Sing Chye's Blog

Any doubts about Racism?

2013-05-20T22:37:00.001-07:00

Look At This Picture carefully!

Still Having doubts?

Now Look At this Second Picture.

Still don't get it....

Okay, don't

force yourself to think..

Just go and read

uTu-SuN

P. Waythamoorthy - a letter just for you

2013-05-03T07:43:00.000-07:00

By: Choo Sing Chye

Waythamoorthy, now that the 13^th Elections is over, I hoped that you have passed the grade set by Najib’s government.

Believe me, Waythamoorthy, there can never be a bright future for us in Malaysia if we do not see and treat ourselves as brothers and sisters.

No one brother or sister can walk alone leaving their siblings in destitute, and at the same time holding their heads high.

It is inevitable that our society changes, but what matters is whether there is real change or just make-believe.

P. Waythamoorthy, you wrote significantly on the loss of the Ladang Batu Pekaka Hindu Burial Ground in Kedah in 2011 and the terrible cultural impact that it had exacted on the Indian Community there.

Unfortunately this problem has its roots stretching back to late 1880’s. In fact in 1939, the then Malaya sent a delegate to India to hold talks with the Chief Minister of Madras, C. Rajagopalachari. The Malayan Deputy Controller of Labour drew up a budget showing how the rate of 33 cents a day was quite adequate for an Indian worker. Rajaji replied: "I see that you have provided for every contingency, but not for his funeral expenses. The Malayan Chief Secretary assured: "The Malayan Government will see to it, Sir." (1)

Regrettably, the Malayan Government then and now Malaysia could only see to it, but had done nothing.

Even through the mid sixties, this problem still persist. I spent my entire childhood living in the Hospital Labourer Quarters and it was near the old hospital mortuary. Thus, inevitably, my childhood was centred around it.

There was an Indian labourer who was given two jobs. One, was to cart the dead from the hospital to the mortuary and two, he had to make crude coffins for the unclaimed dead.

Majority of the unclaimed dead were old Indians, aged between 60 to 75 years and most of the time found by the roadside. If we do our maths right, these poor souls would have come to Malaya in the mid 20’s, and spent their prime life slaving for the filthy rich planters. And when they outlived their usefulness, they were left by the roadside to die.

Nobody knew their names or who they were? The only possession they had were the worn out clothes which they were still wearing. We do not know which part of India he came from, but at least we know how he was brought in.

According to K. Tambisamy, Manager of the Rawang Mines and a contractor, reported to an Enquiry Commission in 1890, the method of recruitment:

"I was sent over to India in 1886 to recruit coolies for (the Malayan) Government, and from the experience then gained I can confidently assert that not one single coolie who leaves India knows the real value of the rupee in this country, nor the cost of living here. The recruiters are, scoundrels to a man; they, not only make gross misrepresentations to the intending emigrants, but even employ force to bring them over. I cannot quote any specific instance of this, but I have myself seen men dragged from the depot to the steamer by force in the presence of Police Officers, who raised no remonstrance." (2)

Waythamoorthy , after 15 grueling days of campaigning with BN, you would be certainly sucked into their ruse. You would definitely be enlightened firsthand by the fact that their subservient press and electronic media obligingly played up the political deception of telling the rakyat that BN is their saviour and they should be grateful to the Barisan Nasional government.

Remember Waythamoorthy, it's the same press and electronic media that demeans you and your Hindraf in 2007.

Uncannily eighty years ago in 1947, the filthy rich planters from the United Planting Association of Malaya (UPAM) said the same very thing to the estate Indians. Strange?

UPAM told the estate Indians that: "Your lot is happier than in any other countries. Where in the world will you find an industry that finds free lodging, free medical attention, space for gardens to grow your own vegetables, ground to graze your cattle free, and plenty of firewood for nothing? How many of you Indians have seen the pathetically low standard of living of millions of your brothers in India, and how many of you Chinese know of the frightful conditions in China ? ... It should be remembered that an increase in wage is no cure for conditions that are ruling today. An increase in wages causes the price of food and all other commodities to increase." (3)

Is your “lot” a lot happier with the BN government even if they come in the shape of Ravana ?

No, Waythamoorthy, the Malaysian Hindu community is a lot happier if help comes in the form of goodness and strong righteous principles, that’s the reason why they seek blessings from Lord Rama in temples across the land.

Photos of the May day Ceramah in Buntong, Ipoh. A huge mix crowd of Indians and Chinese attended this Ceramah. Speakers, Ambiga, Kit Siang, Kulasegaran, Nga Kor Ming and others.

1. “Indians in Malaya, Historical Facts and Figures, Geogre Netto,

Self published, Singapore and the Federation of Malaya, P30

2. Ibid., P26

3. Ibid., P76

Lim Kit Siang – a personification of political decency, honesty and civility

2013-04-28T18:03:00.002-07:00

When Kit Siang visited Pasir Pinji market (23 April), well, I thought I’d have a chance to see him there and perhaps my old hawker friends.

I was the state assembly member there in 1990.

Pasir Pinji market is at the heart of what is going on in the Pasir Pinji state constituency, which is part of the Ipoh Timor arliamentary constituency.

The response to Kit Siang’s visit was enthusiastic and warm, and I could see in the hawkers’ eyes that they appreciated it very much that he personally took time off from the scathing battle in Gelang Patah, Johore, just to see them – his old constituents.

A surprising highlight and befitting end to the visit was when an old Indian Malaysian man, instead of shaking Kit Siang’s hand, gave him a spontaneous fatherly hug.

After this, I retired to have a chat with my long-time hawker friends. One former banker friend came and join us, and with a worried face, said that he was concerned that Kit Siang stands a very slim chance of winning the Gelang Patah seat.

I pondered for awhile and answered, “Yes, if Umno resorts to an intense xenophobic campaign aimed at him personally and the DAP, then you are right.”

“And if the avalanche of gutter journalism from the subservient newspapers and television is stacked against Kit Siang without impediment, then yes, the chance is very slim.

“And if Barisan Nasional pours in tons and tons of money donated by super-rich cronies into their campaign in Gelang Patah, then the chance is very, very slim.”

“And if the Election Commission heaps all its effort against the opposition, YES the chance is worse than slim.

“Then how if he loses?” asked the former banker.

“I hope not, as he is the personification of political decency, honesty and civility,” I replied.

Posted in Aliran at:

http://aliran.com/13304.html

Teng Chang Yeow – You are a TRAITOR.

2013-04-26T08:17:00.000-07:00

By: Choo Sing Chye

Okay, okay, I am not that nasty anyway to call you a traitor or anyone else who call for the restoration of the Penang Free Port status.

Definitely it’s not my style to affix this “T” label on anyone.

Well, if you don’t believe me, go back and look up the Penang Hansard and leaf through the pages to the State Assembly debate on 9^th June 1994.

The debate was centered particularly on the restoration of the free port status in Penang.

And in this debate, our “ketikaran” (plenty smart) friend Azhar bin Ibrahim (BN Assemblyman) labeled all the DAP Assemblymen “TRAITORS” for calling for the restoration of the free port status.

There you are, Teng, I told you, its not me that use the “T” word.

Anyway, before you promote this idea to reinstate the free port status and solicit Penangites’ votes, you got to kick three butts.

First is Azhar’s and the other two are, Koh Tsu Koon’s and Kee Phaik Cheen’s.

You see Teng, you said that it is advantageous and good if the free port status in Penang is restored.

But, Koh Tsu Koon’s and Kee Phaik Cheen’s chose to differ nineteen years ago when they said that the restoration of free port status was “bad” and “harmful” to Penang.

Koh Tsu Koon in the Assembly said that the loss of free port status was a “blessing in disguise” for Penang. He added that the restoration of free port status was “unnecessary” and “out-dated”.

Madam Kee Phaik Cheen, EXCO member in charge of tourism even went further by saying that the restoration of free port status would “distort the business economy of the tourism industry”.

I do not know whether they still hold this position or not, you better check on them before saying anything further on this issue.

When NST, “asked how DAP Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng had been going about restoring the state’s free port status”. You replied: “If the chief minister wanted it, he should have asked for it four years ago, not now.”

Teng, I do not know why you bluff. In fact, DAP Assemblyman, Teoh Teik Huat, moved a motion in the State Assembly calling on the Federal Government to restore the free port status in Penang, nineteen years ago.

He added that the free port status will assist greatly Penang's economic development especially in the field of tourism and making Penang a truly regional service centre of the northern region (similar to you are saying).

But anyway as usual, the BN State Government

said, “NO”

So, when you promise to restore the Penang Free Port Status, it is pertinent for you, to check with UMNO’s fellows before you put this in the State BN’s Manifesto.

Dr Chandra Muzaffar – just an open note for you

2013-03-17T22:34:00.001-07:00

By: Choo Sing Chye

Once your heart was filled with egalitarian ideals which copiously propagated into the pages of your books and Aliran Monthly.

I admired your courage to say these forbidden ideals which in the eyes of the UMNO’s kingpins were seditious.

I believed that you have the passion then, to offer solace for the poor without fear of offending the BN elites of the day.

You didn’t speak for the Opposition, nor the BN government, but you spoke up eloquently for the poor and injustices.

In your heart you feel the anguish, despair, misery and wretchedness of the poor.

But today I see a different you.

You have unmistakably soaked up the best tradition of the 5th Century Greek Sophist, Thrasymachus where he expounded his theory that “justice is simply whatever is to the interest of the stronger party.” (1 )

Today’s reality and challenges are the same as to the day you wrote this book in 1989, Challenges and Choices in Malaysian Politics and Society. Below are some of the quotes from your book which are still as relevant as today’s woes:

“The instability within Barisan parties, the cliques and factions that have emerged in some of them, the fierce and ferocious competition for power among groups and individuals, the buying and selling of votes even in divisional and branch elections, and indeed the foul filth that oozes out of every pore of Barisan Nasional politics…

“Perhaps most of all, it is the growing gap between word and deed, promise and performance that has disenchanted the people.

“One talks all the while of trust and integrity and yet there is no determined, concerted endeavour to unravel the truth about the shameful, scandalous BMF affair.

“One talks all the while of the danger of corruption and money politics and yet corruption through cronyism and the politics of money are allowed to flourish.

“One talks all the while of clean, healthy business practices and yet small but powerful cliques and coteries have entrenched themselves in the world of commerce and industry.

“One talks all the while of thrift and austerity and yet there is lavish spending on prestige projects, tourist complexes, exclusive clubs, expensive mansions, grand celebrations, extravagant ceremonies, and costly trips and travels abroad.

“One talks all the while of how important national unity is and yet one does not cease to divide the people by racialising issues.

“One talks all the while of how liberal the administration is and yet one imposes the severest curbs upon ceramahs and publications.

“One talks all the while of hard work and yet whenever the apostle of hard work visits a state or district everyone stops working!

“It is these blatant contradictions between what is said and what is done which has now led to a serious crisis of credibility. When a government's credibility is at stake, it must know that it is in trouble. For the crisis of credibility is the stage that precedes the crisis of legitimacy. Once a government faces a crisis of legitimacy, it ceases to command any moral authority. It is a sure sign of its downfall. Needless to say, our government is still some distance away from that stage.

“In this sort of situation, it is quite possible that unscrupulous elements among the ruling elites seeing that both their Malay and non Malay bases of support have been weakened considerably may in desperation try to create ethnic tensions which may lead to ethnic conflicts. They may then use the resulting ethnic breakdown as an excuse to set aside democratic procedures and rule by decree in order to consolidate and expand their power.

“If this happens, it would be a grave blow to the people's power. It would be a betrayal of the will of the rakyat. This is why though we may never be able to prevent a formal authoritarian regime from establishing itself, we should not do anything that will make it easier for anyone to impose such rule...”

I believe what you had written then was based on egalitarian idealism that was close to your heart and ours too.

Gone are days when you speak like an idealist, and today you speak like a BN politician and writes like The Star's columnists Joceyline Tan and Baradan Kuppusamy.

Whatever you write now does not matter to us and the poor anymore and perhaps to you now the “foul filth that oozes out of every pore of Barisan Nasional politics,” smells like roses..



Reference:

1. “An introduction to Political Philosophy,” . R.M. Murray, Published by Cohen and West Ltd, London, 1953.

A New Year Wish for 2013 - An Independent Judiciary

2012-12-31T22:54:00.000-08:00

By: Choo Sing Chye

It is too encumbered for the rakyat to ask for a judiciary that is not only independent, but also seen as one?

The three pillars of good government, the Legislature, the Executive and the Judiciary must be separated. The legislature legislates laws, the executive executes them, and the Judiciary checks its implementation.

But in a Westminster Parliamentary system, we shouldn’t put too high a hope because the Prime Minister is the head of the Legislature and as the same time heads the Cabinet which is the Executive. These two entities are seamlessly interchangeable.

In Britain, the separation of powers rest squarely on the Judiciary.

“In 1984, Clive Ponting, a senior civil servant in the Naval Affairs office after the Falklands War, was charged for leaking information to a Labour Member of Parliament. Ponting’s bosses at the Defence ministry had been systematically lying to the parliamentary committee investigating the sinking of the cruiser General Belgrano.

“Poning believed that when Prime Minister Thatcher ordered the attack on the Argentine cruiser, it was already leaving the war zone. There were 368 Argentine lives lost in the sinking, and many Britons were killed in reprisal.

“Feeling that, two years later, a cover-up was still in effect, Ponting decided he owed a higher allegiance to truth and to Parliament than to his bureaucratic superiors.

“Arrested and tried by the government, Ponting was eventually acquitted in a much-publicised trial at the Old Bailey, by a jury of 12 ordinary men and women who, like their fellow citizens, saw no harm in a civil servant insisting on honesty in government.” (1)

In Malaysia, the Barisan Nasional leaders had reduced the parliament into a rubber stamp. And with the sacking of Tun Salleh Abbas, had further provided the Barisan leaders with near absolute judicial power. Now they can change and interpret laws as they like.

Just like in a quasi-democracy, the Malaysian Judiciary is seen as another extension of the Executive.

Should we, the rakyat be contented with the state of affairs that we are in now?

With our neighbours’ democratic space expanding, Malaysia’s is shrinking. Even Burma is taking baby-steps towards the direction of democracy.

Apparently there is no reason whatsoever for the Barisan Nasional leaders to lead our country into the abyss of dictatorship. Only you can stop this trend through the ballot box in the 13th General Elections.

A reminder: “Whereas animals live by instinct and therefore do what they do directly, we can decide between alternatives, and this choice is possible because we can reflect on how we are going to act.” - From: “Philosophy in the Mass Society,” by George Grant

Thus don't look the other way because the choice is yours.

Reference:

1) Patrick Watson & Benjamin Barber. The Struggle For Democracy, Toronto: 1988

Review: The book, The Struggle for Democracy, touches on many aspects of democracy and it gives us a myriad of insightful events which touches the very cord of this subject. This book is a good read, especially for POLITICIANS

Transforming Penang To A World Class Tourism Hub? – Here we go again, Teng Chang Yeow!

2012-12-24T00:30:00.001-08:00

By Choo Sing Chye

The gumption to tell the truth is never a forte of the Barisan Nasional Government. And these lies had been repetitively bundled into cute little news reports that are ever so willingly published by the subservient BN leaning media as truths. This is Joseph Goebbels' doctrine at its best – repeating lies over and over again until it is “transformed” into truths.

In the desperate “Vote Us Back,” message, the BN pledged that “it would raise Penang’s global image to be, in the eyes of tourists, at par with other world-class cities such as Hong Kong and Singapore and create a business-friendly environment for investors and companies.” (MalaysiaKini)

This “Vote Us Back” message that was launched in the amidst of a huge volume of hot air pathetic yelping of transforming Penang into a Singapore/Hongkong like super tourists hub is a TALL TALE!

The State BN chief, Teng Chang Yeow should have known that Penang BN under Dr Koh Tsu Koon had said precisely the same TALL TALE in 1990 and pronounced publicly that a State Tourism Master Plan was to be drawn up to transform Penang into a top tourist center , rivaling the best in the world.

Teng Chang Yeow and his cohorts should easily recall Dr Koh Tsu Koon's 1990 Budget first maiden speech as Chief Minister in the State Assembly. He resolved that:

"Kerajaan Baru akan mengubal pelan Induk Pelancongan untuk menghadapi cabaran-cabaran baru dan untuk meningkatkan lagi kedudukan negeri Pulau Pinang sebagai pusat destinasi pelancongan yang utama di dunia."

This was said by the brand new Penang BN Chief Minister 22 years ago. And in mid 1993 the Penang State Government still hadn’t come out with the promised State Tourism Master Plan. And worse of all, the affluent Malaysian press did not have the decency to probe the then Penang Chief Minister for the truth!

The Chronicle of statements made by the then BN State Government and its State Tourism Committee Chairman Madam Kee Phaik Cheen.

On November the 6th 1990 under the headline in the Star, "Master Plan To Streamline Tourist Trade." the first public statement made by Madam Kee on the Tourism Master Plan, affirmed that a master plan will be drawn up to streamline tourism development in Penang towards the 21st century.

Six months later, in May 1991 Madam Kee further stated that a foreign PR firm would be drafting a directional paper cum action plan to rejuvenate Penang as a major tourist destination.

But a mere 3 months later on August the 1st 1991, Madam Kee changed her mind and under the headline in the Star: "Experts Drawing Up New Tourism Plan." stated that a group of locals (now locals) consultants would be drawing up an aggressive action plan to further promote and market Penang in the international tourism market.

Apparently just in a spate of 3 months, the confused Madam Kee changed the team of consultants from a foreign PR firm to a group of local consultants drawing up the same plan.

Okay before going further, let’s stroll back a little bit just not to be confused. First of all, we know in May 1991, a tourism action plan was supposed to be drafted by a foreign PR firm and in less than 3 months later on August the 1st the BN government changed to a group of local consultants drawing up same plan. Okay, so far so good.

Now, here’s the gem statement of the Penang BN government. Call it transformation if you wish, here it is.

A year later, on June the 19th 1992 Madam Kee again announced that the drafting of the Penang Tourism action plan was to be drafted by the Penang State Government.

Now, instead of being drafted by local consultants, she affirmed that on 11th of November, the same year in the Star, under the headline, "State Government Forms Teams to Draw Up Tourism Action Plan," that the working teams involving relevant government agencies, formed by the State Tourism Committee would draw up a comprehensive and aggressive tourism action plan towards the year 2000.

Okay let’s us regress and simplify this whole episode, in May 1991, a tourism action plan was supposed to be drafted by a foreign PR firm, but changed in less than 3 months to a group of local consultants. Fifteen months later, it changed again to the Penang State Tourism Committee, assisted by working teams from relevant government agencies. Now we are back to an all BN show.

Year 2000 had come and gone-nothing done! And had the Penang State Tourism Committee been successful in transforming Penang into a World Class Tourism Hub, BN leaning newspapers and electronic media would be reporting this success to the hilt, but they did not, and remain very silent, in fact too silent.

Lately, the State BN chief, Teng Chang Yeow with its cohorts’ nasty traits of forgetting the past, dive in to announce the “Vote Us Back plan” ahead of the 13th General Election.

In the travesty of logic, the Penang State BN blared out its breast-beating message that, “Penangites cannot afford to be stagnating. Penang needs another transformation, just like what it had done over 40 years ago.” (MalaysiaKini)

Yes, Teng Chang Yeow, here we go again!

This article also appears in http://aliran.com/11123.html

Najib’s 20,000 affordable houses in Penang – Is it for real?

2012-12-14T21:36:00.000-08:00

By Choo Sing Chye

Jestering about the return of the free port status in exchange for a Barisan Nasional’s victory in Penang had made its chief Teng Chang Yeow an undisputed local political clown. I thought this title would be permanently etched in the minds of the people in Penang, but Najib had to butt in and go national.

I genuinely pity Najib, none of his advisors including Teng Chang Yeow had any clue on the Penang housing problem. Promising to build “not less than 20,000 units of affordable housing…in Penang,” (1) without knowing the fact that the same very State BN had earlier made a promise under the four Malaysia Plans spanning from 1976 to 1991 to build 39,279 houses, but only managed to deliver 5,484. And it is even more clownish as this big “Promise” comes under the “Promises Fulfilled” banner.

The table below shows low-cost housing units built by the State Government under the various Malaysia Plan (Penang Hansard)

Malaysia Plan

		Targets	Actual Units Built
3^rd Malaysian Plan	1976-1980	4,279 units	2,422 units
4^th Malaysian Plan	1981-1985	21,000 units	2,654 units
5^th Malaysian Plan	1986-1990	14,000 units	140 units
6^th Malaysian Plan	1991- to June 1994	No Targets	268 units
	Total	39,279 units	5,484 units

Najib, buoyed by his BN advisors’ flawed perception, shoots out his mouth with a huge dose of pomposity, “it is now open for registration online and these housing units will be priced below the market price so if the market price is RM500,000, it will be sold at RM300,000” (2).

Najib’s advisors should not be in the dark and put their boss in an humiliating position. These highly paid advisors should just leaf through the past records of the BN government, they would immediately know that the state government had another 3-year Special Low-Cost Housing Privatisation Programme of its own to build 41,080 low-cost housing units.

This Programme was launched in 1986 and it was to be completed in 1989. And in it, there were about 40,635 eligible applicants registered with the State Housing Department.

Furthermore, this programme was backed by a RM1.4 billion Special Low-Cost Housing Federal Fund set up by the Federal Government for the purpose of building low-cost homes from which the State Government could apply.

Apparently BN being an incompetent government as it always shown to be, it managed to build only 2,926 units(7 percent) out of the targeted 41,080, thus missing the golden opportunity to provide 41,080 Low-Cost houses for the poor. And shamefully, the 2,926 units were built over a period of 8 years and not 3 years as targeted.

Now, the BN clowns have gone on a breast-beating show around Penang but they cannot hide the fact that they have lost the only once in a lifetime opportunity to help the poor.

The BN government should have fulfilled the targeted 41,080 Low-Cost House for the poor 14 years ago without much difficulties when the cost of land, labour, and material was low.

And furthermore, the majority of the poor in Penang at that time could definitely scrap through owning a RM 25,000 house. But owning a RM 300,000 house is way beyond their reach.

Najib, do have some humility for the poor, the RM300,000 house is not for them. Tell me Najib, when the poor can afford to buy a RM 25,000 house 14 years ago, your BN government screwed up big time in fulfilling this pledge and only built 2,926 units.

Now if we give the same opportunity of low labour, land and material cost to Lim Guan Eng – he would definitely solve the housing problem hands down.

After the first three and the half years under Chief Minister, Dr Koh Tsu Koon, the State Government and its agencies were only able to built and complete 1,797 low-cost housing units. Below is the breakdown:

268 units built by the Penang State Government.
133 units by Penang Development Corporation (PDC).
690 units by Penang Regional Development Authority (PERDA).
706 units by Urban Development Authority (UDA).

All the above information are sourced from the Penang Hansard

All information were gathered during my work-visit to Penang in 1994 with the late P. Patto, to help out with the first Suara Tanjung 3 issue,.

Comments:
I welcome intellectual comments.
If you want to comment please send your comments to
singchye@gmail.com

Comments from Malaysia Today
From Gilagila

Mr Choo Sing Chye, please look again. Your
columns of statistics under
various malaysia plans. Are these
PAN-MALAYSIAN or just applicable to Penang alone?
Your answer will determine how I answer to the

above finding.

Dear Gilagila

I do not have an account with MT so I cannot answer you there. I hope you would surf here. Sorry for the slight vagueness, I have included above the table with this to make clearer: The table below shows low-cost housing units built by the State Government under the various Malaysia Plan (Penang Hansard).
Hoping for your reply.

Reference:

1) Najib pledges 20,000 affordable houses, monorail for Penang.
Malaysian Insider, 08-12-2012

2) Ibid.

BN government never stood by the rakyat in the Bukit Merah – Papan Controversy.

2012-11-27T19:18:00.003-08:00

By: Choo Sing Chye

Never for once, the Barisan Nasional government has stood by the rakyat on issues that are dear to their hearts. For an example, their pursuit for a cleaner environment had always hindered by the machination of the government.

Apparently by not having the rakyat’s welfare at heart, the Minister of the Science, Technology & Innovation Ministry (MOSTI), Maximus Ongkili has forsaken the “prime duty” of the regulatory authorities that the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) had proposed.

The IAEA, which was invited by the government during the Bukit Merah and Papan controversy made many recommendations, and one of them was the “prime duty” which the regulatory authorities should “adhere”:

“there is one principle to which all should adhere: regulatory authorities (Government) should be effectively separated from implementing organization (ARE), since … the prime duty of regulatory authorities is to protect Man and the environment, ensuing the … radiation doses to Man do not contravene the recommendations of the ICRP regulation.”

Contrary to what the IAEA had recommended, the Federal and the State Government, in the case of the Papan and Bukit Merah controversy, chose to sideline the welfare of the rakyat and sided with the giant conglomerate – Mitsubishi Chemical, Japan.

Likewise in Ongkili’s case, by ignoring the rakyat’s welfare, he had deviated from the “prime duty of (the) regulatory authorities… to protect Man and the environment”.

Unmistakably, the proof is in his unambiguous expressed statement which he said: “the onus is on them ( anti-Lynas group), not on me, to say that decision of the board is not correct. So give me additional information to point to the fact that it was not a wise decision.” (Ongkili’s interview with Malaysian Insider, April 15, 2012)

Let us wind back the clock to twenty eight years ago, in the same frame of mind, the then Minister of Science, Technology and Environment, Datuk Amar Stephen Yong, let loose his uninhibited hostility towards the residents of Papan and Bukit Merah by demanding proof that the radioactive dumping was hazardous to health. He also challenged critics of the radioactive waste dumps to prove that the dumps were not safe.

Following close behind, Ramli Ngah Talib, the then Menteri Besar, told the press that the Thorium waste dumps were safe and went on to say: “that although some foreign experts claimed that the dump is unsafe, it is merely their opinion ”.

Tun Dr. Mahathir even remarked that the activists were naïve of the fact that the government was committed to the safety of the dumps.

But in the end, like huge slaps on their faces, the IAEA team reported the same faults as the experts invited by the Anti radioactive groups:

“The already constructed three trenches which definitely do not meet the required specifications. They are not constructed in accordance with the basic principles of sound civil engineering and should therefore not be accepted for the storage of Thorium Hydroxide waste.”

Apparently, the crux of the matter was that the “prime duty” was not upheld in the Bukit Merah and Papan dispute, and unfortunately, this trend has not stopped.

The importance of the “prime duty” must be upheld without fear or favour, and if we are presented with a problem similar to what had happened in Japan recently - how will the government respond?

This is one case that the rakyat would never in a million years believe that any hanky-panky would happen in Japan – lying about the level of radiation exposure.

In Japan, where prime ministers come and go at a slightest mistake, this is a no-no, but it happens!

But if it happens in Malaysia, then, who should bear the onus of blame? Maximus Ongkili?

Read the full press report at : http://www.terradaily.com/reports/Japan_probes_claim_workers_radiation_levels_faked_999.html

Japan probes claim workers' radiation levels faked
Japan's labour minister on Tuesday ordered an investigation into claims that subcontractors at the crippled Fukushima nuclear plant told workers to lie about their radiation exposure.

Yoko Komiyama told a press briefing in Tokyo that she had launched a wide-ranging probe, including checks on a firm at the centre of allegations which have appeared in Japanese media in recent days.

"This is an issue that shakes the foundation of the management of workers' radiation exposure," said the minister for health, labour and welfare.
"We will deal with it in a strict manner if any laws were broken. (If true) this is extremely regrettable," she added.

An executive at construction firm Build-Up in December told about 10 workers to cover their dosimeters -- used to measure cumulative radiation exposure -- with lead casings when working in areas of high radiation, the Asahi Shimbun newspaper and other media said.

The move was aimed at under-reporting employees' exposure to radiation so the firm could continue working at the site of the worst nuclear disaster in a generation, the media reports said.
"Unless we hide it with lead, exposure will max out and we cannot work," the executive was heard saying in a covert audio recording, the Asahi reported.

Comments:
I welcome intellectual comments only.
If you want to comment please send your comments to singchye@gmail.com

Nurul Izzah’s No Compulsion view – A case of misinterpretation

2012-11-16T07:02:00.000-08:00

By: Choo Sing Chye

The recent HAKIM members’ letter (1) to Malaysia Today had prompted me to write this article. Since I am not an expert in Islam, I will not delve into the merits of the letter, and also, what had been said in the press by UMNO politicians and supporters. I only comment on the common faults of politicians in construing something that had not been said.

For a start, the letter hinges (not equates in quality) on the Greek Sophist Protagoras’ (500-430 BC) notion of “Man is the measure of all things, of things that are that they are, and of things that are not that they are not.” (2)

Simply said, “things are to me as they appear to me and to you as they appear to you.” And it is the task of the Sophists (professional teachers) according to Protagoras to use intellectual discourse to convince the minority to accept the better set of beliefs. (3)

The apparent distinction between Protagoras and the HAKIM’s members’ proposal in this particular context of argument, is the targeted group.

Protagoras intents to influence the minority (perhaps non-Greeks or non-Sophists) with a better set of intellectual arguments and the HAKIM’s members, within the Muslim group with the truth.

UMNO leaders and supporters arguments

One common fault of the Malaysian politicians are that they are not precise in their arguments. In Nurul’s case, they literally do not put a limit or a precise boundary on the attributes to her no-compulsion view. They do not care whether or not the attributes belong to her.

Nurul’s no-compulsion view is CONDITIONAL and the majority of criticisms veered away from the intended point.

Now let’s go back to the common fault which I will emphasize by using the Aristotle’s Infinite term, “not-man” which has an infinite meaning.

Examples of not-man are Samsung Galaxy S3, the moon, television, worms, chicken, monkey, car, pistol, , wok, sand and etc., etc., etc. We can literary fit the entire universe between man and not-man, leaving nothing out. (4)

In fact, if they assign these meanings to not-man, they are not wrong. But what is wrong is that they have assigned these to a reflective view in an “infinite” fashion. This should not happen because between Compulsion and no-Compulsion, there is absolutely nothing. This is what one calls the Law of Excluded Middle as opposed to the “Infinite” term.

The Excluded Middle

In the Excluded Middle, it is either Compulsion or no-Compulsion.

Take the examples of yes and no or wise and not wise. There is nothing in the middle. We cannot say middle yes or middle wise. It is either yes or no, wise or not wise. Therefore both cannot be right or true, and at the same time wrong or false. (5)

Now we are left only with the compulsion and no-compulsion.

We cannot quarrel over attributes between compulsion and no-compulsion because there are nothing in the middle. We can only dispute attributes within the compulsion or the no-compulsion.

Thus, when we argue on attributes within compulsion or within no-compulsion, we are treading into an area that needs an advance degree of competence or an above average knowledge on the subject matter. This is what Protagoras and the authors of letter from HAKIM’s implied.

Removing the doubt.

It is without doubt, there are caveats in Nurul’s “no compulsion” view. And it is very important to spot these caveats before one launches an argument.

Thus, in this instant to detect these caveats, I will use the Connotation (Logic) expression.

But first, let us get a grasp on the use of Connotation in this issue. Here I will use the term house as an example.

What is a house? What does the term mean? What does it denote?

To a layman, a house can denote a city mansion, a rural lodge, a cottage, a suburban, a villa, a royal palace and it can also mean sheds, sties, caravan, caves, tree house, abandoned car and so on. (6)

But to an architect, he will definitely not agree with the layman and also will not argue with him/her. It will have no end! Thus, the architect will Connote the term house to arrive at the final accurate description.

i) The architect would use the words building or
structure to exclude caves.

ii) He/she will imply permanency to exclude tents,
booths and caravans.

iii) And when he/she mentions fitness for human habitation, he/she intends to exclude sheds, abandoned car and sties.

So, in finality, a house is a permanent building fit for human habitation and nothing else. (7)

Now we come to Nurul’s “no-compulsion” view. What are the caveats that she has used to exclude all her opponents’ insinuations.

The Caveats.

Nurul: “So I am tied, of course, to the prevailing views” (8)

Here by saying that she is 'tied' to the 'prevailing view,' and she has put caveats to her 'no compulsion' view.

Q. What are the caveats?

A. They are the “prevailing”’ (predominant).

and “tied” ( obligated) view.

Q. What is meant by prevailing view?

A. Prevailing view is the view that is held by
the Muslim Majority.

Q. Who forms the Muslim Majority?

A. Malay Muslims form the Majority in the Muslim Community. They conform to the official tenets of Islam in Malaysia with Sultans as the head of Islam.

Other Caveats

“There are limitations and you know…”

“You believe so strongly in your faith, that even me, being schooled in Assunta with a huge cross in the hall and an active singing Catholic society will not deter you”. (9)

The words “limitations,” “believe...strongly,” and “deter” are qualities of strength towards faith and these qualities are synonymous to the “prevailing” view.

Consequently, one would say in finality that the prevailing (predominant) views held by the Malaysian Muslims encompass none of Nurul’s opponents’ insinuations. Thus, this prevailing view has excluded Nurul from the accusations that her opponents had levelled at her.

In sum, when we are dealing with comments or views that are not indicated or said verbally, we should tread very carefully and not to compound the situation.

So, in its absence, we cannot have a runaway perception in its place – it is not fair to put words into somebody’s mouth.

At time like this, it is helpful that we refer back to the ‘Theme’ of the forum.

Comments:
I welcome intellectual comments only.
If you want to comment please send your comments to singchye@gmail.com

Reference:

1) “Stemming the incoherence of misguided Muslim pundits,” written by Muhammad Husni Mohd Amin, Wan Mohd Aimran Wan Mohd Kamil, Muhammad Syukri Rosli and Wan Ahmad Fayhsal Wan Ahmad Kamal

2) “An introduction to Political Philosophy,” A.R.M.
Murray, Published by Cohen and West
Ltd, London, 1953.

3) ibid.

4) “Logic,” A.A.Luce, Published by The English
Universities Press Ltd (1958)

5) ibid.,

6) ibid.,

7) ibid.

8) Transcript of Nurul Izzah’s Q&A forum: ‘Islamic state: Which version? Whose responsibility?’ (MalaysiaKini)

9) ibid.

Indian Gangsters or just lost souls.

2012-10-23T16:48:00.003-07:00

By: Choo Sing Chye

The other day, at a dinner, I met a former PPP supporter who upon recognising me, came over to my table for a chat. But before saying anything, he quickly declared that he had switched parties, from PPP to a full fledged MIC member.

I asked him, "what's the difference?" He did not answer, but switched subject to talk about the good old days. Then suddenly at one conjecture he asked me whether I had admitted any Indian gangsters during my watch as Perak DAP Organising Secretary.

“No!” I replied. “Hey, don’t “ali-utart” (bluff) me lah, just admit it bro,” he reacted.

I looked at him and responded, “I never come across any Indians who had filled the little dotted line under “Occupation” with the word, “Gangster”, when joining DAP.”

“So, to you when you see an Indian beating another, you call him a gangster and when a rich man or top politician’s son bashing another, you just say, boys will be boys, right?” I retorted. "Is this the way MIC solves the Indian problem?"

This is a true story that happened a very long time ago.

Looking back to my childhood’s days, I remember when we were a group of about 8 to 9 years old, a healthy mix of Malays, Indians and I, would congregate on a small patch of land near the mortuary playing football until the sun sets. I tell you, it was unadulterated fun back then, which I do not see much these days.

When we were tired from all the playing, we would sit down to rest and it was always at this moment in time, a 18 year old Indian boy by the name of Arikiam would suddenly appear and sit beside us uninvited.

Sensing that our eyes were fixed on him, he would suddenly leap up and kick off his story telling in the most animated way that he could, just to make an impression on us.

Once he rode an elephant to the Hospital Quarters where we lived. As children we were stunned to see him riding on the huge animal and immediately followed wherever he went.

Once a while we would work up a little courage and sneaked a pat or two on the elephant’s leg. Later we knew that he was working for the Brazilian Circus which was in Ipoh at that time.

Until today, I still do not know how he managed to ride the elephant out of the circus and took a huge risk just to impress us, kids.

Did he make any impression on us? Yes, he did, back then.

Today, we have forgotten him and his stories on how he allegedly fought with the police and his rivals whom he called bad guys. But, his imitation of John Wayne’s walk still lingers in my mind.

Many years had passed since I saw him, but one fine day while waiting on my motorbike at the traffic lights junction for the light to turn green, I noticed an Indian man behaving rather strangely. Then, he started to walk towards me and I thought he wanted to cross the road.

Nearing me, he literally with his outstretched hands gave me a brotherly hug, in an instant I recognised him - he was none other then the Indian boy who had entertained us with his exploits all through the years when we were growing up.

We went to the side of the road and had a long chat. As time flew by, I said to him that I had to go, suddenly I could see that his eyes started to mist. He knew that this will be the last goodbye and we will never meet again.

He walked away without the usual John Wayne’s walk that he usually do when we were around.

On that day, I felt that the hug was just his way of saying, “thank you,” for listening to his stories and also getting the respect that no other had given him when he was young.

Many years after that meeting, I heard from my friend that he had died, apparently from all the injuries he had sustained through the years.

Sad as it is, he died a nobody. I never judged him as a gangster, but a young boy yearning to be heard and his cry for help was interwoven into his stories. He was just a lost soul, lost in a society that instead of holding out its hand to help him, it just cordoned him off into the abyss of misery and hopelessness, a very long time ago.

The police cannot do much about Indian gangsterism because they are dealing with the end-stage of our societal disease caused by greedy and uncaring politicians from the Barisan Nasional.

The recent call by Lim Kit Siang for a “high-powered” commission of inquiry to address the issue of gangsterism involving Malaysian Indian youths is timely. And the commission should, according to him, involve all sectors of Malaysian society to highlight the causes and solutions to the problem.

Yes, very true indeed, let’s this be the start of a new era to end the anguish and the pain of the poor Malaysian Indians and to welcome them back into the fold of the main stream society.

After trillions spent on ten Malaysia Plans spanning 50 over years, the problem of gangsterism in the Indian society still persist. And it is getting worse, thanks the Barisan Nasional government.

No man can get rich in politics unless he's a crook! - President Harry Truman

2012-10-11T09:04:00.002-07:00

By: Choo Sing Chye

I read with curiosity the recent call by PM Najib to inculcate a “natural abhorrence to corruption into the conscience of society.”

Even after reading his “natural abhorrence” statement, my ringgit still does not feel safe in my pocket.

Frankly speaking, I cannot really grasp the real purpose of his speech because in reality, corruption had already seeped into every nook and corner of our society that had become as common as “nasi lemak”.

Let’s not argue about it. Besides, at times like this, one genuinely needs a healthy dose of joke every now and then to lift one up and out of the dreary and melodramatic antics of some Barisan Nasional’s politicians.

These antics are often oozed into the cesspit bottom of the mainstream government siding electronic and print media as front page news.

Well, if Najib is serious, I mean dead serious, he should put this “natural abhorrence” joke aside and read this book: “Give ‘Em Hell, Harry!”

This book has all the ingredients of what a leader should be made up of.

President Harry Truman

I never saw myself as President. I was just in the right place at the wrong time.

I've always thought of myself as an ordinary man. I don't have any special personal endowments, and I don't waste time worrying about what I don't have.

I just try to do the best I can with what I do have. It's not important how you do something or say it; the point is to get it said and done.

People even object to my language. Some old party hen is supposed to have come up to Bess and said, Mrs. Truman, can't you get the President to stop using the word 'manure'? And Bess is supposed to have replied, it's taken me 40 years to get him to use it.

I may have inherited this job, but, by God, I'm in charge, and they damn well better know it!

You know, a fella could get rich in this job, if he really wanted to.

But I found out something a long time ago: that when you play ball with the money boys, you pay!

Oh, I've done some favors for friends down through the years, just like any other influence peddler in Washington, but I never got anything for myself out of it.

And I'll tell you something else: No man can get rich in politics unless he's a crook! It can't be done.

Road Contractors

When Tom Pendergast paid me a visit after a bond issue had been passed to build roads, I got my first taste of "road contractors." I told Tom that his supporters weren't very good road builders, and that was all that really concerned me.

"Their bids were too damn high, Tom," I said, "and the roads they build are crumbling like pie crusts. I'm going to award the job to some bunch from out of state..."

There are three things on this earth that'll ruin a man—power, money and women.

If a man can accept power as a temporary thing, he's going to be all right. But if he thinks he's the cause of the power, that'll ruin him.

And money, if a man makes too much money, too quickly, it can separate him from the rest of the human race who have to work most of their lives just to earn a living.

And if a man is disloyal to his family, that'll ruin him. “Cause if you've got the right partner in life, you're not going to have much trouble…”

This book is a good read, simple and straight forward. Politically, Truman never budge an inch when he knew that he was right. He literally took the bull by its horns when he was dealing with the Ultra Right Joseph McCarthy, Ku Klux Klan and General McArthur.

In his own party, he had to take on President Franklin Roosevelt who was dead set against him because he was backing legislation to limit Presidents to two terms.

He also took on the all powerful Joseph McCarthy whom he called “the most lamentable mistake of the Almighty…”

“And I tell you, folks, if you keep your mouth shut about something like that, democracy simply will not work!” Truman

Shadow Cabinet – Not again, Najib!

2012-10-01T23:41:00.002-07:00

By: Choo Sing Chye

This is my second write on the Shadow Cabinet issue.

One evening, a tired newspaper editor was dining alone at the university cafeteria. Having a prospect of a long monotonous lecture on Journalism awaits him that same evening.

He tried to finish his food as quickly as possible so that he would catch a few minutes of rest.

Then suddenly, it seems out of nowhere, a student appeared in front of him and threw a question on the subject of Shadow Cabinet.

The editor, being polite, look at him and briefly answered him.

Not satisfied, the student persisted on pursuing the subject.

Looking agitated, the editor, not wanting to prolong the conversation, responded, but in a rather ominous manner.

“Look here, young man, I suppose you are not a student of politics, and if you were, you won’t be standing here asking this question.”

“But anyway I will not beat around the bush to answer your question.

“My paper is only interested in three persons in the Canadian mainstream politics; one, the Prime Minister, two, his Finance Minister (his successor) and three, the Opposition Leader.

“Anybody falls between or beyond them, I’m not interested nor my journalists.

“The Shadow Ministers or Critics that you mentioned, only interest me when they are caught sleeping with somebody's else wife or husband, that's all to it...can I continue with my dinner?”

For your information Najib, in the United States, the offer of Cabinet posts (secretaries) before any Presidential election borders on a precarious line between what is permissible in law and what is not.

It is often seen as a bribe.

And for this reason, Presidential candidates steer clear of this issue of selecting Cabinet post before any elections.

Somehow, this idea of illegality had slipped into the Canadian political system.

Although, it is a British conventional practice used in Canada, they avoid using the term Shadow Ministers. In place, the term Critics is used as a common designate.

That's why in Canada, Shadow Ministers are referred as Shadow Critics not Ministers. Thus, leaving the naming of the new Cabinet Ministers after the General Election and not before.

In Malaysia, the Pakatan Rakyat has a Shadow Committee and its main function is to shadow issues not ministers.

The reason is that not all the ministries have issues. Thus, why bother shadowing them, and disturbing their routine of spending their entire day playing golf?

Rest be assured, Najib, Pakatan will definitely shadow them when issues start to crop up in their ministries just like the Cow scandal involving the family of the Minister for Women, Family and Community Development.

This scandal was effectively shadowed by the then relatively unknown Rafizi Ramli.

Hence, in the meantime, having an MP shadowing them will be a waste of time unless the Pakatan MP is crazy about playing golf.

Practically speaking, it only needs a few effective Pakatan MPs and a few non MPs to shadow the immensely bloated Barisan Nasional Cabinet.

Najib, if Pakatan were to mark your ministers one to one, Pakatan needs to have a bloated Shadow to track your XXL Cabinet.

As for now, all Pakatan needs is to have a lean and mean Shadow Committee to hammer the hell out of your incompetent Cabinet Ministers in the House which they are doing right now with devastating effect.

In addition, NGOs too are shadowing your Cabinet. One good example is Suaram and another is Bersih.

Suaram’s role in shadowing you and the Defense Ministry is so effective that your government is putting all its resources to pin them down.

You are doing likewise to Bersih.

After all these, if you still insist on a Shadow Cabinet from the Opposition, then please provide the funding, set up offices for the Shadow Cabinet Ministers and also provide the workers.

And one very important thing for you to do is to allow the Federal Government Chief Secretary to have meetings with the leaders of the Opposition so that in the event of a victory by the Opposition, there would be a smooth transition. This is a Standard Practice of a Westminster system.

If not, it will make you sound silly for harping on this non issue day in and day out.

Najib, one last advice from me, please listen to your own Deputy Higher Education Minister Saifuddin Abdullah. He is intelligent and speaks more sense than Khairy and your Deputy put together.

Concluding this article, I wish to quote from one British politician on this subject:

"There is no reason for the Shadow Cabinet to exist in our system of government which is already bloated with ineffective Ministers. We don’t need Shadow Ministers as Displays – we have enough.”

For further reading on Shadow Cabinet. Please go to my blog:

http://singchyeblog.blogspot.com/2011/02/shadow-cabinet-do-we-have-one-in.html

Come on Datuk Seri Nazri, Datuk Ngeh Koo Ham’s tweet is not a Proposition but a Question

2012-09-23T20:49:00.002-07:00

By: Choo Sing Chye

'‘Learning Logic will do politicians more good than harm'’, said one professor from my university. ‘I don’t understand,'’ one student chipped in, "you mean that politicians should acquire knowledge on Logic or us."

'‘You,’' replied the professor. ‘'You are all going into the world as journalists and politicians. Therefore you need to study Logic so that you know precisely what you are speaking about, and precisely what you are saying about."

'‘Precision is the first fruit of the study of Logic and precision will sharpen your statements, and add points and force to your arguments correctly.

'‘Lack of it, shows itself in the 'deficiency disease' of the mind i.e. vagueness, woolliness of expression and feeble grip of the matter at hand.

‘'Remember this, Logic at its lower levels blends with grammar and at its height, merges in philosophy.'’

So true, look at the arguments of our local politicians and the writings of the Barisan Nasional leaning columnists and journalists and compare them to the West. You will be the judge.

Datuk Seri Nazri, as man with a vast legal knowledge and what’s more, a minister in the Prime Minister’s Department, you should have known better.

Legally, the controversial part of Ngeh’s tweet is a QUESTION and Logically, it is also a QUESTION and not a PROPOSITION.

So, like any other questions, they end with a question-mark (?). Therefore, there is nothing, I repeat, absolutely nothing can be deduced beyond the question-mark be attributed to Ngeh.

If there is any deduction made, it should be rightly belongs to the person or persons who made it. In this case, Umno Youth Chief Khairy Jamaludin and Perak Mentri Besar Datuk Seri Dr Zambry Abdul Kadir.

Datuk Seri Nazri, now let’s us use Logic to evaluate Ngeh’s tweet which sound as follows, ‘Khairy wants Muslim protest against Same Bacile. For Islam or for his political gains? Are Muslims wasting to much time and energy on this?’

Imperatively in Logic, we must first find out whether or not the controversial part of Ngeh’s tweet is a Propositional sentence. For a sentence to be considered as a Proposition, it should be capable of being true or false.

In Logic, all Propositions are sentences, but not all sentences are Propositions. Ejaculations, exclamations, prayers, wishes, commands, and questions are not Propositions.

Unmistakably, the controversial part of Ngeh’s tweet comes in a form of a question. It is easy to find out – a question-mark at the end of sentence means it is a question.

Therefore it automatically disqualifies Ngeh’s sentence as Propositional and rendering it without the tendency or capacity of being true ( positive) or false (negative).

In other words, Ngeh’s tweet question does not contain any element of falsity or truth.

It is waiting for an answer that contains both these two elements from whom ever wish to ANSWER. Period/Fullstop

Given that Ngeh’s tweet is not a Proposition, but a Question, we must be sincere to treat it as one.

Datuk Seri Nazri, let’s take a few steps further and examine the controversial part of Ngeh’s tweet in a more PRECISE manner.

When you call for the police to investigate Ngeh’s tweet, you must be on solid ground.

Are you on solid ground? No, my dear Datuk Seri Nazri! Here is the reason why?

You would be on solid ground on this one condition only.

If Ngeh had included just a tiny negative three letter words ‘not’ in his controversial tweet, even it is posted in his tweet as a question, Ngeh would be guilty as hell.

Now look at his tweet carefully, this time with a NOT inserted:

'‘Are Muslims NOT wasting too much time and energy on this?'’

Well, this is like saying that Muslims are wasting time and energy even it is intended as a Question.

Lastly, Datuk Seri Nazri, if you can see the difference between the two sentences, you would agree with me that you have made a mistake on Ngeh's tweet. If you don’t, I have nothing else to say - I rest my case.

But, remember, journalists, editors from BBC, CNN and other Media from the West are watching…..please don’t surprise them…..

Yoga? I remember ‘mandi safar’ - a repost

2012-09-23T20:34:00.003-07:00

By: Choo Sing Chye

The recent yoga issue has brought back fond memories from my childhood days. In those days when our parents were dirt poor, the ultimate fun was to spend a day frolicking in the Kinta River with friends. And all these cost us nothing but a very sored-throat from all the yelling and shouting. It was all worth it.

Mandi safar to us (non-Malays) meant a license from our parents to play in the river because we were taken care off by the Malay families with whom we had tacked along – it was undulterated fun.

Mandi safar was a family event then, and at the end of the day, heavy our hearts were, as the fun ended, we would all collect sayur paku for our favourite dish – sayur paku sambal as a last leg of our day at the Kinta River.

The meaning of mandi safar meant little to us, 8 – 10 year old boys and in any case we were too young to have acculmulated enough sins to have an end to end cleansing in the river. Apart from mandi safar, my Malay and Indian friends would go the river to swim during the school holidays.

One year it all ended. There were no more calls from my two Malay neighbours – "Jom mandi safar."

In the subsequent years our "jom, mandi sungei" were greeted with "mak, marah."
Later we found out the real reason and we removed mandi safar and mandi sungei from our intinerary of fun.

My Malay friends still response to our other calls – "jom main layang-layang or jom coun-da-coun-di (Indian game)…."

As we recall, mandi safar (Hindu ritual of sin cleansing) was just a poor man picnic and we had no idea of the religious reason attached to mandi safar.

(mandi safar, sungei, coun-da-coun-di are spelled according to sound spoken)

An open letter to Chow Kon Yeow – Alleged RM300,000 bribe for a top BN politician.

2012-09-17T08:58:00.000-07:00

By: Choo Sing Chye

I am pleased to hear that the Penang Pakatan Rakyat state executive council had decided to set up a high powered executive committee to probe into the sale of some 4,000 acres of prime land made under the Barisan Nasional administration to be headed by you.

This, I hope would provide an accurate account of what actually went on during the long BN’s tenure of the Penang State Government.

But anyway, I wondered if you would take a second look at one scandal happened 18 years ago. And without doubt, this scandal would have made good Hollywood script.

During my work-visit to Penang in 1994 with the late P. Patto, to help out with the first Suara Tanjung 3 issue, I wrote the front page article, RM300,000 For Top BN Politician which was at that time the hottest corruption scandal in Penang.

RM300,000 for Top BN Politician

DAP Assemblyman for Datuk Keramat, K. Balasundram, caused a stir in the recent Penang State Assembly meeting on 1st June 1994 when he touched on an alleged RM300.000 armed robbery carried out by an office-boy-cum-director of a company said to be owned by a former Penang tycoon, an undischarged bankrupt.

This sum of money was meant as a pay-off for a top Barisan Nasional government politician in the Penang State Government..

Revealing further the mystery surrounding this armed robbery, Balasundram said that the robbery itself was only reported to the police six days later on 26th May. Apparently, the victim was prevented from making any police report on the robbery.

At this point, the Speaker of the Penang State Assembly, Dato' Abdul Rahman Abbas, knowing what Balasundram was driving at, tried to prevent him from speaking further on the matter but, failed.

Balasundram stubbornly stood his ground and revealed further that this incident was connected to an application for an excision of a 13.11 acres hill property to a non hill land so that it would be developed like any other land.

(Note: Any land which is more than 250 feet above sea-level is considered as hill land and therefore comes under the purview of the Conservation Act.)

In his speech, K. Balasundram demanded:

"The Penang State Government must establish a committee of enquiry headed by former Supreme Court judges, like either Tan Sri Chang Min Tatt or Tan Sri Eusoffe Abdoolcader, to investigate into this case since it is said to involve a top politician in the government. This is to clear the good name of the government."

Immediately after Balasundram had completed his speech on the above matter, the Deputy Chief Minister, Dr. Ibrahim Saad, who is also the Chairman of the State Land Committee, jumped to his feet, although Bala did not mention the name of the politician for whom the RM300,000 was meant for.

Dr. Ibrahim declared in the House that the matter would be investigated thoroughly. And he even assured Balasundram that the State Government would allow him to sit in this enquiry committee if he so wished.

The next day, 2nd June, the Opposition Leader, Lim Kit Siang, again raised this matter which was still surrounded in mystery. Kit Siang shocked the House when he revealed the name of the top BN government politician.

Normally one would challenge Kit Siang to repeat the accusation outside the House but the Chief Minister, Dr. Koh Tsu Koon, anticipating trouble for the Barisan Nasional government, quickly cut in to declare that the State Government would establish a one-man enquiry committee by him and that he would investigate the matter. And that if anyone was not satisfied with his investigation, then the matter could be brought up in the House.

Kit Siang and Dr. Koh had a heated debate on this matter with Dr. Koh maintaining that he, and he alone, will investigate. Kit Siang insisted that it must be investigated by a Committee of House which should not be headed by him (Dr Koh) alone.

Following this heated furore over the RM300,000 alleged pay-off, the DAP Assemblyman for Pengkalan Kota, Chow Kon Yeow, moved an amendment to the Motion of Thanks. The amendment was to include the setting up of an Enquiry Committee headed by the Speaker - Dato' Abdul Rahman Abbas, the Chief Minister - Dr. Koh Tsu Koon, Opposition Leader - Lim Kit Siang, State EXCO Member - Dr. Helmy and K. Balasundram with the powers to subpoena any person or body of persons, to investigate the RM300,000 pay-off scandal.

However, this amendment was thrown out by the Speaker.

It would appear that neither the Deputy Chief Minister, Dr. Ibrahim Saad, nor the Chief Minister, Dr. Koh Tsu Koon, is genuinely interested in getting down to the root of this scandal although it has been explicitly said to involve a top BN politician in the House.

What had become of this case? Had there ever any investigation done by Dr. Koh Tsu Koon into the alleged bribe.

Although this scandal is beyond the committee scope of investigation, I sincerely hope that you would take a second look at this alleged corruption as you can now access into the 1994 minutes or records of Dr. Koh Tsu Koon's lone investigation.

I have read the 3 comments in the Malaysia Today - it is not the RM 300,000 - it's small feed, but the name of the person involved will surprise you.

2012-08-13T23:38:00.002-07:00

Stop 114A !

Lynas’ Thorium Radioactive waste – A RM 2 - 4 trillion money spinner?

2012-06-03T10:32:00.009-07:00

By Choo Sing Chye

I guess a few weeks ago, Malaysia woke up to the best news of the century – a waste product that could generate RM 2 – 4 trillion for our country.

Who cares about the radioactivity of the by-product? It can never penetrate our thick skin, but for our thick skull, well…nobody can guarantee that it would not.

Take for example, the detractors of Ambiga, if you shine a torchlight (not radioactive) through one of their ears, it would definitely come out from the another. Anyway let’s leave these pendulum butts aside.

Obviously this waste product is touted to bring in mega bucks, so they say, and the matter (atom size) is so tiny that we cannot see with our naked eye, so, why argue?

Okay, let’s get back to the ‘trillion’ ringgit news. According to nuclear physicist Abdul Rahman Omar who told the parliamentary select committee (PSC) that the Thorium waste produced by Lynas’s is a future money spinner i.e., ‘one tonne of thorium generates the same amount of energy as 10 million tonnes of coal.’ (1)

Here’s what he said, ‘It can generate 1 gigawatt of electricity in a year which is worth RM1 billion to RM2 billion, multiply this by the 2,000 tonnes a year that the factory will produce, then it is worth between RM2 trillion to RM4 trillion in electricity.’ (2)

Now wait a minute, didn’t we hear this one before?

Okay, before we salivate at the trillion of ringgit profit from the thorium waste, let us set the clock back to October 1986, when Dr. Fowler, a nuclear energy consultant from the

United States

, engaged by the Asian Rare Earth said the very same thing as Abdul Rahman Omar’s.

Dr. Fowler said, ‘I have deliberately referred to the Thorium cake (from ARE) as a residual by-product, rather than a waste product, since it may have a future value as a fuel material for nuclear electric power plants.’ (3)

But fortunately, foreign experts brought in by the NGOs on behalf of the residents of Papan, Bukit Merah and Menglembu then, strongly negated Dr. Fowler’s invalid proposal 26 years ago?

Today it is ironical for Nuclear physicist Abdul Rahman to bring out the same proposal again without revealing the disadvantages of using Thorium Hydroxide as a nuclear fuel.

Because of this fallacy, I wish to republish what the foreign experts said on this issue 26 years ago.

One, Thorium Hydroxide cannot be use directly as a nuclear fuel. It has to be converted in a special nuclear reactor to uranium 233, before use. This conversion will take between 20 – 60 years. (4)

Two, the potential future use of the waste is unrealistic. For example, if Malaysia is to use the Thorium waste to fuel its reactors, she has to build special Thorium cycle reactors because normal reactors cannot run on this fuel. Thus, the Malaysian Government has to cough out millions of Ringgit to build new Thorium Cycle reactors. (5)

Three, Britain, Canada and Norway have closed down their experimental Thorium Cycle reactors. The remaining Thorium Cycle reactors in the

United States

are facing numerous technical problems and it would not be long for these reactors to be shut down. (6)

Thus, the Molten Salt Reactor (MSR) in Tennessee (1968 to 1972) was abandoned because of numerous technical problems and not just the overproduction of uranium as suggested by physicist Abdul Rahman (7)

Now, the question is, if the cost of uranium falls, then more so in the case of Thorium Hydroxide which needs further expensive process to make it useable to fuel the Thorium Cycle reactors which themselves face numerous technical problems. In fact, if the cost falls, then Thorium Hydroxide will have no value at all.

Apparently if all the hype of the profitability of Thorium Hydroxide is true, the Japanese would be the first to store it in their country because the Japanese government at that time was planning to build 21 nuclear reactors by 1996. But sadly, they were not Thorium Cycle nuclear reactors. Nobody wants this type of nuclear reactors except the Malaysian government. (8)

I wish to end this article with a quote from Terry Prachett. ‘Eight years involved with the nuclear industry have taught me that when nothing can possible go wrong and every avenue has been covered, then is the time to buy a house on the next continent.

Reference:

1) MalaysiaKini

2) ibid.,

3) From my unpublished Book, The Truth
about the Radio Active Waste In Bukit
Merah

4) ibid.,

5) ibid.,

6) ibid.,

7) MalaysiaKini

8) From my unpublished Book, The Truth
about the Radioactive Waste In Bukit
Merah

Toeing the Party line – a bona fide Westminster practice

2012-05-17T23:42:00.001-07:00

By: Choo Sing Chye

Now that lorry loads (1) of diverse commentaries that had been dispensed by various parties on the subject of ‘toeing the party line’, it is unfortunate that none of the Barisan Nasional’s proxy paper and electronic media had given a plausible argument.

Much to my dismay, being columnists of the mainstream news media, they are the top of the heap in the realm of journalism. As such, their comments on issues or events should manifest as articulated views or opinions. And all these should be based on extensive observations without wavering away from the hard facts just to make the National Front smelling like roses and the opposition, like a dumpster.

It is a shame that the gap between views that are expounded by the columnists from the mainstream media and Ah Boh (grandma) who owns the KFC (Kedai-Kopi Fong Cheong) is so narrow that nobody can tell them apart.

Of all the people like Ah Boh who serves delicious kaya-bread and white coffee with a liberal dose of her morning news could out-argue any politicians from the BN or the editors/columnists from the mainstream media.

Sometimes I wonder why Ah Boh’s KFC is jam-packed in the morning without her wiggling her ‘butt’? Is it because of the Kaya-bread and white coffee? Perhaps the uncensored and caffeine induced morning news she dishes out every morning before the sun rises with a big ‘bang’ in the East?

Don’t tell me that these columnists from The Star and other mainstream paper do not know about the business of the Whip or for the matter, Caucus Loyalty? Please give me a break, don’t write rubbish!

Now let’s get to the gist of the matter, toeing the party line is not unusual but it is an inherent code of conduct in the British Parliamentary system (Westminster model). It is not a political add-on!

Toeing the party line is a part and parcel of the British Parliamentary system whether we like it or not.

There are two conventions that the British uses, a) the Whip and, b) Caucus Loyalty.

The Whip is institutionalised and the practice goes back more than 230 years. It is primarily use to ensure backbenchers’ obedience.

In his work on Democracy and the Organization of Political Parties, M. Ostrogorski explains that even in the eighteenth century the whips had an important role in distributing political offices. He refers to the Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasury as the Patronage

Secretary… (2)

The position of the Government Chief Whip has long associations with the office of Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasury and to this day this is the official title of the Government Chief Whip…(or at times known as) the Patronage Secretary (who again) had another name - that of "Secretary for Political Jobs." This was in fact his principal business. "It is rather a roguish office," as Wilberforce remarked in the presence of Steele, just as the latter was about to take up the appointment. Distributing their allowance among the members of the party, the Patronage Secretary brought them up to the vote like a flock of sheep, goaded them on, and had become their "Whipper-in." The opposite party had to adopt… (3)

Philip Cowley has reported how the Conservative whips were said to have kept a ‘black book’ recording their backbencher’s misdemeanours and he has also described how whips could also revert to ‘good old-fashioned physical bullying’, and what a Labour whip (referring to the practice on his side of the House) has described as a ‘tradition of brutalism’. (4)

However Rogers and Walters explain that ‘whips also need to be

good personnel managers’, and Cowley has noted that most academic literature on the whips office tends to play down the role of the whip as arm-twister, bully and Machiavelli all rolled into one…stressing instead the more prosaic functions of the whip… (5)

How Whip works :

Every week, whips send out a circular (called 'The Whip') to their MPs or Lords detailing upcoming parliamentary business. Special attention is paid to divisions (where members vote on debates), which are ranked in order of importance by the number of times they are underlined. Important divisions are underlined three times - a 'three-line whip' - and normally apply to major events like the second readings of significant Bills. (6)

Defying a three-line whip is very serious, unbreakable and has occasionally resulted in the whip being withdrawn from an MP or Lord. This means that the Member is effectively expelled from their party (but keeps their seat) and must sit as an independent until the whip is restored. (7)

Critics of parliament were prone to suggest that the Whips exercised a sort of tyranny over private members, and that they had, destroyed the independence of the Commons. (8)

Although, the Whip tends to serve the Front bench, the Front bench itself cannot do or behave whatever way they like. They too are bound by what the British call - Caucus Loyalty. This practice has no written rule. If one breaks with the loyalty of the caucus (Cabinet), one has to resign his ministerial post in a gentlemanly manner – no unfair pot shot. One fine example is the resignation of the late Robin Cook from Tony Blair’s cabinet. His resignation speech was rated as one of the best by the media and his peers.

His headstone erected in the Grange Edinburgh Cemetery bears the epitaph: "I may not have succeeded in halting the war, but I did secure the right of parliament to decide on war." It is a reference to Cook's strong opposition to the 2003 invasion of Iraq.’ You can find his resignation speech (text): http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/2859431.stm

What is so obviously wrong with these columnists’ arguments is that the practice of the Whip and Caucus loyalty which characterized the British politics and ours are not taken into consideration, thus, leaving a big hole in their arguments.

By bad intentions and most of the time, lack of innate journalistic standard, they argue that the breaking away from the Caucus, especially from the Opposition, as heroic gestures, effectively hiding the fact that the BN itself also practices the same system, even more so, as they are the government of the day. In fact, the BN Whip is more readily to use the Stick without any qualms when the Carrot is refused. It is being the nature of practice in our parliamentary system (also the Westminster System) that the Budget tabled by the Minister of Finance must not be defeated in the House. If the Budget is defeated in the House, the confidence of the BN is rattled.

In sum, the first-past-the-post system that we have now is not conducive to the establishment of an independent bloc in Parliament. Thus, journalists, politicians and the public who are serious in getting independent minded MPs in parliament should support the Proportional voting system to be instituted. In this system, seats are allocated to parties or individuals base on the percentage of the votes they get. Moreover every citizen no matter where he or she lives would get one vote and of the same value. (I have written on this matter here)

References:

1) The word/idea, ‘loads’ is taken from the Robin Cook’s resignation speech

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/2859431.stm

1) Page 3 - snpc-02809-PDF (WHIP) from the Library of the House of Commons

http://www.parliament.uk/documents/commons/lib/research/briefings/snpc-02829.pdf

2) Ibid.

3) Page 5 - snpc-02809-PDF (WHIP) from the Library of the House of Commons

4) Ibid.

5) http://www.parliament.uk/about/mps-and-lords/principal/whips/

6) Ibid.,

7) Ibid.

8) Page 3 - snpc-02809-PDF (WHIP) from the Library of the House of Commons

2012-04-28T12:42:00.000-07:00

Bukit Merah

Bersih 3 in Ipoh

I Have a Dream

by Martin Luther King, Jr.

In a sense we've come to our nation's capital to cash a CHEQUE.

When the architects of our republic wrote the magnificent words of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, they were signing a PROMISSORY note to which every American was to fall heir.

This note was a promise that all men, yes, black men as well as white men, would be guaranteed the "unalienable Rights" of "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

It is obvious today that America has defaulted on this promissory note, insofar as her citizens of color are concerned. Instead of honoring this sacred obligation, America has given the Negro people a BAD CHEQUE, a CHEQUE which has come back marked "insufficient funds."

But we refuse to believe that the Bank of Justice is bankrupt. We refuse to believe that there are insufficient funds in the great vaults of opportunity of this nation.

And so, we've come to cash this CHEQUE, a CHEQUE that will give us upon demand the riches of freedom and the security of justice...

There are those who are asking the devotees of civil rights, "When will you be satisfied?" We can never be satisfied as long as the Negro is the victim of the unspeakable horrors of police brutality. We can never be satisfied as long as our bodies, heavy with the fatigue of travel, cannot gain lodging in the motels of the highways and the hotels of the cities. We cannot be satisfied as long as a Negro in Mississippi cannot vote and a Negro in New York believes he has nothing for which to vote. No, no, we are not satisfied, and we will not be satisfied until "justice rolls down like waters, and righteousness like a mighty stream."

(This is not the complete text of the speech, I have chosen only a few paragraphs)

The existence of 42,051 doubtful voters - trivial?

2012-04-22T07:02:00.000-07:00

By: Choo Sing Chye

23 - 4 - 2012

I find it rather perplexing to find BN MPs queuing up in gusto arguing on the side of the Election Commission based merely on flimsy presumptions that it is fair. Their reasoning does not seem to correlate with the reality on the ground and their mental capacity or intelligence which is indicated in their degrees or PhDs, leaves much to be desired.

How could the Election Commission chairman Tan Sri Abdul Aziz Mohd Yusof Abdul Aziz in a recent press conference assert that the registry is clean even with the existence of 42,051 “doubtful voters”? Ridiculously this assertion found endorsement from UMNO and BN. More disturbing to the common rakyat is that it actually comes from the so-called intellectual elites of UMNO.

One must bear in mind that the primary duty of the Election Commission is to upkeep the electoral roll so that it is clean and free from doubt. If elections are refereed based on this doubtful electoral roll then, legitimacy of the newly elected government will be in question. Should this situation occur, the EC should be brought to task not only by MPs and SAs from the government or the opposition, but most importantly from the raykat.

If the “doubtful” 42,051 voters “manage” to vote in the 13^th General Elections, it could influence up to 42 parliamentary and state seats with a 1,000 votes majority. If it is a 300 vote majority, it could influence up to 140 seats.

Thus, we cannot downplay the significant role played by a small number of voters and it should not be taken lightly!

For an example, in the 1964 British General Elections, “if a total of 350 Labour voters had stayed home in 5 constituencies (Brighton, Kemptown, Wellingborough, King’s Lynn and Colne Valley) Labour would not have recaptured power after an interval of 13 years in opposition”. (1)

The 1750 votes seemed trivial but without them, the Labour would not have been voted into power and perhaps carried out one of the most important and enduring new policy that was to end Britain’s leading role in the World stage - the British withdrawal from the East of Suez (Persian Gulf, Malaysia and Singapore 1964-1968). Without the 1750 votes the withdrawal would not have happened!

Finally, the Election Commission established under Article 114 of the Federal Constitution is appointed by the Yang di Pertuan Agong after consultation with the Conference of Rulers. And in appointing its members the Yang di Pertuan Agong shall have regard to the importance of securing an Election Commission which enjoys public confidence.

The Election Commission is entrusted with the job of conducting voters registration exercises, redelineation of constituencies exercise and the general elections. Their duties and responsibilities must be carried out in the true spirit of democracy.

Since the EC is the sole body responsible for all matters connected with elections, it must be an all powerful body which should not bow to the dictates of the Prime Minister or the Executive. It should, by its actions, show that it is an independent body.

But the manner in which the Election Commission had conducted itself over the years leaves one to wonder whether the Commission enjoys public confidence or regards itself as independent.

1. Malaysian Mirror: http://www.malaysianmirror.com/media-buzz-detail/136-letters-to-the-editor/57458-the-existence-of-42051-doubtful-voters-trivial

2. Harakah : http://en.harakahdaily.net/index.php/articles/analysis-a-opinion/4830-nothing-trivial-about-42000-doubtful-voters.html

3. Malaysia Today : http://www.malaysia-today.net/mtcolumns/from-around-the-blogs/48844-the-existence-of-42051-doubtful-voters-trivial-

Reference

1) Peter Harris, Foundation of Political Science, Prentice Hall Simon & Schuster (Asia) Pte. Ltd. (1997)

What Watergate Scandal had in common with Malaysian Politics? - SEX !

2012-04-03T08:41:00.009-07:00

By: Choo Sing Chye

For a starter, I hate to admit that Dr. Mahathir is absolutely right when he said that UMNO’s intellectual base is thinning just like the fast receding hairline of Samy Vellu’s.

Intelligence is never an UMNO’s or BN’s forte. The persistent call byNallakaruppan and the so-called Anti-Anwar Alliance (AAA) for the impeachment of Anwar by way of Parliament, is one good example. Citing the American example is another.

Clearly, all these actions do not rhyme with a thinking person and human dignity. The spitefulness of the AAA and their insistence to stand firm on the shaky platform of demeaning allegations, is beyond comprehension. Because of this, the Malaysian parliament should be made off-limits to these innuendoes.

Nala and AAA should, instead, rent a seminar room at any hotel just like what Datuk T did, to spew out their venom. In this way, the parliament is spared from associating with these characters.

After all that had happened in the past few weeks, one cannot escape the fact that this episode is beginning to sound like the Watergate scandal.

Apparently, Watergate scandal is analogous to what is happening right now in Malaysia. Looking at Sodomy II, Datuk T’s sex tape and Nalla’s accusations of sexual misconduct, one would see the similarity.

Watergate break-in is not about intelligence gathering on the Democrats prior to the presidential elections which the majority of the people believe – it is all about sex blackmail!

Now, let me elaborate on the Watergate scandal in a very simplistic form by introducing the cast of characters taken from the book by: Len Colodny and Robert Gettlin, “Silent Coup – The Removal of a President”. (Page XVIII)

H. R. "Bob" Haldeman—Nixon's chief of staff during the first term. He pushed for intelligence on the Democrats, but was unaware of Dean's rogue intelligence-gathering that led to the Watergate break-in.

John W. Dean III - Nixon’s White House chief legal counsel. He was the mastermind of the Watergate break-in. His had his own intelligence-gathering operation which he used to get dirt from the call-girl ring that used a phone at the Watergate Democrat’s HQ. When this sleaze operation was exposed, he instituted a cover-up. He lied to President Nixon. Nixon was unaware of Dean’s sleaze operation that uses sexual blackmail to eliminate his enemies. Nixon thought Dean was gathering normal intelligence from the Democrat’s HQ.

Maureen Dean - Girlfriend and later wife of John W. Dean III. Her friend Erika "Heidi" Rikan was the prostitution ring’s Madam called Mo. Maureen’s friendship with Mo gave an opportunity to her boyfriend, Dean, who was looking for sexual dirt on the Democrats.

Cathy Dieter/"Heidi" Rikan - Her sex-for-hire ring was located at theColumbia Plaza apartments next to the Watergate. Known to Phillip Mackin Bailley by her Dieter alias, she used him to help get clients from Democratic headquarters.

Phillip Mackin Bailley - Attorney, whose clients included prostitutes. Through a contact, he helped the local call-girl ring solicit clients from Democratic headquarters at the Watergate.

Charles R. Richey - Federal judge. He ordered Phillip Bailley to a mental hospital, gagged all discussion of the case and later sentenced Bailley to five years in prison.

G. Gordon Liddy - White House Plumber and Watergate burglar. Recruited by Dean as Nixon campaign intelligence chief.

E. Howard Hunt - White House Plumber and Watergate burglar. He knew the true break-in target and received almost all of the hush money Dean collected during the cover-up. His notebooks implicated Dean in Watergate.

Eugenio Rolando Martinez—Watergate burglar. He knew the true target of the bugging was not Democratic chairman Larry O'Brien's phone, but one elsewhere in the Democratic National Congress (DNC): the phone used to set up dates with call-girls.

Anthony T. Ulasewicz - White House private investigator. Dean used him as another intelligence operative, instructing him to survey the DNC offices, and using him to carry the hush money payments to Hunt.

John N. Mitchell - Attorney General and Nixon's close friend. Dean falsely accused him of devising a cover-up plan involving the CIA. Nixon wrongly believed he had ordered the break-in, and never tried to find the truth.

W. Donald Stewart - Pentagon investigator. He obtained Radford's first confession on the Pentagon spying. Gen. Haig and Buzhardt saw him as a threat, and the White House tried to taint him through a false blackmail charge.

Gen. Alexander M. Haig, Jr. - Aide to Kissinger and later Nixon's chief of staff. His relationship with Lt. Bob Woodward, who briefed him at the White House, and his links to the Moorer-Radford military spying affair were kept from Nixon.

Bob Woodward - Navy lieutenant and Watergate reporter. As an officer he traveled to the White House and briefed Haig, who later became his key source in Watergate and whom he shielded under the guise of "Deep Throat”.

Richard M. Nixon - Thirty-seventh president of the United States. His secret foreign policy earned him enemies on the political right. He willingly covered up the break-in without getting the facts, and trusted Haig, who betrayed him.

Henry A. Kissinger - National Security Adviser. He and Nixon conducted foreign policy through backchannels, which caused them to become targets of the spying on behalf of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

Melvin R. Laird - Secretary of Defense. Cut out by Nixon from most foreign policy decisions, he nonetheless knew about the military's spying on the president and Kissinger. He also knew about Woodward's connection to Haig.

Archibald Cox - Watergate Special Prosecutor. His investigation targeted the White House Plumbers, which caused Haig to fear disclosure of his role in military spying on the White House. For that reason, Haig helped engineer Cox's firing.

In sum, when one talks about Watergate, one must read this book because it offers a different angle on the issue which is sex and political blackmail.

It’s a good read for Nalla and AAA.

Article appeared in:

http://www.malaysianmirror.com/media-buzz-detail/136-letters-to-the-editor/57239-what-watergate-scandal-had-in-common-with-malaysian-politics-sex-

http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/category/opinion/2012/04/04/watergate-a-sex-scandal/

Hung Parliament? – Just Rump it, like in Perak.

2012-03-22T09:55:00.006-07:00

By: Choo Sing Chye

An old satire sketch of the sacking of the Rump Parliament(1)

1) The Speaker being pull from the Chair.

2) This House is to let (desecration of the
House)

3) The Owl, a symbol of Wisdom, wears
glasses and holds a candle but still
cannot see (Symbolized the Judiciary). (2)

I do not know why the National Front’s politicians fear a Hung Parliament? First, it was Daim and not far behind is our Honourable PM, Najib.

Now, why in the world does Najib fear it? He has the experience of getting rid of the elected Pakatan Perak State Government and replacing it with a ‘Rump’ of his own.

And believe me, the sacking of the ‘Rump Parliament’ in 1653, bear uncanny resemblance to what happened in 2009 where the Pakatan Perak State Government was removed unceremoniously. Just look at the satire sketch above and the description attached to it and you will see the similarity.

Thus, if a Hung Parliament does happen in the 13^th GE, the choices are plenty, just pick one from the many assorted Parliaments which the Englishmen had created in the 17^th Century.

In 1624, the English had the Happy Parliament, in 1625, the Useless Parliament, from April to May 1640, the Short Parliament, the Long Parliament from 1640 to 1648, the Rump Parliament (1649), and in 1653, the Little (Barebone’s) Parliament. (3)

Now, for the first time in history,

Malaysia

got a Rump State Assembly in Perak and if Najib’s transformation is on track, we would definitely get a Rump Parliament instead of a Hung Parliament.

References:

1) Patrick Watson and Benjamin Barber, The Struggle for Democracy, Lester & Orpen Dennys Ltd. Toronto, Canada.

2) ibid.

3) Google Hung Parliament.

Opinion Polls - measuring shadows cast upon the walls of a cave?

2012-03-15T10:28:00.001-07:00

By: Choo Sing Chye

16-3-2012

Leaping from a 59% approval rate to a recent pudgy 69% for our Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak is by no mean a small feat, considering the fact that his administration is mired in controversy after controversy.

Unmistakably our Budget is unbalance, corruption remains unabated, our economy seems to be capitulating to the natural gravitational pull, the talk of bankruptcy is in the air and against this backdrop, we got a 69% approval rating?

Hey, what the heck is going on? Are we talking Machiavellian Economics or French Politics here?

Many do not know that the French are a very idealistic lot, particularly when it comes to politics and money. They literally support both sides of the ideological poles – Left and Right. They will tell you that their Hearts are on the LEFT and their Purses/Wallets, on the RIGHT. (1) So anything goes in French politics.

But anyway, any survey or polling done (do not care whoever does it) always gives me bad vibes. I mean just imagine by trying to ascertain the state of public opinion by questioning a few i.e. 1,022 respondents against the huge population of 28 million Malaysians? (2)

How can we contemplate the existence of a vast discrepancy in reality and the poll measured? This problem of measuring opinion existed from the time when the notion of democracy began to flourish in Greece.

Apparently, the answer to this vast difference in reality and the poll measured is best described by the ancient Greek philosophers which they likened it to Plato’s myth of measuring shadows cast upon the walls of the cave. (3)

So for an independent opinion research firm (I mean Independent not profit oriented organisations), the main focus of its questions must be based on morality, wisdom, capability and honesty, not money alone. Therefore, it is imperative to frame questions so that the sampled population is made to focused on these values.

Unfortunately, questions asked can be made in favour of anyone if the researchers are not careful. For an example, I could easily get above 70% approval rate, if I ask this question: “Do you think the Prime Minister’s idea of giving RM500 to the poor is good ?” Well, it is difficult to say “no” to this question of giving money to the poor.

Therefore looking at the 69% approval rate for Najib and the reasons given i.e. the budget and the RM 500 relieve for the poor somehow does not reflect the core values that a Prime Minister should have to govern Malaysia effectively.

In fact, the 69% approval rate does not tell us anything about how good the PM is or how bad he is? It just tell us that the sampled population approved the RM 500 “Bantuan Rakyat 1Malaysia”, and perhaps the budget – this certainly does not correlate with the core values of a good PM.

In short, if a mere RM500 (BR1M) could do wonders to an approval rating, then we must be prepared for a long haul if we want see a better Malaysia in the future!!

Discussion:

I've just visited Malaysian Digest's portal and wish to share their poll with you which says:

Should Anwar Ibrahim be investigated over his alleged ties with Jewish organizations? Yes or No

Is anything wrong with this poll by Malaysian Digest?

Now, look at the word 'investigated' give an impression that a crime had been committed so if I choose 'No" is like Anwar is above the law and seems arrogant.

Reference

1) Peter Harris, Foundation of Political Science, Prentice

Hall Simon & Schuster (Asia) Pte. Ltd. (1997)

2) For technicality aspects of survey/experiment,please read:

Experimental Methodology* by: Larry B. Christensen

3) Peter Harris, Foundation of Political Science, Prentice

Hall Simon & Schuster (Asia) Pte. Ltd. (1997)

*Example of the formula (Experimental Methodology)for randomly selecting subjects from a population, and it’s usefulness in determining how many subjects should be included in the study for achieving a given level of accuracy.

n = x2NP(l - P) + d2(N – 1) + x2P(l - P)

where

n = the required sample size

X2 = the table value of chi-square for 1 degree of freedom at the desired confidence level (3.89)

N = the population size

P = the population proportion that it is desired to estimate (assumed to be .50 since this would provide the maximum sample size)

d = the degree of accuracy expressed as a proportion (.05)

Open letter to Khairy Jamaluddin - Single Stream Educational System - Is it a wish too far?

2012-02-06T22:04:00.000-08:00

By: Choo Sing Chye

Your debate with Rafizi Ramli organised by UKEC (United Kingdom EIRE Council of Malaysian Students) was commendable because it had created a less cloudier insight into the young minds of both the opposition and the ruling party.

Apparently, the pain and sufferings of the non-Malays parents who had sent their children to National Schools (Sekolah Kebangsaan) were not attached to your main arguments. One fact is clear, National Schools will form the backbone of a Single-Stream Educational System if it is to be implemented. As a result of this deficiency, your arguments fell into the trappings of a typical ancient Sophist (1) or should I make it more clearer by using Mahatma Gandhi’s term, ‘clever’ arguments but not necessary wise or true.

From this debate, I wish to offer another side of the Single-Stream Educational System argument and later in another letter, the Shadow Cabinet.

To you and advocates of Single-Stream Educational System.

I had invested in your idea 18 years ago when I sent my son and daughters to a National School (Sekolah Kebangsaan) in Ipoh.

I do not want my son or daughters to be a handicap when mixing with the Malays and the Indians. We have to face the hard fact of life, when my son and daughters go into our society as an adult, breaking away from our protective yolk, he/she must be by then able to mix around comfortably with the Malays and the Indians. Most important of all, he/she must know how to treat Malays, Indians and others as brothers and sisters and not just friends.

To begin this letter, my son speaks good Malay and on the first day of school my son was mixing around with the Malays and one Malay boy even had his hand around his shoulder, a sign of close friendship yet to come. By the second week, he was alone. I asked him where his Malay friends were, with much hesitation, he pointed his finger to a group of Malay boys playing near the school canteen. The group was exclusively Malays. I didn’t pursue the matter further.

Two months later, he was playing with a group of Indians and it carried on for quite some time before he ended up alone again. The next time I saw him, he was with another few Chinese boys. I saw their friendship lasted through the whole of his primary school days. I was disappointed but this did not end here.

The second disappointment came when he was in Standard Three. I saw him lagging in his studies and I asked him why? He said that some of his teachers often skipped classes. I admonished him angrily not to use this aged-old excuse for not doing well in school.

I wanted to know the truth, I leafed through all his exercise books, to my horror most of his books remained unmarked and it had already pass the half mark of the year. I crossed checked with another Malay parent and he confirmed what my son was saying. He even quipped that some of the teachers disappeared from school during the UMNO conventions. This, I did not share his joke.

Instead of complaining, my wife and I took over his education and my two daughters. From that day onwards his studies showed improvements and in the end he scored straight A’s in his UPSR.

My youngest daughter too is having the same problem. One morning, while I was passing her Standard One class, I was dumbfounded to hear her teacher teaching with a kampong slang and not standard Malay. From her slang, I know she is from Southern Perak (Parit area). Honestly Khairy, how many Indian and Chinese girls at their first day in school understand this non standard Malay spoken by the teacher?

Anyway, I just smiled at the teacher when she saw me, but in my heart, I couldn’t blame her, I blame the training she had which is being UMNOised rather than Malaysianised.

Now fast forward to the present, my eldest daughter is in Upper 6, an unadulterated National School product. She scored straight A’s in her UPSR, PMR exams and scored 9 A’s in her SPM. All these results got her nowhere.

My son is now in Form 5, he scored straight A’s in his UPSR and PMR. He will be taking his SPM this year.

For my youngest daughter, she will be doing her first major exam – UPSR.

At this tender age, needless to say that they are faced with the reality of the discriminatory policies of the BN government which I believe you and Rafizi didn’t articulate well enough. I will not speculate on why both of you didn’t speak well on this matter.

In my younger days, I too had this bad experience, I remembered very clearly while I was attending Kesusasteraan Melayu class, the Malay teacher referred us, the non-Malays as ‘kawan’ and Malays as ‘saudara’. Khairy, don’t you think this guy was promoting Ibrahim Ali’s or Hasan Ali’s brand of Malay brotherhood as opposed to Malaysian brotherhood in a Kebangsaan School?

The BN had instituted unfair educational policies long before you were born and I was the victim and so were all the non-Malays then. And now it is my son’s and daughters’ turn to bear the brunt of these unfair policies.

Khairy, let’s be real, all you can do is talk about it, but you cannot influence the direction of these unfair educational policies even if you do not like it. The policy of teaching Science and Maths in English is in a mess. Now it is in a limbo. The Education Minister, Muhyiddin is of course, not as bright as you, but definitely a spark brighter than Ibrahim Ali and Hasan Ali, but the fact is, he does not like you and definitely will not let you touch these unfair policies, even with a 10-foot pole.

Okay Kairy, let’s talk for the sake of talking, if you are arguing for the merits of the Single-Stream School system then be brave enough to promote the idea of a fairer Single-Stream system right up to University and say no to the upper secondary duo-Stream system that we have today! And don't forget – a fairer distribution of scholarship!

Reference

1. The term Sophist is referred from the book, “An introduction to Political Philosophy,” A.R.M. Murray, Published by Cohen and West Ltd, London, 1953.

Pg 24 – Sophist or Wise men. Wise men was the original meaning of Sophists but now it usually indicates someone who is clever and plausible rather than wise and honest.

Please google leading Sophists - Protagoras, Antiphon Callics and Hrasymachu.
It is quite difficult to find the above mentioned book.