I Like This...

Thanks Sdr Hussein for the heads up.

“Just as we should reject the thoughtless equation of progress and hope, so we need to distinguish between nostalgia and the reassuring memory of happy times, which serves to link the present to the past and to provide a sense of continuity. The emotional appeal of happy memories does not depend on disparagement of the present, the hallmark of the nostalgic attitude.

Nostalgia appeals to the feeling that the past offered delights no longer obtainable. Nostalgic representations of the past evoke a time irretrievably lost and for that reason timeless and unchanging. Strictly speaking, nostalgia does not entail the exercise of memory at all, since the past it idealizes stands outside time, frozen in unchanging perfection.

Memory too may idealize the past, but not in order to condemn the present. It draws hope and comfort from the past in order to enrich the present and to face what comes with good cheer. It sees past, present, and future as continuous. It is less concerned with loss than with our continuing indebtedness to a past the formative influence of which lives on in our patterns of speech, our gestures, our standards of honor, our expectations, our basic disposition toward the world around us.”


Christopher Lasch, The True and Only Heaven: Progress and Its Critics (New York: W.W. Norton and Co., 1991) 82-3.

The NEM: A Comment By M. Bakri Musa

M. Bakri Musa is one of my favorite commentators on Malaysian socio-politics. Here he gives his views on the 1st NEM report by the Najib government and I think it is very fair comment. All Malaysians must read this before the 2nd NEM report comes out.

Bakri Musa on NEM
April 3, 2010


Bakri Musa on NEM (New Economic Model)
Dr. M. Bakri Musa @ Morgan-Hill, Cal

With threatening clouds overhead, there are no prizes for predicting the flood, only for designing or building the ark. The recently-released New Economic Model (NEM) Report draws our attention (not that we need it!) to the darkening Malaysian skies, and then goes on advising us to build an ark.

That is as far as the report goes. There are no hints on whether the clouds would bring a tropical drenching or just a midday sprinkle. There are also no suggestions on the type of vessel we should build. A barge, yacht or a sampan will all keep us afloat, but beyond that they serve vastly different purposes, not to mention their enormously varying costs. And if the forecast calls for only a light sprinkle, then a simple umbrella would do; no need to expend scant resources on an unneeded ark.

We are told that following “public input,” another report will be released by June, in time for its recommendations to be incorporated into the Tenth Malaysia Plan and the 2011 Budget. This second report, we are further assured, will contain specific policy prescriptions – the ark design, as it were.

The current report is silent on how this “public input” would come about. Before deluding ourselves that we could participate in robust public debates, let me intrude a cautionary note. Acknowledging that there will be opposition, the report urges the government to take “prompt action when resistance is encountered.”

You can be assured that those UMNO-Putras and others glutton on the NEP-spawned patronage system would be spared this “prompt action.” They as well as the Perkasa boys can continue with their shrill voices opposing NEM. For Pakatan folks and others, however, be warned!

Major Conceptual Flaws

On a general level, this report suffers from three glaring conceptual flaws. One, it fails to recognize that the bane of past policies is in their implementation. Two, it ignores the major role culture plays in the successful execution of any economic initiative. And three, there is no attempt at learning from the successes and failures of earlier policies.

This last deficiency is surprising as well as disturbing. If NEM were to supplant NEP, then we should know the strengths and weaknesses of that earlier policy. Or if it was basically sound, then what or who perverted it, and where the failures were in its implementation.

No one argues with the twin objectives of NEP: eradicating poverty and eliminating the identification of race with economic function. Those are laudable goals; the second in particular for a racially diverse society like ours. Indeed, the report pays tribute to NEP for reducing poverty and minimizing inter-communal inequities.

Unfortunately, there the report ends. In an earlier chapter, the report duly lists the numerous problems facing Malaysia to day: widening inequities especially among Bumiputras; talented citizens leaving; the rise of a rent-seeking class; entrenched corruption; and the failure of our institutions.

What happened in between? Unless we know, there is little assurance that the laudable goals of NEM would not be similarly derailed. If we are unwilling to acknowledge and learn from the mistakes of the NEP, then we are bound to repeat them.

Thus there should be some critical analysis of the NEP, at least an elaboration of the positive elements and the highlighting of the negatives. The one chapter that should be in the report would be one titled, “How did we get in the mess we are in today?” I reckon that such a chapter would be filled with narratives on the failures of our institutions. It is this that doomed NEP.

On the role of culture, it is surprising that a committee made up of mostly Malaysians and those familiar with Malaysia would come up with a report that is totally oblivious of this reality. This cultural dimension is crucial not only in economics but also in management and health care. Of all people, Malaysians who are daily immersed in a diverse cultural environment, should be well aware of this.

An initiative that would be embraced by urbanite Chinese in Penang would fall flat among Iban rural dwellers of interior Sarawak. The solo entrepreneur model would probably find a fertile ground in Penang, but not in Kenawit. There, the social system would be more supportive of cooperative-like ventures.

Challenges for the urban poor regardless of race are radically different from those in rural areas; race only compounds those differences. The failure to recognize this dooms many an imaginative plan. When that happens, those policymakers would resort to blaming and stereotyping the poor victims. We have heard that many times.

The colonials brought modern schools to Malaysia with the best of intentions. Non-Malays responded to that gesture and benefited immensely. Malays did not, and suffered the consequences in terms of our economic and social development.

It would be wrong as well as cruel to conclude that Malays did not value modern education, as many (and not just the colonials and non-Malays) were wont to. For when those schools were named Tuanku Muhammad School instead of Convent of the Holy Infant Jesus, Malay parents readily enrolled their children. The content was still essentially the same but only the packaging was different; it was sensitive to the culture of the clients.

American consumers readily respond to their leaders’ exhortations to increase their spending to pull the country out of recession. For the Japanese however, the more their leaders urge them to spend, the more they save, and hoard. Same economic circumstances and the same economic rationale, but the responses and results are diametrically different. Culture explains that.

“Most of economics,” as Landsburg put it in his The Armchair Economist, “can be summarized in four words: ‘People respond to incentives.’ The rest is commentary.” Alas what are viewed as incentives in one culture can be definite disincentives elsewhere. That is the central challenge. Policymakers ignore this at their own peril.

The British, in an attempt to encourage Malays to save, duly increased the interest rates on Postal Savings Accounts. However, instead of increasing their deposits, Malays withdrew theirs! Malays viewed the increase as an inducement to a life of sin. Those sneaky white devils!

Ungku A. Aziz created Tabung Haji and labeled the investment returns as “dividends.” Malays swarmed to that institution, making it the largest in the region. Essentially the same content, but different packaging! The Ungku understood economics well and fully comprehended its central axiom: People respond to incentives.

An extension to this observation is that the incentives you offer would influence your responders. Offer honey, you get bees; rotten meat, maggots. When the committee decries the economic rent-seekers emerging under the NEP, it should carry the analysis further to find out the incentives offered. Rest assured that if NEM were to offer rotten meat as NEP did, NEM will too get its share of maggots.

On the crucial issue of implementation, the report only tangentially addresses the strengthening of our institutions when that should be the major focus. Our institutions are blighted with bloat, incompetence, and corruption; they simply cannot deliver.

Consider the current initiatives to improve the civil service, of which there are too many to count. First there was PEMUDAH, self-described as “a high-powered task force to address bureaucracy in business-government dealings.” It is chaired by no less than the Chief Secretary. Then there was the appointment of Koh Tsu Koon as the minister in charge of “Performance Management.” He had hardly warmed his seat when yet another minister, Idris Jalla, was made in charge of – you guess it – KPIs!

Who is in charge here? Meanwhile the civil service continues its bloat and ineffectiveness, as exemplified by Najib’s own cabinet. And if you have to get your driver’s license, you would still need the services of runners and touts, as well as some duit kopi.

Corruption will not be dented – much less ended – merely with the report blandly declaring “zero tolerance” for it. Make the Anti Corruption Commission independent, answerable only to Parliament or the King, and appoint a seasoned professional to head it. If you cannot find a native, recruit from the FBI or Scotland Yard. That one move would more effectively curb corruption and improve our institutions than all the KPIs, National Integrity Institutes, and NEM’s and others’ declarations of “zero tolerance.” It would also be considerably cheaper.

Accurate Portrait, But No Revelation

This report is refreshingly different from the usual government publications in that it is highly readable and the content well organized. The chapter headings too are clear and simple; they accurately reflect the contents, with such titles as “Where We Are?” Where Do We Want To Be?” and “How Do We Get There?” An index would have been useful, but the well laid-out and sufficiently detailed “Table of Contents” made up for that deficiency.

This report is remarkably free of gross grammatical gaffes and awkward syntax. The committee staff has also done a credible job with the executive summary. The report was made available online almost immediately. These features are rare with our government publications, and thus merit special commendation.

The full report is available only in English, a glaring omission considering that NEM would supplant NEP. As everyone knows, NEP is dear to most Malays, especially those of the Perkasa persuasion. Any tampering of NEP, even if it involves only one letter of its acronym, risks raising the hackles of those folks. Having the full report in Malay would have been a splendid start at trying to influence them, quite apart from being a politically smart gesture. Malay after all is our national language.

As things stand, those proficient only in Malay would have to be satisfied with the Ringkasan eksekutif (Executive summary). My hunch is that they would find the going rough, what with such phrases as “Menginovasi hari ini untuk hari besok yang cemerlang,” (Innovation today for a glorious tomorrow) and, “Inisiatif Pembaharuan Strategik” (Strategic Renewal Initiatives). I would have said it differently, “Cara baru untuk menjamin masa depan yang cemerlang” (A new way to ensure our bright future).

Dark clouds there are – and many – hovering over Malaysia, from the hundreds of thousands of skilled citizens who have migrated, to the anemic growth in our productivity. The report rightly points out the lack of political will to overcome these myriad problems. Kudos to the committee for this forthrightness!

The report paints a gloomy picture for Malaysia if it were to stay the course. Again, few would disagree with that. I wish those luminaries would help us sketch and build the appropriate ark, one that would meet our unique needs and challenges, instead of merely warning us of the impending flood.

The report does not lack for specifics. For example, it aims for an economic growth of at least 6.5 percent annually. Its target too is specific, the bottom 40 percent of Malaysians.

One specific suggestion on improving the government machinery is the proposal to “corporatize” and rename the Malaysian Industrial Development Agency (MIDA) to Malaysian Investment Development Agency. The committee pats itself for the brilliance of substituting “Investment” for “Industrial,” as then the agency could continue keeping its acronym and logo!

If only they recognize that changing even a single letter in a corporate name would entail changing entire letterheads, advertising plates, and web pages. The exercise would consume as much effort as if you had changed the entire name. It would have been more productive if the committee had recommended changes to MIDA’s mode of operations and strategies. After all, Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway did not need to change its name in order to diversify very profitably beyond its initial textile roots.

The Report goes out under the signatures of all but one (Dr. Norma Mansor) of NEAC members. Of the ten who signed and thus responsible for the report, three are non-Malaysians while two are Malaysians (or at least born locally) who have spent their formative careers abroad.

Of the remaining five – the ‘natives’ – only one, the chairman Amirsham Aziz, has substantive private sector experience, having spent his time in banking. He had a brief political career as a cabinet minister, but that was through the appointive senate route rather than through elections. In short, the chairman, like the rest of his committee, is short on political acumen as reflected in the lack of a Malay version of the report.

Again referring to the ‘natives,’ all have formal training in economics except for one. The exception is Dzulkifli Razak, Vice-chancellor of Universiti Sains Malaysia; he is a pharmacist by training. Two of the ‘natives’ were former academics but now, government bureaucrats. The resumes of the committee members are impressive, with seven having doctorates, all but one in economics.

I have no quarrel with the committee’s assessment of our current dismal state. I concur with its observations. I just wish that the committee members would have been more forceful in pointing out whether the Najib Administration’s many recent moves were in the spirit of or contrary to the committee’s aspirations. For example, the committee wisely noted the need for devolution of authority to lower levels, yet Najib’s recent response to the request for local elections runs counter to that.

Similarly, the committee decries the failure of our educational institutions. Yet it does not address whether the recent rescinding of the policy of teaching science and mathematics in English would accelerate or reverse this decline.

I hope that in its final report the committee would be more forceful in addressing these contradictions. The committee owes this obligation not only to the Najib Administration but also to all Malaysians. Doing so would also help us design and build a better ark.

Social Media In A Nutshell

This slide presentation sums up social media in its own way.

Misinformed Minister Of Information's Misinformation And Disinformation

The Ministry of Information is an important tool in the Government's toolbox but some would like to say it is a potent weapon in the BN's armoury. However, judging by the current Minister and his immediate predecessor, the government (or BN) must be either scraping the bottom of the barrel or plain arrogant to have chosen these two clowns.

Who can forget Zainuddin Maidin's TV interview with Al Jazeera just after the BERSIH rally in 2007? Just to jog your memory, here it is...watch it again and cringe again:



Then we have the current guy who replaced Zainuddin, the seemingly qualified yet idiotic Dr Rais Yatim. As Najib's choice to be his Goebbels, Rais Yatim is more articulate but he appears to be just as stupid. His latest statement is mind-boggling:

Minister Rais Yatim Says "Internet Will Erode Malaysian Culture"
Read here for more.

"Rais Yatim, Malaysia's Information and Communication minister, said Muslims and other religious groups must be wary of the INTERNET as it was introduced by the West."

His statement is stupid on 2 counts. The first is the absurdity of the statement itself. The second is the reference to "Malaysian Culture" by a man who clearly has his own warped idea of what "Malaysian Culture" is as seen in the following (now infamous) clip:



Well, is the Minister of Disinformation, Rais Yatim setting the right "Malaysian Culture" example for our Youth? Fortunately, the Youth are not buying it and this is what they think of him:



YOU BE THE JUDGE...

UPDATE: Of Robber Barons And Bottomless Pits?

My friend the famed communist fighter, Dato' Seri Yuen Yuet Leng still holds strongly to his opinion that Najib will deliver on his 1Malaysia. Having loyally served the nation and for a period under Najib's father during the difficult "communist" years, I cannot fault him for his steadfast belief in the son of the father.

Indeed the modus operandi of the BTN was always going to be a sore thumb; threatening to stick it up any genuine efforts to promote 1Malaysia.

There has always been whispers floating around about the controversial content of BTN courses that has only now been openly debated by the Opposition. Non-Malays who have been exposed to the unsavoury content of BTN over the last two decades had somehow been so cowed and fearful of speaking out.

They accept the fait accompli for fear of repercussions while on the other hand, Malays who have undergone the same BTN courses are probably too embarassed to speak out.

So, if the courses have been allowed to continue for more than 2 decades, then does that justify the BTN methods? Obviously not, but the non-Malays never dared to speak out in the past for fear of inciting violent reactions (contrived or otherwise). It always had to be that the Malays should be the ones who speak out against the BTN methods and now they have done so in droves. There is still a chance for Bangsa Malaysia yet!

Obviously, seige mentality and 1Malaysia ideals are mutually exclusive. I hope Dato' Seri Yuen is right and if this interesting piece in The Malaysian Insider today is anything to go by then, perhaps there is still hope for Najib. However, Najib should also look into the BTN-like indoctrination that goes on in the PLKN (National Service) that our youth have to swallow.

Please read:

Najib’s BTN dilemma
By Leslie Lau
Consultant Editor

KUALA LUMPUR, Nov 28 — Datuk Seri Najib Razak, his deputy Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin next to him, and a number of ministers were thoroughly briefed several weeks ago on the divisive nature of the controversial Biro Tata Negara (BTN) courses compulsory for civil servants and university undergraduates.

What will Najib (centre) do about the BTN?

At the end of the briefing, the PM spoke of the fear and siege mentality the BTN courses had created, particularly among Malay participants.

“This must end,” he told those present, including Muhyiddin, Datuk Seri Khaled Nordin and Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz.

The Malaysian Insider understands that all of the Cabinet members who were present at the briefing, arranged by Datuk Seri Idris Jala, nodded in agreement.

Najib is now facing increasing pressure to close down the BTN while the hawkish forces in his administration continue to defend what has been called racist brainwashing courses by participants and the Pakatan Rakyat (PR).

PR is now on a campaign to expose what its leaders say are political indoctrination programmes to ensure civil servants and students back Barisan Nasional (BN) and Umno.

An earlier proposal by the Najib administration to overhaul the BTN, or National Civics Bureau, may not be good enough, with more Malaysians speaking up against the courses.

If the government does not shut down the programme, Najib will face the prospect of more talk that his 1Malaysia talk is empty.

In recent week, a number of former participants which include PR politicians and journalists have spoken of their experiences at BTN camps.

They have pointed to how facilitators would stoke racial superiority, including portraying the Chinese as the most significant threat to the Malays.

PR parties such as the DAP have been portrayed as communist enemies of the country.

A constant theme of the BTN courses, especially for Malay participants, is the emphasis on racial ideology which is strikingly similar to Umno’s Ketuanan Melayu rallying cry, according to the accounts of some former participants.

Government ministers at Jala’s briefing several weeks ago had all privately acknowledged the need for BTN to be revamped.

Jala had spoken on the need to overhaul BTN, to make it more inclusive.

Jala has been charged with the responsibility of promoting Najib’s 1 Malaysia concept.

His team has been incubating ideas which touch on race, religion and other stumbling blocks to better race relations which have deteriorated.

The BTN courses have already been identified as one of those stumbling blocks.

But this week, as the flap grew over BTN, Muhyiddin defended the programme and denied that it was racist.

Instead the Selangor PR government has been the subject of attacks, particularly in the Bahasa Malaysia press, for attempting to ban its civil servants and students at state-owned institutions from attending the courses.

Umno leaders including Defence Minister Datuk Seri Zahid Hamidi, a close ally of Najib, have spearheaded a stout defence of BTN as an organization which promoted national unity and was being subjected to unsubstantiated attacks from PR.

While Najib remains overseas attending the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting (CHOGM), his ministers and party-owned newspapers have promoted the idea that BTN is a flawless organisation.

They are also criticising PR parties for being unpatriotic or being against national unity.

Such a stand is likely to put the Prime Minister in a difficult position.

The Malaysian Insider understands that there are moves within the administration to dilute the syllabus of BTN courses, as a compromise.

But such half-measures are not likely to be enough if Najib is serious about reversing what many Malaysians see as institutionalised racism.

The question now is whether Najib will stick to what was articulated in private.

Of Robber Barons And Bottomless Pits?

Two articles caught my attention today. One entitled, "BTN -- Between true education and indoctrination" by Azly Rahman is about the Biro Tata Negara being a tool for Malaysia's robber barons who wish to plunder the nation by silencing the masses and using the ideological state apparatuses at their disposal. The other, in the Asia Sentinel entitled, "Grand Theft Malaysia", which coincidentally relates to the point Azly Rahman alludes to. Both are must reads together.

The last paragraph of the Asia Sentinel article is as follows:

"In the 1960s, federal prosecutors in the United States who were attempting to jail the late labor boss Jimmy Hoffa for looting the Teamsters Pension Fund of millions of dollars with his cronies were puzzled by the fact that their revelations appeared to have little effect on the union's rank and file. It was because no matter how much money Hoffa and his cronies stole, there was always money left because the fund was so rich. That appears to be the case with Malaysia."

"That appears to be the case with Malaysia." Yeah, for how long and for how much more!?!

The two articles:

*********************************************************

BTN -- Between true education and indoctrination

These days, the idea of Ketuanan Melayu is going bankrupt, sinking with the bahtera merdeka. It works only for Malay robber barons who wish to plunder the nation by silencing the masses and using the ideological state apparatuses at their disposal.




A REPUBLIC OF VIRTUE
by Azly Rahman
http://azlyrahman-illuminations.blogspot.com/

I agree we must give credit to those working hard to "improve the psychological well-being of the Malays" and for that matter for any race to improve its mental wellness. This is important. This is a noble act. The question is: in doing so, do we want to plant the seeds of cooperation and trust-- or racial discrimination and deep hatred? Herein lies the difference between indoctrination and education. Herein lies what the work of Malaysia's Biro Tata Negara is about.

These days, the idea of Ketuanan Melayu is going bankrupt, sinking with the bahtera merdeka. It works only for Malay robber barons who wish to plunder the nation by silencing the masses and using the ideological state apparatuses at their disposal. In the case of the BTN it is the work of controlling the minds of the youth. The work of BTN should be stopped and should not be allowed anymore in our educational institutions. It is time our universities especially are spared of counter-educational activities, especially when they yearned to be free from the shackles of domination. Look at what has happened and what is still happening to our institutions with the University and University Colleges Act and the Akujanji Pledge.

Over decades, many millions of Malays and non-Malays have not been getting the right information on our nation's history, political-economy, and race relations. History that is being shoved to us or filter-funneled down the labyrinth of our consciousness is one that is already packaged, biased, and propagandized by our historians that became text-books writers. History need not be "Malay-centric". Special rights for all Malaysians should be the goal of distributive and regulative justice of this nation, not the "special rights of a few Malays". History must be presented as the history of the marginalized, the oppressed, and the dispossessed -- of all races. We toil for this nation, as the humanist Paramoedya Ananta Toer would say, by virtue of our existence as "anak semua bangsa ... di bumi manusia". Malaysia is a land of immigrants.

In this regard we can learn from the former British colony called America. Whatever the shortcomings may be, America is a land of immigrants and still evolving. Even a Black man or a woman can become president. This is what America conceives itself to be and this is what Malaysian can learn from. Can a non-Malay become a Prime Minster is he/she is the most ethical of all politicians in the country?

No one particular race should stake claim to Malaysia. That is an idea from the old school of thought, fast being abandoned. Each citizen is born, bred, and brought to school to become a good law-abiding and productive Malaysian citizen is accorded the fullest rights and privileges and will carry his/her responsibility as a good citizen. That is what "surrendering one's natural rights to the State" means. One must read Rousseau, Locke, Voltaire, and Jefferson to understand this philosophy. A bad government will not honor this -- and will fall, or will sink like the bahtera merdeka.

The history of civilizations provides enough examples of devastation and genocide as a consequence of violent claims to the right of this or that land based upon some idea of "imagined communities." We must teach our children to make history -- a history of peace amongst nations. This must be made into a new school of thought: of "new Bumiputeraism" that encompasses all and do not alienate any -- because life is too brief for each generation to fight over greed.

The eleventh hour of human existence and our emergence in this world has brought about destruction as a consequence of our inability to mediate differences based on race, color, creed, class, and national origin. Each ethnic group thinks that it is more socially-dominant than the other. Each does not know the basis of its "self". Each failed to realize its own DNA-make up or gene map.

Life is an existential state of beingness, so must history be conceived as such. Nationalism can evolve into a dangerous concept-- that was what happened to Europe at the brink of the two World Wars. It happened in the former Yugoslavia, Rwanda, and Indonesia when Suharto fell. I argue that we must live evolvingly in the "historical presence of historical constructions". The past and the future is in the present.

Back to BTN.

Courses devoid of critical treatment and sensibility and ones that retard student thinking -- such as "Kenegaraan" -- in our universities are designed to tell our mind to live in an imagined past. BTN is playing this dangerous game of blind nationalism still passing down packaged information that do not take into consideration the complexities of globalization and the promise of multiculturalism. We need to offer courses such as Multiethnic Malaysia that will have students aspire to think like multiculturalists and help this nation evolve better.

The ministry of education higher education combined has hundreds of experts -- many overseas trained and have tasted the "spirit of multiculturalism” and the "beauty of intellectual freedom" in their classrooms abroad -- who ought to have engineered a paradigm shift to help dismantle indoctrination agencies such as Biro Tata Negara.

But where are the voices in the wilderness of our public universities -- those who should be speaking up against 'Ketuanan Melayu or Ketuanan this or that race'? Why are many of these experts, instead of fighting for radical changes to affect radical-peaceful structural changes, are making big decisions to further advance the cause of racism? One-dimensional thinking prevails -- the thinking that does not allow diversity of ideas and failed to develop cross-cultural perspectives. Ideas move nations but indoctrinations remove intelligence. Political masters-- however corrupt to the core they are -- dictates the work of our academicians.

Whoever writes history and turn that into say, BTN propaganda, controls the future (or at least they think they do). We must question what is taught during the sessions or during any history lesson; fundamentally:

-- Whose history are we studying?
-- Is it meaningful to me?
-- Who wrote this history? Why? Who benefits?
-- Who gets included and excluded in this history textbooks?
-- Who's the hero -- who's the villain?

What I want to see is a stop to the systematic and ongoing stupefication of the Malays and the non-Malays and to let them be free from being run-down emotionally by boot camp facilitators who make a living humiliating people. We have a new generation of best and brightest Malaysians to educate. As an educator I have worked with thousands of them. These are extremely creative individuals who enjoy being challenged at the most respectable and intellectual levels -- not through indoctrination methods such as those used in BTN camps. They want to be fed with more questions and not be shoved with BTN-type of answers. We cannot afford to turn term them into docile beings while at the same time we holler the slogan "human capital" or modal insan the world over. It will be a "modularly insane" human condition if we continue to capitalize on human docility.

The Biro Tata Negara as an indoctrinating institution was conceived by "intellectuals" who themselves are trapped in their own cocoon or glass coconut shell of "wrongly-defined" Malay-ness and in a paradigm that teaches a poor understanding of Malaysian history. These intellectuals are running around in our public universities promoting a more sophisticated and pseudo-intellectual version of racism. Inciting racial sentiments in classroom and boot camps is big business nowadays -- profits made in the name of patriotism. But who's monitoring the trainers?

Education is not about insulting one's intelligence and instilling fear in our children. This is what the creators of BTN need to learn. In short, the indoctrinators need a good education on how not to indoctrinate. "Melayu 'kan hilang di nusantara ... " if we allow the dumbing down of Malaysians to continue.

Progressive parliamentarians must discuss this serious matter concerning the organization's deliberate attempt to promote disunity and to further fertilize the seeds of racism, at a time when we need to come together as Malaysians in order to face humanity's greater problem such as the food, oil, and water crisis that will plague us as human beings -- at a time when we must focus on constructing a new republic of virtue that will be founded on transcultural ethics, responsive and reflective politics, and a social-democratic-based economic system that do not tempt and feed human greed of the things they do not need. Our Asian despotic brand of capitalism continues to destroy the very foundation of our existence and our moral fibre. It is greed -- big time -- that brought down the National Front.

Through the work of the Rakyat, Divine intervention helped speed up the process of removal of Greed disguised as political parties in power. That's the metaphysical interpretation of March 8, 2008.

We are not running Hitler Youth camps in Malaysia. We must not even come close to setting up one.

SEE VIDEO ON YOUTUBE HERE: http://www.youtube.com/v/Fdkg5sPf-tk&hl=en_US&fs=1&

OUR USUAL REMINDER, FOLKS:
While the opinion in the article is mine, the comments are yours; present them rationally and ethically. AND -- ABOLISH THE ISA -- NOW!


**************************************************

Grand Theft Malaysia
Written by Our Correspondent
FRIDAY, 27 NOVEMBER 2009


Many snouts in the public trough

The Port Klang Free Zone scandal may be big, but it is only the latest in a long line of Malaysian scandals going back to the early 1980s. Time Magazine quoted Daniel Lian, a Southeast Asia economist at Morgan Stanley in Singapore, saying that the country might have lost as much as U$100 billion since the early 1980s to corruption."

The scandals listed below are only a small sample of the looting of the country's coffers:

In July of 1983, what was then the biggest banking scandal in world history erupted in Hong Kong, when it was discovered that Bumiputra Malaysia Finance (BMF), a unit of Bank Bumiputra Malaysia Bhd, had lost as much as US$1 billion which had been siphoned off by prominent public figures into private bank accounts. The story involved murder, suicide and the involvement of officials at the very top of the Malaysian government. Ultimately it involved a bailout by the Malaysian government amounting to hundreds of millions of dollars.

Mak Foon Tan, the murderer of Jalil Ibraim, a Bank Bumi assistant manager who was sent to Hong Kong to investigate the disappearance of the money, was given a death sentence, and Malaysian businessman George Tan who had participated in looting most of the funds, was jailed after his Carrian Group collapsed in what was then Hong Kong's biggest bankruptcy, and a handful of others were charged. No major politician was ever punished in Malaysia despite a white paper prepared by an independent commission that cited cabinet minutes of Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad giving an okay to a request to throw more money into the scandal in an effort to contain it.

That was just the first Bank Bumi scandal. The government-owned bank had to be rescued twice more with additional losses of nearly US$600 million in today's dollars. Ultimately government officials gave up and the bank was absorbed into CIMB Group, currently headed by Nazir Razak, the prime minister's brother. That scandal, which stretched over several years before its denouement in 1985, set the tone for 24 years of similar scandals related to top Malaysian officials and was the first to prove that in Malaysia, you can not only get away with murder, you can get away with looting the treasury as well.

Perwaja Steel, for instance, lost US$800 million and its boss, Eric Chia, a crony of Mahathir's, was charged with looting the company. He stood trial, but was acquitted without having to put on a defense.

In the mid 1980s, the Co-operative Central Bank, a bank set up to aid the Indian smallholder community, had to be rescued by Bank Negara, the country's central bank, after hundreds of millions of ringgit in loans granted to a flock of United Malays National Organisation and Malaysian Indian Congress politicians became non-performing. Some had never been serviced at all. Although the chief executive and general manager were charged with criminal breach of trust, none of the politicians were ever charged.

Before that, the Malaysian government was believed to have lost US$500 million in an attempt at Mahathir's urging to corner the London tin market through a company called Maminco, driving the world price of tin from US$4.50 per tonne to US$7.50. It then sought to cover up the loss by establishing a US$2 company called Mukawasa from which allocations of new share issues to the government's Employees Provident Funds' were diverted. Mukawasa expected to sell the shares at a windfall profit to hide the tin speculation.

Mahathir also was behind an attempt by the then governor of Bank Negara, the central bank, to aggressively speculate in the global foreign exchange market. Bank Negara ended up losing an estimated RM20 billion. The governor, Jaffar Hussein, and the head of forex trading, Nor Mohamed Yakcop were forced to resign.

There have been many other political and financial scandals since. In 2005, Bank Islam Malaysia, the country's flagship Islamic bank, reported losses of RM457 million mainly due to provisioning totaling RM774 million as a result of bad loans and investments incurred by its Labuan branch. Cumulatively, Bank Islam ran up nonperforming loans of RM2.2 billion, partly from mismanagement and poor internal controls but also "years of regulatory indifference fueled by the misconceived notion of an untouchable Bank Islam because it was a favorite child of the Malaysian government, being the first and model Islamic bank in the country and region," according to a December 19, 2005 article in Arab News. "

Bank Islam had a reputation in the market for being the spoilt child of the Malaysian Ministry of Finance; and the perception of the bank was more of a Muslim financial fraternity or government development financial institution," the report said.

In 2007, in what was called Malaysia's Enron scandal, the publicly traded Transmile Group Bhd, whose chairman was former MCA President and Cabinet Minister Ling Liong Sik, was caught having overstated its revenue by RM530 million. A pretax profit from Rm207 million in 2006 was actually a loss of RM126 million, and a pretax profit of 120 million in 2005 was a loss of RM77 million, causing the government postal company Pos Malaysia & Services Holdings Bhd to warn that its earnings for the 2006 financial year might be affected by the reported overstatement, as the postal group owned 15.3 percent of Transmile.

Over the years 2001 to 2006, the government had to spend billions to rescue seven privatized projects including Kuala Lumpur's two public transport systems, the perennially ailing Malaysia Airlines, the national sewage system and a variety of others that, in the words of one study, "had been privatized prematurely." The government also repeatedly bailed out highway construction concessionaires, all of them closely connected to Umno, to the tune of another RM38.5 billion.

In 2008, it was revealed that Rafidah Aziz, who had served as trade and industry minister for 18 years, had been peddling approved permits for duty-free car sales and allegedly lining her pockets. Two companies which didn't even have showrooms – one of which belonged to the husband of Rafidah's niece – received scores of permits. Although Rafidah came in for heavy criticism from within Umno, she remained in office until she was defeated in party elections.

In the 1960s, federal prosecutors in the United States who were attempting to jail the late labor boss Jimmy Hoffa for looting the Teamsters Pension Fund of millions of dollars with his cronies were puzzled by the fact that their revelations appeared to have little effect on the union's rank and file. It was because no matter how much money Hoffa and his cronies stole, there was always money left because the fund was so rich. That appears to be the case with Malaysia.

I Love This! Sanctimonious Journo(s) In The Mirror

This blogger Sincerely, Malaysian Heart is a gem. I reproduced his/her article in a previous post, Depressing Yet Pressing Issue; Using The Press To Oppress? but this latest one takes the cake. No need for narration:

In Response to Rocky's Bru: Journo to Journo: How Low Can You Go?

Rocky's Bru: Journo to Journo: How Low Can You Go?

(Graphic of letter taken from Rocky's Bru)

I'm encouraged by the news (from Rocky's Bru) that a group of practising and former Malaysian journalists are writing to the Executive Chairman of Kumpulan Utusan, Tan Sri Mohamed Hashim Ahmad Makaruddin, to express their anger and disgust at the story on the late Yasmin Ahmad that the tabloid Kosmo! ran on July 27th, 2009. As they write in their email seeking fellow journalists' support for their letter: "Let's uphold the kind of journalism that this country so desperately needs."

Regardless of whether it is based on the truth or not, the article, headlined "Takdir Yasmin", breached not only the journalist's code of ethics, but standards of human decency as well.

Since a journalist's first obligation is to seek truth and report it, why is this article in Kosmo! a breach of journalistic ethics? Because even if it is true, it violates another principle that journalists are obliged to uphold:

Minimize Harm - Ethical journalists treat sources, subjects and colleagues as human beings deserving of respect.

According to this principle, journalists should:

• Show compassion for those who may be affected adversely by news coverage. Use special sensitivity when dealing with children and inexperienced sources or subjects.
• Be sensitive when seeking or using interviews or photographs of those affected by tragedy or grief.
• Recognize that gathering and reporting information may cause harm or discomfort. Pursuit of the news is not a license for arrogance.
• Recognize that private people have a greater right to control information about themselves than do public officials and others who seek power, influence or attention. Only an overriding public need can justify intrusion into anyone’s privacy.
• Show good taste. Avoid pandering to lurid curiosity.
• Be cautious about identifying juvenile suspects or victims of sex crimes.
• Be judicious about naming criminal suspects before the formal filing of charges.
• Balance a criminal suspect’s fair trial rights with the public’s right to be informed.

(From the Society of Professional Journalists' Code of Ethics)

In the case of Kosmo's article, the people behind it have violated this principle in at least four ways:

1. They have treated the memory of their subject, a recently deceased person no longer able to tell her side of the story, with disrespect, making allegations that may (given prevailing societal attitudes, prejudiced though they may be) diminish how she is remembered by Malaysians, and expose her family to odium.
2. They showed little compassion to her family and scant regard for the potential harm to her aged and frail mother.
3. They did not demonstrate any overriding public need that could have justified such an intrusion into their grief and privacy.
4. The mode in which they presented their report suggests that they have pandered to lurid curiosity, perhaps motivated by the need to sell newspapers.

It is therefore fitting that the journalists' letter rebukes Tan Sri so: "...if your objective is to practice ethical journalistic conduct and act with humanity, you have failed - miserably." They go on to ask him, "How much of your personal honour are you willing to part with in order to increase your circulation?"

All of us will be held to account for everything we write, before the One who reads and edits us all. In the meantime, Kosmo and its journalists involved with this article are accountable to us, their readers and colleagues. Let us make it clear to them that we will not stand by to see ethics breached.

Is their story true or false? I wholeheartedly second blogger Kama's wise words, words worthy of repeating and remembering (from here):

"...Yasmin has gone to meet her Maker. Our time will come soon. Seharusnya kita sadaqah Al-fatihah untuk arwah Yasmin and not go into this silly polemic about her gender. May her soul be placed among the blessed. Amin."

Now, may I pose this question, not to Kosmo!, but to all of us who are outraged by Kosmo's article:

Do any of us believe that Kosmo has a monopoly on unethical journalism in Malaysia?

First let's see what the principles of ethical journalism that we are bound to uphold are (adapted from theSociety of Professional Journalists' Code of Ethics):

The duty of the journalist is to further public enlightenment as the forerunner of justice and the foundation of democracy, by seeking truth and providing a fair and comprehensive account of events and issues. Conscientious journalists from all media and specialties strive to serve the public with thoroughness and honesty. Professional integrity is the cornerstone of a journalist's credibility. Journalists should:

1. Seek Truth and Report It - Journalists should be honest, fair and courageous in gathering, reporting and interpreting information.
2. Minimize Harm - Ethical journalists treat sources, subjects and colleagues as human beings deserving of respect.
3. Act Independently - Journalists should be free of obligation to any interest other than the public's right to know. [Advocacy journalists may of course intentionally and transparently adopt a non-objective viewpoint.]
4. Be Accountable - Journalists are accountable to their readers, listeners, viewers and each other.

The letter to Tan Sri Hashim begins "July 27th, 2009 marked the darkest day in Malaysian journalistic history yet." In the light of the above, haven't there been days in Malaysian journalistic history just as dark as 27/7/09?

How about in the days just before the 1990 general elections, when "then opposition politician Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah was depicted as selling out Muslim interests to Christians merely because he was photographed wearing ethnic Kadazan cultural headgear on which was a symbol resembling a cross. The photograph was splashed in the media and Razaleigh had little chance to counter the allegations".

Utusan Melayu published the picture for three days, and Berita Harian's headline on May 19, 1990 was "Ku Li Junjung Salib".

How about something more recent, just eight days ago (22/07/09), when Pakatan Rakyat's position regarding the Royal Commission of Inquiry into the death of Teoh Beng Hock was grossly misrepresented in the pages of the New Straits Times?

Why do we not speak up and act against journalistic misconduct by all news outlets (including our own)? Why are we being selective? Surely our professional ethics apply equally to all, no matter what the victims' (and perpetrators') station in life is? Or is it just a case of double standards and whose ox is being gored?

So, let me put the question back to all the journalists who are rightly outraged at Kosmo: How much of our personal honour are we willing to part with in order to increase our circulation (prospects, promotions, popularity, etc.)?

In other words, when our Editor reads us, will He find us fit to print, or fit to spike?

Lest we be found wanting, we must be mindful of what we ourselves and our colleagues write. For the sake of our integrity, we must speak and act whenever and wherever we see journalistic ethics being compromised, and we must do so in spite of our political beliefs and personal interests. Let's uphold the kind of journalism that this country so desperately needs.

Sincerely,

Malaysian Heart

You can download a printable copy of the Society of Professional Journalists' Code of Ethics in full here (in PDF format).

(I am a member of Hartal MSM, a mediawatch group which had its beginnings in December 2007 in The People's Parliament, an initiative convened by civil rights lawyer Haris Ibrahim. The group seeks to promote a free and fair media as an impetus to Malaysia's stalled nation-building process. The views expressed here are solely my own)

Depressing Yet Pressing Issue; Using The Press To Oppress?

Years ago, a veteran told me that Malaysian politics is mainly about the politics of issues. It was because the rakyat mentality was immature politically that issues could be created or blown out of proportion to rally the masses in whichever direction the propaganda machinery deemed fit.

With the advent of Mahathirism, issues were created and publicized only when Mahathir dictated so; major cases in point being the 1988 Constitutional Crisis that resulted in the emasculation of the Judiciary and the 1993 Monarchy crisis that did the Royals in.

The rakyat was still willing to vote Barisan Nasional in with more than 2/3 majority, GE in and GE out because the economy was thriving; the NEP was in full bloom and no one was going without. The non-Malays were resigned to the effects of affirmative action and had all but given up at the ballot box.

I suppose abuses were not as blatant then although corruption and cronyism were already big concerns...the massive privatization and corporatizing exercises of government institutions, the IPPs, the toll hikes, the prime land conversions, the Daim machinations, etc. all affected our pockets without commensurating increase in service levels nor benefits. But we could at least see signs of development as in the Twin Towers, KLIA, Putrajaya, and other monuments. While most people dared only whisper about their displeasure, none had the guts nor to be fair, the platform to shout too loud and long.

There was a pervading fear of litigation and the partiality of the judiciary. As organizations go, Aliran led by Chandra Muzzafar seemed to be the only one which dared to voice out and it had its publishing permit yanked a few times. The Aliran Monthly was a sort of Malaysiakini in the way that no issue was too hot for it to report.

Two individuals stood out and both were journalists; the late K. Das and that forerunner of our Raja Petra Kamarudin, the late MGG Pillai. Yes! RPK had a predecessor! Neither lawsuit nor harassment could stop MGG Pillai and in the aftermath of the Correct! Correct! Correct! fiasco we now know he had no chance with the defamation suits he faced. I am glad MGG Pillai discovered the Internet before he passed away in 2006. His blog mggpillai.com was the Malaysia Today of its day!

There were plenty of issues too in those days but apart from being fearful, the Malaysian public was naive, amnesiac and blindsided by the mainstream media. There was a perpetual news brown-out and when the Government faced any major controversy, there were total news blackouts or the media would spin to sway the rakyat. Back in those days, no Opposition politician ever appeared on TV or radio let alone was quoted or reported in the newspapers. Conversely, all we ever got to hear or read were that things were dandy and as they should be (and therefore fine). Each successive PM had his own Goebbels, starting with Mahathir who had Kadir Jasin and Dollah Ahmad; the infamous Kalimullah was there for the Preacher Man while Kamal Khalid did the hatchet work; now Najib has Johan Jaafar and his very own publicist in Azmi Anshar.

The nature of media control had perceptible difference from one PM to another. In the case of Mahathir, it was more of misinformation and lack of information; this was extenuated by the fact that Mahathir made no bones about his dogmatic nature or his policies.


Though his successor, Badawi was less Machiavellian he was in many ways worse. He took over on a media fanfare of promises; liberalization, tranparency, meritocracy and accountability. The very media tools that were deployed to blow his trumpet soon became tools to gloss over his abject incompetency. When his outright bumbling and the abuses by his coterie became too obvious, his propaganda team resorted to plain disinformation. Ultimately, his spinmeisters could not prevent his self-proclaimed nice, clean and pious guy image from rotting into plain "nasty, corrupt" and stupid. His “Cemerlang, Gemilang, Terbilang" quickly became "Cemarkan, Gemar-wang, Terbayang"...Temberang.


Why did it take 22 years to expose Mahathir's transgressions and only 5 for Badawi? Was it because Badawi was more liberal? Apparently not; it was because he could not stop the information communication juggernaut called the Internet. He was caught by his own "K-Economy" bull and could not rein in the bloggers and internet news portals until it was too late. He did however try at the end though.


In the last decade, the proliferation of internet users coupled with the intrinsic need to boost bandwith enabled the Internet to power the "Fifth Estate" in Malaysia as with the rest of the developed/developing world. Mainstream media (MSM) began to have an alternative and I dare say now during Najib's watch, the MSM is fast becoming THE alternative media to most educated Malaysians. The difference has been about censorship or lack of.


Najib has his work cut out for him. It is now coming to his 4th month in the hot seat and he has not only to hit the ground running (after years of Badawi "slumber") but also be seen to do the right things. He has after all come onboard with considerable baggage.


How will he make the rakyat see? Will he try to make us blind? Or will he turn out to be the ultimate magician dealing with illusory perceptions? Will it be misinformation or disinformation or both? Or can he surprise us all with absolute transparency? After his first 100 days, the latter seems a bridge too far or far fetched bridge whichever way one looks at it. After GE12, whatever the spin there is only one way for him and that is to deliver what is deemed good for the nation. Brickbats can turn to bouquets...and vice versa.


But what can we expect? Well, for one, Najib or his handlers have obviously learnt about the power of the Internet judging from the increased number of pro-establishment blogs and cyber commentators. Many Barisan politicians are also setting up their own blogs/websites but because most are not self-administered, they do not attract traffic. While Badawi and Barisan were caught with their pants down pre-GE12, now more than a year later, things in the Malaysian cyberspace have indeed changed. Established pro-government bloggers and "information" portals now routinely rebut anything they feel worth rebutting.


The following are a few generally pro-establishment blogs; Another Brick In The Wall, Barking Magpie, Demi Negara, OutSyedTheBox. Rocky's Bru, Mat Cendana, CanYouSeeIt...etc. Socio-political bloggers seem to fall exclusively only into 3 categories: pro-establishment, anti-establishment and middle-of-the-road observers. When a particular blogger shifts his loyalties or stance (as it is known to happen), it is all too obvious. One thing is clear though, not much can be kept hidden in the ultimate battle for voters and no matter what the spin, the Barisan government has to deliver or perish.


The MSM still retains relevance amongst large numbers of Malaysians and one only has to turn on the TV or flip the newspapers to know what the MSM is trying to sell these days (as in the previous days?). Perhaps we shouldn't buy.
The Teoh Beng Hock death is the latest controversial issue and it has seen unprecedented thrusts and counter-thrusts in both the MSM and cyberspace. After Utusan's infamous article which reeked of racism, in the TBH case it was Berita Harian's turn with the lead but if the following article by Azmi Anshar is any indication, we are in for very long ride. That is why it is a must read because the rebuttles by steadyaku47 and sincerely, malaysian heart are even more interesting. You be the judge:


They got their Royal Commission of Inquiry but will they stop their lynching? Online Exclusive 2009/07/22 by Azmi Anshar


IN ordering the formation of a Royal Commission of Inquiry today to probe the chary death of Teoh Boon Hock, the young DAP cadre whose body was found sprawled outside Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission Shah Alam headquarters last week, the Cabinet committed the most pragmatic decision it could make in light of the over-the-top outrage generated, mostly by Pakatan Rakyat leaders and its band of noxious supporters.


The MACC wobbled daily from the toxic Pakatan demonstrations, from the defiant rants at the MACC’s office immediately after the death was discovered to Teoh’s funeral that literally accused the agency of murder, negligence or brutality, whichever contention was convenient, when police have NOT concluded their investigations as to how and why Teoh died. No other plausible causes of death and motive were entertained by this mob. It fact, they emphatically dismissed alternative speculations, no matter how reasonable it sounded.


To cap the week of rage and antagonism that literally criminalised the MACC, Pakatan launched an online petition calling for the RCI’s formation. They were almost certain of getting a favourable Cabinet response but the hyperboles and sly pre-emption that senior Pakatan leaders discharged seemed to have given the appearance that the goading provoked the Cabinet into agreeing to the RCI.


The Cabinet would surely have gone ahead with the RCI initiative without the Pakatan’s instigation, seeing that senior coalition leaders within the Barisan Nasional ranks had strongly endorsed the setting up of the RCI, some even before DAP supremo Lim Kit Siang could parrot his all-time favourite bellowing. But let’s not be surprised that Pakatan would claim credit for their RCI ingenuity.


But the Pakatan leaders’ pressing for a RCI had a disingenuous purpose: several of their Selangor assemblymen, one of whom was accused of maintaining links with gangsters, were under scrutiny for alleged misuse of public funds, in which Teoh was sought by the MACC to provide helpful insights and vital documents as to how the abuse was being put into action. Now that the RCI on Teoh’s death is going to be institutionalised, how will this affect the investigations into the misuse of public funds?


Here’s how the script might flow: the Pakatan people will be nudged aside from the glare of suspicion by the elephantine centre of attention that steamrolls with a RCI examination. And there is no guarantee that investigations will resume once the RCI completes its business.
The only way to hold the momentum of the investigations into the Pakatan Rakyat assemblymen is that the RCI, in establishing its terms and references, embraces the MACC-Teoh element. This means all interview files, documents, statements, and that includes audio and video recordings, will be possessed and scrutinised by the RCI to surmise whether the misuse of funds had anything to do with Teoh’s death.


Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Abdul Razak had just announced that this element will be present. Now anticipate the howls of protest, even if it makes sense to expand the scope of the RCI’s inquiry to include all possibilities. An inquest headed by a magistrate is also imminent to establish the forensics of his death.


The next phase of the RCI’s formation will assure a major disputation: the composition of RCI members. There are already demands that representatives from the Opposition be included. A name with a sagacious reputation cropped up - Tunku Abdul Aziz, the 75-year-old ex-Transparency International Malaysia’s founder. Too bad he can’t be in the RCI let alone chair it, simply because he is now a partisan party sycophant like any other party man or woman.
Again, sly pre-empts had been deployed. Then there’s the call that the composition of the RCI must consult Pakatan Rakyat. Another sly pre-empting ploy. All the Government need to do is put together a neutral team that has the consent of the King. That’s all.


Even before Najib had a chance to weigh in his options before today’s Cabinet meeting, he was already handed a “lost cause”, primarily from Lim Kit Siang who claimed the PM will lose credibility and wipe out his 65 percent approval rating if he does not authorise a RCI.


Fine. Now that Najib has announced the RCI’s formation, will Kit re-stamp the credibility factor back into Najib? Probably not. The last thing Kit wants to do is further inflate Najib’s approval rating. Kit will find other specious means to further pile the burden of attestation on Najib to prove that the RCI is “absolutely independent” and will do their job fearlessly.


This new RCI will be the third this decade, breaking a precedence of sorts when RCIs had been limited to two the most every 10 years since its advent in 1965. When it was first conceptualised, a RCI is supposed to look into issues of governance and administration - the 1965 RCI in reviewed public services salaries and conditions of service, then it looked into workings of local authorities in 1968 and explored the teaching services in 1971. But in 1988, the RCI’s character transformed as it began probing “unsavoury” aspects of life - accidents, deaths, catastrophe and tragedy, from the collapse of the Pengkalan Sultan Abdul Halim ferry terminal in Butterworth (1988) to the religious school blaze that killed students in Yan, Kedah (1989) and Sungai Buloh’s Bright Sparklers factory explosion (1991).


Then the RCI went up close and personal in 1999, investigating the black eye suffered by Anwar Ibrahim while in police custody, which then Inspector-General of Police Rahim Noor took the rap for unleashing a blow on Anwar’s eye that triggered a profound consequence for the nation to last a generation.


The RCI returned to governance in 2004, the study of police reforms that invited a string of determined protests by the police themselves that seemed to scuttle the Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission promised by the Abdullah administration in 2006.
Then the RCI opted for a form of “surrealism”: the infamous Lingam Video Clip commission in 2007 that became one of the many impetuses that tore down the fabric of Barisan Nasional state governments and bore a hole into the coalition’s ability to govern federally in March 2008.
What was that old cliché about being careful on what you wish for because it might come true? Pakatan Rakyat, the DAP especially, might be feeling too euphoric at the moment to think of this RCI’s implications but let’s play the devil’s advocate here: will Kit Siang and Co accept the verdict of the RCI no matter what kinds of findings surface?


If you are to base last week’s rampage of putting the blame solely on the MACC and implicating senior Government leaders, Pakatan Rakyat minions will insist no less than a guilty verdict, that some MACC perp pushed Teoh Beng Hock out of the 14th floor to his death for no reason other than wanting to torture the young man. But what if the RCI finds a less gruesome result, that Teoh died other than all the claims of murder and brutality put together? Will the Opposition swallow their brutish smugness and leave it at that?


The portentous inference to come out of Teoh’s RCI is that the inquiry serves to be an overkill that trivialises the institution and the causes it was constructed to oversee, primarily because it drags down the pride of law enforcement, making it harder for them to patrol the streets and maintain law and order. This, however, is not to excuse the law enforcement agencies, whose reputation has taken a severe flagellation in the past years over perceived incompetence so terrible that confidence in their ability to do their job is a hard sell.


What is entrenched now is the disturbing culture of being declared guilty first, more so for law enforcement agencies caught in the wrong side of public perception, before innocence has to be strenuously proven. And this crushes every basic principle of human rights in the face of mob fury. It gives a new meaning to lynching, Malaysian-style.

**********************************************


The following is Steadyaku47's rebuttal:


Online exclusive - NST


It is now 9.49pm and as is my habit - after the day is almost done – and with ‘Desperate Housewife’ on TV that means that I will have to go to my PC for alternative entertainment. After having a look through The Vision – Uganda’s leading website – I then went to NSTP online just so that I will not miss any earth shattering news and happenings that UMNO wants me to know. An online exclusive caught my eye.


DAILY DISPATCHES: They got their Royal Commission of Inquiry but will they stop their lynching?

IN ordering the formation of a Royal Commission of Inquiry today to probe the chary death of Teoh Boon Hock, the young DAP cadre whose body was found sprawled outside Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission Shah Alam headquarters last week, the Cabinet committed the most pragmatic decision it could make in light of the over-the-top outrage generated, mostly by Pakatan Rakyat leaders and its band of noxious supporters.

Immedietly I had to go to the dictionary when I came across ‘chary’ in the very first paragraph. It meant ‘sorrowful’. Impressed I press on – this reporter can almost be mistaken for a writer!


The next sentence contained another ambigious word (to me) ‘cadre’ which according to Webster means ‘Cadre (pronounced /'kaːdre/, from the French) is the backbone of an organization, usually a political or military organization. Generally it is applied to a small core of committed and experienced people who are capable of providing leadership and of training newer members’
Again I am impressed. This reporter must be worth his weight in gold to his Editor. He has used ‘chary’ and ‘cadre’ in the very first paragraph of this online inclusive. Must have gone to the same learning instituition as that Ketua Pemuda fellow – aisehman I mean during his primary years lah.


Next came ‘pragmatic’ which I was quite familiar with having had to salute many a PDRM mata mata with a ‘boleh selesai encik’ – not because I want to but I had to be pragmatic.
A few seconds later I came across another hard one ‘noxious’ – morally harmful; corrupting; pernicious:


Morally harmful and corrupting being the operative word – words that this reporter should be familiar with when working for Political Masters who are not from Pakatan Rakyat.
Suffice to say that at this juncture I said enough. Who is he trying to impress? Chary, cadre, pragmatic and noxious ..and we are not even past the first paragraph. Sheesh (as my late fellow blogger The Ancient Mariner would say)…I have other things to do then go on reading this pretentious idiot piece. I rather go torture myself and watch ‘Desperate Housewife’ ….with one eye open and one eye close of course.


**********************************************


...and perhaps a more eloquent response from sincerely, malaysian heart which does make for a sort of "ABC of Journalism" and left the NST rather naked by tearing Azmi Anshar's "exclusive" to shreds:
Is This the Standard of Journalism Practiced by the New Straits Times?
(Disclosure: I am a member of Hartal MSM*, an advocacy group that calls for a Paper-free Tuesday -- "No buy, No lies")

• Journalism's first obligation is to the truth.
• Its first loyalty is to citizens.
• Its essence is a discipline of verification.
• Its practitioners must maintain an independence from those they cover.
• It must serve as an independent monitor of power.
• It must provide a forum for public criticism and compromise.
• It must strive to make the significant interesting and relevant.
• It must keep the news comprehensive and proportional.
• Its practitioners must be allowed to exercise their personal conscience.

From "The Elements of Journalism": What Newspeople Should Know and the Public Should Expect


When a news organization's editorial policy is dictated by its owners, the quality of its journalism is often the first thing to go out the window (followed closely by its credibility, reputation and circulation figures). The general level of integrity and professionalism in our news media notwithstanding, I have to say that this "online exclusive" op-ed piece from the New Straits Times (22/7/09), entitled "They got their Royal Commission of Inquiry but will they stop their lynching?", is as egregious a case of journalistic misconduct as I have ever come across. Lest I be accused of making that claim just because I disagree with the article in question, please allow me share with you my reasons for saying so: