‘Anwar’s harping of Sept 16 was based on inducing elected representatives to switch from being BN reps to PR ones. No context can right this wrong principle.’
On Pakatan makes no apologies for Sept 16
Teh Thian Hwa: Hannah Yeoh of Pakatan Rakyat tried to defend Anwar and said Pakatan makes no apologies for the Sept 16 attempt. I think she is wrong and she has clouded the issue. I do not know if she did it intentionally.
I hope she is not one of those dishonest politicians who make an argument knowing full well it is either a weak or even wrong one, but makes it anyway because she is either a thick-skinned politician or thinks she can hoodwink her audience.
The issue is inducing an elected representative to switch political allegiance. That is a betrayal of the voter, pure and simple. When I vote for someone, I do so on the basis of my views of that person as well as the political party that person represents.
When that representative switches political parties, he or she has betrays me and shortchanges me.
Anwar’s harping of Sept 16 was based on his actions of inducing elected representatives to switch from being BN reps to PR ones. No context can right this wrong principle.
If it was wrong for Najib, it is wrong for Anwar. Hey, if my memory serves me right, Anwar is an old hand at this game. Maybe this time, Umno money simply out-muscled him. Anwar no longer has the money to dish out like he used to when he was in BN.
It is wrong no matter who tries it. One won’t think much of Najib doing it. After all, that is the BN way. With Anwar however, it is just a tad disappointing. Talks of building a better Malaysia surely must at some stage give way to altruism and good principles?
Don’t make Anwar out to be a defender of the constitution - he would have moved more forcefully and decisively had he got the right numbers.
No, I think not many would think Anwar’s failure on Sept 16 was out of some adherence to constitutional rule and principles. I’m afraid you clouded the issue, Yeoh.
Brad: I must take issue with Yeoh, especially as a loyal supporter of the PKR, particularly the DAP, and as the actions of my hero Karpal have been nothing short of ‘Fantastic Fou’r stuff.
When you as a politician can call a spade a spade, then Yeoh, then I’ll believe you have graduated in politics but if you say a spade is a hearts for you and a spade for the another, then we call you unqualified and irresponsible to the people you serve.
We all know what hudud means and if allowed to precede the constitution for any reason, it can then be applied to anyone. Karpal knows this, but Yeoh, you will explain this issue away in the same method as you have tried to explain Anwar's attempted take over of the federal government.
Yes, he did all you said, but the crucial question and main difference was, he could not produce the ‘crossovers’ while BN could and did.
So be careful Yeoh, we have to remain consistent, and that is any type or person who crosses over should be condemned. Anwar also had his Parliament sitting later, whereby he could have got all the crossovers to move to his bench but could not.
BN , when the Perak assembly opens, can do that. So be careful. All your rhetoric is not going to change things in Perak. When the assembly opens, Sivakumar is speaker no more, and that's the reality of things. Like it or not, we have to move to plan B.
I am particularly ashamed that your explanation was addressed as if you were talking or addressing uneducated folk, although some of these poor folk who are uneducated will believe your explanation.
Maybe that is your desire, fool the people, but remember the old saying, ‘You can fool some of the people all of the time, but you cannot fool all the people all of the time.’
Remember that Yeoh for you are young and you should respect people like Karpal Singh, and learn from his wisdom and bravery.
GH Kok: I agree wholeheartedly with Hannah Yeoh. The ‘Sept 16 situation’ was such that Anwar believed, based on evidence he and his party received, that a significant number of MPs had lost confidence in the prime minister.
It was felt that a no-confidence motion, openly debated in Parliament, and a subsequent vote taken, was a constitutional way forward. In principle, a no-confidence vote in the PM in Parliament has nothing to do with party-hopping.
A no-confidence vote in the PM is something allowable in the constitution. It has been used before in many developed democracies under various circumstances.
So, if Abdullah had consented to convening a session of Parliament on Sept 16 to discuss a motion of no-confidence in him, and if a vote was taken and all the Pakatan MPs voted for the motion, plus enough votes from BN MPs, the King would have to accept the will of the people as expressed through the MPs.
He would have to ask Abdullah to step down and ask Parliament to select a new PM that commands the confidence of the majority of MPs. At the same time, it is not inconceivable, in fact, it is expected that the BN MPs who voted for the motion, would be sacked from their party.
They can become independents if they chose to, or join a Pakatan party. The MPs then gather and select their choice of the new PM, whether Anwar or someone else. They then present their choice to the King who is obliged to accept the selection.
This is done openly and constitutionally. I see no wrong with this approach. Compare that with the case in Perak.
Adcin: Lost in the crowing of the BN government on their recent 'takeover ' of the Perak state government is their message to us that 'frogs' are legitimate and tainted ones even more so in this game of love and war.
Anwar Ibrahim may have threatened to take over the federal government with the help of 'frogs' but one would have thought he failed because of the inherent check and balances in the constitution which would not have allowed such a takeover without due process and a fresh mandate from the people.
And so as much as the majority of Malaysians then would have loved to see the end of BN hegemony, the rational among us realised that it was a bridge too far for Anwar even before the September 16 deadline came and went.
That Anwar failed was expected but that he even contemplated it was and should be held against him.
Which makes what BN has done in Perak therefore still an unconscionable act and an affront to all fair- minded Malaysians. By succeeding, it legitimises the implied sordid wheeling and dealing that had to take place and crassly disrespects the wishes of the Perak people.
By stooping to conquer in such a manner, Najib tells us he is only better than Anwar in playing this low game and nothing else.
I hope that Anwar and Pakatan have learnt their lessons from what must have been a painful episode for them.
Perhaps from this Anwar will curb his unbridled ambitions and concentrate on delivering from what he has on his plate. Perhaps he may in the near future even champion an anti hopping law.
As for Najib one can't help thinking that his premiership will go the same way as BN's control of Perak - short and not too sweet.
Peaceful Panda: The Perak crisis is clearly a power play between Anwar and Najib, and the latter came out the victor with the victim is Nizar. It all started with Anwar getting the Bota assembly person to betray his party and the voters in his constituency by defecting to PKR.
Najib retaliates by getting two PKR and one DAP assembly person to betray their parties and voters in their constituencies by supporting BN.
After last year’s general election, Anwar believed that he could topple by mass defections the BN government which had ruled Malaysia and controlled the governmental institutions for more than 50 years. Many of his supporters believed it could happen.
Some assembly persons will betray for better prospects, benefits or due to unhappiness in the parties. These assembly persons have no loyalty and gratefulness. They have forgotten that they became assembly persons with the help of their parties and the voters.
Since ancient times, our cultures despise betrayal. The more we betray, the more people will despise us. This betrayal has to be stopped at all cost.
Once betrayal starts, it can worm deeper into Malaysian politics. It will then become a common practice to betray each other and it can happen within the same party also. The voters will not know who to trust.
Hopefully, there will be some community heads, veteran politicians and academicians who will come out and put a stop to this practice. Let us have a society with loyalty instead of betrayal.
The general elections was over one year ago. It is time to concentrate on performance rather than politicking.
On Perak Assembly to suspend Zambry?
Johari Manaf: I refer to the statement ‘Given that Pakatan Rakyat has six reps in the seven-member committee, it is likely to find Zambry and company guilty’. I think it is presumptuous to conclude this.
Any committee sitting on a quasi-judicial manner must address the complaints that come before them based on merit. It cannot be based on political divide or bipartisan politics.
It would be a sad day for the Malaysia if one is found guilty simply because he belongs to a certain political party or that the adjudicators (who belong to another political party) have formed an opinion even before a case is properly brought before them for deliberations.
Everybody irrespective of their political beliefs has a right to a fair hearing. The principle of natural justice must prevail, especially so if the adjudicators (or his/her party) would stand to gain in the event that the Zambry and the six assembly persons were to be found guilty.
On Sarawak bars another PKR leader
Chuacj: This is not normal. It shows that sombody is really, really afraid of Pakatan. If you look around in Malaysia, it is happening everywhere (and all related to BN).
The missing private investigator Bala and the ‘coup’ in Perak are some of the incidents.
They are still afraid of the rakyat even though they have the control of policee, the MACC, the press and the judiciary.
In football analogy, the referee, the goalkeeper, the lines men and the goalposts are all controlled by BN but they are still afraid and find it difficult to win.
Don't worry R Sivarasa, in this digital age, you can have video conferencing from anywhere you like. Long live Pakatan Rakyat.
On 'Tuanku, you've disappointed us'
Concerned Perakian: I believe, we still practice democracy in Malaysia. The voters elect their representative by voting.
It is very sad to hear that the former Lord President can make such a decision. I think the sultan should stay away from politics. Politics is very dirty, especially here in Malaysia which is full of corruption.
Tuanku must reverse his decision and let the people of Perak choose their leaders with stronger mandate. Let it be BN or Pakatan but leave it to the people.
If this happens, no one will be able to blame the palace. I hope Tuanku will change his mind.
On More than 84 reports: Police quiz Karpal
Ravindran Mailvaganam: Eminent jurists have asserted that the venerable lawyer Karpal Singh's intention to sue HRH Sultan Azlan Shah over the Perak constitutional crisis is well within the law.
As a former Lord President of the judiciary, HRH, who knows much law, could have made a public statement to the effect that what Karpal intends to do is by no means a challenge to the institution of the sultanate or an attack on him personally.
Such a declaration would have destroyed whatever pretext certain sections of Umno Youth, the schoolyard bully, have for denouncing Karpal Singh as a ‘treasonous agitator’.
But alas, Umno, the de facto government for its own survival has to keep the crisis on the boil.
Peter Yew: Najib's ascension to the highest civil post of the nation on April 1 carries an ominous sign. The sign is that of pubic dissatisfaction over the way he engineered the takeover of Perak that introduces his style of running the nation.
The people were left out of consultation, he just went ahead to do what pleases him, rightly or otherwise. This is not a consultative leadership a developing Malaysia hopes to get in our new PM.
He should be more open and progressive than any of our previous PMs. He should be able to lead us out of the present economic mess, consolidate the nation with a common vision and goal and undo all the damages caused by his predecessors.
Can he? Will he? These are urgent questions we need assurances from him.
On Bkt Selambau: Hindraf trio nominate fellow detainee
Kenny Gan: Hindraf’s proposal for ISA detainee Vasanthakumar to be fielded as a candidate for this by-election should not be considered.
As a detainee, Vasanthakumar will not be able to service his constituency if elected and will only serve as a symbol of defiance to the establishment. It is time for Pakatan to move beyond mere symbolism and propose a local candidate who can really serve the constituency.
As the case of Manoharan in Selangor has shown, Vasanthakumar’s successful election will not shorten his continued ISA detention. Even more worrying is the fact that he may be subject to blackmail to defect to BN in exchange for freedom in the future.
This is not to imply that he will succumb to such coercion but it is entirely reasonable to suppose that BN will use such tactics when the circumstances arise.
Hindraf as an organisation to advance Indian issues does not have a wide multi-racial appeal. Even more perplexing is that Hindraf retains the old ethno-centric mentality that only Indians can help Indians.
If Hindraf cannot moderate its sharply sectarian mentality, how different are they from MIC, MCA or Umno?
History has shown that race-based politics with each race fighting for its own rights and privileges does not work as it will only result in the dominant race getting the most and the weakest race getting the least.
So why does Hindraf persist in propagating the old racial system when it is time to be colour blind for Malaysia to move forward?
On Hindraf 5 to remain in detention
Maniam Sankar: Now that the courts have again said they will not question the minister’s order to detain the Hindraf five under ISA, would the minister please explain to the country how the five could have possibly subverted the country?
After all they carried no guns, did not harm anyone, did not use explosives and as the minister himself has confirmed, have no links to terrorist organisations.
In the absence of plausible explanations, we must assume the home minister and prime minister to be the real terror-inspiring people.
And I urge all right-thinking Malaysians to write to them demand an explanation.
If this detention order stays; you and your children could be next for it appears we could all be equally as guilty as them in not being terrorists but in being fit to be detained.
David Anthony: My level of respect for PAS has shot up. It was indeed magnanimous of Husam Musa to have travelled from Kelantan to show his sympathy and solidarity with the arrested Hindraf people.
PAS has always been seen as being composed of religious ‘fanatics’ concerned only with Islam and hudud laws.
This gesture shows that they are people who can see beyond religion and embrace human values regardless of religion. He saw them as victims of a big bully. He, the PAS vice-president and Salahuddin Ayub the Youth chief empathised with the hurt of the Indian community.
I take my hat off to PAS. The Indian community has been targeted in the name of Hindraf with selective punishment. The government thinks that they can be easily bullied because most of them belong to the lower-working class and are poor.
There is a Tamil saying: ‘A Tamilian will never go looking for a fight but if a fight comes to him he will not let go of it.’
But this struggle need not be that of the Indians alone. I quote what Musa said to the detainees and their family members:
‘The leaders of PAS, DAP and PKR will fight against this’. Indeed all Malaysians concerned for justice must raise their voices to tell the government that we are fed up with the way they are carrying on.
On All must cooperate to deal with dengue situation
PT Tan: The writer’s complaint is symptomatic of the malaise in Malaysia. We can wait and wait or stand up and be counted, whether it is politics, social problems or with the pesky mosquito.
Here is a simple, dirt-cheap contraption that has been used for some time. Just fill some sugar solution into a mineral water bottle then throw in some yeast (the same as those you use to make cakes).
Wrap the bottle with black paper or with a thick multi-layer of newspapers. Leave it in a dark place overnight.
Next morning, cap the bottle, leave it in the hot sun to kill the mozzies inside the bottle. Do not use insecticide spray as the bottle will not be re-usable.
Reuse the bottle in the evening. Change the water solution every two weeks – use it on your plants – it is a good fertilizer.
(Yeast and sugar ferments and produce CO2, which attracts mosquitoes).
If you are the lazy type, put a funnel on the opening of the bottle and you can leave it for a week or two, as most of the mosquitoes cannot fly out due to the funnel trap.
Or cut the bottle into two and invert the top portion, taped all round. There are many ways to do it.
Let us all stand up and do our thing and forget about the authorities - they have been shrugging their shoulders for far too long.
