Archive for the ‘Issues 课题’ Category

‪LYNAS WILL STAY IF BN REMAINS IN PUTRAJAYA‬


PRESS STATEMENT‬
‪24 March 2012‬
Fuziah Salleh‬
National Vice President (PKR)‬
‪& MP Kuantan‬

So long as the current administration under Najib Razak is in power, the Lynas plant will stay.‬ ‪There is no way, despite all the demonstrations and protest being held by folks in Gebeng, Kuantan and nationwide, for the people of Malaysia to stop Lynas unless the BN administration at Putrajaya is first removed in the coming General Election.‬

‪From the number of other incidents, we have learnt that this is the modus operandi of BN administration under Najib. In the case of Teoh Beng Hock, it is first the Inquiry, then the Royal Commission of Inquiry (RCI), but no actions have been taken against the few MACC staff in the Selangor office. We have also seen the trial of Altantuya’s tragic death, how the third defendant was suddenly acquitted, and a number of questions have yet to be answered.‬

‪Najib has just said that there will be no tribunal to investigate the attorney-general and former Inspector-General of Police by dismissing the allegation as just an unsubstantiated claim. By saying this, Najib is showing that he is not interested to know the truth of such a serious allegation. While a tribunal should be set up to unearth the truth of the matter, Najib should realise that, substantiated or not, the allegation has attracted a lot of public interest.‬

‪‬Also, after the expose by PKR about the cowgate scandal, all that we see is Najib trying to protect certain parties, while the rakyat’s money has been abused.‬

‪There are just too many other cases which have shaken the people’s confidence in our country’s administration, the judiciary, the police and the MACC. Can we trust that Najib will act in the interest of the people, even after the PSC has tabled its report?‬

Scientific proofs are what Najib has sought for, but scientific proofs have been twisted to cover up the truth. Like in the case of Teoh Beng Hock’s death, where there were experts who contradicted each other, I am of the opinion that even in the Lynas issue, there will be two sides of the story; who would Najib listen to?‬

‪‪Even when a parliamentary select committee is set up, Najib has flip-flopped in his statements to the Malaysian public. In an earlier statement made on March 17, Najib had said that that the Parliamentary Select Committee (PSC) on the Lynas rare earths plant could not decide on whether the refinery would be built. In other words, what is the point of setting up a PSC, when people’s lives of thousands of Malaysians are at stake? Is the prime minister himself oblivious of the dangers of exposure to radioactivity? Najib should personally visit Bukit Merah to see the tragedy that was created by his predecessors, instead of allowing history to repeat itself.‬

‪In the latest statement made during an interview with radio station, 988FM which Najib contradicted himself, when he said he would scrap the Lynas plant construction, if there was scientific evidence to prove it was hazardous. Why does he allow the construction of Lynas to progress despite the protest by the Malaysian populace?‬

‪Why hasn’t this prime minister taken cognizance of the dangers that Lynas will pose to the Malaysian public? By allowing Lynas to continue with its construction, the amount of compensation to be paid later on by the Malaysian government would be so much higher by comparison.‬

‪Collectively, we from Pakatan have raised this issue on the behalf of the rakyat, but Najib continues to close an eye. Is this his plot to use the PSC to buy time and allow Lynas to continue with its construction? When he returns to power in the next General Election, he can give Lynas the go ahead to operate, despite all the protest that he has seen; if Pakatan takes over the Federal Government, it would be forced to compensate a huge sum of money to Lynas.‬

‪Enough is enough. The rakyat is fed up. By August 31 this year, the country is 55 years under BN rule. It is now for the rakyat to decide whether they choose to keep the Barisan Government in power for the next 50 years.‬

Anwar Ibrahim: From Arab Street to Wall Street: The Changing Political Landscape

Speech by Anwar Ibrahim at the 20th Public Relations World Conference 2012 in Dubai, UAE, 14th March

Half a century ago in Vietnam, a Buddhist monk set himself on fire and triggered the fall of a regime. Since then, there have been numerous self-immolations with significant consequences but none as catastrophic as the one that happened in Tunisia.

Indeed, as we all know, Mohamed Buoazizi did not just set himself on fire. His death ignited the Arab Spring and spelled the doom of long held dictatorships and autocracies alike.

Back in 2005, at the US-Muslim World Forum in Doha, I spoke of the winds of change sweeping across the deserts of the Middle East. I said that given half a chance, the people would opt for freedom and democracy.

Well, the winds of change have become a raging storm, blowing the likes of Ben Ali, Mubarak, Gaddafi and Abdullah Salleh off their pedestals of power. There are others still hanging on for dear life but we know the outcome: it’s just a matter of time. You can’t fight the tide of history.

The repercussions of the Arab Spring are far reaching, going beyond the Middle East. Southeast Asia, for example, will be among the first to reap the fruits of this phenomenal change. Even so-called Old World democracies are affected. Wall Street, the icon of free market capitalism, has not been spared.

But first, the primary implications for the Middle East. Tunisia has successfully experienced her post-revolution general elections with significant results. The Egyptians too have cast their votes and all indications point to an Islamist-centric power sharing coalition. There are concerns that reactionaries may want to turn back the clock on democracy but this fear is premature. What is certain is that the test of democracy will be manifold and challenges will emerge to push the endurance to its limits.

For Egypt now, the real test of the Arab Spring is whether it will be the voice of the people that will prevail or will the guns and mortar of the military hold sway. And even in this people’s voice, whether the voice of moderation will prevail over the voice of ideological rigour.

As for Southeast Asia, detractors, sceptics, and the powers that be in the region have dismissed the idea of an Arab Spring. They say that it won’t happen because unlike the Middle East, there has been no winter of discontent in Southeast Asia.

They say that the economy has been good, unemployment numbers are far lower than even the old democracies, and that revolution is not the Asian way.

They say that while the Middle East is marked by the rule of autocrats and family dynasties, Southeast Asia is led by democratically elected leaders. One is notorious for human rights abuses, negation of the rule of law and is a hotbed for terrorism. The other is a region of peace and security and espouses the protection of fundamental liberties, a free market and a policy of non-interference.

It is said that street protests run counter to Asian values. An Arab Spring will undermine societal stability and economic prosperity. The powers that be tell us that Asian values favour a strong paternalistic government, not liberal democracy. Indeed, they have made it clear that they won’t allow it to happen.

Now, we think it’s time for a reality check.

Surely, the likes of Ben Ali, Mubarak and Gaddafi never allowed it to happen and had vowed to come down hard on their people. But the people went ahead, and they prevailed.

In spite of this, Southeast Asian leaders still believe that they can cow the people into submission. It seems to be lost on them that the Arab Spring happened because those deposed did not allow it to happen. And that is precisely the point – the spring is not about what they want – it’s about what the people want.

Before we go from the Arab Spring to Wall Street, a quick survey of Southeast Asia will be telling indeed. With the exception of Indonesia, ASEAN is but a confederation of various pseudo democracies and several outright dictatorial regimes. Civil liberties are honoured more in the breach, and political dissent is considered treachery while minorities are treated as second class. Religious minorities in particular are viewed with suspicion and often dealt with in a patronizing way.

As for rule of law, the actions of the authorities leave no room for dispute. For example, instead of being used to fight crime, the police are employed as first line of offence for the powers that be, to suppress street protests by brute force, harass political dissidents, and generally as tools to fight leaders of the opposition.

Similarly, the agency tasked to fight corruption, drags its feet when the suspects are from the government or ruling party while the public prosecutor consistently shows that it is either unwilling or impotent to prosecute those with strong political connections.

In other words, they are behaving in more or less the same manner as the powers that be in the Middle East used to behave before the Arab Spring.

A democracy is characterised by the institutionalising of democratic principles. For example, separation of powers enables the check and balance of one organ of state against another.

In this regard, the Arab Spring itself will be considered a failure if the newly minted democracies like Tunisia, Egypt and Libya are unable to ensure this separation. The judiciary, for example, must be totally free from the influence of the executive. We know that the mother of all power abuses stems from the tenacious hold exerted on the Judiciary by the Executive. I speak from direct personal experience but I’m sure other examples abound.

Again, elections must be free, fair and transparent. There must be equal access to a free media, open debates and a conduct of elections that can stand up to international scrutiny. This level playing field will never be realised when opposition leaders continue to be exposed to criminal prosecutions for exercising their right to free speech.

What proactive steps to reform are the spin doctors talking about when the opposition continues to be barred from the airwaves, rallies are not allowed as of right?

The Arab Spring is a metaphor for freedom and democracy for the rest of the world. It inspires the fight for justice for the oppressed and the marginalised. It gives hope to the weak and downtrodden that despite the odds stacked against them, there is light at the end of the tunnel.

The Arab Spring did not arise from a bed of roses. The violence and bloodshed that was descended on the people will serve as chilling reminders of desperate tyrants and autocrats trying to cling on to power.

The repercussions of the Arab Spring have been so far reaching that some say that Occupy Wall Street has been sired from its loins. Many may take issue with that and to my mind, a more apt description is that both are borne from winters of discontent.

Indeed, Occupy Wall Street is a clear indictment against market fundamentalism. It wants to nail the lie on the Wall Street mantra of “leaving it to market forces”. It exposes the flaws, some say fatal, in the foundations of the capitalistic economic model.

Like the Arab Spring, it has spread beyond its domestic borders moving on from one free market capital to another. It tears apart the philosophy of greed which is said to be the cornerstone of the Smithsonian rationale for capitalism.

I believe it is a build-up of societal angst arising from the gross inequities brought by the free market. The conservatives and the detractors tell them to get a life and get a job. But they have completely missed the point because the fact is that many of them can’t get jobs.

Arab Spring aspirants want free and fair elections i.e. equal opportunity to compete and on a level playing field. Likewise, Occupy Wall Street wants equality and if that is not possible at least an egalitarian deal, a 21st century New Deal. Not the Obama rhetoric of course but a real deal with tangible outcomes.

But we know that free competition has no truck with equality. That is why the bastions of capitalism are being overwhelmed. This is in essence a statement that people are simply fed up with getting poorer while the rich are getting richer – certainly not a new kind of suffering but one which has been given a collective voice by the movement and recognized as a legitimate grievance against the exploitation of the people by the corporate elite.

It is also a clear indictment against the concept of the invisible hand which has remained invisible so often that governments in the free world have felt compelled to intervene in situations traditionally left to market forces.

This brings us to a crucial component of the discourse: social justice. In my view, the principles of justice and fairness in dealings must remain the cornerstone to judge the validity of transactions. Justice and fairness can be attained through social justice.

But it should be remembered that the inequalities of wealth, power and status are not exclusive to nations practicing free markets.

Whatever may be the system, poverty reduction programs are essential without which the gap between the rich and the poor will never be narrowed. Occupy Wall Street therefore carries the overriding principle of the role of the state in guiding towards a more equitable distribution of wealth.

In Islam, the Maqasid al-Shari’a stress the importance of the protection of the environment, the eradication of poverty, and generally the promotion of social justice. Fighting poverty and redressing other social inequities are certainly among the priorities.

These concerns which should be the driving force of Occupy Wall Street must also be encompassed by the reforms of the Arab Spring. It is here that we can see a clear convergence. Where once both political tyranny and social injustice were prevalent, now we can say that the Arab Spring has changed the equation.

It has paved the way for further reforms. It certainly won’t be plain sailing but having come this far, there is no turning back.

Thank you.

 

Straits Times Singapore: Malaysia’s Rare-earth Plant: When govt policy and public views clash

Risalah untuk Dimuatturun / Leaflet for Download / 下载传单

Risalah SLC – SETIAP ORANG BERHAK UNTUK BERTANYA, SILA BERIKAN JAWAPAN KEPADA KAMI!

反莱纳斯联盟文宣品 – 人人有权发问 我们需要更多解答!

从709到226的Q&A

绿恐龙
2012年3月5日 傍晚6点38分 mk

从709到226之后,每次我穿着黄衣、绿衣去活动,都会有人问我下列的问题。这些问题重复了又重复。从家人、亲友、邻居、到路人都有。有些是带着关心、有些则是不屑。我试着把我记得的摘录下来,包含了我的回答。大家不妨一起来分享一下,当你遇到这些问题,是怎么解答的?

问:你去示威?

答:我不是去示威,我是去和平集会(请愿)。

问:你穿黄衣,不怕被抓?

答:穿黄衣为什么会被抓?哪一条法例声明穿黄衣是犯法的?李宗伟、国家足球队也穿黄衣,他们也会被抓么?

问:你们去生那么多事做么?

答:我们不是去生事,生事的不是我们。出来游行的很多是知识份子,不是滋事份子。

问:有工你就做、有饭你就吃,去参加什么游行?

答:每个人都只照顾自己,我们的未来、国家、孩子们,还有希望么?

问:你有没有想过你家里的小孩?

答:当然有啊!我也想到了别人家的孩子们,所以我选择了上街。你呢?

问:你这样做有什么好处?

答:好处就是继续施压、施压,让一些人不能得到好处。

问:政治?“咪搞”我啦?

答:请问你哪一分钟的生活是跟政治无关的? 简单的例子,跟钱有关的,就是跟政治有关。你的买菜钱、糖、汽油、过路费、车子房子等、兑换马币等,有哪一项不是政治的决定?

问:你们都是反对党。

答:我们都是无党无派的。政党的所有活动都跟政治有关没错,但是和平集会的政治活动无关政党。

问:你们是在反政府。

答:我们不是反政府,我们是以马来西亚人的身份,用和平的方式来表达我们的不满。

问:为什么你们要这样做?

答:因为我们都是马来西亚人,我们爱这个国家,我们关心孩子的未来,我们希望这个国家越变越好。

问:你们跟没出来的人有什么不同?你们人那么少?

答:出来,是因为我们有公民意识,我们是执行宪法里赋予给我们的权利。开始的时候,我们的人数少,但是它已经越来越多。别忘记,人多的是在我们这一边。

问:你们上街喊喊一下会有用么?还不是一样不能改变什么?

答:每次累计一些,积少就会成多。很多国家都做到了,为什么你会觉得我们改变不了什么?你看709和226的人数,你就知道关心的人、出席的人,已经越来越多。

问:你吃饱没事做么?

答:你错了。我的工作很忙很忙,我家里有父母有妻小,他们都很需要我,我也不想出来的。如果这个国家管理得好,我们就不需要经常出来上街,还要被你这样讲。

问:被抓进去了怎么办?

答:为了公民社会做事,怕被抓就没有人出来了。即使被抓,还是要去做。做,就对了。

问:法律上,这可是犯法的哦?

答:你知道这些法律是要来帮助什么人的吗?法律不是应该用来保护我们的生命和财产的吗?事实上是不是这样?如果不是,你应该认同这些法律吗?

问:我还有家庭,我精神上支持你们好吗?

答:你知道吗?那些站在最前线,甚至被逮捕的,他们都是有家庭的。精神上支持,跟什么都不做,有什么两样呢?你不怕人家会说你自私胆小么?

问:你们每个星期都有活动,不辛苦的吗?

答:辛苦啊!还常常不够人手、不够资源。所以请问你愿意出来帮忙吗?

我也不知道自己回答得好不好,有没有冒犯别人,但都是心里的话呀!只是到今天为止,我还没有遇到有人说:谢谢你们,上街代表我们的心声,辛苦了!谢谢你们,因为你们,我们的国家会变得更有希望!

(当然,上街不是为了要被人感谢。)

SERANGAN KE ATAS IZZAH ADALAH TINDAKAN BACUL UMNO KAKI PUKUL CERMINKAN BETAPA TERDESAKNYA UMNO YANG SEMAKIN NAZAK

Insiden serangan ke atas Ahli Parlimen Lembah Pantai YB Nurul Izzah Anwar menyampaikan mesej yang jelas kepada seluruh rakyat Malaysia bahawa Umno/BN kini semakin terdesak. Jelas dan nyata Umno kini adalah parti bacul, bukan lagi parti unggul dan Umno kini memalukan Melayu bukan lagi membela Melayu. Pimpinan Umno/BN yang semakin terdesak dalam usaha untuk mencengkam terus kuasa membenarkan penggunaan ugutan waima terhadap seorang wanita sekalipun. Ternyata di ambang Pilihanraya 13 ini, untuk terus berkuasa Umno/BN akan ambil apa sahaja tindakan termasuk membudayakan gelagat samseng dan keganasan. Perbuatan tidak bertamadun oleh pihak yang terdesak khususnya samseng-samseng upahan Umno dilindungi demi memenuhi kehendak rakus pemimpinnya yang mahu terus berkuasa!
Wanita Pakatan rakyat Indera Mahkota mengecam sekeras-kerasnya tindakan samseng Umno yang telah cuba menumbuk Ahli Parlimen Lembah Pantai yang juga Naib Presiden Parti Keadilan Rakyat, Nurul Izzah semasa beliau sedang menyampaikan ceramah di Felda Lepar Hilir 1 baru-baru ini. Serangan yang hampir mengenai mata Nurul Izzah itu walau bagaimanapun telah dapat dihalang oleh salah seorang petugas dan juga penyokong Pakatan Rakyat.
Sikap berdiam diri oleh kebanyakan pimpinan Umno/BN, khususnya pimpinan wanitanya hanya membuktikan ketidakupayaan Umno/BN melindungi hak seorang wanita. Wanita sudah tidak selamat lagi, jika Umno/BN dibiarkan bertindak sesuka hati.
Kami cabar pimpinan Umno/BN mengambil tanggungjawab atas salahlaku ahli-ahli dan mengenakan tindakan keras ke atas individu yang terlibat.
Wanita Pakatan Rakyat Indera Mahkota juga menggesa pihak keselamatan menyiasat segera serta mengambil tindakan ke atas mereka yang terbabit.
Wanita Pakatan Rakyat Indera Mahkota menyeru agar kaum hawa semua bangun mengutuk serangan dan perbuatan mengancam keselamatan wanita dan tolak Umno/BN yang sudah hilang kesopanan dan hormat terhadap wanita.

Tolak Umno/BN, Wanita lebih berdaya, Malaysia lebih sejahtera!

MAJLIS PEMUAFAKATAN WANITA PAKATAN RAKYAT INDERA MAHKOTA
PUTRA, BALOK 3 MAC 2012

Hansard Parlimen Australia – Sekarang kita tahu sama ada siapa yang sedang membohong!