related article TAN SRI MUHYIDDIN YASSIN STRESSED THAT MALAYSIA PRACTISED UMNO DEMOCRACY AND HAD IT OWN LAWS AND WELL-MANAGED LEGAL SYSTEM UMNO STYLE,
related article← The malaysian governtment did the unthinkable, Augustine PauL Federal Court judge GOT THIS POSITION TRU corruption‘ Farah Azlina had no access to vital information’ The prosecution in the Anwar Ibrahim sodomy trial has reiterated that it operates on a “need-to-know” basis. readmore clock below IZZAH; ANNWAR IS STILL A THREAT TO BARISAN GHANI … Read more
What’s frightening is Anwar is believable while Umno/BN isn’t
The amber lights are flashing — Sakmongkol AK47
August 08, 2010
AUG 8 — Not since I wrote articles supporting Khairy Jamaluddin when he was contesting the Ketua Pemuda post have I garnered so many comments. The articles I wrote about Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim have touched raw nerves and the responses have been coming back with such intensity and ferocity.
But I have done this for a purpose. This will become clear shortly.
Umno had better sit up and think of better strategies to counter Anwar Ibrahim. If Umno’s weapons of mass support destruction are to hurl abusive language, personal insults, distasteful characterisation of Anwar, it will find the going tough. It will also find that the widespread belief that Pakatan Rakyat’s (PAS, PKR and DAP) confidence that they will take Putrajaya is not without foundation.
The amber lights for Umno are flashing. Kalau tak sedar, semua kita mampus. Does the Barisan Nasional government want self-perpetuation or self-renewal?
That will be the end of the Umno and BN make believe world, that the destiny of this nation depends on their staying on in power. The people will have none of that without receiving much more than mere sloganeering and liberation from continuing awareness suppression.
I pity Umno if it thinks it weakens the Anwar juggernaut by accusing Anwar as this agent, that agent, etc; what the Umno propaganda machinery does is to treat the public as stupid people and imbeciles. Wrong strategy, as it will only make the public clamour for Umno blood.
After engaging Anwar supporters over the last few days and listening to his recent speeches, I can only conclude that Umno is facing a very tough time. Stupidly, this shocking reality is shielded from the public only by the pom-pom media glitz by the ruling party — by the mass media complex comprising the papers, visual and audio instruments. The reality is there is widespread simmering anguish and rejection of the ruling government, conveniently concealed from an ever-increasingly questioning and cynical public.
The inconvenient truth that Umno/BN does not want to hear is this — the public is willing to excuse Anwar for whatever he has or has not done and is even ready to vilify the BN government for what it has or has not done. If today, Anwar says yes he sodomises Saiful, the public is likely to not care less. Even if the government proves beyond reasonable doubt that Anwar did what he is charged with, the public will not credit the government with anything.What’s frightening is Anwar is believable while Umno/BN isn’t. Either way, the government loses.Whether Anwar goes to prison or not, Umno and BN will face a bleak future. Anwar not in prison means, frontal attacks exposing years of bad governance, abuse of power, economic injustice, social injustices, and economic mismanagement will be amplified by Anwar’s demagoguery. Anwar in prison on the other hand means waves of sympathy that will translate into rejection of BN politics.At the end of the day, The BN government has to attack only one idea that the Anwar machine is telling the people — A Better Malaysia without the BN. A simple idea that’s gaining a lot of adherence. I can’t described what Anwar has done, better that the comments posed by one anonymous in my last posting.
related article CHUA WARNS OF THE GRAVE CONSEQUENCES, M.C.A THE MOST ANTI ISLAMIST PARTY WARNS UNMO
Chua warns of the grave consequences with the use of religion to win support from the Malays.are you saying that you will be sending our children like this Click here to view the WAWA photo gallery Photos of Let justice be done Chan Kheng Hoe THE former chief justice had recently proposed that the civil … Read more
The awakening of Malaysians is partly catalysed by the treatment that [Anwar] received. His trial, incarceration, and subsequent event — rightly or wrongly — for there’s only one truth, but many perceptions awakened Malaysian mind. Yes — there’s other factors, too — the new media, other personalities that’s too many to mention.
The bigger picture is the march for change — Malaysians from all ages who are sick of the current state of the nation. Malaysians who do not like the way things are now. Malaysians who are concerned about the state that they will let their children inherit.
To answer this commentator, this is why I brought out the discussion on Anwar. That is the purpose.
What can Umno do? I shall now return to my usual hunting ground. — sakmongkol.blogspot.com
* Sakmongkol AK47 is the nom de plume of Datuk Mohd Ariff Sabri Hj Abdul Aziz. He was Pulau Manis assemblyman (2004-2008).
* This is the personal opinion of the writer or the publication. The Malaysian Insider does not endorse the view unless specified.
'Umno is the problem, not Muslims or Islam'
Aug 8, 10 7:43am
Share
'If you export Umno to any country on this planet, it will be just as corrupt and narrow-minded as Malaysia.'
DAP chides Chua's negative portrayal of Muslim nations
Tkc: Some of us are getting unnecessarily sucked into Chua Soi Lek's bigoted views about Muslim countries because there are as many Muslim as well as non-Muslim nations that are poor – e.g. Somalia and Sierra Leone are Muslim, Zimbabwe and Congo are Christian, and Laos and Burma are Buddhist.
The biggest single reason why these countries are poor is not due to their religious beliefs but corruption. Therefore, we can dismiss Chua's views as shallow, ill-informed and presumptuous. I got a feeling that he has stopped educating himself after he got his medical degree. He probably watches more pornographic movies than read books or magazines.
Cala: The score is Lim Guan Eng, 1, Chua Soi Lek, 0. Well done, LGE. You have argued well. What matters is the role model one chooses, probably it has little to do with whether it is Muslim- majority nation or not.
But I advise caution. To achieve economic growth, two things must be put in place (Olson, 1996; Henisz, 2000; Feld and Voigt, 2003): i) good economic policies; ii) good institutional arrangements (judicial independence is one of them).
My humble opinion is for a Muslim- majority nation to embrace fully the recipe of the developed nations as in the West is not going to be easy. The West has discarded all notions about power from traditional sources (the churches and the monarchs) because they have gone through the 'enlightenment movement' at great societal costs.In this respect, Malaysia has not. Frankly, to my mind, most Muslim- majority countries are not quite there yet.Atheist: It's amazing that someone of CSL's supposed 'education' is so ignorant and bigoted. Islam/Muslims are not the problem; it is Umno that is the problem. If you export Umno to any country on this planet, it will be just as corrupt and narrow-minded as Malaysia.Helen Ang: It's no wonder LGE's one upmanship makes the Umno blogs caricature him as an exaggerated cartoon in turban, jubah and goatee. Which Islamic country does he want to serve as model - Pakistan, Bangladesh, Somalia, Saudi Arabia?Myrights: Well, for once, I find myself agreeing with CSL, and suddenly, I find LGE too quick to play politics on this topic. CSL's main point is that when Umno and PAS use religion to upstage each other, the end result will be backward and regressive policies, and this is exactly what is happening to Malaysia today, no thanks to Dr Mahathir Mohamad.What is there to disagree about, Mr LGE? Why is LGE talking about India and China and compare them to Islamic countries? How can one compare India and China to an Islamic country? It's comparing apples and oranges. India and China are countries governed by civil laws, while Muslim countries, as the name suggests, are governed based on Islamic laws. Nik V: When I read some of the statements here, I see that Umno-Perkasa-MCA-MIC-BN have succeeded in making some Malaysians believe that it is because of Islam that there is poverty.
Look at these nations here - all of which have something in common: Haiti, Afghanistan, Iraq, Papua New Guinea, Congo, Burma, Iran, Bangladesh, Chad, Somalia, Cambodia, Sudan, Nepal, Uganda, Mali, Rwanda, Ethiopia, Mozambique, Madagascar, Malawi, Sierra Leone, Niger, Congo, Zimbabwe, etc. They are all the poorest nations because they are run by corrupt and tyrannical groups from all sorts of backgrounds and religions.
If we are so superficial to think that it is Islam that is the root of their suffering, then why don't we zero in on the fact that most of these nations are mostly African nations, and therefore Africans are bad?
Know that this has nothing to do with colour or religion but corrupt and greedy people who use anything, including religion and race, to stay in power. Lim Guan Eng is right and farsighted. Chua Soi Lek is wrong and backward.
Sentinel: MCA has lost its bearings and is desperate to get back some votes in the coming GE13. It is not consistent in its policies nor stances and is just grappling in the dark. It will forever be walking in the shadows of its big brother Umno and will speak up only when allowed to. The party is getting more irrelevant by the day, if it has not already lost its total relevance.
Kgen: Chua Soi Lek is still deeply ensconced in the old politics of using race and religion as bogeymen to frighten the Chinese to vote for BN. Such disreputable tactics do not work now but it is difficult to teach an old dog new tricks.
Criticising Umno now is an attempt to do damage control after the political damage from his shameful backdown from a rap by Muhyiddin Yassin.
Habib RAK: Chua Soi Lek (CSL) is right to point out that many Islamic countries are backwards. But by equating PAS to these countries, CSL shows his total ignorance.
CSL is a fear monger and is using deception to mislead the non-Muslims into hating the Muslims. He is opening up a dangerous approach. The significant strides that PAS has made to be progressive, understanding, respecting others, being rationale and many other positive attributes are being ignored by CSL.
Leaders like Mohd Nizar Jamaluddin of Perak and Khalid Samad of Selangor are examples of PAS leadership that is winning hearts and minds of all communities in Malaysia. The collective working together of PAS, DAP and PKR is bringing about a better Malaysia, and CSL wishes to destroy it for his personal gains.
He is being very irresponsible and negative in his approach. All and sundry should rebuke him.
Lonestar: One has to fully agree with this statement by Chua SL: "Some of the most corrupt countries are Muslim majority,” he told 300 participants at MCA's 33rd annual convention in Kedah.
Is Chua fully aware that Malaysia is one such country?
Harris Ali: I was expecting keris-wielding Perkasa to defend Islam, but instead it was DAP.
By Fareed ZakariaThe bottom line on last week's elections: The Republicans did well. Yes, these were a grab-bag collection of races with local particularities and low turnout. But notice that independents, who had shunned the GOP over the past few years, voted for Republican candidates in large numbers. And the overall results are consistent with a surprising trend across the Western world -- the rise of the right.
Imagine you had been told five years ago that a huge economic crisis would erupt, prominently featuring irresponsible financiers, and that governments would come to the rescue of firms and families. You probably would have predicted that, politically, the right (the party of bankers) would do badly and the left (the party of bureaucrats) would do well. But you would have been wrong.
It's not just the Republicans who are coming out ahead. In late September a conservative coalition swept into power in Germany. In France, Nicolas Sarkozy's party has considerable public support. In Britain, conservatives are poised to win their first national election in 17 years. Even in Denmark and Sweden, where social democrats usually win, the right is in power. Across continental Europe, only one major country, Spain, has a left-wing ruling party.
The United States has always been one step to the right of Europe, but even here the center held. The Republicans who won did so by emphasizing mainstream issues and traditional GOP criticisms of Obama -- on spending and taxes. They did not espouse radical economic ideas or highlight their conservatism on social issues. When they did, it alienated voters, as in Upstate New York.
The post-Cold War political landscape was best mapped out by two politicians early in the 1990s. Bill Clinton and Tony Blair saw that the collapse of communism created a new reality. The dramatic left-right divide had given way to a mushier middle, with people converging on the idea of a market-based economy but with a substantial safety net. The electorate wanted not ideological clarion calls but competence. Clinton persuaded Americans to trust Democrats as stewards of public finances by empowering smart technocrats such as Robert Rubin rather than left-wing politicians.
Barack Obama's handling of the financial crisis has mostly been marked by such intelligent centrism. He eschewed calls from the left to nationalize banks, ignored criticism from scholars that the stimulus was too small and has largely avoided business bashing. In all these areas, the left wing of his party is dissatisfied, but the right has been defanged.
On health care, however, the story looks different. There are two great health-care crises in America -- one involving coverage, the other involving cost. The Democratic plan appears likely to tackle the first but not the second. This is bad economics and bad politics: The crisis of cost affects 85 percent of Americans, while the crisis of coverage affects about 15 percent. Obama's message to the country appears to be, "We have a dysfunctional health-care system with out-of-control costs, and let's add 45 million people to it."
Americans see a health-care bill that has been produced by the old Democratic machine rather than the new Democratic technocrats -- more Lyndon Johnson than Larry Summers. It might be the only way to get a law passed, and it might please the party's base, but it will dismay independents. If costs skyrocket over the next few years, the Democrats will have squandered a hard-won reputation for economic competence.
When Clinton and Blair moved their parties to the center in the 1990s, conservatives were initially paralyzed, then responded by shifting even farther right to distinguish themselves from the opposition. In Europe the left has similarly been paralyzed or drifted toward radicalism. Things are still in flux here. But over the next few years, if the Republican Party moves decisively to the center, Obama would face the most serious challenge of his presidency.
Fareed Zakaria is editor of Newsweek International and the author of "The Post-American World." His e-mail address is comments@fareedzakaria.com.
By Fareed ZakariaThe bottom line on last week's elections: The Republicans did well. Yes, these were a grab-bag collection of races with local particularities and low turnout. But notice that independents, who had shunned the GOP over the past few years, voted for Republican candidates in large numbers. And the overall results are consistent with a surprising trend across the Western world -- the rise of the right.
Imagine you had been told five years ago that a huge economic crisis would erupt, prominently featuring irresponsible financiers, and that governments would come to the rescue of firms and families. You probably would have predicted that, politically, the right (the party of bankers) would do badly and the left (the party of bureaucrats) would do well. But you would have been wrong.
It's not just the Republicans who are coming out ahead. In late September a conservative coalition swept into power in Germany. In France, Nicolas Sarkozy's party has considerable public support. In Britain, conservatives are poised to win their first national election in 17 years. Even in Denmark and Sweden, where social democrats usually win, the right is in power. Across continental Europe, only one major country, Spain, has a left-wing ruling party.
The United States has always been one step to the right of Europe, but even here the center held. The Republicans who won did so by emphasizing mainstream issues and traditional GOP criticisms of Obama -- on spending and taxes. They did not espouse radical economic ideas or highlight their conservatism on social issues. When they did, it alienated voters, as in Upstate New York.
The post-Cold War political landscape was best mapped out by two politicians early in the 1990s. Bill Clinton and Tony Blair saw that the collapse of communism created a new reality. The dramatic left-right divide had given way to a mushier middle, with people converging on the idea of a market-based economy but with a substantial safety net. The electorate wanted not ideological clarion calls but competence. Clinton persuaded Americans to trust Democrats as stewards of public finances by empowering smart technocrats such as Robert Rubin rather than left-wing politicians.
Barack Obama's handling of the financial crisis has mostly been marked by such intelligent centrism. He eschewed calls from the left to nationalize banks, ignored criticism from scholars that the stimulus was too small and has largely avoided business bashing. In all these areas, the left wing of his party is dissatisfied, but the right has been defanged.
On health care, however, the story looks different. There are two great health-care crises in America -- one involving coverage, the other involving cost. The Democratic plan appears likely to tackle the first but not the second. This is bad economics and bad politics: The crisis of cost affects 85 percent of Americans, while the crisis of coverage affects about 15 percent. Obama's message to the country appears to be, "We have a dysfunctional health-care system with out-of-control costs, and let's add 45 million people to it."
Americans see a health-care bill that has been produced by the old Democratic machine rather than the new Democratic technocrats -- more Lyndon Johnson than Larry Summers. It might be the only way to get a law passed, and it might please the party's base, but it will dismay independents. If costs skyrocket over the next few years, the Democrats will have squandered a hard-won reputation for economic competence.
When Clinton and Blair moved their parties to the center in the 1990s, conservatives were initially paralyzed, then responded by shifting even farther right to distinguish themselves from the opposition. In Europe the left has similarly been paralyzed or drifted toward radicalism. Things are still in flux here. But over the next few years, if the Republican Party moves decisively to the center, Obama would face the most serious challenge of his presidency.
Fareed Zakaria is editor of Newsweek International and the author of "The Post-American World." His e-mail address is comments@fareedzakaria.com.
No comments:
Post a Comment