Azrul Syahriman Bin Salleh & Norasyida Binti Ahid 222, Lot 2574, Lrg B3, Kpg Tunku, Jln Astana, Petra Jaya, Kuching, Sarawak. Azrul: 016-3973634 Syida: 016-8734036 (Whatsapp or Telegram only)
Sunday 27 May 2012
Saturday 19 May 2012
Jim Rohn quotes
"Profits are better than wages. Wages make you a living; profits make you a fortune."
Quotes by Jim Rohn, America's Foremost Business Philosopher, reprinted with permission from Jim Rohn International ©2011.
As a world-renowned author and success expert, Jim Rohn touched millions of lives during his 46-year career as a motivational speaker and messenger of positive life change.
For more information on Jim and his popular personal achievement resources or to subscribe to the weekly Jim Rohn Newsletter, visit www.JimRohn.com.
Quotes by Jim Rohn, America's Foremost Business Philosopher, reprinted with permission from Jim Rohn International ©2011.
As a world-renowned author and success expert, Jim Rohn touched millions of lives during his 46-year career as a motivational speaker and messenger of positive life change.
For more information on Jim and his popular personal achievement resources or to subscribe to the weekly Jim Rohn Newsletter, visit www.JimRohn.com.
Saturday 12 May 2012
Wednesday 9 May 2012
Tuesday 8 May 2012
BERSIH 3.0 Pt 2
1. Some who condemned my piece on Bersih 3 say that the ruling party abused the authority of the Government to ensure its success. They ask why rural constituencies have more seats for less voters. Why the gerrymandering.
2. This is because since the days of the British the urban areas tend to dominate politics and to be better served by the Government. To balance this, the poorly serviced rural areas have to be given higher representation in the legislature.
3. This is not new. It is common practice in the United States the state of New Jersey with less than five million people gets the same number of Senate seats (two) as California with more than forty million people. In most democratic countries some leverage is given to constituencies which for a variety of reasons are less developed.
4. As to the use of Government authority in elections; this is never clear-cut. There is no clear line when authority is exceeded.
5. When a party in power uses Government to implement policies, plans or strategies so as to ensure support by the people, can we say it is abuse of Government authority. On the other hand when the opposition loudly proclaims that they would do things which would gain them public support, are they not making use of Government authority for their popularity?
6. The opposition says that it would increase subsidies for fuel and fertilizer, replace PTPTN with free higher education and raise petroleum royalty to 20% to the states instead of 5%, isn’t it also making use of Government authority to win support of the voters?
7. Indeed whereas the incumbent has to be cautious as it knows the financial capacity of the Government, the Opposition has no such constrains. If it wins it can have all kinds of excuses for not keeping promises.
8. Abuse of Government authority is not confined only to the ruling party. The Opposition is also bent on abusing Government authority.
9. There may be areas for improving the conduct of Malaysian elections. But the fact remains that in Malaysia the Opposition can and have indeed defeated the Government party. If the Opposition fails to win at federal level, it is simply because the people chose not to support them with the required majority.
Monday 7 May 2012
BERSIH 3.0
1. Sunday’s Bersih 3 demonstration is no doubt the biggest and the most violent in the series. It is likely that future Bersih will be even bigger and more violent.
2. The stated objective is to demand that elections be cleaner and fairer. But is this the real objective? I think not. Malaysian elections have been more clean than those in the authoritarian countries where results have always been obviously fixed. There would always be 99.9% of the votes going to the Government party or the President. If at all the opposition were to win, it would get at best 10% of the seats contested. After that the opposition would be prevented from taking their places in the legislature.
3. But in Malaysia there has never been an election, whether at State or Federal levels when the opposition had not won a substantial number of seats. In fact whole states may be lost to the opposition. And no matter how the Government party tried, it just could not wrest Kelantan from the opposition.
4. At different elections throughout Independence different states were won by the opposition. Kelantan voted for the opposition in 1964 and 1969. In 1974 when PAS joined the Barisan Nasional, Kelantan was won by BN but continued to remain under PAS. It was lost to the BN only in 1978 but reverted to the opposition in subsequent elections.
5. Penang went to the opposition in 1969. In that election Perak and Selangor could not form Governments as neither the opposition nor the Government party had a clear majority.
6. Sabah was also lost to the opposition in one of the elections.
7. The worst result for the Government Party i.e. the party controlling the Federal Government was in 2008 when BN lost five States and one federal territory.
8. At the Federal level although the Government party never lost, but its majority was not constant. In 1969 it virtually lost, winning with an unworkable majority. In other elections the margin were sometimes above two-thirds and sometimes below two-thirds. In 2008 it won such a slim majority that there was real possibility that it would fall because a significant number of BN members of Parliament were expected to switch to the opposition.
9. The lack of consistency and absence of any pattern in the results of the elections showed that the elections were not fixed or manipulated. There were the usual accusations of foul play from both the Government party and the opposition and some of these went to the courts. The courts also did not show special favour for the Government party through their decision. There was no proven case of Government manipulation or hanky-panky in any of the cases.
10. All indicators point to reasonably fair conduct of the elections by the Election Commission. The Government could not rig or influence the EC.
11. Compare this with the advanced democracies and it would be very clear that the results are quite similar to them. The margins are never extreme one way or another.
12. It is absolutely certain that in the 13th General Election the opposition would win a fair number of seats in the State and Federal elections. Almost certainly Kelantan would go to PAS. There would be great difficulty for BN to win back the States it had lost.
13. So why the demonstrations and the demands for the elections to be clean and fair? Well should the opposition lose in the States or at the Federal levels, then one can safely assume that the opposition will claim that the Government had not conducted the elections fairly, that the Government cheated.
14. There would then be more demonstrations, perhaps bigger and more violent. Demands would be made for new elections to be held, or for the Election Commission to be disbanded and a new Commission set up.
15. Seeing how repeated anti-Government demonstrations have brought down Governments in the Arab countries, Nik Aziz of PAS now declares that over-throwing the Government through demonstration is ‘halal’. Obviously PAS is already contemplating Bersih-type violent demonstrations as a way of seizing power if it loses the 13th General Elections. The country will then suffer from violent demonstrations frequently. This will affect business and growth. Already Nik Aziz considers the present Government as oppressive and dictatorial and it is right to overthrow it.
16. The attention of the world would be sought and the Western Press would be co-opted to paint as black a picture as possible of the people’s opposition to the democratically elected Government. The support of foreign Governments and NGOs would come in as we see in the Arab countries. Their agenda would be different but they would see opportunities for pushing their regime change, for putting their candidate in power as Prime Minister.
17. This possibility is not far-fetched. The average Malaysian always think what happens in other countries will not happen here. But the Bersih 3 demonstration shows it can happen here. We know that almost every demonstration in Malaysia has been organised by Anwar. Now he is teaming up with Nik Aziz. Both see much to be gained by seizing power through unconstitutional means.
18. And when they are in power we can kiss goodbye to peace, stability and economic growth in this beloved country.
Friday 4 May 2012
Wednesday 2 May 2012
BOSNIA-HERZEGOVINA
1. Twenty years ago the Serbs of Yugoslavia began their genocidal war against the Muslims of Bosnia-Herzegovina. They made no attempt to hide their intention to kill all the Muslims. They openly declared they were carrying out “ethnic cleansing”.
2. Europe, according to the Europeans, is Christendom – the kingdom of the Christians. The presence of a European Muslim country in Europe seems to contradict this assertion.
3. Although Europeans are not as committed to Christianity today as they were in the past, nevertheless anti-Muslim feelings is still strong. So the elimination of Muslims from Europe is not unwelcome. The genocidal war waged by the Serbs was allowed to go on.
4. But the Serbs committed horrible atrocities against the Bosnians. A television report showed a British Army officer expressing horror and anger when Serbs burnt houses with the occupants still in them.
5. But the NATO forces were there only to watch. They may not shoot at the murderous Serbs. When in Srebrenica the Dutch troops, tasked with protecting the Bosnians saw the Serb soldiers killing 8,000 Bosnians in front of their eyes, they simply moved away. The Serbs used axes to bash in the heads of Bosnian men and boys in one of the worst massacres in Europe.
6. Perhaps it was this massacre which prompted the West to stop the fighting. Apparently they could stop the Serbs if they wanted to.
7. But in a travesty of justice America imposed on the Bosnians the Dayton Plan in which Bosnia-Herzegovina was divided into two.
8. The Serbs were rewarded with an independent state completely under their rule although it is supposed to be a part of Bosnia-Herzegovina. It is called Republika Srpska.
9. The rest of Bosnia-Herzegovina would have three presidents all the time. There would be a Serb President, a Croatian President and a Bosnian President. Every decision by this coalition Government must be agreed to by all three Presidents.
10. As can be expected the Serb President never agreed to anything that can contribute to the rebuilding of this part of Bosnia-Herzegovina.
11. The west talks ad infinitum about justice and the rule of law. Rewarding the murderous genocidal Serbs with an independent state and frustrating the Bosnian Muslims’ quest for independence by giving veto power to the Serbs and the Croats is an example of justice for the West. They have ensured there would be no Muslim state in Christendom.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)