Thursday, August 27, 2009

It’s a Long Road

It’s a Long Road
27 August, 2009

It was not until Samy Vellu’s inadvertent revelation in Parliament that it was known that the four trustees of Hatibudi Sdn Bhd were (drum roll please) Mahathir Mohamad (PM), Ghaffar Baba (DPM), Daim Zainuddin (Finance Minister) and Sanusi Junid (Agricultural Minister and UMNO Secretary General).

By Hakim Joe

Would anyone sensible award a multi-billion Ringgit mega-contract for the building of a 512 kilometer highway to an engineering cum construction firm that has zero experience in the construction of highways and has never built an inch of it?

Would anyone sensible choose this company over two other local companies that had bids lower than “the chosen one”?

Would anyone sensible choose a company that has such a poor record (of other constructions like the infamous collapse of the Northam Court in Penang) that it was suspended by the KLSE and had accumulated RM90 million in operating losses between 1981 and 1985 over two financially sound companies?

Would anyone sensible award this mega-contract to a company that is almost insolvent (stocks suspended at 30 sen) that the body that is awarding the contract also needs to provide part of the capital, stand guarantee for the remaining commercial loans that is taken and provide a written guarantee of profitability when the other two competing companies did not seek such extreme financial assurances?

Would anyone sensible award this mega-contract to a company and then grant them “Pioneer Status” so that this company will be exempted from taxes for the next 10 years?

Well this someone did all the insensible things above. Not only was the multi-billion Ringgit highway mega-contract awarded to this “zero-experience highway builder” over other experienced highway builders, this someone also had to cough out the initial “almost-interest-free” capital plus stand as guarantor over the massive billion Ringgit loans this “KLSE suspended public company” would have to take in order to complete this mega-project. Additionally, this someone also had to provide written guarantees that the “poor-record-construction-company” would not lose one sen in this venture. To cap it all off, this company is exempted from taxes for the next ten years and the proposed 25 years concession period is extended to 30 years.

Let’s start from the beginning.

In February 1986 the Ministry of Public Works launched a tender exercise for privatizing the construction and operation of the remaining portion of the North-South Highway (NSH). The 867 kilometer NSH was about 41% completed by the Malaysian Highway Authority (MHA) then. Five out of the six pre-qualified companies showed interest, namely Pilecon Engineering Berhad, United Engineers Malaysia Sdn Bhd, Shahpadu Holding Sdn Bhd, Unico Holdings Sdn Bhd and Pembinaan Hasbuddin (M) Sdn Bhd. Of these five companies, only Pilecon and Hashbuddin had the necessary experience building highways and only Pilecon and UEM submitted “conforming bids”. (MBF Holdings Sdn Bhd showed no interest at all.)

The question is why the construction of the NSH is being privatized when almost 41% of it has already been completed by MHA. What is an additional 512 kilometer of highway after building 355 kilometer? The Government’s answers to these questions were (1) It is aimed at relieving the financial and administrative burden of the Government in undertaking and maintaining a vast and constantly expanding network of services and investments in infrastructure; (2) Privatization is expected to promote competition, improve efficiency and increase the productivity of the services; (3) Privatization, by stimulating private entrepreneurship and investment, is expected to accelerate the rate of growth of the economy; (4) Privatization is expected to assist in reducing the size and presence of the public sector and its monopolistic tendencies and bureaucratic support in the economy; and (5) Privatization is also expected to contribute towards meeting the objectives of the New Economic Policy (NEP).

Of the five bids, only 3 were considered. Pilecon submitted 4 alternative proposals ranging from RM3.372 billion to RM3.76 billion. Hashbuddin submitted various alternative proposals with a standard tender of RM3 billion. UEM also submitted various proposals but had the highest bid of RM3.5 billion. Additionally, Pilecon’s tender also only specified a requirement of a RM498 million standby credit from the Government while Hashbuddin needed the Government to provide loan support (to its commercial loans). UEM needed RM1.65 billion from the Government. Pilecon proposed a 7 sen/km toll rate for a concession period of 25 years. Hashbuddin proposed a 5 sen/km toll rate for a concession period of 22 years and UEM once again came in highest at 7.5sen/km toll rate for a concession period of 25 years (extended to 30 years after the contract has been awarded.)

If conforming bids were mandatory, only Pilecon and UEM can be considered and Pilecon would win the tender owing to its lower bid, its proven experience at building highways plus the fact that the company only required a RM498 million standby credit facility from the Government.

If conforming bids were not considered mandatory, Hashbuddin would win this tender hands down. One, the company was an experienced highway builder. Two, its bid was the lowest at RM3 billion. Three, the company did not require any money from the Government, it merely required the Government to provide loan support to its commercial loan application(s) and lastly, its proposal for the collection of toll is the lowest at 5 sen per kilometer and the shortest concession period of 22 years only. In fact Hashbuddin also submitted the lowest estimated toll collection at RM17.9 billion. (Pilecon estimated it at between RM18 billion to RM19 billion and UEM’s figures were a whooping RM34 billion.)

On 8 July 1987, Samy Vellu tabled the Federal Roads (Private Management) Amendment Bill, and the Highway Authority Malaysia (Incorporation) Amendment Bill in Parliament to enable the government to privatize the NSH of which was awarded to UEM ahead of Pilecon and Hashbuddin. The total contract was worth RM3.5 billion.

When one studies the conditions imposed upon the Government by the contractor, it exhibits a parody of sorts whereby it is akin to a beggar enforcing strict rules and regulations upon a rich man that has offered him a high-paying job. UEM is asking practically everything (including the kitchen sink and more) from the Government in order to cover all possible risks in the NSH project and yet the Government proceeded to award the NSH project to UEM.

One, UEM does not have to lay one single sen into the RM3.5 billion project. The UEM award is based on a pre-completion government loan of RM750 million to be drawn down during the construction period and a post-completion government loan of RM950 million (reduced to RM900 million) to be drawn down during the operation phase of the project. Furthermore, UEM also wants the interest rate on both these huge government loans to be floating at an interest rate set at the rate of inflation (this means that UEM will pay no interest to the Government if the inflation rate is zero) which the Government eventually denied after protests from DAP in Parliament.

Additionally, UEM wants an External Risk Undertaking (or commonly called a Guarantee) from the Government, to cover costs arising from adverse foreign exchange movements on its external debt, adverse interest rate movement, adverse changes in taxation, delays in completion due to factors outside its control, and cost overruns due to changes in Government Policy, and that this External Risk Guarantee is to be supported by a revolving loan facility whereby UEM could make drawings from the Government in order to cover any costs caused by external risks. (The External Risk Guarantee was rejected by the Government after once again being protested by DAP in Parliament but the revolving loan facility of RM500 million was approved.)

If one thinks that these demands are unreasonable, wait, there’s more. UEM is also asking for a Traffic Volume Undertaking (Guarantee) whereby the Government has to provide a revolving loan facility to it to meet any shortfall in the volume of traffic using the expressways. Repayment of principal of this loan will be subordinated to all operating cost, debt service and dividends due to equity investors. Furthermore, the completed sections of the NSH (by MHA) would also be handed over to UEM gratis. (The RM3.32 billion cost to build the 355 km stretch by MHA will be absorbed by the Government including the discharge of RM1.7 billion in commercial loans made by the MHA.)

Not enough? Here’s more. UEM is also asking for an extension to the concession period. In UEM’s bid, it stated 25 years. Now UEM wants the Government to guarantee them an additional 5 year, from 25 years to 30 years. Also, that the Government make up the toll collection shortfalls from 1997 onwards if total collections do not exceed RM2 billion a year by then. (The British consultant, Rendel, Palmer & Tritton, had conducted an extensive traffic flow study and had estimated that the total traffic toll collection projection for 1997 is estimated at RM800 million only which would mean that the Government needs to top up the additional RM1.2 billion.)

So why would the Government accede to such ridiculous demands from UEM when it could have simply awarded the NSH contract to either Pilecon or Hashbuddin without all the hassles?

Let’s take a closer look at the ownership of UEM. Once entirely owned by Renong Berhad, it has since been taken over by a RM2 shell company by the name of Hatibudi Sdn Bhd (50%). The other major shareholders are United Engineers Ltd (27.65%), Permodalan Bumiputera Sabah Bhd (1.72%), Hong Kong & Shanghai Bank (KL) Nominees Sdn Bhd (1.6%), Mayban Nominees Sdn Bhd (0.35%), Southern Nominees Sdn Bhd (0.32%), Hong Kong & Shanghai Bank (S’pore) Nominees P/L (0.25%) and other public shareholders (16.2%).

From the list above, a total of 2.52% of UEM shares are held by nominees. Who are the real beneficiary owners (or single owner) of these four lots of UEM shares? (UEM was quoted at RM2.50 even before being re-listed by the KLSE after their successful bid for the NSH project.) The 2.52% or 3,151,000 shares are now worth a potential RM7,877,500 and Hatibudi’s 50% share is worth a massive RM156.25 million!

So who owns Hatibudi Sdn Bhd? Herein lies the problem as discovered by Lim Kit Siang (LKS) when he tried to check it out at the Registrar of Companies and no matter how hard he huffed and he puffed, the ROC would not or could not provide him with the answers. The best they could do was a 1984 printout that stated one Halim Saad (Renong’s Chairman) and Mohd. Razali Abdul Rahman (PECD’s Director). It was not until Samy Vellu’s inadvertent revelation in Parliament that it was known that the four trustees of Hatibudi Sdn Bhd were (drum roll please) Mahathir Mohamad (PM), Ghaffar Baba (DPM), Daim Zainuddin (Finance Minister) and Sanusi Junid (Agricultural Minister and UMNO Secretary General).

On 10 July 1987, UEM announced its revised contract with the Government whereby the concession period has been extended to 30 years (1987 to 2017) and that they would stand to collect a total of RM54 billion from toll collections in this period of time. It was also discovered that UEM paid RM26,030 on 27 December 1985 to MHA as fees for documentation and plans of the NSH project. As the Ministry of Works only advertised its NSH privatization project in February 1986, UEM must have had prior knowledge of this privatization exercise and would have been working on their tender more than a month before the other interested companies did. (All companies tendering for the NSH project were only given a three month period to prepare their tenders.)

On 16 July 1987, SV stated that the NSH project was being privatized because the Government could not find the funds of RM3 billion to complete the project (at RM300 million a year for the next 10 years) and would rather loan RM150 million a year to UEM (for the next 10 years) to complete the NSH. This is besides the fact that the Government is already collecting RM72 million a year from toll collections at the Federal Highway Route 2 from Subang to Klang, and potentially RM120 million a year from the completed sections of the NSH. (A combined total of RM192 million a year.)

On 17 July 1987, the proposed signing of the NSH contract was called off pending parliamentary debate. It was also discovered then that as far back as August 1985, then Renong Chairman Halim Saad had written to the PM proposing the privatization of the construction of the remaining NSH at the cost of RM3.42 billion with toll charges of 5 sen per kilometer. Hatibudi Sdn Bhd took over UEM later that year with Halim Saad owning 99.9% of the company and between August and December of that same year, the real ownership was transferred to the four trustees.

On 23 July 1987, Business Times published an exclusive front page report headlined “UEM breaks its silence” complaining that with the DAP demands on the NSH privatization contract, “every last drop of the proposals is squeezed out of us.”

On 13 August 1987, the toll charges for the completed sections of the NSH were doubled from 2.5 sen per km to 5 sen per km. As these sections are to be handed over to UEM immediately, UEM would be instantly collecting RM120 million a year.

On 18 August 1987, LKS filed a suit at the Penang High Court for an interim injunction to restrain the Government and UEM from signing the NSE contract. Justice Edgar Joseph Jr. refused the application for an interim injunction.

On 24 August 1987, Bapa Malaysia, Tunku Abdul Rahman had wrote in The Star that, “I consider it improper and irregular for a leading political party to make use of its power to amass wealth at the expense of other business ventures.”

On 25 August 1987 and on appeal to the Supreme Court, Tan Sri HH Lee (Chief Justice Borneo), Tan Sri Wan Suleiman and Tan Sri Wan Hamzah ordered the interim injunction to be issued with liberty to apply and at the same time directed an early trial of the suits.

On the 29 August 1987, PM Mahathir had this to reply to Tunku’s statement, “We agree…but who is going to pay the RM360 million for the UMNO complex?”

On 5 October 1987, Justice VC George rejected appeals by Government and UEM to set aside the interim injunction.

On 27 October 1987, Operation Lalang began in earnest. 106 people were arrested under the ISA and three newspapers had their licenses revoked (The Star, Sin Chew Jit Poh and Watan.) Prominent people arrested included Opposition leaders LKS and Karpal Singh, ALIRAN President Chandra Muzaffar, PAS Youth Chief Halim Arshat, MCA Vice President and Perak Chief Chan Kit Chee, UMNO Youth Education Chairman Mohamed Fahmi Ibrahim, Publicity Chief of the Civil Rights Committee Kua Kia Soong, Chinese Education Association Chairman Lim Fong Seng and Women's Aid Organisation member Irene Xavier.

The Star was given its publishing license back after a few months but was now under new management (installed by UMNO). Tunku Abdul Rahman’s weekly column “As I See It” was discontinued and almost all the former staff were laid off. From then onwards The Star became a pro-BN Government mouthpiece.

On 16 March 1988, the Supreme Court (by 3 to 2) upheld the appeal of the Government and UEM and discharged the interim injunction. In favor were Tun Salleh Abas (Lord President), Tan Sri Abdul Hamid (Chief Justice Malaya), Justice Hashim Yeop Sani while dissenting were Tan Sri Abdoolcader and Datuk George Seah.

On 18 March 1988, the Government and UEM signed NSE contract. Both LKS and Karpal were incarcerated without trial in Kamunting by then. UEM, from a company that had a poor record and was suspended by the KLSE, now has the potential to reap between RM30 billion and RM45 billion from the NSH concession contract alone. Accordingly, Hatibudi would share half its spoils.

The rest is history.

BTW, not only did UEM get the NSH project in the Government Privatization Plan, UEM was also awarded the $250 million National Sports Complex consultancy project, the $47.5 million (which ballooned to RM1.6 billion) Peninsular Gas Utilization management consultancy service project (Petronas Gas) and the contract to widen the 15 km Federal Highway Route 2 from Subang to Klang (and the right to collect toll from it). UEM was also awarded the contract to build the 35km North Klang Valley Expressway (NKVE) and the right to collect toll from it.

While the stated contractors of Pilecon were almost entirely local companies, UEM sub-contracted the construction of the NSH to three foreign companies, namely Mitsui Co. of Japan, Taylor Woodrow International Limited of United Kingdom and Dragages et Travaux Publics of France. This is owing to the fact that they had no experience building highways.

Building massive highways is not as simple as it seems where asphalt is poured onto the ground, compressed and leveled off. As most Malaysian soil is characterized as “soft ground” with a marine-clay mineralogy, it is therefore imperative that the builders get it correct the first time. There’re the numerous soil tests that would be required to estimate its compressibility, its consolidation (clay salinity and sensitivity), its applied stress ratio, its plasticity index, its piezocone tip resistance to the uncorrected field vane shear strength, its liquid limitations, its distribution of vertical and horizontal settlement and its un-drained shear strength (amongst others). This is on top of the fact that Malaysia is considered a very humid country where torrential rainfalls are a fact of life. As the NSH will be cutting through forests and mountains, the deforestationing of virgin jungle has to be conducted (who profited from the sale of the logs?) and embankments constructed. Why offer the contract to a company with zero experience?

UEM took almost 8 years to complete the NSH when the contract specified a maximum period of 5 years. There’s no information as to whether UEM was penalized for the delay. Furthermore, the Government did not reveal whether UEM lodged a performance bond prior to the signing of the NSH construction contract. The NSH concession contract was never made public although it was signed more than 20 years ago.

Wednesday, August 26, 2009

Online health myths

Online health myths
Mon, Aug 24, 2009
Philippine Daily Inquirer/Asia News Network

BY Michael Tan

Myths and legends are often associated with the ancient past, with heroes and villains who most probably never existed. Or, if they did, their good or evil have been amplified to teach people about human strengths, frailties and vulnerabilities, usually coming from nature.

In the 21st century, even in the world's most modern cities, these stories are still going around but are now called urban myths and legends that are rapidly spread through SMS and the Internet. Like their ancient counterparts, these urban tales often have an element of truth in them and incorporate true-to-life individual events or experiences. Like older myths and legends, our modern ones mirror our anxieties and warn us about threats from people and from nature.

These cybermyths are particularly common as well for health issues, which shouldn't be surprising. Threats to our health are taken very personally, and when cybermyths go around citing personal experiences or quote doctors and health professionals, people feel uneasy, not wanting to believe such stories but not wanting to take chances, either. The health cybermyths also speak of our feelings of helplessness in modern society, often accompanied by fears of technology as well as social prejudices.

How then should we assess the stories we get through texted messages or e-mail?

Trust your instincts. Some of these cybermyths are so incredible it's amazing how people believe them at all. Stories that go, 'This is a true story' should make you wonder. Also check out, which is an amazing site that evaluates hundreds of urban myths and gives the facts.

Except for the myths about bangungot (sudden adult death syndrome) and soy products, the Snopes site rebutted some of the more popular health cybermyths that have been going around. Just goes to show how global these urban myths have gone.

Cybermyth 1: Fruits should be taken on an empty stomach for maximum benefit. If fruits are eaten with a meal, they begin to rot with the other food in the stomach and become harmful.

Facts: Snopes traces this urban myth back to 1998 with an article first produced by a Singaporean culinary writer. It first entered the Internet in 2001 and has been circulating with different versions, some including a claim that cold water after a meal causes cancer. These ideas come from a Herbert Sheton, who was a naturopath (not a physician) and who had been arrested several times for practicing medicine illegally. There is no basis to the claims made in this cybermyth about fruits. Food of any kind gets digested more quickly in a previously empty stomach, but you don't get more nutrients. Moreover, fruits will not rot in the stomach if mixed with other food.

Cybermyth 2: Chicken wings cause cancer. This was based, according to one e-mail, "on a US-based pharmacist who is a cousin of a colleague". A woman is operated on for uterine cysts, then has a relapse and her doctor asks if she takes chicken wings. He then warns her to stop because poultry farms inject chickens with the hormone estrogen, which goes up to high levels around the wings and causes cancer.

Facts: Many poultry farms use estrogen on chickens, but it doesn't have to be the wings alone that get a concentration. Moreover, it is not clear if estrogen in chicken meat will cause cancer. People generally fear hormones, which is why anti-family planning groups are able to scare people by claiming that the pill, which has estrogen, causes cancer. (The reality is that the pill can even protect against some cancers.)

Cybermyth 3: A variation on the estrogen cybermyth: don't give your sons soy milk, taho (a popular Filipino snack made of bean curd, tapioca balls, and sweet sauce) or other soy products because soybeans contain 'estrogen-like substances' which will turn them homosexual.

Facts: High doses of estrogen can cause gynecomastia (enlarged breasts) in males, but the plant estrogens that do occur in soya are not sufficient to make men's breasts get bigger. Moreover, there is no link between estrogen and male homosexuality. This cybermyth clearly rides on homophobia.

And just to set the record straight, lest I end up creating another urban myth: whether you're male or female, soy milk won't give you larger breasts.

Cybermyth 4: Bangungot (sudden adult death syndrome) is caused by dehydration or electrolyte imbalance, which happens if you go to bed thirsty, or after drinking alcohol or eating noodles.

Facts: This is a mix of different theories about bangungot. Early studies suggested acute pancreatitis. When Singaporean researchers looked into bangungot deaths among Thai guest workers, they thought the condition might have something to do with a lack of potassium. Dehydration, alcohol and/or noodles have not been implicated, at least not directly.

There's more evidence now to suggest that bangungot is more of an inherited heart problem, and that individuals who are predisposed can suffer bangungot when they take certain medication. There's still some mystery around this condition, so expect more rumours to go around about its causes.

Cybermyth 5: Antiperspirants cause breast cancer because they prevent you from perspiring and releasing toxins.

Facts: This claim was based on a published study in 2004 that looked into 400 breast cancer survivors. Those who had 'more aggressive underarm habits' were reported to have caught cancer 22 years earlier. The study was criticised for its methodology and statistical analysis. Another subsequent study comparing women with and without breast cancer found no link to antiperspirants.

Another way of refuting this urban myth: Why don't men get breast cancer despite widespread use of antiperspirants? The legend-makers' answer? Men's antiperspirants tend to be sprayed and released into the air, reducing its dangers, while women apply the antiperspirants directly to their skin!

Cybermyth 6: Recycling, heating or freezing thin plastic bottles release dioxins, which cause cancer.

Facts: Plastic bottles used for mineral water and other beverages are made out of polyethylene terephthalate or PET, which will not release chemicals when heated or frozen. Even if it did, PET does not have cancer-causing dioxins. PET bottle manufacturers do recommend that these be used only once, but this is more for hygienic reasons - cleaning the bottles is difficult and bacterial contamination can occur.

Cybermyth 7: Taking shrimps with vitamin C makes you more vulnerable to arsenic poisoning.

Facts: In the unlikely event that the shrimps' habitats are contaminated, they are not likely to cause poisoning to humans who eat the shrimps. The idea that arsenic has a special reaction with vitamin C has no scientific basis.

An Interesting Exchange Of VIews In The Comments To "HOW TO MUZZLE YOUR CRITIC"

Assalamalaikum Dear Dr. Mahathir,

As an Israeli and a Jew, it is not really my business in the internal politics of Malaysia and it is an issue to be dealt by Malaysians solely.
May be I don't understand well the whole Malaysian political processes, but I would like to post my opinion as an "outsider".

Any political leader or any public or national servant must understand that when he/she joins the public role, he/she will be exposed to criticism. It is not a regular criticism. It is criticism using a magnifying lens. A mouse size of a mistake would look now in the size of an elephant. No one can escape of that political drama. This is also even your destiny when you entered the political life.

Where is the difference? There are two kind of politicians. Those who enter into politics for selfish ambitions and pretending to be working for the people and the other are those who enter into politics with the pure intention to serve the people.

Both types are making mistakes. The selfish are making their mistakes because of their narrow viewing angle. Looking always for their own and selfish promotion while the people are last priority. Those will be also the first to jump from the ship if it will sink. Criticism of those leaders by the people and the media is a MUST. The people must understand that this was a wrong choice. These kind of mistakes of the selfish leaders cannot be forgiven and must not.

The true people's political servant may also be mistaken. But this mistake is different, it is not done intentionally and not for selfish purpose. Because that type of leader is motivated for the good of his own people and view a wider angle, he/she may have mistakes due to the huge amount of data to be analyzed. Now he/she have a big dilemma to make a choice of several options. It is not an easy task and mistakes are part of the process. Of course those mistakes must be criticized by the people and media. But this must be with the intention of improvement and learning the lesson for the future. In this case if the leader is a honest servant, he/she will listen to the criticism, internalize the lesson and learn how to avoid similar mistakes in the future. Those mistakes can be forgiven by the people and a second chance can take place. In cases when honest politicians are committing severe mistakes, they are self resigning their position. A selfish leader wouldn't do that.

Dear Dr. Mahathir, I tend to believe that you are the second type of politician and this is why you have so many supporters even you are not leading Malaysia for almost 6 years. People are not forgetting the good things and the bad things leaders did for them. Having so many supporters is speaking for itself.

When people are criticized, it must be done in a way such that the criticized object will not be pushed against the wall. Pushing the criticized to the wall may react opposing to the intention of the criticism. So, criticism must have the proper approach and timing if the intention is to get improvement. If the criticism is in the intention to smear mud on the face of the leader, it will not achieve a thing since mud can be smeared on the face of the criticizer since he/she is not pure of mistakes. Everyone bears a Pandora box that maybe opened.

Now, Malaysians need to understand themselves who is a real leader and who is a false leader and criticize him/her accordingly.

Dear Dr. Mahathir, I’m continuing reading your posts even I'm not commenting on the internal issues of your country. Since "criticism" is a more generic issue, I felt that I may comment.

Dear Dr. Mahathir, I wish you all the best and good health.


Hanan, Jewish,


Dear Hanan, Jews and Son of Israel

One of the Western people say: 7 of Arab are equal to 1 Jews and 7 of Jews are equal to one Dr Mahathir.


Dengan Izin Tun..Terima kasih..


A nice one from you I must concede.Back to the Pandora Box..
Pandora heard a voice from the box that says..Release me..and all the sweet nothing which goes with it..Unable to tempt her curiosity that not only kill the cat..She release all kinds of evil to the world..

Bittered and stung that is the aftermath.

Now back to Malaysian political scene.

Abdullah Argh..Mad Badawi opened Malaysian political Pandora Box..

First : he heeds the voice of ''release me'' from Anwar Ibrahim..

Please release me let me go..For I don't love Mahathir any more..
He..opss..I did it again..I got carried away and not so innocent..

Not all hell break loose in Malaysia but it did it catastropic proportion in Malaysia though..

Second: Abdolla like the Pandora Box myth gives hopes..He gaves many Malaysian hopes but as the saying goes...

His ego writing checks his body can't cash..

I would not go into all the details but suffice to says Tun walks his talks,though his critics will not agrees to this.And they who critizes Tun are the one as always nothing to shows for their critism.They truly forgotten the saying..

People in house glass should not throw stone..

Thank you Hanan..May I have not to say anything about your political scene...:)

Terima kasih Tun..


salam Tun,

Dear Hanan,

Please send my regards to your leaders back home.Gee thanks for evicting those Arabs out of their ancestral homes to make way for Jewish settlers recently.

Thanks a lot for ignoring the world's condemnation and protests against the evictions!

By God,you guys are truly compassionate and peace loving people!The
greatest land robbers...oopps sorry! providers of the 20th century!




Assalamualaikum dear Dr. Mahathir and dear friends,

I read a comment which is not related to the posted item. it was that one:
"By zul81 on July 31, 2009 3:01 PM
Dear Hanan, Jews and Son of Israel
One of the Western people say: 7 of Arab are equal to 1 Jews and 7 of Jews are equal to one Dr Mahathir."

Why did zul81 direct the comment to me? Was his intention to praise me? Or humiliate me? Was his intention to praise Dr. Mahathir? So why did he direct the comment to me and the Jews? Actually he humiliated his own brothers and leader. Is this is the type of Dr. Mahathir’s supporters and is this the kind of comments Dr. Mahathir is expecting? I doubt.
I could use the same silly "jokey" jargon by equalizing the Jew to a pig (like many of the Muslims tend to say). I'll leave the math work for you to address how many pigs are equal to whom. But I’ll not use this equation since I don't believe or support it in the same manner as I don't like zul81’s comment.
I prefer to pour some criticism on the people who criticize the Zionists as non human, brutal, monstrous, etc..., including some famous leaders of your country.
From those tens of thousands or even more readers including the blog administrators and its owners, couldn't address the humiliating joke of zul81. Not a single honest and truthful Muslim raised his voice to condemn that comment. Silence, or maybe acceptance, or maybe ignorance or may be all of that.

The Malaysian leaders and people want to teach the Zionists a lesson of humanity and tolerance by criticizing them everywhere and every time.
You should look in the mirror before any attempt to say a word to anyone. Comments and sayings like zul81's is just the spark to ignite a more humiliation to other nations and minorities. This is a snow ball towards what you can read and watch below:
One picture is worth more than 1000 words.
Don't speak up about any phosphorous bombs, and massacre and apartheid and racism and brutal beating and check points and fences, prior you are pure and innocent. Don't hold the human rights flag prior you are humans yourself. Don't attempt to declare war as crimes against humanity while your law keepers are committing crimes against humanity on defenseless detained people. There is a lot you need to learn about humanity yourselves proir attempting to be a role model of humanity and blast the teaching to others. First declare them criminals, clean your hands and wash the internal laundry.
This is my kind of criticism to all of you and you may do whatever you find proper to do with it even throwing it to the garbage can.

Dr. Mahathir said well:
"Cry my beloved country".
Dr. Mahathir is right, Malaysians - you really deserve it. Cry...because of the shame.

Wassalam friends.

Hanan, Jewish,


Dear Hanan,Jewish

I`m really sorry if you irritated with the comment that i was posted.

Many people includding myseft believe that Jewish are intellegent and smart folk. This is not come by naturality or gift from the God but through Jewish cultural,diet and emphasis to the education since they growing in the fetus stage. I dont know its true or not, a story of one Jewish ante natal mother during her prangnancy , she and her spouse will do calculus and mathematic solution together just for stimulate intellegent of their baby.

I very proud having an intelligent and smart leader like Dr Mahathir. A western man describe the intellegent of Dr Mahathir with to word that I have posted before and make you mad.

Maybe u proud to your Bibi @ Benjamin Netanyahu.

Syallom to u.


to JJJ:
so the article talks about offering more government scholarships to singaporean chinese than to the malays and indians. Apparently, a lot more scholarships are given to chinese students and the writer is upset cause he feel's its biased and not an accurate reflection of the population make-up of Singapore.
JJJ, you can choose to look at it for 2 angles. One, the Singapore government is biased. It selects the scholarship holders based on skin colour and ethnicity.
the Chinese students who received the scholarships are academically bright and based on their records, they are worthy. It is unfair to deny them the scholarship just so to reflect the population make-up because 1. they have worked hard and deserve the scholarship, and 2. the purpose of these scholarships is to recruit the brightest students into the government so that the most capable may lead the country forward, and since the chinese students have shown they are capable, they are awarded the scholarships.

Look, JJJ, if the SG government is truly racist, it would have adopted Pro-chinese policies by giving them priority education, housing and jobs, like the bumiputra policy in malaysia. If the sg government were truly racist, why would they make it compulsory to include at least one minority-race candidate for groups running for election in the GRCs(group representation constituency)? why? because we are racist?

i doubt someone racist like you can understand the stuff i've just said. all the comments you have made seem to be directed at the chinese( chinese taking up scholarships, sg's gov being pro chinese). Try to look at issues from other angles and correct your racist policies in malaysia before criticizing singapore. WAKE UP YOU ANTI-SEMITIC RACIST FOOL!!

Hanan i feel for you.


Assalamualaikum dear zul81,

I deeply appreciate and accept your friendly apology.

We need to bear a second time thinking before saying words. Those words maybe cherishing and praising one side and humiliating the other side. People from different cultures and different races or religions are sensitive to different interpretations of the same words. I know many ugly jokes about Arabs and Muslims, but I dare to say them for two main reason: One - I don't agree with such jokes, two- those kind of jokes must not get publicity. As same I can say that I'm against the cartoons against prophet Muhammad which have been published in the European newspapers at the time.

Allah created all people to be equal and blessed them. Everyone on earth has a duty to fulfill. Is the knowledge of the professor worthy more than the hard working cotter that plants wheat seeds to have bread and feed the professor? As a Jew I don't feel superior among anyone, neither an Arab, nor a Muslim, nor a Christian nor another Jew. Even the sick and invalids have their self contribution to humanity and it is weighing equally. Just imagine the deed of a healthy person to visit the sick person. By being a sick person he made the healthy person to do the deed because the healthy could do the visiting deed. For the religious people of all religions the weigh of our deeds is equal. The wheat of the cotter is equal to the knowledge of the professor who made better means to plant that wheat seeds to have a healthier bread the cotter can seed its wheat. Our harmony in life is full of different deeds and they are all equal. This is about how Judaism is interpreting deeds and I'm pretty sure Islam is doing the same.
I also have a great respect to Dr. Mahathir but he is not unique among any other friendly person. I'm sure that Dr. Mahathir is not looking after the special praising in kind of jokes since it is not adding any honor to the person we honor. When praising of a person is to be expressed, we don't need to make a comparison to other people. When someone is awarded we never say that he did better than another person.


Hanan, Jewish,


Asslamualaikum dear friend antikmalaya,

As you probably saw I already excused zul81.

Zionists are a partial group of the Jewish people. This part is the major part of the Jewish people.
The Zionists are committed to the agenda of returning to our homeland Zion (Zion means Jerusalem, means the land of Israel).
I'll not go once again into the same issues that we already had a debate upon in previous issues and posts of the “chedet blog web site”. You may refer to them and search the answers.

As you mentioned the Iranian Jews that they are safe and protected, let me tell you some interesting facts. They are so well protected, that the Iranians are not allowing a whole family to travel abroad and some family members must stay in Iran as a safety playing card. Do you know why? It is because they don't want the Jews to emigrate and they don't want that the Jews who travel abroad will speak against Iran so the rest of the family are hostages. So don't tell me about the brutal Iranian regime. I know the information from "first source".

You may also look into the history of Muslims who massacred Jews. Not as much as the Christians, but still massacred. There are still enough evidences of Palestinians who massacred Jews even before Israel was established and they massacred the Jews who lived on that land for hundreds of years.

You may think that most of the crimes are done by the Zionists. And I think that the most of the crimes are done by the Muslim Palestinians and Yasser Arafat was the head of criminals to his own people, robbing their money and living in luxury palace while his poor people is oppressed (just see how his widow lives abroad in France, from where did she got that money?). The most criminals are the Saudi's and the oil supplying countries (Muslims) who are living covered with gold and diamonds, forgetting the Quran equality to all and preserve the Palestinians misery just as an excuse against the Jews. This is my example of criminals. You hate the Jews more than you love your own brothers.

As for the proposal to convert to Islam. Thank you for the invitation. I prefer to remain a Jew without the "Jihad" in my agenda. I found the Judaism as a better faith for me in many aspects of humanity and teaching. I like the hard way of Judaism compared the easy way of converting to Islam. At least I don't need to listen to brainwashing clerics in mosques. In the synagogues we don't brainwash against our enemy, we teach Torah. This is not an obstacle for me to become a friend of Muslims and respect thier faith.

As you mentioned that the Quran uses the Jewish people and Zionists as same (you said: "the Muslims generally accept Zionists and Jewish as one. This is because the Quran refers both as Jewish."), kindly can you refer to the word "Zionist" in the Quran and where is it equalized to Jews?


Hanan, Jewish,


Dengan Izin Tun..Terima kasih..


[[The most criminals are the Saudi's and the oil supplying countries (Muslims) who are living covered with gold and diamonds, forgetting the Quran equality to all and preserve the Palestinians misery just as an excuse against the Jews. This is my example of criminals. You hate the Jews more than you love your own brothers.]]

Hanan, I concede and agrees with you on this.No need for elaboration.

[[As for the proposal to convert to Islam. Thank you for the invitation. I prefer to remain a Jew without the "Jihad" in my agenda. I found the Judaism as a better faith for me in many aspects of humanity and teaching. I like the hard way of Judaism compared the easy way of converting to Islam.]]

I don't agree with you with this one hanan..There is no easy way in Islam.

[[At least I don't need to listen to brainwashing clerics in mosques. In the synagogues we don't brainwash against our enemy, we teach Torah. This is not an obstacle for me to become a friend of Muslims and respect thier faith.]]

I respect your faith too but would like you to consider exchange of opinion.

[[As you mentioned that the Quran uses the Jewish people and Zionists as same (you said: "the Muslims generally accept Zionists and Jewish as one. This is because the Quran refers both as Jewish."), kindly can you refer to the word "Zionist" in the Quran and where is it equalized to Jews?]]

Please highlight the importance of this point.

Hanan..we may disagrees in lot of things but I would like to start on new footing.Would you care to explains:

1) How your God describes Himself?
2) What is the purpose of your religion?
3) If 99 percent of your believer acts against the very
teaching tenet of your religion, is your religion at fault or
the follower is?

I think you are a brave man Hanan.Defending one faith is an act of courageous fellow.I believe I am brave too in seeking clarification of your faith in order to shows mine.

Terima kasih Tun.


Asaalamualaikum dear frind wajaperak,

Let me be sharp and short.
I'll not become a Muslim for the reasons as:
• You never greet me with the "assalamualaikum" because I'm a Jew.
• You suspect the honesty of a non Muslim.
• You have the Jihad. And here you may find what can a Muslim do in the name of his faith:,7340,L-3760580,00.html. (if it is not enough, I can find some more of that shame)

You wrote:
"1) How your God describes Himself?
2) What is the purpose of your religion?
3) If 99 percent of your believer acts against the very teaching tenet of your religion, is your religion at fault or the follower is?"

I don't need to justify any of your questions about the purpose of the Jewish religion or God's description since it is not relevant to the "criticism" objective of that post. You'll need to become a Jew to understand that (and it is a very hard process).
I really admire your superior knowledge and placing the fact that 99 percent of the Jews are acting against their own faith. This means two major things of your firm knowledge. One - You know so well Judaism so you don't need to ask the two previous questions. Two - you have a very good and reliable data base with the proper number of Jews who are alike. Isn't it based somehow on the clerics data base?

Hanan, Jewish,


Dengan Izin Tun..Terima kasih..

Waalaikum dear friend Hanan,

I'll try to be concise too.

Freedom of choice.

Allah let's us decide what to choose.Here from Surah Al Kahfi

“Dan katakalah (wahai Muhammad saw): “Kebenaran itu ialah yang datang daripada Tuhan kamu. Maka sesiapa yang mahu beriman, hendaklah dia beriman; dan sesiapa yang mahu ingkar, biarlah dia mengingkarinya...” (Surah al-Kahfi, ayat 29) Firman-Nya lagi: “Dan (bukanlah tanggungjawabmu wahai Muhammad menjadikan seluruh umat manusia beriman), jika Tuhanmu menghendaki nescaya berimanlah sekalian manusia yang ada di bumi. (Janganlah engkau bersedih hati mengenai kedegilan orang yang ingkar itu; kalau Tuhan tidak menghendaki), maka patutkah engkau pula hendak memaksa manusia supaya mereka menjadi orang yang beriman?” (Surah Yunus, ayat 99)

Sorry Hanan..I don't have this translation in English.

[[• You never greet me with the "assalamualaikum" because I'm a Jew.]]

Sorry again to remind you that our Prophet ( P.B.U.H ) is the one who decreed this.Not me.I wish I could make it easier though.

[[• You suspect the honesty of a non Muslim.]]

. I don't suspect the honesty of non Muslim.Ask S..Tan and Pak Pandir08.When I am wrong I am wrong and says sorry..

[[• You have the Jihad. And here you may find what can a Muslim do in the name of his faith:,7340,L-3760580,00.html.]]

This is their intepretation of Jihad.Not true Muslim teaching.Fullstop.

[[• (if it is not enough, I can find some more of that shame)]]

Agreed.But nowadays tempers fly easily.Do you have road rage in your country?..Here, when rage explodes..people do all kinds of thing and religion is an excuse..

You wrote:
"1) How your God describes Himself?
2) What is the purpose of your religion?
3) If 99 percent of your believer acts against the very teaching tenet of your religion, is your religion at fault or the follower is?"

[[I don't need to justify any of your questions about the purpose of the Jewish religion or God's description since it is not relevant to the "criticism" objective of that post. You'll need to become a Jew to understand that (and it is a very hard process).]]

Hanan..True Muslim that is Mukmin is the replica of our Prophet Muhammad s.a.w..He tell us..

"Moses have been hurt more than I do.But he ( Moses ) is painstakingly patient.

[[I really admire your superior knowledge and placing the fact that 99 percent of the Jews are acting against their own faith. This means two major things of your firm knowledge. One - You know so well Judaism so you don't need to ask the two previous questions. Two - you have a very good and reliable data base with the proper number of Jews who are alike. Isn't it based somehow on the clerics data base?]]

Thank you for your compliment Hanan...You are yourself very knowledgeable..Where's my knowledge comes from?From Allah bestowed "Rahmat"..upon believing heart..Torah is first before Al Quran..your clerics data base share's the same characteristic in Our Al Quran..

Many thanks are a worthy foe in name of friend...:)

Terima kasih Tun..




Tuesday, August 25, 2009

Okay, what about this then?

Okay, what about this then?
26 Aug, 2009

Stay tuned for the next episode in this series of articles when we publish documents to show how the MACC, PDRM, and AG’s Chambers ‘buried’ cases in spite of overwhelming evidence of crimes having been committed.


Raja Petra Kamarudin

Poison pen letter fit for trash bin, says MACC's lawyer

The Malay Mail, 25 August 2009

POLICE investigations into the “mystery letter” that caused the Teoh Beng Hock death inquest to be adjourned last week have concluded that four out of five allegations in the letter cannot be proven.

Counsel Tan Hock Chuan, appointed by the Attorney-General’s Chambers to assist in the inquest, told the hearing yesterday that allegations not proven or supported in the unsigned letter dated Aug 5, said to be from Malaysian Anti Corruption Commission officers, are:

● That MACC’s Selangor deputy director (Hishamuddin Hashim) had instructed MACC officers involved in the case to not include him;

● The MACC Selangor deputy director had his own style of questioning.

● The MACC Selangor deputy director had given his DNA swab in his own room and not in a meeting room like the other MACC officers.

● That the same deputy director had instructed his officers to wipe off fingerprint marks from a window on the 14th floor. Tan said the only part of the letter that could be proven was that the MACC Selangor deputy director had not clocked out on the morning of July 16.

“Parties can question him later when he is called up. But the coroner should take note of the CCTV video evidence, which showed him leaving the building at 6.26am on July 16.”

Tan has no plan to bring up other contents of the letter, which he said were not related to the inquest.

On allegations that the deputy director had given his DNA sample in a separate room, Tan said Dr Seah Lay Hong of the Malaysian Chemistry Department refuted it as she was present when the samples of all officers involved were taken.

Tan said fresh samples had been taken from 12 individuals, including the MACC Selangor deputy director, which was witnessed by Dr Seah — and they were exact matches with the DNA samples taken earlier.

He said the swab tests taken from the 12 people, including the MACC Selangor deputy director, did not match with that of the unknown male contributor found on Teoh.

Dr Seah in her testimony earlier said she conducted a swab test on Teoh’s belt and the DNA profile derived from the swab taken at the tear region of the belt consisted of a mixture of male DNA types belonging to Teoh, one unknown male individual and at least another unknown male contributor.

Gobind Singh Deo, who is holding the watching brief for Teoh’s family, said the explanation should come from the investigation officer, not from Tan.

“I have the right to cross-examine the investigating officer, who must give evidence on this and the inquest should not make any conclusion. Some things we can say are true. But Dr Prashant (pathologist from the University Malaya Medical Centre) had said there is evidence of disturbance at the window. This letter contains very damning information,” Gobind said.

Deputy public prosecutor Datuk Abdul Razak Musa, who is holding a watching brief for MACC, said MACC’s stand was that the mystery letter is a poison letter and it should not be entertained.

“In the past, such poison letters were put into the trash immediately,” Razak said.

Tan said the letter should not be marked as an exhibit but be kept in the court file. Coroner Azmil Muntapha Abas later decided that the letter would not be marked as an exhibit.

“In due course, I think when witnesses are questioned and there is evidence to show that the letter is relevant to the case, it would then be marked. For now, it will not be marked,” Azmil said.


The MACC regards unsigned or anonymous letters as ‘poison pen’ letters fit for the dustbin. I was expecting them to say that and was waiting for this statement. And they have said exactly what I had thought and hoped they would say because this allows me to raise an issue that I have been harping on for more than two years since early 2007.

The issue I am talking about is the 12 Statutory Declarations that Malaysia Today published in 2007 and which, recently, we rehashed. These are not poison pen letters or surat layang. These are legal documents, sworn statements signed by 12 people, six whom are police officers. If they signed false Statutory Declarations they can be arrested and charged in court and if convicted can be sent to jail for quite a long time. False Affidavits or SDs is no small matter. It is considered a serious crime.

If the MACC is concerned with only legal documents and does not wish to layan (entertain) unsigned or anonymous letters, then why have they not looked into these 12 SDs? And, I repeat, six were signed by police officers.

Instead of looking into what these six police officers said in their signed SDs, the police are taking disciplinary action against them. Some have been arrested and charge for ‘abuse of power’. The government views these SDs as an abuse of power. What crap!

How do you expect the MACC officers to put their names to that ‘anonymous’ letter when those who did put their names, not only to a letter but to a Statutory Declaration, got into trouble. SDs are more than just letters. SDs are stronger. And they put their names to the SDs. And now they are in trouble.

Okay, the MACC does not want to layan anonymous letters. Never mind. Let us then publish some signed documents. These are not unsigned. These are not anonymous. These are signed declarations. These are exchanges of letters between government officers, Ministers included. Let us see what the MACC does about these. What excuses are they going to now offer for doing nothing?

Stay tuned for the next episode in this series of articles when we will publish documents to show how the MACC, PDRM, and AG’s Chambers ‘buried’ cases in spite of overwhelming evidence of crimes having been committed.

The MACC (PDRM and AG as well) is full of shit. And we are going to prove it.

Sunday, August 23, 2009

Liver cancer warning

Liver cancer warning
Aug 20, 2009
The Straits Times

DOCTORS here are raising the alert that as more people suffer from metabolic diseases like diabetes and obesity, this could become the next leading cause of liver cancer.

An increasingly affluent lifestyle will up the number of people with fatty liver condition, raising the risk of liver cancer, said Dr Chow Wan Cheng, head of gastroenterology and hepatology at the Singapore General Hospital.

Fatty liver occurs when fat is deposited in the liver cells, and this can cause inflammation and scarring of the liver.

Deaths, lung damage linked to nanoparticles in China

Deaths, lung damage linked to nanoparticles in China
Aug 20, 2009

HONG KONG, CHINA - Seven young Chinese women suffered permanent lung damage and two of them died after working for months without proper protection in a paint factory using nanoparticles, Chinese researchers reported on Wednesday.

They said the study is the first to document health effects of nanotechnology in humans, although animal studies in the past have shown nanoparticles could damage the lungs of rats.

"These cases arouse concern that long term exposure to nanoparticles without protective measures may be related to serious damage to human lungs," Yuguo Song from the occupational disease and clinical toxicology department at Chaoyang Hospital in Beijing wrote in the European Respiratory Journal.

But a U.S. government expert said the study was more a demonstration of industrial hazards than any evidence that nanoparticles pose more of a risk than other chemicals.

Nanotechnology is an important industry. One nanometer is one-billionth of a meter (yard) and nanoparticles measure between 1 to 100 nanometers.

It is used in products like sporting goods, tires, electronics, cosmetics and surface coatings and has a projected annual market of around $1 trillion by 2015.

"Their tiny diameter means that they can penetrate the body's natural barriers, particularly through contact with damaged skin or by inhalation or ingestion," Song and colleagues wrote.

They said the seven women had worked for between five to 13 months in a factory spraying paint on polystyrene boards before they developed breathing difficulties and rashes on their faces and arms.

The women breathed in fumes and smoke that contained nanoparticles while working in the factory, Song said.


According to the paper, doctors found the women had excess fluids in the cavities surrounding their lungs and hearts, conditions that impair breathing and heart function.

Their lung tissues and fluids contained nanoparticles about 30 nanometers in diameter - matching particles that health protection officials later found in materials used in the factory where the women worked.

Two of the women died within two years of working in the factory. The condition of the other five women has not improved even though they are no longer handling such materials.

It is impossible to remove nanoparticles once they penetrate lung cells, wrote Song.

Allen Chan, a chemical pathologist at the Chinese University of Hong Kong not connected to the study, said the findings were significant.

"These findings are important because they provide concrete evidence that these materials are harmful and protection must be given to workers," he said.

But Clayton Teague, who heads the National Nanotechnology Coordination Office at the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, noted that the women who were sickened on the job were spraying a paste containing nanoparticles in a very small, unventilated room, and wore gauze masks only occasionally.

He said in the United States the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health has developed extensive safety training for nanotechnology workers and a proactive risk management system to help companies maximize worker safety.

"From what we know, this tragedy could have been avoided by proper industrial hygiene techniques," Teague said.

Friday, August 21, 2009

Umno plays race card, and unsettles many

Umno plays race card, and unsettles many

Aug 21, 2009
The Straits Times

by Leslie Lopez, Senior Regional Correspondent

Headline-grabbing street demonstrations, public spats over the sensitive issues of race and religion, the alleged harassment of opposition politicians, the unresolved death of a key opposition political aide, are conjuring up images of a Malaysia ripped apart by political turmoil.

The real picture is less alarming, political analysts say. Still, they caution that the verbal slugfest could sully the country's reputation as an investment destination.

'Malaysia remains very stable. But this debate sends out a message to the outside world that it is an unsafe place and such perceptions have economic ramifications,' says Malaysia-watcher Bridget Welsh, associate professor of political science at the Singapore Management University.

Wednesday, August 19, 2009

Muhyiddin desperately wants to go to heaven

Muhyiddin desperately wants to go to heaven
19 Aug, 2009

Malaysia’s Deputy Prime Minister wants the National Fatwa Council to come out with a fatwa (decree) on Tok Guru Nik Aziz’s alleged statement that Umno people are not going to heaven. While we are at it can the Council also come out with a fatwa on Muhyiddin’s involvement in the biggest land scam in Malaysian history -- second maybe to the RM12.5 billion PKFZ scandal? Can crooks and robbers go to heaven?


Raja Petra Kamarudin

National Fatwa Council, ulamas asked to clarify Nik Aziz's allegations

The National Fatwa Council and ulamas (Islamic scholars) have been asked to clarify the latest allegations by PAS spiritual adviser Datuk Nik Abdul Aziz Nik Mat that Umno practised a false Islam and that its members would not be able to go to heaven.

Deputy Prime Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin said it was better that ulamas evaluated the allegations by Nik Aziz and gave their views as to whether Nik Aziz was right or his views were contrary to the religion, and advise what action needed to be taken.

"I have mentioned before all kinds of fatwas (decrees) will be made by the opposition. Now with the Permatang Pasir by-election taking place, I have been proven right.

"Although I understand Islam, any statement I make will be interpreted in a political angle. In this matter, I do not want to resort to politics. This is about religion, faith and religious doctrines.

"It's better the National Fatwa Council and ulamas make a decision on this (allegations by Nik Aziz). The faster, the better," he told reporters after launching the book Buku Evolusi Kepimpinan authored by Prof Khairil Annas Jusoh here today.

Muhyiddin said this when asked to comment on the allegations made by Nik Aziz in Penang yesterday.

He added that Nik Aziz, as a person knowledgeable in Islam, should not make such statements but this was not something new from him.

"He (Nik Aziz) makes all sorts of statements which to me, are often in conflict with Islam," he said, adding that if PAS claimed to practice politics based on Islam, its leaders should advise Nik Aziz "not to shoot his mouth off".

"This is not good for Islam, and all this while we (Umno) have shown our willingness to cooperate to develop the country, in the interests of Muslims and the spirit of unity.

"Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak and Umno have stated this but in a situation like this, political allegations in the guise of religion complicates things. As such, I leave it to him (Nik Aziz) to think what he should do," he said. — Bernama


Malaysia's Stamford sues minister
Businessmen – Report, 17 February 1995

Stamford Holdings Sdn. Bhd. has sued Muhyiddin Yassin, chief minister of the Johor state, and businessmen Yahya Talib and Syed Mokhtar Albukhary for damages for alleged conspiracy in acquiring land in Johor through the Land Acquisition Act, the Bernama national news agency reported Friday.

According to Bernama, Stamford Holdings claimed the three had abused provisions of the Act to acquire its 6,600 acres of land through the Johor State Islamic Economic Development Corporation.

The suit was filed at the Kuala Lumpur High Court early this month but was transferred Friday to the Johor Baru High Court, Bernama said.

Stamford Holdings also named the Johor state government as a defendant in the suit, alleging that Muhyiddin and the two businessmen conspired to use the state government's authority to acquire the land.

According to the news report, Stamford Holdings wants the court to declare that the Johor State Islamic Economic Development Corporation was not entitled to invoke provisions of the Land Acquisition Act to acquire a private landed property.


The Privileged Few
By Murray Hiebert, Far Eastern Economic Review, 6 July 1995

Stamford's court documents insist that the company's relationship with the former chief minister dates back to 1988. Four years earlier, the firm had tried to develop some of its huge land holdings near the state capital of Johor Baru. But Stamford couldn't get approval for its project until its directors met two men who were allegedly Muhyiddin's business partners, Syed Mokhtar Albukhary and Datuk Yahaya Tabib.

The two arranged a meeting in Singapore between the firm's representatives and the former chief minister, the firm's documents allege. Within a year, Stamford and the three men had formed a 70-30 joint venture to develop some 724 hectares of land. When the property was sold in 1994, the Muhyiddin group's initial investment of M$1.8 million ($735,000) had soared to M$83 million.

In the meantime, Muhyiddin's group had become "very avaricious," according to the documents Stamford filed in court, and wanted to form a second joint venture in which they would control 70% of the shares but would pay Stamford only M$74,100 per hectare for its remaining 2,672 hectares, company officials charge.

When Stamford insisted on retaining its original 70% and on being paid M$185,250 per hectare for its property, one of Muhyiddin's associates allegedly warned the company that the land-acquisition papers were on the former chief minister's desk and could be "signed at any time." Muhyiddin himself allegedly threatened Stamford in December 1992 by telling one of its directors that "time is getting short." In July 1994, the state government acquired the land on behalf of the Johor Islamic Economic Development Corp.


Malaysian Company Continues Suit Challenging State Acquisition of Land
By Raphael Pura, The Wall Street Journal, 16 June 1995

In 1984, Stamford -- which is 90% owned by three families, the Singapore-based Seet family, and the Gan and Wang families from Malaysia -- applied to the Johor government for permission to develop a light industrial estate on part of the land. Stamford, in its suit, claims nothing happened until 1988. Then, Stamford directors met businessmen Syed Mokhtar and Datuk Yahaya, who said they were Tan Sri Muhyiddin's "close friends and business associates," according to the Stamford suit.

According to Stamford's court submission, the company in late 1989 agreed with Syed Mokhtar and Datuk Yahaya, "acting for themselves and [Tan Sri Muhyiddin]," to create a joint-venture company to develop 1,766 acres of Stamford's property. The Johor trio, led by Syed Mokhtar, invested 1.8 million ringgit in the joint venture, taking 30% of its equity; Stamford held the remainder. The joint-venture company acquired the property from Stamford and submitted a fresh application to convert it to industrial use. The Johor government then approved the conversion "speedily," Stamford says in its suit in which it also alleges that the Mokhtar group "made a clean profit of 83.2 million."

According to Stamford, the Mokhtar group in 1992 approached Stamford's directors, proposing to develop the remaining 6,520 acres of Stamford's Johor property. This time, Stamford alleges, the group insisted on taking a 70% equity stake in a new joint venture and proposed that Stamford's land be sold to the venture at 30,000 ringgit an acre. Stamford protested that it wanted to hold 70% of the venture and should be paid more than twice that price for the land.


Land case settled for RM405 million
By JOTHI JEYASINGAM, The Sun, 7 October 1999

The land acquisition civil suit filed by a firm against the Johor government and several other parties was settled today for a total of RM405 million.

The High Court ordered Stamford Holdings Sdn Bhd to be paid the amount for the acquisition of 6,544 acres of land belonging to it.

The consent order was given by Justice Zainun Ali in chambers.

Under the settlement, the Johor government is to pay the plaintiff RM313.25 million while Kelana Ventures Sdn Bhd was ordered to pay RM92.12 million.

Datuk V. Sivaparanjothi and Manjit Singh appeared for the plaintiff while Datuk Abdul Aziz Abdul Rahim appeared for the Johor State Government, Johor Baru Land Administrator and former Mentri Besar Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin.

Roger Tan Kor Mee appeared for Perbadanan Kemajuan Ekonomi Islam Negeri Johor.

The judge further ordered that all the civil suits, civil appeals and miscellaneous civil applications by the plaintiff be settled and disposed of.

The compensation sum of RM313.25 million is to be deposited in the High Court by or on behalf of the Land Administrator to be paid out to Stamford.

The additional sum of RM92.11 million is to be paid to Stamford by Kelana Ventures, which is one of the interveners/defendants in the case.

The payment is to be made in settlement of the compulsory acquisition of the Stamford properties by the Land Administrator on behalf of Kelana Ventures before the expiry of 18 months from the date of the consent order.

The dispute between Stamford and the defendants involved the whole of the Stamford properties in the mukim of Tebrau, Johor Baru District and involved a total of 6,544.4172 acres which were compulsorily acquired.

Johor govt, parties to pay the sum for land compulsorily acquired.

Tuesday, August 18, 2009

Does this now answer your question?

Does this now answer your question?
18 Aug, 2009

There are many who whacked Anwar Ibrahim for refusing to be subjected to a DNA examination. “If he is innocent of sodomy why refuse?” they ask. “Let the DNA test clear the matter,” they say. Then Anwar can prove he is innocent. Actually, it is not that simple. DNA evidence can be fabricated, as scientists in Israel have now confirmed. Anwar is safer telling the Malaysian police to go fuck themselves.


Raja Petra Kamarudin

DNA evidence can be fabricated, scientists show
By Andrew Pollack, The New York Times

Scientists in Israel have demonstrated that it is possible to fabricate DNA evidence, undermining the credibility of what has been considered the gold standard of proof in criminal cases.

The scientists fabricated blood and saliva samples containing DNA from a person other than the donor of the blood and saliva. They also showed that if they had access to a DNA profile in a database, they could construct a sample of DNA to match that profile without obtaining any tissue from that person.

“You can just engineer a crime scene,” said Dan Frumkin, lead author of the paper, which has been published online by the journal Forensic Science International: Genetics. “Any biology undergraduate could perform this.”

Dr. Frumkin is a founder of Nucleix, a company based in Tel Aviv that has developed a test to distinguish real DNA samples from fake ones that it hopes to sell to forensics laboratories.

The planting of fabricated DNA evidence at a crime scene is only one implication of the findings. A potential invasion of personal privacy is another.

Using some of the same techniques, it may be possible to scavenge anyone’s DNA from a discarded drinking cup or cigarette butt and turn it into a saliva sample that could be submitted to a genetic testing company that measures ancestry or the risk of getting various diseases. Celebrities might have to fear “genetic paparazzi,” said Gail H. Javitt of the Genetics and Public Policy Center at Johns Hopkins University.

Tania Simoncelli, science adviser to the American Civil Liberties Union, said the findings were worrisome.

“DNA is a lot easier to plant at a crime scene than fingerprints,” she said. “We’re creating a criminal justice system that is increasingly relying on this technology.”

John M. Butler, leader of the human identity testing project at the National Institute of Standards and Technology, said he was “impressed at how well they were able to fabricate the fake DNA profiles.” However, he added, “I think your average criminal wouldn’t be able to do something like that.”

The scientists fabricated DNA samples two ways. One required a real, if tiny, DNA sample, perhaps from a strand of hair or drinking cup. They amplified the tiny sample into a large quantity of DNA using a standard technique called whole genome amplification.

Of course, a drinking cup or piece of hair might itself be left at a crime scene to frame someone, but blood or saliva may be more believable.

The authors of the paper took blood from a woman and centrifuged it to remove the white cells, which contain DNA. To the remaining red cells they added DNA that had been amplified from a man’s hair.

Since red cells do not contain DNA, all of the genetic material in the blood sample was from the man. The authors sent it to a leading American forensics laboratory, which analyzed it as if it were a normal sample of a man’s blood.

The other technique relied on DNA profiles, stored in law enforcement databases as a series of numbers and letters corresponding to variations at 13 spots in a person’s genome.

From a pooled sample of many people’s DNA, the scientists cloned tiny DNA snippets representing the common variants at each spot, creating a library of such snippets. To prepare a DNA sample matching any profile, they just mixed the proper snippets together. They said that a library of 425 different DNA snippets would be enough to cover every conceivable profile.

Nucleix’s test to tell if a sample has been fabricated relies on the fact that amplified DNA — which would be used in either deception — is not methylated, meaning it lacks certain molecules that are attached to the DNA at specific points, usually to inactivate genes.

Friday, August 14, 2009

Johor lists 15 hot spots for crime

Johor lists 15 hot spots for crime

Police to step up enforcement, aiming for 20% drop in crime

Johor lists 15 hot spots for crime

If you’re going to Johor, you might notice more police presence in various parts, including the malls in Johor Baru (JB) frequented by Singaporeans.

Johor police will be putting more men in 15 places which are identified as the most crime-prone areas in the southern Malaysian state.

Their target? A 20 per cent drop in crime by the end of next year.

The Johor crime reduction effort is part of the wider National Key Result Areas (NKRA), which lists lower crime rate as one of the targets,reported Bernama.

Of the 15 crime hot spots, five are located within Johor Baru alone.

In particular, southern Johor contributed three to the list, including its city centre, which is frequented by Singaporeans; and Larkin, where many take buses into Singapore.

Johor police chief Deputy Commissioner Mohd Mokhtar Mohd Shariff told The Star that the places identified were riddled with street crimes such as wayside robberies and snatch thefts.

There were 551 snatch thefts recorded between January and early this month in Johor, and 178 people arrested in connection with the cases.

This is comparable to the 560 snatch thefts recorded during the same period last year.

But Johor recorded an overall 11 per cent decline in crime rate between January and August, compared to the same period last year.

Currently, the police to residents ratio in Johor is one officer to 580 people, compared to the national target of one officer to 250 people.

Mr Mohd Mokhtar said that a 24-hour operations room had been set up at the Johor police headquarters to monitor developments.

All heads of department and district police chiefs had been instructed to adopt strategic planning to prevent crime.

Being more vigilant

Police are also enlisting the help of the People’s Volunteer Corps (Rela) and the Civil Defence Department to strengthen enforcement.

He said: "The senior police personnel in charge will look at feedback from the public and analyse every police success and weaknesses at the hotspots."

Mr Mohd Mokhtar also warned criminals that the announcement of these 15 areas does not mean police will neglect other areas.

He told China Press that committing a crime is a foolish act and if criminals think that they can move out of these 15 places to other areas to continue to commit crimes, that would be even more foolish.

He added that residents of these 15 places should not be worried that their areas have been named on the list, and he is confident that police will be able to strategise well to reduce the crime rates.

Alert: The 15 hot spots for crime(in red) include Johor baru city

centre, which is frequented by Singaporeans

This article was first published in The New Paper.

Monday, August 3, 2009

M'sia's weekend clampdown on opposition march: Q&A

M'sia's weekend clampdown on opposition march: Q&A
Aug 03, 2009

KUALA LUMPUR, Aug 3 (Reuters) - Malaysian police arrested almost 600 people on Saturday who were protesting in the capital against the country's Internal Security Act (ISA), a measure that allows imprisonment without trial.

The protest involving around 10,000 people was the biggest since a march to demand rights for ethnic Indians in this Southeast Asian country of 27 million people in November 2007. Most of those detained have been released although the top lawyer for opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim remains in custody.

Anwar faces what he says are politically motivated charges of sodomy, a re-run of a case, following his dismissal as deputy prime minister in 1998, which imprisoned him for six years. The new case has drawn scrutiny of Malaysia's legal system.


The ISA, descended from British-era laws, was used against an ethnic Chinese communist insurgency from the 1940s. Although now largely used against suspected Islamic militants, critics fear it could be used again to stifle dissent. Saturday's rally was less about ISA than to show Anwar's political strength.

The ISA has been used against politicians accused of fomenting racial discord, a sensitive issue in a country where the majority is ethnic Malay but with significant ethnic Chinese and Indian minorities. The ISA, coupled with sedition laws and licensing requirements for newspapers, equip Malaysia's government with a formidable arsenal to clamp down on dissent.

When Najib Razak was appointed the new prime minister in April, he released Indian rights activists from ISA detention and pledged to review the law, but has yet to act. The opposition, which has painted the son of Malaysia's second prime minister as a hardliner, says the weekend clampdown shows Najib will not allow any challenge to the government that has ruled this Southeast Asian country for the past 51 years.

By showing a firm grip on law and order issues, Najib can placate Malays and his United Malays National Organisation (UMNO) party, which is the linchpin of the ruling coalition.


Malaysia does not look set to be the next Thailand. Despite use of repressive measures, the government has survived largely by delivering economic growth, strong leadership and by making opportune alliances to stay in power.

Even the furore whipped up over the Anwar trial, and by the recent death of an aide to an opposition legislator after being questioned by a government body, does not appear to have generated mass support for opposition rallies.

That said, Saturday's protest sends a signal that Anwar remains the biggest threat to the government and the opposition is willing to risk mass arrests to stay in the public eye.


Strong economic growth has kept the country's minorities, especially the richer Chinese population happy, while affirmative action programmes for ethnic Malays have reduced inequalities.

Since the 1998 Asian financial crisis, however, Malaysia has underperformed regional rivals in attracting foreign investment. Malaysia's relatively low-cost economy, built on cheap migrant labour, is facing competitive challenges from China and neighbouring Southeast Asian nations, and the global economic slowdown has slashed exports by 30 percent.

Najib has moved to dismantle some affirmative action programmes, effectively stealing opposition policies, to boost investment, though he risks a backlash from Malays who fear losing privileges.


Najib's political survival depends on strong economic growth returning before elections due by 2013. For that, he is largely dependent on an upturn in the world economy. Growth was planned at 6 percent a year for the five years to 2010 but has hit that level in only one year.

Reforms announced so far are not going to have a significant impact on growth in the short term and Malaysia's economy is set to contract by 5 percent this year, its biggest annual decline since the 1998 Asian crisis.

Oil company Petronas accounts for almost half of revenue but the prospects of widening the tax base or some type of goods and services tax appear to be slim. With Najib's government still on the backfoot after the 2008 elections gave the opposition unprecedented gains, prospects for meaningful budget reform look dim at the moment.

Since his June announcement opening up some sections of the economy, Najib has also unveiled populist measures and backed off from politically risky energy price hikes.