Not surprisingly in Malaysiakini today, on the 17th of September there is this article titled – The Sept 16 ‘heartbreaker’. I would dare say that this article which was written by R K Anand captures the feeling of majority of Malaysians who demand for change.

The excitement in the air was so thick that one would have needed a chainsaw to cut through it all.

For weeks, it had been the talk of the town and when dawn finally arrived on that fateful day, the nation awoke to the possibility that things might never be the same again.

Throughout the day, the telephones buzzed incessantly with curious friends and relatives at the other end wanting to know if it would actually happen.

But then of course, we all know that this is not the case. Instead…

In the end, it was another (Zaid) Ibrahim that stole the limelight with his frank and hard-hitting comments about the prime minister and his cabinet.

So what had happened on the 16th of September?

Will this mean the end of the “political tsunami”?

Some how R K Anand painted a positive prediction:

Sept 16 might have turned out to be a dud but there is an important lesson for the embattled ruling coalition which could prove perilous if ignored.

The powers-that-be must not overlook the fact that the people were generally disappointed that there was no change of government.

It appears that Malaysians are craving for something different and are willing to experiment regardless of the risks involved.

So if it is not Anwar and his political coup, BN might just find the scales tipping over in the next general election if it is not careful.

In my opinion, we all should not put or rest too much hope on one person, in this case Anwar Ibrahim, for political change. If we want political change then all of us must demand for it no matter who is the leader (as in this case Pakatan Rakyat).

Of course, change may only occur if there is enough mass support for it.

Until that critical mass appears, then I suppose we have to be contented with the current situation.

But don’t forget, we all must work to ensure that we have the necessary instutions to make democracy work; because what many of us want is not really a change of government, but rather a Malaysia in which there is ample of democratic space.

Perhaps what R. Sivarasa said in the Malaysiakini youtube channel should not be a surprise.

Sivarasa in ‘He was indeed stripped, measured’ @ Malaysiakini youtube exposed the lies and treachery in the New Straits Time concerning Anwar Ibrahim….

Perhaps I and others should not be surprised at the behavior of the New Straits Time (or any other mainstream media)…

But should we stay silent whilst the mainstream media over and over again spew lies and unthruths? Should we stay silent whilst New Straits Time arrogantly tell the whole world (as that paper and the news item was also online) something that is blatantly one sided?

The answer is no. At least for me, I will not stay silent although I know that whatever the New Straits Time print is not true. Now, I say this as the New Straits Time, like the other mainstream media has the habit of mixing lies and untruths together with the truth… I consider this unacceptable and therefore I have taken an opinion that whatever is said by New Straits Time is not true, unless other media or sources confirm it (the items as said by New Straits Times) to be the truth…

But sometimes and especially now, the lies are too much. It is as if New Straits Time assume that the public is so gullible that they accept whatever is printed in that paper is the truth.

And the worst is that the New Straits Time like to think that people are so stupid. I mean just read Syed Albar’s statement: If he is searching for the truth he can get it very easily. Just give a blood sample for DNA tests..

Hey what is this… doesn’t he know that DNA sampling is a corroborative evidence. Such a statement..from a minister… and then being printed in the New Straits Time… what do these people think of us…. ? Do they think that we are stupid???

Yea… so New Straits Times is also thinking that the people are still stupid… yeas.. rakyat masih bodoh.. yes?

So I am telling to the people in New Straits Time, you all can go to hell!

Now, for posterity and for the record, I reproduce the whole News Straits Time article below. This article was the one that Sivarasa has referred to:

2008/07/18

‘What is Anwar afraid of?’

By : V. Vasudevan

Source: http://www.nst.com.my/Current_News/NST/Friday/Frontpage/2296707/Article/index_html

Ha ha.. look at the picture… you know who he is…

As was said before, DNA sampling is a corroborative evidence. And strangely the New Straits Time quoted the minister saying that under Malaysian laws, one cannot be forced to give blood sample… Take this legal standing of DNA sampling and the minister’s earlier statement… something does not sound right… and the New Straits Times reported it all…

I must say that I am sick and tired of reading such articles… What is happening in the New Straits Times? Do the journalists and editors in that news paper have any idea what is ethics in journalism?

Normally I just ignore them but now… I feel that I have to say something…

And that is… New Straits Time, you can go to hell !!!

I make no apologies in that statement…

Sometimes I wonder, what is the purpose of politics?

Is politics a means to an end?

For example Malay nationalists (of the Biro Tata Negara type) would sing the Warisan song to remind the Malay masses to support their politics in order to secure a future for the Malays…

But this slogan looks outdated and silly now, as the goals of NEP (New Economic Policy) was not achieved. The funny thing is that these politicians use the failure to achieve NEP as evidence that the Malays need them in order to “protect” the collective interests of the Malays. In this regrad the Malays have been fooled big time since 1990 (the year when the NEP was supposed to obtain their goals). The UMNO led Barisan Nasional should have been voted out of power after that year; but lo and behold, the Malays still support them. Very strange indeed, as even after acknowledging their failure, they even failed to achieve NEP’s target even until today. And when some else told them that yes, in certain respects that goal was achieved, they even cried ‘no’. (I can’t remember but I think that was the ASLI chap who said that…). 

All we know is that many politicians from the government are ‘rich’. Isn’t it strange, they are getting richer whilst even by their standards (i.e. the NEP goal, they have admittedly failed!).  At this stage I would hesitate to name names, as in the current period of accusation of slander and libel, naming names (even if they are obvious, is not advisable, unless you are one of the few bloggers who are willing to endure…).

But read Malaysia’s Political Economy: Politics, Patronage and Profits by Edmund Terrence Gomez and K. S. Jomo, and you know what I mean…

Things bring the question to the issue what is the purpose of politics?

And so politics is a means to an end (or series of ends)… but what exactly?

To enable those who participate in politics to become rich….. this idea is actually embodied in the saying … in Malaysia you join politics in order to be rich… Now, I can’t say who was the first to say such a phrase but this phrase is often heard when Malaysians are discussing about politics…

Or is there something else…

There is another reason for participating in politics… and that is to provide public service….

This post will be continued….

Aha….

Ha ha ha… I was reading this comment about Anwar Ibrahim’s in KPMU – Hujah Anwar kosong dan memutarbelitkan tajuk debat…

Ha ha ha…

Very funny:

Debat yang bertajuk “Bentuk Kerajaan, Esok Akan Turun Harga Minyak”. Apa yang dapat diulas disini adalah debat ini sebenarnya tidak mencapai matlamat yang sebenarnya dan bukanlah pula gagal dalam konteks penerangan yang mana debat ini telah diselewengkan dari tajuk asal dimana Anwar tidak fokus kepada isu dan tajuk debat ini yang sebenar. Mungkin bagi pihak pembangkang dan rakyat biasa yang kurang arif dengan subjek teknikal menganggap debat ini berpihak kepada Anwar kerana seperti biasa Anwar telah banyak memutar belitkan fakta sebenar dan berjaya menyusun ayat -ayat yang membayangkan bahawa beliau adalah pejuang kepada rakyat. Dari segi isi sebenar Anwar gagal untuk membuktikan apa yang telah beliau janjikan dan gagal untuk membuktikan bahawa beliau boleh menunaikan janji-janji yang telah dilakukan pada pilihanraya yang lalu.

Anwar dari tajuk sebenar dengan menekan bahawa beliau akan menurunkan harga minyak sebanyak 50 sen. (Lari dari tajuk dan janji beliau pada plihanraya yang lalu) di mana harga minyak pada masa itu adalah RM1.92 jika kita masih mengekalkan harga RM 1.92 maka kerajaan perlu subsidi sebanyak 50 billion yang mana banyak pembangunan terpaksa dihentikan, projek seperti jalan, sekolah terpaksa dihentikan. Anwar banyak merapu dengan mengulangi perkara lama seperti bail out pewaja dan bail out bermacam-macam lagi benda lain yang tidak diterangkan.
.
Pujian patut diberikan kepada Shabery kerana berjaya memberikan jawapan-jawapan dan soalan yang membuat Anwar gelabah sehingga terpaksa membuat memek muka dan menepuk dahi. Yang menarik adalah apabila Shabery menyatakan bahawa Anwar lah orangnya yang bertanggungjawab dalam pembentukan IPP yang mengaut keuntungan seperti yang dikaitkan oleh Anwar dalam pembentangan beliau dengan mengurangkan reserve kapasiti tenaga eletrik negara dari 40 peratus kepada 20 peratus dan yang mendapat keuntungan adalah IPP.

Source: Hujah Anwar kosong dan memutarbelitkan tajuk debat @ KPMU

This piece was written by an author known as Pendeta

Very funny…. in particular the parts that I bold… especially the ones that imply that ordinary citizens are less knowedgeable…

This reminds me of the old adage – “rakyat masih bodoh“….

Well… I am not surprised if kpmu has this attitude… always thinking that they know better than ordinary people…

Sometimes I think that it is KPMU who is bodoh…. they are stupid because of their condescending attitude…

But nevermind.. this is democracy… (at least in this respect)…

If the KPMU  can say such things about the public (i.e. the rakyat), we can do the same to them too..

Ha ha ha…

Anyway, as was shown in the comments, not all agree with what what Pendeta has said…

I was reading Azly Rahman’s column in Malaysiakini – With whom will the army stroll?

One thing interest me… in particular towards the end of his story. He said this:

No army can defeat revolutionary forces that install better regimes through peaceful, silent, ethical and intelligent means. No iron bars can imprison the conscience and the yearn for one to speak the truth to power. The goodness in men and women will be the best police and the best army.

Man is born free yet everywhere he is in chains.

No army on our streets, please. We are Malaysians. We must let justice take it natural course.

One thing interest me, the sentence: No army can defeat revolutionary forces that install better regimes through peaceful, silent, ethical and intelligent means.

I wonder what he really mean by that… What does he mean by “revolutionary forces that install better regimes” ?

What does he mean by “better regimes” ?

Now, I do accept there have been revolutions that install better regime. But in many more revolutions, the new regimes are much worse than the old ones… And sometimes in the countries where the revolutions took place, there follows long periods of instability and chaos after the revolution.

Take for example France. Do you know that after the Revolution, there were long periods of terror and intimidation, and then Europe was engulfed with war due to that Revolution. Take another example Mexico. The 1910 Revolution that overthrew the dictator Porfirio Diaz was followed by periods of civil war and unrest. Do you know that the population of Mexico decreased during those periods? And take for example Indonesia. The 1945-1950 Revolution did not produce material benefits for her people (except for the fact that the nation is independent)? The promised economic benefit failed to materialise, and then the parliamentary government collapsed and Sukarno came in with a new idea ( Konsepsi) and then launched the disastrous Ekonomi Terpimpin and farcical Demokrasi Terpimpin. During those days the per-capita income of Indonesia plummeted so much… And then even sadly, Suharto launched his revolution and took over…. And a period of darkness called Orde Baru lasted until 1998.

Do you see what I mean?

Ah.. yes Azly also mentioned that these revolutionary forces install better regimes through peaceful, silent, ethical and intelligent means.

Like what? Like in India? Hey !!! Gandhi was assassinated by a Hindu extremist don’t you know… and despite being relatively peaceful, the British Raj was replaced by the Nehru Raj and followed by the Indira Gandhi Raj… and millions of Indians stayed poor and millions of Indians are born into these world by those millions of poor Indians. Do see what I am getting into?

If you know that that are many revolutions of the past failed to deliver the promised change, can you say that a revolution in Malaysia will install a better regime?

And one more thing… why “revolution”? Perhaps Azly Rahman might want to explain the difference between “revolution” and “reformasi”.

Yes… I am now waiting for a follow up to Azly Rahman’s With whom will the army stroll? in Malaysiakini.

I was reading Malaysiakini article Cracks show up in opposition ranks, and I would like to highlight one point made in that article.

The point is the statement by Ramon Navaratnam, president of the Berlin-based Transparency International’s Malaysia chapter:

“Malaysia needs fundamental changes to the system not a change of systems,” said Ramon Navaratnam, president of the Berlin-based Transparency International’s Malaysia chapter.

“Reforms are badly needed and Abdullah is giving it priority but the pace is agonisingly slow,” he said.

“He must speed up the pace, set deadlines to achieve reforms and put credible individuals in charge of the reformed institutions like the police and the judiciary.”

Source: Cracks show up in opposition ranks @ Malaysiakini (http://www.malaysiakini.com)

What I want to highlight is this: What is the difference between “fundamental changes” and “a change“?

Aren’t these two terms closely similar? In other words there is only a fine line separating these two terms. Now, I can think of one way to illustrate the close but yet different meanings of these two terms.

Imagine this: you are driving a car and you feel that the car you are driving is having problems, so what do you do? So you go to a mechanic and unfortunately the mechanic says that your car is a gone case as the engines are so badly damaged to wear and tear. So what do you do?

Yes, you can perform a fundamental change by changing the engines. You buy a new engine and have someone replace the old engine with he new one. That is a fundamental change.

Or you can buy a new car. In other words you perform a total change….

Now there are implications as to what is suggested by Ramon Navaratnam. I actually have something more to write about this issue, but at this juncture I would not do that…

Anyway, I sincerely hope that Malaysiakini will do a follow up such as by interviewing Ramon Navaratnam on the issue of “fundamental changes” versus “a change” of system. I think Ramon Navaratnam might have some interesting things to say… and these things are highly related to the current political drama in Malaysia today.

Update:
I have read this post several times, and I notice something odd with the title. I think I might need to change the title to Fundamental changes to the system vs A change of the system. Now the word “of” is used rather than to.

The first term denotes that some action that is made to the existing system. The word fundamental is used to describe that such changes are major and significant. The second term denotes the replacement of the sytem. Basically you throw out the existing system and put in a new one. Perhaps to say “put a new one” may not be appropriate when we are talking about institutions; so perhaps build a new one might better be used.

Well this situation (and error) really reflects the fine line between the term “fundamental changes” versus “a change” of system. It seems that when there is a fine line between similar concepts, one has to be very careful with the language used.. In this regard I made a slight error in the wording of the title. However, for posterity, I suppose there is no harm in maintaining the original title. I suppose for me, an anonymous blogger, it is ok to make such mistakes… nobody is going to hound me….. I am after all not a famous personality even in the blogosphere.

The other day, I posted an entry titled – PM assures impartiality and fairness, but the KPMU and MYKMU are so kurang ajar! and also an entry titled – KPMU and MYKMU supporters running amok?.

Yes, KPMU and MYKMU….. what are those?  Are they merely tools in this current “situation”….???

Well…. KPMU and MYKMU and well known as pro-UMNO websites and they will never ever say good things about the other side… that is for sure…

And sometimes I think that this is a pity…. I mean this is like a sheer waste of internet time…

Aha… there is something,,,,

Well go this entry if you want to know more….  KPMU and MYKMU: Harbingers of Hatred and Hate Speech?

Have just been reading Malaysiakini news – Aide alleges sodomy: Report lodged (http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/85246). Also have read the Bahasa versions in Malaysiakini which contains more stories. Of course the blogs…especially the posting in Anwar’s Blog – Laporan polis hanya rekaan semata-mata.

What will happen to Anwar Ibrahim now…?

I don’t know…

Perhaps a read and recitation of Rendra’s poem is appropriate. Now… read this poem carefully… the words are full of meaning. Of course that poem was written by an Indonesian for Indonesia…. But still…

Here it is:

Rendra: “Sajak Bulan Mei 1998″

Aku tulis sajak ini di bulan gelap raja-raja
Bangkai-bangkai tergeletak lengket di aspal jalan
Amarah merajalela tanpa alamat
Kelakuan muncul dari sampah kehidupan
Pikiran kusut membentur simpul-simpul sejarah

O, zaman edan!
O, malam kelam pikiran insan!
Koyak moyak sudah keteduhan tenda kepercayaan
Kitab undang-undang tergeletak di selokan
Kepastian hidup terhuyung-huyung dalam comberan

O, tatawarna fatamorgana kekuasaan!
O, sihir berkilauan dari mahkota raja-raja!
Dari sejak zaman Ibrahim dan Musa
Allah selalu mengingatkan
bahwa hukum harus lebih tinggi
dari ketinggian para politisi, raja-raja, dan tentara

O, kebingungan yang muncul dari kabut ketakutan!
O, rasa putus asa yang terbentur sangkur!
Berhentilah mencari Ratu Adil!
Ratu Adil itu tidak ada. Ratu Adil itu tipu daya!
Apa yang harus kita tegakkan bersama
adalah Hukum Adil
Hukum Adil adalah bintang pedoman di dalam prahara

Bau anyir darah yang kini memenuhi udara
menjadi saksi yang akan berkata:
Apabila pemerintah sudah menjarah Daulat Rakyat
apabila cukong-cukong sudah menjarah ekonomi bangsa
apabila aparat keamanan sudah menjarah keamanan
maka rakyat yang tertekan akan mencontoh penguasa
lalu menjadi penjarah di pasar dan jalan raya

Wahai, penguasa dunia yang fana!
Wahai, jiwa yang tertenung sihir tahta!
Apakah masih buta dan tuli di dalam hati?
Apakah masih akan menipu diri sendiri?
Apabila saran akal sehat kamu remehkan
berarti pintu untuk pikiran-pikiran kalap
yang akan muncul dari sudut-sudut gelap
telah kamu bukakan!

Cadar kabut duka cita menutup wajah Ibu Pertiwi
Airmata mengalir dari sajakku ini.

Rendra: 1998

Dear Readers,

Anwar Ibrahim’s petrol price reduction proposal was met with heavy criticism from the Barisan Nasional govt and some Malaysian neo-classical economists. And some of the public are not convinced…

I read his response to those criticisms, but sometimes I think that his response is not enough and not convincing.

And he seems to “forget” about that issue now

Aha… I actually read Anwar Ibrahim’s blog (http://anwaribrahimblog.com/) and ha ha ha… he still have the time to Berpantun Santai….

Allright Anwar, perhaps you might want to “forget” Berpantun Santai for a while. Instead perhaps you might want to study how things will go for the Gas Price Reduction Act of 2008 of the United States of America. This act is quite relevant for your proposed reduction of petrol prices.

Here is an excerpt from one source:

The office of Sen. Robert Bennett, R-Utah, issued the following news release:

Senator Bob Bennett (R-Utah) today joined Senate Republicans to debut groundbreaking energy legislation, the Gas Price Reduction Act of 2008, to address the high price of gas and provide a balanced approach to our country’s long-term energy needs.

The four provisions of the legislation include expanding deep sea exploration, repealing the Democrat moratorium on oil shale, increasing research for plug-in vehicles, and strengthening the U.S. futures markets. Bennett addressed the oil shale provision in the bill and urged Congress to allow the development of what is potentially 800 billion to two trillion barrels of recoverable oil in Utah, Colorado and Wyoming.

Source
SENATE REPUBLICANS UNVEIL ‘GAS PRICE REDUCTION ACT’
US Fed News Service, Including US State News. Washington, D.C.: Jun 26, 2008.

I suppose Anwar can study this act; and being a prominent politician surely he can contact the Republican Senator. Of course, PKR (Partai Keadilan Rakyat) must surely have a dedicated research unit of some kind, perhaps they can do a comprehensive study of this act and propose a similar act to suit the Malaysian context.

Oh yes, the summary provisions for this act can be viewed here:
‘GAS PRICE REDUCTION ACT’ summary provisions

As I said previously, the car is the best means of transportation. There are many reasons for this.

In Malaysia in many tropical countries – the temperature is hot and humid. And you sweat a lot. I once had Canadian friend who remarked that he can’t even finish walking one block and he is wet with sweat. Now, Canada is cold country where the cold weather typically dominates over the warm weather in most provinces.

The thing here is that some of friends told me that they refuse to use public transport in Malaysia because it is so hot there….

They say that at least if you use your own car.. it would not be that bad…. Of course the car will get very hot if it was parked outside under the sun.. but things will cool down if the air-cond is working well…

Such a remark are likely to come from women…

Ahhh…. Perhaps we should read these two posts… Sweating it out: Attitudes Not Helpful if You Are in a Tropical Country and Attitudes Not Helpful if You Are in a Tropical Country .

Anyway, I suppose that the weather is a convenient excuse for not doing ditching the car. Of course there are other factors too, such as safety, which was duly noted by one commentator in my previous post.

Ha ha

See also Sweating it out: Attitudes Not Helpful if You Are in a Tropical Country and Attitudes Not Helpful if You Are in a Tropical Country .