Najib cannot be faulted for the continuing political instability

 by Joe Fernandez

COMMENT Even in those countries where the Government has popular support, they cannot just simply wag their tails. The people and the media will not stand for it.

In Malaysia, the ruling Barisan Nasional (BN) obtained only 47 per cent of the votes cast. If all eligible voters are tallied, this 47 per cent shrinks even further to about 25 per cent. BN won its first 112 seats with just 20 per cent of the votes cast. If all eligible voters are tallied, the 20 per cent shrinks to less than 10 per cent of the eligible voters for the first 112 seats.

That's weaker than weak.

The BN getting 133 seats in Parliament means nothing.

If 23 BN MPs were to flee and form a separate block, and there’s no reason why they shouldn’t to save their political future, the ruling coalition will fall from power. It’s a fact that aspiring candidates among Malays don’t see any point in placing their hopes in Umno where some old fogies and veterans rule the roost.

Politics -- restructuring of political power, and restructuring the allocation of resources -- is the art of the possible, not indulging in wishful thinking and living on hope.

It's all about making history, not watching history happen.

The Malaysian Government, being in a weak position, is in no position to wag its tail. However, old habits die hard.

Sometimes, things happen for no rhyme or reason.

This is one of those moments in time.

Events have taken on a life of their own and are in control. There's no other way to explain the Blackout 505 crowds that turn out. A body in motion tends to stay in motion unless acted upon by external forces.

The 47 per cent that voted for BN, the rural masses, prefer to stand by and watch history being made. Again, the Law of Inertia is at work.

Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak cannot be faulted for the continuing political instability in Malaysia. He's a victim of circumstances. Besides, he’s fighting for his political life.

The longer that a ruling party/coalition stays in power and enforces a kind of artificial stability, the longer the period of instability that follows when such a party falls from power.

Consider the fate of the USSR after 70 years of communist party rule, Yugoslavia after 50 years of Tito, Indonesia after 33 years of Suharto, and the Philippines after 20 years of Marcos.

The BN has been in power 56 years.

Mahathir Mohamad alone was in office 22 years, too long for any one person to be in power.

His departure had seen Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, his successor, being severely tested in the ensuing instability and hounded out of office after seven years.  Mahathir himself played a key role in fomenting this instability.

Badawi completed two years of Mahathir's term, won his own mandate for four years and had to resign after a year into his second term.

Najib faces the same fate. He completed four years of Badawi's second term and has just begun his second term. It will be extremely tough for him to last as long as even Badawi did in office.

Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah may be about reviving the old Umno and burying Mahathir's Umno Baru. This will be his last chance.

He was denied the opportunity to be Prime Minister in 1987 when Judge Harun Hashim, a Malayalee Muslim like Mahathir, declared Umno unlawful instead of discounting the illegal votes and handing him the party presidency.

When I wrote not so long ago about Razaleigh being the Prime Minister, everybody laughed at me.

Now the issue has surfaced as a serious possibility.

If Parti Rakyat Sarawak (6), Sarawak Progressive Democratic Party (4) and Sabah (10) seats get together with Razaleigh (10) seats, this 3^rd Force with 30 seats can form the Federal Government with Pakatan Rakyat (89) ... Dap 38, PKR 30, Pas 21.

The Najib faction should throw its support behind Razaleigh so that it can live to fight another day. In 1987, it was Najib who betrayed Razaleigh in his bid for the Umno presidency after he was waylaid by Mahathir operatives. It’s time to make amends.

Ku Li eyes PM post, meeting more MPs, say sources

http://my.news.yahoo.com/ku-li-eyes-pm-post-meeting-more-mps-020448600.html

Sabah, Sarawak activists want to restore sovereignty

Joint Press Statement by Sarawak Sovereignty Movement (SSM) and Borneo’s Plight in Malaysia Foundation (BOPIM)

It was unanimously resolved by both SSM and BOPIM in Kuching on Tuesday 11 June, 2013 to strategize on how best Sabah and Sarawak can restore their sovereignty of 31 Aug, 1963 and 22 July, 1963 respectively.

At the same time, they want to explore the nature of the relationship that both Sabah and Sarawak should have with Malaya after the restoration of their sovereignty.

One idea is that when it comes to Sabah and Sarawak, the Federal Government should confine itself to Defence, Foreign Affairs and National Economic Planning but not for an indefinite period of time.

This is an opportune year for both NGO's to commence pursuing this matter since it marks the 50^th year of the Malaysia Agreement had there been a Referendum on Malaysia in Sabah, Sarawak, Brunei and Malaya.

In the absence of a Referendum, the Government in Putrajaya/Kuala Lumpur saw no reason to comply with the Malaysia Agreement. The Cobbold Commission must not be seen as a Referendum but rather open British and Malayan defiance of the United Nation’s Protocols on Decolonization.

There’s no Constitution for Malaysia either.

Instead, the codified Constitution of Malaya is being passed off as the Constitution of Malaysia and the Federation of Malaya is masquerading as the Constitution of Malaysia.

Sabah and Sarawak are being referred to as the 12^th and 13^th states after the departure of Singapore which saw the definition of Federation in the Constitution being amended against them.

In short, 16 Sept, 1963 became the day that Malaya occupied Sabah and Sarawak. It can be resolved that Sept 16, Malaysia Day, must henceforth be observed as Occupation Day. It’s a day of mourning when the flags of Sabah and Sarawak must be flown at half-mast and the people wear black bands on their arms.

The restoration of sovereignty will bring immense benefits to both Sabah and Sarawak.

For starters, it will help resolve the burning issue of illegal immigrants in Sabah in particular and their presence on the electoral rolls. It’s an open secret that these illegal immigrants and other foreigners have also been handed MyKads meant for citizens by operation of law.

The continued occupation of Sabah and Sarawak by Malaya, if not reversed, will only result in the people in general and the Orang Asal in particular losing their countries to the illegal immigrants.

The restoration of sovereignty will also help the two Nations in Borneo to realize their full potential in every field of human endeavour.

We need look no further than Singapore and Brunei to realize what the restoration of sovereignty would mean. Both countries, one left Malaysia after two years and the other stayed out at the 11^th hour, are light years ahead of Sabah and Sarawak.

At present, as announced by the World Bank in Kota Kinabalu in Dec 2010, Sabah and Sarawak are the poorest parts of Malaysia. Sabah is the poorest with Sarawak being a distant 2^nd poorest.

Having failed to squat on Singapore, Malaysia is squatting on Sabah and Sarawak.
 

Joint Statement by;

Datuk Murshidi Abdul Rahman

Chairman, Sarawak Sovereignty Movement (SSM)

Daniel John Jambun

President, UK-based Borneo's Plight in Malaysia Foundation (BOPIM)

Apologists for the system in the wake of GE13 are anachronisms

by Joe Fernandez

COMMENT The apologists for the system in the wake of GE13 are anachronisms who refuse to see the writing on the wall.

I would define a racist as one who tries to deny others -- read Umno -- their place in the sun. There could be any number of reasons.

Umno's racism is of the sapu bersih opportunist kind which includes squatting on others. Malaysia, after having failed to squat on Singapore, is squatting on Sabah and Sarawak. Consider the fact that the World Bank declared in Dec 2010 in Kota Kinabalu that  the two Nations in Borneo were the poorest in Malaysia. Sabah is the poorest. Earlier, the World Bank also warned that Sabah was chasing its tail on poverty eradication because of the continuing influx of illegal immigrants

For example, why isn't there even one non-Malay VC among the 20-odd Government-owned universities? So, we don't need to humour such buggers and engage in the humbuggery of having a "civilized debate" with them. They are probably hooting with laughter behind our backs as we engage in this so-called civilized debate with them.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racism

Ex-Navy man and malaysiakini columnist Thaya Param is wasting his time in fighting an increasingly losing battle on land. The apologists will never concede defeat. That's like asking them to eat their own sh.t. We should be telling these buggers to FO and stay that way and don't bother about proving to us that they are civilized. Intellectually, they are yet to shed their tails and come down from the trees to find their way on the ground. Thaya's fellow columnist Terence Netto has wised up a long time ago and says nothing and means nothing even as he churns out  some 20-odd pieces a month while struggling not to see the forest for the trees. He worships the very ground that Anwar Ibrahim, his great hero, walks on.

By the same token, someone who fights for his place in the sun -- read Hindraf Makkal Sakthi -- cannot be termed a racist.

Having said that, let's explore the issue of "Chinese tsunami" raised by Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak when explaining in Bugisthink why the ruling Barisan Nasional (BN) could only manage to win 133 seats in Parliament during GE13 on May 5 or 505.

It's an undeniable fact that many eligible voters among the Chinese not only registered but turned up to vote and when they did, they were against the Malaysian Chinese Association (MCA), Gerakan and the Sarawak United People's Party (Supp), all lapdogs of Umno and the Pesaka Bumiputera Bersatu (PBB). It's the right of the Chinese to vote for whomever they wish. Umno cannot refer to the refusal of the Chinese to vote for Chinese parties in BN as indication of their betrayal of the Malays (actually meaning Umno). Pas is Muslim and Malay, Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR) is Malay-led and Malay-based and there are many Malays in the Democratic Action Party (Dap).

At the same time, it seems that many eligible Malays not only did not register as voters and where they did, many did not turn up on 505 to cast their votes. This shows that many Malays have given up on politics and the system of political parties as an exercise in futility. They may have been influenced at the same time by the Talibanist line of thinking that democracy is unIslamic.

Also, to be considered is the fact that any aspiring young Malay politician today has no place in Umno which is dominated by the old fogies and veterans who are into mini dynasty building. Outside the dynasties, there's a long queue of ever hopeful people waiting to be candidates so that they can get their hands on a share of the loot. So, this group will naturally gravitate eventually in frustration towards Pas, PKR and Dap in that order to be fielded as candidates. In 2008, some of these people thought that they could frog over to BN for a share of the spoils of office, after winning on an Opposition ticket, and get away with it. GE13 proved them wrong. The sky is the limit for a Malay who joins Dap. Eventually, there would be more Malay than Chinese MPs in Dap. There's nothing PKR and Pas can do to prevent this.

In reality, the Umno-dominated BN has no political ideology and is bogged down by the ruling elite's `"Cina ini, Cina itu" mindset based on "jealousy of the Chinese, in particular of those in business". This is their recipe for plunder. Umno is driven by ketuanan Melayuism, a sick combination of Apartheid, Nazism, Fascism, communism, militant Islam, political Islam, and the caste system a la feudalism.  Behind this facade, the ruling elite is busy running up the National Debt Burden to facilitate their plundering of the National Treasury to feather their own nests under the guise of bringing so-called development to the people.

Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR), an Umno in the making, is driven by greed, jealousy and revenge against Umno. Anwar Ibrahim's highest ambition is to get Umno MPs to cross over to his party so that it can replace Umno to promote ketuanan Melayuism.

Both Umno and PKR are determined to maintain the current political system in Sabah and Sarawak  made up of the proxies of Putrajaya, their (the proxies') stooges and Putrajaya's rogue elements who are used for issuing MyKads (meant for citizens by operation of law) to illegal immigrants and other foreigners and entering their names on the electoral rolls.

Pas is into political Islam and obsessed with hudud and an Islamic state.

Dap is for secular politics free of race.

The electoral system is loaded against the Opposition.

The GE13 results shows that BN won 112 parliamentary seats with only 20 per cent of the votes cast, and another 21 seats with 27 per cent of the votes cast.

Umno and PBB talk about embracing change.

What they actually mean is self-preservation i.e. the more that things appear to change, the more they remain the same.

The change that the people want is one which involves the Opposition seizing the reins of power in Putrajaya.

It's time after 56 years of BN rule for the Opposition to form the Government and conduct due diligence of Umno. The people have a right to know the truth of those 56 years.

Malaysia squatting on Sabah, Sarawak

JS,

To answer your questions in the email below:

(1) Malaysia did not exist before 16 Sept, 1963. So, the question of Sabah and Sarawak joining Malaysia does not arise;

(2) Again, Malaysia came into being on 16 Sept, 1963. This Extraordinary Event (in history, law and Constitution) was not the result of independence but of Occupation of Sabah and Sarawak by Malaya on the heels of the British departure (In fact, the thinking in Malaya -- especially among the Malays -- is that the British gave them Sabah and Sarawak. That's why they behave likewise and why Mahathir Mohamad, who needs no introduction, handed out MyKads meant for citizens by operation of law to illegal immigrants and other foreigners and their children in Sabah without batting an eyelid and remains unrepentant, unapologetic and combative on the issue. Had Malaysia been set up properly, Mahathir would have been hanged for Treason.);

(3) 9 July 1963 refers to the date of the Malaysia Agreement; 31 Aug, 1957 refers to the independence of Malaya or the handover of the Administration to Malayans. There's some dispute on whether the British presence in Malaya was colonial rule. This was raised by history dons not so long ago at Universiti Malaya;

(4) What do you mean by asking whether Sabah and Sarawak signed any agreement with Malaya after their independence on 31 Aug, 1963 and 22 July, 1963? What Agreements are you referring to?

(5) Again, 9 July 1963 was the date of the Malaysia Agreement. There's no such thing as independence for Sabah and Sarawak through Malaysia. If that was the case, Sabah and Sarawak would not have become independent on 31 Aug, 1963 and 22 July, 1963 respectively. It was Singapore which obtained its independence through merger with Malaya via Malaysia which was supposed to have been facilitated by Sabah, Sarawak and Brunei.  This issue was put to the Singaporeans in a Yes or No Vote.

Note:

There was no Referendum in Sabah, Sarawak, Brunei and Malaya on Malaysia. The Cobbold Commission in Sabah and Sarawak was not a Referendum. It was open British and Malayan defiance of the UN's Protocols on decolonization.

Dr Jeffrey Kitingan was still in school when Malaysia happened. Now, he has realized that his forefathers were conned into it and wants to do something about it so that future generations will not urinate on his grave too.

However, he's barking up the wrong tree by harping on compliance of the Malaysia Agreement. That will never happen in a million years. What's there to comply with when there was no Referendum on Malaysia? The fact that Dr Jeffrey is calling for compliance shows that there's no Constitution on Malaysia as demanded by an "Extraordinary Event". Had there been a Constitution, whether codified (written in one document) or uncodified (in separate documents), the Malaysia Agreement would have been one of the constitutional documents incorporated in a codified Constitution of Malaysia or one of the constitutional documents making up the uncodified Constitution of Malaysia. Now, we have the Federation of Malaya masquerading as the Federation of Malaysia and the codified Constitution of Malaya being passed off as the codified Constitution of Malaysia.

If Dr Jeffrey wants to contribute to the Debate, he should call for Malaya -- masquerading as Malaysia -- to end its colonial occupation of Sabah and Sarawak. We are not talking here about internal colonization, as in the case of the Indian Nation in Malaya, but colonial occupation.

I don't think that compliance is Dr Jeffrey's idea. Someone probably planted the idea in his head and he has been harping on it ever since without thinking too much about it. Did he sit down with a battery of lawyers and constitutional experts and historians before harping on non-compliance? Did he conduct any research on declassified documents in London and at the UN before harping on compliance? That's why the Malaysian Government doesn't take him seriously. Where they have commented, they claimed various things. Examples: the Malaysia Agreement is only a political agreement (meaning no need to follow); the 20/18 Points is a political guideline, is out of date, has been amended, has been incorporated in the Constitution etc. During GE13, the Sabah BN Manifesto claimed that it would comply with the "Spirit" of the 20 Points. This was an afterthought in response to Star.

A Constitution is not so much about law but politics. It's politicization of issues to gather the people's support which results in an Extraordinary Event -- war (victory or defeat), independence, merger, Revolution -- and the birth of a Constitution.

A Constitution is the ultimate Political Document. So, how can it be said that the Malaysia Agreement, had there been a Referendum and Malaysia set up properly,  is "only a political agreement" (meaning no need to follow/comply). Then, what's the basis for this so-called Malaysia?

Putrajaya is equating a political agreement  with an election manifesto. They are not one and the same thing.

I hope that you understand now why I wanted to be in the main organizing committee for the International Conference on Malaysia Agreement and to record the minutes of the committee meetings and make discussion notes on the meetings. You cannot have clowns running amok -- like a chicken running around with its head cut off -- with an issue like this. The Borneo Heritage Foundation is plagued by uneconomic and unproductive activities because there are too many headless chickens ruling the roost while Dr Jeffrey is torn between being the proverbial ostrich with its head buried in the sand. the three monkeys in the collective: see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil; and the three blind men in the collective and the elephant. When asked to describe the elephant, one described the tail, another ears and the third the trunk. WTF is C.K. Low to decide on anything? It's because of people like him that many people want to quit Star and the reason while Nila Krisna James and Zainal Ajamain left the United Borneo Front.

Anyway, I have changed my mind.

I no longer wish to be in the main organizing committee, nor do I want to record the minutes. Besides, you have already appointed another to do the minutes and there has been no indication from you on whether Dato James Ligunjang and I will be invited to join the main organizing committee. It was not necessary for you to say that you would have to ask Daniel John Jambun first. Daniel told me that he has nothing to do with who attends or does not attend the main organizing committee meetings. Rosalind Bion too said the same thing.

I will also not be attending the said Conference. Ini bukan pasal merajuk. I see no point.

I want to have nothing to do with Dr Jeffrey's "Comply with Malaysia Agreement" movement. He will run into a dead end and end up banging his head on a brick wall. Then, he will have a third PhD to add to the one from Harvard and the other (Permanent Head Damage) from Kamunting. He must not think that he can secure a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) from Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak on the Malaysia Agreement (Compliance Mechanism) in the same way that Hindraf Makkal Sakthi chairman P. Waythamoorthy secured an MOU for the Indian Nation in Malaya to end their internal colonization. The issues are different. Colonization and Internal Colonization are not one and the same thing.

Dr Jeffrey won't secure an MOU even if he fasts to death.

The people of Sabah and Sarawak are not interested in compliance. That's the main reason why Star's campaign fell apart during GE13.

The people would only take an interest in local politics if the issue of the restoration of the sovereignty of Sabah and Sarawak is raised. Otherwise, they have no alternative but go along with Barisan Nasional's bullshit on development and Pakatan Rakyat's plea that the people must decide between the two Malaya-based national coalitions only in line with the idea of a so-called two-party/coalition system with no place for a 3rd Force in Parliament. 

In reality, the Umno-dominated BN has no political ideology and is bogged down by the ruling elite's `"Cina ini, Cina itu" mindset based on "jealousy of the Chinese, in particular those in business".

Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR) is driven by greed, jealousy and revenge against Umno.

Pas is into political Islam and obsessed with hudud and an Islamic state.

Dap is for secular politics free of race.

Sabah and Sarawak would of course be much better off if they are on their own like Singapore, Brunei and so many other countries including South Sudan, Kosovo and Timor Leste to cite recent examples. Kurdistan is in the making. Besides, the Orang Asal would lose their countries if the Malayan colonial occupation of Sabah and Sarawak continues. Sabah being free of Malaya in Malaysia is the only way to resolve the problem of illegal immigrants and other foreigners and their children having MyKads meant for citizens by operation of law and entering the electoral rolls.

Singapore's progress, as observed by Mahathir Mohamad, can only be at the expense of Malaysia.

If Singapore has done well for itself, it's entirely due to the extreme stupidity of people like Mahathir and his Umno bunch of clowns. The Malays are more taken up by fairy tales and myths.

By right, Malaysia should have a much larger GDP than Singapore.

Singapore should at best be to Malaysia what California is to the US.

Instead, having failed to squat on Singapore, Malaysia is squatting on Sabah and Sarawak. Consider the fact that the World Bank declared in Dec 2010 in Kota Kinabalu that  the two Nations in Borneo were the poorest in Malaysia. Sabah is the poorest. Earlier, the World Bank also warned that Sabah was chasing its tail on poverty eradication because of the continuing influx of illegal immigrants.

Elsewhere, I hope to see a free Tibet, New Delhi freeing Sikkim one day and the rest of India emerging along the lines of the European Union instead of continuing to remain as an ungovernable unitary state masquerading as a federation. Why must New Delhi decide on everything? That's why the Sikhs in Punjab went on the warpath not so long ago and demanded Khalistan. Mrs. Indira Gandhi stormed the Golden Temple in Amritsar and killed all the Khalistani militants instead of entering into a dialogue with the people. She paid with her life. Today, the Khalistanis are restive again and being aided by Pakistan as before Amritsar. I hope that Kerala, for example, will push for status as a sovereign nation in an Indian Union instead of being a state in India. Small is better. Big is evil. Less Government is better. More Government is evil.


J



From: Juliana S <jsvoutique@gmail.com>
To: Joe Fernandez <jfernandez14@yahoo.co.uk>
Sent: Monday, 10 June 2013, 3:00
Subject: Re: Three Nations

Dear Fernz the Great,

1.   Sabah and Sarawak never joined the Federation of Malaysia?

2.   Malaysia as it stands today has no Independence Day / date?

3.   Malaysia came into being on 9.7.63 but gained ' independence ' on 31.8.1957?

4.   Sabah and Sarawak gained Independence from the British on 31.8.63 and 22.7.63 respectively and thereafter did not sign any agreement with Malaya?

5.  9.7.63 was the signing of MA 63 not Independence 'through' Malaysia for Sabah and Sarawak?



On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 1:11 AM, Joe Fernandez <jfernandez14@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

Sabah and Sarawak's pre-Malaysia self-determination status of 31 Aug, 1963 and 22 July, 1963 respectively remains undiminished for two reasons:

(1) there was no Referendum on Malaysia in Sabah and Sarawak and none in Brunei and Malaya;

(2) the idea of Sabah, Sarawak and Brunei being in Malaysia was to facilitate the independence of Singapore through merger with Malaya in the new Federation.

Brunei stayed out of Malaysia at the 11th hour and Singapore was expelled from the Federation two years later in Aug, 1965.

The oft-cited theory of security for Sabah and Sarawak in Malaysia is an afterthought. Sabah and Sarawak did not get the security promised them.

Sabah, like Sarawak, continues to be overrun by illegal immigrants who continue to enter the electoral rolls and marginalize and disenfranchise the locals, especially the Orang Asal.


Posted by Fernz the Great to Fernz the Great . . . a matter of public record at 2 June 2013 09:54

Sent by DiGi from my BlackBerry® Smartphone