In need to find something?
Custom Search
Related Posts with Thumbnails

Sunday, August 07, 2011

Is Pakatan Rakyat to blame for an enactment passed in 1988?

Technorati tags: , , ,

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out who was in charge in Selangor in 1988. Yes, there are already laws on the books allowing the religious authorities to act on non-Muslims, as JAIS did when it raided the DUMC earlier this week.

That said, there must clearly have been an "offence" committed before they can act, and evidence thus far points to the fact that none could conclusively proven to have been committed.

As pointed out in the article below, there are a few other Islamic "criminal" enactments, all passed before 2008.

Bottom line, do we blame Pakatan for DUMC when these laws were already on the books well before they took charge?

1988 state law allows Jais to act against non-Muslims

The Selangor Islamic Religious Department (Jais) had likely acted within the law when it raided a church here, as a controversial enactment passed by a Barisan Nasional (BN) state government in 1988 allows action against non-Muslims.

Malaysian Bar Council chief Lim Chee Wee pointed out, however, their being empowered also meant the religious authorities can only act within the confines of the Islamic laws, highlighting that the words allegedly said to prove Christians were proselytising to Muslims at the event — “Quran” and “Pray” — did not fall within the religious enforcement’s context.

“Whilst Jais may have the legal power to enter the premises, it must do so on a proper legal basis that there has been an offence committed. From the presently available facts, there is no basis for its intrusion,” he told The Malaysian Insider in an email.

Lim said there were four existing state Islamic legislation that give the authorities wide powers to act on religious matters, namely:


•  Enakmen Jenayah Syariah (Selangor) 1995 (“Enakmen Jenayah”);


•  Enakmen Ugama Bukan Islam (Kawalan Pengembangan di Kalangan Orang Islam) 1988 (“Enakmen Ugama Bukan Islam”);


•  Administration of the Religion of Islam (State of Selangor) Enactment 2003; and


•  Syariah Criminal Procedure (State of Selangor) Enactment 2003.


Selangor’s Non-Islamic Religions (Control of Propagation Amongst Muslims) Enactment, which outlines offences deemed as acts of proselytisation by non-Muslims towards Muslims, grants the religious authorities powers to launch investigations and arrest individuals without producing a warrant.

Read more at www.themalaysianinsider.com
 

Click here for the full post......

Saturday, August 06, 2011

The Apes Franchise Reboot!

Technorati tags: , , ,

This is actually one film that Walski is quite looking forward to watch. You see, when he was growing up, The Planet of the Apes, and the subsequent film franchise, was somewhat of a favorite.

It will be kind of interesting to see how Tim Burton's Planet of the Apes (1981) gets tied in to how the new franchise is expected to progress. The film was released yesterday, and is expected to run in Malaysia sometime soon (although IMDB.com doesn't have the exact release date yet).

Amplify’d from movies.nytimes.com

Rise of the Planet of the Apes (2011)

Looking Apocalypse in the Eye

“Rise of the Planet of the Apes,” an amusingly cheerful film about the end of humanity that’s PETA and critic approved — no animals were harmed in its making, and neither was James Franco’s career — is precisely the kind of summer diversion that the studios have such a hard time making now. It’s good, canny-dumb fun. Employing bleeding-edge technologies in the service of old-fashioned entertainment, it insists on the emotional truth of its absurd story, its tongue in cheek (and in check), while offering self-aware asides, like the ritual bow to Charlton Heston, the lockjaw hero of the original 1968 “Planet of the Apes.”

At once an origin story for that period-appropriate freakout and a solid kick in the franchise pants, the new “Apes” movie takes place in a present that, with a few exceptions (a space mission included), looks plausibly like our own. Mr. Franco — serious, focused, sympathetic — plays Will Rodman, a scientist and romantic idealist who is one hubristic mistake away from becoming a latter-day Frankenstein. Like the shiny headquarters at Gen-Sys, the pharmaceutical giant for which he works, Will makes science look good, as he bustles about in his white lab coat. Rarely have big-pharma-like doings looked so harmless, at least if you don’t count the animals doped up on the would-be wonder drug that Will hopes will cure Alzheimer’s.

It isn’t long before that temple of scientific rationalism goes kablooey. One afternoon a prized chimpanzee, nicknamed Bright Eyes for the eerie green tint of her peepers, throws a fit, running amok through the Gen-Sys labs and into the meeting room where Will is pitching his cure to his boss (David Oyelowo) and prospective investors. Oops! Cut down by a bullet, Bright Eyes both ends Will’s immediate dreams and offers him something like a new beginning in the form of her baby, a bundle of beastly joy. Out goes the man of science, as the accidental daddy takes the infant home, where he’s baptized Caesar by Will’s own father, Charles (John Lithgow), and grows quickly, fast becoming a lively, curious, very smart young thing.

After this brisk preamble, “Rise of the Planet of the Apes” settles into a playful stretch. Caesar cozies into his human home for an inverse version of the first “Apes” movie (with shades of “Curious George”), if mostly without incident, despite foreboding static with a neighbor (David Hewlett). Time passes, and Caesar grows stronger and smarter as Will finds a love (Freida Pinto) and Charles, suffering from Alzheimer’s, worsens. In desperation Will plays God and turns Charles into his next experiment, becoming both the son and the father to his own lab rats. More time passes, and a story about a modern blended family shifts into a jittery cautionary tale about man’s domination of nature and turns “Apes” into a weird twin of the recent documentary “Project Nim,” about a chimp who was used and abused in the 1970s in the name of science.

Read more at movies.nytimes.com
 

Click here for the full post......

Sunday, July 31, 2011

Poll Position: The Teoh Beng Hock RCI - Conclusion, yes, but is there closure?

Technorati tags: , , ,

The subject of myAsylum’s most recent poll: your thoughts on the outcome of the Teoh Beng Hock Royal Commission of Inquiry. The poll closed at midnight this past Friday, and the results have been tabulated.

Poll Position results, image hosting by Photobucket

Quite overwhelmingly, the respondents were dissatisfied with the outcome of the inquiry. Looking at dissatisfaction in general, 92% felt dissatisfied to some degree, with a very large segment (81%) expressing total dissatisfaction. Only about 8% of respondents where satisfied to some degree, with only one respondent expressing complete satisfaction.

The actual results had 60 respondents choose one of the four responses. Two respondents, selected ‘Other’ and providing the following responses:

  • bull shit RCI – it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to analyze that this pretty much meant 100% Not Satisfied.
  • it’s open ended. anyone to be charged?Walski made a decision to regard this as Somewhat Not Satisfied.

Granted that this was a simple straw poll, but it does reflect what Walski has read online – that the RCI brings us nowhere near to bringing the sad saga of Teoh Beng Hock to closure.
(no closure, and not much remorse, in the full post)

Walski is not sure if you have read the full Royal Commission’s report, which he had put up in the posting announcing the poll last week. Personally, Walski was somewhat satisfied, BUT only in as far as the commission laying accountability on the officers involved with the TBH interrogation. He was NOT satisfied with the finding that TBH committed suicide.

It’s one thing that a layperson like Walski thinks so, but quite another when a similar opinion was expressed by someone more knowledgeable in the area of law.

A respected former senior judge has branded the three judges on the Teoh Beng Hock royal commission of inquiry (RCI) “three blind mice” for concluding that the political aide committed suicide despite lacking expert opinion. Former High Court and Court of Appeal judge Datuk N. H. Chan said the commission had “no business” forming such an opinion as none of the experts it called upon gave the opinion that Teoh committed suicide.

He pointed out that this went against Section 45 of the Evidence Act 1950, which states that when a court has form an opinion on a point of science, the opinions of experts are relevant facts.

“Without any relevant fact, that is to say, without an opinion from an expert, a court is unable to form an opinion upon... the scientific point that Teoh Beng Hock took his own life. In this case, none of the experts gave the opinion that Teoh took his own life,” Chan said in an essay sent to The Malaysian Insider.
(source: The Malaysian Insider)

Pretty strong words, if you were to ask Walski. The former judge based his opinion on pertinent legal requirements. If you recall, an earlier Coroner’s Inquiry into the case concluded that Teoh Beng Hock died from neither homicide, nor suicide.

Understandably, the conclusion that the RCI has arrived at was not something the family of the late Teoh could accept either, and they are now considering whether or not to pursue a judicial review of the RCI’s conclusion and report.

Prime Minister Najib has urged Malaysians to not dispute the RCI report on Teoh (via Free Malaysia Today), stating that “the findings were based on truth”. Perhaps it would be a good thing for the PM to consider that another Royal Commission’s findings and recommendations were once upon a time disputed.

Walski reckons that it all depends on who the disputing party is, huh?

On a separate note, the MACC has responded by suspending the three officers named in the RCI report. But many Malaysians are probably asking: And then what?

In the meantime, as all of us are aware, another MACC interrogation resulted in an almost similar tragedy, ironically while the RCI was in session. So far, what the MACC has had to say is that they it study the report. Oh, and that the suspension of the three officers will not damage the morale of the commission.

Not exactly a show of remorse, if you ask Walski. Nor has there been any apology from the Malaysian government. But then again, that’s Malaysia for you – it’s probably easier to squeeze water out of a rock than it is for someone to say they’re sorry.

What happens next? Reckon that we’ll just have to wait and see. Hopefully, something really positive comes out of this latest RCI. But based on the track record of recent RCIs, Walski isn’t about to hold his breath any time soon.

Click here for the full post......

Friday, July 29, 2011

Norway: An intelligent response to a tragedy of terror

Technorati tags: , , , ,

It would have been easy to fall prey to playing the victim, as some lesser world leaders are wont to do. But not in Norway, which was rocked by the twin-terror attacks by a far-right wing extremist.

A friend (a Norwegian, incidentally) commented that "Utøya is Norway's Oklahoma City". Walski's not sure what his friend meant exactly by that remark. On the surface, it could mean that what happened at the youth retreat was home-grown terrorism.

On another level, his friend could've meant that the tragedy would mark the beginning of the end for Norway's open society, much like how Oklahoma City fueled the US towards greater conservatism at large.

It is heartening, therefore, that the approach Norway's PM plans to take, as reported in this article, will not cause the latter. Any other approach, in fact, would only mean that terrorism won the day.

As Walski writes this, he cannot help but wonder how Malaysia's PM would have reacted in a similar situation...

Amplify’d from www.time.com

Fighting Terrorism with Democracy: How Norway's Prime Minister Plans to Heal His Country

Norway's Prime minister Jens Stoltenberg is seen after a press conference at his residence on July 27, 2011.

Jens Stoltenberg, the Norwegian prime minister, is sitting in a garden chair
on a sun-drenched terrace in a comfortable, but not exceedingly luxurious
house. A gardener plies a hole in the black loam with his spade, and then
plants a small bush of purple Aster in full bloom as a garden waterfall
bubbles tranquilly nearby.

Since July 22, when twin attacks by a right-wing extremist destroyed
Stoltenberg's office, left 76 dead, and rocked Norway, Stoltenberg's bucolic
home-office has doubled as his command center. In one room, a group of aides
are huddled over laptops. In another, two security guards seem to be trying
hard to remain invisible and pass the time. The furniture is modern, but not
extravagant. If Norway were a house, it might resemble the prime minister's
residence: modern, functional, wealthy, but a home that would fit a dentist
or a lawyer just as easily as the head of government. (See "Viewpoint: Defending the Open Future of Scandinavia.")

"This house says a lot about Norway," says Stoltenberg, a fit 50-something,
sporting dark athletic sunglasses, in an interview with TIME. "One of our
qualities is that the distance between political leaders and the people is
smaller than in many other countries. Our challenge now is to try to remain
a society where people can still be close to their political leaders."

That is Stoltenberg's mantra. Since Friday's bombing and shooting of dozens
of teenage members of his left-leaning Labor Party by a right-wing extremist
named Anders Behring Breivik, Stoltenberg has stayed on message at every
occasion, whether in press conferences, or memorial services in Oslo, or
facing a barrage of television cameras. He insists that Norway will not
change.

Read more at www.time.com
 

Click here for the full post......

Wednesday, July 27, 2011

10 things the Monyet (Monkey) King wants Civil Society to do

Technorati tags: , , ,

Yes, Walski did say that the King is fair... and in this third installment of his 10 things, the target is Civil Society. Meaning, the NGOs and individuals who care enough to say and do something.

Being a peripheral part of civil (and many times 'sewel', meaning nutty) society, Walski thinks his simianness' advice may not be something you want to hear, but it definitely is something you NEED to heed.

And yes, Walski still maintains that the Monyet King is being very fair. So, stop monyetting around and read the piece in its entirety (only the points have been clipped here).

Being fair ain't easy, but it's something we all gotta be, if we want to be regarded with any amount of credibility. If the Monyet King realizes this, so, too, should we...

Read more at planetofthemonyets.blogspot.com
Planet of the Monyets
See more at planetofthemonyets.blogspot.com
In order to be really fair, I think it is proper that I also write about the 10 things that I want civil society or the third force to do [although I think Yoda might be offended at the use of the term “force”. You can’t simply play around with this force thing, you know]. [Actually I am also not sure whether using the term third force is appropriate to what I am writing… so I am rojakking third force, civil society, NGOs in the write up. Don’t bother with the technicalities, you will get I am trying to say]
1.Be fair
2.Good governance
3.Empathy
4.Capacity building
5.Create hope
6.Engage with more Malaysians
7.Learn from Sabah
8.Be prepared for the long haul
9.Work on the younglings
10.Stay away from race rhetorics
Read more at planetofthemonyets.blogspot.com
 

Click here for the full post......

Monday, July 25, 2011

Why the SPR needs to be Bersih-fied

Technorati tags: , , ,

Interesting analysis, unscientific as it may be (so claimed by the author, not Walski). Trending the popular vote percentage versus the seats won, over a 50 year period, it's quite obvious that the Malaysian electoral process is rather skewed.

Give the full article a read, if you can - it's yet another reason for Bersih's existence - to create a level electoral playing field. Yes, the incumbent will always have an advantage, but at least, from Walski's perspective, a fair advantage.

Only then will our electoral process really mean something, rather than just a means of prolonging an incumbent whose mandate is clearly decreasing over time...

Amplify’d from www.tindakmalaysia.com
Why we need BERSIH 2.0 to clean up the SPR?
This is not a very scientific analysis but if we plot the results of the election results over the past 50 years, we can see a very clear pattern. The results are skewed heavily towards BN (or its earlier form – The Alliance Party). Both are dominated by UMNO and UMNO used the SPR to distort the electoral process in their favour.
Consider the graph above. It is a plot of the parliamentary seats won by BN/Alliance vs the popular vote. In 1969, when the Alliance Party won 49.3% of the popular vote, they still managed to secure 66% of the seats. This is a glaring outcome of an unfair voting system. Above 50% of the vote, the advantage to BN became greater, so much so that in 2008, BN won 90.4% of the seats with only 63.9% of the votes.
At what % of the vote will BN secure 50% of the seats?
Read more at www.tindakmalaysia.com
 

Click here for the full post......

Sunday, July 24, 2011

The scary Yellow Straw Man called Bersih

Technorati tags: , ,

Straw Man
a component of an argument and is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position. To "attack a straw man" is to create the illusion of having refuted a proposition by replacing it with a superficially similar yet unequivalent proposition (the "straw man"), and refuting it, without ever having actually refuted the original position.
(source: Wikipedia)

July 9, 2011 is a date that some will remember for the rest of their lives. For others, it is a date that they'd rather forget. Walski had wanted to post this write up a long time ago, but despite it being a couple of weeks after the rally, he still thinks it is something relevant to talk about. For a few reasons.

Key among them is how the Malaysian government has reacted – or overreacted, as some would say – to the coalition of NGOs. And continues to do so until today.

In an all too non-humorous way, it’s funny how Bersih 2.0 has been politicized, and hijacked by its opponents. The arguments against this civil society initiative have revolved around:

  • Bersih not being about free and fair elections at all
  • That Bersih is actually for the benefit of Anwar Ibrahim primarily, and in a larger context, PKR
  • Bersih is being used to topple the government of the day illegally (i.e. through revolution, and not through the ballot box)
  • Bersih is being used to resurrect Communism
  • Bersih is being funded by foreign elements bent on destroying our country
  • ... and too many more to mention

But ask yourself this question, as a rational person: are all these accusations based on hard evidence and facts, or merely what UMNO politicians have been saying?

As a rational person who can think and analyze on his own, it really makes Walski wonder: why the vehement, and, yes, violent, opposition?

Thus far, all Walski hears about the opposition to Bersih is that the movement is bad. No solid (or at the very least, logical) reasons given. Yes, there are DAP, PAS, and PKR political figures involved with Bersih. But does becoming a politician relieve one of being a citizen? And does this involvement mean that Bersih is about Pakatan Rakyat, and not about clean and fair elections?

Granted, as Marina M. has quite correctly pointed out in her column this past week, politicians being politicians, they have this tendency to hijack something for their own benefit. In this regard, Walski cannot help but lay blame on some Pakatan Rakyat politicians for trying to use Bersih as a launch pad.

UMNO/BN politicians, too, have tried to hijack Bersih for their own agenda. Applying the same kind of reasoning that has become the justification for Bersih to be vilified, Perkasa must then naturally be part of the UMNO agenda, a sort of strong-arm outsourcing, if you would. Walski is very sure that those within UMNO and Perkasa will disagree, but actions and events pretty much have created that perception.

Has a scary Yellow Straw Man been created to thwart the voice of Bersih, a civil society initiative? And if the answer is Yes, isn’t it reasonable to wonder WHY? 
(our rights seen as wrongs, and more, in the full post)

Walski, in truth, can’t answer the question of why. But based on the equally paranoid more recent action of the government to deport French human rights lawyer, William Bourdon, indications are that the UMNO/BN led Malaysian government of the day is one with a lot of scary skeletons in its closet.

Much more scary, in all probability, than the Yellow Straw Man that has been conjured to scare off the populace from associating themselves with Bersih. As we have seen from what happened on July 9, that strategy backfired quite badly.

From the get-go of Bersih 2.0 announcing it’s July 9th march, opposition to it was almost immediate. Among the first to balk was, of course, Ibrahim Ali and Perkasa, claiming that 'Bersih 2.0 is organised by Pakatan Rakyat leaders to "rescue" PKR de facto leader Anwar Ibrahim's political career by throwing the country into "chaos"' (via Malaysiakini).

Claiming this as an exposé, he read out the names of committee members who are also politicians - such as PAS deputy president Mohamad Sabu.

Ibrahim noted that none of the committee are NGO members.

"The committee shows that it is a Pakatan project, but they try to cloud this fact by putting (former Bar Council president S) Ambiga as president.

"They have no choice, they failed to change the government with (the) Sept 16 (takeover claim) and now Anwar has enter his defence (in the sodomy trial). It's a matter or life or death for Anwar and the best way for them to topple the government." To support his case further, Ibrahim produced a copy of a June 7 PKR circular by secretary-general Saifuddin Nasution inviting members to attend the Bersih 2.0 rally to protest unfair elections.
(source: Malaysiakini)

Before that, Ibrahim Ali had proclaimed that Perkasa would hold a counter-demonstration if Bersih went ahead with the July 9 rally, claiming that chaos would erupt, resulting in injury and mayhem, like in Tunisia.

As it turns out, Ibrahim Ali’s vitriol was all bark – he and Perkasa decided to pull a no-show on July 9.

But as Kee Thuan Chye wrote in his article published in Malaysian Digest, Bersih 1.0 got chaotic because of the police unleashing chemical water cannons and tear-gas – the march had every intention of being a peaceful one, until the police ensured otherwise.

Following in Perkasa’s footsteps soon after was Patriot, a counter-Bersih movement formed by UMNO. And what did Patriot do to dissuade the Bersih rally on July 9? They threaten PKR.

So, calling for fair and clean elections is NOT OK, but threatening a counter-march, and actually carry out not-so-veiled threats of harm is OK, apparently. A constitutional right is now ‘wrong’, and a wrong (threats of violence is still illegal in Malaysia, Walski believes) somehow is condoned as ‘right’.

In the meantime, the police apprehended anyone seen in the yellow Bersih 2.0 t-shirt, and even some wearing non-Bersih yellow. It is almost as if PDRM has been gripped by a mysterious outbreak of xanthophobia. A non-viral sort of Yellow Fever, if you would.

Free the EO6, taken from PSM's website, image hosting by Photobucket Incidentally, the accusation of trying to resurrect communism and the involvement of “foreign elements” emerged because certain socialist paraphernalia was found during the police raid on Parti Sosialis Malaya (PSM). 30 PSM members were arrested, and 6 remain in custody under the Emergency Ordinance (EO), which allows for a 60-day detention without trial. The initial charge, by the way, was “waging war against the Yang Di Pertuan Agung”.

The EO6, as the six have become to be known, are still in custody, despite the revelation that their detention has nothing to do with communism, but all to do with Bersih. They remain victims of an overzealous effort to thwart the voice of civil society.

From a personal perspective, Walski agrees with Bersih, in principle. He has no problem with the 8 demands, and he does view them as reasonable ones. In that respect, Walski is fully supportive of the movement.

He also is of the opinion that Malaysians are capable of conducting peaceful assemblies – provided that the police are there to ensure the peace, and not there with the intention to disperse, by force if necessary, any assembly deemed illegal. But as we all saw, the police were out in full force not to facilitate a peaceful demonstration, rather to thwart it.


Bersih 2.0 - New York City from Leng-Feng Lee on Vimeo.
Without police crackdowns, demos can be peaceful...

So, is Bersih such a dangerous and scary movement deserving of the violent opposition, much of it state-sponsored, that it has received? Or is the crackdown really symptomatic of a paranoid UMNO/BN government so desperate to stay in power?

Raja Petra Kamaruddin, in the days following July 9, released a communiqué that if true, indicates that all the opposition, attempts at painting Bersih as a platform for the resurrection of communism, demonization by all and sundry – everything plus the kitchen sink, in other words – has been a concerted effort to construct a scary straw-man, bright yellow in color, one that purportedly will bring about chaos and destruction.

Concerted, in that it has involved law enforcement, UMNO’s Unit Media Bahalol Baru (UMB), the mainstream electronic and print media, NGOs and martial arts organizations friendly to UMNO... the list is extensive.

Give the directive a re-read, either here, or at Malaysia-Today where it was first disclosed. Are these directives reflective of a government that understands the meaning of democracy?

We live in an era where technology enables information to break the traditional shackles of state control. It is something the government is well aware of, but simply cannot come to grips with, it seems.

Instead of engaging Bersih in an intelligent and sincere way, the government has instead chosen the archaic approach of arrogance and government-is-always-right attitude.

The Yellow Straw Man it has built may be scary to those with sycophantic tendencies, but for the increasingly intelligent populace at large, it is very easy to see through the gaps between the loose straw weaves, which easily fall apart like a battered piñata, upon closer scrutiny.

In closing, allow Walski to make one thing crystal clear – the only way to change our government is through the polls. And what Bersih wants is for the polls to be fought on a level playing field. Nothing more than that.

Employing archaic scare tactics, authoritarian communist-like strategies, and constructing a Yellow Straw Man that in the end scares no one but UMNO/BN themselves, will not make Malaysians at large love them a single iota more.

Quite the contrary, continue with the arrogance the government is currently showing, and GE13 may prove their paranoid fears come to self-inflicted fruition.

Click here for the full post......

In Memoriam: Amy Jade Winehouse (1983 - 2011)

Technorati tags: , ,

This obituary may come as a surprise to some. Especially for those who know Walski, and know what kind of music he likes.

Well, maybe you don’t know Walski well enough. No, he was never an Amy Winehouse fan, nor does her demise come as a shock of any kind. She lived a life and lifestyle that was, to put it mildly, on the edge. To know the real reason why Walski is posting this obit, listen to the following, with your eyes closed.

The world of popular music just lost a genuine, soul-filled voice, troubled as it may have been, and the naturally talented vocalist who brought that voice to the fore.

And it is for that reason Walski posts this. 
(27 Club gets another member, and more, in the full post)

If the video earlier on doesn’t convince you of the talent the world has lost, here’s another clip that probably gives more justice to the voice that was Amy Winehouse’s.

Amy Winehouse was found dead in her London home just short of her 28th birthday (cause of death still unknown/undisclosed), making the late vocalist/songwriter the newest inductee into the 27 Club, whose illustrious members include music legends such as Jimi Hendrix, Janis Joplin, Robert Johnson, Brian Jones, Jim Morrison, and of course, Kurt Cobain.

The Great Jam of the Realm Beyond just got a little sultrier...

RIP Amy – may your voice live among the living for eternity...

Click here for the full post......

Saturday, July 23, 2011

Opinion Poll: Are you satisfied with the Teoh Beng Hock RCI outcome?

Technorati tags: , , ,

Earlier this week on Thursday, the Royal Commission of Inquiry (RCI) into the death of political aide Teoh Beng Hock released its report.

In case you haven’t done it yet, the full report (courtesy of YB Lim Kit Siang) can be found in the full post.

Taken from Screenshots, image hosting by Photobucket The gist of the report: that Teoh was driven to suicide by the intense interrogation by the MACC. Another key point revealed by the report is that the investigation into alleged corruption by Teoh’s boss, Seri Kembangan assemblyman Ean Yong, was launched by a senior Selangor MACC officer merely ‘on an informant’s “mere belief” and without supporting facts(via The Malaysian Insider).

The question, and subject of our latest poll, that Walski wants to ask you: are you satisfied with the outcome of the RCI? 

The poll is located at its usual place on this blog (top of the sidebar on the right). Walski launched it yesterday, and it will remain open until midnight next Friday, July 29.  
(the RCI report, and more, in the full post)

Walski thought it would be a good idea to have you read the report for yourself, and therefore has presented it below, in both English and Bahasa Malaysia.



Laporan Suruhanjaya DiRaja untuk menyiasat kematian Teoh Beng Hock

The commission's findings, although clearly stating that the MACC is indeed accountable for Teoh's demise, points to the conclusion that Teoh did indeed commit suicide. Understandably, this is something that his family simply cannot accept. What action the late Teoh’s family will take is left to be seen. Reports indicate that the family will await the advice of their legal counsel before proceeding any further.

As far as our poll goes, all the usual facilities apply – you can take the poll here, or at the Polldaddy.com hosting site. You can also host the poll on your own blog or website – if you have a Blogger-based blog, simply click the “Add to Blogger” button below the poll, and use the shortcode [polldaddy poll="5255827"], if yours is a Wordpress based one. Alternatively, if you need the raw HTML code for the poll, leave a comment and Walski will e-mail it to you.

So, what do you think – fully satisfied, fully dissatisfied, or somewhere in between?

Walski will post the results of the poll once it closes next Friday, and then he will reveal what he personally thinks.

Click here for the full post......

10 things the Monyet King wants PR to do

Technorati tags: , , ,

Not only is the Monyet (Monkey) King wise, he's also fair. What's good for the goose, as they say, is also good for the other goose.

And so after the Monyet King made his 10-things list for BN, now comes the 10-things list for Pakatan Rakyat (PR). Some of the line items are the same - no surprise, because we are after all talking about a bunch of politicians. And like it or not, most, if not all, Malaysian politicians are cut from the same cloth. Okay, the style and fashion may be different, but the cloth is pretty much the same (with some exceptions).

PR should take heed - these are wise words from a wise (and fair) Monyet King. To ignore them is to potentially fall face-in-the-mud on the banana peel slippery slope of Malaysian politics...

Do read his highness' post in full. The bits that Walski's clipped are merely the points, which tell you the Whats. The Monyet King's post elaborates the Whys behind the Whats.

And like the previous 10-things list, the Monyet King is certainly not monkeying around...

Read more at planetofthemonyets.blogspot.com
Planet of the Monyets
See more at planetofthemonyets.blogspot.com
Three days ago, I wrote about the 10 things I wanted BN to do
Here are 10 things that I would like Pakatan to do (note : the first and last two items are similar to the BN list)
1.Listen to the rakyat
2.Encourage opposing views
3.Succession plan
4.Agree on common positions on important issues
5.Cut the double speak
6.Focus your efforts on governing SG, PG, KD & KN
7.Improve party governance
8.Don’t be a sour puss
9.Bridge in gender gap in politics
10.Put up intelligent candidates
I hope you fellows in Pakatan will also loosen up a bit… you seem more sensitive to criticism than the people in BN. Chill, bro. Just because you are opposition does not mean you are an angel.
Read more at planetofthemonyets.blogspot.com
 

Click here for the full post......

Wednesday, July 20, 2011

10 things the Monyet King wants BN to do

Technorati tags: , , ,

Yes, the Monyet (Monkey) King has decreed.

But don't let his seemingly simian and diminutive proportions fool you into thinking that the 10 things he wants is simply a regal simian monkeying around. Far from it, the Monyet King is serious about what he's decreed.

Walski's clipped the 10 points, but each comes will at least a paragraph of elaboration (so do yourself a favor and read the whole damned thing).

For the target of the post, the ruling BN coalition, this piece may prove to be more slippery than a banana peel... but if BN is serious about being there for all Malaysians, the least they can do is read the post.

And take the unsolicited advise seriously - the king may be a Monyet, but the 10-point decree is certainly no monkey business...

Read more at planetofthemonyets.blogspot.com
Planet of the Monyets
See more at planetofthemonyets.blogspot.com
Here are 10 things that I would like BN to do (in a few days, I will write about the 10 things I want Pakatan to do)
1.Listen to the rakyat
2.Encourage opposing views
3.Liberalise mainstream media
4.Do more to wipe out corruption
5.Sabah and Sarawak
6.Orang Asli
7.Strengthen schools and universities
8.Attract talent
9.Bridge in gender gap in politics
10.Get rid of the tainted and the incompetent
Read more at planetofthemonyets.blogspot.com
 

Click here for the full post......

Politicians and the bipolar world they live in

Technorati tags: , , , ,

Marina Mahathir, in her regular column Musings, doesn't pull back any punches in her latest installment.

Bersih 2.0 has been demonized before the event, and more so after. It's sometimes amusing to hear the kind of rancid tripe that come out the politicians' gullets, but that's just symptomatic of the bipolar world they seem to want to live in.

The more the anti-Bersih folks talk, the more stupid they make themselves sound, it seems. Bersih has been blamed on just about everything - the Jews, Christians, Communists, Socialists... you name it, someone somewhere has probably laid blame on it.

And yet, it's the elephant of an idea, standing stark naked in the middle of the discussion arena, that goes unnoticed - what Bersih is really about.

What's clipped here is merely an excerpt. Read the whole thing. Walski guarantees you it'll be worth your time.

Amplify’d from thestar.com.my
The people who went to Bersih 2.0 are Malaysians who will forever feel united and bound to each other because of that experience. Some may have been politicians and NGOs but so many more were just people of every race, religion, age and creed.

The polarised world of politics

Musings
By Marina Mahathir

The Star Online

Politicians can’t seem to fathom anything but a bipolar world.

They can’t seem to get it into their heads that firstly, there may yet be a third (or fourth, fifth) way of looking at things, and secondly, that the ones with these different perspectives could conceivably be civilians.

Politicians of every stripe have two bad habits.

Firstly, they think those who don’t belong to any political party are incapable of having a single political thought.

They forget that every five years or so, it is they who insist that we think of politics when we go and vote.

Secondly, when non-politicians think of a good populist idea, politicians of all stripes rush to hijack it.

Non-politicians, otherwise known as civil society, then have to fight them off tooth and nail.

Read more at thestar.com.my
 

Click here for the full post......