I suppose the market today has been pretty boring, so, not surprisingly, this afternoon in my chatbox, there was a passionate discussion between chatter "Dreamy" (or mydreamgetrich) and "Dali" (author of Malaysia Finance blog) about the upcoming FUPO vs the current FCPO contract liquidity in 2 months time. For the record, I came into the picture late, and so, might not have captured the salient points.
Anyway, the debate boiled down to this single question: By November 5, 2008 (Wednesday), which of the 2 contracts (FUPO or FCPO) will have the higher daily volume in their most popular contract months?
Since this involves a specific prediction about the future, someone asked whether I can "blog capsule" this for future reference, and I am glad to do so, since this is an interesting question and discussion, and the answer does not appear obvious when there are several conflicting factors.
Starting first with the reasons to support FUPO popularity, we have Dali with his persuasive arguments, which he has blogged here - http://malaysiafinance.blogspot.com/2008/09/fupos-significance.html - and so, I won't repeat them here.
And on the other hand, the reasons to support FCPO continuing popularity are led by Dreamy & others, which I'll try to summarize here for future reference:
1. In the physical market, it is believed that Malaysian CPO companies prefer to hedge in RM than USD since most of their shareholders are local with RM profitabilities. (although Dali raised the interesting issue about local planters with US$ bonds who might prefer to hedge their US$ exposure).
2. FUPO introduced another complexity and variability (you need to also form a view on future USD/RM currency movements to trade successfully) making it more difficult to trade than FCPO, which is volatile enough already.
3. FUPO doesn't appear to have been well marketed locally by Bursa. Past attempts several years ago to introduce the USD palm kernel futures was apparently appalling.
4. More than one person thinks even if FUPO eventually overtakes FCPO, it might not do so in the first 2 months of implementation, due to the lack of marketing push by Bursa. Also, some of the new products introduced by Bursa failed miserably in the past.
5. Traders currently are used to trading FCPO, so, FUPO with extra currency variability will take some time to get used to (although 2 months might be more than enough time for some to get used to it, other things equal).
6. According to Dreamy, Singapore also trades FCPO in US$ but not very successfully.
7. FCPO most popular month contracts tend to be bunched and skewed hugely in just one month, which is usually the 3rd month and it is very visible compared to the other contract months. On the other hand, it is unclear whether the coming FUPO volume will have similar shape, or flatter across contract months.
8. Dreamy thinks that if local producers with physical oil don't participate in FUPO, then, it might not be as attractive as FCPO, although traders in general would tend to dominate futures volume than true hedgers.
In short, many reasons to support both sides of the fence.
For some reason, testosterone levels must have been high during that discussion, because we ended up with some rather "playful" bets and ended up forming teams! Dali's supporters included Moolah, naruto and ckkuan, and Dreamy's supporters included juicy and ivtac. And to balance the numbers, I lended my support to Dreamy - All in the name of good fun between the boys!
And the prize for the winner? Well, I'm personally not clear exactly now, but between Dali and Dreamy, one of them will apologize to the other every single day for a week for something like that (I'll leave this between Dali and Dreamy to sort out the details). And as for the supporters, well, apparently, the losers will address the winners as "xifu" also everyday for a week! LOL! The things we do in good fun!
So, I hope I've documented this blog capsule accurately. If not, do drop a short comment to correct me here.
Cheers, and good luck to both teams come Wednesday, November 5, 2008!
Thursday, September 4, 2008
MCA accepts (?) Najib's apology, says Ka Ting
I had blogged on this issue before here - http://fusioninvestor.blogspot.com/2008/08/another-umno-racist-remark.html.
Recall that on August 25 (12 days ago) during a ceramah in Permatang Pauh, Bukit Bendera Umno chief Ahmad Ismail had allegedly called the Chinese "squatters"! Called the Chinese immigrants! And worse, said it was impossible to achieve equal rights amongst races!
I find Ahmad Ismail's statements completely unacceptable as I'm sure any right thinking Malaysian would!
Yesterday (or 11 days after the alleged event), DPM Najib uttered a semi-conditional-apology belatedly. http://www.nst.com.my/Current_News/NST/Wednesday/Frontpage/2339528/Article/index_html
I am actually further annoyed by this apology for many reasons.
1. A third party apology is not a genuine apology. Ahmad Ismail must apologize in person. The aggreived needs to listen to him directly. It is insufficient. The right thing to do is for Ahmad Ismail to apologize first because it is him who uttered those remarks.
2. Why does it take Najib 11 days to apologize? Was he reluctant in the first 10 days? Did he not see the error in his ways immediately when it was obvious to many? Imagine if in his role as Defence Minister - an enemy attack Malaysia ... Is he going to hesitate and slow to respond to enemy's attack, like he did with his apology? Was it difficult to identify that the situation requires an immediate apology? Why take 10-11 days? If he can't see that this situation demans an apology immediately, then, what other things can't he see immediately?
3. What is the nature of this apology?
"We hope the non-Malays will not be too disturbed by the statement and we apologise if it caused unhappiness."
IF?
You mean, you haven't even accepted that this statement is racist in nature?
What kind of apology is this when there is no personal acceptance that this is simply wrong?
What about Ahmad Ismail - did he accept personally that his remarks are wrong?
If not, how can I forgive him or DPM Najib when there is no personal acceptance by either Ahmad Ismail nor Najib?
The proper way to apologize Mr Najib and Mr Ahmad Ismail - and let me teach you how - is to not use "conditional" apologies. Apologize with no conditions. Just say "I am sorry for ... ". No conditions!
A conditional apology is simply unacceptable. It shows no remorse. It is insulting to everyone. Period.
4. Mr Najib, apologize to all Malaysians. Yes, including the Malays too. There are many Malays who are offended also by those utterances. It is presumptuous that you represent Malays as both Mar 8 and August 26 showed very clearly.
5. Mr Najib, be specific. What exactly are you apologizing for? Are you apologizing because you were born into this earth? What exactly since I could not read it in the statements reported?
To me, Najib and Ahmad Ismail should apologize for related but different actions. They both did different things that are wrong. Ahmad Ismail mistake is to utter the racist remarks and he must refer to those remarks specifically and apologize for it. Najib's mistake is to do nothing when Ahmad Ismail uttered these racist statements, and he should admit to those mistakes, and apologize. But Najib simply didn't refer to his silence as an error and neither did he apologize for that specific mistake.
There are 5 statements reported to have been uttered by Najib in this NST article here - http://www.nst.com.my/Current_News/NST/Wednesday/Frontpage/2339528/Article/index_html
None of the 5 statements refer to him admitting that his mistake was to remain silent and allowed Ahmad Ismail to pontificate those racist statements.
If Najib simply did not acknowledge nor accept that what he did was wrong, then, is his apology really acceptable? Why would anyone want to forgive him, let alone forget when he himself still doesn't believe that what he did was wrong?
Sorry Mr Najib, your "apology" is simply not an apology.
It is still completely unacceptable to me.
Your refusal to identify and admit what you did wrong and your "putar-belit" tells me loudly that you do not believe personally that what you did was wrong. And I am afraid I simply do not trust you.
6. And how do Malaysians know that you will not repeat this again?
7. Will you expel Ahmad Ismail to show the world that you are serious?
8. Will you ask to all BN members to sign an updated code of conduct that simply do not permit such racist statements to be made again in future?
In conclusion, to me, Mr Najib's "apology" is not an acceptable apology because it is too vague, it is too conditional, it doesn't show remorse, it doesn't provide assurance at all, and all indications point to it as merely being empty and hallow rhetorics. In short, it is not a genuine apology.
_______________
And so, I was eagerly awaiting what MCA response might be.
Today, he was reported to have said something. You can see what Mr Ong Ka Ting said here - http://mt.m2day.org/2008/content/view/12171/84/
And quite expectedly, MCA and Mr Ong is reported to have "appreciated and accepted" Mr Najib's apology!
APPRECIATED and ACCEPTED!
So, now it seems I must give an open advice to Mr Ong here.
Mr Ong, let me be very clear please.
Unlike you and MCA, I simply do not accept Mr Najib's apology for the 8 reasons mentioned above.
Unlike you and MCA, I definitely do not appreciate Mr Najib's empty and hallow rhetorics at all.
I am aghast to read "NILAI: The apology by Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak over the alleged remarks made by Bukit Bendera Umno division chief Datuk Ahmad Ismail recently has received a positive response from the MCA. "
Let me tell you right here, right now - your party's positive response simply do NOT represent how I feel at all.
"The deputy prime minister's apology shows that he is aware and understands the people's sentiments over the issue, especially the non-Malays," MCA president Datuk Seri Ong Ka Ting said yesterday."
Again, no. Read my lips. I think DPM is NOT aware. DPM does NOT understand. Especially the non-Malays like me.
"We appreciate and accept his apology and are confident that it will calm the emotions of those who were deeply upset. "
Again, no. Your action and statements does not calm the emotions. In fact, it further compounded the errors made by the other BN component members starting with (1) Ahmad Ismail racist utterances. (2) PM Abdullah excuses. (3) DPM Najib's conditional, vague, rhetorics. (4) Gerakan's Koh Tsu Koon's nonsense, and now, (5) MCA's nonsensical acceptance.
In short, I simply failed to see even a hint of Barisan Nasional government admitting their errors. Worse, I don't see even one sign of genuine remorse, nor the possibility of a change for the better.
There. I've said my piece.
Don't expect me to forgive Ahmad Ismail - from my perspective, he hasn't even yet apologized for it.
Don't expect me to forget it too - I am documenting the episode here in my blog for future reference.
Recall that on August 25 (12 days ago) during a ceramah in Permatang Pauh, Bukit Bendera Umno chief Ahmad Ismail had allegedly called the Chinese "squatters"! Called the Chinese immigrants! And worse, said it was impossible to achieve equal rights amongst races!
I find Ahmad Ismail's statements completely unacceptable as I'm sure any right thinking Malaysian would!
Yesterday (or 11 days after the alleged event), DPM Najib uttered a semi-conditional-apology belatedly. http://www.nst.com.my/Current_News/NST/Wednesday/Frontpage/2339528/Article/index_html
I am actually further annoyed by this apology for many reasons.
1. A third party apology is not a genuine apology. Ahmad Ismail must apologize in person. The aggreived needs to listen to him directly. It is insufficient. The right thing to do is for Ahmad Ismail to apologize first because it is him who uttered those remarks.
2. Why does it take Najib 11 days to apologize? Was he reluctant in the first 10 days? Did he not see the error in his ways immediately when it was obvious to many? Imagine if in his role as Defence Minister - an enemy attack Malaysia ... Is he going to hesitate and slow to respond to enemy's attack, like he did with his apology? Was it difficult to identify that the situation requires an immediate apology? Why take 10-11 days? If he can't see that this situation demans an apology immediately, then, what other things can't he see immediately?
3. What is the nature of this apology?
"We hope the non-Malays will not be too disturbed by the statement and we apologise if it caused unhappiness."
IF?
You mean, you haven't even accepted that this statement is racist in nature?
What kind of apology is this when there is no personal acceptance that this is simply wrong?
What about Ahmad Ismail - did he accept personally that his remarks are wrong?
If not, how can I forgive him or DPM Najib when there is no personal acceptance by either Ahmad Ismail nor Najib?
The proper way to apologize Mr Najib and Mr Ahmad Ismail - and let me teach you how - is to not use "conditional" apologies. Apologize with no conditions. Just say "I am sorry for ... ". No conditions!
A conditional apology is simply unacceptable. It shows no remorse. It is insulting to everyone. Period.
4. Mr Najib, apologize to all Malaysians. Yes, including the Malays too. There are many Malays who are offended also by those utterances. It is presumptuous that you represent Malays as both Mar 8 and August 26 showed very clearly.
5. Mr Najib, be specific. What exactly are you apologizing for? Are you apologizing because you were born into this earth? What exactly since I could not read it in the statements reported?
To me, Najib and Ahmad Ismail should apologize for related but different actions. They both did different things that are wrong. Ahmad Ismail mistake is to utter the racist remarks and he must refer to those remarks specifically and apologize for it. Najib's mistake is to do nothing when Ahmad Ismail uttered these racist statements, and he should admit to those mistakes, and apologize. But Najib simply didn't refer to his silence as an error and neither did he apologize for that specific mistake.
There are 5 statements reported to have been uttered by Najib in this NST article here - http://www.nst.com.my/Current_News/NST/Wednesday/Frontpage/2339528/Article/index_html
None of the 5 statements refer to him admitting that his mistake was to remain silent and allowed Ahmad Ismail to pontificate those racist statements.
If Najib simply did not acknowledge nor accept that what he did was wrong, then, is his apology really acceptable? Why would anyone want to forgive him, let alone forget when he himself still doesn't believe that what he did was wrong?
Sorry Mr Najib, your "apology" is simply not an apology.
It is still completely unacceptable to me.
Your refusal to identify and admit what you did wrong and your "putar-belit" tells me loudly that you do not believe personally that what you did was wrong. And I am afraid I simply do not trust you.
6. And how do Malaysians know that you will not repeat this again?
7. Will you expel Ahmad Ismail to show the world that you are serious?
8. Will you ask to all BN members to sign an updated code of conduct that simply do not permit such racist statements to be made again in future?
In conclusion, to me, Mr Najib's "apology" is not an acceptable apology because it is too vague, it is too conditional, it doesn't show remorse, it doesn't provide assurance at all, and all indications point to it as merely being empty and hallow rhetorics. In short, it is not a genuine apology.
_______________
And so, I was eagerly awaiting what MCA response might be.
Today, he was reported to have said something. You can see what Mr Ong Ka Ting said here - http://mt.m2day.org/2008/content/view/12171/84/
And quite expectedly, MCA and Mr Ong is reported to have "appreciated and accepted" Mr Najib's apology!
APPRECIATED and ACCEPTED!
So, now it seems I must give an open advice to Mr Ong here.
Mr Ong, let me be very clear please.
Unlike you and MCA, I simply do not accept Mr Najib's apology for the 8 reasons mentioned above.
Unlike you and MCA, I definitely do not appreciate Mr Najib's empty and hallow rhetorics at all.
I am aghast to read "NILAI: The apology by Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak over the alleged remarks made by Bukit Bendera Umno division chief Datuk Ahmad Ismail recently has received a positive response from the MCA. "
Let me tell you right here, right now - your party's positive response simply do NOT represent how I feel at all.
"The deputy prime minister's apology shows that he is aware and understands the people's sentiments over the issue, especially the non-Malays," MCA president Datuk Seri Ong Ka Ting said yesterday."
Again, no. Read my lips. I think DPM is NOT aware. DPM does NOT understand. Especially the non-Malays like me.
"We appreciate and accept his apology and are confident that it will calm the emotions of those who were deeply upset. "
Again, no. Your action and statements does not calm the emotions. In fact, it further compounded the errors made by the other BN component members starting with (1) Ahmad Ismail racist utterances. (2) PM Abdullah excuses. (3) DPM Najib's conditional, vague, rhetorics. (4) Gerakan's Koh Tsu Koon's nonsense, and now, (5) MCA's nonsensical acceptance.
In short, I simply failed to see even a hint of Barisan Nasional government admitting their errors. Worse, I don't see even one sign of genuine remorse, nor the possibility of a change for the better.
There. I've said my piece.
Don't expect me to forgive Ahmad Ismail - from my perspective, he hasn't even yet apologized for it.
Don't expect me to forget it too - I am documenting the episode here in my blog for future reference.
Monday, September 1, 2008
Can Malaysia be a nation at peace with itself?
I find the first few paragraphs of this article inspiring and heart-warming, and will link it here for future reference - http://mt.m2day.org/2008/content/view/11984/1/
I WAS pleasantly surprised to discover that Georgetown University has a full-time Muslim chaplain among its campus ministry staff. Imam Yahya Hendi heads a chaplaincy programme that provides religious services and support to Muslim members of the university, while also serving as the spokesperson of the Islamic Jurisprudence Council of North America.
There is a Muslim prayer room in Copley Hall, where the five daily obligatory prayers are held, while on Fridays Salatul Jum’ah is held in the main students’ building, the Leavey Center.
That the faith life of Muslim students and faculty members should be as much a concern of the university as that of Christian, Jewish or Hindu members of the academic community in Georgetown is seen by its administration as obvious and unremarkable. Georgetown University seems to be a community at peace with itself, able to accommodate within its Catholic origins what it describes as a “centred pluralism” that respects and engages the various religious and humanist perspectives and traditions of members of the university community.
Although Catholic in origin, Georgetown University provides ample worshipping spaces for its multi-religious body, including the Muslim prayer room in Copley Hall (Pic by Aloysious Mowe)
Halfway across the world, in the land of Islam Hadhari, the Catholic Students’ Society at Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia has been refused permission by the university’s administration to hold meetings of Catholic students on the campus of UKM Bangi during the 2008/2009 academic year.
The students were told in a letter dated 21 July 2008 that programmes and activities of only the “official religion” may be held within the campus of the university. (Seng comment: This is very dissappointing, even though I'm neither a Christian nor a Muslim. The "official religion" should not be synonymous with the "only religion". If we are truly at peace with ourselves, what is so wrong to allow every religion to hold their own meetings? If the intention is to not allow every religion, then, the 21 July 2008 letter should not refer to "official religion" as a reason to reject. Otherwise, the only logical conclusion is that this is discriminatory in favor of one religion over others.) The letter was signed by Shahruddin Ahmad, the director of UKM’s Pusat Perkembangan Pelajar, the Centre for Students’ Advancement. The irony, we can be certain, is entirely unintended.
That there should be no room in our universities for non-Muslim students to explore and deepen their faith is just one indication, 51 years after its attaining independence, of how far Malaysia is from being a nation at peace with itself.
For the rest of the article, click on the link above.
I WAS pleasantly surprised to discover that Georgetown University has a full-time Muslim chaplain among its campus ministry staff. Imam Yahya Hendi heads a chaplaincy programme that provides religious services and support to Muslim members of the university, while also serving as the spokesperson of the Islamic Jurisprudence Council of North America.
There is a Muslim prayer room in Copley Hall, where the five daily obligatory prayers are held, while on Fridays Salatul Jum’ah is held in the main students’ building, the Leavey Center.
That the faith life of Muslim students and faculty members should be as much a concern of the university as that of Christian, Jewish or Hindu members of the academic community in Georgetown is seen by its administration as obvious and unremarkable. Georgetown University seems to be a community at peace with itself, able to accommodate within its Catholic origins what it describes as a “centred pluralism” that respects and engages the various religious and humanist perspectives and traditions of members of the university community.
Although Catholic in origin, Georgetown University provides ample worshipping spaces for its multi-religious body, including the Muslim prayer room in Copley Hall (Pic by Aloysious Mowe)
Halfway across the world, in the land of Islam Hadhari, the Catholic Students’ Society at Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia has been refused permission by the university’s administration to hold meetings of Catholic students on the campus of UKM Bangi during the 2008/2009 academic year.
The students were told in a letter dated 21 July 2008 that programmes and activities of only the “official religion” may be held within the campus of the university. (Seng comment: This is very dissappointing, even though I'm neither a Christian nor a Muslim. The "official religion" should not be synonymous with the "only religion". If we are truly at peace with ourselves, what is so wrong to allow every religion to hold their own meetings? If the intention is to not allow every religion, then, the 21 July 2008 letter should not refer to "official religion" as a reason to reject. Otherwise, the only logical conclusion is that this is discriminatory in favor of one religion over others.) The letter was signed by Shahruddin Ahmad, the director of UKM’s Pusat Perkembangan Pelajar, the Centre for Students’ Advancement. The irony, we can be certain, is entirely unintended.
That there should be no room in our universities for non-Muslim students to explore and deepen their faith is just one indication, 51 years after its attaining independence, of how far Malaysia is from being a nation at peace with itself.
For the rest of the article, click on the link above.
Malaysia Today has no respect for religion: Syed Hamid?
Link here - http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2008/8/30/nation/20080830182005&sec=nation
My question is - is this the best that they can come up with? A general reason that says "No respect for religion"?
Let me quote Syed Hamid & SKMM in italics red, so that you can form your own opinion whether the government's explanation to censor Malaysia Today website is adequate or not.
"The Malaysia Today news portal has no respect at all for religion even though the topic is very sensitive and the "fire of religion" could cause chaos and havoc"
Too general. Presumptive. Which article? Which date? Which paragraph?
"this did not mean it could be used to disparage, defame, libel and circulate untruths without boundaries and restraint, and that the Government has a responsibility to act in the name of public interest."
Too general. Presumptive. Which article? Which date? Which paragraph?
"you must not create public fear, or send a message that would cause uncertainty and a lot of damage to the country in terms of public confidence and investor confidence,"
Too general. Presumptive. Which article? Which date? Which paragraph?
"The SKMM head Mohamed Shahril Mohamed Tarmizi told Utusan that the ban against Malaysia Today was because an article in the website had tried to draw parallels of the Holy Prophet to the former Iraqi president Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda's Osama bin Laden."
Too general. Presumptive. Which article? Which date? Which paragraph?
As a general comment, I am a daily MT reader, and quote a lot of articles in MT in my blog here. Everyday, I try to make it a point to read every single article in MT. If for some reason I could not read it today, I will try to catch up the next day, if not the day after.
Since last year, my conservative estimate is that I must have read at least 3,000 MT articles, or very conservatively say 10 a day over the last 300 days.
And not even once have I come across this article that "draw parallels of the Holy Prophet to the former Iraqi president Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda's Osama bin Laden.". If I did, I certainly don't remember it. And I certainly did not felt fear. And I would not run around creating chaos and havoc as Syed Hamid claims.
In fact, logically speaking, if it did create chaos and havoc, wouldn't you and I already know? I mean if it doesn't create chaos and havoc today, yesterday, 2 days ago, 3 days ago, then, how old exactly is this article? And why censor MT at 6 PM on August 26?
As for creating public fear, if RPK's article did it, I expect the root cause to be the participants in the message and not the messenger.
So, I repeat - Which article? Which date? Which paragraph?
""I thought personally when they (SKMM) took action - under current developments - that we were very slow to take action even though we are hurt very badly so often," he added."
Too general. Presumptive. Which article? Which date? Which paragraph?
Other comments:
I have been extremely patient with the government, but from what I've seen so far, despite the numerous newspaper articles and despite the numerous explanations by Syed Hamid, I remain unconvinced, despite trying to keep an extremely open mind to the possibility.
But to date, they have not yet even mentioned the specific article, the specific date, nor even quote the specific paragraph!
I must therefore now come to this conclusion:
Is the government publicly lying to us?
My question is - is this the best that they can come up with? A general reason that says "No respect for religion"?
Let me quote Syed Hamid & SKMM in italics red, so that you can form your own opinion whether the government's explanation to censor Malaysia Today website is adequate or not.
"The Malaysia Today news portal has no respect at all for religion even though the topic is very sensitive and the "fire of religion" could cause chaos and havoc"
Too general. Presumptive. Which article? Which date? Which paragraph?
"this did not mean it could be used to disparage, defame, libel and circulate untruths without boundaries and restraint, and that the Government has a responsibility to act in the name of public interest."
Too general. Presumptive. Which article? Which date? Which paragraph?
"you must not create public fear, or send a message that would cause uncertainty and a lot of damage to the country in terms of public confidence and investor confidence,"
Too general. Presumptive. Which article? Which date? Which paragraph?
"The SKMM head Mohamed Shahril Mohamed Tarmizi told Utusan that the ban against Malaysia Today was because an article in the website had tried to draw parallels of the Holy Prophet to the former Iraqi president Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda's Osama bin Laden."
Too general. Presumptive. Which article? Which date? Which paragraph?
As a general comment, I am a daily MT reader, and quote a lot of articles in MT in my blog here. Everyday, I try to make it a point to read every single article in MT. If for some reason I could not read it today, I will try to catch up the next day, if not the day after.
Since last year, my conservative estimate is that I must have read at least 3,000 MT articles, or very conservatively say 10 a day over the last 300 days.
And not even once have I come across this article that "draw parallels of the Holy Prophet to the former Iraqi president Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda's Osama bin Laden.". If I did, I certainly don't remember it. And I certainly did not felt fear. And I would not run around creating chaos and havoc as Syed Hamid claims.
In fact, logically speaking, if it did create chaos and havoc, wouldn't you and I already know? I mean if it doesn't create chaos and havoc today, yesterday, 2 days ago, 3 days ago, then, how old exactly is this article? And why censor MT at 6 PM on August 26?
As for creating public fear, if RPK's article did it, I expect the root cause to be the participants in the message and not the messenger.
So, I repeat - Which article? Which date? Which paragraph?
""I thought personally when they (SKMM) took action - under current developments - that we were very slow to take action even though we are hurt very badly so often," he added."
Too general. Presumptive. Which article? Which date? Which paragraph?
Other comments:
I have been extremely patient with the government, but from what I've seen so far, despite the numerous newspaper articles and despite the numerous explanations by Syed Hamid, I remain unconvinced, despite trying to keep an extremely open mind to the possibility.
But to date, they have not yet even mentioned the specific article, the specific date, nor even quote the specific paragraph!
I must therefore now come to this conclusion:
Is the government publicly lying to us?
NS deals led to RM110m loss
As a parent, I am not a fan of the Malaysian National Service program (or Program Latihan Khidmat Negara (PLKN)) .
There are far too many horror stories around.
Rape, lost in jungle, food poisoning, outbreak of unknown fever, poor security, lack of hygeine, atrocious living conditions, and worse unnecessary deaths and fatalities. (refer http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malaysian_National_Service)
Which parent in their right mind would want to subject their precious child/ren to these completely unnecessary risks?
And the irony - PM Abdullah and UMNO does not want to open up UiTM to non-bumis which would result in 12 times longer interactions between the various races, but want to expand the NS program which only runs for 3 months but at great cost to taxpayers because of "national unity"! How ironic! Can one even take PM Abdullah and UMNO Rhetorics seriously?
On the other hand, you have a great deal of public and taxpayers funds being wasted unnecessarily. A recent example is this article printed in The Star on Merdeka day ironically titled the above. The link is here - http://mt.m2day.org/2008/content/view/12005/1/.
(The Star) - National Service shirkers and a very “rigid” contract have caused the Government losses of up to RM110.1mil from 2004 to last year, the 2007 Auditor-General’s report said.
Over the four years, the audit found that 63,417 people failed to attend the programme for various reasons, which led to the Government having to fork out the money to camp operators due to the way the contract was set out.
The contract spelt out that the Government would pay rent for the use of equipment and facilities for between 690 and 890 trainees for 2004 and between 300 and 400 trainees for 2005 and beyond.
The fee, per trainee, worked out to RM30 in the peninsula and RM41 in Sabah and Sarawak for 2004. In 2005, it cost RM25 in peninsula and RM34.30 in Sabah and Sarawak.
This meant that the Government had to pay for the stated number of trainees in the contract even if the number of trainees turning up was less or more than the figure stipulated in the agreement.
“Every year, between 16% and 23% of those called up to join the programme did not turn up.
The ministry must review the contract conditions regarding how many trainees are allocated to each camp,” the report said.
It added that the ministry should also have a backup name list as there had to be a stop to the losses due to people not turning up for training.
“The NS Training Department also has to double-check its name list with the relevant authorities before putting out the roll call,” it said.
Among the reasons those called up did not attend were: a change in address, still studying, sole bread-winners, disabled, did not receive notices, died, overseas, in the army, health problems or have attended NS before.
In its reply, the ministry said it was in the midst of reviewing the contracts, adding that the department would be increasing the number of trainees next year to 140,000 to make up for any shortfall.
The audit also found that RM57mil in arrears had yet to be collected from camp operators for advances they had taken to construct the camps.
The audit also checked on certain camps from various angles such as the suitability of its location, cleanliness, food quality and quality of equipment supplied.
It found that the Beringin Beach camp in Langkawi was unsuitable because high tides often flooded dormitories and left a classroom unusable.
For the Wawasan camp in Sabah, camp operators told the audit team that it was difficult to obtain fresh fish to cook for the trainees but the audit team found it otherwise at the Kota Kinabalu market.
The audit also found that T-shirts, track pants, baseball caps and sports shoes supplied under contracts worth RM41.12mil were of low quality.
Just focusing on the article above:
1. The root cause for the $ loss is attributed to actual numbers turn out smaller than planned.
2. Most of the causes given are no-brainers and expected when dealing with large number of people and time-lag from first screening to attendance.
3. However, some of the causes are mind-boggling - e.g. "attended NS before"! How on earth can someone be asked to attend NS twice? This reflects extremely poorly on the NS organizers!
It begs the question - How can the NS administrators not know the kid has already gone through NS before? Is the NS record keeping system so poor? Is there simply no checks performed to make sure noone is invited twice or cross-referenced against the attended database? Poor database integrity? Poor programmers?
4. If they can't do 3. right, how on earth are they going to manage the proposed DNA Database that I discussed earlier when the latter has far greater implication on potentially all 27 million Malaysians? http://fusioninvestor.blogspot.com/2008/09/why-you-should-oppose-dna-bill.html
5. What annoys me is that this has been going on in 2004, 2005, 2006 and 2007, and not just 2004!
6. A prudent and responsible organizer should have identified this problem, even before the first NS program in 2004 is implemented.
7. It doesn't take a genius to know that when you send 10,000 invitations out, you will never get 10,000 attendees!
8. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that when 2004 experience happened, you don't repeat it in 2005, 2006 and now 2007!
9. Who exactly are responsible for the wastage? Is this purely an implementation problem? Or they just simply don't care about the implementation? I can't help but think that they just don't care about the implementation, because if they do, they would have put more effort to make sure that the monies are well spent, and especially, that the horror stories does not happen.
10. What about the poor quality goods? Is the Auditor General wrong in labelling these goods as "low quality" in its report? Or another example of rampant corruption by the BN cronies again? Or is this simply not a problem at all that the Auditor General can just say anything he likes, the newspapers publish anything they like, and the BN government just ignore everything since Malaysians mudah lupa?
There are far too many horror stories around.
Rape, lost in jungle, food poisoning, outbreak of unknown fever, poor security, lack of hygeine, atrocious living conditions, and worse unnecessary deaths and fatalities. (refer http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malaysian_National_Service)
Which parent in their right mind would want to subject their precious child/ren to these completely unnecessary risks?
And the irony - PM Abdullah and UMNO does not want to open up UiTM to non-bumis which would result in 12 times longer interactions between the various races, but want to expand the NS program which only runs for 3 months but at great cost to taxpayers because of "national unity"! How ironic! Can one even take PM Abdullah and UMNO Rhetorics seriously?
On the other hand, you have a great deal of public and taxpayers funds being wasted unnecessarily. A recent example is this article printed in The Star on Merdeka day ironically titled the above. The link is here - http://mt.m2day.org/2008/content/view/12005/1/.
(The Star) - National Service shirkers and a very “rigid” contract have caused the Government losses of up to RM110.1mil from 2004 to last year, the 2007 Auditor-General’s report said.
Over the four years, the audit found that 63,417 people failed to attend the programme for various reasons, which led to the Government having to fork out the money to camp operators due to the way the contract was set out.
The contract spelt out that the Government would pay rent for the use of equipment and facilities for between 690 and 890 trainees for 2004 and between 300 and 400 trainees for 2005 and beyond.
The fee, per trainee, worked out to RM30 in the peninsula and RM41 in Sabah and Sarawak for 2004. In 2005, it cost RM25 in peninsula and RM34.30 in Sabah and Sarawak.
This meant that the Government had to pay for the stated number of trainees in the contract even if the number of trainees turning up was less or more than the figure stipulated in the agreement.
“Every year, between 16% and 23% of those called up to join the programme did not turn up.
The ministry must review the contract conditions regarding how many trainees are allocated to each camp,” the report said.
It added that the ministry should also have a backup name list as there had to be a stop to the losses due to people not turning up for training.
“The NS Training Department also has to double-check its name list with the relevant authorities before putting out the roll call,” it said.
Among the reasons those called up did not attend were: a change in address, still studying, sole bread-winners, disabled, did not receive notices, died, overseas, in the army, health problems or have attended NS before.
In its reply, the ministry said it was in the midst of reviewing the contracts, adding that the department would be increasing the number of trainees next year to 140,000 to make up for any shortfall.
The audit also found that RM57mil in arrears had yet to be collected from camp operators for advances they had taken to construct the camps.
The audit also checked on certain camps from various angles such as the suitability of its location, cleanliness, food quality and quality of equipment supplied.
It found that the Beringin Beach camp in Langkawi was unsuitable because high tides often flooded dormitories and left a classroom unusable.
For the Wawasan camp in Sabah, camp operators told the audit team that it was difficult to obtain fresh fish to cook for the trainees but the audit team found it otherwise at the Kota Kinabalu market.
The audit also found that T-shirts, track pants, baseball caps and sports shoes supplied under contracts worth RM41.12mil were of low quality.
Just focusing on the article above:
1. The root cause for the $ loss is attributed to actual numbers turn out smaller than planned.
2. Most of the causes given are no-brainers and expected when dealing with large number of people and time-lag from first screening to attendance.
3. However, some of the causes are mind-boggling - e.g. "attended NS before"! How on earth can someone be asked to attend NS twice? This reflects extremely poorly on the NS organizers!
It begs the question - How can the NS administrators not know the kid has already gone through NS before? Is the NS record keeping system so poor? Is there simply no checks performed to make sure noone is invited twice or cross-referenced against the attended database? Poor database integrity? Poor programmers?
4. If they can't do 3. right, how on earth are they going to manage the proposed DNA Database that I discussed earlier when the latter has far greater implication on potentially all 27 million Malaysians? http://fusioninvestor.blogspot.com/2008/09/why-you-should-oppose-dna-bill.html
5. What annoys me is that this has been going on in 2004, 2005, 2006 and 2007, and not just 2004!
6. A prudent and responsible organizer should have identified this problem, even before the first NS program in 2004 is implemented.
7. It doesn't take a genius to know that when you send 10,000 invitations out, you will never get 10,000 attendees!
8. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that when 2004 experience happened, you don't repeat it in 2005, 2006 and now 2007!
9. Who exactly are responsible for the wastage? Is this purely an implementation problem? Or they just simply don't care about the implementation? I can't help but think that they just don't care about the implementation, because if they do, they would have put more effort to make sure that the monies are well spent, and especially, that the horror stories does not happen.
10. What about the poor quality goods? Is the Auditor General wrong in labelling these goods as "low quality" in its report? Or another example of rampant corruption by the BN cronies again? Or is this simply not a problem at all that the Auditor General can just say anything he likes, the newspapers publish anything they like, and the BN government just ignore everything since Malaysians mudah lupa?
Why You Should Oppose the DNA Bill
There are many reasons, including the 10 reasons that the Bar Council has raised here - http://www.malaysianbar.org.my/legal/general_news/dna_bill_tabled_and_opened_for_debate_despite_opposition_protests.html
Bloggers have even blogged on it here:
http://malikimtiaz.blogspot.com/2008/08/why-unholy-haste.html,
http://www.mpkapar.com/manikavasagam/posts/why-dna-bill-need-further-consultations/,
http://asia.cnet.com/blogs/teteatech/post.htm?id=63005535#talkback.
Even one BN MP has raised concerns on it, in a party known to whip its members into absolute conformity - http://www.themalaysianinsider.com.my/index.php/malaysia/8230-anifah-attacks-dna-bill
Hence, I do not intend to repeat what's been said.
However, I intend to share with you just some of my thoughts on the DNA Database and some of the implications.
My question is how do they intend to "manage" this DNA Database? Will it be managed like a "permanent criminal record"?
For example, imagine this "DNA collection" scenario. Imagine a security guard was shot dead from a distance at night when there was no witnesses. Forensics came in the next day to collect DNA evidence to nail down suspects. They found 100 different DNA around the scene of the crime, because it was a public place. It included yours, because you happened to be there at the scene of the crime a few hours before the murder occurs, and a strand of your hair dropped / you shed some dead cells (which occurs everyday) and the place was not yet cleaned by the cleaners. Or maybe it was planted there?
Technically, that makes you along with 100 other people suspects.
What could be some of the implications that would arise as a result of this?
1. Under what circumstances would the Police choose whether to follow-up this lead or not? Would most of these not followed-up due to the sheer volume of work - surely not all 100 are suspects when only 1 guard is shot? Would the police only act when ordered by superiors to follow up certain leads?
2. When the Police visits you, they may then ask you to prove your innocence by telling them your whereabouts together with alibis. For those who are innocent, sometimes, this is not an issue, if the Police force is efficient, works fast and promptly, and your cooperation would help them narrow down the list of suspects from 100 to 99. But if you can't account for it for privacy or any other reasons, what happens then? Are you then guilty until proven innocent? What if they don't visit you and instead summoned you to the Police Station to give your statements and it is across town? If you don't go, will you then be deemed guilty? Can you see how ridiculous and not just inconvenient this will become at a society level?
3. Even in the best case scenario - where you failed to account your whereabouts, but they manage to nail down the killer - will your "suspect record" be wiped off, or will it remain "forever" in the DNA databank? In other words, you remain in there for life? According to Bar Council - "The destruction of the sample is at the discretion of the DNA bank director, which is unacceptable and it does not meet the international standards"
4. If it's there for life, how will society view this? For example, if your employer knows that you have records in the DNA databank, would he view you differently from another person who don't have any? What if you or your parents found out that your fiance/fiancee have a DNA databank record? What if you find out that your neighbour have such a record?
5. The bigger issue is where the burden of proof lies. According to experts, apparently, the DNA Bill to shift the burden of proof from the prosecutor to the accused. Currently, the burden is on the Prosecutor to prove your guilt. But under the proposed DNA Bill, it seems the burden is now on you to prove your innocence! This has far reaching implications that must be clearly understood!
6. What if you happen to be someone whom the government wants to prosecute you even if what you say is the truth but they want to silence you? Does this Bill not give them hugely additional powers to do so, hypothetically speaking?
7. Consider an even worse scenario. Imagine your DNA sample was collected and stored permanently in the DNA Databank. Imagine no follow up, but over the next 5, 10 years, without your knowledge, more of your DNA samples continue to be collected.
Then, one day, you find yourself in the "bad list" of the government of the day. The government checks the DNA databank, and found that you are a suspect in at least 10 unsolved crimes. They now claim that they have "over-whelming" evidence to charge you since there is now a collection of 10 which they point as a "pattern". How are you going to prove your innocence in practice? Is there a time limit where if the Police have not charged you, the "old DNA evidence" becomes obsolete? Or are they in there "forever"?
Do you think you can remember where you were over the past 10 years if I were to pick randomly 10 dates in the past? Will you be able to supply alibis who can remember? If you are lucky, great! But the odds are against you. Under the proposed DNA Bill, if you are unable to prove your innocence, does that mean you are guilty and will be sentenced accordingly?
Ridiculous isn't it? Yet, it's now past 2nd Reading, and upon 3rd Reading will become law!
8. How do you know whether the DNA evidence is not planted or fabricated? Who in Malaysia is able to tell the difference whether it is genuine or not? Are there specialists? Are they in abundant supply? How much would it cost to engage the services of such people? Will they be within the reach of the average Malaysian?
9. According to the Bar Council, you don't even have the opportunity to do an independent test of the DNA sample that they've collected. And the costs is most likely to be prohibitive to most Malaysians.
10. This assumes the DNA databank is collected and maintained by a fully competent and professional team, with safeguards, checks and balances in the system, with full integrity. If someone planted the DNA record into the Databank to be associated with the crime, can you challenge that it is not collected professionally? Or is the burden of proof now shifts to you, to prove that it was planted?
11. Will we see increased bribery situations? For example, how much will it cost to erase these DNA records from the Databank? If simple things like immigration records can be erased, what about the more damning DNA Databank records? Won't this give the Police and the government too much power to potentially abuse?
12. Obviously, I have only scratched the surface since I haven't thought much about the DNA Bill - this is just an amateur's comments.
13. But what I do know is that there is clearly a strong need for greater public consultation. More public feedback and feedback from all stakeholders especially the experts. This is not something that should be rushed, because once it is law, it will be a long time before it can be undone, and by then, a lot of damage could have occured.
14. The public must have adequate protection - checks and balances - that goes beyond individual personalities and be structured into the system, so that the absence of any one individual does not corrupt the integrity of the entire system.
15. Why is the BN government in such a haste to implement this DNA Bill, despite protests from the public?
16. You may find this article interesting also - http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2006/10/26/18323702.php. There are so many implications, that I really don't see the need to even have a DNA Bill.
17. Another reason which I failed to understand why we need the DNA Bill? Isn't DNA evidence already an acceptable evidence in court? Isn't it treated in the same manner and rank as other evidence in court currently? If so, why the need to raise DNA evidence to be above other evidence? What is the meaning of "DNA being a conclusive evidence"? Does the courts continue to have the ability to "weigh other contrary evidence?" Why does the DNA Bill need to refer to this when this is already an existing point in law?
18. In short, because I have too many questions, and I can imagine too many common situations where this will be abused, I strongly oppose to the proposed DNA Bill.
Shouldn't you oppose to the proposed DNA Bill?
Bloggers have even blogged on it here:
http://malikimtiaz.blogspot.com/2008/08/why-unholy-haste.html,
http://www.mpkapar.com/manikavasagam/posts/why-dna-bill-need-further-consultations/,
http://asia.cnet.com/blogs/teteatech/post.htm?id=63005535#talkback.
Even one BN MP has raised concerns on it, in a party known to whip its members into absolute conformity - http://www.themalaysianinsider.com.my/index.php/malaysia/8230-anifah-attacks-dna-bill
Hence, I do not intend to repeat what's been said.
However, I intend to share with you just some of my thoughts on the DNA Database and some of the implications.
My question is how do they intend to "manage" this DNA Database? Will it be managed like a "permanent criminal record"?
For example, imagine this "DNA collection" scenario. Imagine a security guard was shot dead from a distance at night when there was no witnesses. Forensics came in the next day to collect DNA evidence to nail down suspects. They found 100 different DNA around the scene of the crime, because it was a public place. It included yours, because you happened to be there at the scene of the crime a few hours before the murder occurs, and a strand of your hair dropped / you shed some dead cells (which occurs everyday) and the place was not yet cleaned by the cleaners. Or maybe it was planted there?
Technically, that makes you along with 100 other people suspects.
What could be some of the implications that would arise as a result of this?
1. Under what circumstances would the Police choose whether to follow-up this lead or not? Would most of these not followed-up due to the sheer volume of work - surely not all 100 are suspects when only 1 guard is shot? Would the police only act when ordered by superiors to follow up certain leads?
2. When the Police visits you, they may then ask you to prove your innocence by telling them your whereabouts together with alibis. For those who are innocent, sometimes, this is not an issue, if the Police force is efficient, works fast and promptly, and your cooperation would help them narrow down the list of suspects from 100 to 99. But if you can't account for it for privacy or any other reasons, what happens then? Are you then guilty until proven innocent? What if they don't visit you and instead summoned you to the Police Station to give your statements and it is across town? If you don't go, will you then be deemed guilty? Can you see how ridiculous and not just inconvenient this will become at a society level?
3. Even in the best case scenario - where you failed to account your whereabouts, but they manage to nail down the killer - will your "suspect record" be wiped off, or will it remain "forever" in the DNA databank? In other words, you remain in there for life? According to Bar Council - "The destruction of the sample is at the discretion of the DNA bank director, which is unacceptable and it does not meet the international standards"
4. If it's there for life, how will society view this? For example, if your employer knows that you have records in the DNA databank, would he view you differently from another person who don't have any? What if you or your parents found out that your fiance/fiancee have a DNA databank record? What if you find out that your neighbour have such a record?
5. The bigger issue is where the burden of proof lies. According to experts, apparently, the DNA Bill to shift the burden of proof from the prosecutor to the accused. Currently, the burden is on the Prosecutor to prove your guilt. But under the proposed DNA Bill, it seems the burden is now on you to prove your innocence! This has far reaching implications that must be clearly understood!
6. What if you happen to be someone whom the government wants to prosecute you even if what you say is the truth but they want to silence you? Does this Bill not give them hugely additional powers to do so, hypothetically speaking?
7. Consider an even worse scenario. Imagine your DNA sample was collected and stored permanently in the DNA Databank. Imagine no follow up, but over the next 5, 10 years, without your knowledge, more of your DNA samples continue to be collected.
Then, one day, you find yourself in the "bad list" of the government of the day. The government checks the DNA databank, and found that you are a suspect in at least 10 unsolved crimes. They now claim that they have "over-whelming" evidence to charge you since there is now a collection of 10 which they point as a "pattern". How are you going to prove your innocence in practice? Is there a time limit where if the Police have not charged you, the "old DNA evidence" becomes obsolete? Or are they in there "forever"?
Do you think you can remember where you were over the past 10 years if I were to pick randomly 10 dates in the past? Will you be able to supply alibis who can remember? If you are lucky, great! But the odds are against you. Under the proposed DNA Bill, if you are unable to prove your innocence, does that mean you are guilty and will be sentenced accordingly?
Ridiculous isn't it? Yet, it's now past 2nd Reading, and upon 3rd Reading will become law!
8. How do you know whether the DNA evidence is not planted or fabricated? Who in Malaysia is able to tell the difference whether it is genuine or not? Are there specialists? Are they in abundant supply? How much would it cost to engage the services of such people? Will they be within the reach of the average Malaysian?
9. According to the Bar Council, you don't even have the opportunity to do an independent test of the DNA sample that they've collected. And the costs is most likely to be prohibitive to most Malaysians.
10. This assumes the DNA databank is collected and maintained by a fully competent and professional team, with safeguards, checks and balances in the system, with full integrity. If someone planted the DNA record into the Databank to be associated with the crime, can you challenge that it is not collected professionally? Or is the burden of proof now shifts to you, to prove that it was planted?
11. Will we see increased bribery situations? For example, how much will it cost to erase these DNA records from the Databank? If simple things like immigration records can be erased, what about the more damning DNA Databank records? Won't this give the Police and the government too much power to potentially abuse?
12. Obviously, I have only scratched the surface since I haven't thought much about the DNA Bill - this is just an amateur's comments.
13. But what I do know is that there is clearly a strong need for greater public consultation. More public feedback and feedback from all stakeholders especially the experts. This is not something that should be rushed, because once it is law, it will be a long time before it can be undone, and by then, a lot of damage could have occured.
14. The public must have adequate protection - checks and balances - that goes beyond individual personalities and be structured into the system, so that the absence of any one individual does not corrupt the integrity of the entire system.
15. Why is the BN government in such a haste to implement this DNA Bill, despite protests from the public?
16. You may find this article interesting also - http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2006/10/26/18323702.php. There are so many implications, that I really don't see the need to even have a DNA Bill.
17. Another reason which I failed to understand why we need the DNA Bill? Isn't DNA evidence already an acceptable evidence in court? Isn't it treated in the same manner and rank as other evidence in court currently? If so, why the need to raise DNA evidence to be above other evidence? What is the meaning of "DNA being a conclusive evidence"? Does the courts continue to have the ability to "weigh other contrary evidence?" Why does the DNA Bill need to refer to this when this is already an existing point in law?
18. In short, because I have too many questions, and I can imagine too many common situations where this will be abused, I strongly oppose to the proposed DNA Bill.
Shouldn't you oppose to the proposed DNA Bill?
Sunday, August 31, 2008
Another UMNO Racist Remark
Link for future reference - http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2008/8/30/nation/20080830200907&sec=nation
Article and my comments below:
Saturday August 30, 2008 MYT 8:18:56 PM
PM to instruct Bkt Bendera chief not to repeat remark
By YENG AI CHUN
KEPALA BATAS: Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Badawi will personally see to it that Bukit Bendera Umno chief Datuk Ahmad Ismail does not repeat his remarks about the Chinese community.
“I’ll tell him not to do it again. You know during campaigning all sorts of things can come up. I don’t think he meant it. I’ll make sure to tell him not to say it again,” he said Saturday after chairing the Bertam Umno division meeting here.
Ahmad had allegedly called the Chinese "squatters" and said that "as the Chinese were only immigrants it was impossible to achieve equal rights amongst races" during a ceramah in Permatang Pauh on Aug 25.
He had allegedly made the remark in the presence of Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak.
Ahmad’s remarks have caused a furore among the Barisan Nasional component parties after it was printed in several Chinese newspapers.
Penang Gerakan Youth committee member Dr Thor Teong Gee lambasted Ahmad and alleged that Umno was still using racial ideology to achieve its personal political agenda.
Bukit Mertajam MCA division chairman Lau Chiek Tuan said disciplinary action should be taken against Ahmad.
“An apology is not enough to the Chinese community. We want Umno to take disciplinary action against him. We want him to leave Barisan and Umno because he has broken the racial harmony (of the parties),” said Lau, adding that the division had also lodged a police report against Ahmad.
Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng’s political secretary Ng Wei Aik has also called on Ahmad to immediately retract his statement and apologise to the community.
Ahmad could not be reached for comment.
In George Town, Tanjung Gerakan Youth division chief H’ng Khoon Leng lodged a police report at the district police headquarters in Patani Road over Ahmad’s alleged remarks.
Speaking to reporters after that, H’ng reminded people of all races to learn and be aware about the contribution of other races to the nation so that they won’t look down on others.
PKR adviser Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim said Umno leaders should stop using racial sentiments to seek support from the people.
“They (Umno leaders) do not seem to understand history very well.
“They are not being respectful and sensitive toward the feelings of the non-Malays,” he told reporters Saturday at a thanksgiving luncheon in Kampung Permatang Pasir, Permatang Pauh.
_____________
Comments:
1. To me, Ahmad Ismail is either a racist or a liar, and clearly does not deserve to be called Datuk. Calling him a Datuk merely insults all the other Datuks.
2. His public remarks as a community leader (Chinese = squatters; Chinese = immigrants; Chinese = less than equal rights) are completely unacceptable to me, and I'm sure to every right thinking Malaysian.
3. I wonder if Ahmad Ismail ever mixes with Malaysians Chinese at all. If he does, why doesn't he tell them to their face that they are squatters, immigrants and deserve less than equal rights? Why didn't he tell them in their face, but behind their backs, told the entire world that Chinese = squatters, Chinese = immigrants, Chinese = less than equal rights?
Isn't this behaviour clearly one of a liar and a morally defective character?
4. If 3. isn't applicable i.e. if he doesn't mix with Chinese at all, what does that tell you about racial unity when a community leader and a Datuk like Ahmad Ismail doesn't lead by example? Is Ahmad Ismail a suitable person to be a community / UMNO leader?
5. To me, Ahmad Ismail - by his public display - is clearly unsuitable to be both a Datuk, as well as a community / UMNO leader. I demand UMNO sack him immediately, to show the world that UMNO is dead serious about National Unity. Similarly, if Pakatan Rakyat MP were to say the same thing, I would also demand no less!
6. UMNO and PM Abdullah's choice is actually very simple. Which is more important - National Unity (which include respecting every race in Malaysia), or condoning Publicly Uttered Racist Remarks? If you sincerely believe that the former is clearly more important, discipline and sack the guy. Period. There should be no 2nd thoughts.
Conversely, UMNO's lack of action clearly shows that the former is simply not a priority nor a consideration. Rhetorics by PM Abdullah is cheap, and means nothing. Action speaks louder than words.
7. What is the point of spending Billions of $ in Budget 2009 to promote racial unity, when, we tolerate public remarks like Ahmad Ismail? Which does greater damage to racial unity - Ahmad Ismail remarks, or not spending Billions? His insensitive and public racist remarks has the potential to undo a lot of good things in this country, or whatever good that is left.
8. Deputy PM Najib was present when the racist remarks were made! Why didn't Najib publicly state that this is completely unacceptable? Doesn't he realize that his silence is equivalent to acceptance? Is this someone Malaysians want as the next Prime Minister? If he continues to remain silent, I certainly don't.
9. PM's response and statements are extremely dissappointing for several reasons.
9.1. First, PM Abdullah - as a PM for all Malaysians - must make it very clear with no uncertain terms - that community leaders must never incite racism in a public setting. There should never be a valid reason to incite racism in a public setting. We must never tolerate this as a nation.
9.2. Second, DPM Najib has erred and needs to be corrected by the PM.
So, if I were the PM and want to talk to someone, I would talk to DPM Najib first than Ahmad Ismail.
I will make it clear to DPM Najib that Ahmad Ismail's behaviour is completely unacceptable. I will also make it clear to Najib that his silence then is also unacceptable.
I will not accept any excuses from Najib.
And I will then instruct Najib to correct his mistake by delegating this to him personally to handle the disciplinary action on Ahmad Ismail.
In other words, as a First World leader, PM Abdullah must make sure that his deputies are at least as capable as he is. And he cannot do everything himself.
Obviously, there is no point for PM Abdullah to correct Ismail Ahmad, when his very own DPM still thinks it is publicly acceptable.
9.3. Third, I am dissappointed that PM Abdullah made at least 2 excuses on Ahmad Ismail. First excuse = "You know during campaigning all sorts of things can come up". Excuse me? This is a public speech by Ahmad Ismail. He incited on his own initiative these racist remarks publicly. PM Abdullah even dare to give an excuse?
Second excuse = "I don’t think he meant it. ". What? You haven't even spoken to the guy, and you already made excuses on his behalf? Or are you saying you spoke to him earlier, he told you that he didn't meant it, and you didn't chide him then? PM Abdullah, are you are First World Leader, or a Third World Leader?
PM Abdullah - if you are a true First World leader, you should NEVER make excuses when one of your guys has incited racism publicly.
Your 2 excuses tells me loudly that you are NOT SERIOUS about national unity.
Your 2 excuses tells me loudly that you do not intend to take stearn disciplinary action against Ahmad Ismail.
Your 2 excuses tells me loudly that you actually condone his behaviour, and sends a loud message that it is acceptable for other UMNO community leaders to repeat such behaviour!
Your 2 excuses are simply UNACCEPTABLE to me!
If you continue to make these excuses, then, I demand that you step down immediately Mr PM, as you are clearly UNFIT to lead this nation! The longer you stay on, the more likely Malaysia will never achieve its Vision to be a First World developed country by 2020.
10. It is commendable that Gerakan Youth has filed a police report. But PM Abdullah doesn't seem genuine to take disciplinary action. Instead, he prefer to make excuses. So, Mr Gerakan Acting President Koh Tsu Koon - as the leader of Gerakan party, what are you going to do about it? Lie down like a low lying dog again?
11. I notice Bukit Mertajam MCA called for disciplinary action. But PM Abdullah again doesn't seem genuine. So Mr MCA President - as leader of MCA party, my question to you is the same one as I asked in 9. above. What are you going to do about it? Lie down like a low lying dog again?
12. And where is all the other BN component parties like MIC? Mr MIC President - no comments from you because it's Chinese and not Indians? Remember - when you don't speak when injustice is being done to other races, one day, don't be surprised when others don't speak up when injustice is done to your own race.
13. Imagine this were to happen in a First World country like the USA where a Republican party leader were were to say the same kind of things that Ahmad Ismail did - e.g. Blacks = squatters, Blacks = immigrants, Blacks = less than equal rights. Do you seriously think that the US President and leader of the Republican Party George Bush could get away doing to same thing as what our PM Abdullah is planning to do?
If George Bush doesn't immediately sack the guy, you can be sure the Republican Party will sack him! In fact, it is obvious the entire America will reject Bush AND the Republican Party if he doesn't immediately take stearn disciplinary action on the errant guy and his 2nd in charge! No question about it.
14. With this type of third class mindset deeply prevailing in BN parties, do you think Malaysia will be able to fulfill its Vision to be a First World nation by 2020, which is only less than 12 years away?
Article and my comments below:
Saturday August 30, 2008 MYT 8:18:56 PM
PM to instruct Bkt Bendera chief not to repeat remark
By YENG AI CHUN
KEPALA BATAS: Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Badawi will personally see to it that Bukit Bendera Umno chief Datuk Ahmad Ismail does not repeat his remarks about the Chinese community.
“I’ll tell him not to do it again. You know during campaigning all sorts of things can come up. I don’t think he meant it. I’ll make sure to tell him not to say it again,” he said Saturday after chairing the Bertam Umno division meeting here.
Ahmad had allegedly called the Chinese "squatters" and said that "as the Chinese were only immigrants it was impossible to achieve equal rights amongst races" during a ceramah in Permatang Pauh on Aug 25.
He had allegedly made the remark in the presence of Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak.
Ahmad’s remarks have caused a furore among the Barisan Nasional component parties after it was printed in several Chinese newspapers.
Penang Gerakan Youth committee member Dr Thor Teong Gee lambasted Ahmad and alleged that Umno was still using racial ideology to achieve its personal political agenda.
Bukit Mertajam MCA division chairman Lau Chiek Tuan said disciplinary action should be taken against Ahmad.
“An apology is not enough to the Chinese community. We want Umno to take disciplinary action against him. We want him to leave Barisan and Umno because he has broken the racial harmony (of the parties),” said Lau, adding that the division had also lodged a police report against Ahmad.
Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng’s political secretary Ng Wei Aik has also called on Ahmad to immediately retract his statement and apologise to the community.
Ahmad could not be reached for comment.
In George Town, Tanjung Gerakan Youth division chief H’ng Khoon Leng lodged a police report at the district police headquarters in Patani Road over Ahmad’s alleged remarks.
Speaking to reporters after that, H’ng reminded people of all races to learn and be aware about the contribution of other races to the nation so that they won’t look down on others.
PKR adviser Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim said Umno leaders should stop using racial sentiments to seek support from the people.
“They (Umno leaders) do not seem to understand history very well.
“They are not being respectful and sensitive toward the feelings of the non-Malays,” he told reporters Saturday at a thanksgiving luncheon in Kampung Permatang Pasir, Permatang Pauh.
_____________
Comments:
1. To me, Ahmad Ismail is either a racist or a liar, and clearly does not deserve to be called Datuk. Calling him a Datuk merely insults all the other Datuks.
2. His public remarks as a community leader (Chinese = squatters; Chinese = immigrants; Chinese = less than equal rights) are completely unacceptable to me, and I'm sure to every right thinking Malaysian.
3. I wonder if Ahmad Ismail ever mixes with Malaysians Chinese at all. If he does, why doesn't he tell them to their face that they are squatters, immigrants and deserve less than equal rights? Why didn't he tell them in their face, but behind their backs, told the entire world that Chinese = squatters, Chinese = immigrants, Chinese = less than equal rights?
Isn't this behaviour clearly one of a liar and a morally defective character?
4. If 3. isn't applicable i.e. if he doesn't mix with Chinese at all, what does that tell you about racial unity when a community leader and a Datuk like Ahmad Ismail doesn't lead by example? Is Ahmad Ismail a suitable person to be a community / UMNO leader?
5. To me, Ahmad Ismail - by his public display - is clearly unsuitable to be both a Datuk, as well as a community / UMNO leader. I demand UMNO sack him immediately, to show the world that UMNO is dead serious about National Unity. Similarly, if Pakatan Rakyat MP were to say the same thing, I would also demand no less!
6. UMNO and PM Abdullah's choice is actually very simple. Which is more important - National Unity (which include respecting every race in Malaysia), or condoning Publicly Uttered Racist Remarks? If you sincerely believe that the former is clearly more important, discipline and sack the guy. Period. There should be no 2nd thoughts.
Conversely, UMNO's lack of action clearly shows that the former is simply not a priority nor a consideration. Rhetorics by PM Abdullah is cheap, and means nothing. Action speaks louder than words.
7. What is the point of spending Billions of $ in Budget 2009 to promote racial unity, when, we tolerate public remarks like Ahmad Ismail? Which does greater damage to racial unity - Ahmad Ismail remarks, or not spending Billions? His insensitive and public racist remarks has the potential to undo a lot of good things in this country, or whatever good that is left.
8. Deputy PM Najib was present when the racist remarks were made! Why didn't Najib publicly state that this is completely unacceptable? Doesn't he realize that his silence is equivalent to acceptance? Is this someone Malaysians want as the next Prime Minister? If he continues to remain silent, I certainly don't.
9. PM's response and statements are extremely dissappointing for several reasons.
9.1. First, PM Abdullah - as a PM for all Malaysians - must make it very clear with no uncertain terms - that community leaders must never incite racism in a public setting. There should never be a valid reason to incite racism in a public setting. We must never tolerate this as a nation.
9.2. Second, DPM Najib has erred and needs to be corrected by the PM.
So, if I were the PM and want to talk to someone, I would talk to DPM Najib first than Ahmad Ismail.
I will make it clear to DPM Najib that Ahmad Ismail's behaviour is completely unacceptable. I will also make it clear to Najib that his silence then is also unacceptable.
I will not accept any excuses from Najib.
And I will then instruct Najib to correct his mistake by delegating this to him personally to handle the disciplinary action on Ahmad Ismail.
In other words, as a First World leader, PM Abdullah must make sure that his deputies are at least as capable as he is. And he cannot do everything himself.
Obviously, there is no point for PM Abdullah to correct Ismail Ahmad, when his very own DPM still thinks it is publicly acceptable.
9.3. Third, I am dissappointed that PM Abdullah made at least 2 excuses on Ahmad Ismail. First excuse = "You know during campaigning all sorts of things can come up". Excuse me? This is a public speech by Ahmad Ismail. He incited on his own initiative these racist remarks publicly. PM Abdullah even dare to give an excuse?
Second excuse = "I don’t think he meant it. ". What? You haven't even spoken to the guy, and you already made excuses on his behalf? Or are you saying you spoke to him earlier, he told you that he didn't meant it, and you didn't chide him then? PM Abdullah, are you are First World Leader, or a Third World Leader?
PM Abdullah - if you are a true First World leader, you should NEVER make excuses when one of your guys has incited racism publicly.
Your 2 excuses tells me loudly that you are NOT SERIOUS about national unity.
Your 2 excuses tells me loudly that you do not intend to take stearn disciplinary action against Ahmad Ismail.
Your 2 excuses tells me loudly that you actually condone his behaviour, and sends a loud message that it is acceptable for other UMNO community leaders to repeat such behaviour!
Your 2 excuses are simply UNACCEPTABLE to me!
If you continue to make these excuses, then, I demand that you step down immediately Mr PM, as you are clearly UNFIT to lead this nation! The longer you stay on, the more likely Malaysia will never achieve its Vision to be a First World developed country by 2020.
10. It is commendable that Gerakan Youth has filed a police report. But PM Abdullah doesn't seem genuine to take disciplinary action. Instead, he prefer to make excuses. So, Mr Gerakan Acting President Koh Tsu Koon - as the leader of Gerakan party, what are you going to do about it? Lie down like a low lying dog again?
11. I notice Bukit Mertajam MCA called for disciplinary action. But PM Abdullah again doesn't seem genuine. So Mr MCA President - as leader of MCA party, my question to you is the same one as I asked in 9. above. What are you going to do about it? Lie down like a low lying dog again?
12. And where is all the other BN component parties like MIC? Mr MIC President - no comments from you because it's Chinese and not Indians? Remember - when you don't speak when injustice is being done to other races, one day, don't be surprised when others don't speak up when injustice is done to your own race.
13. Imagine this were to happen in a First World country like the USA where a Republican party leader were were to say the same kind of things that Ahmad Ismail did - e.g. Blacks = squatters, Blacks = immigrants, Blacks = less than equal rights. Do you seriously think that the US President and leader of the Republican Party George Bush could get away doing to same thing as what our PM Abdullah is planning to do?
If George Bush doesn't immediately sack the guy, you can be sure the Republican Party will sack him! In fact, it is obvious the entire America will reject Bush AND the Republican Party if he doesn't immediately take stearn disciplinary action on the errant guy and his 2nd in charge! No question about it.
14. With this type of third class mindset deeply prevailing in BN parties, do you think Malaysia will be able to fulfill its Vision to be a First World nation by 2020, which is only less than 12 years away?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
