Najib to Stand Down in 2015?

A STOP GAP THAT LEAKS

The end of the road for Najib Razak as prime minister of Malaysia appears nigh. We understand from sources close to government and within UMNO that there have been intense (and confrontational) albeit secret discussions between groups jostling for the position of prime minister and by default leadership of the United Malay Nationalist Organization (known by its acronym UMNO).

Najib Razak’s tenure as prime minister of Malaysia was as it now appears only a stop gap for convenience and borne out of necessity following the disaster that was the Abdullah Badawi government. That government of Badawi tore apart the fabric of UMNO, of Malaysia and drove a wedge between the races  destroying the harmony and prosperity that existed before he arrived and thrust himself into the top job.

THE WORM IN THE APPLE

It is an indisputable fact that Abdullah Badawi was cultivated by (the Neo Cons) Washington during his posting at the UN. He was trapped (cultivated), wined and dined in much the same way Habibie the impotent president of Indonesia was before being shooed into office after former president Suharto was forced to step down there.

Anwar had originally been cultivated to take over Malaysia’s leadership in much the same way as Habibie was and by the same crowd. However a vigilant Mahathir intervened in time and the rest as we now know is history.

In Habibie’s case his impotence in office allowed the west to divide Timor into east and west Timor. In dividing Timor they ensured they would retain a hold on the strategic deep submarine caves of east Timor to counter the other strategic foothold the Russians had gained for their nuclear submarines in the deeper waters off Cam Rahn Bay in Viet Nam.

DESTROYING UMNO AS A FIRST STEP TO ENDING MALAY DOMINATION

For the past 6 years the political landscape in Malaysia has been fraught with instability and internecine fighting within UMNO. Deep divisions have also arisen within the Indian and Chinese communities at all levels.

UMNO’s fate lay in the hands of the Badawi clan cultivated and lying in wait for an opportunity to strike. It was Badawi who sowed the seeds of discontent and division within UMNO and the rest of the coalition in government.

Badawi washed his hands of any responsibility for the country after lighting the fuse that gave rise to the large number of opposition groups, alternative media that turned into a juggernaut of foreign funded groups vying for power and Washington’s largesse to assist their varied agendas for Malaysia.

Badawi then tied the hands of the law enforcement agencies also whilst he was in government. His support of Ambiga Sreenevasan, the Malaysian Bar and other foreign funded groups in particular Chinese opposition groups is legend and well documented.

UMNO the organization, once the Achilles heel of Malay unity has been the subject of internal power struggles, betrayals and allegations of massive corruption, financial excesses, impropriety and personal feuds between regional political leaders. Once more the Badawi government’s handi work in these divisions is evident.

NAJIB MUST STEP DOWN: DEEP CONCERN IN THE ROYAL HOUSES

Najib Razak by his indolent and lacklustre performance whilst at the helm of government appears to have only encouraged divisions amongst Malays and the coalition parties originally created by Badawi. Najib even allowed his personal integrity, his reputation and that of his family’s to be sullied and defamed to a point his leadership has been severely undermined and his reputation irreparably damaged.

The various groups now jostling for power within UMNO and the Malays have reached consensus concluding that Najib Razak must go. We take that point one step further now with the news the King and a number of the sultans have also made it clear (but in private) that Najib Razak’s prime ministership has become untenable and that they can’t support it or him anymore.

Much has been invested by the US and some European countries supported by local Chinese groups and so called NGO’s to breaching that rock solid unity of the Malays UMNO.

Opposition funded from abroad has been designed to divide the Malays first and then to substitute Malay political and cultural dominance for ethnic Chinese domination of political power in government. Achieving this change would it seems complete the post independence vision of the Chinese to rally against others in their quest for political and economic supremacy and domination of government first, ensuring total Chinese domination over the peninsula and beyond in south east Asia guaranteeing US hegemony in the region.

UPDATE

Dr.Mahathir Mohamed former prime minister and elder statesman has confirmed in an interview with a Malaysian journal , the call to Najib Razak to step down by his party. It is further reinforcement of our report that prime minister Najib Razak’s term as prime minister of Malaysia may be close to an end.

UMNO AND THE GREAT BETRAYAL

Many Malays believe that UMNO has lost its direction, its political and its moral authority to validly represent the Malays as a people. They believe UMNO as an organization and they as its beneficiaries have been abused and used to further and to advance the personal ambitions and fortunes of UMNO’s current crop of leaders.

Many more Malays believe the excesses of UMNO’s current leadership has been nothing short of a betrayal of the promises of the founding fathers of UMNO that the organization in whom they placed their trust would be custodians of their future, their land and their inherent political and cultural rights into perpetuity.

The general neglect of the Malay community and the deep class divisions that now prevail within is evident in not only the political and social dialogue over cyberspace but also in the emergence of what appears to be a credible preferred alternate political group claiming ascendancy over UMNO to represent Malay aspirations. That group and new entity is Perkasa.

UMNO is widely seen as a platform for the promotion of the interests of the Chinese, some Indians and the wealthy connected urban elite group of Malays to the detriment of UMNO’s grass root constituents now being absorbed by groups like Perkasa whose appeal appears more in focus with Malay aspirations.

NEGOTIATIONS OVER SUCCESSION 

From the information provided to us, it is evident that negotiations on a succession plan have been on going for some time now (accelerated since the outcome of GE 13) between factional leaders. Our sources tell us that these negotiations have been held in secret and conducted largely outside Malaysia in places as Australia, London, the US and at other times in secret locations within Malaysia.

Dr. Mahathir Mohamed who although not directly involved in these discussions and negotiations has been asked to refrain from any overt comment or direct action in the dispute and succession plans  for fear it may add to greater volatility in an already tense situation. It is feared that any comment by the former prime minister now elder statesman would serve to further inflame the present situation adding to the inertia of Perkasa’s momentum and its ascendency amongst the Malays.

The situation is volatile and the Malays deeply divided. Dr. Mahathir’s input it is believed by many political observers will inevitably hasten if not bring about the  demise of present day UMNO. The Malays are from all indications demanding radical surgery for UMNO, the dismantling of the current power structures within it and a more inclusive organization and a more meaningful consultative role in government.

THE ALTERNATIVES FEW BUT CLEAR: “NAJIB MUST GO”

The alternatives for UMNO and prime minister Najib are limited. Any failure on his part to address the current situation pro-actively, sensitively and with haste, paramount to which is the divide amongst the Malays and address the excesses (perceived and real) and indulgences of an elite within its leadership  according to political observers, will further undermine his and UMNO’s credibility. Unless he takes some drastic and immediate steps to bridge the divide and rein in corruption within UMNO the current leadership of both government and UMNO it is inevitable that UMNO will implode leaving Perkasa standing as the only legitimate representative of the majority Malays.

Perkasa and Isma and the momentum they have gained given the vacuum created by UMNO appear to be more representative of the aspirations of Malays. They will emerge to victorious, fill the void and assume the mantle of UMNO as representatives of the political and cultural will of the Malays.

No one contacted within Perkasa’s leadership recently has been prepared to comment on the subject matter of this article.

FOOTNOTE

In an insult to the freedom of expression and independent media, online media outlets like Yahoo have embedded in their news portals, anti government media organizations like Malaysia Kini, the Star and the Malaysian Insider. News items on Yahoo are now attributed directly to each of these private media organizations redirecting ereaders to their websites allowing them control any rebuttals and comments to their “news items”. It also allows the likes of Malaysi Kini, the Malaysian Insider and the Star to do as they always have done and that is to censor any blogging, comments or responses to their “news” items. They censor anything that is not anti government or letters and comments that challenge the veracity of their journalism.

Yahoo has been identified along with Google as an eves dropping device and station of US intelligence and homeland security.  Their conduct in this regard is nothing short of censorship and interference in the domestic affairs of a sovereign state.

We stand by our sources and the credibility of their information

Syariah in a Secular Constitution

SYARIA THE CONSTITUTION AND THE PROMINENCE OF NOUGHT

The debate currently raging on Islam and the constitution in Malaysia raises some very pertinent and perplexing questions not only about the character of the federal constitution, its role in government and politics, but it also reflects how little of the constitution is understood by those who comment on it and then attempt to interpret its provisions.

At the heart of the current debate on the perceived ‘rise of radical Islam’ ‘in breach of the secular character of the constitution is that “clash of civilizations” narrative conceived and conceptualized by conservatives in Washington post 9/11. That narrative and all that it stands for is now being played out in Malaysia.

Ventilating the position of what even the right wing in Washington refer to as the “rabid looney far right”, is an urban, ‘educated’ elite, embedded in the cities and metropolises of Malaysia. They and judging from their socio political dialect are an elite, alienated from the mainstream of Islam and their own culture. They have little connection to the realities of the daily lives, struggles and aspirations of the vast majority of Malaysia’s Muslims, Its Malays. Yet they claim to speak on behalf of Islam and the Malays in pronounced western monologues and tones .

THE GANG OF 25 AND ITS SECULAR ARGUMENT

The latest barnacle of this socially and politically aware coterie, attached to the hull of an opposition ship piloted by civil societies and other so called NGO’s is the Prominent group of 25. Led by former Malaysian Ambassador to the Netherlands Datuk Noor Faridah Ariffin, the group raises amongst other things, ‘a head of steam’ in what many in their class perceive as the unwelcome ascendancy of Islam as a religious and political force in national politics. They see the rise of Islam as threatening and a breach of the secular character of the federal constitution. But they don’t raise any argument capable of supporting the non ‘secular’ aspect of the  ascendancy of Islam as they see it or how it breaches the constitution’s ‘secular’ character in the process.

Relevantly Faridah Noor is quoted as saying “It is high time moderate Malays and Muslims speak out. Extremist, immoderate and intolerant voices as represented by Perkasa and Isma do not speak in our name,”  in an open letter sent to all Malaysian media. What she failed to say was that the letter was not meant for the media. And then there were 24.

Noor Faridah fails to qualify or substantiate her claims in respect of the constitution, Islam and secularism  in that letter. She fails to address or ignores the fact she and her group of 25 Datuks and Datins have little in common with the wider body of the Malay Muslim population, from which it could be argued that the 25 have far less in the form of a credible mandate than Perkasa or Isma to speak out for Muslims  or for Malays.

The 25 decorated, socially connected, upper middle class signatories to that letter have little connect with the vast body of marginalized mainly rural Malay Muslims for whom Isma and Perkasa speak so eloquently and effectively drawing Noor Fardiah’s ire and attention.

So much for her respect and knowledge of the constitution, of secularism, of democratic principles and  the needs and aspirations of Malays.

ONE MANS EXTREMIST ANOTHER MANS CHAMPION

Interestingly Noor Faridah refers to Perkasa and Isma as extremists for a few misplaced sentiments of its members. One swallow it appears does a summer make. She conveniently avoids comment on the totalitarian mindset and extreme language of chauvinistic (the exclusive and Chinese dominated) opposition politicians from the DAP, Bersih and elements of the Malaysian Bar. Each of these groups seek to overthrow government outside the ballot box. Noor Faridah and her G25 don’t see this as a threat to democracy and secularism.

Noor Faridah ignores reference to the plethora of  insults hurled at Islam and the Malays and the litany of lies and defamatory remarks in propaganda prior to and during the general election period of 2013 by her allies.These are the foreign funded rioters who  threaten to undermine democratic, representative, government by their actions.

Not even after Ambiga Sreenivasan’s audacious admissions on record to being foreign funded with an agenda to disrupt the elections and government has Noor Faridah anything to say about that threat and its extremist undemocratic non secular tones.

Faridah and the ‘prominent’ 25 are not outraged. Nothing extreme or dangerous to the rest of the state there it seems. Nothing unconstitutional or intolerant about Bersih either. Yet the language Noor Faridah choses in her contumely against Islam is couched in very similar language to that used by Bersih, the DAP’s, PR and the civil society’s other assets in the region. One therefore must ask by what credentials did Noor Faridah attain the lofty post of Malaysian Ambassador to the Netherlands. And what did she there?

Noor Faridah  is deafeningly silent also about the Catholic church and its unwarranted divisive provocations of Muslims in cahoots with the US sponsored evangelistas. Critically and conveniently she fails to demonstrate why Perkasa and Isma are racist.

Could it be that she believes that Isma and Perkasa by one or even 10 of  their number have  issued political statements like those of Bersih’s, Fr. lawrence’s or Rev. Ong Moon and Anwar’s that do not meet with her approval? or worse still could Isma’s offending statements have been in the mold of the former Pope’s (Ratzinger)“Islam is a religion of evil” remark? or more to the point,  is it because Isma and Perkasa  are not of the same social pedigree as the G25 members?

WHERE DOES THE TRUTH LIE?

Nothing could be further from the truth than Noor Farida’s implied negativity and interpretations of secularism and the constitution arising as she implies from inclusion and recognition of Syariah law as an equal or parallel civil code in the Malaysian legal system.

It is a very long bow to draw to suggest that Malaysia, Afghanistan and Pakistan in some respects are in a parallel orbit because the Malays in a majority in exercising their constitutional rights appear to support Syariah, whilst also resisting in a tide of opposition to their rights by non Malays.

This group of 25 does not comprise Islamic or legal scholars of any repute or distinction. Nor do they comprise anyone of standing with theological or academic credentials (Islamic) in Islamic or constitutional jurisprudence capable of supporting their arguments.

The group of 25 speculate, create fear and loathing of Muslims and invite incitement to sectarianism with the open letter. Nothing more, nothing less. Noor Faridah’s credentials as a lawyer and one who held such a high position in the public service and as one who may have instructed counsel in the Pulau Batu Puteh litigation leaves a lot to be desired.

SEPARATION OF CHURCH-STATE  A FICTION OF THE SEPARATION OF POWERS DOCTRINE

Truth is that religion, inspite of the fictional doctrine of separation of church and state has, always been like the Syariah, an integral part of state and politics.

The same applies to Holland (where Noor Faridah served) which is ruled by the House of Orange as it is in the UK ruled by the House of Windsor (the Queen) as it is in Malaysia.

The Syariah has from time immemorial been an integral part of Malay politics and deeply ingrained in the Malay psyche. Its existence and influence predates encroachment by the British colonial government and the ensuing influences of waves of imported migrants both cultural and religious. The conventions and influence of Syariah remains alive inspite of Anglo Christian legislation having obscured its existence, tarnishing its history and questioning its legitimacy.

The once seemingly dormant and benign force of Islam stirred up recently by provocative religious minorities and foreign funded anti Islamic forces appears to have finally found their sea legs. The opposition appears to have precipitated a crisis from which it is desparate to withdraw but unable to find the means to do so honourably.

These so called Liberal Muslims who the 25 appear to appeal to must in part shoulder responsibility for the increased radicalization, isolation,  militancy and rise of the politics of Islam in mainstream Malaysia today.

Islam is seen as The political doctrine, ideology and shield of a largely marginalized polity amongst the Malay population. The group of 25’s discomfort at the rise of Syariah is of their own making, their own negligence and their own incompetence.

The dispossessed amongst the Malays who are greater in number than their ‘Liberal’ counterparts, the 25 appear to appeal to, have a far greater right to an expressive voice (however offensive and disagreeable) in a democracy. And from what is happening they appear to be prepared to use their voices to express their rights to their advantage in numbers. What is so wrong about that, that those who in a majority stand up to be counted offend others? Something so wrong according to Noor Faridah. But what?

A MUSLIM IS A MUSLIM -NOT LIBERAL NOT RADICAL- JUST MUSLIM

Liberal Muslims (whatever that term means) can no longer avoid the obvious, the inevitable and the consequential damage from decades of suppression of the deeply personal and religious aspirations of a silent marginalized majority, the Muslims.

Being Muslim and being Malay is as analogous to being celibate and being the Pope at the same time. These are inseparable characteristics of both concepts and not mutually exclusive terms or propositions in the Malaysian context at least. These are truisms we cannot ignore.

Terms like ‘moderate Islam’ and ‘liberal Islam’, ‘radical Islam’ and ‘progressive Islam’ are terms coined in places like the creative media labs of the powerful Hill & Knowlton and other consultancies to the anti Islamic lobby in Washington created more than a decade ago. They are colourable terms used to distort and to defame, to destroy and to debilitate.

These same terms now embarrassingly find currency amongst a belatedly ‘secularized’ community 13 years too late. The language is a dead give away of where the strings to these anti Islamic campaigns are attached.

THE AFGHAN PAKISTANI PARALLEL-IGNORANT AND UNFOUNDED

When all else fails………….Noor Faridah unfairly and unjustly draws parallels to what has occurred in Pakistan and Afghanistan to what is likely to happen to Malaysia if the Syariah Isma Perkasa juggernaut is not stopped. 

Afghanistan like Pakistan are two states cursed by their strategic location as entry points to central Asia and the Arabian sea. Historically the British, the Russians and the Americans had all sought to subjugate and rule a martial race of people in the Hunzas, Baluchi’s, Waziris (the people of Samson of Samson and Delilah of the bible) the Pathans and the other tribes that make up the two regions. None of Britain, the US or the Soviet or their armies succeeded.

Both Pakistan and Afghanistan had a strong liberal, educated class who aspired and sought to claim for their people a fair share of the goods and services of a functioning democracy which would enable them to co-exist alongside the conservative principles and rigours of Islam and their tribal parochialism.

It was the British first, then the Soviets second then the Americans (under Ronald Reagan and William Casey) who militarised and radicalized the people of these two nations, assassinating, imprisoning and exiling their intellectuals, their liberal politicians, then setting up a false intellectual pseudo liberal class in an effort to lend a facade of legitimacy to their subjugating and ruling Pakistan and Afghanistan under an extreme form of Islam ‘Wahhabism’ to which the US was midwife at its birth in Saudi Arabia.

DEMOCRACY BY THE GUN-ISLAM BY WASHINGTON-FREEDOM BY DEATH

Coup after coup after assassination they failed. The west had by now brutalized, radicalized and militarized Islam in these places. It was now their brand of Islam that would exist in the region destroying it and its people whilst promoting western designs and supporting pro western strategies in the region.

The lynching of Zulfikar Ali Bhutto one of the very few democratically elected Pakistani leaders was a watershed in Pakistani and South Asian politics.

Pakistan has had a sleuth of despots, military brutes, medieval warlords and tyrants all installed and supported by the US before and after that event. Noor Faridah appears to latently support the myth of Islam being the root cause of the problems of Afghanistan and Pakistan with her ill informed misdirected rhetoric.

If Malaysia is to become like either of these two states it will not be because of Isma or Perkasa  or the Syaria. It is more likely to be so because of the fear mongering and ill informed claims of a misguided Noor Faridah and her cohorts and their ignorant (however well meaning) rants in this debate. This is exactly what occurred in Egypt and in other places in the middle east where American sponsored springs resulted in totalitarianism anarchy and bloodshed. The writing on the wall is the same.

What Noor Faridah and others like her are doing is precisely what the US did to Pakistan and to Afghanistan before destroying their liberal cultural and democratic and secular political institutions before turning these places into chaotic irredeemable failed states.

These agents of change achieve the destruction of their subject states by first creating then deploying a class of pseudo intellectuals with little limited knowledge, or regard for their own history or for fact. They flashed the public with their one liners instead.

Each of the extreme elements of Islam from the Taleban, Osma Ben Laden, the Muslim Brotherhood, the Algerian Brotherhood (the anti French resistance), the Chechen Rebels, (Saudi Arabian and American intelligence) the Filipino Abu Sayef (US intelligence to keep Marcos under check) and the Ayatollah’s Iranian Revolutionary Guard (the French), Hamas, Amal and Hezbollah (by Israel to keep the PLO under check) was a direct or collaborative instrument of US foreign policy. The same applies to ISIS.

Sadly for Noor Faridah there are no parallels to draw with Malaysia’s situation unless she is referring to the nexus with her group and these same forces of US foreign policy.

“Those whom the Gods wish to destroy them make mad first“.

WHAT’S IN A NAME A DEFINITION OR A LABEL?

There is no such thing as liberal Islam or liberal Christianity. These are religions. They are socio political concepts embedded in theologies (religions) born out of revolts, rebellions,social and political upheaval against oppression a long time ago.

The religious edicts of Islam demands strict personal disciplines as ‘ordained by God through his prophets’ and adherence to an even stricter moral code which is also claimed to be from the word of God.

For man (or woman) to alter the word of God in any way is more than merely Haram worthy of a Fatwah. Such reinventions (deviations) reduces God to a creation of man and a subject of man and not the other way round as it should be.

There are no liberal or progressive or extreme versions of Islam. There is Islam and there is Christianity. It is absolute. You either take it or leave it. You can’t reinvent it, liberalise it or dilute it.

SECULARISM VS SECULARISM-  ‘CONSTITUTIONAL EXPERTS’ VIEW- AMBIGA SPEAKS

The Malaysian constitution is secular in nature as Malaysia’s system of government is that of a parliamentary democracy. But whether or not one accepts these descriptions of Malaysia’s constitution, its government and its character the question is this. What is the meaning of secular in the context of government and the constitution. What is a democracy?

Ambiga Sreenivasan was quoted recently as explaining the meaning of secular in the framework of a similar constitution to that of Malaysia’s, the Indian constitution. In her explanations she  suggests that the notion of secularism in the Indian constitution“ is to make the Christians and Muslims feel safe and to protect them against a government being pro Hindu”. How ordinary. How misleading. How shallow.

Ambiga failed to take the opportunity to disabuse the ill informed of why the word constitution and secular are words not cast in stone to be explained with copious references to articles of the constitution by their number and paragraph alone. In fact that is not the way to explain the constitution at all.

As an example of the point. Secularism is described as being an ‘a’religious concept’ (of politics and government in this context) where no religion or spiritual belief takes precedence over the laws or over government.

Another way of describing this is simply is by reference to the concept of  The rule of law. No one is above the law (institution or individual). That does not necessarily mean no religion can prevail within the confines of the law or the constitution in a multi confessional society.

However and getting back to Amnbiga’s embarrassing explanation of the Indian example; in India, you have marriage and property acts exclusively applicable to different religions which differ in application, resultant rights and obligations but under a unitary ‘secular constitution’. An example of a few appear below for convenience:

Anand Marriage Act, 1909. (07 of 1909), Arya Marriage Validation Act, 1937. (19 of 1937), Converts’ Marriage Dissolution Act,1866. (21 of 1866), Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act,1939. (08 of 1939,), Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956. (78 of 1956), Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. (25 of 1955) Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1937. (26 of 1937) Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986. (25 of 1986) Parsi Marriage and Divorce Act, 1936. (03 of 1936) The Indian Christian Marriage Act, 1872. 

This example in the Indian constitution when applied against the backdrop  of secularism can be argued as being the very antithesis of secularism.

The law  and the constitution in India’s example is subject in part (as above) to religious doctrines, laws and the various theological imperatives which India’s constitution accommodates in varying degrees of discrimination resulting in a form of sectarianism. But they call it secular in India. Not sectarianism.

IGNORANCE IS NOT SECULAR- IT IS NARROW AND CANNOT ENLIGHTEN

The point is this. India’s constitution like that of Britain’s is said to be secular. But what secular means is clearly not understood by all. Secularism it may be said is like the elephant to the three blind men in the room. Each sees and feels it from a perspective of his or her own short comings and limited knowledge.

The US, it is difficult to forget, called itself a democracy for over a century defined by the “Gettysburg Address”. “ A government of the people by the people”. But no one dared ask the vexed question for over a century about, “a government by which people  for what people”. And for a century at least the Native Americans and the African American population lived under a shadow of unparalleled oppression, deprivation and brutality under a white Christian majority, till the events that culminated in Dr. Martin Luther King’s civil rights million man march of 1968 forced a re think of the ideas of democracy and secular government there.

Yet the world recognized this ‘moral, economic and military power’ as being not only a democratic state but also the model of democratic government and a secular constitution others had to aspire to or face their wrath in the breach. The demon then was communism. Today it is Islam.

WHY THE INCLUSION OF SYARIA IS NOT A BREACH OF SECULARISM IN THE CONSTITUTION

Malaysia’s constitution is secular, its government a parliamentary democracy, its majority and therefore its social fabric fundamentally cloaked in a Muslim Malay character.

By introducing Islam into the legal system the constitution does not in any way become sectarian or breach  its ‘secular character’. It may be argued that it in fact gives the idea of secularism a wider multi dimensional interpretation. It adorns the otherwise pallid secular characteristics of the constitution in its very Anglo Christian form as it currently is. Islam as an added ingredient to the constitution in fact recognizes and legitimizes the popular notion of the concept of secularism. Separation of church and state. But is that separation real?

Malaysia’s constitution, a variant of the Westminster English constitution according to the Malaysian Bar’s ‘constitutional experts’ and by implication of the call by the group of 25  is said to be secular.

In England the constitution its laws and every element of government in its preamble is by reference to the Queen in whose name parliament is called, prorogued and in whose name every law is enacted. Now how is that secular?

The Queen is head of the Church of England and the Protestant Churches. All government is hers. Her Prime Minister her Ministers, her armed forces, her courts and her civil service. Where therefore is the separation of state and religion?

The laws which determine what is wrong and what is right has its origins in the 10 commandments beginning with the first “I am the Lord thy God thou shalt not have strange Gods before me”. Interpreted in simpler form “ The King and parliament is sovereign and no other power or law shall have precedence over them”. The “constitution is the supreme law of the land” Not the US constitution, not the British constitution, but the Federal Constitution of Malaysia is the supreme law of the land. At least that is what the pre amble to the constitution says.

One can go on about the other laws such as the homicide act which is derived from the fifth commandment “thou shall not kill”, the tenth “thou shalt not covet they neighbours goods” the origins of the theft act and so on and so forth. But is it necessary?

SYARIA VERSUS CHRISTIAN CIVIL CODES

Now where is the problem in the introduction and recognition of Syaria on par with the Christian civil code? Syaria is often ignorantly viewed through a ‘sensationalist ignorant’ prism as a regime of prohibitions alone leading to amputations and stoning.

Such perceptions are further reinforced by exaggerated media hype about organizations such as Boko Haram and ISIS whilst ignoring the equally evil “cult of the Christ of death” (Santa Muerta) in Mexico. Santa Muerta  has been responsible for the tens of thousands of deaths over the past decade where innocents have been hacked to death, mutilated, kidnapped, raped and beheaded indiscriminately. Referred to by the media as the Cocaine wars all care is taken to avoid reference to Santa Muerta a Catholic cult of death which hangs over this murderous rampage.

The US has done nothing to stop the carnage and continues to merely report it as organized crime. It in fact is far greater a danger than what ISIS (which the US created) is today. Yet the narrow minded amongst us sheepish and shallow in their intellect are willing to further advance these myths  riven by fear and a healthy dose of Islamophobia to the extent they have denigrated themselves in the process.

The singular incidents of a conflict of laws involving the Syaria and civil codes are but conflicts of law which cannot be resolved through name calling, hurling insults and demonizing one side or the other. Needless to say for a population as proportionately large as the Malays are in Malaysia they are dwarfed by the enormity of the resources in money and technical expertise of English and Chinese anti Malay anti Islamic online publications whose primary purpose is to insult them and hijack everything from their culture to their religion to their language and rights.

Isma and Perkasa are but creatures of necessity having been ignored for far too long by the comfortable middle classes and the voracious lofty ambitions of the mainly Chinese land grabbers in their midst. In the end the Malays will prevail not because of the rest of us non Malays and what we think of them, but inspite of it all.

A CONCLUSION FOR ALL

Noor Faridah and any of the signatories to this “open letter to government” have an obligation to resign from any government position they now hold. A resignation in these circumstances is part of the Westminster Constitutional conventions  Malaysia has adopted.

It is imperative that they resign because their “open letter” is a disendorsement of confidence in the government they serve. They are therefore unfit or in the alternative not able to serve a government in whom they have expressed no confidence.

The other side of this situation is that the Prime Minister to whom and to whose government the letter is in effect addressed must resign if he does not immediately respond and put his position on the table. The Prime Minister’s response must be to sack any serving civil servant in the list of signatories to this “open letter” if he does not himself tender his resignation and that of his government.

Anytime there arises an expression of no confidence in government, there are but very few options available to the protagonists if they are within government. It is the underlying principle of responsible government that demands such a response.

Floods and the Sultan’s Anger

A RIGHT ROYAL RAGE

The Sultan of Pahang, HRH Sultan Ahmad Shah may have opened up a Pandora’s box with his recent outburst directed at those who he believes responsible for the damage to the crown jewel of his state the Cameron Highlands.

The Camerons and surrounding areas of his kingdom suffered great physical and environmental damage following heavy rains recently precipitating a torrent in the rivers especially Sungei Bertam that caused  heavy flood damage to the areas through which it flows.

The Sultan’s reaction to this calamity is captured in his comments published in the NST (New Straits Times 20 November 2014). The Sultan’s comments are surprising for his apparent ‘lack of knowledge’ of what has been occurring in his state over time.

Surely the Sultan must have known of the stealthy encroachment into his territory through illegal means by certain groups, many of which are fronted by people he has decorated with knighthoods (Datukships), bought and paid for with the money from their illegal activities especially in deforestation of his state.

ILLEGAL LOGGING -THE SULTANS-DATUKSHIPS- BULLYING

The degradation of the rainforests of Malaysia through illegal logging and ‘farming’ is legend. The rest of the world has been screaming out in anger and outrage for ages about this environmental disaster in the making (the deforestation of Malaysia), but It appears that the Sultan is about the only person in his state oblivious to that fact.

The Sultan thinks it is the lowly public servant who is to blame. He singles out a minister in Palanivelu a minister of government without connections to a monied community, apportioning blame on the man for the problem which is decades old.

The Sultan then shamelessly and without lawful authority threatens to interfere in the electoral process by saying ‘the minister can forget about his chances for re election‘ or words to that effect ‘if the situation is not corrected‘. How convenient indeed. How unconstitutional, how unlawful.

THE HISTORY OF TIMBER AND THE INVOLVEMENT OF THE ROYALS

The former Prime Minister of Malaysia Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohammed during a recent road trip through that state observed a large number of logging trucks and the abundance of valuable timber being carted on them to their final destinations. He wrote a comment on it on his website Che Det which is worth a read.

Each of the Malaysian states abundant with timber resources has been hijacked by rich and powerful business interests and communities all of them by-passing legal process and procedure to acquiring rights to these resources. They are then hailed by the same Royals as the Sultan as hard working examples of enterprise. Read Antah Holdings for an example.

As a first step to their looting of the environment and state resources, these groups infect the integrity of the rulers of their target states. They pay them generously for their ‘Datukships’ and lavish upon these Royals gifts of cash, overseas trips, cars, women and other luxuries in an age old ritual that has become all too commonplace in Malaysia.

The royals are themselves deeply entrenched in this practice of patronage and pillaging of state resources. Not least of which is the royal household of the Sultan.

IGNORANCE BY DESIGN BETRAYAL OR WILLFUL BLINDNESS?

To claim ignorance of the rape of state resources, land and forests is to feign ignorance in these matters is to insult us all.

It is an unimpeachable truth that the Sultan’s ignorance of these matters is feigned. And here are our reasons for saying so.  

The claim to not knowing about what is happening in Pahang state is being made by a person who has both a moral and legal obligation to make it his business to know what is happening in his state.

It is not simply enough for the Sultan to scapegoat the weakest link in the chain in a minister after a tragedy like the recent floods in the Camerons. The Sultan ought to have known and acted on the impending disasters the results of illegal mining and logging in Pahang before these events occurred. Its called responsibility and being responsible.

At the Sultan’s disposal is the machinery of the state of Pahang and the federal government. If he so desired he has access to these resources at any time. This same position applies to all Sultans and rulers of all states throughout Malaysia. In fact it is also true a position when applied to all politicians and parliamentarians in all states.

Such a claim as is made by HRH the Sultan of Pahang (which I am quite certain is a defence likely also to be raised by other Royals if questioned) is not only laughable (if it were not so tragic) and indefensible, but it is also demeaning to the integrity and the sanctity of the office of the ruler of a state.

His Royal Highness the Sultan of Pahang is not alone in this regard. His comments and his response to the floods is regrettable. It exposes the weaknesses of the Royal Households and the calibre of the traditional rulers of Malaysia many of whose lineage ascended the throne courtesy of the patronage of the British.

If however the Sultan is genuinely as he implies ‘in the dark‘ about these practices of land grabbing and illegal logging in his state, then it is those who surround him in office that need to be identified, thoroughly investigated and punished for keeping the ruler insulated from reality and isolated from knowledge of the affairs of his state.

What has occurred now has brought the Sultan and his office, through his comments and his actions, into disrepute. The damage to his reputation and to the office he holds is irreparable.

Such conduct by the Sultan’s advisors and  minders is high treason, unpardonable and impermissible. It amounts to undermining the authority of both the Sultan and eroding the power of the state he rules over and deserves immediate and independent remedial action. It is sedition in its classic form.

STATE AND SOVEREIGN COMPLICITY IN PILFERING NATIONAL RESOURCES 

The rape of the land in places like the Camerons is legend. It stands out like a pair of dog’s proverbials and no one, not least of all the Sultan could possibly have missed out on noticing it or to claim not to know about it.

The Camerons is but an isolated example of what is happening nation wide which needs attention. And the Sultans recent comments may have been the catalyst for action against these land pirates. The misconduct of the state rulers is what is helping to undermine good government and the rule of law.

Kuala Lumpur and its surrounds has for decades been the scene of unlicensed, unlawful and unabated environmental damage for “development” purposes by unlicensed and licensed developers alike many working under the protection of the Royals.

Local councils have been bought and planning laws sidelined if not completely ignored in pursuit of the development dollar. Penang is another vivid example of unbridled environmental vandalism sanctioned by the state.

Selangor, Johor, Perak and Kelantan have all become captive to groups of opportunists who help themselves in disproportionate amounts, to assets which rightfully belong to the state. All this achieved through the device of a compliant Royal house or member of a Royal household.

Datukships are sold like confetti to the highest bidder and used by recipients as an accessory to be flashed at social functions and to embellish the otherwise pallid characters and under achievements of its recipients.

The practice has to stop. What the award of Datukships has served to do is to reduce the integrity of the office of ruler (Sultan) to that of being a captive to a community of law breakers.

These robber baron law breakers then  wave their paid for knighthoods (Datukships) as a badge of honour and a ‘get out of jail’ free pass in pursuit of their destruction of the social fabric and physical and cultural environment of the country.

In the process knowingly or otherwise the Sultans have allowed their reputations to become tainted, sullied and their positions seemingly tied to a leash controlled by these monied communities.

The Royal households of each state are complicit in the environmental vandalism that has led to tragedies such as the Cameron highlands floods and the erosion of law and order. There is no getting away from this allegation. The overwhelming body of evidence clearly implicates the Royal households of each state to the activities of land vandals, logging companies and improperly sanctioned developers.

FARMING SLAVES AND LAND GRAB-THE CAULDRON BOILETH OVER

The illegal market gardens and farms mainly Chinese owned in not just the Camerons but nationwide are now the property of corporate squatters from as far away as mainland China, using local fronts and imported slave labour from India, Bangladesh and Myanmar to run these enterprises.

The practice endures in east Malaysia too on a very grand scale where the involvement of members of the state legislature are directly involved in these enterprises. The recent case of an Indian national who escaped a surreal and bizarre experience of being kidnapped and being forced to work as a slave in Sabah appears to be the tip of a very large iceberg of human trafficking in this area.

Unless the federal government acts and acts immediately, effectively and with sincerity, the anticipated change people  expect of government may not after all come through the ballot box.

There is a stygian anger brewing amongst not only the migrant population of the country. It now engulfs the grass roots rural Malays. And  unless there is immediate action by government against organized resource thieves and environmental vandalism, these problems will meld into a single cause that will inevitably cause the cauldron of the weak and dispossessed to explode into uncontrollable rebellion. If this does occur as many suspect it will, the human torrent of anger and inequity will outdo the overflowing and fast Sungei Bertam in a flood and consume everything in its path including an indolent government.

Considering UN statistics on the numbers of illegal workers and trafficked humans in Malaysia, disruption in this area may be an understatement. Any change at this level would be by an uprising in violence led by slaves imported from neighbouring countries in large numbers who have no recourse to justice or relief from their enslavement. Joining them will be the marginalized Malays. And they count for very large numbers.

The current government is and has been aware of human trafficking, illegal land clearing and unlicensed industries for decades. State governments and the Sultans too have been aware of these rorts which has made hundreds of millions of ringgit in untaxed wealth for their promoters.

IGNORANCE IS NO EXCUSE

Sadly an angry Sultan, and I suspect angry at the unavoidable murmurings of his own people at the grass roots level has decided to deflect responsibility by re directing his anger at low level public servants instead of directing it where it ought to be aimed at.

Public servants of the caliber the Sultan of Pahang has attacked have no legal power, authority or capacity to effectively restrain powerful business communities who hold him and his government captive to their enormous and tempting wallets.

Unless the Sultans of each of these states in Malaysia where illegal trades flourish do something fast and sincerely to abate these practices (including stopping the award of knighthoods for sinister and unmeritorious purposes) , their own subjects will eventually out of necessity dislodge the power base upon which they now rest through direct action.

CECIL ABRAHAM- A LYNCHING BY THE MALAYSIAN BAR

A PUBLIC INQUIRY INTO A STATUTORY DECLARATION DRAWN BY CECIL ABRAHAM

In what may be a case of over playing their hand, the Malaysian Bar may have unwittingly created then walked into a trap of its own making by demanding, that a hearing into allegations of professional  misconduct against Cecil Abraham, a lawyer of their own ranks, be held in public.

Cecil Abraham is alleged to have, in short, ‘concocted’ the Statutory Declaration (SD) made by the controversial late Balasubramaniam Perumal (Bala) a private investigator who claimed to have known everything behind the life and death of Mongolian prostitute Altantuya Sharibu.

In addition to this, Abraham is alleged to have coerced the late Bala into signing a retraction of an earlier SD Bala swore, courtesy of his handlers, lawyers Amrick Singh Siddhu and another lawyer Sivarasa MP.

BALASUBRAMANIAM A TICKING TIME BOMB-AN UNMITIGATED LIAR

Bala came into notoriety after having made several claims which he later retracted, amended or materially changed about his involvement in and his engagement with those allegedly involved with the woman called Altantuya.

Bala also claimed to have had first hand knowledge of the circumstances surrounding the mysterious and controversial death of Altantuya Sharibu.

Notably none of Bala’s claims about the Altantuya affair and the surrounding peripheral issues that kept the story and media attention on him alive were consistent. He provided no proof of his assertions nor did any of the evidence in the courts on the trial of the two people convicted of murdering Altantuya corroborate Bala’s exaggerations and fanciful stories.

Bala’s recollection of events, “facts” and “statements” about the Altantuya affair, whenever presented an opportunity to air “his role” as a bodyguard of Razak Baginda and his time with Altantuya were at best irrelevant, inconsistent or hazy the second time round. Much of his recollections on reflection were made up by the man caught up in the spotlight of someone else’s misery.

BALA-AMRICK SINGH SIDDHU-SIVARASA AND MANJIT DHILLON-BIRDS OF A FEATHER?

Balasubramaniam and his lawyers, Amrick Singh Siddhu and Sivarasah have both of their own material made admissions in public on the record to having ‘assisted’ Bala, a semi literate man, not only to prepare his SD but to also in the process author and edit its contents.

There are words in the Bala SD that did not belong in Bala’s limited vocabulary. Siddhu, with Sivarasah and Dhillon in the now infamous “press briefings”  of 4 July 2008 admit to their part in crafting Bala’s litany of lies they call his SD. Lies because Bala’s statements have not been proved to be anything else and appear to have no basis at all in the truth.

AN IMPARTIAL TRIBUNAL? NOT THE MALAYSIAN BAR

The call by the Malaysian Bar for Cecil Abraham to have the proverbial torch put to his belly in a public circus they intend to choreograph over Bala’s SD is something Abraham and his lawyers ought to welcome and encourage. 

However in order that any hearing against Cecil Abraham be seen and for it to be impartial and fair, the Malaysian Bar and Abraham should not have any part in the selection process of the panel to conduct that hearing.

The Malaysian Bar, because it is a political organization and their call for investigating Cecil Abraham a political exercise.

Cecil Abraham on the other hand should have no part in the selection of the panel for the lesser reason that he is the accused, the subject of disciplinary proceedings brought against him by the Malaysian Bar.

OPEN TRIBUNALS TO CHECK CONSPIRACIES AND LIES

Self regulation even in the hands of trusted and highly learned men and women of the professional classes is subject to the frailties and weaknesses of human nature. And no better example of self regulation falling victim to the frailties of human nature can be found anywhere else than in the Malaysian Bar.

JUST FOR THE RECORD-LEST WE FORGET

In 4 July of 2008 the following event occurred staged by the protagonists featured in a youtube recording of a press briefing by Siddhu, Sivarasa and Dhillon about the Bala SD.

In this press briefing is a taped Malaysia Kini press conference called by Siddhu, Sivarasa MP and Manjeet Dhillon to explain the circumstances in which Bala’s SD was created.

In that briefing Dhillon referring to himself as Siddhu’s lawyer provides critical admissions with his self destructive, inculpatory testimony of Siddhu’s conduct  in the drafting of Bala’s SD. (A point to note here).

Sivarasah does not come to the conference armed with a lawyer but Siddhu does. (and why?)

The following is a transcript of the final minutes of that press briefing called by Siddhu, Sivarasa and Dhillon recorded by Malaysia Kini uploaded 4 July 2008 given by Siddhu, Sivarasa and  Siddhu’s lawyer Manjeet Singh Dhillon.

In that press conference Siddhu’s legal representative, lawyer Manjeet Singh Dhillon takes to the microphone to defend Siddhu by making the following statements appearing below in italics:

(Notably none of the lawyers present rebutted any of the statement below issued by Dhillon:)

Fatally, lawyer Sivarasa’s contribution to the conference implicates him as well in what has always been suspected to be a politically motivated conspiracy (the Altantuya affair) by members of the Malaysian Bar on behalf of Anwar Ibrahim and the opposition political parties:

Manjeet Singh Dhillon commenting on Balasubramaniam’s affidavit and Siddhu’s role in the July 4 press briefing in 2008 says thus. (underlined for emphasis by the  author)

“As far as Amrick is concerned he is (sic) discharging his duties as lawyer. He was basically helping to prepare and format the document (in context the Balasubramaniam SD).  He was not concerned with the truth or otherwise of the document. The document was presented…information on the document was coming from his client and he merely put it in the necessary language of the SD. That declaration was then sworn voluntarily before a commissioner of oaths. Mr. Amrick Singh’s position was that is was a voluntary document……..”  

A LAWYER’S DUTY TO HIS CLIENT THE LAW AND THE COURTS

Critically Siddhu says through Dhillon his lawyer ‘he was not concerned with the truth or otherwise of the document’ (meaning Balas statements in the controversial Bala SD). If that statement by Siddhu made on his behalf by his lawyer Dhillon does not constitute professional misconduct, professional negligence or misleading conduct by Siddhu, Dhillon and Sivarasa then the tribunal and the Malaysian Bar have a serious problem which goes to their credibility and competence.

Such a statement as that made by Dhillon on Siddhu’s behalf and not withdrawn or retracted by Siddhu or Dhillon  at the earliest possible opportunity to do so and within a reasonable time, incriminates Siddhu in a material particular in so far as the offence of professional misconduct and professional negligence is concerned.

In Siddhu’s case, he either knew very well what the purpose of the Bala SD was drawn and sworn for or at the very least he was reckless as to what Bala and his handler’s were attempting to achieve by that SD. Dhillon corroborates this point very well and willingly at the press briefing referred to here.

Siddhu cannot deny that knowledge now, having for so many years been embedded in the heart of the political circus now know as the Altantuya affair.

A lawyer as an officer of the court cannot afford to be negligent, callous or unconcerned about the truth or otherwise (meaning falsehoods) of a statutory declaration or any other document he draws up on behalf of a client.

An SD of the Bala variety was intended and used as evidence to further allegations against Malaysia’s Prime Minister and his wife in an attempt to falsely implicate them in the murder of prostitute Altantuya Sharibu.

Knowing or reckless as to whether the contents of the evidence (being the material in the SD) was true or otherwise is an explicit admission to misleading conduct.  And it misled many an agency, the public and distorted the truth about Altantuya and how she died.

A lawyer has a duty to caution his client (the deponent) about the penalties for falsehoods and the consequences of perjury, make every reasonable effort to determine the veracity and the truth of the statements the deponent swears to before him (especially where he assists in drafting it contents) as an SD. Amrick Singh appears to have avoided that duty of his as a lawyer assisting Bala.

Where the lawyer does not witness the signing of the deposition in the SD, then he ought to at least be certain that what he has drawn in the SD on behalf of the deponent is as far as he is able to reasonably ascertain, accurate in the circumstances, reliable and the truth.

A lawyer has an overriding obligation to ensure the document is neither false, over stated nor made without regard for the truth or prospect of proof being reasonably deduced out of what is deposed to in the SD. It is after all evidence.

Amrick Singh Siddhu wantonly and deliberately avoided all of his professional responsibilities in this respect.

WHO DID BALA BELONG TO?

At law, no one has property over a witness. This is especially true as concerns a witness like Bala in court proceedings.

In order to demonstrate there was an ongoing exclusive relationship between lawyer and client in Siddhu’s case, the panel of inquiry must be shown and be satisfied that there was  an unconflicted relationship between Bala and his interests as a client of Siddhu. Siddhu must demonstrate the unconflicted interests of his and those of  with Sivarasah and Dhillon in a given matter or retainer.

Conversely with Abraham the panel must be shown there existed an unconflicted relationship between Bala and Abraham at that point of time that Bala approached Abraham to act for him.

Further still it must also be shown and satisfactory to the tribunal that those interests of Bala’s for which Siddhu is said to have originally been retained by Bala (if in fact he was) did not conflict with any of Abraham’s ethical obligations to Siddhu as a lawyer when he is said to have taken on a retainer from Bala.

WHOSE CLIENT WAS BALA AND WHEN DOES A RETAINER TERMINATE?

Critically the relationship between Bala and Siddhu can only be resolved by Siddhu placing before the tribunal evidence of the written retainer he claims between himself, his firm and Bala signed by the parties.

Equally important a question will be how Siddhu was paid for his services by Bala a man said to be impecunious (and subjected to the torments of temptation with bribery by many).

Once that element of the professional lawyer client relationship between Siddhu and Bala is established as proof of what it purports to be, it is then open to Abraham to rebut Siddhu’s claim against him. He does this by demonstrating that the matter Bala came to retain him for (the controverted second Statutory Declaration) did not in fact place him Abraham (and not Siddhu) in a position of potential conflict with his (Abraham’s) ethical obligations to Siddhu under the legal profession act.

This simply means that at the time Bala approached Cecil Abraham, Abraham did not have an existing retainer to say act for Siddhu in some other matter: or that Abraham was not engaged in a matter with a nexus to Siddhu’s interests conflicting with Bala’s instructions to Abraham, Dhillon, Sivarasah or Siddhu.

If such a relationship arose through Bala’s ‘lawyer shopping’ it could well have breached Abraham’s ethical obligations to both client (Bala) and Siddhu under the Legal Profession Act. No such conflict is known to have existed or declared to exist or claimed by Bala, Siddhu or Abraham.

If such a conflict (or potential for conflict) did exist, it has not been placed in evidence before the tribunal or any other tribunal from our knowledge. The Malaysian Bar as a starting point should because of its own rules have been informed by Siddhu of that conflict. The Bar it appears was not.

However and judging from the Malaysian Bar’s recent history of direct involvement in politics, and amongst other matters, the Altantuya matter, it could well have been aware of Siddhu’s conflict but chose instead to ignore it.

If Abraham is to be believed, then Abraham was dealing with a matter that necessarily (by implication of Bala’s conduct in approaching him), ended the retainer between Bala and Siddhu.

TERMINATION OF RETAINER-  MOVING FROM CIVIL TO CRIMINAL

In approaching Abraham over the issue of the SD, Bala is necessarily and by implication of his conduct suggesting that there was a problem with his previous SD drafted by Siddhu.

It is implied that something caused Bala to either loose his confidence in Siddhu or feel that he needed to end his retainer with Siddhu. Siddhu after all by his trade mark conduct would have compromised any lawyer client privilege by going public with matters relating to Bala, his evidence and matters relating to his alleged involvement in the Altantuya affair.

There is another possibility: Bala may have felt that the Siddhu drafted SD was not a reflection of what he Bala had intended to put down in a Statutory Declaration and wanted the SD rectified or withdrawn and replaced with a new SD that more accurately reflected what he had to depose to under oath.

In such circumstances as described above, all that was needed was for Bala to formalize the termination of his retainer with Siddhu by putting it in writing, or for Abraham to write to Siddhu with a note from Bala confirming his instructions that he Bala would be terminating his retainer with Siddhu in favour of the new retainer with Abraham.

At this point the relationship between the parties changes. Siddhu becomes a potential witness in a criminal matter involving Bala and his SD. Such a situation carries with it professional misconduct and criminal implications and possible sanctions against both Bala and Siddhu, possibly vis a vis each other.

Further still in circumstances as sensitive and controversial as that which Bala had made previously about his personal security and safety, it would not have been unprofessional or unethical for Abraham not to have informed Siddhu immediately or at all about the change of Bala’s circumstances (retainer).

He would have logically waited perhaps, after receiving advise from the police, to who Abraham should have reported Bala’s personal safety concerns. (which would include  informing the police of Bala approaching him over his complaint and the personal safety issues).

Given the circumstances of Bala’s history of duplicity and contradictions and his paranoia of the police it would be excusable if he instructed Abraham not to contact the police. But that of itself does not exonerate Siddhu, Dhillon and Sivarasa.

AS THE DUST SETTLES OVER MH 17

 

AN ABOUT FACE- SO WHO BROUGHT DOWN MH 17 REALLY?

Reports coming out of the US this morning now show a change of heart as to who may have been responsible for bringing down MH 17.

Senior U.S. intelligence officials say they have no evidence of direct Russian government involvement in the shooting down of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17.

They say the passenger jet was likely felled by an SA-11 surface-to-air missile fired by Russian-backed separatists in eastern Ukraine and that Russia “created the conditions” for the downing by arming the separatists.

The officials briefed reporters on Tuesday under ground rules that their names not be used in discussing intelligence related to last week’s air disaster, which killed 298 people.

They said they did not know if any Russians were present at the missile launch, and they wouldn’t say that the missile crew was trained in Russia.

This is a far departure from the very shrill bellicose rhetoric used by the US and its allies including Holland and Australia about who brought down the Malaysian airliner. They were so very sure then that it was a Russian conspiracy and the attack against Russia was being led by its illegitimate new ruler Poroshenko and  Arseniyev both virulent anti Russian individuals known to be on the payroll of Oligarchs who now live comfortably abroad.

NO SANCTIONS AGAINST RUSSIA – FRANCE AND GERMANY

The French who have been relatively silent about who did what to MH 17 also have one of the more powerful and reliable intelligence services in Europe. They have finally broken their silence over the anti Russian tirades coming out of Europe and the US this week over MH 17.

It was the clearest signal yet from Paris that they are not part of this hastily cobbled conspiracy against the Russians in an effort to protect a US/ European strategy to demonise then encircle Russia,  

France’s response has been to go through with the controversial deal to sell a helicopter carrier ship “Mistral” to Russia despite the Ukraine crisis. And its decision to do so came only hours after British Prime Minister David Cameron said it would be “unthinkable” for France to fulfill such an order.

“Hollande is not backing down. He is delivering the first (ship) despite the fact he is being asked not to,” Jean-Christophe Cambadelis, head of Hollande’s ruling Socialist Party, told I-Tele television on Tuesday.

“This is a false debate led by hypocrites … When you see how many (Russian) oligarchs have sought refuge in London, David Cameron should start by cleaning up his own backyard.” “Just because the Americans say ‘jump’ we shouldn’t jump,” Xavier Bertrand, a former minister under Sarkozy and senior member of his conservative opposition UMP party, told France Inter radio. “France’s word, its signature, must be respected.”

President Barack Obama expressed concerns about the “Mistral” contract in June because of Russia’s support for separatists in eastern Ukraine.

The wrangling over the warships highlights the difficulties the 28-member European Union has had in agreeing a joint line on dealing with Russia, a major gas supplier to countries such as Germany and Italy, as well as to central Europe.

MALAYSIA’S OPPORTUNITY TO STAND OUT AS AN INDEPENDENT NATION

Malaysia like all other civilized nations has an obligation to carpet the British and American Ambassadors along with the Australians to demand they explain their conduct and hand over their “intelligence” over the downing of MH 17 and demand answers from each of them.

The disinformation campaign (a euphemism for propaganda of lies) has been flowing thick and fast. It appears to be undeniable now that 289 people could have been sacrificed to provide a western smoke screen for the barbaric Israeli incursion and attacks in Gaza against Palestinians of all religions classes colours and creeds.

Only a few days ago Britain, Holland and the US were certain along with Ukraine that the Russians were responsible for the downing  of MH 17. They must now come out with their “intelligence” to back those claims or apologise and tell the truth. Malaysia has a stake in the whole affair as it was a Malaysian aircraft and crew that was murdered by people the west say they have identified as perpetrators.

Malaysia has the single greatest opportunity to show the world leadership at a time of crisis. The opportunity has been handed to it by a European American miscalculation by an act of their barbarity in shooting down a Malaysian Airliner with all its passengers aboard. Malaysia is in a position to demand answers from each of the Obama Administration, David Cameron, Tony Abbot and Mark Rutte over the MH 17 affair.

As an Islamic nation it has the moral high ground to demand answers. It has also the right to demand if MH 17 was a smokescreen used to cover the west’s indulgence of Israel’s incursion into Gaza seeing as no other Islamic nation has the moral clout it seems or the proverbials between their political legs to do so. If it does not, it remains a two bit excuse for foreign investment, devoid of political, moral and policy independence.

All Arab states (and Turkey) without exception have proved to be an insult to Islam, an anachronism where their connection and claims to represent Islam and humanity are concerned. Beginning with Saudi Arabia and the Saudi Royals with their un Islamic excesses these nations have reduced Islam and the words of the Prophet (PBUH) into a cash cow and a justification for indulging in every known excess and vice on earth.

Apart from Malaysia and its Muslims there are very few (if any ) in any other state that could call themselves Islamic and point to their conduct and lives to justify it. The Arabs themselves speak highly in praise of Malaysia and its Muslims and their examples as such. The Muslim world now needs a leader. Malaysia and Najib should step up to the plate now or forever lose the opportunity that God (or fate by MH 17) has delivered to them on a silver platter.

UKRAINE WITHOLDING THE FACTS ON MH 17

ALL CLUES POINT TO A FAILED ATTEMPT AT ASSASSINATION OF PUTIN

Quite correctly an indignant Russian Deputy Minister of Defence made the following statement to RT Media (a Russian Media outlet) 3 days after the downing of flight MH 17.

Deputy Defence Minister Anatoly Antonov criticized Western countries for jumping to conclusions just “24 hours after the crash of MH 17” that Russia was to blame for the crash of MH 17 without providing a shred of independently verifiable and credibly admissible evidence to support their far fetched allegations.

“They try to show to the whole world that we are responsible for the crash. It is very strange that without any evidence my colleagues from western media would like to find somebody who is responsible for the crash,” Antonov said. “It seems to me that this is part of information warfare which has been started against the Russian Federation and armed forces.”

He then put 10 questions for the Ukrainian regime in Kiev to answer which has thus far only elicited scorn and regrettably evasive and questionable answers from both the Ukrainians and the west.

TEN QUESTIONS FOR THE UKRAINIAN AUTHORITIES TO RESPOND TO BEFORE APPORTIONING BLAME ELSEWHERE

1. Immediately after the tragedy, the Ukrainian authorities, naturally, blamed it on the self-defense forces. What are these accusations based on?

2. Can Kiev explain in detail how it uses BUK Missile Launchers in the conflict zone? (Ukraine owns several of these) And why were these systems deployed there in the first place, seeing as the self-defense forces don’t have any planes?

3. Why are the Ukrainian authorities not doing anything to set up an independent international commission of inquiry into the crash ? When will such a commission begin its work if one is indeed planned?

4. Would the Ukrainian Armed Forces be willing to let international investigators see the inventory of their air-to-air and surface-to-air missiles, including those used in SAM launchers?

5. Will the international commission have access to tracking data from reliable sources tracking the movements of Ukrainian warplanes on the day of the tragedy?

6. Why did Ukrainian air traffic controllers allow the plane to deviate from the regular route to the north, towards “the anti-terrorist operation zone”?

7. Why was airspace over the war zone not closed to civilian air traffic, especially since the area was not entirely covered by radar navigation systems?

8. How does Kiev officially respond to comments on and on media reports in the press and on social media, by a Spanish air traffic controller who works in Ukraine,  who alleged that there were two Ukrainian military planes flying alongside the Boeing 777 over Ukrainian territory?

9. Why did Ukraine’s Security Service start working with the recordings of communications between Ukrainian air traffic controllers and the Boeing crew and with the data storage systems from Ukrainian radars without waiting for international investigators?

10. What lessons has Ukraine learned from a  similar flight in 2001, when a Russian Tu-154 crashed into the Black Sea? Back then, the Ukrainian authorities denied any involvement on the part of Ukraine’s Armed Forces until irrefutable evidence proved official Kiev to be guilty.

A HISTORY OF SHOOTING CIVILIAN  AIRCRAFT IN WAR

What most of  us fail to realise is that whatever we read in the media as “evidence and proof” is insufficient by any civil standards to constitute  evidence let alone conclusive proof to satisfy a conviction for a motor traffic offence. But since there is a propaganda war out there it is those who speak loudest that need to be scrutinized.

Each of the US, the former USSR (not the present day Russia), the Ukraine in 2001, Israel and Belgium have all had the ignominious distinction of having shot down civlian airliners on one pretext or the other. Of these the Belgians are known to be the worst offenders as the evidence unearthed years later would show, Belgian Air force planes stationed in the Congo brought down the plane carrying Dag Hammerzhold the then UN Secretary General who did not approve of their handling of the Congo crisis.

A POSSIBLE PLAUSIBLE SCENARIO EMERGING

The fact there is a war going on in the Ukraine between rebels of many different ethnic backgrounds, many such as the Cossacks who speak Russian and identify with Russia appears lost on the west. Convenience? perhaps. But whats more astounding in the heat of this war and its most pitiful victim, MH 17 and its passengers is that, the plane and its passengers have become a “shield” for the west and its new illegitimate political progeny bordering Russia (the Ukraine) in its anti Russian propaganda war.

The US and Europe have been threatening sanctions against Russia but have thus far not succeeded because of the implications and fall out of any sanction on Europe and the US itself. Putin’s Russia has carefully placed strategic investments of the west in their grasp and hold firmly on to these. Rocket engines which the Russians supply the US cannot be replaced and substituted overnight.

Gas and oil from Russia’s massive fields are piped to Europe via Ukraine and Ukraine itself is dependent on Russian gas for which it owes Russia over $15 billion it can’t repay. The west has promised to underwrite Ukraine’s debt to Russia is it joins NATO. A listening outpost for the west on Russia’s border. It has not been easy for the west dealing with the ascendancy of a political, militarily and economically strong Russia. The western media says otherwise.

More to the point. The failure of the west cripple Russia’s military might with an illegal coup using the Maidan demonstrators to overthrown a Moscow friendly government in Kiev has embarrassed and strengthened Moscow’s hold in the region. The Black Sea Fleet is stationed in the Crimea. Without this port the Russian navy is literally non existent.  Putin took it over with Russian forces. No one did anything but write about it.

IT WAS A FAILED ATTEMPT TO ASSASSINATE PUTIN

It has become clear to the west that the only way to check mate Putin according to Russian intelligence is to “take him out”. He has always been aware of plots to assassinate him. Putin questioned the west’s right to assassinate Gadaffi and Saddam Hussein in the face of overwhelming silence by others. He has always questioned the west’s legitimacy to assassinating Rumanian leader Nicolau Caucescu, to kidnaping Panama’s Manuel Noriega and its aiding in the ouster of democratically elected Muslim Brotherhood leader Mohammed Morsi of Egypt.

Putin’s plane was dovetailing MH 17 on the fateful day of the crash of MH 17 and for reasons best known to Russian intelligence the flight took a different route over Poland avoiding Ukrainian airspace. Malaysian airlines was lapped by Putin’s aircraft returning from Brazil. Nothing is yet clear about why Putin’s plane made that diversion from its planned path. The secretive Russians are immune to western criticisms of their actions and are used to being demonized by the west.

What is clear now is that this time this matter has turned personal. If history is anything to go by, the long term consequences for the western nations that participated in what is now widely believed to have been an attempted assassination of Vladmir Putin will not be pleasant or civil. The Ukrainian leader’s President Poroshenko and Prime Minister Arsenyi Yatsenyuk have a lot to account for now.

Former KGB station head in Delhi now turned commentator and Russian critic Vitaly Yurchenko (Ukrainian) is reported to have told a reporter at the New York Times last week that both Poroshenko and Yatsenyuk have sought assurances of protection from the US following the downing of MH 17. In short what he alluded to was their request for assurance of a place to flee to in the event they are implicated in an attempted assassination of Vladimir Putin. 

The Germans have washed their hands of the event an are paying lip service to sanctions against Russia. This he says is because Angela Merkel’s intelligence chief had already warned her of an impending disaster ahead. German intelligence had uncovered plans for a “black job” and identified the sources of that “black job” within the US embassy and their operatives in Bonn. It is what prompted the German response of identifying the CIA station chief in Bonn then expelling a number of US “diplomats” in the week prior to the shooting down of MH 17.

THE WEST AND UKRAINE OVERREACHING THEMSELVES

Having helped to set up an illegal regime in Kiev the west has now found itself with a battle on its hands it cannot contain lest it disrupt and weaken the new NATO states of the former Soviet Union that border the Ukraine. Poland in particular. There is no drunk compliant leader as Boris Yeltsin was signing away everything the US wanted to destabilize Russia with for a few million dollars.

There is no more a corrupt vain Sheverdnazy either for the west to rely on for their failures. They the CIA destroyed him according to a former CIA operative in the region. They were CIA funded NGO’s that entered parliament in Georgia and forced him to flee for his life. More importantly the bear, the vain CIA stooge Mikhail Gorbachev has been caged, humiliated, scorned and reduced to figure of public ridicule and contempt in the Russian Republic.

The west has to deal with a professional soldier in the Kremlin a man more than a match for the Hollywood cut out of himself the token African American Barack Obama. No choreographed Paul McCartney, Stevie Wonder props in the background. No Saddam Hussein or Gadaffi’s in the Kremlin for him to rattle. This Gremlin in the Kremlin bites and bites back hard. Obama is no strategist no soldier. he will be out of office in 18 months. Not Putin. he in for the long haul.

There is disquiet amongst the polish especially who realise the consequences of sabre rattling a Russian cage by the west without feet on the ground when the need arises. Radoslaw Sikorsky former Polish foreign minster said recently that their relationship with the US was worth nothing.

Only two weeks ago Angela Merkel the German Chancellor had the bitter experience of having to expel two very senior US diplomats accused of spying on her country and its government. In addition it was discovered that there was a nest of CIA spies working out of the US Embassy in Bonn. The US has been actively trying to destabilize its own friends in Europe for its own ends regardless of the consequences to these countries from their espionage there.

RON PAUL AND THE DANGERS OF THE US LOGIC ON RUSSIAN INVOLVEMENT IN MH 17

Drawing parallels between the potential for a Russian-made missile system’s connection to the attack of the passenger jet on Thursday over the restive Donetsk region of Ukraine and the capture of US-made weapons by Islamist insurgents in Iraq, US Senator Ron Paul pointed out that the missile’s potential source of manufacture was largely immaterial.

“That may well be true, but guess what, ISIS has a lot of American weapons,” said Paul. “We sent weapons into Syria to help the rebels and al-Qaida ends up getting it — it doesn’t mean that our American government and Obama deliberately wanted ISIS to get American weapons.”

“So who gets the weapons is a big difference between how they got them and what happened and what the motivations were,” Paul added. “So even if it was a Russian weapon — doesn’t mean a lot.”

Europe (and the US) has yet to feel the wrath of its good independent citizens and institutions fed up with US involvement and destabilization of their governments and political institutions. Worse still they are about to feel the heat of an angered Russian Federation determined to regain its position in Europe and the world under a nationalistic and determined Vladmir Putin.

“The rhetoric from the MH 17 disaster is so 1960’s 70’s and 80’s” according to a German foreign office official in Bonn. “It is unhelpful and quite frankly an insult to basic human intelligence. Don’t know where they get them from” he said referring to those who create these propaganda stories in the media.

There is yet much to be said and discovered from what really happened to MH 17. And the truth will as often is the case be stranger than the fiction we are now being subject to.

 

 

MH 17 HOW DOES THE WEST KNOW SO MUCH SO SOON?

Siberia Airlines Flight 1812 (2001) Now Malaysian Airlines MH 17 (2014)

Oleksandr Kuzmuk, pictured above, the Ukrainian Minister of Defense who resigned after the shooting down of Siberian Airlines Flight 1812.

WAS PUTIN THE INTENDED TARGET OF THE MISSILE ATTACK

Times of India one of many media organizations reports that there is speculation that Vladimir Putin’s aircraft may have been the intended target of the missile battery that brought down MH 17. Both planes are painted in similar colours and if visual contact was required to take out the target, the colours of a Malaysian Airlines aircraft are eerily and deceptively similar enough to look like Putin’s Illyushin IL 96 aircraft.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/

Whats interesting is that the Times of India once owned by Bennett Coleman is a very pro western paper with one of the largest if not the widest circulation of any publication in the English speaking world.

The claim or suggestion by the Times of India is no more a conspiracy theory than that being floated by US vice president Joe Biden and Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott about what and how MH 17 met its end.

Perhaps the Air India pilots who flew within visual range of the ill fated MH 17 could shed some light on what occurred. They were only 25 Kms behind MH 17.

ANOTHER UKRAINIAN SHOOTING OF A CIVILIAN AIRLINER? LEST WE FORGET

The precedent for the shooting of Malaysian Airlines MH 17 in the Ukraine is the shooting down in 2001 of a Russian built Tupolev passenger jet a TU 154 by Ukrainian Armed Forces missile batteries on October 4, 2001.

In that crash 64 Siberian Air passengers and 12 crew on board the ill fated aircraft en route from Novosibirsk to Tel Aviv were killed when the plane was shot down over the Black Sea by a Ukrainian missile. No reason was cited for the shooting down of the plane except for the speculation that it was a military exercise gone wrong. The victims were mainly Jews.

There was an outpouring of grief and the Ukrainians were described as anti Semites by various Jewish groups following this event (and for their history of supporting Hitler and their documented careless disregard for human life in world war 2). It did not help that at the time of the crash their denials over the shooting down of a civilian airliner were equally careless as it is with the crash of MH 17.

More notably the Ukrainian armed forces then too offered speculative reasons as to what happened attempting to blame others for the shooting down of the Air Siberia TU 154.

DENIALS THEN AS THEY ARE NOW

It took a while for the Ukraine to admit that it had in fact shot down the aircraft. And that too after considerable pressure was brought to bear on the Ukrainian leadership by Russian investigators.

Ukraine’s then-president, Leonid Kuchma, eventually conceded that the Ukrainian military was responsible for the shooting down of the Russian passenger jet.

The day of the shoot-down of the aircraft occurred at a time the Ukrainian military was conducting a massive exercise which involved shooting down 23 missiles at drones.

“Experts say that the radar-guided S-200, among the farthest-flying and most capable anti aircraft missiles in the arsenal of former Soviet nations (at the time), simply locked onto the Russian airliner after it raced past the destroyed drone some 20 miles off the Crimean coast,” the New York Times’ Michael Wines reported then.

Then President of the Ukraine Leonid Kuchma accepted the resignation of his Minister of Defense, Oleksandr Kuzmuk, following the admission that the military was culpable.

From 2003 to 2005, Ukraine paid a total of $15.9 million to families of victims following a deal with the government of Israel.

Oddly enough the Ukrainians today rush to play what they say (without independent verification) that they intercepted radio conversation between Russian backed separatists discussing the shooting down of an aircraft at the same time MH 17 went down.

The west likewise keen to demonize the Russians and to take the heat off  the Ukraine on one side whilst conveniently taking the attention off Israel’s butchering of Palestinians by Israel’s military on the other is playing up that smokescreen of Ukrainian “evidence” that Pro Russian separatists brought the aircraft down.

If it indeed was a Russian mistake then how different a mistake would it be to that of the US shooting down an Iranian Air civilian passenger aircraft in the late 1980’s? In that particular instance, the US claimed its radar could not distinguish between civilian and military aircraft. How criminally convenient. But the west bought that excuse till the Pan Am disaster over Lockerbie believed to be revenge for the downing of the Iranian passenger jet. But the US un willing to test the resolve of the Iranians if they went toe to toe over that incident chose Libya instead to pin the tail on for Lockerbie.

THE MYTH OF THE AUDIO INTERCEPT

The latest from the “audio intercept” as the Ukrainians claim to have in their possession is one which requires very close scrutiny for what it does not say rather than for what it purports to.

The Russians have one of the most sophisticated field radio systems for communication in a battle zone which is designed to hop frequencies and to avoid detection.

The Russian made anti aircraft radio or wire guided missile batteries (BUK) which the Ukrainians and the Americans say brought down  MH 17 is in the military inventories of both nations.

The BUK (s 300 or its predecessor S 200) is a Russian designed and built anti aircraft system often marketed to client states via Belorussia and the state arms corporation Rosoboronexport. To “brother states” like the Ukraine it is sold directly. Most former Soviet states have these missiles in their inventories.

It seems that social media is attributing many absurd claims about the crash of MH 17 to a pro Russian military commander.  And the US and Australia appear to be lending credibility to these absurd comments each time they appear in the  press.

IT WAS ” (THE MUSLIM) COSSACKS” AND THE GRU- GOOD GUYS BAD GUYS

The rush to blame Russia and the Cossacks (the ethnic Muslim Russians who live in the Ukraine supporting Russia) in the “intercepted radio messages” is suspect.  Being Muslims they the Cossacks are an easy target of hatred worldwide. The apocryphal so called radio message “audio intercept” released by the Ukraine does not support Russian  (or any other trained army) protocols for communication on the battlefront in the field.

The Russians and their allies do not contact the GRU directly just as the filed operatives of US backed militia in Iraq, Afghanistan or other battle zones do not contact the CIA and its director directly to report an event. It is highly improbable and would be unprecedented if it did occur.

NEW IDEAS NEW TACTICS- NO SUCH THING AS AN INNOCENT BYSTANDER

There was no such radio intercept of the downing of the 3 other aircraft supposedly downed by Pro Russians separatists in the Ukraine. Suddenly all sides change tactics radically with the Pro Russian separatists speaking to the head of the GRU Igor Sergun and a Russian Major in the armed forces of the Russian Federation we are asked to believe by Holland and the US.

Then we have the paradigm shift in Ukrainian tactics of intercepting highly classified but uncoded open line communications between pro Russian separatists and Moscow.

What is tragic about this incident coming so close to the heels of the yet unsolved MH370 incident is that civilians are now more than ever coming to grips that there is no such thing as “innocent bystanders in a conflict”. That phrase coined by a Palestinian hijacker who hijacked a BOAC VC 10 aircraft in the early 1970’s told his passengers appears to have been prophetic indeed.

A LESSON FOR MAS AND THE MALAYSIAN GOVERNMENT

It is time the government of Malaysia and its national Airline learned how to deal with the world and the western media by engaging professional media consultants regardless of their race colour class or creed when dealing with such disasters.

There is nothing wrong in an investment in quality, impressive public speakers (without the fake US accents) personnel, trained, knowledgeable  and savvy when dealing with the international media.

As it stands the prime ministers own ability to impress is impaired following the MH 370 incident. The then acting minister Hishamuddin Onn although not incompetent was short of what the media had expected. There is a special skill required to deal with a media organizations and agencies run by sensationalists ready and waiting to bait an ill prepared minister or other official in such situations. And that damage from not being prepared in such situations may be irreversible.

There is an art and a skill not present within the existing Malaysian media scrum. Neither is it present in Malaysia’s government apparatus capable of dealing with such a situation. And that’s a disaster in itself.

Government needs spokespersons who are skilled. People who are informed, with a legal background, international current affairs specialists who are forensic, articulate and possessed of people and crisis management skills sufficient for them to be able to interact amiably with the diverse and often hostile international media that throng to KL each time something like this occurs.

The Staccato Malaysian accent is horrible and for most of the time not understood. With punctuation and expressions all misplaced in what should otherwise be a short and sharp response is often dragged on, disabled by the accent, the diction, mispronounced words and inappropriate analogies.

It is best that Malaysia give the media a plausible explanation of events than for them to make up their own minds and lend their own interpretations in frustration from dealing with incompetent spokespersons.

Such a situation always ends up causing untold damage to a nation that has gained so much in a short time and has so much to lose in a shorter time by the poor handling of these events.