TNB and the IPPs

When Information Minister Ahmad Shabery Cheek and former deputy prime minister and de-facto opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim took the stage for the recent debate, the name of former Tenaga Nasional Berhad’s (TNB) executice chairman was mentioned.

Anwar said that Tan Sri Ani Arope resigned because he was not in favour of the government’ s stand on the independent power producers (IPPs). Tan Sri Ani was TNB’s executive chairman from 1990 to 1996 and it was during his tenure that the first generation IPPs were created.

Tan Sri Ani is known for his honest and no nonsence way of doing things and former high court judge, Dato Syed Ahmad Idid justly described the Penang-born scientist as follows:

“Tan Sri Ani was and remains an upright person and had to suffer because he did not agree with the IPPs getting away with too much … and consumers have to pay.”

“I am not anti-IPPs per se. It is good to have other players but it has to be done fairly. It has to be fair to the consumers, not just TNB, which is a conduit. TNB, because of the electricity hike, has been treated as the whipping boy. The focus should be on the consumers,” Tan Sri Ani once told StarBiz in an exclusive interview.

When Anwar touched on the IPPs, Shabery Cheek replied that it was implemented when Anwar was Finance Minister. It is interesthing to note that in the StarBiz interview, Tan Sri Ani was asked “How was the Malaysian model of IPPs created?” and he answered “Ask our Prime Minister.”

He was also asked “How was the process of negotiations with IPPs conducted?” and he replied: “There was no negotiaion. Absolutely none. Instead of talking directly with the IPPs, TNB was sitting down with the EPU (Economic Planning Unit of the Prime Minister’s Department). And we were harassed, humiliated and talked down every time we went there. After that, my team was disappointed. The EPU just gave us the terms and asked us to agree. I said no way I would.”

Tan Sri Ani also said the pricing and terms of the contracts was all fixed up. “This is the price, this is the capcity charge and this is the number of years. They said you just take it and I refused to sign the contracts. And then, I was put out to pasture.”He described the terms agreed by the EPU as “grossly unfair.

” At 16 sen per unit (kWh) and with the take or pay situation, actully it was 23 sen per unit. With 23 sen, plus transmission and distribution costs, TNB would have had to charge the consumer no less than 30 sen per unit. If mix with TNB’s cost, Tan Sri Ani said the cost would come down but that was at TNB’s expense because the utility company were producing electricity at 8 sen a unit. “We can deliver electricity at 17 sen per unit,” he said.

Tan Sri Ani also said that “nobody produces excess electricity like Malaysia and it goes to waste because there are no batteries to store that power. TNB only needs a reserve of 15 per cent to 20 per cent.”

In the interview, Tan sri Ani told StarBiz that he felt sick of the process of awarding the IPP contracts. “It was morally wrong and not fair. If it is legal and not fair, I will not do it. If it is fair and illegal, I still won’t do it. It has to be legal and fair. We work for the consumers, workers and shareholders. TNB is morally obliged to these three, but the consumers come first, otherwise we won’t be around. It is then the workers and the shareholders. ”

Source: StarBiz (The Star)Posted by Syed Imran at Friday, July 18, 2008

Anwar is not guilty..

K Bing | Jul 18, 08 6:00pm

1. Is Anwar gay? A person who has fathered six children has established his sexual orientation firmly. Bisexuality is very rare and in any case he does not fit the mould. He has a loving family and his wife is standing steadfastly by him which says a lot.

2. The highly controversial sodomy conviction of 1998 failed to convince most people. A person in a position of power who allegedly cannot control himself to even keep away from his wife’s driver, must have a string of partners. One must ask, why has nobody else come out of the woodwork? Why was it necessary to coerce false confessions from two of his associates?

3. A person on the cusp of attaining political power would not be so stupid as to risk everything. If indeed one assumes that he cannot control his urge, where are the others that he may have violated or other consensual partners? With multiple partners, it’s a secret which is almost impossible to keep for a public figure.

4. Anwar’s anger and outrage at the new allegation is exactly how a wronged person will react. His body language when he speaks of the issue is consistent with his words.

5. When news broke of the police report against him, Anwar took refuge at the Turkish embassy. I believe he did so as he feared immediate arrest and not so much a threat on his life. This shows that Anwar believes there is a conspiracy against him rather than a private complaint which would not warrant immediate arrest. A guilty person would immediately assume it’s a private complaint.

6. Saiful’s resignation e-mail to Anwar did not suggest he had been sodomised and traumatised by his boss. This e-mail has not been denied by him.

7. The notion that a 61-year-old man can force himself on a 23-year-old youth is unthinkable. If threats were used, what can Anwar possibly threaten him with as he is not in a position of power?

Is there a conspiracy against Anwar? I believe there is for the following reasons.

1. The accuser, Saiful was obviously closely connected with Umno and has been photographed with a few Umno leaders including an aide to the deputy prime minister.

2. Saiful is obviously pro-Umno as had been revealed by his online postings. Why then did he induct himself into PKR as a volunteer if not for some ulterior motive?

3. His visit to the DPM’s office a few months before the incident was explained as him having gone there to apply for a scholarship. This is a very awkward explanation. As a college dropout, Saiful was not in the market for a scholarship and in any case, the DPM’s office is the wrong department to go.

And why would a scholarship applicant have his photograph taken with a senior aide? One must ask, why is it necessary to obfuscate and conceal the real purpose of his visit?

4. Najib at first denied he had ever met Saiful and later admitted that he met Saiful at his residence when a traumatised and sodomised Saiful came to ask for his advice. Why did Najib first deny and then admit later when under pressure? Was he trying to conceal something?

5. Najib said he listened to Saiful’s story and told him it’s up to him whether he wants to lodge a police report or not. This is not credible. Wouldn’t Najib have jumped at the opportunity to discredit his political nemesis and insist that Saiful make a police report?

It is wrong for anybody - much less a minister - who has been told a crime not to bring it to the attention of the law enforcement agencies. Why is Najib giving unbelievable explanations? Is he trying to divert all thoughts away from a conspiracy and overdoing it?

6. Najib said that Saiful visited him a few days before he made his police report. The report was made on Saturday and the sodomy was alleged to have occurred on Thursday. This means Saiful could only have visited Najib on Friday, one day before he made his report.

This is stretching the definition of ‘a few days’ to breaking point. Establishing when the meeting actually took place will shed light on the veracity of the allegation.

7. How easy is it for an ordinary person to drop in and see the DPM at his residence or office on such short notice? If he has been sexually violated, there is no need to hawk his allegation to politicians first before going to the police.

8. Saiful’s smiling and confident demeanor when he emerged a few days after his police report certainly does not indicate a man who has been sodomised and traumatised.

9. Saiful’s public challenge to Anwar to swear his innocence on the Quran is unbecoming of a real victim who would be expected to feel depressed and keep a low profile rather than play politics.

To round it up, let me deal with some objections.

1. It is too outrageous to imagine that Umno would weave a sodomy conspiracy against Anwar again as nobody would believe it.

Do you think negative public opinion will stop them? Umno controls the AG’s chambers, the police, the judiciary all of which are sufficient to convict a man of trumped-up charges. For good measure, they also control the mainstream press.

2. The allegations will increase sympathy for Anwar so a conspiracy is unlikely.

On the contrary, it could well discredit Anwar. The tactic could backfire but it is not beyond politicians to miscalculate the effects of their action.

3. Anwar stands to gain the most from it so Anwar must have planned all this.

Isn’t this even more outrageous than the above? No need to waste words on this.

4. Why sodomy again? Isn’t the script 10 years old?

What else can they pin on Anwar? He is not outwardly corrupt. A legal conviction is the most efficient way to get Anwar out of the political scene for good. After serving the sentence, he will have to wait another five years before running for public office by which time he may be too old to have any political ambition.

5. It is too transparent as Saiful has been photographed with high-level Umno politicians.

The plot may have been hatched after all those photographs. We have to be realistic, there are not many candidates who would do this.

6. Why did PKR take in a person without background checks?

He volunteered at a time when PKR was desperately short of staff. Once in, a person is not easily dislodged even when his previous pro-Umno leaning is known. There’s always the notion of fair play and judging a person by his work rather than his past.

In conclusion, when events really happen, details automatically fall into place. When there’s nothing to hide, explanations do not create more questions. A person’s demeanour and facial expression is a reflection of his inner thoughts.

All the bits and pieces collected together can create a complete picture. The picture is not complete but it is complete enough for me to decide that on the balance of probabilities, the incident never happened and Anwar is again facing another political conspiracy.

Thanks to K Bing | Jul 18, 08 6:00pm

What is Syed Hamid Albar afraid of?

Friday, 18 July 2008 19:03

In a rhetorical stance, the Home Minister Datuk Seri Syed Hamid Albar posed this question to Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, “What is he afraid of?” Aliran would like to pose this very question to Syed Albar, “What is he afraid of?” Why are they afraid to release the police report lodged by Mohd Saiful Bukari Azlan against Anwar Ibrahim on 28 June alleging sodomy?

Syed Hamid is quoted by the New Straits Times as saying, “Give blood sample for the sake of truth.” Aliran would like to tell Syed Hamid, “Give the police report for the sake of justice.”

Justice demands that an accused person should know what he is being accused of. Only then he can defend himself. It is ridiculous for the police to claim that Saiful had made a police report against Anwar and therefore they have to investigate Anwar. Isn’t Anwar entitled to know the nature of the report? He has a right to know when the alleged offence took place and where. This information is crucial for Anwar’s rebuttal.

If Syed Hamid is wondering why this information is urgent and necessary, Aliran would like to take him back ten years ago when a similar report of sodomy was lodged against Anwar. His accuser then struggled to name a date to make the allegation stick. He gave three different dates variously, including a date when the building where the alleged sodomy was deemed to
have taken place was not even up! The accuser contradicted himself several times. He was even caught for khalwat, raising questions regarding his morality and reliability.

The injustice was so apparent in that episode of a decade ago that the Federal Court overturned the High Court’s controversial conviction.

Based on this experience, Anwar has every right to suspect that the police want to get as much information as possible from him so that the police report against him could be manipulated to incriminate him. Anwar had legitimately asked, “Is it so that they can keep amending and amending and amending it to fit in with the statement that I have just given to the police. I gave my statement for five hours yesterday (Wednesday) and for another 30 minutes this morning.”

He has raised a relevant and pertinent point: “If they give the report to me now, how am I supposed to know that it is the original? Are they waiting to make up the ‘perfect’ police report (to fix me)?”

The police report was inexplicably denied every time it was requested for on the premise that the police had been instructed against giving him a copy. Who is this faceless and nameless superior officer who had given this despicable instruction? If they are after the truth, shouldn’t they have released the police report so that Anwar himself would be in a position to assist the police in discovering the truth?

Do they realise that by refusing to release the report, the police are seen as believing Saiful’s side of the story and suspecting Anwar of being guilty? Where is the fairness? Both the accuser and the accused should be treated fairly and justly so that the truth can be laid bare in the interest of justice.

It is three weeks since the police report was made by Saiful. Why is it so difficult to make the report available to Anwar? Anwar has insinuated that both the Inspector-General of Police and the Attorney-General, who have been accused of having manipulated the evidence against Anwar in the past, could be the source and cause for Anwar’s predicament in this instance.

Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak had commented that Anwar should be accorded ‘the degree of decorum and respect he deserves’. Would he, having said that, now go the extra mile by instructing the police to release the police report to Anwar. If he does that, he would be walking the talk.

P Ramakrishnan
President
18 July 2008

Good reasons to fear planting of DNA evidence

R Sivarasa, Jul 18, 08 5:15pm
The following is the full statement given at a press conference called by embattled opposition leader’s lawyer R Sivarasa.

Statements being made by senior government officials raise concerns as to the credible dispensation of the law, and suggest that a political conspiracy is very much at play in smearing the credibility and reputation of our client. They are making statements imputing that Anwar Ibrahim is not cooperating with the police.

We are referring, as an example, to the comments made by Home Minister Syed Hamid Albar reported on the front page of the New Straits Times, page three of the Star and covered in other printed and electronic media. Syed Hamid should know better than to attempt to exert his influence on this matter.

judiciary forum lingam tape 171107 sivarasaAs a cabinet member, Syed Hamid’s comments are tantamount to interfering in an ongoing investigation. He is quoted as saying, “What is he afraid of? He can have his own doctor present when giving the sample.”

Besides being an inappropriate interference in the investigation, these comments show a fundamental misunderstanding of the concerns we are raising regarding the introduction of DNA evidence.

In 1998-1999 trials, Anwar experienced the phenomenon of fabrication of DNA evidence. We had SAC Rodwan illegally removing DNA samples from forensic custody. In cross-examination of the prosecution’s witnesses it was exposed that DNA taken from blood samples was planted on the infamous mattress.

When confronted with this fact the prosecution amended its charge and persuaded the judge, Augustine Paul (now Federal Court judge), to expunge the entire DNA evidence from the record, preventing Anwar Ibrahim’s lawyers from responding.

anwar ibrahim musa hassan gani patailThe persons who were implicated in the fabrication of evidence during Anwar’s 1998-1999 trials, namely (attorney-general) Gani Patail, (police chief) Musa Hassan, and Rodwan (Mohd Yusof) are the same players who are involved in the current case. Today they are in much more powerful positions within the law enforcement apparatus.

Anwar has even more reason to believe of the probability that DNA evidence will be fabricated once again. This is reasonable because the complainant remains in police custody since June 28, 2008 and the police are also in possession of Anwar’s DNA from the earlier case. Our client’s concerns are therefore not resolved, as Syed Hamid believes, by his handing over a DNA sample through his own doctor or through an international forensic expert.

It would have to be independently verified first that all medical examinations and sample taking relating to the complainant were done professionally and without any interference from the police before Anwar will consider participating in any DNA analysis.

We also reiterate that there has yet to be any credible justification for resorting to DNA analyses when the police report made by the complainant remains shrouded in secrecy and no evidence substantiating the allegations are made available.

It is also false to imply that Anwar was not cooperating with the police. He agreed to meet with police at a prearranged date and time. He then gave a lengthy, five-hour statement, consented and voluntarily submitted to a strip search and measurements of his private parts, contrary to the unnamed sources cited in the New Straits Times today on page six.

We would also reiterate that he made that lengthy statement even though he could have exercised his rights within the law to have remained completely silent as the contents of the complainant’s police report were not made known to him.

Sivarasa Rasiah
Counsel to Anwar Ibrahim

Anwar: Stripped Naked-Measured Private Part

Anwar disclosed that during his medical examination at the KL Hospital, he was stripped naked, had his whole body examined including his private parts measured.

In newspaper papers, for example, people from the government, notably the Home Affairs Minister who helped Malaysia lose Batu Puteh, started to make statements that suggest Anwar was not cooperating with the police investigations into the alleged sodomy claim made against him.

Let me excerpt New Straits Times:
Anwar also spoke of his embarrassment at being ordered to strip naked and “measured” when he was taken to the hospital.

“I was stripped naked and had my private parts examined. They also measured the parts” Anwar

He said he refused to have photographs taken “as that could end up on YouTube”.

The allegation that he was stripped naked, however, was denied by hospital authorities who also claimed he was not “measured”.

A hospital official said all those brought in for rape of sodomy cases were given due respect and examined in a professional manner in keeping with the code of medical conduct.

“At all times, due respect is given to ensure that the patient’s decency is not violated,” the official told the New Straits Times.

Now, enters the third version. This is from Anwar’s lawyer and the MP for Subang, R Sivarasa, and I quote Malaysiakini:

“That statement is false,” said R Sivarasa in a press conference, referring to a New Straits Times report which quoted hospital authorities as denying that Anwar was stripped naked and measured.

And again, Sivarasa was quoted as saying in another Malaysiakini story:

“I’m not sure if it’s entirely within journalistic ethics. You quote an unnamed source, hospital authorities say that this did not happen, and we’re saying that’s a false statement.

“He was stripped naked, he was measured, for the record,” he said.

A reprise of the 1998 debacle?

Importantly, Sivarasa also said that the police were not addressing a prime issue pertaining to Anwar’s concerns about the possibility of his DNA sample being fabricated and manipulated. The lawyer quoted the 1998 episode:

“In 1998-1999 trials, Anwar experienced the phenomenon of fabrication of DNA evidence. We had SAC Rodwan illegally removing DNA samples from forensic custody. In cross-examination of the prosecution’s witnesses it was exposed that DNA taken from blood samples was planted on the infamous mattress,” said Sivarasa.

“When confronted with this fact the prosecution amended its charge and persuaded the judge, Augustine Paul, to expunge the entire DNA evidence from the record, preventing Anwar’s lawyers from responding.”

Mahathir slams Najib

Mahathir MohamadFormer premier Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad took a swipe at Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak today by calling for an open contest in the Umno party elections so that vice-president Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin can go for deputy president’s post.

“There should be an open contest so that Muhyiddin can have a chance to go for deputy president… and if he goes for deputy president and wins, then Najib should not be appointed deputy PM.”

Mahathir, who once openly supported Najib, has come down hard on the deputy premier in recent days and did not mince his words when he said: “People perceive Najib as a weak leader. He has never had his own stand”.

“He (Najib) merely repeats words such as ‘I support’ and ‘I am very touched’…and people are generally disenchanted with Najib,” Mahathir

“If he (Najib) competes for deputy president, he would have to compete against Muhyiddin… and it is quite possible that Muhyiddin will win and Najib will lose,” Mahathir.

“It is possible that Abdullah may not be able to manipulate the general assembly to grant a victory to Najib,” Mahathir.

Anwar’s press statement in full Jul 17, 08 3:38pm

The following is Anwar Ibrahim’s press statement providing his own account of what had transpired in the days leading to his arrest.

On Saturday, July 12, 2008, the police came to my house to serve a Section 111 Criminal Procedure Code notice, harassing my family and demanding my presence at the IPK Kuala Lumpur (Federal Territories Police headquarters) at 2pm on Monday, July 14, despite an earlier agreement with my lawyers for me to come to the IPK.

On the next day, Sunday, the police also served an ex-parte court order, prohibiting me from physically being within 5km from the Parliament on July 14. As you can see, my house and the IPK KL are within 5km radius from the Parliament building. The court order effectively put me under house arrest on Monday and at the same time prevented me from going to the IPK.

On July 14, the presence of police personnel outside the compound of my house strengthened our suspicions that they would be prepared to arrest me as soon as I left the compound of my residence, on the pretext of me violating the court order. The issue here, is which order should I comply with, the ex-parte court order or the Section 111 notice from the police?

On the same day, the police through the investigating officer, one DSP Jude Pereira wrote and faxed to my lawyer at about 1.06pm, informing that I was required to be present at the IPK KL on Wednesday, July 16 at 2pm to assist with the investigation. I conveyed my agreement to the appointment and it was communicated to the police through my solicitor, SN Nair and Partners via telephone and letter on the same day.

On Wednesday, July 16, I was at the Anti-Corruption Agency (BPR) head office to record my statement pursuant to the police report lodged by me at IPK Shah Alam on July 1, against attorney-general Gani Patail and inspector general of police Musa Hassan for their involvement in the fabrication of evidence way back in 1998. To ensure that we will be able to attend the appointment with the police at 2pm, we cut short our statement at the BPR’s office, and this fact was clearly conveyed to the BPR officers present.

Ambushed by masked men

At about 12.45pm, the investigating officer (IO), DSP Jude Pereira called Mr Nair to confirm about our attendance and Mr Nair confirmed that we would attend that 2pm appointment. We were about to have a quick lunch at my house before proceeding to the IPK. Five minutes later, we were ambushed by a team of masked and heavily-armed police personnel near my house.

I was arrested and brought to the IPK. I cooperated fully with the police by giving my cautioned statement from 2.30pm to about 7.30pm. At this particular point, the IO and the other officers handling this case were doing their job professionally. I was then given assurances by assistant commissioner of police Razali and later senior assistant commissioner II Khor (through my lawyer) that I would be released on police bail on the same day.

However, later on, upon my return from Kuala Lumpur General Hospital (HKL), the IO, DSP Jude Pereira informed me and my lawyers that I will be detained and put in the police lock-up overnight for the purpose of recording a further statement in the morning.

I and my lawyers protested, giving our undertaking that we will be back anytime required by the police to continue with the recording of the statement, and there was no need for me to be detained overnight, and that I should be released on police bail.

The police, through the IO were adamant that I should be detained and put in the police lock-up overnight, despite them knowing about my physical condition. I had to spend the night sleeping on a cold cement floor, which aggravated my back injury which was due to the beating I received from the then IGP, Tan Sri Rahim Nor on Sept 20, 1998.

This morning, after a short statement that was recorded for about 30 minutes, I was released on police bail. I was in pain and had to immediately receive some medical treatment upon my return home.

CID chief tells blatant lie

I now wish to deal with the statement of the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) director, Mohd Bakri Mohd Zinin as appeared in Utusan Malaysia today, inter alia

“Pasukan khas bertopeng polis terpaksa memintas kenderaan DSAI di Bukit Segambut di sini dan menahan Anwar ekoran tindakan Penasihat PKR itu mengubah haluan kenderaannya pada saat-saat tempoh yang diberi kepadanya untuk menyerah diri kepada polis pada pukul 2 petang ini hampir berakhir.”

This is a blatant lie from the CID director to cover up their shameful act of abuse of police powers. I have given the assurances and had just informed the IO five minutes before the disgraceful ambush by the police through my lawyer who was with me in the same car.

In addition to the above, Deputy Home Minister Wan Farid said, as reported in Star Online that, I “went voluntarily to the police car without any incident.” Again, this is also a blatant lie by the government.

I take to task the IGP for this abuse of police power against me through the events I’ve narrated above. It appears that the events of the last few days, the nature of my unwarranted arrest, my overnight incarceration which was actually absolutely unnecessary, were an act of personal vengeance against me in retaliation to the reports I lodged earlier against him, which are now being investigated by the ACA.

Why I refused to give my DNA

I have reasonable grounds for having no confidence in the system. In the course of the trial of the false allegations of sodomy in 1998, DNA evidence was fabricated and used against me. The persons responsible for the fabrication then were the IGP, SAC Rodwan and the AG, are new key players in this investigation.

Until now, I have been denied access to the police report made by the accuser against me.

My accuser is still under police protection and as such, any fabrication is possible if they take my DNA. My decision to refuse a DNA test is taken through advice of my lawyers and DNA experts, both local and overseas.

Anwar Ibrahim
July 16, 2008

BN Ministers not belive in M’sia Education System

Education Minister, Datuk Seri Hishammudin Tun Hussein’s son is doing O’ levels and will be going off to the United Kingdom this coming September to further his studies.

Deputy Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak’s daughter, Nooryana Najwa has been accepted into Georgetown University in Washington DC to read politics and international relations after doing her IB (International Baccalaureate) .

Datuk Seri Hishamuddin Tun Hussein and Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak’s children are academically smart. However, it seems like both of them did not sit for SPM.

Before doing her IB, Nooryana had her education in Garden International School. Najib’s son, Norashman Razak had his education there too.

But Garden International School bases its curriculum on the National Curriculum of England. It teaches the English National Curriculum through Key Stages 1 to 4 and Cambridge ‘A’ Level.

Najib was education minister while Hishamuddin is current education minister, if they not belive in Malaysia education they should change that system while not show just sitdown into the miniter post doing nothing. ITS SHAME FOR EVERY MALAYSIANS

Education also become racial in Malaysia

Educatiion also became racial issue in Malaysia, bumiputra Malay only eligiable to get JAP what about the local bumiputra “Orang Asli” who living in forest, also the Sabah and Sarawak bumiputra. Is there are eligiable to get JPA. The UMNO-MB not able to answer the opposition questions while poiting them as raciest.

This prompted Fong Po Kuan (DAP-Bukit Mertajam) to ask about the racial quotas under the scholarships.

Tajuddin Abdul Rahman (Umno-Pasir Salak):  This is Malay rights. I have met several cabinet ministers and they agreed me with me that scholarships should only be reserved for Malays. There should be no compromises!

Kulasegaran (DAP-Ipoh Barat): “This is racist!”

Loud murmurs from both sides were temporarily silent by Tajuddin’s shouts for Kulasegaran and Fong to shut up.

Tajuddin Abdul Rahman (Umno-Pasir Salak): You shut up! You shut up! I have children studying in England,  Ireland and Australia and they have no scholarships. But I want rural Malays  and lower income groups - even in Sabah and Sarawak - to get scholarships,  like what is said in the constitution!

Kulasegaran (DAP-Ipoh Barat): In Pasir Salak, are there no Chinese and Indians?

Tajuddin Abdul Rahman (Umno-Pasir Salak): You think you are so smart? Penyokong Hindraf Penyokong Hindraf (Hindraf supporter! Hindraf supporter!) Anti-Malaysia.

Ibrahim Ali (Independent- Pasir Mas): I support the  Chinese and Indian communities. For them, set up foundations. But what’s  written in the constitution is that the right to scholarships are only for Malays and bumiputera.

However, the pandemonium later died down when Nazri explained that the government had not forgotten Malay rights and said that the new policy was not populist.

“I am just being fair and I have not compromised (Malay rights), I guarantee you that.”

Chong Eng (DAP-Bukit Mertajam):  ”Pasir Salak is racist. He is defending a racist policy. On the other hand, we are opposing a racist policy and yet we are called racists.”

Debat winner arrested

This afternoon at 1:05 PM Anwar Ibrahim, former Deputy Prime Minister of Malaysia, was arrested outside of his home in Kuala Lumpur. He was due to issue a statement at IPK KL (Kuala Lumpur Police Contingent Headquarters) at 2:00 PM based on an agreement reached with the police on Tuesday.

Anwar Ibrahim was returning from the Anti Corruption Agency to his home after giving a statement pertaining to the police report that has been filed regarding suppression of material facts in the case involving him in 1998. He was accompanied by his senior legal team, staff, and security.

As he entered the neighborhood of his home, a contingent of ten police cars, half unmarked and half patrol, forced the two cars in Anwar Ibrahim’s entourage to stop. There was a contingent of 20 balaklava-clad masked commandos (UTK) who accosted him, reminiscent of the forces sent to arrest Anwar Ibrahim at his home in September 1998.

An officer approached Anwar Ibrahim and demanded that he accompany the police in an unmarked vehicle to the Kuala Lumpur Police Contingent Headquarters. His lawyers were not permitted to travel with him to the police station.

This arrest has taken place less than fifteen hours after Anwar Ibrahim appeared live on Malaysian television for the first time since 1998 and announced to millions of viewers his intention to stand for election, and upon the formation of a new government, to lower the domestic price of fuel by 50 sen. The overwhelming majority of Malaysians expressed their support of his televised statement.

These events are deeply disturbing to us and indicate that this entire episode is a repeat of the actions taken against Anwar Ibrahim in 1998. During the last few weeks the government owned mainstream media has demonized and vilified him. His staff has been harassed and we see a conspiracy being hatched to thwart the political change that is imminent in Malaysia.

Under no circumstances will the people of Malaysia and the international community tolerate any harm coming to Anwar Ibrahim. We remind Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi of the promise he made to ensure Anwar Ibrahim’s protection. We have been able to communicate with Anwar Ibrahim, who calls upon his supporters and the people of Malaysia to remain calm and to reject any attempts at provocation, which will give a pretext for an emergency situation to be declared.

This afternoon at 1:05 PM Anwar Ibrahim, former Deputy Prime Minister of Malaysia, was arrested outside of his home in Kuala Lumpur. He was due to issue a statement at IPK KL (Kuala Lumpur Police Contingent Headquarters) at 2:00 PM based on an agreement reached with the police on Tuesday.

Anwar Ibrahim was returning from the Anti Corruption Agency to his home after giving a statement pertaining to the police report that has been filed regarding suppression of material facts in the case involving him in 1998. He was accompanied by his senior legal team, staff, and security.

As he entered the neighborhood of his home, a contingent of ten police cars, half unmarked and half patrol, forced the two cars in Anwar Ibrahim’s entourage to stop. There was a contingent of 20 balaklava-clad masked commandos (UTK) who accosted him, reminiscent of the forces sent to arrest Anwar Ibrahim at his home in September 1998.

An officer approached Anwar Ibrahim and demanded that he accompany the police in an unmarked vehicle to the Kuala Lumpur Police Contingent Headquarters. His lawyers were not permitted to travel with him to the police station.

This arrest has taken place less than fifteen hours after Anwar Ibrahim appeared live on Malaysian television for the first time since 1998 and announced to millions of viewers his intention to stand for election, and upon the formation of a new government, to lower the domestic price of fuel by 50 sen. The overwhelming majority of Malaysians expressed their support of his televised statement.

These events are deeply disturbing to us and indicate that this entire episode is a repeat of the actions taken against Anwar Ibrahim in 1998. During the last few weeks the government owned mainstream media has demonized and vilified him. His staff has been harassed and we see a conspiracy being hatched to thwart the political change that is imminent in Malaysia.

Under no circumstances will the people of Malaysia and the international community tolerate any harm coming to Anwar Ibrahim. We remind Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi of the promise he made to ensure Anwar Ibrahim’s protection. We have been able to communicate with Anwar Ibrahim, who calls upon his supporters and the people of Malaysia to remain calm and to reject any attempts at provocation, which will give a pretext for an emergency situation to be declared.

OFFICE OF ANWAR IBRAHIM

Anwar won the debat with Shabery Chik

Anwar Ibrahim a de-facto leader of the Opposition delivered on local television. His contender, Minister Saberi Cheek was full of rhetoric and made direct personal attacks against Anwar in a show of no competence from a Minister.

“Good enough though that Anwar Ibrahim won the debate upper handed, crushing the weak and ill-prepared Saberi Cheek on all grounds,” she added.

It was a fabulous 12-0 victory for Anwar Ibrahim, a victory that could lead the country to a massive change of regime in any future general elections. Anwar Ibrahim hinted that with the government continuing to ignore the facts, the ruling coalition was fated to a much bleaker future.

Minister Saberi Cheek used his emotions to try propelling himself to the same level as Anwar. He might have succeeded in the election evening like propaganda but faced with Anwar; the Minister stumbled completely and delivered one of his government’s worst performances on television.

Anwar on the other hand, a fine gentleman, was more often direct to the point, refusing to be dragged into the political ploy from the Minister and his aide and answering all the questions with tact and logic. His strategy worked well and the display of this performance on television – for the first time in Malaysian history.

Anwar explained that it was a debate on oil and how to reduce the price in order to redress the economy of the country, which he suggested was going astray and was imposing much pain on the population.

Anwar said the government could reverse the decision taken in April this year when it increased the price of oil by 41 percent, with the fuel price jumping from Rm1.92 to Rm2.70, which he said he would be able to reduce by Rm0.50 cent if he was in power.

He added that by imposing transparency and good governance his government or the opposition in power would be able to restore fuel subsidies but also correct the imbalances in the economy. He added that the country had a much bigger inflation figure, suggesting that the current inflationary figure given by the government was incorrect.

Anwar explained that the debate was not about demonizing Petronas, the National Petroleum Company of Malaysia but to show the incompetence of the government in dealing with the global oil price rise. The Minister insisted that Anwar Ibrahim was attacking Petronas and the government.

Bung Mokhtar: Showi’s vulgar sign at Parliment

MP Bung Mokhtar shows vulgar sign at Perliment, And still dont know “Why PM never take any action against him?”.

He was popular with ‘tiap-tiap bulan bocor’ and apologized for their comment and now he started again their real attitute.
The sign itself equals to ‘F** Y**’

Shameful for the peoples who voted him to bring him to PARLIMENT as MP.

Uncle Sam angry with branch chairmen

MIC president Datuk Seri S. Samy Vellu’s dinner for branch chairmen yesterday evening turned sour when many began to leave immediately after having their food, an hour before the function was due to end.

A visibly upset Samy Vellu walked around the Dewan Tun Razak Hall at the Putra World Trade Centre and ordered those who were about to leave to sit and wait till the event ended.

He even went outside the hall and corralled those who had been smoking back inside. He then ordered the guards to close the shutters to all the entrances to ensure that no one left the hall.

“If you think this was a waste of time, I apologise. I will not make such arrangements in future,” Samy Vellu

Samy Vellu left at 9.50pm, 40 minutes before the dinner was scheduled to end, leaving nearly 3,000 branch chairman shell-shocked but they later followed suit.

100 NGOs protesting Selangor’s Islamic administration

One hundred non-governmental organisations (NGOs) in Selangor today handed to Sultan Sharafuddin Idris Shah a memorandum protesting against the administration of Islamic affairs in the state.

Some 200 representatives of the NGOs, led by Datuk Abdul Rahman Palil, handed the memorandum to the sultan’s naval aide-de-camp (ADC) Commander Ahmad Ramli Kardi at Istana Bukit Kayangan here at about 3.00 pm.

“The memorandum was delivered with the intention that what was happening would be rectified as the sultan is the head of religion in the state,” Abdul Rahman .

Abdul Rahman said the memorandum also protested against the unrestricted construction of houses of worship of all races without consideration for racial sensitivities.

80% of scholarships for bumiputra

A RECENT statement by Pasir Salak MP Datuk Tajudin Abdul Rahman in Dewan Rakyat has sparked the ire of some and the MCA will be sending a complaint letter to the Deputy Prime Minister seeking disciplinary action while other party such as MIC and Gerakan never comments anything about this.

The Government should help non-bumiputra students, who achieved academic excellence but not at the expense of jeopardising scholarships awarded to bumiputras, said Datuk Tajudin Abdul Rahman (BN - Pasir Salak).

“By all means, we help them but not at the expense of bumiputra students. I do not agree to increase the ratio of scholarships to non-bumiputra students. “The ratio of 80% for bumiputra students should remain”

MCA Youth secretary-general Dr Wee Ka Siong said the movement, together with Sarawak United Peoples’ Party (SUPP) Youth and the Federation of Malaysian Clans and Guilds Youth Associations, condemned the statement by Datuk Tajudin that all non-Malays were descendants of immigrants to Malaysia.

“His statement has offended the feelings of non-Malays. Because of this kind of arrogant message BN received good punishment from people not only from non-Malay while form Malay but still their MBs not keep any good attitude.

Can PM take action againts him to show they are PM for everybody.