A FOREWORD ON AMBIGA SREENIVASAN’S JULY RIOT

WHISPERS FROM THE HORSE’S MOUTH

A CONFRONTATION IN THE MAKING

On 9 July 2011 Datuk Ambiga Srinivasan former President of Malaysia’s Bar Association plans to lead a “march of thousands” in their “Yellow Shirts”  against government which she has called for in an intense social media campaign under the banner of Bersih.

Bersih is the Malay word for clean. That campaign it is known is not directed as widely believed by Bersih alone. The objects of the campaign it is also now known are not those of Bersih nor is it Bersih. There is nothing local about the origins of Bersih. The campaign calls for guarantees of clean elections and transparency. Nothing wrong with that except………..

The movement calling for this campaign is anything but that.  Ambiga Srinivasan’s objects in fermenting this disturbance is far from clean and even less transparent than the transparency she seeks of government. Thus far Malaysia’s police chief in the exercise of his discretion has not approved nor given permission for the march to proceed. A confrontation is brewing. That now appears to be the primary objective of this group.To create a confrontaiton and to precipitate civil disturbance which will ignite civil disorder.

In precipitating a crisis by her actions and in acting with what she now knows or ought to now know, having been put on notice that the march will not be allowed, Ambiga cannot claim to be acting on behalf of a civil society by provoking what could well be an incitement to violence. She is effectively seeking to overthrow government through means other than through the ballot box.

CONSTITUTIONAL LEGITIMACY AND TIMING

If interpreted correctly the Articles of the Malaysian constitution which Bersih and PKR claim gives them a ‘right to march peacefully’ will be breached if on the nominated day, the march proceeds in defiance of the Inspector General of Police’s warnings to Bersih not to march.

Those ‘rights’ claimed by Bersih, other NGO’s,  Parti Keadilan Rakyat and the Malaysian Bar to conduct such a march in the circumstances in which they are set to occur are not guaranteed in the Malaysian Constitution.

Each of the rights to free speech and freedom of assembly as provided for in Malaysia’s constitution and claimed as an absolute right by Bersih and its allies is not an absolute right at all. It is a qualified right. More on that subject later.

The timing of this July march is no coincidence either. It falls a few days short of the 86th birthday of the widely celebrated Dr. Mahathir Mohamed Malaysia’s fourth and most successful prime minister, the nemesis of the Malaysian Bar, Ambiga Srinivasan, sectors of Malaysia’s Chinese and Indian communities and those sinister outside groups they represent.

Ambiga and her cohorts on record have consistently referred to Dr. Mahathir in disparaging terms either directly or by association with the remarks of others as being corrupt and  a crook. His sin, empowering Malaysia’s largest ethnic group, its majority race and the original inhabitants as recognized at international law, the Malays.

Dangerously and unnecessarily the primacy of the Malays as its original inhabitants in Malaysia  is also hotly being challenged by Ambiga Srinivasan and her fellow NGO’s in highly provocative and volatile language. This appears to be the unseen and unspoken core of the thrust of Bersih and its allies. Read on……

NOT SO CIVIL LEADERS OR OBJECTS FOR A CIVIL SOCIETY

The local spin in Malaysia, in its social networks and alternative media is that Ambiga Srinivasan is an internationally renowned Malaysian lawyer renowned for her prowess as a lawyer and  for her interpretation of its constitution. Nothing could be further from the truth.  Ambiga Srinivasan is a hardly known commodity outside of social networking circles and the fraternity in Malaysia. She has a profile with NGO’s connected with civil societies and that’s about it. Even there she is not known for her prowess of the law or the constitution. Far from it.

Apart from a heavily lobbied for dog collar from Hillary Clinton she is not widely regarded anywhere. Not at least in legal circles unless they are of a similar political complexion to hers and connected to civil societies. And after Hillary Clinton’s fall from grace who would value such a dog collar anyway? Perhaps only someone of a similar degree of credibility, like that maid in a New York hotel who made what now appears to be false allegations of rape against French presidential candidate and former head of the IMF Dominic Strauss Khan.

A Brahmin of Tamil descent, Ambiga Srinivasan and her close associates in Malaysia’s largely Chinese political groups, view the local Malays  through the same prism with which the British, Malaysia’s colonial masters viewed the Malays once upon a time.  A benign, contemptible, lazy and lesser form of humanity in their midst.

That sentiment unfortunately endures to this day. It is troubling. It is particularly disturbing when ‘educated’ Chinese and Indians to whom many look to for inspiration, conspire with outside forces to destablise an otherwise prosperous nation in which they are major beneficiaries.

AMBIGA SRINIVASAN -TORJAN HORSE OF THE RIGHT OR CHAMPION OF CIVIL SOCIETY

Datuk Ambiga Srinivasan former President of Malaysia’s Bar has over the past few years actively pursued what can be said to be largely anti Malay causes. In pursuing these objects she has invariably been the recipient of US government funding being handed out generously to any cause that has an anti Islamic aura to it. Attacking the Malays through UMNO thorough the government satisfies that criteria.

Oddly enough and perhaps not surprisingly much of the ideology Ambiga advances in support of regime change in Malaysia (because that’s what it is) contains the same billeous rhetoric hatched in the think tanks of Washington’s ultra right, adopted by the so called ‘Arab Spring’ and other violent political events in the region. A by product of the Soros foundation for promoting ‘civil societies’ everywhere.

A recent leaked document reveals how Datuk Ambiga Srinivasan lobbied for a judicial appointment in Malaysia. Her nomination was roundly rejected for a number of valid reasons.

Judges in theory and in practice are meant to be apolitical, detached and forensic as good lawyers are also meant to be. Ambiga is highly political and a partisan one at that. She has openly and publicly advocated political causes demonstrating political bias and poor judgment every time. She has also demonstrated a lack of and sometimes very poor judgement in the many calls she has made on a number of political issues including her backing for the notorious, highly unreliable and mercurial Raja Petra Kamaruddin. On record she has consistently and sadly been unable to differentiate between legal principles on the one hand and political ideology and personal preferences on the other.

HELL HATH NO FURY

Ambiga’s non political minuses that may have served to exclude her from any judicial appointment includes the many suspect cases of which she has had conduct of in the past. Currently there is known to be at least 2 cases in which she has acted which are the subject of private review. In the event the suspicions of negligence and unprofessional conduct by Ambiga and her firm are proved, these and many more matters like them could be brought before Malaysia’s courts to be re tried.

Any revelations of improper conduct as suspected of her will serve as a watershed in the affairs of the Malaysian Bar and its many members. Many prominent Malaysian lawyers have long been suspected of  corruption, professional negligence and incompetence. Allegations  especially amongst its very prominent members some of whom have risen to the bench have circulated for quite a while with lawyer Lingham being targeted in a way as to score political mileage and take the heat off the likes of Anwar Ibrahim and Ambiga Srinivasan. Their actions has undoubtedly laid the groundwork for a stinging and condign response.

Ambiga’s very close and sinister connection to certain members of the Malaysian judiciary sitting and past in advancement of her own personal and political ambitions has tainted her character as an independent legal mind suitable for judicial office. It has also tainted the independence of those judges who support her and her causes.

There is no seminal legal case in the annals of Malaysian legal history that can be attributed to Ambiga’s efforts or skills as a legal practitioner in the class she has moulded her image into. There is nothing outstanding in her legal career that could possibly make her an outstanding candidate for judicial or political office.

Ambiga through the influence of her uncle a sitting judge at the time and another now retired Court of Appeal judge ascended the chair of the Malaysian Bar for a term. She was elected not for any exceptional contribution by her in the academic or legal field but simply for her Brahmin pedigree, her connections and for her connections to the a former controversial Court of Appeals judges turned member of the bar.

Ambiga’s answer to rejection of a place on the bench it now appears is to destroy a system she believes has wronged her by not recognizing her contributions in the field of the law. That’s her opinion of herself.

On the one hand she covets a position amongst those in an institution she claims publicly is corrupt. The judiciary. On the other hand she appears to considers rejection to that “corrupt” office a hurt sufficient for her to unleash her fury and a death wish on herself and the many who have blindly held her in such high esteem as “a woman of conscience ready to uphold the law at all cost without fear or favour“.

DANGER OF FALLOUT IN THE REGION

Coincidentally the theoretical basis for the arguments advanced by Bersih for change, which Ambiga herself presents, are conveniently pitched and tuned towards the causes of American geopolitical and economic  strategies for the region. That includes the US’s wider socio economic agenda and interests worldwide.

Included in that wider agenda of the US through these groups are the interests of their compliant economic partners in the region like the island state of Singapore.

It is however unlikely that Singapore will openly be advocating for support of the 9 July march. This is perhaps a result of a very rude awakening they received from the unexpected surge of resistance and opposition to that fragile ‘great way of life’ and ideal political system’ in that one party state as delivered by their constituents at their recent general elections.

In the prevailing tinder box environment for change there, it is clear that Singapore is now critically primed for such an uprising, as Ambiga seeks to promote in Malaysia.

If a similar movement grows legs there in Singapore it will without doubt in one fell swoop demolish the carefully cultivated and choreographed  facade of their ‘meritocracy’ and artificial nurtured ‘national unity’ and multi racial ‘harmony’ socially engineered and forcefully ordered in that society.

AMBIGA BERSIH AND SOME CREDIBILITY ISSUES

The fact Ambiga denies any connection to Neo Cons or to sinister covert US foreign policy instruments in this regard is irrelevant. The fact she claims to be ignorant of her connection to these movements is also not the point. She is at the very least conveniently and blissfully ignorant of the connection by choice in this regard and a  recipient of its protections and largesse  not to be tainted.

Ambiga is also widely believed and is on the record to having acted in litigation when in conflict with the interests of clients for reward. She is widely believed from the information we have been given to have knowingly acted for both sides in at least one major litigation, in disregard for her professional obligations and for those of her client’s interests. It is apparent that in doing so she has failed to disclose her conflicted position to her clients or to her professional peak body the Malaysian Bar.

In fairness to her if it is of any consolation to her, Ambiga is not alone when it comes to such practices of conflicts of interests and failure to disclose those conflicts to clients when acting for them in breach of established legal, ethical and professional obligations that prevail within the legal profession. Such practices and breaches of ethical and professional standards are very common within the legal fraternity in Malaysia. The practice extends to judges (at least 3 judges two ex, come to mind in this context).

Ironically from the ranks of the 3 judges  who it appears may have indulged in unethical and unprofessional conduct in this context, all 3 have also been been critical of Lingham the lawyer and his alleged conduct arising from the  evidence of the ‘Lingham tapes’. At least 2 of them had actively discussed issues relating to the Lingham matter with Ambiga either directly at least on one occasion. On other occasions their contact with Ambiga and other lawyers during their tenure as judges could well have fallen within the bounds of removable misbehaviour as judges.

Interestingly Ambiga when acting for reward as a paid lawyer has not viewed the courts or and the judiciary ( an arm of government) as being corrupt. If she did and she nonetheless acted through those very same corrupt courts and government she complains of so bitterly, then Ambiga Srinivasan has a lot to answer for on the question of her own contribution to corruption. To be specific corrupting the courts.

The same principle applies to those opposition fed, led and politically motivated members of the Malaysian Bar in her category who strongly allege government and judicial corruption, but are prepared to overlook the alleged corruption they hold as fact for financial reward.

Ambiga’s ( and her colleague’s within the Malaysian Bar) undisclosed actions in respect of her dealings with judges, litigants and witnesses to proceedings hitherto unknown to the public and clients alike are moral, ethical and legal conflicts with her obligations as an officer of court  and as a legal practitioner. She would be well advised to come clean on these and clear the air now that she finds herself in the eye of a political storm pointing the fingers at others for their shortcomings.

On one hand Ambiga is highly critical of her government alleging all sorts of rorts and corruption against them without the benefit of any proof to proffer for her claims, yet she preaches the virtues  of a monotheistic political philosophy  of Democracy (and Free speech) on the high horse of  ‘clean hands’.

Contrary to her assertions of being oppressed and having to live in an undemocratic society, Ambiga generously uses a democratic platform of the right to speak freely thus far as an excuse to belching out a rabidly anti Malay anti Muslim sentiment directed against Malaysia’s majority government. Thorough it quite unsubtley she directs her venom and hate at Malaysia’s majority constituents Malaysia’s Malays and through them by default its Muslims.

A PEEK INTO A VERY DARK CORNER-THE MORALITY OF AMBIGA KEADILAN AND BERSIH

This article is relatively small. It consists of  new and important extracts from a patchwork of controversial, fresh information sources, emerging now on subjects as Bersih, NGO’s, Arab and other uprisings (Haiti and Venezuela) and of Datuk Ambiga Srinivasan in particular. Not least of our sources are the growing disgruntled members of the Malaysian Bar.

Seeing as Ambiga has put her personal stamp to a highly controversial undemocratic and potentially violent form of regime change  in her region on the basis of someone else’s ideas of democracy, justice and constitutional government,  Ambiga has now irretrievably and inextricably set herself up on a path to inevitable self destruction.

In the process she has placed herself squarely and legitimately in the cross hairs of critics and the public on the subject of her personal performance as a lawyer, her morality and on the probity of her many claims.

Her activities, a matter of public interest, must be subject to thorough scrutiny and the transparency test she demands of her government and other public figures without compromise.

Ambiga’s record on rights and on the truth is not bersih. Neither is the record of the movement she led before Bersih, the controversial Malaysian Bar, nor that of the runaway self anointed charlatan Prince Raja Petra Kamaruddin whose lies she supported so vociferously till he fell on his sword.

Her first concerted attack on Dr. Mahathir Mohamed after he had retired from office was that incredulous ‘Panel’ of so called ‘Eminent Person’s’  which conducted an inquisition then published a highly controversial one sided version of events that led to the sacking of Salleh Abbas J. The Report was widely discredited then shelved for its lack of utility or purpose.

BIT PLAYERS IN THE WINGS NOT SEEN BUT HEARD-JUDGES OFF THE RECORD

Her second and more sinister act of perfidy came when she knowingly turned a blind eye to the Lingham tapes  at the time they were being handed to Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim to exploit for a political purpose.

Ambiga was in fact asked for a legal opinion on the subject. She proffered one at the time knowing that the matter as it then stood risked bringing the courts and the justices of Malaysia’s courts into disrepute and public ridicule through a purely political exercise. Apart from this Ambiga sought to influence the inquiry into the Lingham tapes……more on that later.

The fact is that Ambiga like her fellow travellers in the opposition, in Bersih, other NGO groups and sections of the Malaysian Bar believed their mischief would have the desired effect on their politics but that their involvement would never see the light of day is a grave miscalculation. Hubris.

More disturbing is the fact that amongst those Ambiga consulted in the Lingham Tapes / Chief Justice Fairuz affair were two senior retired and at least one sitting judge of Malaysia’s courts.

Each of these judges are known to have had an axe to grind with the Barisan Nasional government of the Mahathir era. Ambiga is known to have had discussed the matter of the Lingham tapes with at least 2 of them, sought counsel informally and acted subsequently behind the scenes in advancing the objects and purpose of that attack on the chief justice Fairuz, and by proxy furthering their attacks on Dr. Mahathir with the 3 judges.

One of those judges, now in retirement claimed to have been privy to an offer to ‘throw’ a judgement by the then Chief Justice Fairuz during his tenure but did nothing of it. Another still claimed he was the subject of improper pressure by the former Prime Minister Dr. Mahathir to influence the outcome of specific cases but offered no proof for his outrageous  claim. A third now also retired has had marital disputes intervene in his advancing claims of judicial corruption to the extent he would have preferred. He has however and instead relegated his claims to third party social networking and through innuendo on the lecture circuit where he embarrassingly displays his incompetence in the law with his shallow interpretations of legislation, jurisprudence and case law to an audience of NGO’s and to the converted at the Malaysian Bar.

These are matters Ambiga should now come clean on in much the same spirit in which she demands her government come clean on offences of electoral fraud (by implication of her demands) for which she has no admissible proof to charge them with.

ADDITIONAL BACKGROUND INFORMATION

The background information here extracted from an extensive array of sources of information available on NGO’s and ‘‘movements for change’ takes in with it Ambiga’s Bersih. It is presented in a condensed form for discussion. Although not expressly referred to by name in the articles copied below (extracted from their authors and their sources whose names we mention below), extracts of the articles referred to and appearing below are intended to provide a useful and independent background on populist groups like Bersih, their mythical clean philosophies of free speech and clean government the public, to their sinister purposes and its origins.

This essay exposes the nexus these groups like Bersih have to the the sentient minds behind these planned internal rebellions and disruptions spreading across the middle east (and Southeast Asia).

It exposes their ideology, their networks and the origins of their language (stock phrases) and rhetoric as applied in their criticism of government. It exposes the well spring of their distorted self serving  political ideologies based on manufactured truths, conveyed through media networks  funded by the same sources that fund their mischief as NGO’s . In short this is dangerous stuff and Ambiga is playing a game of brinkmanship she has no moral or legal capacities to deal with.

The information below offers an insight to the origins of these organizations, their claims to legitimacy as being representative of the masses, independent and of being Non Government Organizations. What really does that mean? By Non which government do they mean?

NGO’S NEO CONS & THE FRATERNITY OF BETRAYAL 

It is relevant, it is important for those who believe Ambiga and her NGO counterparts have something ‘independent and original’ to offer them by marching with them on 9 July 2011 to consider the calibre, the credibility and purpose of Bersih and Datuk Ambiga herself. It is necessary before embarking on what is largely a provocation and an invitation to anarchy, violence and chaos to advance Bersih’s and more particularly Ambiga Srinivasan’s own political agenda.

Marching with the ‘Yellow Shirts’ ( a relevant colour for their courage)  is an invitation to a dangerous expedition for which everyone else is a ‘porter’ to the ambitions of Ambiga, the Lim Kit Siang and Anwar Ibrahim would be political dynasties. That’s their idea of democracy.

ANWAR vs AMBIGA (LEMBU PUNYA SUSU)

Whose aspirations do Ambiga and her fellow travellers really represent? the Neo Cons of Washington or the majority of Malaysia’s citizens of Malay heritage who are its majority? She certainly does not speak for Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim the crucified one time champion of their causes.

Regardless of what one thinks of Anwar, he has at least paid a very high price and continues to do so for his beliefs. His wife and daughter are paradigms of stoic, unrelenting loyalty in the face of seemingly insurmountable personal challenges  arising from Anwar’s failures.

Ambiga is  by comparison a usurper of Anwar’s sacrifices and his vision. He at least has had the courage to endure the punishment and the trials and tribulations of his political vision and his ambitions.

Ambiga by contrast is unashamedly racist and one who is prepared to play to the tune Anwar was accused of dancing to.These being the Neo Cons of Washington and the ultra right think tanks that spring rebellion wherever convenient as a political tool even if it costs the lives of thousands as it has in the middle east.

We will hopefully post a more direct piece prior to the July riot planned by the “Yellow Shirts” headed by Ambiga and Bersih complete with information on their nexus to Anwar Ibrahim’s PKR,  Lim Kit Siang and other members of their political coalition who march closely behind them as Trojans of Washington’s ultra right and their agenda of which these people are a willing and destructive agents.

Notably now Lim Kit Siang as advisor to the DAP has asked his members if participating to keep the party out of it and to generally keep a low profile on the day.

It is important reading. It strips bare the veneer of respectability exposing the shame of a tyrannical treacherous nefarious mob focused on a power grab from a majority government in undemocratic violent fashion. They seek to prevail regardless of the consequences to ordinary people in places like Malaysia.

Are there not similarities between the Bangkok Yellow and Red shirts dichotomy present in this ‘spontaneous’ rebellion in the making? has Thailand solved its problems simmering beneath the surface? has Egypt’s revolt resulted in real change or has the place become more dangerous and volatile especially for the US’s greatest ally in the region Israel?

What’s the real object of these rebellions?  Will it now encourage the Malay’s of Singapore to rise up with the disgruntled Chinese who threw seven sitting members of parliament from their guaranteed seats out by the scruff of their political necks? Perhaps that may not be such a bad thing after all.

The next in this series is the result of carefully collated research on Ambiga, her organizations and that of her colleagues who have hijacked the Malaysian Bar and other dissident groups in an effort to overthrow government through means other than through the ballot box.

BACKLASH

Already there are travel warnings being issued by several countries to their citizens intending to travel to Malaysia during the early days of July 2011 as a direct consequence of the planned ‘march’ by Bersih and their coalition of NGO’s.

As was the case before May 13 -1969 foreign embassies in the know are restricting the movements of their staff in KL which may say something about what they know. Needless to say the vast majority of indigenous Malays of Malaysia, the majority once more are feeling politically insecure and threatened by these continued attacks on their rights and status as Malaysia’s majority and as the recognized original inhabitants of the country.

There have been misgivings and the rise of organized groups threatening reprisals against opposition groups like Bersih. Their frustration is to a large extent understandable. The insults against Malays, their traditional rulers, their religion and their position in their own country has been allowed to fester like a running sore for far too long. There is a stygian anger waiting to be unleashed. Signs of it have been gradually appearing everywhere. The writing is on the wall. The rumblings for the moment may well be a precursor to a violent eruption if care is not taken and the government remains silent.

Abdullah Badawi Malaysia’s most recent former Prime Minister has to accept much of the blame for this head of steam having built up under his stewardship, through his inaction, his encouragement through silence of attacks against UMNO and the Malays of Malaysia.

SPEAKING FROM THE SHADOWS

The next in this series includes extracts from a former Australian Security Intelligence Organization operative whose knowledge and expertise in disinformation campaigns, in organizing dissident groups in the region spans more than two decades.

He assisted in the reinforcement of Suharto’s legitimacy against Suharto’s enemies, helped undermine Singapore’s opposition and Lee Kuan Yew’s enemies and finally helped sowing the seeds of what is now a coalition of dissident groups in Malaysia that fly under the banner of NGO’s  including the Sisters of Islam, Bersih and others in concert with US interests.