Snatch The Match From That Monkey Najib Before He Burns Down The Village

April 19, 2018

Snatch The Match From That Monkey Najib Before He Burns Down The Village

M. Bakri Musa
It would take more than just a monkey with a match to burn down a village, despite the dwellings being made of wood and having flammable thatched roofs. Those homes have withstood generations of indoor wood-burning stoves and nightly mosquito-repelling ambers underneath their floors. There would have to be more, as with a long spell of dry hot weather and mountains of ignitable garbage strewn around.
      Yet when the kampung does get burned down, everyone would be shocked. The immediate reaction would be to blame the idiot with the match, and the fury heaped upon that poor soul would then be merciless.
      Consumed with vengeance and with little inclination or intelligence for reflection, the necessary probing questions would never get raised. As with who gave the idiot the match or why was he not supervised. Few would notice much less ponder why the strewn garbage was allowed to accumulate and thus pose a fire as well as health and other hazards.
      The kampung that is Malaysia has not burnt down, at least not yet. Malaysians are still smug and remain blissfully unaware of the long dry spell and the tinder dried debris that has been stacking up. Nor do they realize the danger posed by the idiot running around with a match in his hand and threatening more mischief. God knows he has wrecked enough damage already.
Being in the tropics, Malaysians are used to hot weather but the current hot political climate is very recent. The 1969 “incident” excepted, political riots and turmoils are not yet the norm. Malaysia has been thankfully spared such scourges as the assassinations of leaders and politicians, the staple of Third World politics.
Image result for Chimps of Malaysia
The BERUKs of Malusia
If Najib and his Barisan coalition were to prevail in the upcoming general election on May 9, 2018, however slim their victory, that would be akin to giving the village idiot a match, and then encouraging him to continue playing with it amidst the flammable debris and the high-voltage political atmosphere.
     The flammable debris are our failing institutions. Malaysias are also now deeply polarized, lending to the current highly-charged political climate. The last time Malaysians were stridently divided was during the 1969 election. Then the ruling coalition’s defeat in a few states and its loss of a supra majority at the federal level triggered a horrific race riot that killed thousands and maimed many more. Parliament had to be suspended and the nation ruled by decree. The scar of that national tragedy has now thankfully been sealed with a thick scab. It is unlikely that it would be rubbed open again despite the mischievous attempts by many.
     The polarization then was interracial, between Malays and Chinese to be specific, and the outbreak of violence was localized only to Kuala Lumpur. Today the schisms and polarizations are widespread but not interracial despite crude attempts by many to make it so, rather intra-racial, among Malays. Only East Malaysia is spared. As such Malaysians, in particular Malays, do not or refuse to recognize or even acknowledge this new threat to the nation. Therein lies the danger.
     Yet the evidence is glaring. I have never seen more ugly or blatant displays of vicious and visceral hatred directed at Najib and Mahathir. The two leaders themselves have set the pace and tone. Others too like their HRHS The Sultans and ulamas have taken sides. Their revulsion, as well as that of their followers, is so open. Such gross and uncouth displays are so un-Malay. I fear that should something untoward were to happen to Najib or Mahathir, that would trigger a vicious civil war among their fanatic followers, meaning, Malays.
Image result for Chimps of Malaysia
     Throughout history the most savage conflicts are intra rather than interracial. Witness the ongoing carnage in the Middle East. I am referring not to the Arab-Israeli dispute but the continuing savageries among the Arabs. The Korean Peninsula is still a tinderbox, ready to explode and taking the world with it. Then there was the earlier Chinese civil war. It would be a futile exercise to venture whether the Chinese suffered more under the Japanese or during their own civil war. It would not be an exaggeration to assert that the Japanese Occupation at least interrupted the brutalities the Chinese inflicted upon each other.
Image result for chief of malaysian armed forces
They are partial to UMNO Malays, thanks to Najib’s “cash is king” lure.
What is so volatile about the current threat facing Malaysia is the absence of any restraining element to buffer or dampen this intra-Malay schism. Our institutions–from the sultans and the Election Commission to the Armed Services and the police–have failed us. The Sultans and Agung are not the “protectors” of Islam and Malay customs as they claim, or as tradition and the constitution would have it. They are partial to UMNO Malays, thanks to Najib’s “cash is king” lure.
Image result for Clown Prince ofJohor
     The Chief of the Armed Forces had to retract his earlier statement proclaiming his troops’ and officers’ loyalty to Najib. That General forgot his oath of office, to serve King and country. Likewise the Registrar of Societies; she did her “job” in a single blow (pardon the pornographic pun) by denying the registration of Mahathir’s new party, a powerful opposition force. Meanwhile that clown Prince and Sultan wannabe in the southern tip of the Peninsula thinks he can titah (command) his fantasized “Bangsa Johor” as to which party to vote for! His father the sultan had gone even further.I would have expected Malaysian minorities to buffer or dampen this dangerous intra-Malay rift if nothing else for their (non-Malay) own self-interest. Instead they are sucked in by their own miscalculations into this perilous undertow.
Image result for Free People of Sabah and Sarawak reject racist Malaysia
A sliver of hope is Sabah and Sarawak. Perhaps because everyone there is a minority, Malaysians there are inclusive and tolerant. They have gone beyond; they have not let their ethnic and cultural identities define or limit them. It is sad that their exemplary collective stance is lost on their fellow Malaysians in the peninsula.
Image result for The late Chief Minister of Sarawak for Sarawak
 Sarawakians must honour Tan Adenan Satem
The fact that UMNO, a national party otherwise, does not have a beachhead in Sarawak, explains why the particularly virulent racist virus that has infected UMNO’s body and mind in the Peninsula has not spread east across the South China Sea. I hope East Malaysians will keep it that way.

Malaysians have a crucial task in this upcoming May 9 General Election. They must snatch that dangerous match away from that idiot Najib and his band of mischievous UMNO monkeys. He and they have done enough damage to Malaysia. Stop them before they burn the whole country down.


The Changing Shape of Protests in the Second Year of the Trump Era

April 7, 2018

The Changing Shape of Protests in the Second Year of the Trump Era

Since Donald Trump took office, the tenor of liberal mass protest has grown sophisticated not just in its messaging but in its sense of how local political power can be. Photograph by Scott Heins / Bloomberg / Getty


In the past month, teachers in three conservative and comparatively poor states have gone on strike, and, in that short time, certain patterns have developed. In West Virginia, Kentucky, and, most recently, Oklahoma, the teachers have worn red clothing, and they have had a protest song—Twisted Sister’s hair-metal anthem “We’re Not Gonna Take It”—which, at the Oklahoma state capitol on Monday, was played enthusiastically on drums and brass by several dozen of the state’s band teachers. The strikes have been organized on Facebook rather than called by union leaders, and, in West Virginia and Oklahoma, the teachers have rejected lawmakers’ initial offers of pay raises; they have said that they also want to change the systematic underfunding of education. “The real midterms are happening right now, in Kentucky, West Virginia, Oklahoma, and Arizona,” the left-wing political theorist Corey Robin tweeted on Sunday.

The tenor of liberal mass protest has changed in the fifteen months since Donald Trump became President. The early demonstrations (the counterprotests at the Inauguration; the vast and furious crowds at the Women’s March, a day later; the more anxious ones that gathered at airports, calling for the release of sequestered Iranian graduate students and Iraqi grandmothers, after the President issued his first travel ban targeting predominantly Muslim nations) had a feeling of holding the country back from a precipice. There was talk of creeping fascism, and a sense that the Trump Administration was a bad dream from which the country might awake if people pinched themselves hard enough. At a Los Angeles march in November, 2017, protesters carried signs that read, “Let this nightmare end.”

The protests in the second year of the Trump Administration have taken on a different character. For one thing, they have been somewhat less about Trump. As a gun-control movement coalesced in the aftermath of the massacre of seventeen people at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, in Parkland, Florida, its villain was not Trump but the National Rifle Association (N.R.A) and the influence it exerts in Washington and state legislatures around the country. The student activists from Parkland have been careful to argue that their call for gun control is in the reasonable mainstream, in contrast to the inflexible, extreme positions taken by politicians loyal to the N.R.A. “Our platform is moderate and common sense,” Matt Deitsch, a recent Stoneman Douglas graduate, who served as the head of messaging and outreach for the March for Our Lives, tweeted this week. “Anything that polls with a supermajority in our country cannot be seen as left / right.”

The Parkland protests were sophisticated not just in their messaging but in their sense of how local political power can be. In Sacramento, California, during the past two weeks, there have been demonstrations in response to the police killing of Stephon Clark, a young, unarmed African-American man who was shot after allegedly running away from officers who had confronted him in the yard of his grandmother’s house. The protests have aimed to shut down civic life in the city—blocking an interstate that runs through downtown Sacramento, delaying the start of a Sacramento Kings game. Shortly after the killing, Clark’s brother Stevante took over a Sacramento City Council meeting, and for three days demonstrations were held outside the offices of the county’s District Attorney, Anne Marie Schubert, who many residents believe has failed to hold cops accountable. These beliefs existed before Clark was killed. A few days before the shooting, a leader of the local Black Lives Matter chapter, Tanya Faison, had called for volunteers to follow police officers around Sacramento, recording what they did, as a method of citizen surveillance. The plan, she told reporters, was an unarmed version of a tactic the Black Panthers used, half a century ago.

The red-state teacher revolts have been especially precise in their tactics. They have focussed on the long-running matter of how conservative states, some of which require legislative supermajorities to raise any tax at all, pay for their schools. A common refrain in Oklahoma, where school funding has been so aggressively cut that about a fifth of schools now open for only four days each week, has been that many teachers have taken home about the same pay for a decade or more. The images that have circulated are of textbooks so old that they must be held together by duct tape. Schools are in bad shape all over, not just in states run by conservative politicians; in Baltimore, for instance, many public schools closed this winter when the city could not heat them. But, as Paul Waldman pointed out in the Washington Post this week, Hillary Clinton won nineteen of the twenty states where teachers are paid the most in the 2016 election, and Trump won nineteen of the twenty where teachers are paid the least.

Image result for robert mueller

Robert Mueller is taking his own sweet time and spending American taxpayers’ money as if there was no tomorrow, all in the name of thoroughness.

The world of American politics right now is bracing for two events: the outcome of the Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation and the midterm elections. Together, these two concerns occupy so much of the horizon that it is difficult to see much else. Mueller is following his own private timeline, discernible to the public only in glimpses. But the midterms are beginning to take shape—or, at least, the stakes of the elections are. Since the ascendance of the Tea Party, in 2010 (and, in some places, since long before then), politics in many parts of the country have been arranged around a program of cutting taxes and radically limiting governmental services. In November, we will know quite a bit more about whether that approach will continue to be a major part of our politics, or whether it will prove to be an ideological fad that took over for a while, and then dissipated. In the past few months, Democrats have continued to win special elections in places where they used to lose handily. Thousands of people have declared themselves candidates for public office. And the confidence of teachers in red states has grown: in Oklahoma, they rejected an offered fifteen-per-cent pay raise; in Arizona, they are demanding a twenty-per-cent hike. Those are not the bargaining positions of people who assume that the public will abandon them. It is the posture of those who assume, like the student activists from Parkland, that they are taking the common-sense position, that, even in red states, they have behind them a critical mass of support. (A recent poll released by the Oklahoma Education Association found that ninety-three per cent of Oklahoma residents believe the state legislature “has not done enough to increase funding for Oklahoma students and public schools.”)

In the months after Trump took office, it seemed like the nation’s politics had shifted for good; that the new normal would be cyclone after cyclone of angry populist feeling on the left and the right. But the demonstrations of the past few months have suggested not a split country but a broken political system: in a less toxically partisan time, a slightly more restrictive gun-control regimen or a steadier rate of funding for the schools could be resolved by subcommittees, instead of through marches. The increasingly extreme Republican regimes of this decade—Scott Walker’s in Wisconsin, Sam Brownback’s in Kansas, Mary Fallin’s in Oklahoma, and Paul Ryan’s and Donald Trump’s in Washington—have tended to act as if narrow electoral majorities were a mandate for vast political change, and as if those groups who supported their opponents should have no voice at all. For the past decade, these politics have redesigned actual towns and cities, leaving them with books with rotting bindings and schools that close on Fridays because they can’t afford anything more. But people live and teach in those towns, and they take notice of changes like these. Eventually, a bill comes due.


Benjamin Wallace-Wells began contributing to The New Yorker in 2006, and joined the magazine as a staff writer in 2015. He writes mainly about American politics and society.

GE-14: What is the Economic Agenda?

April 4, 2018

GE-14: What is the Economic Agenda?

by Dr.  Shankaran Nambiar (received via e-mail)

WHAT is at stake in the next general election? There are accusations and counter-accusations being traded. Scandals are being hung for all to see – on both sides of the divide.

Image result for Shankaran Nambiar

Can one expect a major shift in the economic policy framework? It is not certain if the next government is going to cut the size of the civil service. Or if we are going to have high quality state-financed healthcare as in Norway, Finland or the United Kingdom. Or if higher education is going to be entirely a public sector affair as in the UK or Australia.

It seems that the fundamental economic model is set and will not change. Nevertheless, all political parties are strongly convinced of the importance of free trade, regional integration and the role of foreign direct investment. The implementation and details will vary with each party.The devil, as usual, is in the details.

But there is no doubt that the country needs a clear agenda for economic progress. The principles guiding economic reform have to be re-visited and a framework will have to be designed.

One such list of priorities could be as follows:
» Rolling down government involvement in business
» Prioritising efficiency and the achievement of outcomes
» Creating adequate opportunities for all groups, particularly the disadvantaged
» Ensuring the economic neutrality of the country
» Affirming good governanceImage result for Malaysia in Troubled Times

From One Malaysia to Malaysia TN50–Quo Vadis, Malaysia

A little elaboration is in order. First, government participation in business cannot be ruled out. As economic theory suggests, government participation is necessary in areas that are not attractive to the private sector. The government’s involvement is usually welcome if security issues are at stake; or if the investment is risky but necessary for the public good.

The rationale for government-linked companies to invest in hospitals or private universities is a bit of a puzzle. Why should the government (even if indirectly) get in the business of healthcare and education when it should be supporting the provision of these services?

Second, the efficiency of the public sector has to be further upgraded. This includes public delivery systems (where there has been tremendous improvement in many areas) and it should also include public procurement and the decision-making on projects (particularly mega projects).

Third, the responsibility of the government should be to ensure the fair distribution of opportunities. Prioritising opportunities entirely on the basis of ethnicity can create inefficiencies. It can also de-incentivise targeted agents. People who have been selected to receive benefits can lose the motivation to maximise their performance.

Efficiency and the achievement of outcomes cannot be pushed aside. There is a debate in economics on outcomes versus opportunities. In practical terms, one cannot indefinitely defend creating an opportunity-rich environment with no regard for outcomes.

Fourth, good governance covers a range of issues including institutional integrity, the freedom to voice one’s opinions, being free from violence, transparency and zero tolerance for corruption.

The Rule of Law is a key pillar of good governance. It should stand above position, title, religious belief and political association.

Fifth, it is essential that Malaysia retain its independence and sovereignty.

Razeen Sally, a prominent academic and Sri Lanka observer, is known to have remarked at a conference that Sri Lanka should not become a vassal state of China. The same cautionary comment could be made in a different and perhaps a more general context. Malaysia should resist any attempt to reduce itself into being a vassal state of any superpower.

Politicians claim that Malaysia needs foreign direct investment and that it does not matter where this comes from. This is a naïve argument. There is a difference between an investment made for commercial reasons and one that is made so that a superpower can exert its sphere of influence.

A careful examination is necessary to decide on the economic viability of any foreign investment.

A set of criteria should be established to assess whether foreign investment should be accepted: the rates of return should be acceptable, the use of foreign labour should be allowed subject to need, there should be transfer of technology, and the terms on which loans are offered should not be unfavourable.

Malaysia has to remain economically and politically neutral, a state that is free to pursue its own agenda.If Malaysia is to be a star it needs to develop a more liberal culture in the economic and social spheres.

Dr Shankaran Nambiar is a senior research fellow at the Malaysian Institute of Economic Research. He is author of Malaysia in Troubled Times. Comments:

Polarizing Politics in Trump Land

April  4, 2018



Image result for Mike Mineham

The NRA controls The White House and The  US Congress. Fact or Fiction (Fake News)? Student activism may change that.

Polarization of extremes in politics is nothing new. But political polarization seems to have hit a new low in the USA.

This is because the National Rifle Association (NRA) is taking aim at the teens who were the survivors of the February Parkland school shooting in Florida.

These teens and their activism on gun policy have now become the target of the NRA and its supporters, who claim that the Democrats are using these student survivors as pawns to advance the Democratic agenda of tighter restrictions on firearms.

The NRA’s most outspoken board member is the musician Ted Nugent, who says the protesting students are liars and are soulless:

Ted Nugent is also notorious for inviting the then Presidential Candidate Obama to “suck on my machine gun” in 2007.

CNN provides more details about the Fox News host, Laura Ingraham, who attacked one of the Florida high school survivors, and then found that advertisers were deserting her show:

CBS News reported on the 2nd April that at least 15 companies have now pulled their advertising from Ingraham’s show in protest after her criticism of Parkland High School Senior David Hogg.

Polarization in America is most noticeable in reactions to news outlets themselves. According to the American Pew Research Centre, 9 out of 10 Democrats now say that criticism of leaders by news outlets helps prevent these leaders from doing things that they shouldn’t. But only 4 in 10 Republicans agree. The other 6 out of 10 argue alternatively that this criticizm stops leaders from doing their job.

This divergence is a 47 point gap, and it’s worsened dramatically since the Presidency of George W Bush, when the same gap between Democrats and Republicans about news media was only 27 per cent.

It’s interesting to speculate on the reasons why this chasm has widened, and why there is now so much toxicity. Perhaps the Trump mantra of ‘fake news’ is contributing. Perhaps the confrontational politics of President Trump are another causal factor. Or perhaps the way Trump uses the power of the Presidency to publicly pursue his own vitriolic vendettas might be yet another accelerant.

Image result for gun culture in america


But whatever, targeting school kids who have just survived a massacre in which 17 of their school friends were killed, well, that’s an all time low that should be out of bounds for even the NRA. Especially the NRA, which at other times, is at pains to project its image of law abiding citizens trying to protect the Second Amendment.

Image result for gun culture in america

I can’t help feeling that America is becoming another victim. The politics of viciousness now seem to be the norm.

And anyway, what sort of a culture is it that kicks kids when they’re down? I would say this is a careless culture, because these kids and their supporters will step up to the ballot box very soon.

PSM and GE-14: On Principle,Go It Alone, Michael

April 3, 2018

PSM and GE-14: On Principle, Go It Alone, Michael

by Michael Jeyakumar Devaraj

Read :

Image result for michael jeyakumar devaraj

With PRU 14 fast approaching there are many Malaysians, especially urbanites, who feel that a change of government is at hand. Several among them urge the PSM not to “create 3-corner contests” but to take stock of the big picture and go along with the Pakatan Harapan. This would mean standing down all PSM candidates except for myself – I alone will be allowed by PH to contest Sg Siput under PKR logo.

To our friends and supporters who urge this course of action, I would like to point out three facts. The first is that the 3 corner scenario has been foisted upon us by the PH itself as they went ahead and apportioned all the seats in Semenanjung amongst themselves. The PSM, which has indicated since 2011 that we wished to work with the Pakatan Rakyat (as they were then) to bring a change in government, was never invited to any seat negotiations. As a result, wherever we stand in Semenanjung there will be a 3-corner situation. But is it fair to say that the PSM has “created” these?

The second point is even more important – what happens to the Reformasi agenda in the aftermath of  PRU 14? (The day after – the 2 years after). This is I think, the even bigger picture that people who want genuine change must take into account. Can the Pakatan Harapan, which is making a number of tactical compromises, in a good position to oversee the reform agenda, or do we need other political parties around to help push that forward? Reading the PH Manifesto might give some clues –

–          There is no mention of Local Council elections;

–          They seem to be backing away from Free Education at varsity level;

–          Ethnic based policy pitches seem to be making a comeback;

–          Several of their economic policies have a strong neo-liberal flavor.

 Now don’t get me wrong –  the PSM is calling on the people of Malaysia to support the PH in PRU 14 (except in the few seats that the PSM is standing – at this point in time 5/222 Parliament and 11/545 State seats). The PH is the better of the 2 alternatives available at present.

Image result for michael jeyakumar devaraj

 But the question that Malaysians who want to see politics moving in a more healthy direction need to ask themselves is – will the PH be able to deliver what we hope for, on their own? Or is there a need for a party like the PSM that keeps reminding all of us that

–          Poverty in Malaysia cannot be comprehensively tackled without addressing the massive transfer of profits out by the 500 richest Multi National Corporations which control the “global chains”;

–          We need to call out the World Bank and the IMF who would like us all to believe that poverty in developing countries is due to our low “productivity”. We are the only political party in Malaysia that is pointing out there is a problem with how productivity of our workers is measured. Consider – the selling price of an electronic chip produced in Bayan Lepas is about a fifth of the selling price of an identical chip produced in California. Based on the current formula, the “productivity” of the Californian worker is five times that of our worker – for the same product, and the same volume of output! The oligopolistic position of the MNCs enables them to suppress the prices of good that they subcontract out to us and other 3rd world countries. So the root problem is not productivity but the excessive market power of the biggest MNCs.

–          We need to counter the perception that liberalizing the economy and giving more scope to businesses is the best way to tackle bureaucracy and inefficiencies in the Public Sector. We believe that such an approach would tend to push costs up and further marginalize the bottom 80% of the population.

–          We are keenly aware that increasingly, the richest business groups in Malaysia have great influence over the political process in the country as they fund both sides of the political divide. Our democracy is being undermined by massive political funding by the business elites. The PSM has been calling for public funding for political parties, and we have suggested mechanisms for doing this in a way that enhances the peoples’ influence;

–          We seem to be the only party that feels there are concrete reasons why the rural Malays are apprehensive about regime change. We have been studying the rural economy for the past few years to ascertain why rural poverty persists despite the billions of ringgit the government has thrown at it. We have the framework of a program to address this problem – a program that has great potential to allay the fears of the rural Malay voters and get them to support our reform agenda.

–          We believe that political leaders have to be more accountable regarding their wealth accumulation. We advocate that those who want to amass wealth should choose some other profession and not come into politics and rip off the people.

–          We are against populist policies like toll-free highways, lower prices for cars and cheaper petrol. Concern for the environment cannot be limited to speeches on Earth Day! We need to cut our carbon footprint – we should use economic incentives to shift to public transport and develop more electric powered vehicles while working on electricity generation from renewables.

–          We believe that automation and AI should be a boon for humankind and not a cause of unemployment and gloom. The rapidly increasing productivity of our global economy means that we do not need to work 12 hours a day to make ends meet. But at present, those who can’t find work can’t consume – its painful both for them and the global economy as aggregate demand will remain sluggish if people do not consume. The solution, as we see it, is a massive increase in the hourly wage rate coupled a 32 hour working week – so people will be able to get a living wage for working less, and all families will have work and businesses will have adequate markets to sell to. We all will then have more time for ourselves, our families, the community, religion the arts sports etc – the full flowering of human potential. I doubt if any other party in Malaysia has a similar vision of a better society if we could order our economy on the basis of social solidarity and not the avariciousness of the Forbes 500.


People might say we are deluded, but we in the PSM really believe that we have a great deal to contribute to the political process in Malaysia – and I haven’t yet touched on the commitment and selflessness of our frontline activists who stand each day with the marginalized groups in our society. That is why we will not quietly “close shop” and retreat to the sidelines of politics.

We remain committed to bring regime change – and we agree that at this point in time, only the Pakatan Harapan is big enough to do this. We are prepared to work with them. We would be quite prepared to compromise and stand down half the seats that we are preparing to stand in – if we are given the remainder as 1:1 contests against the BN (ie the PH backs out of these). Which seats? – That can be settled through discussions and we called for these more than 24 months ago. Only now, at the 11th hour are representatives from the PH reaching out to us. We have replied that we are ready to meet asap.

 I would like to appeal to all Malaysians who support the Pakatan Harapan – you too have a role to play in the resolution of this problem. Tell your PH leaders to deal fairly with the PSM – convince them that the PSM can add value to the reform movement. Sometimes, (and this is the third point I want to raise) it’s your uncritical support for them that leads to a touch of arrogance in the way they deal with others!


Jeyakumar Devaraj

CnM Minister Salleh Said Keruak just defined “Fake News”!

April 1, 2018

CnM Minister Salleh Said Keruak just defined “Fake News”!

by Sarawak Report

Image result for salleh said keruak

Malaysia’s Tough Talking CnM Minister Salleh Said Keruak–Our Paragon of Virtu 


Know this Guy? Clue: He is the Supreme Realist

Communications and Multimedia Minister Salleh Said Keruak has denied that the anti-fake news law is aimed at silencing debate on the 1MDB.

“But this is not true. There is nothing to stop anyone from debating or talking about 1MDB,” Salleh said in a blog posting this morning in response to critics. However, he said, the issue is when a person spreads false information as “news” and “facts”.

“For example, we keep hearing ‘news’ that RM42 billion of 1MDB’s money has ‘disappeared’ into thin air when this has been officially explained and proven false.

“The bigger issue here is to deal with the irresponsible spread of such fake ‘news’ and ‘facts’, which applies to many other situations in our lives,” he added.

Salleh pointed out that when a lie is repeated many times, the people believe it to be the truth.

SR’s  comment

The Communications Minister himself has now confirmed what everyone has suspected, which is that the ‘Fake News’ bill is all about protecting Najib Razak over the 1MDB scandal and all his other corruptions. To silence the critics and cover-up.

Image result for Najib RazakDato Seri Najib Razak is the 6th Prime Minister of Malaysia: Is that fake news or fact, Mr. Salleh?


The problem is that the world can see that it is all these cover-ups that are the Fake News, as Salleh’s claims and antics become all the more contradictory and ridiculous.

On this occasion he is claiming that ‘Fake News’ providers are saying that RM42 million “disappeared into thin air”.  In fact, what people are saying is that the money was traced by MACC investigators from 1MDB’s subsidiary SRC into Najib’s bank account, where amongst other things it was used to pay for a very wasteful and ineffective anti-ageing treatment for his wife.

We know this, because the documents have been leaked and the details corroborated, including the cheque paid to the anti-ageing doctor in that particular case, which was confirmed by his alternative medicine association boss.

Not only that, Salleh’s own Attorney-General waved the MACC papers that showed the same money trail in front of cameras at the very press conference Salleh is referring to when he says “this has been officially explained and proven false”.

As the facts pile up world-wide in this 1MDB investigation, amidst asset seizures, court rulings, jail sentences and all the rest.  Salleh and Najib are left only bleating ‘Fake News, Fake News’.

It has become a very sad joke at the expense of the dignity of Malaysia.