Dr M has right to free speech ... so do M'sians
Former prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad says that as a
private citizen, he has the
right to
criticise
the government. Malaysians too have a right to free
speech, says a reader.
Sangkancil: To retire and age gracefully is always a challenge. Humans find it tough to let go and tends to hold on to their ideals way into their vintage years.
However, changes must continue and new ideas experienced for better, or for worst. The retired seniors should come out with their opinions as speaking is free in the world - except when you have to use the telephone - or the remarks are derogatory and one exposes oneself to litigation. One should, however, listen to oneself before speaking out.
I guess change has and will always remain to be a tough matter to comprehend and fit into, but one has to remember that as we head towards a more globalised world, young or old, change will continue to confront us. However, it is good if all Malaysians and not Mahathir alone can have their tableaux to express their qualified and professional opinions about how the nation is being run and let the leaders not always hide behind terms such as "patriotism", "racial sentiment" or "religious sensitivity" to prevent open discussion about confronting issues and challenges of the moment for the nation.
Former prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad says that as a
private citizen, he has the right to
criticise the government. Malaysians too have a right to free
speech, says a reader.
Sangkancil: To retire and age gracefully is always
a challenge. Humans find it tough to let go and tends to hold on to their ideals
way into their vintage years.
However, changes must continue and new
ideas experienced for better, or for worst. The retired seniors should come out
with their opinions as speaking is free in the world - except when you have to
use the telephone - or the remarks are derogatory and one exposes oneself to
litigation. One should, however, listen to oneself before speaking out.
I guess change has and will always remain to be a tough matter to
comprehend and fit into, but one has to remember that as we head towards a more
globalised world, young or old, change will continue to confront us. However, it
is good if all Malaysians and not Mahathir alone can have their tableaux to
express their qualified and professional opinions about how the nation is being
run and let the leaders not always hide behind terms such as "patriotism",
"racial sentiment" or "religious sensitivity" to prevent open discussion about
confronting issues and challenges of the moment for the nation.
Such
issues as to the real reasons behind our sponsored students, many of which
includes bumiputera students who have stayed back in their host education
nations, or the slow action to collect outstanding loans from defaulters owed to
the scholarship fund, or the monopolies or oligopolies created for some services
(e.g. taxi services at KLIA to the detriment of the passengers or monopole
advertising within the jurisdiction areas of MPPJ) and some trades (e.g. supply
of street lighting by three companies only) or the failure of our education
system when in the pre-1970s Malaysia was a bastion for foreign students
particularly from Thailand, Vietnam, Cambodia and Indonesia.
Opinions
are important to bring about change as well, and today, while signs can be seen
for more openness, I guess that the door to openness and the maturity to accept
opinions amongst our multi-racial environment must continue to expand or we will
live in a time boom of capped-up steam in a multiracial cooking cauldron.
Sungai Buloh: Why can't
the present government just answer his questions?
- Did we (Malaysia) offer Singapore sand and air space to build a straight
bridge?
- Why sell Agusta for RM4 when we bought it for RM300 million?
- Who is responsible for the abuse of APs?
KSN: In his 22 years as PM,
Tun Mahathir has made lots and lots of statements not intelligent to ordinary
minds but his current statement takes the cake! Is he implying that he made a
pact with Abdullah that certain projects and policies, regardless of their
benefit to the nation and the people will be continued after his retirement? If
that is what he is now saying, I cannot understand what part of his anatomy he
reasons and thinks with!
Neither Mahathir nor Abdullah has any right to
make such a pact. Assuming it was entered into, probably verbally, it is even
more ridiculous for Tun to assume and believe that they will be carried out by
the government that took over from him. Does he think that the country and its
resources are his family inheritance? If that is the way he understand things he
should have left a "will" for Abdullah! Are they not the decisions the sitting
government should take?
Now that the cat is out of the bag, the public
has the right to know the details of the pact as Tun is accusing Abdullah of
betrayal and ungratefulness. We have now a fair idea how the country was being
run for the last 22 years and its resources utilised. The country and the
ordinary people are beginning to pay the price for those abuses and
extravagance!
Let me add quickly, lest I am misunderstood, that my
comments above are not meant to defend Abdullah's government. It is the public
perception that the same approaches continue, albeit in more subtle form, with
new actors and players! The PM's recent statement about his "jihad" under the
9MP should be an eye opener to all non-Malays.
In short, only God can
save this country from inept, incompetent, corrupt politicians without integrity
without the well-being of the poor people and the future of the nation in at
heart.
Totally Disgruntled
Citizen: I also would like to ask the former prime minister the
following questions:
- Why was the North-South highway awarded to an Umno-controlled company as
revealed by Samy Vellu? Is this not a blatant breach of fiduciary duty to the
people, giving a contract to Umno for which he was then the president.
- If Proton is doing so well, how come it cannot compete in the international
arena without subsidies from the head office?
- If there is agreement over the bridge, how come it is crooked?
- If Perwaja is so good, how come it is not making money?
- Who tried to corner the tin market in the early 80s and lost lots of money?
- Why did Petronas have to buy the 49% of the Twin Towers just before his
retirement for millions and millions of dollars?
- Why was the social welfare lottery ticket licence cancelled and the licence
give to a company controlled by one of his best friend?
- Why is Astro given a monopoly over satellite broadcast when other countries
can receive broadcasts from other satellites?
- Why, on a search of the AK's group of companies, its ultimate holding
companies are always in some tax haven countries which have bearer shares? Can
the former PM swear by the Koran that he and his family have no shares in the AK
group of companies?
- Why was Malaysians taken for such a big ride in the IPP contracts?
A litany of many more questions will follow. But let's have some answers to
the above questions first.
Mr
Anonymous: I think Dr Mahithir should have kept quiet and retain
his reputation. In attacking the new government, he suffered the loss of respect
from the public and his own previous ministers. Some say he is too old. Some say
he has become childish, obsessive, paranoid and crazy.
Well, it is
natural for one at old age to be reversed in nature. I remember the idiom 'Swan
sings'. An Orlando Gibbons madrigal states the legend thus:
The silver
Swan, who living had no Note,
when Death approached, unlocked her silent
throat.
Leaning her breast upon the reedy shore,
thus sang her first and
last, and sang no more:
"Farewell, all joys! O Death, come close mine eyes!
"More Geese than Swans now live, more Fools than Wise."
Chaucer
wrote of 'The Ialous swan, ayens his deth that singeth". In Shakespeare's 'The
Merchant of Venice', Portia declaims:
Let music sound while he doth make
his choice;
Then, if he lose, he makes a swan-like end,
Fading in music.
Thai Eng: I almost fell
off my stool when I came across this headline, Musa's diagnosis:
Mahathir suffering from PMS! PMS usually stands for "pre-menstrual
syndrome" and I suddenly thought that the new Tun M has turned doctor and
diagnosed the other Tun M as so.
Other diagnoses of what ails Tun M
have been offered. Only last night at the kopitiam, there was this
self-professed psychiatrist who diagnosed Tun Mahathir as obviously having SGC -
Severe Guilt Complex. This self-appointed professor was explaining to all who
bother to listen to him that Tun M showed symptoms of SGC for many years,
especially in the last few years of his prolonged reign.
The professor
made mention of those well-documented episodes where Tun M would cry in public
for no reasons, or for reasons he had self-created like being unable to
'de-crutch' certain groups of Malaysians. This early symptom of public crying is
said by this professor to be consistent with early realisation of the wrong he
had hoisted on the nation he reigned over.
In recent years, self-imposed
retirement and the abundance of free time to reflect on his 22-year reign had
made him realise more of the harm he had done to the people and nation.
Initially, he tried to deny all these wrongs and fantasise that things were not
really what they were. Tun M then came out to say that during his reign there
was much more media freedom, less corruption and a better judiciary. But of
late, true realisation of all that he had done has finally crept in and this has
resulted in his latest outburst.
The professor said that this latest
outburst against his successor is actually a desperate plea for help to seek
atonement and redemption for all the wrong done as well as to reconcile with the
people he had lorded over. Like most dictators, the said professor reasoned that
it would be so unbecoming and impossible for the Tun, himself, to reveal all the
skeletons in his cupboard or to confess to all the wrongs done.
The
latest outburst is an attempt to prod his successor to reveal all instead. The
professor claimed that all these are consistent with SGC sufferers. He also
predicted that the Tun will continue to speak out and prod his successor and
others till his guilt is finally laid to rest with the revelations of all the
skeletons in his cupboard and all the wrongs he has done. The professor
concluded his discourse by saying: "Will Pak Lah do just that or does his
cupboard also contain skeletons too?"
Sadirah K: I recall a time when a journalist asked
Dr Mahathir about his successor and he glibly replied that he was not ready. Dr
Mahathir has tasted power for too long and now suffers the lack of it. He has
again exhibited his sense of arrogance.
Dr Mahathir has contributed to
the nation but it has also to be stated that had he placed his priorities on the
population as a whole, much more could have been achieved. What has Putrajaya
done but to isolate the civil servant from the public at large. Many of his
grandiose plans may have dealt with his inferiority complex when compared with
developed countries but the opportunity costs lost in terms of such expenditure
being vested in making living conditions better for Malaysians cannot be
underestimated.
He needs to be treated in the same way he treated Tunku
and Hussein Onn when he secured power. Feel it Mahathir, for the shoe now
pinches you.
The following are comments from readers on other
reports. These are on Temple demolished, 5 arrested, 1
injured
A Muslim & A
Concerned Citizen: I would like to preface my comments by
stating that I firmly believe that the Malaysian constitution commits all
Malaysians to defend and honour freedom of religion and worship. Hence, it is
most disconcerting that the issue of the demolition of Hindu temples has been so
badly handled by the relevant agencies.
If some of these temples built
by Hindu labourers during the British colonial period have to make way for new
highways and buildings, let's do it with a lot more sensitivity and common
sense. A dialogue between worshippers, landowners, others involved in the
project and the authorities is essential to avoid the ugly scenes we are
witnessing.
All parties should show goodwill and a willingness to
resolve issues amicably. Politicians and religious zealots of all colours, and
all others intent on exploiting the situation for their own ends, should stay
away.
Is God Happy: I
refer to the news report on the demolishment of a Hindu temple. We pride
Malaysia as a ''religious'' country but yet go around demolishing religious
place of worship. As I am not a Hindu, I do not in any way believe or subscribe
to the Hindu faith, yet I would not go round demolishing a temple under the
guise of development or other reasons.
I do not know enough about
Hinduism but I would not be wrong to say that the values and ethics which
Hinduism teaches are about being good to all. My question is: What would God
think of this episode?
I do not know the answer because I am not God.
But I challenge those who are behind the recent demolitions to examine the whole
issue and ask whether they are pleasing their own egos or pleasing God? I am
very sad, very, very sad indeed, and can only pray that there will be peace in
my country and life (whatever colour or faiths) is not lost. Surely this is what
God wants.
K
Narayansamy: Surely there are other more civilised ways to
handle such cases. Why can't such cases be referred to the courts for a decision
before action is taken? At least, when the matter is referred to the courts,
both sides have a chance to put forth all their facts for the judge to make a
decision without haste.
Civil servants acting unilaterally in a
sensitive matter and should never be condoned by a government that claims to
have the interests of all Malaysians at heart. Just because the Hindus are in a
minority with little political and economic clout, all these seem to be done in
this manner. But justice and fairness never see the minority as a disadvantage.
The government must put out in the open the list of temples that do not
have valid documentation and officially give the management of such temples a
reasonable notice - and the list must be published by the local media - so that
all will know the actual situation. If the management does not take appropriate
action and refuse to act within the timeframe, it must be hauled up to court for
a final decision.
If the government wants to face the problem of places
of worship built without permission, it must have a clear strategy of action,
given the sensitivity of the issue rather than be seen trampling on the
interests of the minority.
On Nazri ticked off for
backing Article 11
Deeply
Concerned Malaysian: What do PAS really want? On one hand, they
want to woo non-Malays into their fold and hardly a day had gone, they now brand
the non-Malays as "enemies of Islam" and went to paint a doomsday scenario for
the non-Malays all over again. I just don't know what it would take to enter the
thick skulls of these people that no one, and I mean no one, is "seeking to
challenge and undermine Islam in the country".
Please pause for a
moment, and think. The non-Malays were not in a bind before Mahathir's so-called
declaration that our country was an Islamic state. After the announcement was
made, we had over zealous religious officers hassling everyone including the
non-Malays. Don't you think that send shivers down our spine and yet we were
told Islamisation would not affect the non-Malays.
In my view, this is
not possible. A country cannot have two systems. We are not China and Hong Kong.
It is either we are secular (as stated in the Federal Constitution) or Islamic.
Sooner or later, this Islamisation move is going to encompass everyone, whether
we like it or not. Everyone knows that, and it is therefore the Article 11
coalition was formed to ensure that the non-Malays rights would not be affected.
After all, who are the people in Article 11 that are so powerful that
can override the government and implement policies that would affect our Malay
Muslim brothers? These are simple NGO members trying to right a wrong by
reviewing the the Federal Constitution with the public so that we clearly
understand where we are today as a citizen of this country. If the Federal
Constitution is not our protector, than who or what is, may I ask?

