corruption in malaysia? where got?

Corruption in Malaysia? Where is the proof? Stab in the back According to Musa, the former premier’s vocal criticism only serves to benefit the opposition and nobody else. “During Mahathir’s era, there were allegations of corruption. Mahathir asked, 'where is the proof?' Now, Mahathir is alleging corruption but where is the proof?” he said. The above is extracted from Malaysiakini. An interview with Musa Hitam. What is preposterous is that corruption is everywhere, flowing out from the ears and nose. But Mahathir was asking for proof. No proof means no corruption. And the music plays on. We are corruption free. That is Mahathir at his preposterous best.

mahathir hitting badawi below the belt

Mahathir's latest salvo at Badawi was below the belt. He made it public that Badawi was not his number One choice, attempting to insinuate that Badawi was not good enough. It was very fortunate that Badawi won a landslide victory to confirm that the people were behind him and supported him. Now all the cabinet ministers too came out to defend him. That is good for the time being. But they cannot keep on defending and allow Mahathir to attack unrestrained. In order to take on Mahathir effectively before being hurt as the constant attack will eventually lead to a change of mind in the people, Badawi must go on the offensive and attack Mahathir's mistakes. Hang up his dirty laundry to dry as well. And for this he will need a charismatic orator to deal with Mahathir. The current batch of cabinet ministers is not in the class of Mahathir to take him on. And none will dare to do so.

permanent US bases in Iraq

Iraq war bill deletes US military base prohibition By Richard Cowan Fri Jun 9, 4:59 PM ET WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Congressional Republicans killed a provision in an Iraq war funding bill that would have put the United States on record against the permanent basing of U.S. military facilities in that country, a lawmaker and congressional aides said on Friday. The $94.5 billion emergency spending bill, which includes $65.8 billion to continue waging wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, is expected to be approved by Congress next week and sent to President George W. Bush for signing into law. As originally passed by the House of Representatives, the Pentagon would have been prohibited from spending any of the funds for entering into a military basing rights agreement with Iraq. A similar amendment passed by the Senate said the Pentagon could not use the next round of war funding to "establish permanent United States military bases in Iraq, or to exercise United States control over the oil infrastructure or oil resources of Iraq." The Bush administration has said it does not want to place any artificial timelines on a U.S. presence in Iraq and that it wants to begin withdrawing troops when Iraqi security forces are better able to protect the country. But it has not ruled out permanent bases in Iraq. The above extract confirmed what the Iraqis and the Arab nations were afraid of, permanent US presence in Iraq and the occupation of Iraq. What it means to the war in Iraq is that it will continue in greater ferocity. Now the fight is against foreign occupation and colonisation. It will become a war of independence.

myth 10

'Staying Together, Moving Ahead' Today's announcement of the lift upgrading programme tells all. After casting the vote for the opposition, you belong to the opposition and deserve to be left behind.

staying together, moving ahead?

After reading the Sunday Times this morning I must say that it is confirmed beyond any doubt that too much power will lead to arrogance and delusion. The issue of upgrading has been thrashed out during the election rally and why the people is so pissed off with the unfair application of tax payers money to serve partial politics was obvious. I thought the message has sunk in. And if not, the slogan, 'Staying together, Moving Ahead' would be a reminder of what remaining united as a nation and people means after the politiking is over. Even Hsien Loong called for a closing of ranks and be one people again. The announcement that upgrading will still be preferential and favoured constituencies that voted for the PAP is totally against staying together as one people. It is divisive politics and petty. It smacks of hypocrisy to ask the people to set aside political differences and work together as a people. What is important, and short sighted people failing to see, is that the split in voters for and against the ruling party is about 60:40. This means that in constituencies that voted for the PAP, 40% voted against. On the contrary, in opposition constituencies, there were 40% PAP supporters. This upgrading policy actually benefitted the 40% of opposition supporters in PAP wards and victimised the 40% PAP supporters in opposition wards. At a national level, when opposition only occupied two small single wards, the benefits of this policy to people who voted for the opposition is much greater as a population. And 60% of two opposition wards is insignificant. Would such a mindset bring more votes for the PAP in the next election or bring more anger and be seen as distasteful, thus causing more votes? Is the policy arrived at to win the hearts and minds of the people or a tit for tat boyish tactics, you don't vote for me, no sweet for you?