Saturday, December 29, 2012

Ong Tee Kiat : Will He Or Won't He?

It was a privilege to attend a closed door meeting with MCA president, Datuk Seri Chua Soi Lek.

Being about 15 minutes late in what I would describe as a Q and A session, what was asked and answered of the MCA president before I arrived, obviously I have no knowledge.

That said, I will agree with most of what was written by blogger OutSyed The Box in his article, "Morning Tea With Dr Chua Soi Lek" is a fair account of matters elaborated.

My personal opinion and first hand impression of Datuk Seri Chua is, a passionate politician with sincere concerns for his party and country for the impending general elections. Datuk Seri Chua is combatively confident of an improved showing by both the party and the coalition despite the many challenges faced by and as MCA party president.

The subject of my article, however, is that The Malaysian Insider had picked up OutSyed The Box'es article and chose to focus more on ex-party president, Datuk Seri Ong Tee Keat, with "Tee Keat may jump ship with hung Parliament, Soi Lek claims".

Being a known opposition leaning online news portal, it came as no surprise TMI would play up the issue of Datuk Seri Chua's opinion of Datuk Seri Ong. Especially so on the subject the MP for Pandan jumping ship in the event of a hung parliament, rather than the issues raised by Datuk Seri Chua that needed to be addressed for a more convicing BN victory.

What I clearly remember and can say for sure is that the issue of whether Datuk Seri Ong would jump ship was by way of a rhetoric question, with Datuk Seri Chua asking those present - would he or wouldn't he jump ship if BN were to find itself in that particular situation.

All I can definitely say is that no one answered but most of us had broad smile as an answer.

I cannot speak for the rest but I will say mine was in the affirmative.

That TMI chose to focus on Datuk Seri Ong and so will I, to provide reasons why I believe Ong is capable of deserting MCA for more fertile ground in the event of a close election result.

Many, as I would, recall that it was none other than Datuk Seri Ong who threatened to leave Barisan Nasional.

While Datuk Seri Chua saw the threat as nothing more than a party election ploy during a contentious period of the MCA, Ong took the threat so far as to put a poll on his website asking if the party should pull out of the Barisan Nasional.

I saw this as a person who was willing to severe ties with a senior partner of a coalition with the strongest of historical ties, a tie that resulted in the independence of our nation, more for personal gain and nothing else.

Those were tumultuous times in the MCA, which Chua Soi Lek would come out from the political wilderness to become MCA president, beating two former presidents Tee Kiat and Ka Ting in the MCA presidential election.

Tee Kiat's selfish attribute is further supported when he is on record to unequivocally state he would stand as an independent candidate or set up a new party in the event that he should be dropped from contesting in the next general election. Although Ong denied he would not be joining Pakatan Rakyat, any political observer worth his salt will tell you such an action would benefit the opposition in split votes. More detrimental to the BN being the incumbent party holding the seat.

Will He Or Won't He?

Ong was alleged to have had meetings with Teresa Kok and Anwar Ibrahim to switch over to the opposition.

But most importantly, although jumping ship is an opinion expressed by MCA party president Datuk Seri Chua, that ex-party president Datuk Seri Ong has not refuted this, is close to an admission of a fact.

Friday, December 28, 2012

So Who is Raising the "Allah" Issue Now?

So who is raising the "Allah" issue now? Desperate DAP Penang Chief Minister, Lim Guan Eng, that's who.

This is to be expected as the DAP is finding itself in all sorts of situations such as not a single Malay being voted in the DAP CEC elections. Perak DAP leader and Christian, Ngeh Koo Ham or Datuk Ngeh to be exact, getting into big business with the Kelantan state government.

The DAP is now raising the issue because their fraudulent image and Pakatan Rakyat "common policy framework" is tearing at the seams, exposed as nothing more than a covenient lie.

That is why Lim Guan Eng is raising the "Allah" issue. To bring about Christian scorn against a BN government. A desperate attempt to resurrect lost Christian support after the recent salon and indecent arrest incidents in Kelantan which raised non-Muslims fear of PAS' Hudud.

But the tactic has blown directly in his face with PAS urging the "Use ‘Tuhan’ instead of ‘Allah’ in Malay Bible".

It is a total contradiction when Pakatan Rakyat de facto, but now not so sure as PM, leader Anwar Ibrahim carried a Harakah Daily post,
"After a special meeting to discuss a recent controversial court ruling, PAS has decided to reiterate its stand that the use of the word Allah by Christians was not against Islam and in accordance with the federal constitution which guarantees religious freedom.

“As a responsible Islamic body, PAS is ready to explain this issue to all parties in order to ensure a harmonious environment that is based on the principles of fairness such as is guaranteed in the constitution and by Islam itself,” PAS president Abdul Hadi Awang said in a statement issued after a three-hour long discussion.

He also called on all parties not to politicise the matter as this could threaten the peace among the different religious groups in the country"
So who is raising the "Allah" issue now?

Smartphone Rebate : Why the Fuss?

In the wake of criticism, unjustified I must add, the MCMC came out with a press release reported by Bernama, "SMARTPHONE RM200 REBATE FOR YOUTH AND RM1,000 GRANT FOR ONLINE ENTREPRENEURS TO START ON 1 JANUARY 2013: MCMC".

All if not most of the criticism levelled at a government initiative is addressed by MCMC.

It is always sad when efforts by the government for a desired goal, in this case to broaden the internet reach specifically among the youth, are seen in a skeptical and suspicious manner.

It is alright if criticisms are to improve the mechanisms in implementation. These are welcome.

But in finding fault for a political angle, anyone can throw all sorts of unwarranted insinuations, just to slate the goverment.

Malaysiakini, as is always the case as a frontline opposition mouthpiece, does just that, "RM200 rebate only for smartphones below RM500" and "Unhappy netizens mock RM500 smartphone criteria"

Salient points in the government initiative can be summed up by excerpts in the MCMC press release,
"Whilst the Youth Communication Package is a scheme implemented by the celcos, this initiative, coordinated by the Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission (MCMC), was announced by the Prime Minister as part of Budget 2013 tabled in September this year to encourage more youths especially those in rural areas to enjoy the nation’s broadband facilities.

The idea is to spread the incentive across to those who do not yet use smartphones. We really want to help those who cannot afford to change phones to upgrade from their old 2G phones to a basic 3G smartphone. Those who can afford phones priced above RM500 are really not in the intended category or target market.
If is that is not clear enough then go ahead and criticise and politicise, for no good reason, taking an opposition stance and point of view.

Digital News Asia came out with "The smartphone rebate just got stupider" with reasons just as stupid as the title,
"I am hoping that this is a mistake, because as it stands now, if you’re between 21 and 30 years old, and you just got a job that pays you that much – and your parents are well-heeled executives earning 10 times your salary – not to worry, you poor thing. You too qualify.

And since that RM500 is just pocket money to you, you can beat out that poor guy whose entire family earns less than RM3,000 per month – if only because by the time he saves up the money to buy the device and subscribe to a data plan, it will be 2014. Or that RM300 million allocation would have run out"

What in heaven is the writer talking about?

Obviously, when "your parents are well-heeled" you would not give even a second glance to any smartphone below the RM2K bracket.

Only a greedy affluent household where "RM500 is just pocket money" will take advantage and abuse this opportunity otherwise meant for those targeted by the government and explained by MCMC.

The writer should not be so lazy and make statements like "Finding a smartphone priced at below RM500 (US$163) is going to be a feat in itself"

The same goes for comments coming out like those expressed in Malaysiakini. Don't be surprised if these commenters are those who have the very latest and priciest smartphones in the market.

Where pricing is concerned, smartphone models have been stated in the MCMC press release.

A simple google search on 3 models, of notable brand names, came out with the following.

Samsung Galaxy Y S5360 in Malaysia Price, Specs & Review


Entry level Sony Xperia tipo now available at RM499


Nokia Lumia 610 (8GB, Black, iPmart Warranty)


Surely as seen above, for "those who cannot afford to change phones to upgrade from their old 2G phones to a basic 3G smartphone especially those in rural areas to enjoy the nation’s broadband facilities", they will be a very, very happy lot indeed.

Thanks to the government.

Enuff said.

Thursday, December 20, 2012

PI Bala SD I : Do you Believe in Santa Clause?

This actually happened quite a few years ago.

A week before Christmas, in a desperate bid to address depressing sales, a cabal of major toy stores in the US, somehow manage to convince Santa Clause and announce in major newspapers, that Santa would no longer be delivering presents. The announcement, so the cabal thought, was to have an effect of parents rushing to toy stores all over the country, thereby creating a huge spike in toy sales.

What the cabal did not reckon with, however, were the kids.

Children all over the US could not believe that Santa would do such a dastardly deed. So it was, a group of resourceful kids somehow managed to get hold of Santa Clause to announce the very next day, also in major newspapers, that he was duped into making the previous announcement.

Shamed, Santa Clause exiled himself to the North Pole but duly continued his usual Christmas deliveries and all the children got their presents.

The dastardly deed of the cabal had failed.

End.

The way it was announced so dramatically, would have an effect, that the statutory declaration of PI Bala - SD I, was a major disclosure with serious implications, at the time.

Many, yours truly included, found the disclosure and the SD itself, to be highly incredulous and suspicious, what with and in the presence of Anwar Ibrahim.

PI Bala SD I, for all intents and purposes, is choronological. (http://anwaribrahimblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/07/bala_pi_stat_dec-1.pdf)

Here is some of PI Bala's flights of fancy and his testimony under oath in open court.

For this, I have included his testimony as reported within the appropriate section of the SD, with relevant emphasis.

"Private eye: Razak hired me"
SD I:

5. I was however re-employed by Abdul Razak Baginda on the 05-10-2006 as he had apparently received a harassing phone call from a Chinese man calling himself ASP Tan who had threatened him to pay his debts. I later found out this gentleman was in fact a private investigator called Ang who was employed by a Mongolian woman called Altantuya Shaaribuu.

Testimony:

Earlier, Balasubramaniam, a former police corporal, said Abdul Razak met him on Oct 6 or Oct 7 last year.
This testimony in June 2007, 8 and a half months after Altantuya was murdered but PI Bala is not sure of the date he met Razak Baginda. Yet, 2 years later he is precise on the date he was employed.

‘Razak did not ask me to kill her’
SD I:

Item (16) mentioning date "On the 11.10.2006.." up to (26) "On the 19.10.2006.."

Testimony:

Abdul Razak had mentioned the first three reasons in the presence of his family lawyer Dhiren Rene Norendra during a meeting with the private eye at Nagas restaurant in Brickfields on Oct 16.
There is no mention of this in Bala's SD.

‘Cops took woman away’
SD I:

28. Whist I was talking to Aminah, she informed me of the following :-

29. After talking to Aminah for about 15 minutes, a red proton aeroback arrived with a woman and two men. I now know the woman to be Lance Corporal Rohaniza and the men, Azilah Hadri and Sirul Azahar. They were all in plain clothes. Azilah walked towards me while the other two stayed in the car.

30. Azilah asked me whether the woman was Aminah and I said ‘Yes’

Testimony:

Elaborating on his encounter with Altantuya, Balasubramaniam said she started telling him “her sad story” until a policeman came in a red Proton Wira with two passengers - male and female.

The policeman came up to him and asked if he was “Bala” and if (referring to Altantuya) “this was the woman”.

33. After the 19.10.2006, I continued to work for Abdul Razak Baginda at his house in Damansara Heights from 7.00 p.m. to 8.00 a.m. the next morning, as he had been receiving threatening text messages from a woman called ‘Amy’ who was apparently ‘Aminah’s’ cousin in Mongolia.

Testimony:

On Oct 20, around 2pm to 3pm, the private investigator went to meet the analyst at his office in Jalan Ampang to collect his payment.

“After that, he settled the payment, wished me Happy Deepavali (which fell on Oct 21 last year) and asked me to continue my stakeout at his house every night until Oct 26,” he said.

Asked if he knew whether Abdul Razak had made a police report, Balasubramaniam replied that he did not know.

Subsequently, the private investigator testified that on either Oct 21 or Oct 22, Abdul Razak had asked to meet him in Pusat Bandar Damansara to make a police report.

He did not say why he wanted to lodge the report,” he said.

Earlier, Balasubramaniam identified Gal Orchir Uuriintuya and Namiraa Gerelmaa as the two other Mongolian women seen with Altantuya.

Gal Orchir is believed to be Altantuya's cousin while Namiraa was her friend.

The private investigator said the following day, Abdul Razak asked him to come over to his house because the two women and Altantuya’s private investigator named Ang were causing a commotion.
This would make it 22 or 23 October. Strangely, Bala cannot remember whether it was on Deepavali or the next day after Deepavali, when Razak Baginda asked to meet for the purpose of making a police report.
SD I:

34. On the night of the 20.10.2006, both of Aminah’s girl friends turned up at Abdul Razak Baginda’s house enquiring where Aminah was. I informed them she had been arrested the night before.

35. A couple of nights later, these two Mongolian girls, Mr. Ang and another Mongolian girl called ‘Amy’ turned up at Abdul Razak Baginda’s house looking for Aminah as they appeared to be convinced she was being held in the house.
That would make it 22 October which Bala was not sure when he testified.
SD I:

36. A commotion began so I called the police who arrived shortly thereafter in a patrol car. Another patrol car arrived a short while later in which was the investigating officer from the Dang Wangi Police Station who was in charge of the missing persons report lodged by one of the Mongolians girls, I believe was Amy.

37. I called Abdul Razak Baginda who was at home to inform him of the events taking place at his front gate. He then called DSP Musa Safri and called me back informing me that Musa Safri would be calling handphone and I was to pass the phone to the Inspector from Dang Wangi Police Station.

38. I then received a call on my handphone from Musa Safri and duly handed the phone to the Dang Wangi Inspector. The conversation lasted 3 – 4 minutes after which he told the girls to disperse and to go to see him the next day.

39. On or about the 24.10.2006, Abdul Razak Baginda instructed me to accompany him to the Brickfields police station as he had been advised to lodge a police report about the harassment he was receiving from these Mongolian girls.

40. Before this, Amy had sent me an SMS informing me she was going to Thailand to lodge a report with the Mongolian consulate there regarding Aminah’s disappearance. Apparently she had sent the same SMS to Abdul Razak Baginda. This is why he told me he had been advised to lodge a police report.
According to SD (39), it was "On or about the 24.10.2006, Abdul Razak Baginda instructed me to accompany him to the Brickfields police station as he had been advised to lodge a police report" after events from SD (35) to (38). Bala's testimony is that it was either 21 or 22 October that Razak Baginda wanted to make a police report.

Bala's testimony in court is therefore false because the police report Razak Baginda intended to make (on either 21 or 22 October) cannot be on account of "the night of the 20.10.2006, (when) both of Aminah’s girl friends turned up" at Razak Baginda's house, SD (34). This is because Bala's SD makes no mention of Razak Baginda intending to make a police report, between (34) and (35), only later in (39).

Bala also testified “He did not say why he wanted to lodge the report,” but in Bala's SD (39) and (40) above, he specifically gives the reason why.

‘Razak did not ask me to kill her’
SD I:

54.4 Emphasize the fact that having been a member of the Royal Malaysian Police Force for 17 years I am absolutely certain no police officer would shoot someone in the head and blow up their body without receiving specific instructions from their superiors first.

Testimony:

“I would have lodged a police report if anyone asked me to kill someone else,” he said.
So, PI Bala, a member of the Royal Malaysian Police Force for 17 years, is absolutely certain that "no police officer would shoot someone in the head and blow up their body without receiving specific instructions from their superiors first". But in the same breath says he "would have lodged a police report if anyone asked me to kill someone else".

So, here is a person who would make a police report if anyone asks him to kill someone, yet said nothing despite being absolutly certain, police officers were shooting people in the head and blowing them up, in all his 17 years in the police force.

The most telling testimony in court, that demolishes and leaves no doubt that PI Bala's SD is a figment of some other person or persons pervert imagination, is the following.

"PI tells of Altantuya’s fury"
SD I:

20. On the 14.10.2006, Aminah turned up at Abdul Razak Baginda’s house in Damansara Heights when I was not there. Abdul Razak Baginda called me on my handphone to inform me of this so I rushed back to his house. As I arrived, I noticed Aminah outside the front gates shouting “Razak, bastard, come out from the house”. I tried to calm her down but couldn’t so I called the police who arrived in 2 patrol cars. I explained the situation to the police, who took her away to the Brickfields police station.

21. I followed the patrol cars to Brickfields police station in a taxi. I called Abdul Razak Baginda and his lawyer Dirren to lodge a police report but they refused.

22. When I was at the Brickfields police station, Aminah’s own Private Investigator, one Mr. Ang arrived and we had a discussion. I was told to deliver a demand to Abdul Razak Baginda for USD$500,000.00 and 3 tickets to Mongolia, apparently as commission owed to Aminah from a deal in Paris.

23. As Aminah had calmed down at this stage, a policewoman at the Brickfields police station advised me to leave and settle the matter amicably.

24. I duly informed Abdul Razak Baginda of the demands Aminah had made and told him I was disappointed that no one wanted to back me up in lodging a police report. We had a long discussion about the situation when I expressed a desire to pull out of this assignment.

25. During this discussion and in an attempt to persuade me to continue my employment with him, Abdul Razak Baginda informed me that :-

Testimony:

On the night of Oct 17, he said, Altantuya went alone to Abdul Razak’s house and the political analyst called him to say that the woman was making a lot of noise outside.

“At that time, I was on my way back to Abdul Razak’s house from Hotel Malaya where Altantuya stayed.

“I was at the hotel to pay my workers their wages for helping to observe Altantuya’s movement,” he said.

He said upon reaching the house, he saw Altantuya causing a commotion there.

“She shouted, ‘Razak bastard, you come out! I want to speak to you’,” he said, adding that the woman was furious when she uttered the words.
This is where Bala's SD falls, like a house of cards, in all it's despicable and dirty purpose. He testified events as it happened on 17 October. Testimony that cannot be challenged or denied as it is corrobrated by another testimony.

"Altantuya demanded money, air tickets, says witness"
Testimony:

Ang said that Abdul Razak’s private eye, P. Balasubramaniam, had told him to stop Altantuya from lodging a police report after she was taken to the Brickfields police station from outside the analyst’s house on Oct 17.
Since SD (20) could not have taken place on 14 October, it is a fictitious and fabricated date. It is proof positive and by extension that everything else in SD(20) to SD (25.5) are also fictitious and fabrications, intended for a specific effect.

"Altantuya demanded money, air tickets, says witness"
Testimony:

Altantuya Shaariibuu had demanded US$500,000 (about RM1.85mil) and three air tickets to Mongolia from political analyst Abdul Razak Baginda as a condition not to lodge a police report against him.

Private investigator P.Subramaniam said Altantuya made the demands outside the enquiry room at the Brickfields police station on Oct 17 last year, after she was taken there following a ruckus she had made outside Abdul Razak's house earlier that evening.
PI Bala never mentions "apparently as commission" even if "apparently".

This in turn confirms PI Bala's SD I as shams of the highest order.
SD I:

28.3 That she was promised a sum of USD$500,000.00 as commission for assisting in a Submarine deal in Paris.

50. I have given evidence in the trial of Azilah, Sirul and Abdul Razak Baginda at the Shah Alam High Court. The prosecutor did not ask me any questions in respect of Aminah’s relationship with Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak or of the phone call I received from DSP Musa Safri, whom I believe was the ADC for Datuk Seri Najib Razak and/or his wife.
See how devious in that PI Bala only complains "The prosecutor did not ask me any questions in respect of Aminah’s relationship with Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak", which has been established to be a fabrication.

Be that as it may, Altantuya had revealed to Bala on the 19 October, that she was specifically "promised a sum of USD$500,000.00 as commission for assisting in a Submarine deal in Paris".

Bala complains that the prosecutor did not ask him about a "relationship" but surely when giving evedence in court, he could have revealed this disclosure by Altantuya about being "promised a sum of USD$500,000.00 as commission for assisting in a Submarine deal in Paris", which is no "sad story" and have the same devastating impact. Further proof that Bala's SD is nothing more than a fabricated instrument, in a most injurious fashion, to inflict maximum humiliation and damage for a specific effect.

Believing PI Bala's SD I is as good as believing in Santa Clause.

It also then follows that, immediately upon release of PI Bala's fake SD I, only a resourceful kiddie like Deepak Jaikishan would want to reverse what is obviously counterfeit, to enjoy some goodness or goodies.

As a favour, so it seems.

Deepak Jaikishan is also another Santa Clause.

If you ask me, Raja Petra Kamarudin knows more than what Deepak Jaikishan cares or dares to mention.

As I said, the script has changed, again and again, but the song remains the same.

On another note, if you had ever wondered why Altantuya went to Razak Baginda's house alone, read "PI on why Altantuya went to Razak’s house alone" and see if it makes any sense.

Or you can ask RPK.

Friday, December 14, 2012

Tony Pua's 4G-LTE Crash

Anyone or everyone having a handphone, smartphones and tablets will tell you the service presently provided by telcos, without any exception, leaves much to be desired.

Grouses such as bad internet connection, slow download speeds for smartphones and tablets (even laptops).

Dropped calls and unconnected calls being charged for handphones, smartphones and tablets.

The Star reported, "Hello! My call has dropped", a survey was carried out by the Union Network International-Malaysian Liaison Council (UNI-MLC) found more cellphone users are complaining about dropped calls.

The UNI-MLC president, Shafie BO Mammal, went on to say that the issue was not a new issue and questioned what the telecommunications companies were doing and that was time for telcos to upgrade their system.

Interestingly, as reported, an Information, Communications and Culture Ministry official, who declined to be named, said dropped calls could actually benefit local companies because they could make more money as consumers would have to make another call.

What it means is the public are losing money, a lot of money.

Just consider that in 2008 it was forecasted that the number of subscribers would be 28.5 million by 2010!

A more recent article, although not stating the exact numbers, says that recent government census puts mobile phone penetration rate in Malaysia as of Q3 2011 at a whopping 124.7%; that means there are more mobile phones than there are people in Malaysia.

And losing a lot money is a current issue.

Which brings us to opposition DAP MP Tony Pua.

The latest noise coming out from MP Tony Pua is the awarding 4G-LTE spectrum to eight companies but specifically lambasting Malaysian communications and multimedia regulator, Malaysian Communications And Multimedia Commission (MCMC) for awarding a "bigger" share of the spectrum to Puncak Semangat Sdn Bhd and auction farce.

This is typical opposition antics needing to find fault and raise issues even after questions, in all or most aspects, had been duly addressed and answered.

In this case, despite the fact that MCMC chairman, Datuk Mohamed Sharil Tarmizi, had given reasons and rationales behind the awarding as reported by The Sun, The Edge, online news portal Free Malaysia Today and Malysiakini.

Digital News Asia has a very comprehensive report on the 4G LTE award excercise. A chart from the report is reproduced to see the other 7 telco and total share of the spectrum.


From all the reports even a layman can understand the grounds underpining the award by MCMC to all the 8 telcos - spectrum balancing, improvement and optimisation of service, innovation, tehnological advancement, competition, infrastructure, network sharing and more.

The impression being given is that Puncak Semangat was given a large chunk of the spectrum without any basis or ulterior.

Mohamed Sharil openly justified the "bigger" share allocated to Puncak Semangat and had even given an assurance of recourse should the telco or telcos fail in their undertakings.

In fact The Edge reported the MCMC having fined telcos, such as YTL E-Solutions Bhd and Redtone International Bhd, for reasons of failures and compliance.

If Tony Pua questions even after questions have been answered, one is also able rebut his rhetorics.

For example in the matter of auctions it is not all hunky dory. In Thailand, "Graftbusters to investigate NBTC over 3G auction" and India, "2G spectrum auction flops; less than Rs. 10K crore bids received" or even in the UK -"The 4G windfall has long been expected to raise considerably less then 3G as carriers complained they over-paid for 3G frequencies, and have had a tougher time making money from mobile data."

Given the level of vilification by Tony Pua of MCMC in the award excercise, and there having been no complaints from the other established telcos, the conclusion is it is another empty opposition anti-government propaganda.

Tony should not be so cantankerous about the 4G-LTE which will be beneficial in and for the future.

Rather, DAP Tony Pua would be more appreciated if he made a bigger noise against those telco giants, who are presently seen to be milking the public of their hard earned money by the millions of ringgit, as a lesson and deterrent for that future.

The thankful public might even call him, "God".

Wednesday, December 12, 2012

Tony Fernandes' Early Christmas

Could not help writing this post reading FMT's "Fernandes admits QPR disaster" and twit his dysfunctional tweets.

Holiday in Malaysia? See, you can fool all of the people some of the time.

Club in trouble and he goes shopping and it's not for players. It's more appopriate for his New Year tweets.

Tony, Tony quite contrary. I don't think QPR supporters share his high spirits and take kindly his happy, happy call at this point in time. Or endear them.

All Tony wants is 3 points but this week ain't Christmas.

Tony has more faith in Santa than good ole Harry.

Hehehehe

Tuesday, December 11, 2012

Jet Engines Stolen Again and Robert Phang

Yes it's true.

Just as this happened over here in the past, jet engines have been stolen in of all places and you will never believe it, Israel. Apparently more than once as reported, "F-16 engines stolen from Israeli base".

DAP patriarch, Lim Kit Siang had made it such an issue. That fellow, Anwar Ibrahim, had even called for an RCI.

To support the security of Israel, Anwar should also strongly suggest an Israeli commission of inquiry.

In the same retro vein, a slew of sociopolitical issues have come to the fore with former Inspector-general of police, Tan Sri Musa Hassan, now taking centre stage.

The other personality resurrected from the past, that is now most likely to be jet "setting", is Tan Sri Robert Phang.

Blogger Another Brick In The Wall had posted "Exposed: MACC adviser bribed a Ministry Sec-Gen!" and a follow-up, "More from where it came from"

ABITW is more than vindicated when it was reported Tan Sri " Musa reveals more, implicates businessman".

Tan Sri Musa had openly implicated Phang to be complicit in shady activities within the police force.

No one gives insights into personalities like Phang and Ramli Yusuff better than the Voice at ABITW.

Rounding up, Datuk Rocky's "Robert Phang's Statutory Declaration", is a necessary read.

Thursday, December 6, 2012

Deepak Jaikishan : Prequel and Sequel

When adressing Mr Deepak Jaikishan so called "explosive" disclosures, we need to recognise actors of both SD I and II, for an in-depth perspective of a very dark and sinister show.

All the actors are connected, one way or another, and could lead one to arrive at another point of view or possibilities, prequels and sequels.

The main actor is of course, P. Balasubramaniam, famously or infamously known as, PI Bala.

Recall,
Raja Petra does his usual spin of mixing truth and fiction in order to make a story sound interesting. Unfortunately for him, lies remain lies.

He says I invited him to a meeting at lawyer M Puravalen’s house on 2nd July 2008 – this is the day before the press conference at PKR Headquarters where P. Balasubramaniam’s (“Bala” ) 1st SD made on 1st July 2008 was made public.

RPK was invited to that meeting in Puravalen’s house the day before the 3nd July press conference to be given a pre-view of Bala’s 1st SD to put up on his blog and write about it which he did. - Press statement by PKR MP Sivarasa Rasiah
This was in response to Raja Petra Kamarudin's, better known as RPK, "The day I met P. Balasubramaniam".

Also, PKR MP Sivarasa was deigned to reply, by way of a press statement, because on the day RPK met PI Bala, RPK made these claims,
"Sivarasa coached Bala on what he should and should not say at the press conference. Bala was told to avoid answering too many questions from the media and in the event they ask him difficult questions then the lawyers would take those questions. They were worried that Bala might say something wrong and contradict himself."
From the above, we have two others in the co-starring role, Sivarasa and Raja Petra Kamarudin, and we get a bigger picture of who the others are.

So, fact or fiction?

The date and title of the following is significant.

On 4 February 2010 RPK headlined "Nasir Safar, the ‘mystery man’ the day Altantuya died" and wrote "Yes, that man in the blue Proton Saga was Nasir Safar."

Three days later, on 7 February 2010, The Malaysian Insider headlined, "PI Bala: Razak Baginda is innocent" reported,
"He has also identified another man who drove past Abdul Razak’s house on the night of the murder as Datuk Nasir Safar an aide of Najib’s who has since been sacked after he made derogatory remarks about Malaysian Chinese and Indians in a public event."
The same TMI article was posted the same day in RPK's Malaysia Today. A picture is worth a thousand words when you compare the pic at TMI and the pic in Malaysia Today.

Get the picture? Never mind.

When PI Bala made his u-turn, the Star reported "I believe he was coerced, says lawyer Americk" and to me what was reported is significant,
"He said he had first met Balasubramaniam two months ago at a restaurant where he was asked by the latter to help draft a formal document on the Altantuya case."
Corroborated from a Question and Answer article at RPK's Malaysia Today,
Q 53. Did they record your statement?

A. Yes. They questioned me for about 6 hours. They did not seem to be interested in my 2nd statutory declaration and concentrated their questions in relation to my 1st statutory declaration.

They wanted to know who was involved in it and how I was led into making it.

I explained everything to them from the time I met my lawyer Americk Sidhu in a pub one night with ASP Suresh, M. Puravalen and Sivarasah Rasiah in April or May 2008 up to the time of my first press release.

ACP Muniandy was the officer asking all the questions while his colleague recorded my statement.
More actors and their co-starring roles.

PI Bala in his testimony in the Altantuya trial, excerpted from the Star report,
"After Altantuya’s visit to Abdul Razak’s house, Balasubramaniam met up with the analyst and his lawyer Dhiren Rene Norendra at the Starbucks cafe in Pusat Bandar Damansara" and "He said he, Abdul Razak, Dhiren and one ASP Suresh were supposed to meet up to discuss whether to report the Mongolian women’s presence outside the analyst’s house to the Immigration Department and have them deported."
Another important supporting actor.

When RPK first disclosed Nasir Safar as the mystery man, he also took the opportunity to publish the SD I.

Bala's declaration :
21. I followed the patrol cars to Brickfields police station in a taxi. I called Abdul Razak Baginda and his lawyer Dirren to lodge a police report but they refused.

44. I stopped working for Abdul Razak Baginda on the 26.10.2006 as this was the day he left for Hong Kong on his own.

51. On the day Abdul Razak Baginda was arrested, I was with him at his lawyers office at 6.30 a.m. Abdul Razak Baginda informed us that he had sent Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak an SMS the evening before as he refused to believe he was to be arrested, but had not received a response.

53. I have been made to understand that Abdul Razak Baginda was arrested the same morning at his office in the Bangunan Getah Asli, Jalan Ampang.
From what Bala declared in that dirty SD I and reports, the following can be established :

1. It had taken 2 to 3 months to prepare SD I.

2. PI Bala had stopped working for Razak Baginda on 26 October 2006.

3. PI Bala was acquainted with Razak Baginda's lawyer, Dhiren Rene Norendra.

4. In fact, PI Bala, by his own admission, had been to Dhiren Rene Norendra's office on the day that Razak Baginda was arrested.

I find it odd that PI Bala would misspell lawyer Dhiren's name as "Dirren" having being acquainted and being at the said lawyer's office. After taking up to 3 months to prepare the SD I with the help of lawyers, and other names mentioned in SD I spelled for the most part, accurately, Dhiren would have been spelled Dhiren. More so when you consider spellings like Altantuya Shaaribuu.

Just stating having called "Razak Baginda and his lawyer" would have sufficed. Naming the lawyer meant it was important, for relevance, to include the name. Surely, therefore, a correct spelling of the name of the lawyer could not have escaped PI Bala or his lawyer(s) who helped draft SD I.

PI Bala says that he stopped working for Razak Baginda on 26 October 2006. Later declaring being at Dhiren's office together with Razak Baginda on the day Razak was arrested, is therefore a lie.

Razak Baginda was arrested on 8 November 2006.

How could PI Bala have been with Razak Baginda at Dhiren's office on the 8 November 2006 when he had quit working for Razak Baginda earlier in October 2006?

We now come full circle to Mr Deepthroat Jaikishan's "disclosures" which had been earlier "disclosed" when Deepthroat was whacked by RPK.

As was to be expected, the greatest actor of all time, Anwar Ibrahim, was immediately suspected to be the man behind the scenes.

As was to be expected, the greatest actor for all times, Anwar Ibrahim, came out to deny any involvement.

The Malaysian Insider,"Anwar: Pakatan not behind Deepak, Musa allegations", reported,
“What has that got to do with us? I mean he wanted to defend himself to adduce evidence that would support his case..what has that got to do with me?”
Well, Free Malaysia Today reported that a ‘Video proves Anwar is behind Deepak’, with a supporting actress thrown in to boot.

How can anyone not suspect the greatest actor? Guess who is now defending Mr Deepthroat?

RPK carried this report, "Lawyer flays Deepak for land scam claim",
Earlier during the hearing, High Court Judge Datin Zabariah Mohd Yusof instructed Deepak to refrain from mentioning the political positions held by Raja Ropiaah as the details were not relevant but Deepak pleaded that it was relevant to show "political conspiracy".
See the picture? And does it sound familiar?

Free Malaysia Today also reports and quotes Sivarasa defending Mr Deepthroat, "PKR leaders deny masterminding exposé",
“But I made the decision to take up Deepak’s case, just as I act for all my other clients. There is no way I coached him on anything."
Sounds familiar?

One could not have asked for a better script, with so many twists and turns, with so many actors in so many scenes and an actress in a cameo role.

Then again, one should ask, who exactly it is that conceived and executed these scripts? From day one. From PI Bala to Deepak and to Deepak again.

Think hard and carefully before arriving at any answer.

A clue, perhaps - if you wanted to pay off somebody, would you pay by (a series of) cheques or would you bank cash into the fellow's account?

Tuesday, December 4, 2012

Deepak Jaikishan's Silence of the Lambs

From Free Malaysia Today, "Deepak: I will not be silenced",
"Deepak Jaikishan claimed that there was an attempt by a high ranking Umno man to ‘silence’ him following the various the interviews the carpet trader has given in the past few days."
FMT reported Mr Deepak receiving a call from a “senior Umno supreme council member” asking him to meet at the Grand Dorsett Hotel in Subang. The man, who he refused to name, seemed aggressive.

So, the Deepak fellow brought along some extra protection for his safety. Just in case, I guess, even though it was at a very public place, a hotel.

The meeting was also attended by a few pro-government bloggers and I was one of them, just kidding.

Well, Deepak said he was told not to make any more noise, at least until the end of the Umno AGM.

Well, I don't know what difference it would make, making noise before or after the UMNO General Assembly. Do you?

Didn't he drop the "bomb" before the UMNO assembly. Never mind.

FMT also reported, Mr Deepak, tongue in cheek,
"I told them you cannot stop me from having press conferences… even if I have to go to the Istana Negara, I would do it. If they really force me… I would go in front of the palace and petition the King lah,”
That he said, not I, but when asked to reveal the names of the individuals he met, Mr Deepak reportedly said,
”Oh, then I’ll be in serious trouble. Then it would be messy.”
So I'm guessing he didn't even though, as reported, he also said,
"I’m not afraid. If I am afraid I wouldn’t have come this far."
And coming this far, you wonder why stop.

FMT noted Deepak said he agreed to “give due respect” and cancelled all his media interviews he had lined up for Saturday.

Yes, Mr Deepak's fears were unfounded, he originally thought he would be in danger but when he met the Umno man, “they were very civil”.

When asked if he was offered anything for his cooperation, Deepak said they offered him nothing to stop making noise. The Deepak fellow said making noise is something he will not negotiate.

So the moral of my story is - there no need for aggression, enticements and and the like.

When you need something, anything, just be civil.

Due respect will be given and what you ask for will be given.

Everyone has nightmares.

Mr Deepak cannot be any exception but I am very sure Mr Deepak had a good night sleep that night.

No lambs bleating nightmares, for sure.

Essential reading

Master blogger Another Brick In The Wall has a lowdown on the fellow, "Troubled and desperate ... Deepak could do anything"



Saturday, December 1, 2012

The Pattern of Lies and Deceit

At the tail end of my previous post, "Deepak Jaikishan : A Pattern of Lies and Deception", a question and my observation, "Me, I think it's clever".

In Mr Deepak Jaikishan's attempt to justify his lies, instances I had posted, there is a fatal contradiction. In the Malaysiakini report he said,
Because there was a concentrated effort. There were two factions here - you had Bala sitting down with (opposition leader) Anwar (Ibrahim) and you had another faction that didn't want the people named in the first SD to come to power.
The key words being "another faction" and "didn't want".

By his account, that sentence must only be taken to mean there are or were two factions, within the group who were responsible in PI Bala SD I - one faction belonging to Anwar Ibrahim and another faction unnamed.

But both had the same objective.

Both factions "didn't want the people named in the first SD to come to power".

It is further supported in his same breath,
"They were determined, although they were from different sides, to work together to achieve this..."
The key words here now is "They" and "to work together to achieve this".

The same objective of two factions within a same group, working together, because "they" were determined and "didn't want the people named in the first SD to come to power".

Deepak went to great length to disclose two factions among those responsible for SD I who had an "absolute concern", to the question - Why would the SD trigger such a response?
"... and both (factions within a same group, working together. My emphasis) had the power to do so. Hence the absolute concern."
A "response", made to appear on the face of it, by those who saw SD I as a threat. That is, those now allegedly "responsible" for SD II.

Thus, the next question is manifestly disconnected - And those who pushed the second SD were those wanting to ensure Najib becomes prime minister?

In the context of Deepak's answer to the previous question, this question subsequently elicited the desired answer, and Deepak's affirmative but furtive reply is a distinct contradiction because where before it was "didn't want the people named in the first SD to come to power" it is now to "want the people named in the first SD to come to power",
"Yes. I think the only reason I got involved in helping with the second SD was to protect the interests of Najib. There is no other logical reason, is there?"
No other logical reason?

Well, for one, how about creating suspicion.

Another, plenty to gain and nothing further to lose.

Not in the way you are being led to believe, by a sleazy and calculated initiative of classic deceptions in epic proportions, from day one.

The lyrics are changing but the song remains the same.

Clever indeed.

Friday, November 30, 2012

Deepak Jaikishan : A Pattern of Lies and Deception

From reports and blogs, some excerpts of personalities involved in the PI Bala SD I and II affair.
Lawyer M. Puravalen, who was Abdul Razak Baginda's first lawyer in the Altantuya Shaariibuu murder case two years ago, has refused to divulge to the police today the details of "privileged information" shared with him by his client.

The 54-year-old lawyer said such information when made in full confidentiality was a fundamental and sacrosanct aspect of the lawyer-client relationship. - As posted on the Malaysian Bar website.
That was 3 years ago, 18 July 2008.

Fast forward, 14 August 2012 a press statement by Sivarasa Rasiah, PKR Member of Parliament for Subang,
RPK was invited to that meeting in Puravalen’s house the day before the 3nd July press conference to be given a pre-view of Bala’s 1st SD to put up on his blog and write about it which he did.
I just cannot reconcile the above two quotes. For anyone who understands what Bala SD I was all about, it raises questions.

For example, how could Mr Puravalen house a meeting related to a statutory declaration which had (at the time) significant references to his former client and not risk breaching "privileged information" of the lawyer-client relationship?

Was it judicious for Mr Puravalen to be involved, in any way, with a statutory declaration that could, one way or another, be seen as damaging to his former client?

Anyway back the Deepak fellow.

Bear in mind, of course, we do not know to whom or what the Deepak fellow is referring to, as he is riddling us this and that.

These are for those are frothing at the mouth and think whom and what the fellow is referring to.

For starters.

Then,
Deepak Jaikishan, the carpet dealer mentioned numerous times by blogger Raja Petra Kamaruddin, said Rosmah "is a good person, if you know her personally".
Now,
“I had no business being there, I am a businessman. I regret helping a friend whom I thought was true... I am not supposed to be involved in this James Bond movie."
Then,
He also rubbished the website’s claims that he had played a key role in silencing private eye P. Balasubramaniam in the 2006 sex-murder scandal of Mongolian model Altantuya Shaariibuu; and in Opposition Leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim’s ongoing sodomy trial.(sic)
Now,
“It was damage control to stop the problem... I was tasked - don’t ask who tasked me - with getting him to agree to sign another SD, not because of the (first) SD itself but because of the repercussions that will happen the next day if that (first) SD was not reversed,” he said.
I see a distinct stratagem here and the personalities involved in the PI Bala saga are interconnected.

Support first and later, in the familiar words for Raja Petra Kamarudin, whack.

And whack first and later, support.

RPK prints all over.

"I would have better use for the millions of ringgit that I would have needed to do that, which I don’t have in the first place" - Sivarasa Rasiah
Mull on that for now.

By the way, what do you make of the following?

Because there was a concentrated effort. There were two factions here - you had Bala sitting down with (opposition leader) Anwar (Ibrahim) and you had another faction that didn't want the people named in the first SD to come to power.

They were determined, although they were from different sides, to work together to achieve this and both had the power to do so. Hence the absolute concern.

Me, I think it's clever.

Addendum

Altantuya murder: 'I told Pak Lah - Najib not involved'
Musa, who was the police chief, said he personally briefed Abdullah on the allegations surrounding then deputy prime minister Najib Abdul Razak in the scandal.

"I briefed him. I said those involved were Abdul Razak Baginda and two police officers (who have since been convicted for the murder).

"Then, he asked if Najib was involved and I said 'no'. The investigations showed that Najib was not involved. That was what I told him," Musa said in an exclusive interview with Malaysiakini last week.

He also described claims that Najib's wife Rosmah Mansor was present at the murder site as untrue.

"There was no involvement, even the military was not involved in this. The only ones who did it (the murder) were the two police officers," Musa said.

He added that the briefing was given to Abdullah after police concluded their investigations and decided in early 2007 to charge Abdul Razak and the two police officers with the murder of Altantuya

Edited 1 December

Monday, November 26, 2012

Scorpene Sub in Singapore

So that we know,

according to a Looney Malaysiakini report, "French lawyers' Scorpene briefing moved to S'pore",
Malaysia has not provided the duo with an assurance of security during their intended briefing for MPs, explains PKR’s Sivarasa Rasiah.
And "Taklimat kes Scorpene ke Singapura" from Free Malaysia Today,

as at 6.03 pm can SUARAM say, are the reports refering to SUARAM lawyer's or are they now PKR's lawyers, as SUARAM's website makes no mention of any such briefing.



Well Done Green March Anti-Lynas Protest

Size matters.

The Sun has "10,000 join hands to protest against Lynas" and Malaysiakini affiliate CJMY had "Wong Tack @ Dataran Merdeka" speaking to a 20,000 crowd.

So, well done to Wong Tack as well.

But, anyone who has an understanding of current Malaysian politics and the present day protest nature of certain segments, will tell you underpining the size of the anti-Lynas protest or any protest is, support of opposition political parties.

Political online social networking being what it is, an indespensible tool for both the ruling and in this case the opposition parties, would had made the anti-Lynas protest to assume seemingly wide support.

The usual suspects and pictures tell the story.

Sitting in,


With the bosses wife,


With the bosses daughter, political rookie under fire going undercover,


Under cover of tight security protection,


The protest was peaceful with The Sun reporting police presence was light, where only about 100 general duty police barricaded the perimeter of the square itself, and there was no light strike force unit (LSF) nor federal reserve units (FRU) in sight.

Peaceful, despite the fact the presence of another usual suspect,


The Malaysia Insider reported Anwar Ibrahim PKR de facto chief proceeded to the makeshift podium — the back of a parked lorry — before launching into a short but fiery speech flaying Barisan Nasional (BN) for allegedly putting their greed above the interests of the people.

Peaceful, fortunately, because there were no hidden hand signals,


in which the protest would have ended up like this,


Therefore, if size were to be the measure of support for anti-Lynas and inspite the endorsement of the opposition and presence of their party heavyweights, then the only conclusion anyone will arrive at is, it's a total embarrasment.

What those who partook in the protest, deliberately or innocently, do not know and the opposition would not want you to know, is that the Malaysian government had invited the International Atomic Energy Agency, IAEA, with a "request to organise an independent expert review of the radiation safety aspects of rare earths processing facility currently under construction in Malaysia, a part of the Advanced Materials Project being developed by the Lynas Corporation Limited."

The IAEA's "Report of the International Review Mission on the Radiation Safety Aspects of a Proposed Rare Earths Processing Facility (the Lynas Project)" and recommendations is here.

It is evidently clear, the government had been and is being most responsible for the safety of everyone first and foremost, in as far as the Lynas is concerned, and in the process derive the economical benefits that the project will generate in due time.

It would not be difficult for parties outside the government to establish any kind of watchdog, NGO if you like, to work with the government to ensure and meet the recommendations of the IAEA.

Yet, interested parties have gone to the courts, and not satisfied, now take it to the streets.

This is what the opposition parties want, with support diminishing by the day, to further their waning political agenda.

Well done, Wong Tack and Green March for gratefully allowing the opposition parties to exploit another issue or non-issue, again.

Well done, for being another embarassment to this country we all love.

Blogger note:

Genuine concerns for human life and safety will alway be welcome. The life and safety of citizens must never be compromised for whatever benefit.

Additional reading on Lynas here and here.

Saturday, November 24, 2012

Freedom of Religion : Nurul Izzah's Blunder (Part 2)

Continuing from Part 1

Freedom of Religion

If readers, especially interested Catholics, had read the article "The Audacity of Power: President Obama Vs. The Catholic Church" part 1, you will understand that the author is articulating President Barack Obama is ignoring the US First Amendment to the Constitution: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof” (emphasis added) for political capital.

It revolves around Health and Human Services rulings of the Obama administration that would be effectively bar the Catholic church in the US to practise, what the Church has long held sinful — abortion via the morning after pill, sterilization and contraceptives and when religious beliefs conflict with government decrees, religion must yield.

Obama, to energize his political base, positioned his Administration as the defender of “women’s health” for the Presidential campaign by government decrees granted to women which ran counter unalienable right to act in accordance with religious beliefs and conscience, overturn the First Amendment, and tramples the nation’s founding principles as announced in the Declaration of Independence.

Recall that important info on Obama winning by a slim margin? Juxtapose to the above, Obama would probably not have been re-elected had it not been for the women votes.

Read "By the numbers: Women voters", The Five Reasons Why Romney Lost", "Minorities, Youth, and Women to Obama: You Owe Us" and the "Vatican reminds Obama of differences on healthcare, abortion".

Hence, there is NO true or absolute Freedom of Religion, even in the greatest democracy in the world, when political interest supercedes religious interest.

(Next and final part - Nurul Izzah's Blunder)

A Word of Thanks to Free Malaysia Today Updated

In response to a commenter, an update of the letter from Victor Lim, "Who is more dangerous, PAS or Umno?"

In the matter that this another Lim, exacerbates, I dare say on a subject he is ignorant or has limited understanding, Hudud.

All I will say is, I am in total agreement that Hudud, if or when implemented, will (have to) be applied to all. For all intent and purposes, it would be illogical otherwise.

That said, for all his bluster, he cannot be so ignorant to "Kelantan’s gender segregation rules affect non-Muslim businesses" and numerous other gender-segregation controversies, which makes him more than likely an impressive idiot.

Therefore, the answer to his question is who is more dangerous - PAS, first.

Second, Victor Lim.

Friday, November 23, 2012

A Word of Thanks to Free Malaysia Today

THANKS

As I said there is a limit to freedom of speech and expression.

Everyone is entitled to his views and opinions.

We all respect that.

But there must be a limit to preserve all that is good in Malaysia in everything we do.

Thursday, November 22, 2012

Demand to Free Malaysia Today

There are limits to freedom of speech and expression.

I call on Free Malaysia Today to immediately remove your latest publication of a letter from a this despicable person who goes by the name of Victor Lim.

Nothing Better To Do

That late "great" defender of human rights defender, SUARAM, has an urgent alert "KAMPUNG SEMANGAT RESIDENTS FACING THREAT. 6 INJURED AND ARRESTED"

Mull on that headline a bit longer.

Now the same incident as reported by the Malaysiakini affiliate CJMY, "Scuffle broke out in Kampung Semangat squatter village" and what was reported,
A total of sixteen people were arrested which include 9 contract workers and 6 villagers and are now being remanded in the Kempas police station which is situated just a kilometer away.
Considering CJMY was borne out of "The growing skepticism and distrust among readers have created a demand for impartial and objective news and gave birth to a new form of journalism known as citizen journalism" and that SUARAM failed to mention squatters and 9 others arrested, further questions the honesty of and trust for the "great" defender.

Having been left dumbstruck by the level of and suitably exposed for it's diabolical effort to demonise the government and the prime minister, cannot blame the "great" defender which now has nothing better to do other than to call for "urgent" attention to a scuffle and being dishonest at that.

PKR deputy president "Azmin wants audit of federal funds to Selangor" by an independent auditor not unlike his state boss and Selangor mentri besar, Tan Sri Khalid Ibrahim, when cornered for justifications.

The Pakatan Rakyat gloats, boasts and makes glowing when the Auditor General reports of Pakatan Rakyat states are positive.

What the PKR deputy president is suggesting may not only be unconstitutional but in essence now not only questions the integrity and credibility, it insults the position of the same Auditor General who gave the Pakatan Rakyat those boasting rights.

From the AG website, Article 106: Powers and Duties of Auditor General
(1) The accounts of the Federation and of the States shall be audited and reported on by the Auditor General.

That's what you get when you choose to elect someone, especially from the PKR who acts like a wannabe mentri besar, has nothing better to do than to make outrageous suggestions.

You wonder why that fellow chose Australia and not Great Britain or the United States.

I say, the guy is no longer the "darling".

Well, that said, "Australia rejects Anwar’s clean election assistance plea"

The guy must be stupid if he does not undertstand and that the Australian government was being gracious when it said, "We're not the election authority for Malaysia".

This apart from the other unsavoury conclusion of the fellow that can be derived from the Sundaily report.

That's what you get when you choose to trust someone who when stupid is as stupid does goes around defending the security of Israel, discriminates homosexuals and doing acrobatics with China dolls among others, has now, nothing better to do.

How can I possibly forget, nothing better to do, because no longer wanted a wannabe prime minister.

Wednesday, November 21, 2012

Malaysiakini and A Malaysian Red Indian

Reading Datuk Rocky's "So, does the Batu Caves condo pit non-Muslims against Pakatan Rakyat?" taking to task journalists of opposition leaning The Malaysian Insider, inspired me this question - How can journalists and columnists at The Malaysian Insider, in good consience, accept remuneration, if any, from an entity that is known to pervert truth and relies on deception to remain relevant?

Perversion and deception by any other name is dishonest.

It is more deplorable when the sum of perversion and deception, that does not equal honesty, is employed as a measure that only creates suspicion, enmity, distrust, disharmony and all that is evil among the diverse peoples of this great country.

I had written not a bit about The Malaysian Insider and am never surprised when the level it stoops gets lower than the sole of our shoes.

Anyway, browsing through my drafts on the subject matter of journalistic integrity led me to the other opposition leaning online news content provider, Malayiakini.

These are two comments published by Malaysiakini, "Supreme law with an extreme flaw" and "People of Malaysia vs Dr Mahathir Mohamad"

The footnote at the end of both the articles published by Malayasiakini describes the author thus "JUDGE NAVIN-CHANDRA NAIDU is a lawyer based in Utah, United States"

The description of the author has a result of which, and the manner he writes with authority, would lead many reading what was published as comments wholly credible.

But just who exactly is this Navin-Chandra Naidu?

Reports say he is Singapore born. CNN, Coup leader Speight's lawyer in own legal strife,
"Naidu, a Singapore-born ethnic Indian, came to Fiji from the United States to defend Speight against a charge of treason."
(From the Dailymail, George Speight and armed nationalists stormed parliament on May 19, 2000, saying Indo-Fijians were undermining indigenous rights. His extremist nationalist backers, who include some Fijian chiefs, said they wanted ethnic Indians stripped of political power. Speight had pleaded guilty to the treason charge and sentenced to death but was commuted to life imprisonment.)

Whether Mr Navin C. Naidu was and is a bon fide lawyer to defend George Speight was called into question reported Television New Zealand, "Speight lawyer wanted for forgery",
"Naidu's forged degree showed that he had graduated in July 1987, just two months after he enrolled. In a letter to the Fiji Law Society, the head of the university's registry, Jonathan Seddon, says Naidu's degree is not genuine."
More interesting is another TVNZ report a day earlier, that of "Speight lawyer's degree from Jesus", Naidu claimed that his credentials come from Jesus and that he is confident of being admitted to the bar.

Navin C. Naidu was deported to the United States where he appears to be an American Bar Association member but is not currently licensed to practice law in two states where he has lived or in Texas where the Constitutional Sheriffs organization is based, excerpts an article posted in the Denver Post entitled, Constitutional Sheriffs have an Ecclesiastical “lawyer”.

The Denver Post article also states,
"Among his accomplishments, he lists the establishment of the Ecclesiastical Court of Justice and Law Offices. Naidu’s website for that august body states that Believers (with a capital B) can basically operate outside the laws created by men as long as they follow Biblical law."
From Naidu's website, Ecclesiastical Court of Justice and Law Offices contact information link, you get more than a glimpse of the person that is and why he is prefixed Judge Navin.

Among his honorifics - Chief Justice, of the Sultanate of Sulu, Philippines and Kayan Dynasty, Shanghai, Peoples Republic of China which lists an Inauguration - King of Borneo.

Possibly, it is his positions as Chief Judge, Lipan Apache Band, Texas and Little Shell Pembina Band, North Dakota that entitles him to be bestowed "Judge" Navin.

Maybe Judge Navin is too humble, he is also Judge Navin of the Nato Indian Nation (which declares that it is a sovereign nation with its own government, judiciary and police force), as ascribed in an affidavit by James Timothy Turner in his case (page 18) against the President of the United States.

JUDGE NAVIN-CHANDRA NAIDU is a lawyer based in Utah, United States?

You be the judge.

(DO take the time to click every link at Ecclesiastical Court of Justice and Law Offices and relevent reading American Indian law: an overview.

ADDENDUM

D.P. Dwyer, in defence of Navin C. Naidu, against the fraudulent lawyer charges provides a newspaper cutting to support his "Fiji and Media Distortion", is a story more befitting of a Dan Brown novel.

Citing a DPP source, the newspaper cutting reads "what we know at the moment is that he is a Fiji citizen and has practised law in Fiji."

While it cites but does not name the DPP source, it does name US embassy public relations officer, Nirmal Singh, which the reports says "Naidu is a US citizen" as well!

Judge Navin C. Naidu is confirmed a Malaysian citizen with passport number A15641353 in this royal appointment by the Sultan of Sulu.

Then again, I am sure Judge Navin believes he is a citizen of every country, in his ecclesiastical world.

Monday, November 19, 2012

Pakatan Rakyat's Diminishing Returns

Pakatan Rakyat's great deception is an unpardonable inequity.

An unpardonable inequity by deceiving their supporters and others gullible enough, into believing their false esprit de corps ala Buku Jingga or Common Framework Policy or whatever, in every aspect of the illogical tripartite.

DAP Chairman, Karpal Singh, noted that PAS president Abdul Hadi Awang had publicly stated on June 3 last year that the Quran mentioned a “welfare state”, not an “Islamic state”. The DAP party stalwart also said it reflected beyond the pale of a doubt that PAS has given up its aim to set up an Islamic state,” and that “PAS has, clearly, opted for a welfare state.”

PAS president Datuk Seri Abdul Hadi Awang had said the difference between an Islamic state and a welfare state was merely semantic as both concepts uphold public wellbeing and is quoted as saying, “In fact the term in the Quran is ‘welfare state’ nowhere does it say Islamic state”.

Dr Ahmad Farouk Musa, Chairman and Director of the Islamic Renaissance Front, in no uncertain terms writes, "If there is anything unmistakably clear from the recent muktamar or general assembly of the Islamic Party of Malaysia - PAS - it is that despite the acceptance of the concept of tahalluf siyasi or political consensus among the three major components of the opposition front - Pakatan Rakyat - PAS' ambition in establishing an Islamic state and implementing hudud laws is unwavering, if not more resolute".

Over to you, Karpal Singh.

It is still Anwar for PM says Guan Eng, that has been decided by all three parties as it was then, and DAP wants Anwar as PM, Lim insisted today that Anwar remains the DAP’s and PR’s candidate for prime minister, as it is now.
Only policies mentioned in the Common Policy Framework, Buku Jingga or agreed to by all 3 parties will be implemented in a PR government - Media statement by Lim Guan Eng in Kuala Lumpur on Wednesday, 12th October 2011
This does not sound like it was agreed by all three parties, Hadi:I’m ready to be PM. Datuk Seri Abdul Hadi Awang said he was ready to lead the country should Pakatan Rakyat (BN) win the next election.

The announcement by Abdul Hadi makes nonsense of anything agreed upon, that Anwar Ibrahim is the Pakatan Rakyat choice for prime minister, in effect the biggest deception of all.

Over to you, Lim Guan Eng.

IMF : Outside Looking In

Here are a few headlines in alternative online news media covering the recent visit of IMF managing director, Christine Legarde, reports and her interviews pertaining to the economic situation in Asia in general and Malaysia in particular.

Madam Legarde had visited Malaysia on the 14 November 2012 with a courtesy call on the Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak.

The Malaysian Insider - "Malaysia needs to step up tax and subsidy reforms, says IMF chief", Free Malaysia Today - "Avoid missteps, excesses in West, IMF chief tells M’sia" and Malaysiakini - "IMF hails Malaysia's long-term economic strategy".

Online Financial news portal, The Edge had "Lagarde optimistic about Asia’s future" in their interview with Madam Legarde, (which for some reason the Google link does not work and is picked up) here, and "M'sia needs broad range of reforms" found here and here.

The IMF had on the same day published "Asia and the Promise of Economic Cooperation" in conjunction with the organisation's managing director's visit to Malaysia, appended here verbatim including all emphasis:
Good evening. Selamat sejahtera! It is a great pleasure to be here. Let me thank the Malaysian Economic Association and the Bank Negara Malaysia for organizing this event. I would especially like to recognize Governor Zeti, who is quite rightly regarded as one of the world’s best central bankers—and one of the longest serving! Let me also recognize Tan Sri Dato’ Mohamed Sheriff, the president of the Malaysia Economics Association.

It is good to be back in Asia. I was just here last month for the IMF Annual Meetings in Tokyo. I keep coming back for one simple reason: the increasing leadership role that Asia plays in the global economy—and in the IMF too.

Just look at how far the region has come. Over the course of three decades, emerging Asia’s share of world GDP jumped from 10 percent to 30 percent, living standards rose sixfold, and an incredible half billion people pulled themselves out of poverty. Over the past decade alone, emerging Asia has grown by more than 7½ percent a year.

More recently, during the dark days of the global financial crisis, it was Asia that kept the flame alive, accounting for about two-thirds of global growth. Clearly, the momentum is here, the dynamism is here, and the future starts here.

Malaysia is big part of this story. This is a country with a rich and ancient history. It has always been a great trading nation where cultures meet and thrive. I see this today as I visit between two important holidays for the different traditions—Deepavali and Awal Muharram. Today, Malaysia is one of Asia’s most dynamic and innovative centers—with eyes fixed firmly on the future.

It is with this future in mind that I would like to talk about three things today:

1. The policy agenda for advanced economies—and the implications for Asia.

2. The virtues and benefits of further economic cooperation within Asia.

3. And the broader importance of international policy cooperation.

1. Policy agenda in advanced economies and implications for Asia

Let me start with the global economy, where momentum continues to slow. We expect global growth of 3.3 percent in 2012 and 3.6 percent in 2013—lower than we thought a few months ago.

The slowdown itself is not the main story. The main story is that the slowdown is spreading to regions that have previously held up well. This is what worries me the most. In this interconnected world, there is really nowhere to hide.

We see this here. Malaysia has held up well so far with growth above 4½ percent, but we are in risky territory. This year, growth in emerging Asia fell to its lowest level since 2008—partly from domestic slowdowns in China and India, but also because of strong gusts from storms in the west.

These links are strong. Demand from Europe and the United States each account for about a third of emerging Asia’s net exports. Foreign participation in local sovereign debt markets has nearly doubled over the past five years. Again, we see this here in Malaysia, where foreigners now hold almost 30 percent of government bonds. So from all sides, Asia is exposed to sudden shifts in sentiment.

Going forward, we believe that growth will pick up again, and that Asia will retain its position as a growth leader—expanding 2 percentage points faster than the world average next year.

But none of this can be taken for granted. It depends on the actions of global policymakers, especially in the United States and Europe. And “action” is the operative word.

Here, I believe the west can learn from Asia’s own brush with crisis in the 1990s. In the wake of that crisis, Asia came through strong and resilient, on the back of sound macroeconomic and structural policies. Asians did not draw the wrong lesson from the crisis—they did not hunker down, pull up drawbridges, or withdraw from the world. Quite the contrary.

Look at the recent record. Both public and private sector finances have been managed well. Since the Asian crisis, corporate debt-equity ratios fell by two-thirds. Financial leverage and reliance on foreign funding are also lower. The ratio of short-term foreign debt to official reserves—a key indicator of external vulnerability—fell by a third or more.

In short, Asia’s economic foundations became safer, sounder, and more resilient—but still open to the world and open for business. This has important lessons for the advanced economies currently facing severe challenges.

Given their importance, let me talk a bit about the United States and Europe, which have a special responsibility to act.

Of immediate concern, American policymakers must avoid the so-called “fiscal cliff” at all costs. If expiring tax provisions and spending cuts were indeed to come into play, growth in the United States would fall to zero or below—and the rest of the world will not be immune. This policy uncertainty must be resolved, and it will require all sides coming together.

The Eurozone, which is still facing crisis, must also deliver on its policy commitments at the national and regional level—fiscal, financial, structural. And again, all players must play their part.

So Europe must forge ahead with greater economic cooperation—especially through deeper fiscal and financial integration. A major priority for the Eurozone is a true banking union to complement its monetary union. As a first step, this means a single supervisory framework; and ultimately, there also needs to be a pan-European deposit guarantee scheme and a bank resolution mechanism with common backstops.

This kind of integration will protect the stability of the region as a whole. By coming closer together, Europe helps itself—and it also helps the entire global economy.

2. Increased Economic Cooperation within Asia

This brings me to my second area this evening—the virtues of further economic cooperation within Asia.

Just as in Europe, our interconnected world calls for new approaches in this region too. As the young Malaysian novelist Tan Twan Eng put it, “Moments in time when the world is changing bring out the best and the worst in people”. May we always choose the best!

Let me be clear on this point: I am not talking about political integration or the kinds of monetary union we see in Europe and in various other parts of the world. Rather, I am talking about the broader promise of economic cooperation in two areas in particular—trade and finance.

Trade integration

In terms of trade integration, Asia has already made great strides. Over the past decade, trade within Asia tripled, and regional trade among emerging Asia grew even faster.

With Asian trade, many tributaries flow together as a single great river. A typical pattern is that Asian economies send intermediate goods to China, which assembles them into final goods for exports. In fact, intermediate goods now account for over 70 percent of all Asian exports.

Malaysia is part of this flow—especially through exporting valuable electronic goods up the chain. Malaysia’s intermediate exports to China have increased fourfold since the mid-1990s. This “relay race” along the supply chain has served Malaysia and the region extremely well, making sure that common rewards flow to common efforts.

But this flow is never static. We know that China’s role is changing fast. Its current account surplus has already fallen from a peak of 10 percent to 3 percent of GDP. This is mainly driven by investment so far, but we expect a shift to consumption. This is the next big phase, and I believe that the ASEAN countries are well placed to benefit from this large and enticing market.

ASEAN countries themselves, of course, will also need to support domestic consumption. After all, the shift toward high-income status can only come through a strong middle class. And again, further regional integration can help with this, by offering new avenues for mutual gain.

Looking ahead, the formation of the ASEAN Economic Community in 2015 offers the vast possibilities of a common market. The Trans-Pacific Partnership can also deliver great benefits, especially by emphasizing service markets—a sector that has been too protected for too long.

There is no question about it: looking ahead, Asia can benefit from opening even more doors to trade.

Financial integration

What about financial integration? Here, there is even more scope for progress because financial integration is currently lagging behind trade integration. More than 90 percent of ASEAN cross-border portfolio investment flows are with advanced economies outside Asia. Asia—with its current account surpluses—is simply not investing enough of its savings in itself.

Certainly, we do see FDI flows within the region. Malaysia, for instance, is a big direct investor in Cambodia, Indonesia, Thailand, and Vietnam.

Greater regional financial integration could open up a host of new benefits. It can boost domestic demand—partly by making it easier for small businesses in countries like Malaysia to gain access to credit. It can make economies safer, by allowing more insurance against volatility and adverse developments. And one other important benefit: greater access to financial services by the poor can reduce inequality.

On a practical level, financial integration is eased by making local banking systems more open and competitive. The integration of ASEAN stock markets would help, as would a larger regional bond market, as envisaged by the Asian Bond Market Initiative.

With its Economic Transformation Program, Malaysia is helping to lead the way and is ready to take the next step—boosting productivity and growth to become a vibrant, high-income, country by 2020. This is more than aspiration—it is based on firm policy intention.

To support this transition, Bank Negara Malaysia has designed a financial sector blueprint that seeks a world-class financial system worthy of a high-income country. I believe that it can be done.

Indeed, Malaysia already has a history of innovative finance. It has become a world leader in sukuk, or shari’ah-compliant bonds—accounting for two-thirds of the sukuk market. Malaysia saw an opening and took it. I expect the future to be no different.

Further economic cooperation—despite the very different span of countries, cultures, and systems across Asia—is a big part of that future.

Making integration work

We should all recognize that integration does not come without costs. More financially-integrated economies are more exposed to storms. In particular, while capital flows can bring great benefits, they can also overwhelm countries with damaging cycles of crescendos and crashes.

At the same time, deeper financial market development allows an economy to put down strong roots and weather storms well. You know this here in Malaysia. Governor Zeti has pointed out that a mature financial system can handle capital flows without being overwhelmed. And it is testament to her superior economic management that Malaysia is well protected.

Economic management is the key. If the flows are coming through the banking system, then macroprudential tools make sense—such as tightening conditions for housing loans or having banks hold more capital. In other circumstances, temporary capital controls might prove useful. I should point out that Malaysia was ahead of the curve in this area.

Making the most of financial integration also means better regulation. Here, I am thinking of global rules like the Basel III reforms. I am also thinking of local rules, like stronger and more harmonized regulatory frameworks, including in the area of cross-border supervision.

Asia has a unique opportunity to get financial integration right—avoiding the missteps and excesses of the west.

One more point: in a more integrated world, it is sometimes too easy for people to get lost or forgotten. In such a world, it becomes even more important to make sure that growth benefits everybody and that vulnerable people are protected—and included.

Asia has some room for improvement here. Despite the tremendous fall in poverty over the past few decades, income inequality is on the rise. Even Malaysia, which made great strides in reducing inequality in the 1970s and 1980s, has not seen further reductions since then.

Making growth more inclusive means moving on many fronts:
  • There is room to spend more on healthcare and education, which are at relatively low levels in Asia.
  • There is room to cover more people under pension and unemployment insurance schemes—only 20 percent of the working-age population is covered in emerging Asia, as opposed to 60 percent in the OECD.
  • There is room to raise minimum wages for the poor, which are relatively low in Asia—and I understand that Malaysia has recently introduced a minimum wage policy.
  • And there is room to improve access to financial markets—right now, nearly 60 percent of the people in East Asia are excluded from the formal financial system.
I know that Malaysia is working hard on this important agenda, and I can see the progress that is being made. Now is the time to push even further.

3. International policy cooperation

So far, I have talked about the policy actions needed from the advanced economies and implications for Asia. I have talked about increased economic integration within Asia. Let me now turn to my third point—the importance of international policy cooperation.

As Tunku Abdul Rahman—Malaysia’s father of independence—put it, “Our future depends on how well many different kinds of people can live and work together”.

Asia understands this well. Countries cooperate and collaborate with each other at the regional level, at the global level, and through the IMF.

Starting with the regional level, the Chiang Mai Initiative Multileralization is a good example of the ASEAN countries’ commitment to deeper cooperation. I am also greatly encouraged by the emergence of the ASEAN+3 Macroeconomic Research Office (AMRO), which has begun to provide independent regional surveillance—gently nudging countries to act in concord with each other.

At the global level, Asia has a major and highly-respected voice in global economic governance, including through the G20 where it has six members.

Asia also plays an increasingly important role in the IMF. When our current round of governance reforms is completed, we will see a shift in quotas—countries’ shares in the Fund—of 9 percent since 2006 to the dynamic emerging markets and developing countries. China, India, and Japan will all be among our top ten shareholders.

Let me also mention that within the top management of the IMF, two Deputy Managing Directors—Naoyuki Shinohara and Min Zhu—are from Asia; as is Anoop Singh, our Director of the Asia-Pacific Department.

As we face an increasingly complex and interconnected world, we understand that the IMF needs to change and modernize—and we are doing so. We have certainly learned some lessons since the Asian crisis.

Let me give you a few examples of how we are trying to be even more effective in serving our global membership:
  • We are deepening our analysis of the dense patchwork of interconnections that crisscrosses the entire global economy and focusing more on economic and policy spillovers.
  • We are more flexible across a number of dimensions, including the time horizon for fiscal adjustment and policy responses for dealing with surges in capital flows.
  • We put more emphasis on protecting social safety nets and sharing the burden of adjustment fairly.
Of course, to support our global membership properly, we must also have the necessary resources. This year, the membership came together to boost our firepower by $461 billion—bringing our total lending power to over $1 trillion. Our membership also came together to ensure that we have enough concessional lending for the IMF’s poorer member countries in the years to come.

Why is this important? First, because it is a vote of confidence in the Fund. More than that, it is a vote of confidence in partnership, in solidarity, in the idea that by helping others, you are also helping yourself.

I am very appreciative that Asia—including Malaysia—played such a leading role in building that financial firewall.

At the end of the day, with its 188 member countries, the IMF is the premier forum for economic cooperation in the world today. It is the leading way for countries to stand together in normal times and help each other in tough times.

You could say that cooperation is in our lifeblood. We believe in cooperation and we want to help our members gain from cooperation.

We are at your service.

Conclusion

Let me conclude. I could not help but notice that Malaysia is using an eye-catching phrase to help brand its many advantages to the world: “Malaysia, Truly Asia”. This contains a wealth of wisdom. It suggests that Malaysia is poised to contribute to and share even more in the great promise of Asia.

Malaysia can do that by further embracing its neighbors, by further embracing the world—and in turn, by fully embracing its destiny.

That destiny lies within the common Asian destiny—to provide strength and leadership to the global economy of the 21st century, through cooperation and in partnership.

In another time, the Indian poet Tagore talked about the “opening of a new chapter in history” after a period of turmoil. “Perhaps that dawn will come from this horizon, from the East where the sun rises” he said.

This sentiment still holds true today. This is why I am back in Asia, and why I will keep coming back to Asia.

Thank you—terima kasih!
For all intent and puposes, it is abundantly clear that the overall positive assessment of the economic administration of the country, coming from the highly influential financial body, is testimony that the government's policies are carefully formulated, in line to address and meet local essential needs with international norms, crucial in the current global climate of difficult times.

Now, in the extreme politicking on both sides of the political divide prevalent in the country, nothing is sacred, be it racial or religious, it's also the economy that is an issue played up for both side's advantage.

But there was no political innuendos nor hidden messages coming from Madam Christine Legarde.

To even suggest as much would be inane, disingenuous and not be compatible to her credentials.

Madam Christine Legarde's appointment as IMF head was hailed in Europe, and supported by the US, Russia and China.

Reference to alternative online news reports, at the start above is not happenstance.

As mentioned, issues such as race, religion and the economy are decisive issues determining the outcome of the next general elections. Rightly or wrongly, the mainstream news media takes every opportunity to be favorable to government and critical of the opposition while the alternative online news content are conversely known to be more critical of the government and supportive, putting it mildly, towards the opposition.

It is no happenstance, however, that the alternative online could not find and fault Madam Legarde for an undeniable praiseworthy assessment of the country.

Perusing contents of IMF release, it is not only an endorsement of the economic policies of the present administration under prime minister and finance minister, Datuk Seri Najib, it is also a vindication of the policies the previous administration under Tun Mahathir to overcome the Asian financial crisis.

Madam Legarde not only has positive outlook for Malaysian economic policies of the past and present but also more importantly, the future.

This fact could not and must not have been lost by the alternative news medium or more politically correct, it's owners.

That said, looking at what was reported online alternatively as against, and more significantly, what are the actual salient points of that short but concise IMF communication from Madam Legarde (and The Edge Interview) that should be noted, as far as Malaysia is concerned?

The Malaysia Insider, while quoting that Edge interview with Madam Legarde, highlighted "Malaysia needs to step up tax and subsidy reforms" as it's headline could not shed it's opposition proclivity spots to add,
Malaysia’s finances are regarded as among the weakest in Asia due to its high debt-to-revenue ratio and reliance on petroleum to finance its budget.
What was actually reported by The Edge to a question posed to Madam Legarde, her reply not reported by the Malaysia Insider (click on screenshot), "The Economic Transformation Programme is at the core of these reforms, and it could be a catalyst for the investment take­off that is envisioned. Malaysia’s strong financial sector, its sound supervision and regulation" and "its global leadership in Islamic finance are all added advantages and All of these reforms are achievable and could help spur Malaysia’s continued success."


That reply further acknowledges a sound government policy and almost certainly repudiates the TMI remark as nothing more than a misguided notion.

Online mainstream NST in it's report,"IMF praises Malaysia’s high-income plan" also alluded to an interview conducted by it's Group Managing Editor Datuk Abdul Jalil Hamid Madam Legarde on TV3 which touched on the debt-to-ratio issue.

In the report had Madam Legarde saying "Malaysia's debt to GDP ratio is reasonably high".

High but the constructive word being "reasonably" high.

The opening lines in the report also has the IMF chief noting that the government taking the right approach through its Economic Transformation Programme and other reforms.

Another alternative online news provider, Free Malaysia Today, made it's point by a headlined "Avoid missteps, excesses in West, IMF chief tells M’sia".

But it needs to be pointed FMT had got it wrong when it reported,
"She said although Malaysia has come a long way in bridging the divide since the 1970s and 1980s, more can be done, as there has not been further reduction since then. The country can spend more on healthcare and education, as well as in pension and unemployment insurance schemes to help close the widening income gap"
In the context of the IMF release above, Madam Legarde was making the view of inequality in reference to Asia and not "the country"

However, what is correctly referenced to the country, in the same context, is "Even Malaysia, which made great strides in reducing inequality in the 1970s and 1980s, has not seen further reductions since then."

The ironical connections, other than an IMF chief acknowledging as appropriate Malaysia's remedy in the Asian financial crisis in a country that rejected the IMF approach, is the inequality finding, "Malaysia, which made great strides in reducing inequality in the 1970s and 1980s, has not seen further reductions since then".

One would not be too hard-pressed to make an observation which finance minister it was that advocated IMF remedies at the advent of the Asian financial crisis and who was the finance minister after the 1980's in the early and late 1990's.

But the IMF chief did note "Malaysia is working hard on this important agenda, and I can see the progress that is being made".

Putting aside the online alternative news media reports, other salient points that can be gathered from the IMF managing director is summarised thus:

"Malaysia is one of Asia’s most dynamic and innovative centers—with eyes fixed firmly on the future."

"Malaysia is a big direct investor in Cambodia, Indonesia, Thailand, and Vietnam."

Malaysia's "Economic Transformation Program, Malaysia is helping to lead the way and is ready to take the next step—boosting productivity and growth to become a vibrant, high-income, country by 2020."

"Malaysia already has a history of innovative finance"

"Deeper financial market development allows an economy to put down strong roots and weather storms" and in this respect "Malaysia is well protected."

"Economic management is the key" and "Malaysia was (sic) ahead of the curve in this area."

And from the Madam Legarde's interview with The Edge, "I am impressed with Malaysia’s growth record since independence. In a little over half a century, the country has been lifted into the ranks of the most successful emerging market countries. The transformation has been marked by strong foreign investment, proactive government policies and high levels of savings."

Well, we have had only one same government since independence, the Parti Perikatan which is now the Barisan Nasional.

Video clip "IMF chief impressed with Malaysia's economic development"

Footnote:

As for the widely acknowledged as the most fanatical opposition leaning online new portal, Malaysiakini, it had a very complimentary headline "IMF hails Malaysia's long-term economic strategy" but do take time to read comments in the Facebook posting of the same report.