Gerakan Leaving The BN !!

(Blogspot was down again yesterday. So this post was delayed)

.

Anyway this is what I heard yesterday. But Gerakan is not really leaving. Talk is Gerakan will merge with the MCA. Most of their members will join the MCA. Koh Tsu Koon may be given a VP's post in MCA. So there will be only one party representing the Chinese in the BN. If this story (from very well informed sources) is true, it means that there are some brains being applied by someone, quite confidently too (meaning with some guts).

.

Some people from Gerakan may join the DAP. What happens to the Indian members of the Gerakan? Talk is they will be absorbed into the PPP, if they wish to do that. There are very few Malays in the Gerakan, just like in the DAP.

.

For all practical purposes, Gerakan is a dead party. I have suggested before that they should wind up. If this rumour is true, then they are taking my advice. Good. On the other hand MCA has been a loyal partner in the BN for over 54 years. Most marriages have their ups and downs, their downcycles and their upcycles. Also it is an observed fact that marriages go through distinct phases. Marriages that are successful can last long because the partners change and adapt to their changing circumstances, fortunes and even physical conditions.

.

It is the transition period, the period of time where the changes must take place, that must be handled carefully. Slips of the tongue, poor choice of words, new kids on the block being brash etc may cause strains. But it will be difficult for anyone to deny a 54 year old partnership. Gerakan was born as an opposition party. On the other hand, the MCA has been in the BN since Day One.

.

Part 3 : Tak bersih - Azmin Ali’s Chinese voters.

This is getting to be more interesting. My “Part 2 - Tak bersih : Lim Chee Wee” which was posted yesterday seems to be creating waves within the Bar Council. I have read some of the comments from members of the Bar. Tak masuk akal.

.

One lawyer fellow said this : “I dont recall the Press Statement (by their President) focusing on whether Malaysia has free and fair elections“.

.

I dont recall ??? In other words, just like Johari Abdul these clowns also 'tak boleh ingat'. Suddenly they are suffering memory lapses.

.

Typical lawyer crap. Now they are denying that the Press Statement by their President of the Bar did not touch on “whether Malaysia has free and fair elections“. Pi dah mabuk. Lepas baling batu, dia sembunyi tangan pula.

.

The sin here is in your ommission. While 'Bersih' is mentioned four times, there is nary a mention of Pemuda UMNO and Perkasa. There is only a fleeting mention of 'other groups'. You have omitted mentioning Perkasa and Pemuda UMNO who have also threatened to run wild in the streets on 9th July. Your Press Statement only mentions Bersih. Why did you not mention Pemuda and Perkasa, you black hearted fiends?

.

When you omitted Perkasa and Pemuda UMNO but choose to highlight only Bersih’s right to run mad in the street, you are making a clear statement that you endorse Bersih’s madness only. You are taking sides. Pemuda and Perkasa’s right to run mad in the streets is not worthy of your delusions. It is bad enough that you speak with forked tongues, it becomes worse when you unashamedly boast your deceit. Tak ada malu punya orang. This is a clear cut admission of your complicity.

.

Today lets discuss Mohd Azmin Ali’s statement that there are five unknown Chinese voters who are registered to vote at his mother’s house. Each time anyone mentions this fellow’s name you should wash your mouth with Listerine or some other strong mouth wash. One day this fellow’s real story will become evident. It is filthy. I will avoid using his name too many times.

.

He also challenged the EC to reply his accusation about the five Chinese voters registered in his mother‘s house. The EC has already replied him. Did you all notice that all of a sudden he has gone quite silent about this issue? The Bar Council, please take note as well. Why has this fellow gone silent? The reason is because the EC has released a Press Statement that raises more questions about this fellow, and not the other way around.

.

Their implication is that the EC is in cahoots with UMNO to register ‘ghost voters’. Ok but Kampong Baru Klang Gates (where his mother lives) is a Malay area. How would registering five Chinese "ghost voters" help UMNO in a Malay constituency? Why would UMNO, which they say is Malay racist, want to put five Chinese names on the voter rolls in the first place? Wouldnt that be the job for the MCA or Gerakan? But in Kampong Baru Klang Gates ?

.

Shouldn’t it be the other way around? Shouldnt UMNO delete five Chinese names and replace them with five or fifty Malay names instead, and in a Chinese area ? Ini konspirasi UMNO jenis apa pula - tambahkan pengundi Cina pula? Tak masuk akal lah.

.

The truth is there are 11 voters registered to vote at the fellow’s mother’s house, whose address is at 1E, Kampong Klang Gate Baharu. The 11 names plus the dates they registered to vote at this address are as follows:

1. Che Tom binti Yahaya - 1 January 1972

2. That ‘wash mouth’ fellow - 2 Julai 1989

3. His wife (also wash mouth) - 2 Julai 1989

4. Mohd Azwan Ali - 2 Julai 1989

5. Ummi Hafilda Ali - 2 July 1989

Now here are the other strange names :

6. Tan Teek Fong - 31 March 1990

7. Tan Teek Hock - 31 March 1990

8. Song Poo Wan - 31 March 1990

9. Lim Hock Seng - 9 September 1994

10.Chong Chee Peng - 9 September 1994

11.Amirudin bin Harun - 19 Ogos 1993

Please note that by that time L*wat was already an UMNO Minister in the Cabinet. In fact by 1993, L*wat was already Deputy Prime Minister. And ‘wash mouth’ was his buddy and so was his other half (yukky). Here is the EC's Press Release. I dont know if you can zoom in :

.

.

So the question is who registered five Chinamen and one Malay guy as voters using the mother’s address? Since when does UMNO go around registering Chinese voters in Malay majority areas?

.

The fact is BEFORE 16 July, 2002 the laws were such that anyone could use any address to register as a voter. It was not necessary to register using your IC. This led to many people registering to vote using addresses which they did not live in. This was provided under the Law. Before 16 July 2002, this was allowed.

.

The best example is people registering to vote using their hometown addresses although they lived and worked in Kuala Lumpur.

.

The law was changed in July 2002 where year round voter registration was introduced. This time voters must register using their ICs and their voting address cannot be different from their IC address.

.

Having said that, even now you can still legally have 10, 20 or 50 voters registering to vote using the same address but all their ICs must also bear the same address. This is not a crime.

.

Even today in some dwellings in urban areas, there may be 500 voters registered at the same ‘address’. These are called apartments, condominiums, rumah pangsa, flats etc. Essentially if you live in an apartment, you live at the same locality as all the other apartment dwellers. Its no big deal. The important thing is that everyone votes only once. No one should vote twice.

.

Before 2002, political parties had long abused this loophole and registered friendly parties to vote in their constituencies. That may be the reason why so many different people were registered at one address. In Kelantan, PAS was notorious for doing this thing. (There is one more interesting constituency which I shall be talking about.) It was not an illegal thing to do. However this loophole has been closed since July 2002. Nowadays you must register to vote only at your IC address. You cannot use an address that is different from your IC.

.

However those people who have already been registered as voters at the same address (since before 2002) can remain where they are. This is also provided by the Law. They can of course (or rather they should) change their voter registration address to reflect their IC addresses. Or we have to wait for them to die.

.

There is one constituency in Malaysia which until today does have 20, 30 or 50 voters registered to vote in one kampong address. It is a rural constituency with many kampong houses. Can you guess which constituency this is? Here is a multiple choice answer (I have made it easy to answer lah).

.

a. Wangsa Maju, KL

b. Lembah Pantai, KL

c. Seputeh, KL

d. Bukit Bintang, KL

e. Permatang Pauh, Pulau Pinang.

.

Since a. to d. do not have kampong houses, the obvious answer is e. And as you all know the MP for Permatang Pauh is none other than Mr Backdoor himself.

.

So maybe the Bersih fellows can make a “lawatan sambil belajar” to Permatang Pauh and check out how many kampong houses have 10, 20, 30 or 50 voters registered at those kampong addresses?

.

This phenomena has also given rise to the ‘ghost voters’, especially at kampongs and small towns.

.

Because the Law (prior to July 16, 2002) allowed voters to register using addresses that were different from their Identity Cards people living and working in KL for years would register to vote in their hometowns. Or political parties would round up their supporters and register 30 voters in one address.

.

Come election day, people in small towns and kampongs would see strangers in outstation cars arriving and casting votes. Hence the ‘ghost voters’.

.

Prior to 2002, the Law allowed for registration without using the address on your IC. Since 2002, this Law has been changed. However existing registered voters cannot be prevented from voting. It will take years for all these ‘ghost voters’ to disappear.

"..saya tak tahu sebab saya tak ingat.."

From Berita Harian today :

"Berhubung dakwaan bahawa beliau berbohong kerana sebelum ini menafikan pelaku di dalam rakaman video seks itu ialah Anwar, tetapi video hari ini menunjukkan sebaliknya, Johari berkata: "Ini adalah negara demokrasi."

.

Sementara itu pada sidang akhbar di bangunan Parlimen hari ini, Johari berkata, beliau masih belum menonton video melibatkan beliau itu dan tidak akan berbuat demikian.

.

"Apa saja dalam video itu, saya tak tahu sebab saya tak ingat. Saya tak tahu (tentang dialog itu). . . Apa saja dalam video itu saya tidak tahu sebab saya tak ingat.

Part 2 : Tak bersih - Lim Chee Wee

The following is a Press Release by Lim Chee Wee, President, Malaysian Bar dated 23 June 2011. My comments follow thereafter.

Press Release

Respect the right for a clean and peaceful walk

Much has been said about the proposed BERSIH 2.0 rally calling for a clean and fair electoral process. This is scheduled to take place on 9 July 2011. Other groups have also announced their own plans for a rally to take place on the same day. Police reports have been lodged against BERSIH 2.0 opposing the rally, and there have been calls to arrest the organisers of the BERSIH 2.0 march under the Internal Security Act 1960.

It should be recalled that it was the United Malays National Organisation (“UMNO”), led by Dato’ Onn Jaafar, the then-President of UMNO and the grandfather of our present Minister for Home Affairs, which led the public to the streets nationwide to protest the setting up of the Malayan Union. Subsequent UMNO leaders have also led street demonstrations, for example to call for independence, and those in support of the Palestinians.

Public rallies have therefore been very much a part and parcel of our history, whether to protest against the injustices of colonial administration, or other injustices, such as those we are currently experiencing with respect to our electoral system. Those who say that street protests are not a part of our culture are clearly ignorant of our nation’s rich history.

A public march is very different from an event held in a stadium or other fixed venue. The purpose of a public demonstration is to invite public attention to a particular cause or concern. The right to advocate one’s views and opinions in the public arena in a peaceful manner is a foundational human rights principle.

The response in the past, and the response which ought to be adopted today, is to respect the right to assemble and walk in support of a cause. This is a fundamental feature of democracy, contained in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (“UDHR”), which was passed by the General Assembly of the United Nations in 1948. Malaya in 1957, and Malaysia in 1963, embraced and accepted the UDHR when admitted to the United Nations. Our Federal Constitution enshrines the right to freedom of assembly and expression in Article 10.

The Royal Commission to Enhance the Operation and Management of the Royal Malaysia Police (headed by Tun Mohd Dzaiddin), which reported in May 2005, recommended to the Yang Di-Pertuan Agong that section 27 of the Police Act 1967 – requiring a permit for a public rally – be abolished. The Human Rights Commission of Malaysia, SUHAKAM, has made a similar recommendation to the government on several occasions.

The Malaysian Bar supports and defends this fundamental freedom, and calls upon the government to do likewise. We point to the positive and salutary examples that the Polis DiRaja Malaysia (“PDRM”) demonstrated in cooperating with the organisers of the “Walk and Rawk for Change” (held on 26 March 2011), and the two anti-Lynas rallies (on 30 March 2011 and 20 May 2011). In these three events, PDRM allowed a public rally and demonstration to take place, notwithstanding that no police permit had been applied for. The police monitored the routes and managed traffic flows in order to allow those participating in these marches to walk and express their viewpoints in safety.

PDRM has therefore shown that it is possible for peaceful public rallies to take place when organisers of such gatherings and the police cooperate with each other. This occurs regularly in more mature democracies, and it has happened in Malaysia. We should allow such practices to continue.

With proper liaising and co-operation, we feel that it IS possible for PDRM and the organisers of the BERSIH 2.0 march, and any other walks, to work together to allow for the public to exercise their fundamental rights in a clean, peaceful and responsible manner. Let us use this opportunity to promote, enhance and celebrate democracy.

Lim Chee Wee

President

Malaysian Bar

23 June 2011

.

The above Press Statement by Lim Chee Wee the President of Bar Council is distorted and malicious. It gives much credence to the view that other than being bottom feeders, too many lawyers in this country speak with forked tongues.

.

The allegation (by anyone) that the entire electoral process in Malaysia is not clean and fair is malicious. Repeating such allegations, even for reference purposes, hints at malice.

.

Where is the proof that the whole electoral process in the country is not clean and fair? Being a lawyer and the president of the Bar Council, can Lim Chee Wee help the Bersih mobs bring forward any evidence that the whole electoral process in this country is not clean and fair? Pending such evidence, these allegations can be deemed lies. (Lim Chee Wee can position himself appropriately)

.

The accusation that the entire electoral process in Malaysia is unclean and unfair is a malicious generalisation. Lim Chee Wee should not be a party to this malice in any way. Not only are you the President of the Bar Council, I believe you are also a church going person.

.

But what exactly is the implied meaning of the accusation that the elections are not clean and not fair? Idle gossip may prevail even within the Bar but more substance is required to get nearer to the truth.

.

This type of drivel will sell among the hardcore fanatics and the converted zombies among the Pakatan mob. They need this to work themselves into a frenzy. But lets do some scrutiny shall we?

.

How does Lim explain the fact that Bersih, which the Bar Council is clearly in support of, have NOT refuted the results of the most recent general elections in Penang, Kelantan, Selangor, Perak and Kedah? The Opposition won these States. Can Lim Chee Wee help Bersih explain this anomaly? How can the Opposition win five States if the elections are unfair and unclean?

.

Does Lim Chee Wee know of any cases of ‘unclean and unfair’ election in any of those five States won by the Opposition on March 8th 2008? (I ask this because you say you support Bersih. It is important that you know what you are supporting, including questions they cannot answer or for which they have no answer).

.

Similarly in the recent Sarawak State elections, the Opposition DAP doubled its seats from six to 12. Can Lim Chee Wee help Bersih explain any ‘uncleanness and unfairness’ in any of the 12 seats won by the DAP in Sarawak? Or does the ‘unclean and unfair’ label only apply to seats where the Opposition lost? Lim Chee Wee, can you help Bersih show us just one example? (You say you support Bersih. Surely you must know the entirety of what you are supporting).

.

No bullshitting, no guesswork, no lies ok.

.

(This applies to the Pakatan supporters who will be sending comments in here too. Please provide facts. What your friend heard from his friend who heard it from his friend is not applicable. I will delete your comment)

.

As you know the allegation (through a Statutory Declaration) that Rosmah shot and killed Altantuya has now been denied by the person who made that Statutory Declaration. At that time, I personally asked him where he got the information that Rosmah shot and killed Altantuya? His reply to me was that the wife of a Malay Ruler (no need for names here) told it to someone who told it to someone else and on and on and it finally reached him.

.

Bear in mind that 'declarations' like these have incited the angry to become even more angry. Others who are more mischievous have manipulated 'declarations' like these to incite anger against a system they hate. You will know where to place yourself accordingly.

.

(So if any of you commenters make these types of unsubtantiated comments I will delete it. Give proper facts. Be honest guys. It does not mean that just because you support the sodomist and philanderer, that you must always tell lies)

.

It is a fact that Dato Mustapa Mohamed (UMNO - BN) lost the Manik Urai State seat in Kelantan by a razor thin margin of over 60 votes. TokPa complained and asked for a recount. The recount was denied because his polling agents and helpers made a mistake. Here is the story.

.

Before 2003 there was NO counting of votes at the Polling Station. Instead in every constituency, all the Ballot Boxes were transported from the various Polling Stations to one centralized Counting Centre. In Lembah Pantai, Kuala Lumpur the Bangsar Sports Complex was used as the Counting Centre. That is why in those days, the election results came in very late at night. All the ballots had to be transported to the Counting Centre, emptied out and counted.

.

Since 2003 the election rules have been changed. Now the ballots are counted at the Polling Station itself. No need to transport the Ballot Boxes to the Counting Centre anymore. Just like before representatives and agents of the candidates and many other representatives are present and watch with eagle eyes to make sure the Ballot Boxes are properly opened and that all the votes are properly counted.

.

The total number of votes counted at each Polling Station must also tally exactly with the number ofvoters who turned up to vote at that station. (Once you vote, your name is “crossed out” with that long ruler, the computer is also updated with your name and IC Number.) So the number of votes found inside the ballot box, the names and IC Numbers updated in the computer plus the number of names that have been “crossed out” on the election roll must match exactly).

.

So Lim Chee Wee, in the recent Sarawak Elections, please ask Bersih to show us at least one case where the number of voters whose names were crossed out DID NOT tally with the total number of votes found inside the Ballot Boxes? Give us just one example. You can especially refer the Senadin State seat where the Pakatan lost by 58 votes and kicked up a big fuss over the loss. (Blackout, floods, tempest etc).

.

Remember Lim Chee Wee, it is not a sin to tell the truth. You are the President of the Bar Council too.

.

Anyway after the votes are counted at the Polling Stations, the ballot slips are put back into the Ballot Boxes and sealed. The ballots have now become quite useless. A a form is filled up by the Polling Officer. It is called the Borang 14. Here is a copy of the Borang 14. This is an empty sample. Its no big deal - just a simple piece of stationery. You can click on the picture and then zoom in.

The Borang 14 lists down the total number of votes cast, which party won how many votes, etc. While the Polling Officer holds on to the original Borang 14, copies are immediately given to the representatives of each of the candidates contesting that seat - who are present at each individual Polling Station.

.

(How do I know all this? The Bloggers met with the SPR folks recently. We asked them a thousand questions. Even Ambiga would have been surprised at our questions. More to come.).

.

Now read this part very very carefully : This is why nowadays, after every By Election or General Election, very detailed “unofficial results” starts leaking out as early as 5.00 pm about which party has won exactly how many votes in exactly which polling station. You can figure out why. Because once the vote counting is over, every representative of each candidate at every Polling Station already has a copy of the Borang 14 in his possession. So they start smsing the results from individual Polling Station to their friends. That’s how we know the "unofficial" results so quickly.

.

So to the dungus who tell lies that the Ballot Boxes are stuffed with votes AFTER polling is over, they are lying. This is NOT possible. This was the accusation at Senadin in Sarawak. They say there was a "blackout" and the ballots were stuffed. (I will also be talking about Postal Votes later). Once the Borang 14 is issued, the ballot papers and the Ballot Boxes become useless. You can stuff as many votes as you want - the all important Borang 14 has already been issued.

.

And the Borang 14 does not become valid unless it is signed by the all the candidates or their representatives or agents at the Polling Station. So Lim Chee Wee, please tell Bersih to go and check in Senadin, Sarawak if all the Borang 14 were signed by the Pakatan candidate or not? He or his agents must have signed the Borang 14, otherwise they cannot announce the results for Senadin. Then please ask the candidate why did he or his agents sign the Borang 14 ??? Bodoh ke? If they say the ballot boxes were stuffed, conspiratorial blackout etc, why did they sign the Borang 14 ??

.

Remember it is not a sin to speak the truth.

.

The rules also say that once the election results are gazetted (within 21 days) then all the ballots must be destroyed. This is also why, after the elections are over, if for whatever reason anyone "reopens" the Ballot Boxes, they will find chewing gum wrappers etc inside these used Ballot Boxes. Election workers and staff (who are still trash throwing Malaysians) use these 'used Ballot Boxes' as trashbins. Why? Because once the Borang 14 has been issued, the ballot papers become quite useless.

.

So Lim Chee Wee, the president of the Bar Council, can you please assist Bersih to provide us evidence of just one case where ballots boxes were stuffed with votes?

.

How about the 16 By Elections that we have had since January 2009? Can you assist Bersih to show us just one case where ballot boxes were stuffed AFTER polling had closed? None? Not even one? But this is what Bersih is alleging also isn’t it? When you choose to throw your support behind Bersih, you must know all that they stand for - including their lies and b.s.

.

Let me make it even more easier for you. How about from the March 8, 2008 General Elections? Do they have even one complaint filed by anyone that Ballot Boxes were stuffed with votes? Ada ke tak ada? Just one ok. Remember Lim Chee Wee, it is not a sin to tell the truth.

.

Here is another one : do they have even one case where one person voted more than once? This has been the talk of the coffee shops for a long time also. Phantom voters, five Chinese voters registered in Mohd Azmij Ali's mothers house address. (Stay tuned folks I have the names of the five Chinamen who are registered as voters using Azmin's mother's house address). But can anyone bring forth just one case? Just one case where someone voted twice? Ada ke tak ada? Helloooo Lim Chee Wee?

.

But I want to go back to Dato Mustapa Mohamed (UMNO - BN) in Manik Urai, Kelantan. He complained that since he lost to PAS by a razor thin margin (within 4% of votes cast) he deserved a recount. But the election rules since 2003 say that the request for the recount must be made at the Polling Stations. This was not done by TokPa’s boys. They raised the protest after all the Borang 14s from the many Polling Stations were being compiled at the Vote Tallying Centre for the final announcement by the Returning Officer. It was too late. These are the rules folks. You can object but it must be done at the Polling Station. NOT AT THE VOTE TALLYING CENTRE. And once Tokpa and his agents had signed off on the Borang 14, you cannot object anymore. These are the rules.

.

In the recent Sarawak Elections that Pakatan candidate lost by just 58 votes in Senadin. Again he raised the objection too late, after they themselves had signed off on the Borang 14. This was the same issue raised by Dato Mustapa Mohamad (UMNO-BN) at Manik Urai. They apply equally to Tokpa (UMNO - BN) and anyone else.

.

Both in Manik Urai and in Senadin the candidates, their agents and reps etc WOULD NOT SIGN OFF the Borang 14 unless the number of voters whose names were manually cancelled on the electoral roll using the long ruler, the names and IC Numbers updated on the computer plus the actual number of ballots emptied from the Ballot Box all tallied. They must tally, otherwise it will become a big issue. And once the Borang 14 has been signed by all the candidates, Anwar Ibrahim can stuff as many ballot papers as he wants where the sun does not shine. It is too late. Borang 14 has been signed and issued.

.

Like all democratic countries with an established electoral process, Malaysia too has Courts which deal with elections petitions. Lee as a lawyer and President of the Bar should know this better. If legitimate disputes arise in any elections, then the affected parties have the right to approach the Court. This happens all the time too.

.

Then there are also election disputes which are settled “out of Court”. For example Lim Chee Wee must also explain the agreement that was achieved by both PAS and UMNO in Kelantan after the 2004 General Elections. There were nine Election Petitions filed by both UMNO and PAS against each other involving State seats in Kelantan. One of the State seats in dispute was Nik Aziz’s own seat.

.

Both sides were confident of presenting their evidence in Court. But some horse trading took place between PAS and UMNO. To avoid unnecessary risk of losing their seats in Court, Mustafa Ali of PAS met with representatives from UMNO and settled the matter out of Court. Both sides agreed to maintain the status quo. Both sides dropped their Election Petitions. This happened in 2004.

.

Since Mohd Sapu B.O, the main organiser behind the Bersih Rally is also the Deputy President of PAS, Lim Chee Wee must ask Mohamed Sapu B.O. why and how did the PAS come to make such an agreement with UMNO in 2004 to withdraw their Elections Petitions.?

.

If the elections are so dirty and unfair in this country as alleged by Mat Sapu B.O, why did PAS come to agree with UMNO to withdraw their Election Petitions in 2004? Lim Chee Wee, it is not a sin to tell the truth. So please go and ask Mohd Sapu B.O. to explain to you. He is the main organiser behind Bersih for which you have openly declared your support.

.

So someone, anyone please provide evidence of “unfair” and “not clean” elections. Be specific. Coffee shop talk cannot be presented as evidence. It is also unbecoming of a lawyer and Bar Council president to be persuaded by coffee shop talk. Where is the evidence which persuaded you to support Bersih?

.

If Bersih wishes to dispute the electoral process minus evidence, based on mere accusations, wild allegations or based on deceit, as an excuse to demonstrate in the streets, what then is their real intention ? Do you want to be a party to this? If your answer is yes, why so? What are the demons that are propelling you in such a direction?

.

The announcement by Bersih that they wish to hand over a Memo to the YDP Agong on July 9th is dishonest. Till today they have not made any attempt to even communicate with the Office of the YDP Agong. Isnt this strange? You say you want to hand over a Memo to the YDP Agong. But todate you have NOT even written to the YDP Agong asking for an appointment to hand over the Memo to him. Isnt that kurang ajar? This is the King, the YDP Agong you are talking about. Not the “Friends In Conversation” with whom you have ‘teh’ tarik.

.

It is obvious that they are merely abusing the YDP Agong’s good name for their political agenda. The Malaysian public is not that obtuse to be not able to see through this ruse.

.

They have made known to the whole world that they will be marching to the gates of the Istana to hand over a Memo. But they have not had even the slightest courtesy to petition the YDP Agong to seek an audience, even at his front gate. Ambiga is manifesting a riff raffness that seems to be written on her forehead.

.

Bersih’s fear is that the Agong may indeed agree to receive a Bersih delegation to meet him privately to hand over their Memo.

.

BUT what if the YDP Agong changes the date? Say BEFORE or AFTER the 9th of July.

.

What if the Agong says, ‘Ok guys, since you want to give me a Memo, send three Bersih people to see me on the 7th of July.’ Their demo planned for July 9th will die a quick and natural death.

.

Or if the YDP Agong says “OK send three people to see me but on the 12th of July. I am busy on the 9th.” Bersih will be caught with their pants down. (L*wat may get excited though).

.

Or what if the YDP Agong says, “OK I will meet you on the 9th of July but come to my palace in Kuala Terengganu”. Ambiga and Mat Sapu B.O may be gasping for oxygen.

.

Or the YDP Agong says, ’Ok guys. Come over and give me your Memo at the riding club’.

.

That will be really quite disastrous for Bersih. The YDP Agong can really mess their plans to run mad in the streets. That is why they have no intention of asking the YDP Agong permission to meet him. (Anyway sources say that the YDP Agong will not even be in the country over 9th of July).

.

But so what? Bersih does not want to meet the YDP Agong. They don’t want to go early on the 7th either. Neither do they want to show any respect to the Agong in Kuala Terengganu. Or met him at the riding club. They just want to demonstrate in the streets. This is a mob.

.

Please note that almost 1400 Police Reports have been lodged against the Bersih rally by various people. Never before in the history of Malaysia have 1400 Police reports been lodged against any one single disruptive event.

.

Then Lim Chee Wee also exhibits stupidity when he tries to draw parrallels with Dato Onn Jaafar’s protesting against the colonialist Malayan Union threat in 1946. Malaya was not yet an independent nation at that time. There were no free elections at all. Period.

.

Dato Onn Jaafar the founder of UMNO, was fighting against the British colonialists for the establishment of a free and democratic country. Lim Chee Wee apa pasal lu dungu sangat? He cycled to the kampongs and spoke to the people about their freedoms. He did not run amok in the streets like Bersih.

.

If elections had been made available to Dato Onn by the British, he would have certainly made use of the electoral process. We know this for a fact because after the formation of UMNO in 1946, Dato Onn Jaafar suddenly left the party because he wanted non Malays to join UMNO and be given equal voting rights in all affairs of the UMNO party.

.

When his ideas were rejected, Dato Onn did not demonstrate in the streets. Instead he stuck to the democratic process and formed a new multi racial political party called Party Negara. After Independence when his new party was defeated at the ballot box (Dato Onn himself won just one seat in Terengganu in 1959) Dato Onn faded away from the scene. He died in 1962. But he will be forever renowned and remembered for sticking so closely to democratic ideals. He was truly a man who was far ahead of his time.

.

Sorry lah but Lim Chee Wee’s attempt to sully the good name of Dato Onn Jaafar exposes a “New Village” idiot - of the same pedigree as riff raff. Dato Onn was a great man. Please do not try to equate his achievement to the mobs that you support. Or try to elevate the mobs up to the level of Dato Onn. Dia punya kasut pun lu tak boleh pegang.

.

Lim Chee Wee’s dungu-ness continues. He also says : “Subsequent UMNO leaders have also led street demonstrations, for example to call for independence, and those in support of the Palestinians”.

.

The Malayan Union was mooted in 1946, 11 years before Independence in 1957. There were no free elections in 1946. We were a colony, colonised by the British. The anti - Malayan Union movement was calling for freedom from colonialism.

.

Today we are an Independent nation, with our own King, Parliament and we govern ourselves. There are no more British colonialists around. UMNO did NOT run wild in the streets in the same scale Bersih already did in Kuala Lumpur once before in 2007, and is planning to do again.

.

When the Colonial British gave up their plans for the Malayan Union in January 1948, the protests led by UMNO also stopped. Malaya walked peacefully towards Independence from 1948 onwards, despite the fact that there were no elections at all in colonial Malaya until seven years later in 1955. The first “General Elections” were held peacefully in Malaya in 1955. The Alliance (Barisan Nasional) won 51 out of 52 seats. There were no street demonstrations.

.

Lim Chee Wee should know that it was the Communists who could not accept a non Communist Malaya or a non violent political process. They chose to wage war against the Malayan people. At that time Chin Peng had no idea that his face would one day be printed on a T shirt by supporters of Bersih.

.

Clearly, Lim Chee Wee is conveniently ignorant of truth and quite dense when it comes to the history of the nation.

.

As a lawyer and President of the Bar Council, Lim Chee Wee must also advise the people that Section 27 of the Police Act 1967 – requiring a permit for a public rally – has not been abolished. It is still therefore the law of the land. And the Police have the discretion to allow or refuse permits for public gatherings.

.

The President of the Bar Council is stoking flames if he even suggests that the people of Malaysia NEED NOT obey Section 27 of the Police Act or any other laws of Malaysia. (That is what you are doing when you say you support the illegal Bersih Rally which has NOT been given a Police Permit).

.

Inciting the people to disobey the Law of the Land is an act of Sedition. Anyone can be arrested, tried and jailed for sedition if he tells people to disobey Section 27 of the Police Act or any other Law.

.

If a law is seen as unjust, then Lim Chee Wee as the president fo the Bar Council must know that the correct means to address the issue is through the Electoral Process and the Legislature. Since the majority vote in this democratic system finds it to their great benefit to maintain such legislation, it is therefore not the right of the minority mobs to impose their will on the majority through dubious and malicious methods outside the democratic process. It will become gangsterism. The law of the jungle.

.

Let us settle our differences through the Ballot Box. This country is a democracy. For 56 years UMNO and the Barisan Nasional have made sure that General Elections are held every five years like clockwork.

.

Even when we had a glitch in 1969, and inspite of the absolute powers granted to the National Operations Council headed by Tun Abdul Razak, the father of the present Prime Minister, our country still went to the polls like clockwork in 1974. Among the member nations of the Commonwealth, Malaysia along with very few other countries, now boasts of the longest tradition of a safe and predictable electoral process.

.

Being the president of the Bar Council, which often becomes unduly inebriated over issues like this, Lim Chee Wee must understand that in a democracy it is a fundamental principle that the majority brings into effect legislation through which the people then govern themselves.

.

The Police Act does not derive its powers from the IGP or the Minister of Home Affairs. Neither should the Police take instructions from Bersih or Lim Chee Wee.

.

The Police Act remains in force because we the people have given it such powers. If the Police wish to exercise their discretion according to Section 27 of the Police Act it is because we the majority of the voters have elected to grant the Police such powers. And todate the majority of voters are quite happy with what we have done.

.

It becomes the law of the jungle when riff raff and mobs seek to dictate to the majority that the majority should listen to the whims of the mob.

.

L*wat has declared in public that he can pick up the phone, call Ambiga and ask her to call off the mob. Despite Ambiga’s play acting rebuttal, it simply goes to show the gangster attitude behind his statement : ’I can ask her to call it off anytime’. Macam bapak dia punya negeri.

.

If the lawyers, if the President of the Bar Council itself and Opposition Members of Parliament (who are themselves lawmakers) do not want to respect the Laws of the Land, then how do you expect the ordinary people to obey the Laws of the Land?

.

Many years ago, the DAP sent flowers to one Prime Minister with a note reading, ‘Where democracy fails, revolution is the answer’. Let me repeat to you this most pertinent observation by the DAP. Indeed “where democracy fails, revolution is the answer“.

.

If the majority of the electorate in this democratic country get fed up with the incessant demand by a minority mob, that the laws of this country should be broken or bent to suit their whims and fancies, then indeed democracy has failed.

.

It is turning out to become the tyranny of the minority mobs against the majority. Democarcy has failed. What you are asking for then is a revolution. If that is your wish, let me assure you that the majority will not shy away from heaping such a revolution on your head.

.

The country is heading towards chaos because of the gangsterism and the tyranny of the minority. If you don’t stop, a time will come when this will have to stop. Please be on notice.

.

May I also take this Opportunity to advise the Minister of Home Affairs and the IGP to rise to the occasion. The majority of the people are behind you wholeheartedly. It rests upon your shoulders to save the nation from the mobs. Also from the sodomists, adulterers, liars and their lying wives, lying children, lying families and friends with their lies and deceptions.

.

I must also put the Minister of Home Afairs and the IGP on notice. The new IGP Tan Sri Ismail Omar is reputed to be a straightforward and hardworking man who lives in a regular terrace house.

.

Todate over 1400 Police Reports have been made against this illegal riot that is being planned by this mob. It is enough evidence that the majority of the people do not want to see the peace and harmony of the nation disrupted by these mobs. So please take decisive action. If even one single individual (it does not matter whether from bersih, kotor, anugerah tuhan, Pemuda UMNO, Perkasa or whoever) gets hurt or gets his or her head cracked - then the IGP must resign. You must take responsibility Tuan.

.

And if anyone gets killed on July 9th, (from any side at all) then both the IGP and the Minister of Home Affairs must resign. 1400 Police reports have already been made. That is an extremely loud and clear message to you from the people, to do your job. Do not say that you could not do anything.

.

Since Lim Chee Wee is said to be a church going man, here is something from the Al Kitab which you believe is Allah's Word :

.

Romans 1

21 because that, knowing God, they glorified him not as God, neither gave thanks; but became vain in their reasonings, and their senseless heart was darkened.

.

22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,

.

23 and changed the glory of the incorruptible God for the likeness of an image of corruptible man, and of birds, and four-footed beasts, and creeping things.

.

24 Wherefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts unto uncleanness, that their bodies should be dishonored among themselves:

.

25 for that they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshipped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.

26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile passions: for their women changed the natural use into that which is against nature: (passions of dishonor)

27 and likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another, men with men working unseemliness, and receiving in themselves that recompense of their error which was due.

.

So Lim Chee Wee, you well know that the man is a sodomist, an adulterer, a philanderer, a liar, a cheat. A bad actor. A nothing. This little romp he is planning on the streets is to divert attention away from the demons which posses him. For he is certainly possessed.

.

Where do you come in? We can understand your hatred against the status quo in this land, the religious bigotry and the thousand other things that have gone not so well. Ok, you can say this is your enemy. And the enemy of your enemy is of course your friend.

.

But consider this though : What if it is you who are the enemy? Or the enemy is also in you. And you dont realise it. Then, should the enemy of your enemy still be your friend?

.

No matter how great your anger against the status quo, do not cohabit with the serpent. You will get bitten.

UPDATED : JULY 9 : UNDERSTANDING THE CONTEXT

(Breaking News 10:30 am : Folks there is another video. This one shows Tan Sri Rahim Tambi Chik, Dato Eskay and Johari Abdul. You can see it here athttp://ruangbicarafaisal.blogspot.com/2011/06/video-aksi-johari-abdul-menonton-video.html. I think it is self explanatory. In the video a watch is shown by Dato Eskay to Johari Abdul. It is believed to be that 'missing' watch. Here are two questions : How is Johari Abdul going to explain this video? How many other videos are there?)

*********************************************************************************

The following is an article by Dr Chandra Muzaffar about Bersih.

By Dr Chandra Muzaffar

It is a pity that almost 54 years after Merdeka there is still a great deal of uneasiness among the authorities about a fundamental right which is so essential to the functioning of a democracy. They forget that the “right to assemble peaceably and without arms” is a freedom enshrined in Article 10 of the Malaysian Constitution. It is a freedom whose observance will not, in most circumstances, threaten the well-being of society.

.

Nonetheless, like all rights and freedoms, the actual expression and articulation of the Freedom of Assembly has to take into account its context. It is this context that is critical in the case of the planned ‘July 9 Rally.’ There are various dimensions to this context which Bersih, the proponent of the rally, and Perkasa and UMNO Youth, its opponents, will have to take heed of.

.

Issues.

1) Bersih claims that the primary purpose of the rally is to highlight weaknesses and defects in the conduct of our elections. Since it has had discussions with the Elections Commission on this it should continue to talk to that body. The Chairman of the Commission is prepared to dialogue. He should now publicly invite Bersih to resume the discussions, its July 9 rally notwithstanding. Bersih, in turn, should respond positively to the Commission. In a mature democracy any and every opportunity to dialogue in order to resolve issues should be taken up.

.

2) Some of the issues that Bersih has focussed upon such as the automatic registration of voters (which I endorse) are beyond the purview of the Elections Commission. They would require legislative approval. If Bersih cannot persuade the Barisan Nasional (BN) government to introduce new electoral laws, has it succeeded in getting Pakatan Rakyat (PR) MPs to table a private member’s bill on any of the electoral reforms it is now demanding? On how many occasions have such bills been tabled since March 2008? Were attempts to table such bills thwarted by the Speaker of the Dewan Rakyat? Since Bersih includes opposition parties represented in Parliament, it should inform the public in detail on how it sought electoral reform through Parliament in the last three years.

.

3) In making its demands, Bersih has not distinguished the actual conduct of elections from the larger electoral-cum-political process. The actual conduct of elections in Malaysia since 1959, from the maintenance of electoral rolls to safeguardingthe integrity of the ballot paper,has been largely fair and just---- given that no electoral system in the world is totally devoid of flaws. This was one of the conclusions that the Election Watch group headed by the late Tun Mohamed Suffian Hashim that looked at the 1990 General Election (I was a member of that group) came to.

.

We also pointed out that the lack of fairness in the electoral-political process was manifested in the incumbent’s misuse of state facilities for campaign purposes and in the biased role of the mainstream media. Since these very legitimate concerns have not been addressed, Bersih has every reason to raise them.

.

4) If Bersih is sincere about rectifying them, the political parties who are in the forefront of this coalition, should set the example in the states which are under PR rule by ensuring that state facilities are not misused in any election or by-election. And yet, in by-elections in Selangor, Penang and Kedah, it is alleged that the state government had deployed some of the resources of the state, directly and indirectly, for their campaigns. Similarly, if Bersih wants equitable access to BNinclined print and electronic media, it should also encourage opposition oriented online newspapers to be fair and balanced in their coverage and analysis of political issues. After all, cyber media in Malaysia today is an important source of information--- and disinformation.

.

5) While some of Bersih’s demands are reasonable, its failure to locate these demands within a larger framework has tarnished its credibility. For all the shortcomings in its electoral system, Malaysia is one of the few countries in the Global South that has held regular elections participated by parties with totally divergent ideologies ever since Independence in 1957.It is equally significant that these elections have been completely free of violence--- which is a rarity in the Global South. In the first General Election itself, two states came under an opposition party. Today, four out of the 13 states in the Federation are in opposition hands. There has never been a single moment in Malaysian electoral politics when the opposition has commanded less than 35 per cent of the popular vote.

.

Security.

.

1) If the issues raised by Bersih should be viewed in their proper context, so should the public give due consideration to the question of security which is expressly stated in Article 10 (2), a, b, and c of the Constitution. There is no denying that with three organisations asserting their determination to hold rallies and marches without police permit, the political temperature has increased by a few degrees. Leaders of two of the organisations have received death threats.

.

2) There is another contextual dimension to the security question which we cannot afford to ignore. In the first Bersih demonstration on November 10 2007, a number of people were injured. There were also similar casualties in the Hindraf demonstration on November 25 in the same year. In almost all the reformasi demonstrations from September 1998 to the middle of 2000, individuals and some police personnel were hurt.

.

3) I had thought initially that Bersih demonstrators should be allowed to congregate in a stadium, in accordance with their constitutional right but I didn’t realise that there was a security issue lurking in the shadows. Apparently, if the stadium option had materialised,certain elements in Bersih, it is alleged, would have turned the stadium to a Tahrir Square, with demonstrators camping there day and night for weeks on end.

Of course, the Western media would be there to dramatise the event, especially since both the de facto and de jure leaders of Bersih --- Anwar Ibrahim and Ambiga Sreenivasan --- have such close ties to the Western media. It would be a terrible travesty of justice since the Malaysian situation bears no comparison to Mubarak’s Egypt or to those autocratic Arab monarchies and republics which are now being challenged by their people. None of them is an inheritor to more than five decades of continuous civilian rule legitimised through competitive electoral politics.

.

Impact.

.

1) How the proposed July 9 rally and counter rallies will impact upon taxi drivers, traders, shoppers and the general public is yet another factor that deserves our attention.There is a high probability that the rallies will cause a degree of dislocation especially since three different groups with their own agendas are involved. Traders and taxi drivers in the affected areas will inevitably suffer a loss of income. Here again, the past is a good teacher. In previous demonstrations in Kuala Lumpur, people in various walks of life have had to pay the price.

.

2) It is quite conceivable that July 9 will reinforce yet another unhealthy development which has become more and more obvious in the last two years. Partisan political polarisation is increasing in the country. The BN-PR schism is deepening within the populace. If we do not make a serious attempt to reverse the trend, we may move in the direction of Thai politics which has been severely hamstrung by the cleavage that separates those with the government and those with Thaksin Shinawatra.

.

Motives.

.

1) There are also ulterior motives behind the Bersih plan that any reasonable person would probe. I am very much aware of this partly because of my own experience with demonstrations and the self-serving politics of the prime mover behind July 9. When I was Deputy President of Parti Keadilan Nasional ( now Rakyat) (PKR) from 1999 to 2001, the party was solidly behind the reformasi demonstrations. After a while I realized that the demonstrations were taking us nowhere; they were not leading to any democratic awakening among the masses. On the contrary, the people were turning against the party because of the hardship they caused.

.

A number of our activists were arrested, some under the ISA. Most of all, I could see that the demonstrations instigated by Anwar from behind prison walls served only one purpose: to keep him in the limelight, and to get him out of prison. Within the party leadership, I took an unambiguous position against demonstrations. With the exception of Keadilan President, Dr.Wan Azizah Ismail, no one else supported me. The Malaysian public came to know of my opposition to the demonstrations, and the then Prime Minister, Dr. Mahathir Mohammad even alluded to it in the media.

.

2) Anwar’s ulterior motive is even more brazen today. He desperately wants to become Prime Minister, and will resort to any means to achieve his ambition. He is hoping that July 9 will help him overcome some of the obstacles he now faces and give him the boost that he needs. A massive mobilisation of his supporters and fence-sitters on July 9, he thinks, will divert attention from his sodomy trial which begins later in the month and from his sex-video scandal. At the same time, he is expecting the demonstration to create the sort of momentum that will erode support for the BN and shore up his own position. If this impresses his allies and endorsersin some Western capitals they may even give him stronger backing to achieve “a regime change”.

.

3) Apart from Anwar’s own party, both his PR partners, the Islamic Party of Malaysia(PAS) and the Democratic Action Party (DAP), are also driven by the desire to gain powerthrough the quickest route. For them also the end justifies the means. July 9--- whatever the arguments against it--- is an important stepping-stone towards that goal.

.

Once Malaysians understand the context--- especially the ulterior motives--- theywill be wary about July 9. They will be able to distinguish the self-serving agenda of a deeply flawed politician from the genuine quest for electoral reform and political transformation. They should not allow such a politician to undermine their future.

.

Dr. Chandra Muzaffar is a political scientist who has written extensively on Malaysian politics.

27 June 2011.