Tiada Akta Parlimen yang menamatkan atau menyekat penggunaan bahasa Inggeris bagi apa-apa maksid yang disebut dalam Fasal (2) hingga (5) Artikel 152 boleh mula berkuatkuasa berkenaan dengan penggunaan bahasa Inggeris dalam Fasal (2) Perkara ini sehingga sepuluh tahun selepas Hari Malaysia.
Malangnya, dalam video yang kita saksikan sebentar tadi, Ahli Parlimen DAP tersebut tidak menyebut mengenai had sepuluh tahun selepas Hari Malaysia, iaitu pada 16 haribulan September 1973. Sebaliknya, bekiau berkeras menyatakan bahawa ianya menjadi hak beliau sebagai orang Sarawak untuk terus menggunakan bahasa Inggeris di dalam sidang Parlimen.
Setelah Hari Malaysia 1973, iaitu tamatnya perlindungan hak sepuluh tahun berbahasa Inggeris, Akta Bahasa Kebangsaan 1963/67 (semakan 1971) secara automatik berkuatkuasa di seluruh Persekutuan Malaysia. Ini bermakna bahasa penghantar rasmi bagi Sabah dan Sarawak juga adalah Bahasa Malaysia. Walau bagaimanapun, Seksyen 5 Akta tersebut memberi kelonggaran untuk seseorang Ahli Parlimen mahupun Ahli Dewan Undangan Negeri dari Sabah dan Sarawak untuk berucap dalam bahasa Inggeris di dalam majlis Parlimen tetapi dengan izin Speaker Dewan. Ianya bukan lagi suatu hak mutlak. Sekiranya tidak diizinkan oleh Speaker Dewan maka setiap Ahli Parlimen mahupun Dewan Undangan Negeri hendaklah menggunakan Bahasa Kebangsaan. Malah Akta tersebut dipinda semula pada tahun 1983 dan diperluaskan lagi.
Saya berasa hairan akan kedegilan pihak DAP yang terus menggunakan bahasa Inggeris sedangkan tidak berapa lama dahulu mereka memperjuangkan penggunaan Bahasa Kebangsaan dalam Kitab Injil malah tetap dengan pendirian mereka bahawa penggunaan kalimah Allah dalam kitab Injil adalah sebahagian dari ajaran Kristian yang tidak boleh diabaikan.
Oleh kerana mereka kini berkeras ingin gunakan bahasa Inggeris di dalam Parlimen, adakah ini juga bermaksud kalimah Allah tiada lagi kepentingan dalam perjuangan DAP?
Ini bukan kali pertama Ahli Parlimen Kuching daripada parti DAP ini mempersenda dan mempertikai apa yang termaktub dalam perlembagaan dan bersuara bagai menanam kebencian terhadap Malaysia.
Pada 17 September tahun lalu, Chong menganggap lagu kebangsaan Negaraku sebagai memalukan dan mengarut sebelum meminta maaf.
For almost a year now Malaysians and non-Malaysians alike have been fed with the story that both Prime Minister Najib Razak and 1MDB have been doing a mega con job that puts Malaysia at peril.
Exorbitant figures were given and accusations kept flying around that have caused a deficit in trust among Malaysians and eroded the confidence of foreign investors. These figures as well as the goalpost (if there was any) keeps changing every time there is a rebuttal by both Najib and the 1MDB.
Notwithstanding the explanations given Mahathir kept up his attacks on Najib by sending his paid lieutenants to lodge police reports all over the world, colluded with the opposition, created a false perception that Najib would be a wanted man if he travelled overseas, while Mahathir himself met up with Tony Pua of the DAP at the Fullerton and also Sarawak Report’s Claire Rewcastle Brown to open up new battle fronts against Najib.
Even the New York Times, an associate of Syed Mokhtar’s Malaysian Reserve, ran an article in Bahasa Malaysia connecting Jho Low to Najib’s stepson and eventually, Voila! Najib himself! The millions of Malay Americans in the US must have benefitted from that article!
Three days ago the Attorney-General has cleared the 1MDB from any wrongdoing. Although the Bank Negara Malaysia (BNM) has twice recommended for officers of the 1MDB to be charged based on the Exchange Control Act, 1953 which really is about online form-filling and is subjective to BNM’s interpretation of whether the information given is complete or not. In BNM’s words, the charge was that the approvals obtained for the 2013 fund transfers were based on inaccurate or without complete disclosure of material information relevant to BNM’s assessment of 1MDB’s application.
There was no mention of malicious fraud in the declarations at all; neither was there any mention if missing billions nor of money being laundered.
BNM never made any recommendation based on either the Anti Money Laundering Act,2001, or the Anti Money Laundering and Anti Terrorism Financing Act, 2014 which can only mean one thing – after investigating the transactions made by the 1MDB, there is no basis found for it to be charged under either Act.
This goes to show that Mr Botox, Mr Multi-Religious Hunger Striker who are Mahathir’s paid lieutenants, his well-paid bloggers, the Bruno Manser Fund (Sarawak Report) have all been malicious in trying to destroy the reputation of one man even at the expense of ruining this country by undermining its finances and economy. This tantamounts to terrorism – acts of persons acting on behalf of, or in connection with, any organisation or individuals which carries out activities directed towards the overthrowing or influencing, by force or violence, of the Yang DiPertuan Agong’s government or any other government de jure or de facto.
Now that his lieutenants have been arrested Mahathir paints the “pariah nation” image onto Malaysia, saying that there is no freedom of speech here despite having said so many malicious things for the longest time.
Lest we forget it was Mahathir himself who, during his 22-year rule by fear, jailed hundreds wrhout trial, orchestrated the removal of two deputy prime ministers, fired a deputy prime minister, fired four ministers, shut down newspapers such as The Star, Watan and the Sin Chew Jit Poh for speaking against him.
And what did the Chief Pariah say last night about his next step against Najib and the 1MDB in spite of all the “all clear” given?
Anything goes for him as long as Najib goes – even if Malaysia goes as well. Even without hard evidence.
Sometime in March or April this year I was told, Mahathir stayed at the Fullerton in Singapore and met up with Tony Pua. What was discussed during the meeting is not known but we can all see the timeline of how attacks on the Prime Minister and the 1MDB intensified around that time too. Whether this meeting is directly related to the attacks or not is not known.
The elderly “statesman” was also said to have bought a watch from the hotel’s gift shop and gave it to the younger man.
Anwar Ibrahim must be grinning with a raised eyebrow.
The two photos above were taken at the Pakatan Rakyat 2.0 Roundtable Discussion attended by key office holders of the DAP, PKR and Mat Sabu’s yet to be officially-named bastardised version of PAS.
Seated in the back are the observers from the various Pakatan-friendly NGOs. If you look carefully in the photos you would see UMNO’s thorn-in-the-rear Saifuddin Abdullah.
This was what Saifuddin Abdullah had tweeted earlier:
I wonder what substantive matters and strategies does UMNO have that should be shared with its political enemies? Perhaps Saifuddin is trying to find ways to remain relevant after those whom he had nurtured to speak against the government have lost badly in the recent university elections.
I also wonder when are the sissies sitting in UMNO’s Disciplinary Board going to take action against Saifuddin Abdullah ever?
Two hours after he was spotted in discussion with a Caucasian man, Mr Botox was held by the police. (Updated) The police has received a 6-day remand order to question him.
The same people who passed me the photos of that discussion said that he is now starting to spill the beans trying to drag as many people down with him as the ship begins to sink – so much for not being afraid of being arrested.
He reportedly has named a few key people including bloggers paid to discredit the Najib administration. I hope to get more details on this.
At about the same timelast night, owners of the Daddy Anak Party, Lim Kit Siang and Lim Guan Eng met up with eight prominent businessmen at a high-end restaurant located jn an office building in Damansara Heights. One of them is the Chairman and Group CEO of the company which building houses the restaurant. What also transpired during this meeting is also unknown but among the attendees include people in the aviation and real estate business while another is the CEO of an investment bank.
This has been an interesting week and will get even more interesting soon.
p.s:- anyway the photo above is meant for you to lose your appetite and to spoil your long weekend
I am still opposed to any form of public rallies no matter how many times you say that it is within your rights to do so or that it is guaranteed by the Federal Constitution. That guarantee is given to you through Article 10(1) of the Federal Constitution, much like my right to move freely within the Federation of Malaysia as guaranteed by Article 9(1). But like Article 9, Article 10 too has its limitations, much like Article 20(1) of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights where everyone has a right to the freedom of assembly and association. Â Article 9 of the Federal Constitution has its limitations set in Article 9(3), while Article 10’s limitations are spelt out in Article 10(2), (3) and (4). Â Similarly Article 20(1) of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights has its limitations set in Article 29 of the same. Â It reads:
(1) Everyone has duties to the community in which alone the free and full development of his personality is possible.
(2) In the exercise of his rights and freedoms, everyone shall be subject only to such limitations as are determined by law solely for the purpose of securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others and of meeting the just requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare in a democratic society.
(3) These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.
What do the above mean?
Article 29 reminds us that we not only have rights but also duties (Clause (1)); the limitations on rights not only may (Clause (2)) but also must be drawn (Clause (3)).  The notion that freedom of speech and assembly are absolute is an absolute nonsense.  Therefore, I and other motorists, have more rights to the roads that are blocked by demonstrators as we pay the tax for the use of these roads using our vehicles, not the demonstrators on foot.  Nevertheless, I wore red on Malaysia Day, just as some 150,000 red shirt demonstrators gathered to rightfully voice out their grievances as did the ones in yellow two weeks earlier.
Why was I in red?
I was not in favour of the original theme where it was to be a Malay thing and about Malay rights, although I admit the undertone is very much that. Since the general elections in 2008 Pakatan Rakyat (especially DAP) has been harping on issues pertaining to race and religion and has on occasions even challenged both the sanctity of Islam and the Rulers Institution. They would push the envelope to see what would break the Malays. They rule Penang, and rule Selangor by proxy.
It is also no secret that more than 80 percent of office holders in DAP are evangelists, and DAP has been challenging the sanctity of Islam especially in the Kalimah Allah and the DUMC cases. If you want to know more about both cases and why is Malay allowed to be used in Bibles in Indonesia, Sabah and Sarawak, just search this blog for “DUMC” and “The Case for God” series. Not even before the 13th May 1969 tragedy had inter-religion issues come into play by politicians, yet this time DAP pushed this envelope, misleading the people on the laws and Constitution, went to the extent of being in contempt of the courts just for their political ambitions. Every quarter they would organise rallies asking for things that have been fulfilled and played up old and expired issues just to incite hatred towards the Malays. This had me write a long post in Malay prior to the previous general elections asking Malay voters to reject DAP.
So, yes, when I wore red, it was because of my absolute hatred for all that DAP has done thus far in trying to tear the fabric of this nation. DAP here means the Malay, Chinese and Indians who are in that party and their supporters. And although I am against any public rallies, I am very glad that finally the silent majority have spoken. I really hope there would be more, and organised in places like Penang. And I am glad that former navy and air force commandos were seen in red and were among those on the streets of KL and at Padang Merbok.
And like the hypocrites they are, the advocates of the Pakatan-driven BERSIH have even praised the police for releasing tear gas at the red shirts who flocked the Petaling Street area, the second time they have done so; the first being during the Low Yat incident – and definitely the first time they have actually supported police action against a group of protesters. When it happened to them, they were quick to say it was a breach of human rights. Not surprising the political-party-wannabe Barua Council was also silent on this.
Hypocrites threw insults at the police when they rallied at where Malays conduct their business but cry for help when it is their business that is affected
I must commend the police for the way they handled the red shirts’ do and for taking action against those who breached the restrictions placed by the Peaceful Assembly Act 2012. I must commend also the organisers and participants for maintaining discipline and following the instructions of the police based on the requirements of the same Act. This goes to show who are the ones uncouth, rude, racists and have cow-shit for brain.
Remember, this is not so much about the underlying message, this is about freedom of speech, assembly and association. It is the rights of the red shirts as it is also for the yellow bellies shirts as claimed, and no one (according to the Barua Council) has the right to stop people from expressing themselves. This must certainly be a very bitter pill for them to swallow.
As for the message, let this be a reminder that Newton’s Third Law is in force. For every action there will be an equal and opposite reaction. And the next time there is an action by the yellow-shirts or in any form that they may appear in, I will be amongst my former comrades and others in red. That is the beauty of the Rights they yellows have been shouting about, only to have it used against their Wrongs.
Will it be a walk against the Chinese? Do I hate the Chinese? No. My brother-in-law is Chinese. My late uncle was Chinese. My second cousins, two families, are half-Chinese. I only hate the Daddy Anak Party.
I am opposed to any form of rally in open public places but it was freedom of speech and assembly and within the constitutional rights guaranteed to each citizen when BERSIH 4, the supposedly DAP-defined apolitical movement called for a 34-hour rally to last until the stroke of midnight on the 31st Augusr 2015, on Malaysia’s independence celebration day.
The rally was made up by 90 percent Chinese participants when PAS refused to participate. But it was held where very few, if any, Chinese businesses are run.
When a rally by an opposing party was organised by a largely Malay group, to be held on Malaysia Day in largely Chinese business area, this was what Lim Guan Eng, co-driver of BERSIH 4, had to say:
I love the way people reacted to my previous post. I made no mention of who’s who at the meetings, and I was merely writing about what I was told. The reactions, or over-reactions have been priceless. It wasn’t me who stalked them. They should be more aware of their surroundings. Furthermore not one of the above are a leader of any of the opposition-held states. Unless, as the Malays would say: PERASAN.
The police should also investigate the alledged Pemuda UMNO Whatsapp messages that went flying around recently. Messages can be deleted, but the Whatsapp server still stores them. All that is needed is a number or two, and the whole trail of messages can be retrieved.
All attempts or conspiracies to remove the Prime Minister should be investigated. Not because I am protecting Najib Razak, but the institution of the Prime Minister. The last thing Malaysia needs is a vicious cycle of removals and appointments of Prime Ministers that would totally erode the confidence others still have in this country.
On the economic fundamentals of this country, this is what Abdul Wahid Omar had to say:
Back in 1997/98, Malaysia had international reserves below USD30b sufficient to cover 3.2mths of retained imports. We had trade deficit & corporates were highly geared with many borrowing in USD when their income/assets were in MYR. Now even after the recent outflows, our international reserves is more than 3 times larger at USD96.7b as at 31 July 2015 sufficient to cover 7.6 mths of retained imports.
Our trade surplus reached RM41b for 1st half 2015 notwithstanding the lower oil & commodity prices. And corporates’ balance sheets are much healthier. Our labour market conditions are stable with low unemployment rate of 3%.
Our banks are well capitalised with core Tier1 capital ratios of 12.5%, liquid & with good asset quality where net impaired loans ratio is at a low of 1.2%. Banks & financial system are well regulated & supervised by BNM. Our fiscal position continues to improve with budget deficit reducing from 3.4% of GDP in 2014 to a target of 3.2% in 2015. We are still on track to achieve GDP growth of between 4.5% to 5.5% this year. That’s what I meant by strong economic fundamentals.
I don’t talk much about who I am. Only BigDog actually sent me a private message on Twitter about four years ago asking if I am who he thought I am. I just said yes. Being who I am also means I do not have to rely on The Edge to know of some things. On that same note even Rahman Dahlan could dig up more information on things, better than a certain person who had to rely on The Edge ever did.
Being who I am also means I still have strong links with my father’s former contemporaries. These once junior officers are now very senior ranking officers, and loyal to their profession and to the institution of the force. I had dinner with a couple of them tonight and of course the discussion that ensued ranged from the old days to the current political circus. Much was revealed about the things that have been happening in the background.
And what a revelation it was.
It seems that a certain former senior minister had met up with the head of an opposition-led state government with thirty other MPs to discuss the formation of a coalition government to replace the current one. Of course PAS was not invited, not the incumbents of course. There was also another similar meeting held at the KLGCC where around fifteen people attended. When the lead “guest” arrived, they changed the venue to a larger meeting room.
This seems to tally with the recent raids by the police on the MACC. Of course The Edge would not tell you that the raid is about leaking information pertaining to the investigation so everyone could be led on to believe that this is all a conspiracy to cover up. And this coming from the same people who complain about criminals going scott free due to leaks.
And being the person I am also means I know three other things: first, that the recent meeting with the Sultan of Johor by the former Deputy Prime Minister was not at the request of His Highness. Rather, it was arranged by a certain businessman who did not get to execute a project when Pak Lah was the Prime Minister. Second, that the former Attorney-General has to go for three dialysis sessions per week that takes up a whole work day each session. Third, the MACC head has been hospitalised to remove a growth near his spine. It is operable but has to be done quickly, and the good Tan Sri will be out of action for about a month.
Of course, you would not be able to read the above on The Edge. Therefore I felt that I’d have to pre-empt any talk of conspiracies.
Anyway, yesterday too there was a “guerrilla movement” (as described by the message originator) by a group of UMNO people, inviting non-UMNO party of the BN coalition members to join them in pressuring the Prime Minister to step down. When I asked my dinner companions, they just smiled and said, “Wait for it. We know.”
Terence Gomez of Transparency International confirms what Najib and Rahman Dahlan said as he was part of the team to regulate political funding.
Yes, Terence confirms that DAP and opposition were the ones who objected to full transparency of political funding.
This means that Lim Guan Eng was telling a white lie again by saying PM never approached DAP to ask them about regulating political funding.
Lim Guan Eng conveniently forgot to mention that it was the Transparency International team that led this initiative which they rejected and not PM Najib.
Tokong or Tokong… always telling little white lies.
—
In his letter, published in Malaysia’s leading newspapers on 1 August 2015, Rahman, a minister in Najib’s cabinet – offering his views in his capacity as the BN’s Director of Strategic Communication – drew attention to a meeting held between Transparency International (TI) and members of the opposition parties in Parliament on 1 December 2010.
TI had initiated a project to review the financing of politics and to prepare relevant recommendations to eradicate processes that were hindering the conduct of fair elections. I had been appointed by TI to help implement this project.
At that time, the president of TI was Paul Low, now a minister in the Prime Minister’s Department. Abdul Rahman disclosed, at this meeting with TI, that opposition parliamentarians were not in favour of mandatory full disclosure of all funding sources as this would deter their contributors from financing their parties.
The views held by the opposition, as outlined by Abdul Rahman in his letter, are in my recollection accurate.
Only one person showed up for this meeting: Mohd Nazri Abdul Aziz, in his capacity as Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department.
At this meeting, Nazri acknowledged that Malaysia’s general elections were free but not fair as political parties did not have equal access to funds. He asserted that donors to Umno were registered, but some of them preferred to remain anonymous.
Nazri agreed with some of TI’s recommendations, including direct state funding of parties to reduce, even halt, the latter’s dependence on business for money to run their campaigns; to prohibit ownership of the media by parties; and to institute full disclosure of political donations.
However, Nazri did not agree to all of TI’s recommendations. Nazri’s primary concern was TI’s recommendation that power be devolved to oversight agencies such as the Election Commission (EC), as well as the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) and the Attorney General’s Chambers – but this one is a completely different subject and not related to disclosure of political funding.
SeaDemon Says 
You must be logged in to post a comment.