey Donovan. Ia menerima pencalonan Oscar untuk kategori sinematografi dan penataan seni. Jolie sendiri dicalonkan untuk kategori pelakon wanita terbaik.Changeling adalah satu lagi tanda dalam sinema moden.
Sekiranya filem Malaysia berminat untuk meninggalkan tanda di peringkat antarabangsa, filem yang berani seperti ini harus dihasilkan. Pelbagai korupsi yang pernah menjadi skandal dalam politik negara wajar difilemkan. Isu skandal BMF, Perwaja, reformasi tahun 1997, tragedi Memali, pembunuhan Altantuya Shaaribu, kes liwat Saiful Bukhari Azlan atau kematian misteri Teoh Beng Hock memberikan bumbu cerita yang bertenaga.Filem dengan sisi muluk dan molek pihak berkuasa ala Gerak Khas hanya meninggalkan citra propaganda. Kausaliti dengan niat propaganda sering diabaikan di peringkat internasional. Malah cepat kita lupakan.Tetapi adakah karyawan Malaysia yang berani?
Tersiar di Siasah edisi 15-21 November. Dilarang menerbit kembali atau memindah ubah.
RASULULLAH S.A.W DAN PENGEMIS YAHUDI BUTA
Satu kisah untuk dijadikan iktibar. Teringkat pula pepatah Inggeris menyatakan " Don't Judge A Book By It's Cover".
Di sudut pasar Madinah Al-Munawarah seorang pengemis Yahudi buta hari demi hari apabila ada orang yang mendekatinya ia selalu berkata "Wahai saudaraku jangan dekati Muhammad, dia itu orang gila, dia itu pembohong, dia itu tukang sihir, apabila kalian mendekatinya kalian akan dipengaruhinya". Setiap pagi Rasulullah SAW mendatanginya dengan membawa makanan, dan tanpa berkata sepatah kata pun Rasulullah SAW menyuapi makanan yang dibawanya kepada pengemis itu walaupun pengemis itu selalu berpesan agar tidak mendekati orang yang bernama Muhammad. Rasulullah SAW melakukannya hingga menjelang Beliau SAW wafat. Setelah kewafatan Rasulullah tidak ada lagi orang yang membawakan makanan setiap pagi kepada pengemis Yahudi buta itu.
Suatu hari Abubakar r.a berkunjung ke rumah anaknya Aisyah r.ha. Beliau bertanya kepada anaknya, "anakku adakah sunnah kekasihku yang belum aku kerjakan", Aisyah r.ha menjawab pertanyaan ayahnya, "Wahai ayah engkau adalah seorang ahli sunnah hampir tidak ada satu sunnah pun yang belum ayah lakukan kecuali satu sunnah saja". "Apakah Itu?", tanya Abubakar r.a. Setiap pagi Rasulullah SAW selalu pergi ke ujung pasar dengan membawakan makanan untuk seorang pengemis Yahudi buta yang berada di sana", kata Aisyah r.ha.
Ke esokan harinya Abubakar r.a. pergi ke pasar dengan membawa makanan untuk diberikannya kepada pengemis itu. Abubakar r.a mendatangi pengemis itu dan memberikan makanan itu kepada nya. Ketika Abubakar r.a. mulai menyuapinya, si pengemis marah sambil berteriak, "siapakah kamu ?". Abubakar r.a menjawab, "aku orang yang biasa". "Bukan !, engkau bukan orang yang biasa mendatangiku", jawab si pengemis buta itu. Apabila ia datang kepadaku tidak susah tangan ini memegang dan tidak susah mulut ini mengunyah. Orang yang biasa mendatangiku itu selalu menyuapiku, tapi terlebih dahulu dihaluskannya makanan tersebut dengan mulutnya setelah itu ia berikan pada ku dengan mulutnya sendiri", pengemis itu melanjutkan perkataannya.
Abubakar r.a. tidak dapat menahan air matanya, ia menangis sambil berkata kepada pengemis itu, aku memang bukan orang yang biasa datang pada mu, aku adalah salah seorang dari sahabatnya, orang yang mulia itu telah tiada. Ia adalah Muhammad Rasulullah SAW. Setelah pengemis itu mendengar cerita Abubakar r.a. ia pun menangis dan kemudian berkata, benarkah demikian?, selama ini aku selalu menghinanya, memfitnahnya, ia tidak pernah memarahiku sedikitpun, ia mendatangiku dengan membawa makanan setiap pagi, ia begitu mulia.... Pengemis Yahudi buta tersebut akhirnya bersyahadat dihadapan Abubakar r.a.
Di sudut pasar Madinah Al-Munawarah seorang pengemis Yahudi buta hari demi hari apabila ada orang yang mendekatinya ia selalu berkata "Wahai saudaraku jangan dekati Muhammad, dia itu orang gila, dia itu pembohong, dia itu tukang sihir, apabila kalian mendekatinya kalian akan dipengaruhinya". Setiap pagi Rasulullah SAW mendatanginya dengan membawa makanan, dan tanpa berkata sepatah kata pun Rasulullah SAW menyuapi makanan yang dibawanya kepada pengemis itu walaupun pengemis itu selalu berpesan agar tidak mendekati orang yang bernama Muhammad. Rasulullah SAW melakukannya hingga menjelang Beliau SAW wafat. Setelah kewafatan Rasulullah tidak ada lagi orang yang membawakan makanan setiap pagi kepada pengemis Yahudi buta itu.
Suatu hari Abubakar r.a berkunjung ke rumah anaknya Aisyah r.ha. Beliau bertanya kepada anaknya, "anakku adakah sunnah kekasihku yang belum aku kerjakan", Aisyah r.ha menjawab pertanyaan ayahnya, "Wahai ayah engkau adalah seorang ahli sunnah hampir tidak ada satu sunnah pun yang belum ayah lakukan kecuali satu sunnah saja". "Apakah Itu?", tanya Abubakar r.a. Setiap pagi Rasulullah SAW selalu pergi ke ujung pasar dengan membawakan makanan untuk seorang pengemis Yahudi buta yang berada di sana", kata Aisyah r.ha.
Ke esokan harinya Abubakar r.a. pergi ke pasar dengan membawa makanan untuk diberikannya kepada pengemis itu. Abubakar r.a mendatangi pengemis itu dan memberikan makanan itu kepada nya. Ketika Abubakar r.a. mulai menyuapinya, si pengemis marah sambil berteriak, "siapakah kamu ?". Abubakar r.a menjawab, "aku orang yang biasa". "Bukan !, engkau bukan orang yang biasa mendatangiku", jawab si pengemis buta itu. Apabila ia datang kepadaku tidak susah tangan ini memegang dan tidak susah mulut ini mengunyah. Orang yang biasa mendatangiku itu selalu menyuapiku, tapi terlebih dahulu dihaluskannya makanan tersebut dengan mulutnya setelah itu ia berikan pada ku dengan mulutnya sendiri", pengemis itu melanjutkan perkataannya.
Abubakar r.a. tidak dapat menahan air matanya, ia menangis sambil berkata kepada pengemis itu, aku memang bukan orang yang biasa datang pada mu, aku adalah salah seorang dari sahabatnya, orang yang mulia itu telah tiada. Ia adalah Muhammad Rasulullah SAW. Setelah pengemis itu mendengar cerita Abubakar r.a. ia pun menangis dan kemudian berkata, benarkah demikian?, selama ini aku selalu menghinanya, memfitnahnya, ia tidak pernah memarahiku sedikitpun, ia mendatangiku dengan membawa makanan setiap pagi, ia begitu mulia.... Pengemis Yahudi buta tersebut akhirnya bersyahadat dihadapan Abubakar r.a.
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
A BIT OF HISTORY : MAHATHIR - ANWAR IBRAHIM FEUD
Artikel lama untuk disingkap. Jangan orang kata Melayu Mudah Lupa. Cuba lihat dan faham pada ayat yang saya terangkan dgn warna merah.
Malaysia: The Feud
How Mahathir and Anwar became embroiled in a clash that threatens to send Malaysia into upheavalby Sheri Prasso and Mark Clifford in Kuala Lumpur, with Joyce Barnathan in Hong Kong.
To Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad, who has a passion for flying and sailing, Malaysia’s annual air and boat show on the island of Langkawi was an event he hated to miss–even as his nation stumbled through an economic crisis. So Mahathir decided to hold the December 3, 1997, meeting of the Malaysian Cabinet on the island, instead of in the capital of Kuala Lumpur.
But by the time he arrived at the elegant Gunung Raya hilltop retreat, Mahathir was in for a jolt. His next-in-command–Deputy Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim–had virtually concluded business without him, according to sources knowledgeable about the meeting. In what amounted to an economic coup, the cabinet had decided to adopt an austerity plan similar to those imposed on neighboring Thailand and Indonesia by the International Monetary Fund. The plan would slash public spending and halt infrastructure projects championed by Mahathir.
The new policy was a stunning rebuke to Mahathir. Since the onset of the Asian crisis five months earlier, he had been railing against a perceived Western conspiracy and insisting Malaysia could maintain its breakneck growth. Mahathir’s reaction: He humbly agreed to go along with his Cabinet’s decision–but on the very next day undermined it by announcing Malaysia would proceed with a controversial $2.7 billion rail and pipeline project. Alarmed investors immediately sent the ringgit to a new low.
Those intrigue-filled days in December were a prelude to what has become Malaysia’s worst political crisis in nearly three decades. Although Mahathir and Anwar had long had differences over economic stewardship and management of political spoils, that rift widened as Asia’s financial crisis wore on and the two leaders worked increasingly at cross purposes. Ultimately, the dispute led Mahathir to clamp controls on the currency and jail his deputy, casting himself as an international rogue.
Today, the clash threatens to send Malaysia into upheaval. Anwar, a central player in the old patronage system, has now emerged as a hero of the swelling reformasi movement, which advocates a more open society and economy. He goes on trial November 2 on 10 charges of sodomy and corruption. A conviction could turn the protests into an ugly confrontation.
How did the two men end up so militantly opposed to each other? Over the past month, BUSINESS WEEK interviewed dozens of Malaysians from both camps, including Anwar prior to his arrest, prominent pro-Mahathir businessmen, informed academics, and Anwar associates. Together, they draw portraits of the one-time allies and their battle to control the future of Malaysia Inc., an economic model that uses patronage to speed economic development.
HEIR APPARENT.
It is a tragic spectacle. Just a few years ago, Mahathir was poised to retire from politics as the prickly but nonetheless brilliant and erudite architect of a model developing nation. And Anwar, the anointed successor, would smoothly take the helm of the ruling United Malays National Organization (UMNO) and lead a modern, politically stable 21st-century economy.
Former Islamic radical Anwar, 51, was the more Western-friendly of the two, often quoting Shakespeare and hobnobbing with the moguls of international finance. Mahathir, 72, has long taken a confrontational stance toward the West. But like Anwar, he viewed foreign investment as key to Malaysia’s economy and advocated freer trade within Asia.
Both also were savvy politicians who steered choice deals to their allies in the business community.
Just last year, foreign investors criticized the government’s handling of insider deals by Malaysian Resources Corp., a media and infrastructure company controlled by Anwar allies.
Still, Anwar had a reform agenda. In recent years, he increasingly advocated the rule of law and more transparency. But until the crisis erupted, he was willing to bide his time until it was his turn to run the country. ”He was that close to power,” says Anwar’s wife, Wan Azizah Wan Ismail, holding her thumb and forefinger close together. ”He was tolerating a lot.”
Perhaps the key difference between the two leaders was their outlook on the world. Anwar quickly realized that the meltdowns of Thailand and Indonesia were caused by excessive borrowing, overbuilding, and big trade imbalances–and that Malaysia’s situation was similar. Malaysia didn’t yet need an IMF bailout, but he feared its economy would implode without swift action. While this surely would hurt his business allies, Anwar was willing to have Malaysia absorb economic pain first and rebuild for the future.
Mahathir looked at it differently. Unlike the ascendant Anwar, he was in the twilight of his career–and feared for his legacy. While Anwar hinted he wanted to end patronage, Mahathir genuinely thought the system he proudly calls ”Malaysia Incorporated” was a legitimate model for developing nations. A handful of wealthy businessmen are singled out for privileges and given the role of creating jobs, implementing big projects, and keeping the economy and the ruling party humming. Then wealth trickles down from Mahathir’s chosen few to the many.
”We view Malaysia as a corporation, and the shareholders in the government are companies,’’says Mustapha Mohamed, the new No.2 at the Finance Ministry. ”To the extent you help the bigger guys, the smaller guys benefit.” When Western agencies attacked his system as institutionalized corruption, Mahathir ”was quite angry,” says Francis Yeoh, managing director of YTL Corp. and a longtime Mahathir ally. ”He found it incredibly ! ! hypocritical and unfair.” Mahathir declined to be interviewed.
When Malaysia was growing 8% to 10% annually, the uneasy alliance worked. But the crisis in Malaysia’s financial markets provoked a fury in Mahathir toward the outside world. The feud broke out two days after Mahathir returned from a two-month globe-trotting sabbatical in July, 1997, just as the crisis hit. He began blasting foreigners–and he kept it up for months. He blamed ”international manipulators” such as financier George Soros and Jewish traders for trying to undo the success of the Muslim Malaysians.
Malaysian officials grew weary of the Mahathir effect on the currency and stock markets. The central bank, Bank Negara tracked the plunges in the ringgit every time Mahathir lashed out, and officials showed him the data. If Mahathir would tone it down, they suggested, the ringgit might stabilize. For a while, he complied.
Meanwhile, Anwar tightened up on money and began urging Mahathir to suspend big infrastructure projects. When Mahathir agreed on September 5 to postpone the $5.3 billion Bakun Dam, a new airport, and plans to build the world’s longest building, the market enjoyed the largest one-day surge in over three years. But it fizzled as the crisis deepened.
Mahathir’s patience ran out. On November 21, he set up the National Economic Action Council to devise remedies. It included Mahathir, Anwar, economic adviser Daim Zainuddin, and prominent economists and business leaders. Council members quickly squared off over the best cure for the crisis: the IMF’s austerity medicine or the easy money and massive government spending Mahathir preferred. ”We argued back and forth, back and forth,” recalls Zainal Aznam Yusof, deputy director of the Institute for Strategic & International Studies, a government think tank. But as the months wore on, ”we became convinced that you cannot go on with tightening monetary policy. You might push the economy over the edge.”
Then came a move that rocked market confidence and drove a deeper wedge between Anwar and Mahathir: the bailout of big infrastructure developer Renong. Headed by longtime Mahathir associate Halim Saad, it was precisely the sort of company Mahathir was determined to save. Renong had built some of Malaysia’s biggest projects but was choking under a pile of debt. In a complex transaction that left minority shareholders in the cold, Renong subsidiary United Engineers Malaysia (UEM) paid a stiff premium to buy out the parent company. Analysts suspected that Mahathir allies benefited, a charge Renong denied.
Anwar, miffed at the way the bailout was handled, ordered regulators to investigate. UEM was found to have broken disclosure rules, but the punishment was light. ”Within two weeks of the Renong-UEM deal being announced, it was all over” for Malaysia’s stock market, says a local securities trader.
Five days after the Renong bailout came the meeting on Langkawi. Anwar, having just met with IMF Managing Director Michel Camdessus and acting on the advice of his central bank governor, Ahmad Don, had concluded that the IMF formula of tight monetary policy and government austerity was right. The Cabinet agreed. When Mahathir arrived, the virtual IMF program was a fait accompli.
”MORAL OBJECTION.”
But local business leaders were growing unhappy with the effects of Anwar’s policies. So was Mahathir. ”The intensity of business collapses and bank collapses was like tenpins falling every day,” says YTL’s Yeoh. ”He couldn’t stand it.” Adds another prominent businessman: ”He doesn’t believe in bankruptcies.He has a moral objection to them.”
The attempts to get around Anwar’s IMF-style budget grew. According to Anwar associates, Daim called the CEO of Bank Bumiputra, Abdul Aziz Othman, and asked him to lend $20 million to a company in trouble. After checking with Anwar, these sources say, Aziz told Daim no. Tensions between Daim and Anwar rose. Daim declines to comment on the allegation or other matters related to Anwar. Bank Bumi did not respond to requests for comment.
By February, Mahathir was pushing for more bailouts. Anwar aides contend that the Prime Minister had broached the idea of using Petroliam Nasional (PETRONAS) to bail out his son Mirzan Mahathir’s shipping company, Konsortium Perkapalan (KP), which had trouble servicing its $490 million debt. Both Mirzan and PETRONAS deny the Prime Minister had anything to do with the $220 million purchase of KP’s assets by a PETRONAS unit.
‘I didn’t ask him to intervene. I just told him that any businessman faced with this situation will have to sell and pay down the debt,” says Mirzan, who holds a Wharton MBA.’We believe we are a viable company.”But the deal reminded many Malaysians of Indonesia’s Suharto, who fell partly because of his family’s greed.
In 1994, opposition politicians criticized the stakes Mahathir’s sons had in over 200 companies. Now, those concerns were resurfacing. Comparisons with Suharto ”must have upset Dr. Mahathir, even though there are important differences between the two,” says University of Malaya economist Professor K.S. Jomo.
In April, the Anwar-Mahathir rift grew wider. Speaking in New York at the elite Council on Foreign Relations, Anwar lauded the virtues of ”creative destruction.” Mahathir would deride that term time and again in speeches months later.
Anwar later told Mahathir he was trying to push Malaysia’s agenda by calling for reform of the international monetary system. But he did not mince his words in New York about what was going on back home. ”What are meant to be mere crutches often become permanent appendages, spawning a dependency mentality and rendering the public purse a rich feeding ground for all kinds of parasites,” he said to applause.
Yet while he was away, Anwar got wind of another attempted bailout, this time for Daim pal Tajudin Ramli at Malaysia Airlines. ”The moment my back is turned, they push through this nonsense,” he told his aides. ”How am I supposed to explain this over here?”
Mahathir denied he was involved. Anwar suggested the Finance Ministry would veto the deal, and it was never done.
Shortly after Anwar returned home, Suharto fell. Mahathir had met with the aging strongman in Cairo on May 14 at the G-15 summit. Mahathir left the meeting speaking of ”foreign parties trying to unseat us both.” The new Indonesian President, B.J. Habibie, was a friend of Anwar.
ESPIONAGE CHARGES.
So was Indonesian newspaper editor Nasir Tamara, who caused a flap on June 2 when he addressed Malaysian scholars, businessmen, and social activists assembled by Anwar’s think tank. While he didn’t mention Malaysia, Nasir spoke of cronyism and explained how the reformasi movement toppled Suharto. An Anwar aide says Mahathir questioned his deputy about the speech.
By the time the UMNO General Assembly meeting began on June 20, Mahathir had decided to get rid of Anwar–and the open battle began. Information packets given to the 1,900 conference attendees all contained a book alleging homosexual and heterosexual affairs by Anwar. The book, Fifty Reasons Why Anwar Cannot Be Prime Minister, also charged him with spying for a foreign power. Diplomats and other sources say the book could not have been distributed without Mahathir’s knowledge.
Anwar’s camp returned fire. The leader of the UMNO Youth league, Ahmad Zahid Hamidi, criticized the government for ”corruption, collusion, and nepotism.” Mahathir blasted back the next day, saying that everyone, including Anwar and his allies, had benefited from the state’s largesse. Days later, Mahathir announced that Daim would take over management of the economy. Anwar’s role was sharply curtailed. At a mention of Daim during an interview with BUSINESS WEEK on June 30, Anwar crossed his arms and visibly stiffened.
By the end of August, Malaysian stocks were down 80% from the previous year. On September 1, Mahathir shocked the world by imposing currency controls.
He told Anwar to resign by 5:30 p.m. the following day ”or I’ll humiliate you tomorrow,” according to former Anwar aides. He refused. ”I told him, ‘If you resign it’s like an admission of guilt,”’ Anwar’s wife Wan Azizah recalls saying the next day over a lunch where the food went uneaten. Anwar then went to his Finance Ministry office. At 5:30, the power went off at his official residence. At 7, Anwar received a letter from Mahathir saying he had been dismissed.
”I tried to work within the system,” Anwar told BUSINESS WEEK three days after his ouster. But now, Anwar acted like the outsider. He organized the biggest protest in Malaysia’s history on September 20, attended by up to 50,000 people, to call for reform. That day, Britain’s Queen Elizabeth II was in town for the Commonwealth Games. Mahathir ordered Anwar’s arrest that night.
A week later, Anwar appeared in court, bruised from what he said was a police beating.
Whatever the verdict in Anwar’s trial, it is unlikely to end the momentum for reform kindled by his ouster. Clearly Malaysia’s reform movement has legs, although no one wants a repeat of the violence that devastated Indonesia during Suharto’s fall. It looks like the transition won’t be easy.
Mahathir seems intent on staying in power to safeguard the economic structure he spent 17 years building.
But even if Anwar vanishes from power, the questions he posed in this turbulent year will haunt his stern mentor for years to come.
Malaysia: The Feud
How Mahathir and Anwar became embroiled in a clash that threatens to send Malaysia into upheavalby Sheri Prasso and Mark Clifford in Kuala Lumpur, with Joyce Barnathan in Hong Kong.
To Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad, who has a passion for flying and sailing, Malaysia’s annual air and boat show on the island of Langkawi was an event he hated to miss–even as his nation stumbled through an economic crisis. So Mahathir decided to hold the December 3, 1997, meeting of the Malaysian Cabinet on the island, instead of in the capital of Kuala Lumpur.
But by the time he arrived at the elegant Gunung Raya hilltop retreat, Mahathir was in for a jolt. His next-in-command–Deputy Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim–had virtually concluded business without him, according to sources knowledgeable about the meeting. In what amounted to an economic coup, the cabinet had decided to adopt an austerity plan similar to those imposed on neighboring Thailand and Indonesia by the International Monetary Fund. The plan would slash public spending and halt infrastructure projects championed by Mahathir.
The new policy was a stunning rebuke to Mahathir. Since the onset of the Asian crisis five months earlier, he had been railing against a perceived Western conspiracy and insisting Malaysia could maintain its breakneck growth. Mahathir’s reaction: He humbly agreed to go along with his Cabinet’s decision–but on the very next day undermined it by announcing Malaysia would proceed with a controversial $2.7 billion rail and pipeline project. Alarmed investors immediately sent the ringgit to a new low.
Those intrigue-filled days in December were a prelude to what has become Malaysia’s worst political crisis in nearly three decades. Although Mahathir and Anwar had long had differences over economic stewardship and management of political spoils, that rift widened as Asia’s financial crisis wore on and the two leaders worked increasingly at cross purposes. Ultimately, the dispute led Mahathir to clamp controls on the currency and jail his deputy, casting himself as an international rogue.
Today, the clash threatens to send Malaysia into upheaval. Anwar, a central player in the old patronage system, has now emerged as a hero of the swelling reformasi movement, which advocates a more open society and economy. He goes on trial November 2 on 10 charges of sodomy and corruption. A conviction could turn the protests into an ugly confrontation.
How did the two men end up so militantly opposed to each other? Over the past month, BUSINESS WEEK interviewed dozens of Malaysians from both camps, including Anwar prior to his arrest, prominent pro-Mahathir businessmen, informed academics, and Anwar associates. Together, they draw portraits of the one-time allies and their battle to control the future of Malaysia Inc., an economic model that uses patronage to speed economic development.
HEIR APPARENT.
It is a tragic spectacle. Just a few years ago, Mahathir was poised to retire from politics as the prickly but nonetheless brilliant and erudite architect of a model developing nation. And Anwar, the anointed successor, would smoothly take the helm of the ruling United Malays National Organization (UMNO) and lead a modern, politically stable 21st-century economy.
Former Islamic radical Anwar, 51, was the more Western-friendly of the two, often quoting Shakespeare and hobnobbing with the moguls of international finance. Mahathir, 72, has long taken a confrontational stance toward the West. But like Anwar, he viewed foreign investment as key to Malaysia’s economy and advocated freer trade within Asia.
Both also were savvy politicians who steered choice deals to their allies in the business community.
Just last year, foreign investors criticized the government’s handling of insider deals by Malaysian Resources Corp., a media and infrastructure company controlled by Anwar allies.
Still, Anwar had a reform agenda. In recent years, he increasingly advocated the rule of law and more transparency. But until the crisis erupted, he was willing to bide his time until it was his turn to run the country. ”He was that close to power,” says Anwar’s wife, Wan Azizah Wan Ismail, holding her thumb and forefinger close together. ”He was tolerating a lot.”
Perhaps the key difference between the two leaders was their outlook on the world. Anwar quickly realized that the meltdowns of Thailand and Indonesia were caused by excessive borrowing, overbuilding, and big trade imbalances–and that Malaysia’s situation was similar. Malaysia didn’t yet need an IMF bailout, but he feared its economy would implode without swift action. While this surely would hurt his business allies, Anwar was willing to have Malaysia absorb economic pain first and rebuild for the future.
Mahathir looked at it differently. Unlike the ascendant Anwar, he was in the twilight of his career–and feared for his legacy. While Anwar hinted he wanted to end patronage, Mahathir genuinely thought the system he proudly calls ”Malaysia Incorporated” was a legitimate model for developing nations. A handful of wealthy businessmen are singled out for privileges and given the role of creating jobs, implementing big projects, and keeping the economy and the ruling party humming. Then wealth trickles down from Mahathir’s chosen few to the many.
”We view Malaysia as a corporation, and the shareholders in the government are companies,’’says Mustapha Mohamed, the new No.2 at the Finance Ministry. ”To the extent you help the bigger guys, the smaller guys benefit.” When Western agencies attacked his system as institutionalized corruption, Mahathir ”was quite angry,” says Francis Yeoh, managing director of YTL Corp. and a longtime Mahathir ally. ”He found it incredibly ! ! hypocritical and unfair.” Mahathir declined to be interviewed.
When Malaysia was growing 8% to 10% annually, the uneasy alliance worked. But the crisis in Malaysia’s financial markets provoked a fury in Mahathir toward the outside world. The feud broke out two days after Mahathir returned from a two-month globe-trotting sabbatical in July, 1997, just as the crisis hit. He began blasting foreigners–and he kept it up for months. He blamed ”international manipulators” such as financier George Soros and Jewish traders for trying to undo the success of the Muslim Malaysians.
Malaysian officials grew weary of the Mahathir effect on the currency and stock markets. The central bank, Bank Negara tracked the plunges in the ringgit every time Mahathir lashed out, and officials showed him the data. If Mahathir would tone it down, they suggested, the ringgit might stabilize. For a while, he complied.
Meanwhile, Anwar tightened up on money and began urging Mahathir to suspend big infrastructure projects. When Mahathir agreed on September 5 to postpone the $5.3 billion Bakun Dam, a new airport, and plans to build the world’s longest building, the market enjoyed the largest one-day surge in over three years. But it fizzled as the crisis deepened.
Mahathir’s patience ran out. On November 21, he set up the National Economic Action Council to devise remedies. It included Mahathir, Anwar, economic adviser Daim Zainuddin, and prominent economists and business leaders. Council members quickly squared off over the best cure for the crisis: the IMF’s austerity medicine or the easy money and massive government spending Mahathir preferred. ”We argued back and forth, back and forth,” recalls Zainal Aznam Yusof, deputy director of the Institute for Strategic & International Studies, a government think tank. But as the months wore on, ”we became convinced that you cannot go on with tightening monetary policy. You might push the economy over the edge.”
Then came a move that rocked market confidence and drove a deeper wedge between Anwar and Mahathir: the bailout of big infrastructure developer Renong. Headed by longtime Mahathir associate Halim Saad, it was precisely the sort of company Mahathir was determined to save. Renong had built some of Malaysia’s biggest projects but was choking under a pile of debt. In a complex transaction that left minority shareholders in the cold, Renong subsidiary United Engineers Malaysia (UEM) paid a stiff premium to buy out the parent company. Analysts suspected that Mahathir allies benefited, a charge Renong denied.
Anwar, miffed at the way the bailout was handled, ordered regulators to investigate. UEM was found to have broken disclosure rules, but the punishment was light. ”Within two weeks of the Renong-UEM deal being announced, it was all over” for Malaysia’s stock market, says a local securities trader.
Five days after the Renong bailout came the meeting on Langkawi. Anwar, having just met with IMF Managing Director Michel Camdessus and acting on the advice of his central bank governor, Ahmad Don, had concluded that the IMF formula of tight monetary policy and government austerity was right. The Cabinet agreed. When Mahathir arrived, the virtual IMF program was a fait accompli.
”MORAL OBJECTION.”
But local business leaders were growing unhappy with the effects of Anwar’s policies. So was Mahathir. ”The intensity of business collapses and bank collapses was like tenpins falling every day,” says YTL’s Yeoh. ”He couldn’t stand it.” Adds another prominent businessman: ”He doesn’t believe in bankruptcies.He has a moral objection to them.”
The attempts to get around Anwar’s IMF-style budget grew. According to Anwar associates, Daim called the CEO of Bank Bumiputra, Abdul Aziz Othman, and asked him to lend $20 million to a company in trouble. After checking with Anwar, these sources say, Aziz told Daim no. Tensions between Daim and Anwar rose. Daim declines to comment on the allegation or other matters related to Anwar. Bank Bumi did not respond to requests for comment.
By February, Mahathir was pushing for more bailouts. Anwar aides contend that the Prime Minister had broached the idea of using Petroliam Nasional (PETRONAS) to bail out his son Mirzan Mahathir’s shipping company, Konsortium Perkapalan (KP), which had trouble servicing its $490 million debt. Both Mirzan and PETRONAS deny the Prime Minister had anything to do with the $220 million purchase of KP’s assets by a PETRONAS unit.
‘I didn’t ask him to intervene. I just told him that any businessman faced with this situation will have to sell and pay down the debt,” says Mirzan, who holds a Wharton MBA.’We believe we are a viable company.”But the deal reminded many Malaysians of Indonesia’s Suharto, who fell partly because of his family’s greed.
In 1994, opposition politicians criticized the stakes Mahathir’s sons had in over 200 companies. Now, those concerns were resurfacing. Comparisons with Suharto ”must have upset Dr. Mahathir, even though there are important differences between the two,” says University of Malaya economist Professor K.S. Jomo.
In April, the Anwar-Mahathir rift grew wider. Speaking in New York at the elite Council on Foreign Relations, Anwar lauded the virtues of ”creative destruction.” Mahathir would deride that term time and again in speeches months later.
Anwar later told Mahathir he was trying to push Malaysia’s agenda by calling for reform of the international monetary system. But he did not mince his words in New York about what was going on back home. ”What are meant to be mere crutches often become permanent appendages, spawning a dependency mentality and rendering the public purse a rich feeding ground for all kinds of parasites,” he said to applause.
Yet while he was away, Anwar got wind of another attempted bailout, this time for Daim pal Tajudin Ramli at Malaysia Airlines. ”The moment my back is turned, they push through this nonsense,” he told his aides. ”How am I supposed to explain this over here?”
Mahathir denied he was involved. Anwar suggested the Finance Ministry would veto the deal, and it was never done.
Shortly after Anwar returned home, Suharto fell. Mahathir had met with the aging strongman in Cairo on May 14 at the G-15 summit. Mahathir left the meeting speaking of ”foreign parties trying to unseat us both.” The new Indonesian President, B.J. Habibie, was a friend of Anwar.
ESPIONAGE CHARGES.
So was Indonesian newspaper editor Nasir Tamara, who caused a flap on June 2 when he addressed Malaysian scholars, businessmen, and social activists assembled by Anwar’s think tank. While he didn’t mention Malaysia, Nasir spoke of cronyism and explained how the reformasi movement toppled Suharto. An Anwar aide says Mahathir questioned his deputy about the speech.
By the time the UMNO General Assembly meeting began on June 20, Mahathir had decided to get rid of Anwar–and the open battle began. Information packets given to the 1,900 conference attendees all contained a book alleging homosexual and heterosexual affairs by Anwar. The book, Fifty Reasons Why Anwar Cannot Be Prime Minister, also charged him with spying for a foreign power. Diplomats and other sources say the book could not have been distributed without Mahathir’s knowledge.
Anwar’s camp returned fire. The leader of the UMNO Youth league, Ahmad Zahid Hamidi, criticized the government for ”corruption, collusion, and nepotism.” Mahathir blasted back the next day, saying that everyone, including Anwar and his allies, had benefited from the state’s largesse. Days later, Mahathir announced that Daim would take over management of the economy. Anwar’s role was sharply curtailed. At a mention of Daim during an interview with BUSINESS WEEK on June 30, Anwar crossed his arms and visibly stiffened.
By the end of August, Malaysian stocks were down 80% from the previous year. On September 1, Mahathir shocked the world by imposing currency controls.
He told Anwar to resign by 5:30 p.m. the following day ”or I’ll humiliate you tomorrow,” according to former Anwar aides. He refused. ”I told him, ‘If you resign it’s like an admission of guilt,”’ Anwar’s wife Wan Azizah recalls saying the next day over a lunch where the food went uneaten. Anwar then went to his Finance Ministry office. At 5:30, the power went off at his official residence. At 7, Anwar received a letter from Mahathir saying he had been dismissed.
”I tried to work within the system,” Anwar told BUSINESS WEEK three days after his ouster. But now, Anwar acted like the outsider. He organized the biggest protest in Malaysia’s history on September 20, attended by up to 50,000 people, to call for reform. That day, Britain’s Queen Elizabeth II was in town for the Commonwealth Games. Mahathir ordered Anwar’s arrest that night.
A week later, Anwar appeared in court, bruised from what he said was a police beating.
Whatever the verdict in Anwar’s trial, it is unlikely to end the momentum for reform kindled by his ouster. Clearly Malaysia’s reform movement has legs, although no one wants a repeat of the violence that devastated Indonesia during Suharto’s fall. It looks like the transition won’t be easy.
Mahathir seems intent on staying in power to safeguard the economic structure he spent 17 years building.
But even if Anwar vanishes from power, the questions he posed in this turbulent year will haunt his stern mentor for years to come.
MAHATHIR ATTACKS ANWAR IBRAHIM ON HIS BLOG
Cuba tengok apa yg dikomenkan oleh Margaret Thatcher pada tahun 1993. 5 tahun selepas komen ini, Anwar Ibrahim masih kekal jadi Menteri Kewangan sehinggalah 2 September 1998.
“…the Government’s policy has been to build a framework within which enterprise flourishes and foreign capital is attracted to invest in Malaysia. Particular praise is due to Dr Anwar Ibrahim, the Finance Minister, for the prudent monetary and fiscal policies which he has pursued, and indeed for making Malaysia such an open financial centre. If Finance Ministers could be transferred like star football players, I could think of several very much larger countries who would pay astronomic transfer fees to get him!”– Margaret Thatcher’s Speech to Citibank in Kuala Lumpur ( September 3, 1993)
The Iron Lady of Great Britain is unafraid to call a spade a spade. I remember the Late Tun Tan Siew Sin once remarked to the former National Westminster Bank Chairman–and later Bank of England Governor– Robin Leigh-Pemberton in my presence that (Baroness) “Mrs. Thatcher is the Only Man in the British Cabinet”. Tun Tan admired her for taking on and taming the Trade Unions, empowering the private sector, and dismantling the system of “milk and butter” socialism of Labour Prime Ministers, Clement Attlee and James Callaghan.
For your information, Prime Minister Thatcher was a disciple of Friedrich August von Hayek (author of “The Road to Serfdom”) and the economic soulmate of President Ronald Wilson Reagan who was influenced by Milton Friedman and his University of Chicago economists.
Thatcher’s comments on Anwar Ibrahim is a compliment since she herself had the brilliant and strong willed (Lord) Nigel Lawson as her Chancellor of the Exchequer and LSE’s urbane don Sir Alan Walters as her Economic Advisor. —Din Merican
Sorang dilantik jadi Penasihat Kerajaan Negeri Selangor dan sorang lagi dicadangkan dijadikan Menteri Kanan. Adakah pertembungan seumpama 1998 akan berulang kembali?
“…the Government’s policy has been to build a framework within which enterprise flourishes and foreign capital is attracted to invest in Malaysia. Particular praise is due to Dr Anwar Ibrahim, the Finance Minister, for the prudent monetary and fiscal policies which he has pursued, and indeed for making Malaysia such an open financial centre. If Finance Ministers could be transferred like star football players, I could think of several very much larger countries who would pay astronomic transfer fees to get him!”– Margaret Thatcher’s Speech to Citibank in Kuala Lumpur ( September 3, 1993)
The Iron Lady of Great Britain is unafraid to call a spade a spade. I remember the Late Tun Tan Siew Sin once remarked to the former National Westminster Bank Chairman–and later Bank of England Governor– Robin Leigh-Pemberton in my presence that (Baroness) “Mrs. Thatcher is the Only Man in the British Cabinet”. Tun Tan admired her for taking on and taming the Trade Unions, empowering the private sector, and dismantling the system of “milk and butter” socialism of Labour Prime Ministers, Clement Attlee and James Callaghan.
For your information, Prime Minister Thatcher was a disciple of Friedrich August von Hayek (author of “The Road to Serfdom”) and the economic soulmate of President Ronald Wilson Reagan who was influenced by Milton Friedman and his University of Chicago economists.
Thatcher’s comments on Anwar Ibrahim is a compliment since she herself had the brilliant and strong willed (Lord) Nigel Lawson as her Chancellor of the Exchequer and LSE’s urbane don Sir Alan Walters as her Economic Advisor. —Din Merican
Tuesday, November 17, 2009
DR.MAHATHIR : Anwar Right Choice To Bankrup Selangor
Betul punya marah nampak Uncle Det kita ni, ni marah tentu sebab Anwar caj RM1 utk servis dia, bilaman Uncle Det caj $$$$$$ jadi Penasihat Petronas.
Tak ke bodoh dan nyanyuk punya statement. Kalau Anwar tak pandai nak urus ekonomi negara, pasai apa Uncle Det kekalkan dia sampai 8 tahun sebagai Menteri Kewangan.
Depa lupa nak masukkan kes Pewaja, baby projek Uncle Det....
'Anwar was your right choice too, Dr M'Nov 17, 09 7:54am'
It was you, Dr Mahathir, who made Anwar Ibrahim the finance minister in your cabinet and he was sacked for reasons other than failing as finance minister if my memory serves me correctly.'Dr M: Anwar right choice to bankrupt S'gor
Kanesin SVS Sappania Pillay: Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad, it was you who made Anwar Ibrahim the finance minister in your cabinet and he was sacked for reasons other than failing as finance minister if my memory serves me correctly. I am sure he would have learnt from his 'failure'.Ed: Hmm, and yet he was the right choice for finance minister under your administration.
I guess Mahathir always had the tendency to surround himself and his cabinet with people who 'didn't know anything' in relation to the offices they held.
SusahKes: Well, let's see Dr Mahathir. You were responsible for:
1) Awarding privatisation contracts at hugely inflated prices
2) Bailing out MAS by paying higher than market value for its shares
3) Using Petronas to bail out your son
4) The loss-making Paya Indah Wetlands/Sepang projects
5) The loss-making Putrajaya development
6) The loss-making Cyberjaya/MCS development
7) The huge Bank Negara forex trading losses (which you conveniently called 'paper losses')
8) Bailing out Proton and passing the mess back to the taxpayersI've only just mentioned the financial side.
What about the 'raid' you made on the judiciary?
What about the use of ISA/OSA? What about corruption?
Do you know how much of potential FDI we lost over the years because of the non-financial aspects of your dictatorship?
Aiyo, Dr M, don't 'pusing-pusing' la...
Victor Johan: Mahathir, when journalists seek your opinion, it does not mean that you should think they and the rakyat are stupid. Your reply only reflects who you are.In my opinion, your statement certainly reflects your mental state - you're uncomfortable with the progress that Anwar and other like-minded Pakatan Rakyat representatives are making in providing the rakyat with an alternative government come the 13th general election.Their success will certainly be your demise and those of the other BN reps - all the cans of worms and skeletons in the closets will be revealed. We need facts, not gutter-level political replies. You were prime minister and finance minister once, remember?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)