MI and Siasah spin 1Malaysia comments to perpetuate perception of Najib-Muhyiddin riff

The latest issue of opposition political tabloid Siasah dwelled on Tun Dr Mahathir's statement that he didn't quite understand 1Malaysia. His reason was the Malays and Chinese had different understanding of 1Malayisia.

They reinterpret Muhyiddin's diplomatic response as agreement to Dr Mahathir and labelled him as sabotaguer of 1Malaysia.

The Malaysian Insider (MI) did the same. The initial report was twisted with headlines in that direction if not for Muhyiddin's Press Secretary, Dato Ainon fast response. Their refusal to amend clearly shows their frustation.

But both MI and Siasah went on with the same script to create a perception that Najib and Muhyiddin are heading for loggerhead.

Sayuti Omar, a Malay genre political writer, wrote in Sisah's column to flimsily interpret Dr Mahathir's response to mean disagreement. He refused to accept that Dr Mahathir couldn't understand the slogan.

At the backpage, the headline reads "Muhyiddin merobek 1Malaysia" (Muhyiddin destroying 1Malaysia) with a Zunar-styled caricature of Deputy Prime Minister, Tan Sri Muhyiddin.

In their report, Siasah spinned in their report that Muhyiddin's response to Dr Mahathir's statement was that of agreement. They interpreted that way from Muhyiddin's statement for more effort to explain.

When in fact, Muhyiddin tried to say without being disrespectful of Dr Mahathir that if he doesn't understand, more effort need to be done to explain. It is rude and improper to say in such a manner. Furthermore, it invite other political interpretation.

Did Siasah bother to follow the MI report which saw them tried to pull a fast one on Muhyiddin but was stopped? The MI report was in English.

When Dr Mahathir first commented on August 2nd, MI headlined their report as "Dr Mahathir Najib must explain 1Malaysia." Without reading the content, the twisted headline was already self explanatory.

The spin on Muhyiddin's response the next day was worse and crude. They headlined it as "DPM agrees with Dr Mahathir that people don't understand 1Malaysia."

That got Ainon to call and e-mailed MI to correct what Muhyiddin actually said. This was subsequently reported as a "Error in 1Malaysia article - The Malaysian Insider. Her e-mail was published in full.

However, Jahabar Sadiq, the former NST and Kalimullah's crony and now CEO/Editor of MI, did not amend the original report but only left a not quite visible asterick note. He explained:

As a matter of policy, we add an asterisk and note below an article when it has been corrected. However, we shall accede to your wishes to remove the said asterisk, and the note that follows the asterisk.

Once again, our apologies and herewith reproduced is your letter and the transcript.

How ridiculous a policy is that? He acknowledge the error in the report but decide to leave the wrong version on and publish the amendment in another report?

Emulating ABITW? But this blog clearly highlight any mistakes. Was MI's asterick visible and highlighted clearly?

The next day MI reported Nazri the (attack) dog made commented that Dr Mahathir made a similar mistake on the term Bangsa Malaysia in his Vision 2020 statement for its was ambiguous then.

But their real motive was clearly to perpetuate a perception created by Malaysiakini that Muhyiddin is heading for a clash with Najib. They reported Muhyiddin's denial of a riff on August 10th and in another report, Pakatan politicians insist the rift is real on August 11th.

The rumour of a riff is currently being spread by opposition and their sympathisers in UMNO. However, such a riff is utterly ridiculous. Given the current state of UMNO, the top two men can't be playing politicsa although it is good times.

It sends the wrong message to the grassroots. Although few leaders are skirting the limit, all leaders know another power struggle of the highest level would destroy UMNO. This blogger would just say f**k off to all of them.

It is unlikely for them to open into an open quarrel. Najib owe Muhyiddin for the help nudge Tun Dol in resignation. Muhyiddin is known not to lawan boss. He knows age is not permissable for him to aspire to be PM.

In the event of any differences policies, Muhyiddin would just withdraw than see UMNO fall apart. The Johorean spirit in him will prevail.

Why was opposition able to put such a spin?

Dr Mahathir was not wrong for having such a view. When 1Malaysia slogan was launched with much pomp and pageantry, the communication people at the Prime Minister's office failed to prep up the press on the specific meaning of the slogan.

The Chinese controlled newspapers went one way and Malay newspaper went another way. The opposition controlled political tablod only wanted to play along the Altantunya way.

The poor communication could not put in perspective 1Malaysia in tandem with the subsequent text of priority for the people and emphasis on performance. Rais Yatim and his Information Ministry was to blame also in their dissemination campaign.

Opposition decided to play along the issue of unclear concept of unity within Malaysia; integration or assimilation of the non Bumiputera.

Personally, it was not a deeply thought out slogan. 1Malaysia could be discarded and the slogan, "Rakyat didahulukan, Pencapaian diutamakan" is powerful enough a preposition for a campaign message.

It was these unexplained and unsorted out issues that is fodder for opposition media to seize when the opportunity arise. Our Government seemed ill equiped to handle opposition propaganda. Their communication team seemed unable to understand the need for speed.

Just look at the response to explain the settlers lawsuit. How many days does it take before bloggers can explain the lawsuit. How do I know about Felda's. Well ... I am the one pestering the inaudible Tan Sri Yusof Noor's PA.

Felda settlers' lawsuit: Pakatan ploy for votes and seats

The spokesmen of Felda may not be an impressive lot to meet the information demand of the day. There is the rajin but at times, space out UMNO's Information Chief, Dato Ahmad Maslan. And there is the slowly but surely, inaudible former Minister, Tan Sri Yusof Noor.

It doesn't help their cause neither doing the dumbest thing of suing Suara Keadilan over the first wave attack to accuse Felda as bankrupt.

The poor communication strategy is unfortunate because Felda is one of the best agency in the world in it's category. It's landbank is humongously huge, million/(s) of people under it's dependency, and it's organisation is expansive and with comprehensive functionality. Not only that, it is planning to reduce dependence on plantation and for next generation/(s) to Felda settlers.

This Government agency is self sufficient, commercially viable, living without grants since 1994, and still absorb the social needs of the settlers. Yet, the balance sheet is rock solid.

The decline in cash position is a normal situation for an organisation undergoing transformation and business diversification. Felda is a truly a success story for Malaysia.

To get a detailed understanding of the background, read Syed Akbar of Outsyed the Box here.

Whether the trouble issue is allegations of Felda's insolvency, or issuance of land grant or undermarket purchase as in the recent lawsuit by 766 Felda settlers, it is all but opposition ploy. There are answers to all the grumbling.

Pakatan aims to destablise Barisan Nasional and UMNO at their safe seats. At stake in all areas involving Felda are 55 Parliamentary seats and about 100 State Assembly seats. Get the picture now?

PAS knows the political value of Felda from as far back as the 70s when they were together with UMNO in Barisan Nasional. They have been yearning for a piece of this political pie from way back during the time most of the current Felda schemes were jungles.

Felda was one of the source of disagreement between UMNO and PAS that led to the 1977 breakup. Of course, like any sore losers, PAS would groan and complain of their loss to blame it on UMNO. Is there any other way?

This story was relate to quite a few bloggers by Tan Sri Sanusi Junid. During the establishment of Felda schemes all over the country, Dato Asri Muda, the then PAS President was the Minister for Mining and land Development, I believe.

Tun Abdul Razak was a brilliant man who came up with many economic, social, political and international relation schemes, even while he was working under Tunku Abdul Rahman. Tunku hanya main kuda dan minum brandy.

UMNO was making all sorts of initiatives. When in the Federal Government, PAS was just a passenger to warm the seats. They were, like they are today, only interested to gain political mileage, expand their political influence, and using religion as their political tools.

What happen was PAS had placed their people in Felda schemes like Jerantut and in pockets all over the country including places like Serting and Jempol where the lawsuits originated from.

[Coincicently, I bumped into my friend - the PAS candidate for ADUN Serting in the past two GE - few days ago. Should have asked him about this.]

That broke a gentleman agreement between UMNO and PAS that is to not encroach into each other's political turf. UMNO had to come to term that they cannot be together under the same BN umbrella.

PAS was embarassed and used the Kelantan debacle as excuse to quit BN. But forever laying blame on UMNO. If Nik Aziz's heart is not filled with hatred, he would own up.

So, all these "do but blame other" tricks being employed today - Khalid Ibrahim's Selangorgate, Chua Jui Meng's Sultan faced banner, Tony Pua's bullet note and endless blamer Lim Guan Eng, Anwar, Khalid and all Pakatan leaders - is nothing new.

Before moving to the so-called grouse by the 766 settlers suing Felda, read this opposition slanted news portal, Free Malaysia Today below:

766 settlers sue Felda for RM200 million
By Zefry Dahalan - Free Malaysia Today,

SEREMBAN: A group of 766 settlers from Felda Serting and Felda Raja Alias from Jempol, Negeri Sembilan filed a suit against Felda and Felda Palm Industries Sdn Bhd for fraud and breach of trust and claiming losses of more than RM200 million at the Seremban 2 Court complex this morning.

The 766 settlers are from Felda Serting Hilir Kompleks 1, 2, 4, 5, 6 and 7 from Air Hitam, Jempol and also from Felda Raja Alias 1, 2, 3 and 4 from Serting, Jempol.

They are represented by lawyer R Sivarasa, assisted by Latheefa Koya and T Kumar. Also present was the representative of the settlers Karip Mohd Salleh.

Speaking to reporters at a presss conference in the compound of the Seremban 2 High Court, Sivarasa, who is also the Subang MP and PKR vice president, alleged that the settlers were paid at a lower rate of the oil palm extraction grade (Kadar Perahan Gred or KPG) averaging at 18.9 percent for the last 15 years.

"The settlers suspected something was amiss when they realised that they could not match the recommended rate from the Malaysian Palm Oil Board which was higher at 22 percent.

"In March and July this year, the settlers sent their fruit yields samples to two different independent laboratories to assess the actual rate of the KPG and the results showed a much higher rate of 24 percent and 25.5 percent.

"This is a 6 to 6.5 percent more than what the rate Felda Palm Industries Sdn Bhd used," said Sivarasa to which the crowd responded with 'Felda Penipu'.

Accumulative losses for 15 years

According to Sivarasa, based on the six percent losses of the fruits yield on the oil palm extraction grade for the year 2008, each Felda settlers from the group 766 faced losses amounted to RM20,039.05 each for the year 2008 alone.

"That means for 2008, the total amount losses for the 766 Felda settlers was RM15,349,912.00.

"We are claiming for the losses from year 1995 till 2010 with four percent interest annually. So the accumulative losses for a period of 15 years will be more than RM200 million," explained Sivarasa to cheers from a 300 capacity crowd.

The settlers are also claiming examplary damages and eight percent of the total losses and damages.

Also present was the National Felda Settler Childrens Association's (Anak) president Mazlan Aliman; Negeri Sembilan PAS commisioner Zulkefly Mohamad Omar; Jempol PAS chief Abdul Rahman Ramli and Negeri Sembilan PKR secretary Sabaruddin Mohd Yassim.

More than 300 of the affected settlers were present in the vicinity of the court to show their solidarity.

To rehash, the leading figures present were the lawyers - R. Sivarasa (PKR Vice President), Latheefa Koya (PKR Press Liaison), and T.Kumar.

Pakatan had present - Mazlan Aliman (PAS activist), Zulkefly Mohamed Omar (Negeri Sembilan State PAS Commisioner), Abdul Rahman Ramli (Head of PAS Jempol) and Sabaruddin Mohd Yassim (Negeri Sembilan PKR Sec-Gen).

The interesting thing here is the role of Anak, a so-called Felda based NGO with membership limited to few Felda settlers in Johor. It's President, Mazlan Aliman was a second generation Johor Felda settler. He was jobless, uneducation, and living as a PAS political rally speaker. There lies a credibility issue.

Mazlan has been spreading risalah througout Felda to drum up anger and get support. But still those that came and making issues are merely PAS members. Remember those Dato Asri placed all over the country. We managed to get copies of the risalah and it's allegations. Click the image to read.

The reports received was that the 766 peneroka had to pay one off RM500 each to the legal team and that adds up to RM383,000. The arrangement with the lawyers include as follows:

• The settlers will have to pay RM5,000 each to withdraw the case. Just add another zero.
• In the event of a loss, they only pay RM500 each.
• But in the event of a win, the lawyers gets 30% of the winning. It is not likely to be RM200 million.

Noticably, the 300 attending the lawsuit filing were PAS leaders and members and lawyers are PKR Vice President and Media Liaison Officer.

This remind us of Rockybru's posting of his column in the Malay Mail here and article Separation of layers and politics. What credibility can we give to this claim if opposition politicians and lawyers are involved.

Is it truly for justice? Or it is about handsome legal fees and commission? Or it boils back to politics for the 100 Parliament seats?

It's obvious, isn't it?

Agree with KJ but not his language

The cabinet decided yesterday that students will not be allowed to get involved in political parties.

That was announced by Higher Education Minister, Dato Khaled Nordin after yesterday's cabinet meeting chaired by Deputy Prime Minister, Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin. Prime Minister, Dato Seri Najib was away and had only returned yesterday evening.

Malaysiakini sent out an SMS alert of Khairy's response:

11/8: Khairy Jamaluddin describes the cabinet decision not to allow student involvement in party politics as 'gutless' and outdated./MKINI

Although Khairy's position has in it political backward bending, this blogger do not agree too with the cabinet decision.

Neither do this blogger agree with his language.

Unless he is spinned by Malaysiakini, although this blogger felt it is unlikely given the appearance of close rapport between M'kini and Khairy, he could have used many other words to describe his disagreement. But why?

Is it because it is not Dato Najib that is chairing the cabinet meeting? If Najib was chairing it, would Khairy - the most hard up member in UMNO history next to Anwar Ibrahim to want a cabinet position - used the same words?

While UMNO is struggling to get it's act together, Khairy and the Pemuda UMNO he led is inactive and ineffective for the past two years. That did not stop Khairy from subversively compiling data and names to plan his re-election as Ketua Pemuda? Yes, it is all a lie.

In fact, the suddenly vocal Khairy is just a political act. He is trying to right position himself. He is trying out alliances with MCA and taking potshot at Ibrahim Ali and Perkasa, knowing a survey showed Perkasa has 70% of Malay approval.

By hitting at Muhyiddin, Khairy is assisting either his alliance Zahid Hamidi or 'mentor' Hishamuddin or baba Tun Dol's preference Ali Rastam.

Perhaps Khairy believe the rumour that liberal Najib is heading for a clash with nationalist Muhyiddin. Nak bodek Najib jadi Menteri?

Although his position on student participation in politics is within his political philosophy, the once keris kissing political binatang does not do something without any political consideration.

It has something to do with his attempt to tinker with the new makeup of Pemuda to preserve himself perpetaully tehre till teh time is right to moveon. The Ketua Pemuda has the power to approve new membership into Pemuda UMNO.

Khairy is likely to want the future members or if not leaders in Pemuda, are the type who are pro-liberalisation, believer in open free market, and embrace globalisation but unfortunately are also corruptible and hypocrit Melayu Liberal.

He wants those like him and his Tingkat 4 boys. Even if most of them are not working in MNCs but kerja Gomen in GLCs. And even if they talk of Melayu berdikari without tongkat but still rely on Govenment help like securing oil-for-food, Government contracts, jobs in Government GLCs and gangling their Bumiputera status.

No more the nationalism monkeys from local University UIA like Reezal Merican. Not only will Reezal not have any more place in Pemuda UMNO, Khairy is moving to run in Kepala Batas to replace Tun Dol. His Gombau constituents hates him and he may fall there. And Reezal ... akan nganga.

For this blogger to agree with Khairy on students involvement in party politics, it has more to do with the Constitution.

Every Malaysian have the right to vote by the time they reach 21. This means a student who reached the age of 21 can vote and must be accorded his or her rights under the Constitution including the right to join associations, political parties etc.

Some one with the right to vote also has the right to run for public office. To run for Member of Parliament or State Assembleymen, it would need to be a member of a political party.

One can also run as an Independent candidate. But the point here is a student, who has reach the age is constitutionally accorded his political rights, is denied his constitutional rights by a law specific for governing University students. Hope students dare to take the issue to court.

Imagine a 21 year old who quit secondary school and work i.e. uneducated but is allowed to join some political party. His good luck got him to hold position and run for a public office.

How much quality can he provide to Malaysian politics vis-a-vis the University student?

This is not to generalise all non University going 21 year old as politically dumb or all University going 21 year old as politically clever or mature. But the dice would work such that the University student will have a better chance of understanding and articulating his role.

The argument to enact the AUKU or the University Act then was that students are wasting their time with politics. Resources invested in the students are wasted if they neglect their studies and fail due to student politics or partisan politics.

Perhaps back in the early 70s, that argument holds water. Malaysia was a growing nation and Bumiputera were far behind. Malay students in University were needed to help Government's development drive. They are wasted resources if their ability is only used for politics.

It is timely for Government to change it's attitude on politics and student activism. By holding back on student political involvement, we are depriving the nation of future generations of mature voters.

Political education is as much important as academia, leadership training, motivational courses and life experiances.

It helps to create a less emotional, less sentimentally driven and more rationale political environment. For Malays, they would not be lost to an unbalanced consideration to forsake their interest.

By depriving students involvement in politics in the past, it had actually create an indifferent segment of Malaysian.

A large segment of Malaysian with tertiary education and professionals are not registered voters and have an indifferent attitude towards politics, public issues and nation building.

Although the number need verification, this bloger believe that a significant portion of these Malaysian developed their political consciousness in their middle age and even later in life, near retirement age.

When they decided to participate, it is rather ractionary. They take a cynical and conspirational view of politics from their life experiance dealing with Government bureaucrasy and politicians.

There are those who continue with their couldn't care less attitude. Among them are those corruptible and driven by narrow sense of interest.

While there are those building up defense system and strange taboos like Dr Mahathir, Lim Kit Siang, Nik Aziz and Anwar Ibrahim are saint and human without flaws that can't be questioned.

Instead of politics about policies, and reassessing performance and analysing future plans, our political mindset are stuck in third world personality adoration and feudel blind loyalty.

This blogger believe that the current heavy play on politics of perception is a long term backfire to the Government's past nanny policy on it's students.

It is time to stop worrying about the young being idealitic and anti establishment, they will grow up.

The young brings the idealism and innocence of youth to the world. What is wrong in having the injection of a new spirit of politics from our youth?

It is something the nation and political party, particularly UMNO badly need, in order to reinvigorate itself.

If the young is ever relied on to bring about change, why not let them start early?

What is important for the young is in their quest to be feisty but yet polite, agressive but yet proper, and persistent but yet with decorum.

Hold on to good values and culture. Maintain that respect and mind your language when talking to the elders.

Wishing a peaceful Ramadhan to all

Ramadhan is here again.

I like to wish fellow Muslims a peaceful and serene Ramadhan. May you find that spiritual enlightening.

Typical of us Malaysian, the festivity or event of one ethnicity will be somewhat celebrated by other ethnic groups.

Although I have known a few that do, non Muslim generally do not participate in our religous one month fasting. However they could enjoy invitations to open fast with Muslim friends.

Otherwise, they can always visit the spread of kueh and food sold at Pasar Ramadhan. This is also the time for us to savour food not commercially available at other times of the year.

After slowly coming out of the closet from almost absolute anonymity, this one year had been quite a busy one.

Since GE 12, bloggers were suddenly the new celebrity in politics. We have been kept busy with invitations for events, participating in press conference and closed door discussions, and attending events.

From refuting the role of bloggers, UMNO politicians suddenly come to belief that bloggers can do wonders. Some novice claiming as experts in UMNO believe it is all replicable.

If only Johnny Come Lately UMNO and their claimed experts on blogging understand the gist of blogging - mechanics, capability and potential, they would appreciate that expertise from experiance.

It will be their misfortune to be stuck with such arrogant self importance for leaving us the real players out and taking in half bake experts.

At the same time, few of us bloggers are increasingly having access to many people of position; all the way up to just short of Agong and Raja-Raja Melayu.

Sorry, we just can't take everyone along. It is either a case of not up to it or the number has to be limited to be effective.

This Ramadhan will be timely to lay low for awhile from this sudden gush of accessibility. It will be an oppurtune time to find back your spiritual self and revive your spiritual consciousness.

Ramadhan has always been the spiritual breather for me to savour it's tranquility and serenity. Perhaps to ponder and take stock of my life.

It is not about neglecting your other responsibility or over ritualising the sunat (non compulsory practices) as one friend kept arguing perpetually.

It is the ease to reach that internal solitude, peacefulness, and hopefully closeness to God one get in the month of Ramadhan that will be amiss. Such pleasure can be only felt and not described.

This Ramadhan will be back to a simple common man affair for me to break fast at the Masjid. I will be staying away from VVIP or hotel breaking fast functions. Except for very few exception, I will respectfully decline any invitation.

After years of seeing me practise it, my mother-in-law was finally enticed to join us and stay on for ibadah till Terawih (special nightly Ramadhan prayers) before we have dinner. She realised she does not have to tire herself from cooking.

I would like to be able to finish reciting and reading the Quran at least once this month. It will be far from my past ability to finish the Quran few times in Ramadhan but this time it is quality I am seeking.

Hopefully I am strong enough to do the Terawih everyday and try to do the compulsory prayers with the jemaah at Masjids.

I will still blog though.

May I end by wishing again a peaceful Ramadhan to all.

"You have to ask the AG on that." - Selangor CPO

This bloody Inquest could have ended before it could get started.

DAP would not have continued with their shenanigans to make the dangerous and irresponsible accusation of murder on MACC.

If the power at be knows how to play their psywar, DAP will be left totally embarassed. SOPO cyber writers can do battle on other issues rather than stuck on this long ridiculous accusation which the motive for murder doesn't add up.

MACC would not be diverted from their work to put corrupt public officials, politicians and hopefully, incompetent but corrupt GLC CEOs behind bars.

Not only we are stuck with this never say die case of the death of Teoh Beng Hock but it had gotten more complicated to the point of demand there is a demand for Royal Commission for Inquery by Bar Council.

Damn hypocrit this Bar Council!

They support political groups that has no respect for Raja-Raja Melayu but yet kept asking for RCI.

Just swell ... back to the Inquest.

Despite no decision to accept the suicide note by the Coroner, there have been few development today.

Firstly Gobind realised he is working for the interest of the family of the late Teoh Beng Hock. He said handwriting expert will be employed to study the 'suicide note.'

Secondly the Attorney General issued a statement to deny there was suppression of evidence. He tried to explain that he was equally startled. Back up la the story with information ... because something still doesn't jive.

Is he saying that he did not know of the evidence? Does that mean he is trying to blame the lawyer representing the Government hide it? Or it could mean he is accusing him of witholding evidence?

That may result, in not only implication on his professionalism but also in these testy times, accusation of racial collusion be hurled against him. Chinese covering up for Chinese?

AG also said the so-called 'suicide note' back was found two months after Teoh beng Hock's death in July last year.

Although it reflects badly on the Investigating Officer, taken that the note could be hidden in some secret compartment in Teoh's bag and it was only realised in September. Maybe it underwent some process of translation and verification for a month.

So who sat on it hoping to hatch not just chicken but human being from October till August? The Selangor CPO's response was when asked by reporters, "You have to ask the AG on that." Did Gani had a baby recently?

-------------------------

Attorney-General's statement

IN Teoh Beng Hock’s death inquiry today, the officers representing the Public Prosecutor, in assisting the said inquiry, intended to put in a note found in the deceased’s sling bag which contains an indication that may throw some light regarding his death.

However, the existence of the note was disputed on the grounds of delay in disclosure, failure to furnish a copy of the said note to the counsel representing the deceased’s family and suppression of evidence by the Attorney-General’s Chambers.

The Attorney-General’s Chambers vehemently denies any suppression of evidence (and) instead was equally startled when the discovery of the note was made known and thereafter caused further investigation to be carried out.

The Attorney-General’s Chambers was informed of the discovery of the note by the investigating officer, ASP Ahmad Nazri bin Zainal, on Oct 7, 2009, some two over months after Teoh Beng Hock’s death.

According to the investigating officer, it was not found when he first searched the deceased’s sling bag after the incident.

The note was immediately translated and there was sufficient cause to send it to be analysed by a document examiner of the Chemistry Department.

The said note was sent on Oct 9, 2009 and subsequently on Oct 20, 2009.

The document examiner prepared his reports and they were considered by the Attorney-General himself where the Attorney-General, Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail, was not convinced of the authenticity of the note due to insufficient samples to verify the handwritings, in particular the Chinese characters.

In addition, the note was said to be discovered some two over months after the death and that this would raise suspicion over its authenticity and discovery.

Having considered these factors, Tan Sri Abdul Gani was of the view that the note should not be tendered until and unless the investigating officer could provide satisfactory explanation as to its discovery.

As regards the note, the Attorney-General’s Chambers was earlier briefed by the investigating officer that he conducted a thorough search after being advised by the psychiatric (sic) that ordinarily there would be a note left in a suicide case.

However, recently, the investigating officer owned up by admitting that he did in fact find the note when he searched the sling bag on July 17, 2009 but did not realise the significance of it as there were other documents found and that they were written in both Chinese and Roman characters.

As a result of this, the Attorney-General decided to put the note in and directed the investigating officer to explain this in court to avoid any repercussion in future and let the coroner decide on its weight after considering the explanation by the investigating officer and the document examiner’s report.

Therefore, there is no suppression or withholding of evidence and that the decision for not tendering it earlier was made based on the document examiner’s report as well as the discovery of the note which gave rise to suspicion.

The Attorney-General’s Chambers will tender a document as evidence only and until it is satisfied that any shroud of suspicion surrounding it is lifted.

Jabatan Peguam Negara
9 August 2010

-------------------------

Selangor CPO silent on ‘Teoh’s note’

PETALING JAYA, Aug 10 – Selangor police chief Datuk Khalid Abu Bakar today refused to take any questions on the note purportedly written by Teoh Beng Hock, but only found by a police investigator more than two months after his death in July 2009.

Khalid, who has been loquacious about investigations through updates in his Facebook account, was however laconic about the “note” found by the investigator which was deemed not important at that time.

“You have to ask the AG on that. He is the prosecutor,” he said, when Teoh’s case was raised at a press conference here.

Khalid also pointed out that it was not fair for him to comment on the case at this stage.

“You could have ask me anything before but not when the case is in court,” said Khalid, referring to the inquest.

A statement from the Attorney-General's Chambers last night has raised questions over a “note” found last year in Teoh Beng Hock’s sling bag “that may throw some light regarding his death”.

The statement said he AG’s Chambers issued a statement last night about the discovery of the note by Investigating Officer ASP Ahmad Nazri Zainal last October 7.

The death of the political aid is subject of an ongoing inquest after widespread disbelief that he killed himself after being questioned over graft allegations by the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC).

The AG Chambers issued the statement after lawyers, including those acting for Teoh’s family, accused prosecutors for suppressing evidence until the tail-end of the inquest.

The statement noted that the AG’s Chambers was earlier briefed by the investigation officer that he conducted a thorough search after being advised by a psychiatrist that, ordinarily, a note would be left in a suicide case.

The statement also said Ahmad Nazri recently owned up that he did find the note when he searched the sling bag on July 17 last year but did not realise the significance of it as other documents were also found and that they were written in both Chinese and Roman characters.

The Malaysian Insiders

------------------------------

Hopefully the note is really that of Teoh's and Coroner accepts the explanation.

Sorry for the family of Teoh Beng Hock. They want to believe that MACC did it but no it is not them. In fact, they should look at the Ronnie Liu's letterhead issue seriously.

Now that Ean Yong is not in the same faction with Ronnie, he could perhaps share more sordid details of Ronnie's indiscretion and abuses.

Why Gani? Why?

A controversy erupted today at the Inquest on the murder of Teoh Beng Hock that occured early last year.

The "suicide note" claimed existent by the NGO, Jaringan Muda Melayu (JMM) last month surfaced at the Inquest today and caused quite a ruckus.

Gobind who represent the family of the late Teoh Beng Hock protested to the submission of the suicide note and left the Inquest in anger. He accused the court for judicial abuse of power.

The position taken by Gobind is strange. As one pro-UMNO blogger, RBF here pointed out Gobind is supposed to seek the truth for the family.

Why should he attempt to stop an evidence that will shed more light on the murder? Is he trying to avoid the embarassment to DAP for having accused MACC for the death of Teoh last year? Politik juga cerita.

RBF also asked where lies the issue of judicial abuse of power?

If JMM had known of the suicide note, it means many other parties had known of it.

Lawyer for the Government, Tan Hock Chuan had told the Inquest that the letter had been available since October last year. Why was it not submitted then? Is there a time limit to submit evidences?

I am no lawyer. You tell me.

Before moving further, read the Bernama report below first:

New Evidence In Teoh's Inquest Causes Dissatisfaction Among Lawyers

SHAH ALAM, Aug 9 (Bernama) -- A new evidence has surfaced at the inquest into the death of political aide Teoh Beng Hock, causing dissatisfaction among lawyers representing the Teoh's family and the Selangor government.

This resulted in the hearing, which was supposed to resume today, to be postponed to Aug 18 to give time for all parties to obtain further instructions from their respective clients.

Coroner Azmil Muntapha Abas postponed the hearing in chambers in the presence of the lawyer for the Teoh's family, Gobind Singh Deo, lawyer Malik Imtiaz Sarwar, who represented the Selangor government, counsel assisting the government Tan Hock Chuan, deputy public prosecutor Mohamad Abazafree Abas and Datuk Abdul Razak Musa, who represented the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission.

Teoh, 30, who was political secretary to Selangor executive councillor Ean Yong Hian Wah, was found dead on July 16 last year on the fifth floor of Plaza Masalam here after giving his statement to the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission, located on the 14th floor of the same building.

Met by reporters outside the court, Gobind Singh said the latest development had affected their case because the evidence should have been submitted much earlier.

"This is new to us, but not new to them. They have the documents and they have been in their possession since October," he added.

Before the hearing started today, Gobind Singh stood up and requested all parties to discuss the matter in chambers, but an hour later he was seen leaving the chambers, looking angry.

The others left the chambers about 15 minutes later, with Tan telling reporters that the inquest had been postponed to next week.

Gobind Singh only agreed to meet the media about an hour later and called for a royal commission to hear the case.

He also wanted Attorney-General Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail to explain the latest development.

From blog sources like the Unspinners here and verified with certain sources, the suicide note was written in Chinese and addressed to Ean Yong.

It was found in Teoh's bag placed at the edge of the seat he slept at the MACC Shah Alam office in that awful night.

In the letter, it is understand that Teoh told Ean Yong that he was "forced" to tell everything to MACC and will hereby commit suicide.

Other than Tan Hock Chuan, few parties had known of the 'suicide note'. It include Datuk Abdul Razak Musa, who represented the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission, Deputy Public Prosecutor Mohamad Abazafree Abas and perhaps the police, since translation from Chinese is done by PDRM.

Logically, submitting it as evidence now should not be an issue. That should answer Gobind grievance immediately. However, it is fair on his part to know as to: Why is the letter only submitted now?

The subsequent question would be: Why did Tan Hock Chuan and the lawyers representing the various Government agencies not submit it back in October 2009?

The buck stops at the Attorney General, Tan Sri Gani Patail. Did he stopped them from submitting the suicide note? Why?

Inquest is resuming next week.

The elusive Dr Porntip is appearing on August 18 and will she still insist on the probability of a homicide at 80% after undergoing the second autopsy and the other experts are saying suicide.

The Inquest is promising to be more interesting again. Stay tune.

The politics of Malay Unity

The initial intention was to give the title "The Myth of Malay Unity" but midway into the posting, the title "The politics of Malay Unity" was felt to be more appropriate.

This must be the third or forth time in my lifetime to experience the talk of Malay unity or the preposition for cooperation between UMNO and PAS.

However, the impracticality of Malay Unity remain and few realities for an UMNO-PAS cooperation need to be understood.

Firstly, UMNO and PAS are ideologically, culturally and geographically different.

While that did not stop them from uniting under the Barisan Nasional banner in the 1970s, the different psyche eventually lead to the split in 1977.

Strangely, the change of time brought about a more liberal PAS in their stance towards DAP. With Nik Aziz himself acknowledging Islamic state is not in PAS's constitution, PAS is slowly but surely emulating UMNO.

Secondly, in Malay majority of more than 65%, it is usually a face off between UMNO and PAS. The seat that PAS yearns for is the same seat that UMNO wants. There lies a certain level of difficulty to achieve the political unity.

Thirdly, UMNO-PAS unity can be concluded as not adding more seats to the Malays. Other than reducing election campaign heat, it is of little political strategic value.

Surmise to say, talk of Malay Unity is nothing more than partisan political posturing.

At individual level, life to the ordinary Malay goes on irrespective of the partisan differences between certain segment of their community.

The bulk of Malay voters are indifferent and still fence seaters. The figure could reach as high as 60% in certain channel.

The voting consideration of the simple Malay folks is neither ideological nor policy initiatives but based on who they know, like and relationship. The slight difference now is the once manipulatable Malay voters are not as easy to lead on as before.

If one had a chance to be in Parliament, members of the Parliament socialise in the canteen irrespective of their partisan affiliation. The so-called animosity between PAS and UMNO are only at the fanatical followers level.

Only outside and in the public eye, do these politicians get into their act of battle. After sometime, this game is all rather pretentious and mere game of perception.

Let's assume that UMNO and PAS actually decide to forget their past grievances and patch up. Then again, it is still not that easy for them to make a political pact. For one, they have to compromise with each other in the division of territory.

Then, UMNO have to consider their partners in Barisan Nasional. In the Peninsular, UMNO subsidise MCA seats in areas with Malay majority areas. All MCAs current seats are in UMNO's Malay majority areas.

Many of those seats will be taken back to cover for shortfall for seats given to PAS and possible loss of seats to PKR in areas with wider race mix. This will effect the MIC seats too. MCA, Gerakan and MIC will have to slog for their party's representation in Parliament and Government.

On the other side, PAS will have issues to contend with in their ever delayed Pakatan Rakyat coalition. They can't simply leave.

PAS would be a laughing stock if they lose what they gained in Pakatan to join UMNO. More embarassing if UMNO and PAS later get into a squabble again. It will be a case of "yang dikejar tak dapat, yang dikendung keciciran."

So, the idea of election cooperation does not make political sense.

Furthermore, as the major race of this country, the Malays cannot be seen to be a political bully to the minorities.

No race in the world is united in absolute. Differences in views, approach, and value system will exist.

Malay Unity is nothing more than a psywar and actually more a case of politicking the message of Malay Unity. The dealbreaker will be brushed as villains and hopefully Malay will place their votes to the party that advocate Malay unity.

In most cases, PAS fell victim in this psywar. Seldom they are the ones insisting on certain conditions and when UMNO, call their bluff, PAS end up spinning other excuses and it is a lost cause from thereon.

This time again UMNO sets no condition. With PAS at the heights of over-confidence, few leaders such as Nik Aziz, Khalid Samad, Nizar and few of the pro-Anwar Erdogans in PAS had shot their mouth to reject.

They almost fell for it until sensibility sets in. After their Port Dickson retreat, they realised that the numbers is not in favour PAS. Malay vote are still swinging against them. They may face the prospect of losing Kedah, if Shafie Apdal and UMNO Kedah could gets his and their act together, which they don't seem to.

If Pakatan only allocate them existing seats to defend their existing seats, they will be at the losing end in the Pakatan pact. PAS will be jeer as being used because it is their election machinery that made tremendous impact in Pakatan's by-elections.

There is also another changing factor.

In the face of a political onslaught from an increasingly united Chinese, the fear factor amongst Malays may favour UMNO at the expense of PAS.

While, UMNO may lose seats to PKR due to swing in Chinese votes for Pakatan. A win for PKR does not mean seats for Malay. Majority of PKR seats in Parliament are held by non Malays despite the bigger number of Malay membership.

As far as UMNO's BN partners in Semenanjung, it is not encouraging. Gerakan is as good as 'bungkus'. They are not expected to win any seats against DAP.

With many former Gerakan leaders joining Penang's DAP Government, Gerakan is viewed as a Pakatan agent inside BN. They are more an irritant than a partner to UMNO.

MCA is trying to shed their image as obedient partner to UMNO. They are trying hard to potray themselves as a fighter to win the heart of the defiant Chinese.

Dr Chua Soi Lek and Wee Ka Siong is leading the charge. Their mistake is to use Perkasa as the punching bag and for crossing into unfamiliar territory of brandishing Islam. Perkasa's Ibrahim Ali has already sounded his warning shot to see MCA lose their seats.

Without Malay and Chinese votes, MCA can also be considered as 'bungkus'. Current indication points to a finished MCA.

Will UMNO's seat in the Peninsular together with votes for BN in Sabah and Sarawak sufficient to maintain the BN Government?

They could pull through. But no more is the dominance of a two third majority.

Both PKR and PAS realised their problem in gaining ground on Malay votes.

There is also growing concern amongst Malay Pakatan leaders that without Malay voters backing them, a Pakatan win on the back of a split Malay votes will give power to DAP.

The attitude of DAP in Selangor, Perak and Penang is not desirable for a stable and peaceful Government. How much more can they stomach DAP's Chinese favoured policies at the expense of Malays?

They need to use Najib's liberal policies and relaxed affirmative action policies against UMNO. But DAP is not helping.

There is also another twist to this.

The poor attitude and participation in by-elections, psywar against Pakatan and BN event participation by Gerakan and MCA raised suspicion that Gerakan and MCA do not have their heart in the BN coalition.

The theory being bandied is that certain MCA and Gerakan leaders are in collusion and cutting deals with DAP and Chinese leaders in PKR to Chinese swing votes for Pakatan. The indication is Penang Gerakan leaders jumping ship to Pakatan and MCA's public statement breaching their usual sensitivity level.

Part of the plan is to jump party after candidate nomination and for candidates in Malay majority areas, it is after the results. Certain community leaders see the need for such plan to save MCA and Gerakan from total demise.

This concern could have manifested itself in Haji Hadi's latest response to Tony Pua with an affirmation that PAS will defend the Bumiputera and Malay rights.

If these is what is meant as Malay Unity, then it is a unity of purpose i.e. common ground to defend issues of common interest. But how long will it last before the next PAS policy flip flop and some idiot start to raise such argument as assobiyah?

However, this time around the call for a dream team of UMNO-PAS is somewhat louder, more serious and more urgent tone. Could it be a response to the surging Chinese quest for political power?

On the ground, the popular opinion is that Chinese clans, associations, kongsi, trade organisation, and NGOs have reached a consensus to give their vote to DAP and Pakatan.

In Chinese politics, the power structure is bottom up and these groupings will determine where the overall Chinese voting trend.

The believe is that Chinese has tasted blood in Penang, Perak and Selangor and the time to wrest power is now. No more is the strategy for "different ships to sail the same direction."

For the Chinese to take such a chauvanistic attitude for political power, it is not a smart move. Chinese cannot hold to power without the support of the other races. Just like Malay majority cannot pursue only Malay policies, Chinese majority cannot be inward looking like what is happening in Penang.

It could backfire and cost them politically. And worst still, it would destabilise the peace and prosperity of the country.

With the Bumiputera and Malays population at more than 60%, what would happen if they responded with a call for "Melayu undi Melayu" and "Bumiputera undi Bumiputera" for East Malaysia?

It means to consider ones race first in ones consideration to vote. The party is only considered when it a case of Malay against Malay or Bumiputera against Bumiputera. This idea is not difficult to promote. All it takes is an Ibrahim Ali-type character to make this call nationwide.

What happens to the nation if the whole nation decide to vote on purely racial consideration?

The nation will be divided along racial lines. We will backtrack to the early 1960s during the time Parti Buruh and PAP were behind the common occurring racial strife. A repeat of 1969 is just a matter of when?

For these same reasons, this blogger never bought the idea of Malay political unity. Let there be diversity and choice.

Ideally, changing votes does not mean a major change in ideology but merely administrative approach and policy emphasis like Republican vis-a-vis Democrat and Labour vis-a-vis Conservatives.

The condition is the Constitution or the original spirit of it must be preserved. Don't anyone dare to to mess with the Constitution.

* Edited 8:00 AM