Mahathir vs Abdullah Badawi. Have a break. Have a Kit Kat.

Looks like there's going to be some respite from all the jibes and comebacks.

According to Leslie Lopez from The Straits Times, both the PM and former PM will be taking holidays away from each other. Datuk Seri Abdullah left with his family (including Khairy, I presume) for a three-week holiday in Australia on Wednesday, while Tun Dr Mahathir will head for Europe early next week.

I have no idea why both would suddenly walk away from their spat, and timing it such as if on cue. Maybe they really do need a break. Maybe foreign locations would provide more discrete venues for clandestine meetings to marshal their resources and supporters. We'll just have to wait and see.

The Sun has gone as far as quoting Information Minister Datuk Zainuddin Maidin that "someone dear to Tun M and respected by Pak Lah" will mediate between the two. Time will tell if this eventually comes to pass. But even if I were a betting man, I wouldn't place too much money on a truce resulting from it.

In the meantime, a lot's happened after Tun Mahathir's speech at the Malaysia Today sponsored event on Saturday last week which was attended by many from the opposition.

Many cabinet ministers have commenced barking. Sparking it all, like a bang from the starter's gun, was the outburst from Law Minister in the PM's Dept Nazri Aziz. Then came Entrepreneur Development Minister Khaled Nordin, Agriculture Minister Muyiddin Yassin, Foreign Minister Syed Hamid Albar and Education Minister Hishammudin Hussein. Pardon me if I left someone out. But all of them carried basically the same message, albeit at varying intensity. By speaking at a function attended by opposition representatives, Tun M is in bed with the opposition (and is therefore disloyal to UMNO). In addition, whatever he has to say to say to the govt, should be said behind closed doors... to preserve "party unity". Basically, retire already, don't rock the boat lah.

Doesn't sound like anything more than toeing the party line to me.

Now even former Deputy PM Anwar Ibrahim is getting plenty of coverage in the mainstream press. He has said that he's being considered to replace Kofi Annan as Secretary General of the United Nations. Well... that's what he says lah. We've yet to see Annan or US State Secretary Condoleeza Rice pay him a visit at his house.

He's also had some comments on the Tun M - Pak Lah situation. He said Tun M should be allowed to ask questions and the govt should respond as those are relevant questions. He also agrees that Tun M, like him, has been largely ignored by mainstream media. And he says that this feud has the potential to destabilise UMNO. He goes on to say that Tun M's motives are personal.

Err... right. Tell us something we don't know, why don'tcha? That was nothing more than simple regurgitation of what bloggers, letters to the editor, coffeshop commentators have been saying for weeks.

And this last one is more interesting. P Gunasegaram, who's some don't-know-what executive editor at The Edge had an article published in the same. He's gone and listed 22 questions directed at Tun M, seeking answers to some big questions that were the result of Tun M's 22 year administration. They range from perceived bad economic decisions like using EPF money to support failing GLCs, to megaprojects like KLIA and Putrajaya, to Anwar's imprisonment and to the Islamisation of what used to be Constitutionally secular Malaysia.

He asks some relevant questions, but I would dispute the purpose of asking them now. Why now? Why now when Tun M is no longer in power and when getting answers to those questions about a malfunctioning previous administration will do nothing more (or nothing less) than help the current malfunctioning administration get the monkey off its back?

Is that really what the Malaysian public needs? Divert attention away from the current administration's problems by focusing on the past? Aren't we better served by having Tun M stick a hot iron into the arse of the current govt - with the hope that some improvement might actually result from this? Notwithstanding whether Tun M has any ulterior motives or not.

Like it or not, there is nobody else capable of forcing the govt to explain itself. And from everything that has transpired since the last general election, there is a lot to explain, don't you agree?


Late breaking news (added on 1 July 2006):

Title	:	Malaysia's ex-premier agrees to mediator in PM spat
By	:
Date	:	01 July 2006 1920 hrs (SST)
URL	:	http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/afp_asiapacific/view/216678/1/.html

KUALA LUMPUR - Malaysia's former premier Mahathir Mohamad has agreed to let a mediator try and salvage his crumbling relationship with Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, state media said Saturday.

Information Minister Zainuddin Maidin, known to be close to Mahathir, said the former leader had agreed late Friday to meet with a mediator to discuss Abdullah, the target of caustic criticism from his predecessor.

"I told Dr Mahathir it is difficult for (Abdullah) to meet him privately because (Mahathir) has shown his unhappiness with the prime minister," he told the Bernama news agency Saturday.

"Dr Mahathir agreed to accept the mediator," he added.

The name of the mystery mediator was not known but was thought to be a mutual friend of the two prime ministers.

Mahathir has bitterly criticised Abdullah and his administration in recent weeks over their handling of the economy, and key national issues.

The ruling United Malays National Organisation has become increasingly worried by the public dispute, which has sparked speculation of a party rift and fears of political instability.

Mahathir's office, when contacted, declined to comment on the use of a mediator to resolve the spat, but said the former leader was leaving Sunday to holiday in Europe, and would return to Malaysia on July 20.

Mahathir vs Abdullah Badawi. Where is Anwar Ibrahim in all this?

I have to admit, there's one factor in this whole Tun M - Pak Lah feud that I haven't considered much. And that's Anwar Ibrahim.

Articles from Raja Petra Kamarudin have alluded slightly to the Anwar factor, and so too, have many of the commentators on Malaysia Today. But nobody is exactly sure what role Anwar plays in all this.

But there are a few pieces of information that links everything together.

1. Tun M is pissed. And nobody is sure exactly why he's so pissed. It can't be for the simple things like a discontinued bridge or a sacked Proton CEO. As important as these things may seem, they're actually quite trivial in the overall scheme of things. But good as smokescreens to keep everyone busy.

2. The PM's son-in-law, Khairy Jamaluddin is central to all this. The recent speeches by Tun M, press conferences by Nazri are testament to that. But initially, I was under the impression that Tun M was angry at Khairy for his ties with Singapore (and the apparently increasing loss of Malaysia's national interests to Singapore). I thought that formed the basis of Tun M's allegation that Malaysia was losing her sovereignty.

3. But the freeing of Anwar Ibrahim soon after Pak Lah comes into power, and the recent mistrial judgement regarding Sukma Dermawan's conviction - lends to the notion that Anwar Ibrahim is a player or a pawn in all this intrigue and the govt of Pak Lah is somehow un-encumbering him for some reason.

4. Raja Petra Kamrudin has alleged that Khairy (soon after Pak Lah was installed), boasted that he will put Daim Zainuddin and Tun M in jail. Moves have already been made against Daim. The ongoing Metramac case where the presiding judge, Gopal Sri Ram in his preliminary judgement - implicated former Finance Minister Daim, as having his finger in the pie. Only time will tell if this will snowball against Daim.

Could the reversal of Anwar Ibrahim's legal fortunes, then be construed as a move against Tun M? Anwar already has a civil suit pending against Tun M. Will the govt do all in its power to let that carry through in court and put Tun M in real legal trouble? Possibly facing jail time? The recent poison pen letter against the judiciary under Tun M's time and the revelation of former TNB boss, Ani Arope, targetted at exposing Tun M's alleged misdeeds - are also of impeccable timing.

So, therefore and to summarise,

- is Tun M making a ruckus because he is angry that Pak Lah / Khairy are undermining the country's sovereignty

OR

- is he angry that Pak Lah / Khairy are not doing enough to protect him from the past or indeed have actually masterminded & initiated the increasing legal momentum against him by freeing Anwar Ibrahim and allowing old skeletons to surface?

Abdullah Badawi's administration finally declares war on Tun Mahathir

In a long press conference after Parliament, Minister in Prime Minister's department, Nazri Aziz, made the first formal challenge of the administration to Tun Mahathir.

His main point was that Mahathir is the former PM and still a member of UMNO. But he is being a more effective opposition that the opposition ever was.

By Nazri's logic, Mahathir should be a man ("jantan") and resign from UMNO. Then Nazri will take him on 'fair and square'.

What's UMNO membership got to do with it? And don't you think the whole country already knows that the UMNO Supreme Council already considered sacking Tun M from UMNO but decided against it? Apparently, this occurred during the Supreme Council meeting last week and they decided that the possibility of a backlash from Tun M's supporters in UMNO was too real and possibly too powerful to be discounted. A move to sack Tun M from UMNO could be counter productive in that it will split UMNO if the motion was defeated.

What I find most telling is Nazri's assertion that Tun M shouldn't criticise the PM's son-in-law, Khairy Jamaluddin. Nazri's asserts that an elder statesman like Tun M shouldn't concern himself with a young and inexperienced child like Khairy.

More wool over the public's eyes? If Raja Petra Kamarudin and the Khairy Chronicles are to be believed (and I'm finding myself believing it more after 3 sources have been making references to Khairy being the central figure in all this.

1. Matthias Chang,
2. Tun M - although in the form of veiled references to Oxbridge educated advisors to the PM on Lvl 4 of Putrajaya having more power than the person on Lvl 5 ie. the PM, and now
3. Nazri.

Well, a couple of things are becoing clear to me.

1. Khairy Jamaluddin is definitely the point. The increasingly frequent references to him and his mates in the govt and Malaysian media apparatus says as much.

2. The "elegant silence" is not working. It hasn't convinced the public that there is nothing that the govt needs to answer for. And it certainly hasn't silenced Tun M. Hence, the barking of the Abdullah administration mouthpiece.

Tun Dr M's speech & dialog event organised by Malaysia Today

On Saturday, Tun Dr M gave a speech at a venue in Kuala Lumpur. The event was organised by Malaysia Today.Net. Below are excerpts of some of the topics Tun M spoke on.

MALAYSIA & SINGAPORE

Crooked bridge was a loss of sovereignty to Sgp. Why did we have to ask permission from Singapore to do something on our own land? The Govt says Malaysians did not want a bridge. But Tun M says that it's not the bridge they don't want. But it's Johor that doesn't want to sell sand to Sgp. And Johor doesn't want foreign military aircraft over its airspace.

Tun M says that sand and air was offered by Malaysia. Not a demand from Singapore.

Tun M's "suspicious mind" suspects that the bridge was scuttled because "someone" was not able to sell sand to Singapore. Someone would not be able to profit from the sale of sand even if the bridge went ahead because Johor would not agree to sell sand. Since there was no money to make from the bridge, cancel it.

seantang says: "While I agree that Malaysia need not get Singapore's agreement for the crooked bridge, I disagree with the project itself. It was a useless project that would not address any of the existing causeway's shortcomings, and it will cost hundreds of millions of ringgits. The causeway is a bottleneck. Building a crooked bridge over halkf of it simply makes the bottleneck more acute. It, in no way, alleviates the problem. If it doesn't solve the problem, why do it?"

KHAIRY

Throughout the speech, the Tun had some choice barbs aimed at Khairy and his corp of Oxbridge flyboys.

"Sikit, sikit pi Singapura main golf. Anak menantu pun pi." - at every excuse, they play golf in Singapore. Even the son-in-law goes.

SAYA SOKONG (I SUPPORT)

All the cabinet ministers and all the UMNO section heads support the PM. They support because he is the PM. It doesn't matter what's the issue, they will support. Tun M mentioned when he was PM, mereka selalu cium tangan. Sekarang tangan bau busuk (they always kissed his hand, but now his hand stinks).

MV AUGUSTA

Who's the buyer ie. Gevi SPA? Tun M's "suspicious mind again" is asking who's behind Gevi SPA? It apparently was incorporated specifically to buy MV Augusta. Who profits from it?

Q&A session.

ABDULLAH BADAWI AS PM

Tun M said he gave him the PM's power, but he neglected to put in a condition that he couldn't give his power to his son-in-law. Right now, Tun M doesn't know who's in power.

seantang says: This is yet another reference to Khairy being the power behind the throne.

NAJIB

Najib has his own problems too.

ISLAM HADHARI

No need for it. Basic Islam is sufficient. We only need to make sure we interpret it correctly.

The organisers, Malaysia Today is hosting the videos here.

Note that the speech is mainly in Bahasa Malaysia. A transcript of the ensuing press conference is also available in the same page.

Hong Kong Bus Uncle throws a fit!

This is the video from HK that made headlines and new channels worldwide.

The incident occurred on the top deck of a Number 68X Kowloon bus on April 29. A young man observed that the middle-aged person in front of him was talking too loud on the mobile telephone. So he tapped the man's shoulder and asked him to keep it down. This led to a vigorous response, including a string of obscenities. The entire proceedings were recorded by another passenger. Cantonese video with English Subtitles.




Here's an interview with the passenger who took the video on this camera phone. Cantonese audio only.




A spoof of the incident use to promote World Cup 2006 betting. Cantonese video.

(Is This The Way) To The World Cup - Tony Christie

This must one of the best feel-good world cup songs ever. ENGLAND... 40 years, who gives a... Oi!

When will Malaysia ever come up with something even close to this? It'll go a long way to bring our people together with sports and music - and for 30 days every 4 years, forget about race and religion which are forever driving us apart.

For the time being, I guess we'll be stuck with the ridiculously archaic and old fashioned Jabatan Penerangan & Kombo RTM national day parade renditions of "Negara kita sudah Merdeka"...




The lyrics here.

More Pictures of Police FRU vs KLCC Price Hike Protestors

More pictures of "rowdy" protestors attacking fully body-armoured Police FRU with manila cards and plastic bags filled with sandwiches.

Under the threat of such serious bodily harm and the probable use of small children as projectiles (why else would violence prone demonstrators bring their offspring) - no wonder the FRU had to beat the snot out of them.

The pictures are here and here.

Also refer to previous blogs, here and here.

An open letter to the PM Abdullah Badawi

An open letter to the PM
Jacqueline Ann Surin

Dear Prime Minister Abdullah, When you first came into power after the 2004 general election, you promised us that you would be prime minister for all Malaysians.

In fact, I still have the letter you sent out to voters before the elections that promised you would fulfill your duties with sincerity, integrity, efficiency and fairness.

It was a letter that moved people, including staunch Opposition supporters.

There was hope that a new leadership which was more conciliatory, more willing to listen to differing views and more just was in store for the country.

And people invested in that hope by voting the Barisan Nasional back into power with a clear majority.

But recent events, including your administration's reactions to these events, have been deeply troubling.

The most recent has been the disruption of a peaceful and legitimate public forum in Penang organised by a group of non-governmental organisations that wanted to help people reclaim their rights under the Federal Constitution.

It was unfortunate, but really no longer inconceivable, that those who opposed such a civil discussion should frame their opposition in ways that incite hostility, threaten violence and make false accusations in the name of Islam, a religion that in fact promotes peace and justice.

What is actually more troubling is that as prime minister, you have also publicly announced that these issues of Constitutional rights are "sensitive" and the organisers of such events must be careful not to tread on "dangerous ground", lest the government has to use the Sedition Act against them.

Why would you lend legitimacy to the argument that Malaysians should steer clear of discussing issues which affect us all as citizens, whether Muslim or non-Muslim?

By continuously telling Malaysians these issues are "sensitive" and "dangerous", isn't your administration really creating a self-fulfilling prophecy? Aren't you in fact supporting the argument that these issues should not be discussed?

Additionally, Malaysians have been reminded by Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Datuk Seri Mohamed Nazri Abdul Aziz that it's not for no reason that the word "amok" comes from the Malay community.

Non-Muslims - and that easily translates to non-Malays in this country - are told we cannot speak out about the way Islam is used to formulate laws and public policies in this country even though they affect all of us.

We are told that not just the Sedition Act can be used, so can the Internal Security Act which allows for detention without trial.

In fact, I found it deeply paradoxical that Nazri could repeat the threat of the ISA at an international meeting of experts on Islam and human rights last month.

How can an unjust law be Islamic? We know it cannot, and yet, it would seem your administration is wielding it as a way to silence citizens in a democracy.

The way I see it, naming something "sensitive" and "dangerous" is just a disingenuous way of saying, "This is not open for dialogue and discussion. We might tolerate your views but only to a certain extent."

What that extent is, is left to be seen. We hope your election promises will be kept for all Malaysians, but really, many of us are more fearful than reassured.

From a non-Muslim perspective, the events leading up to the need for public discussions such as the Article 11 forum in Penang, have been disconcerting and troubling.

The painful injustice suffered by S. Shamala who found that her estranged husband could unilaterally convert their children to Islam, and the widow of M. Moorthy who discovered she could not bury her husband according to Hindu rights, are real and frightening.

But those instances of injustice are not being framed as "sensitive" by non-Muslims. They are not being used to threaten violence or incite hostility in order to silence discussion of the issues at hand.

Additionally, when you upheld the decision for the tudung to be used in police parades, did you consider how it would make non-Muslims feel? How can it still be a surprise then that most non-Malays will not join the police force?

Really, I don't need to be a Muslim or a Malay to have a stake in this country. But even that might be delegitimised because in more ways than one, I'm a minority.

And I'm constantly reminded that my views and concerns must give way to the privileges and rights of the dominant race, and a specific interpretation of the faith they profess.

But really what I want to ask you is this: Why do I have to constantly feel afraid in my own country? Why am I continuously told I have less rights to discuss important issues affecting my community?

You promised to be prime minister for all Malaysians. We hope you will remember that promise.

A Malaysian citizen.

Jacqueline Ann Surin believes that you cannot be neutral on a moving train. She is an assistant news editor at theSun.

Konsortium Wawasan Klasik Sdn Bhd (KWK) company to monopolise RTD transactions

Sounds like somebody's been 'granted' a monopoly to charge for RTD transactions.

How was this company selected? Was there a tender? Who helms it? Does the company have a good track record? And if the company is newly formed, why give such a large concession to an untested company?

Would it have been better to open up this "business" to a several companies competiting against each other?

Exactly how will this monopoly reduce the rampant corruption in the RTD? Will the company have the freedom to increase prices etc? Will RTD "make life difficult" for people do not use this new "service" and carry out their transactions personally

PETALING JAYA: Motorists will now have an option to carry out road transport transactions through a company endorsed by the Transport Ministry. The company aims to provide a more professional alternative to traditional runners, including charging lower fees that are standardised throughout the country.

Through a tripartite arrangement with the Road Transport Department (RTD) and financial institutions, the company, Konsortium Wawasan Klasik Sdn Bhd (KWK), will act as the agent for the financial institutions in their dealings with the RTD on matters such as:

» registration of new/imported vehicles;
» transfer of ownership of used motor vehicles; and
» road tax renewal.

KWK managing director and chief executive officer Rafi Khan Shahzada, who was a traditional runner 20 years ago, said the company will coordinate all runners and give them a new image as customer service coordinators or Cusco.

He said the company has 150 operators in the country dealing with state RTD offices and branches as well as financial institutions' branches and dealers.

KWK executive chairman Mohd Salahuddin Abdul Rahman, said: "Our system will enable the customers to check the service status through the website (www.erunner.com.my) besides helping to reduce the congestion and waiting time at the RTD offices."

The system will also help the RTD eliminate unethical practices and give the customer coordinators a new professional outlook, he told reporters yesterday.

RTD director-general Datuk Emran Kadir said about 30 million road transport transactions are conducted yearly, which include about 13 million road tax renewals, 10 million licence renewals, 1.2 million transfer of vehicle ownership, 1.02 million new car registrations, and 800,000 driving tests.

National Fatwa Committee: Kongsi Raya leads to Blasphemy!

Ulamas attending the Ulama Conference 2006 have decided that "kongsi raya" celebrations and "open houses" need to be reviewed because these practices can be blasphemous and erode the faith of Muslims. This is according to working committee chairman, Datuk Seri Harussani Zakaria.

For the uninitiated to Malaysian celebrations of traditional festivals such as Chinese New Year, Hari Raya and Deepavali - "open houses" are large parties open to the public (sometimes guests number in the thousands) commonly organised by govt agencies, political parties and individuals of high status. Kongsi Raya are simply the celebrations like open houses which are to celebrate more than one festival. For example, there is Kong Xi Raya (Chinese New Year + Hari Raya) and DeepaRaya (Deepavali/Divali + Hari Raya) when the dates of these festivals are in close proximity to each other. There's yet to be a "DeepaKong" though.

Now, for my take. Just how does getting together with your friends and neighbours of other races and religions, for a good hearty FREE meal, cause the erosion of faith amongst Muslims?

Is it an issue of getting together with non-Muslim people?

Is it an issue of sharing a meal with non-Muslim people?

Or is it an issue of eating a FREE meal? I don't think so as the Ulamas don't seem to have a problem with NEP (New Economic Policy).

On one hand, the PM is promising the Malaysian people Islam Hadhari and Muhibbah, and on the other hand, we have these Ulamas (whose salaries are paid with our tax money, Muslim and non-Muslim taxpayers, btw) who proclaim innane and ridiculous statements like this. And these are the people who are supposed to guide the religious and moral well-being of our Muslim countrymen!

PM Abdullah Badawi has another opportunity to clamp down on these deviationists and obstacles to Muhibbah. But judging from Pak Lah's previous inaction on Article 121 of the Constitution (Syariah Courts have jurisdiction over all Muslim matters even if it impinges on the rights of non-Muslims) and the surrender of the entire Malaysian police force to a violent mob (supposedly championing Muslim rights) who were protesting an inter faith forum in Penang etc., I have little expectation that he will even utter a word against the National Fatwa Committee.

For the PM with the strongest religious credentials, Pak Lah seems to me to be the most timid PM yet in living history when it comes to confronting religious issues faced by multi-faith Malaysia.

But then again, he's got bigger worries on his mind, like Tun Mahathir.

The original reference article can be found in The Star.

There are some sane voices in the govt who have spoken out against the National Fatwa Committee. But these people are few & far between, and seem to be extremely cautious with their comments. It feels true to me that even the strongest politicians in Malaysia tremble at the prospect of being perceived as "not Islamic enough" by the Malay heartland and as a consequence treat all these issues with kidgloves.

Perhaps getting tough with religious zealots is another thing that the current administration can learn from Tun Mahathir.

Rais' comments about all this can be found in The Sun.