一个网友给民联的公开信

Featured

(转载自网络)

每天听到红卫兵洗脑地说要敢敢换, 问他们要换成什么, 是不是要换成男女分开,不能帮异性剪头发, 女性失去自由与权力, 男性不能喝酒,才算改变!

红卫兵说先不要关这些, 要两线制, 问他们所谓的两线制, 是不是根据火箭党的党选, 是不是像PKR的最高领袖不需要竞选, 或者是PAS的精神领袖说的话不能被挑战, 这样就算是两线制。

红卫兵又洗脑说不要看党选,要实现媒体自由,不干涉记者报道权力, 问他们是不是能杯葛媒体, 能不能骂记者是走狗, 攻击其他专栏作者, 甚至发死亡威胁, 这算不算干涉媒体自由。

红卫兵转移视线说在国阵贪污, 问他们有什么证据, 安华当那么多年财政部长为何不拿出证据, 民联当州政府5年为何不拿出证据,红卫兵说养牛事件,但是养牛事件是由国家审计机构揭发, 代表国阵透明, 不像民联州政府的支持信, 达南丑闻, 非法采沙下封口令。

红卫兵只好拿出最后一招, 诬赖说国家会破产, 问他们根据什么说国家会破产, 国家的债务95%都是内债,国家经济成长6%比经济强国表现更好, 柔佛经济走廊吸引中国,中东, 新加坡外资, 加上国油在政府领导下不断发现新油田, 国家已经走在转型计划, 是不是要像吉兰丹那样才不算破产。

红卫兵问教育怎么说,问他们华人这50年有没有忘记本身的母语, 有没有失去受教的机会, 舞狮有没有被逼用青色狮子,子女有没有每天骂粗口三只经,是不是要安华的茅草行动才是维护教育。

红卫兵, 红卫兵, 不要再误导人民了, 看看你们本身, 毫无证据地抹黑, 人身攻击, 毫无政绩, 为了权力是非不分支持回教国, 打压异己甚至不放过党内同志, 你们何时清醒???

Advertisements

平时不工作, 大选搞讲座!!

Featured

马来西亚政局越来越像台湾。  许多平时没有政绩的政党以及候选人,一到大选时,就频频上报,搞一场又一场的造势大会,以期让人民觉得他们的服务得到肯定与支持。

其实这种造势大会抄自台湾政治,特别是陈水扁,善于利用造势大会来煽动支持者的情绪,博同情,抹黑攻击对手,为对手扣帽子,种种政治手段,以期让人民忘记了比较政绩,而是情绪化地相信他们的口号,憎恨对手,失去理性的判断能力。

这种情况就如前雪州大臣卡立所说,大选宣言并不是承诺,它不过是口号而已。

马来西亚人民真的懂得分辩何谓两线制,真的达到成熟的民主意识吗,真的知道何谓真相与毫无根据的煽动与抹黑吗?

其实大多数的政治分析家都知道情况真好相反,马来西亚经过上次的大选后,人民没有变得更理性,而是更加陷入充满憎恨情绪的政治局面,政客们也看清楚人民的弱点,知道平时不工作,大选搞讲座,一样可以用华丽的口号,愤世嫉俗的形象赢得选票。

可怜的政治分析家,却害怕受到攻击,而不愿揭发丑陋政客们的面具,马来西亚缺少了一位像涛哥那么勇敢揭露真相的主持人。

槟州政府夸言告别40年水灾 清晨一场大雨竟水淹半个槟岛

Featured

(转载自: 搜密网)

清晨一场大雨,几乎半个槟岛发生大水灾。槟州民联政府还在道路四周悬挂"告别40年水灾"的布条,形成一大讽刺!首长政治秘书甚至睁眼说瞎话,否认发生水灾的事实,被愤怒的网民围剿。(林思伟)

槟州政府治水有功,槟城全年不淹水?

周六清晨一场大雨,非但水灾黑区又再大淹水,连一向没发生淹水的地区也闹淹水,居民愤而怒拆民联槟州政府到处悬挂的“告别40年闪电水灾”布条,并且怒骂槟州首长林冠英言而无信,治水无能!

公正党籍的槟州治水工程委员会主席刘子健于去年12月曾宣称,由于民联槟州政府治水有功,槟威全年都不受水灾影响。

此外,林冠英的政治秘书黄伟益也在其选区高挂“告别40年闪电水灾”的布条。

行动党柑仔园区州议员佳日星更放话,如果比南利路再淹,他就剃光头!

当大家都以为在民联执政下,槟城人民真的从此可以摆脱水灾的梦魇时,星期六清晨的一场大雨,却让人们惊醒,原来民联州政府及议员们讲的全是骗话!

槟城非但还没有摆脱水灾的纠缠,而且情况比之前更严重。

周六清晨的一场连绵豪雨,非但比南利路一带的水灾黑区又再淹水,连一向没淹水的地区也水淹数尺高,令居民们叫苦连天,加上很多车辆抛锚在路中央,造成交通大阻塞。

结果,很多人在面子书内大骂林冠英及民联州政府,指很多在308前从来没有发生水灾的地区,自从民联州政府向全世界宣布槟州告别水灾后,都纷纷发生严重大水灾。这证明槟州首长只是讲,没有做,自己讲自己爽。

更令人气愤的是,当很多居民的住家淹水、很多车主的车抛锚在路中央,更有很多驾驶人士堵在车龙中时,林冠英的政治秘书黄伟益竟然在他的面子书里贴文讲风凉话说:他接到朋友的来电,指大雨洗干净56年的粪,现在我们准备重建我们的国家(I received from a friend: heavy rain bersihkan 56 yrs of shit… now, we’re ready to rebuild our nation!.)

这些顾人民疾苦的风凉话,当然引起公愤,一些居民在怒不可遏下,冒着雨拆掉黄伟益挂在霹雳路交通圈附近的“告别40年闪电水灾”的布条以泄愤。

而黄伟益从面子书里知道其“告别40年闪电水灾”的布条被愤怒的居民拆除后,竟然这样留言:布条还在原位。不信? 去交通花园林耀椿路看看, 根本就没有水灾, 而且蓄水池发挥了很大作用, 让居民告别了40年一雨成灾的梦靥。

当有人反问他,是不是他在知道其布条被人民拆下后,马上派人重新挂上时,黄伟益回应说:不需要拆掉, 事实就是事实。没有水灾就是没有水灾, 有什么好怕?

而责问他的人马上贴上一张交通花园的淹水相片,叫黄伟益认一认,这是不是他声称没有水灾的交通花园?

几乎半个槟城淹水,黄伟益竟然睁着眼说瞎话,网民当然很气愤,结果纷纷加入战围,对他破口大骂,黄伟益见引起公愤,只好抱头鼠窜,不敢再贴文。

以行动党为首的槟州民联政府,自308执政以来,对槟岛日益严重的交通和排水问题,一直都是采取头痛医头,脚痛医脚的方法,完全不懂如何针对问题采取一劳永逸的解决方案。

加上槟州政府近年无限制地批准山坡建屋计划,过渡的发展加上缺乏周全的排水系统,是造成今天一雨成灾的主要原因。槟州人民在未来的日子肯定还会不断的面对同样的烦恼。

GE13: It’s on

PUTRAJAYA: The 13th General Election is on. Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak confirmed that the King had consented to dissolution of Parliament on Wednesday.

“I met the Agong this morning and he consented to the dissolution of Parliament,” Najib said during a live televised speech after teh Cabinet meeting here Wednesday.

The Electoral Commission will now meet to set dates for nomination and polling day, which will be separated by at least 11 days.

However, elections must be held within 60 days of today, that is June 2nd.

The EC has also said that it will hold all state elections simultaneously with parliamentary elections, except for Sarawak which still has three years of its mandate left after holding polls in 2011.

林明華‧仇恨中的人沒有理智

Featured

// 高等教育部副部長賽夫丁警告說,大馬政局有陷入“仇恨政治"的不良趨勢,無論是國陣或民聯都有責任控制這種局面,以便為大馬打造一個健康的政治環境。

姑且不去爭論是誰在鼓吹仇恨政治,那些在選戰的過程中發生的踩場、挑釁、叫囂、攻擊事件,或在網上展開的抹黑、圍剿、羞辱、人肉搜尋等行徑,都是在某個程度上,燃起某些人心中的黑暗激情,助長了仇恨政治文化的滋生。

誰在干著這樣負面選舉術?借用一句老話回答:人在做,天也在看,大家心知肚明。

當政治變成了充滿仇恨觀念的時候,煽情的口水便如決堤之水洶湧而出,它的嚴重後果,就是暴力事件迭起,以致整個社會瀰漫著互不信任的猜疑情緒,不同族群或不同宗教信仰社群之間,也處於一種相互對立的惡質狀況之中。

毫無疑問,訴諸仇恨政治手段,是很無恥的一種負面選舉術,但可悲的是,今時今日,它仍能發揮吸票作用,這種選票效應也使它至今仍擁有很大的市場!

於是乎,我們看到,為了選票,為了勝選,為了政權,一些政客竟不惜犧性國家的利益,把自己包裝成民族英雄,無所不用其極地訴諸於悲情與謊言,藉著散播仇恨種籽以尋求自己的慰藉和歡娛的同時,也等著坐收政治的利益。

熱衷於仇恨政治的政客在訴諸於煽動悲情之餘,也採用“順者是,逆者非"的是非邏輯來迷惑大眾,在他們的操弄之下,善惡、黑白、對錯,一切都沿著政黨的界線划分,一切都用雙重標準來判斷,因此政治立場可以凌駕是非原則,政治利益也可以改變是非觀念。

當政治淪落到只有利益的追逐的時候,政治已經沒有理性和智慧可言,剩下的只有憤怒、仇恨、偏執與愚昧。尤為可怕的是,仇恨中的人們是沒有理智的,他們心中的怒火一旦點燃,很快就會形成燎原之勢,並一發不可收拾,燒掉了我們的原本善良的人性,也毀掉了我們美麗的家園。

我們的政治不該淪落至此,無論國陣還是民聯的領袖,還有這兩大陣營的忠貞黨員和支持者,都應該有這樣的警戒,不只譴責敵營的流泯暴力行為,也制止己方的過於偏執的狂熱行徑,讓我們看到一場有素質、有操守、有品德的選舉,而不是一場兩個流著鼻涕的壞孩子在斗臭斗爛的大選。

不管大選的結果如何,我們都希望看到,政權能和平延續或和平轉移。這是民之所欲,但願朝野雙方帶領我們向此前進!

Change for a better Tommorow?

Featured

PKFZ : Deal consistent with JPPH valuation but Talam : Deal never follows JPPH valuation

In July 29 last year, former transport minister Dr Ling Liong Sik was charged with misleading the cabinet into approving a land deal at an inflated price.

Dr Ling, 68, is charged with cheating the government by not disclosing to the Cabinet an additional interest rate of 7.5 percent per annum on the purchase price of the land for the PKFZ project, which had been fixed at RM1,088,456,000 by the Valuation and Property Services Department (JPPH) based on RM25 per sq ft inclusive of the coupon/interest rate.

He also faces two alternative charges, of cheating and intentionally omitting from the Cabinet that the 7.5 percent per annum was an additional interest rate on the land price.

The offences were allegedly committed at the fourth floor of the Prime Minister’s Office, Perdana Putra building in Putrajaya, between Sept 25 and Nov 6, 2002.

The case has since been tried before High Court Judge Datuk Ahmadi Asnawi.

On Thurs, 21 March 2013, it was reported that an expert has testified in the trial of Tun Dr Ling Liong Sik, that the sale and purchase agreement (SPA) for the Port Klang Free Zone (PKFZ) land was consistent with the valuation done by the Valuation and Property Services Department (JPPH).

Earlier in the trial, Dr Mahathir has also testified that the figure given in Dr Ling’s letter in June 2002 is actually lower than the figure stated by JPPH.

“Figure given by JPPH is actually bigger than figure stated by Datuk Seri Ling Liong Sik,” Dr Mahathir said.

He disagreed that this could be taken to mean that there was an attempt to cheat or mislead him.

Dr Mahathir said that if Dr Ling had given a figure that was higher than the Valuation and Property Services Department(JPPH)’s figures, he would agree that there was a bid to mislead.

Upon reading this, people in Selangor cannot help but relate it to the Talam land deal structured by the MB Selangor in year 2010.

Wong Koon Mun (BN-Kuala Kubu Baru) has highlighted that the Property Services and Valuation Department (JPPH) was not used to valuate Talam’s assets and the state government had instead used the services of a private appraiser.

He further claimed that most of Talam’s 160 hectare land in Ulu Yam had grade 3 and 4 slopes, which were unsuitable for development and had been forfeited by the State Government after purchasing it from Talam.

Sulaiman Razak (BN-Permatang) has also posted a question which has never been answered why the 539.2 hectare Talam land in Bukit Beruntung was taken over by the Selangor government at RM262 million whereas the land was only assessed at RM113 million by JPPH.

In reply during the winding up of State Assembly, MB Abdul Khalid had merely confused all including himself by saying that the Talam land evaluations were based on commercial rates to speed up the process of acquiring the debt as the company’s financial situation was critical and categorised as PN17 in BursaMalaysia.  He added that the decision was based on the commercial and not administrative aspect.

The lack of trustworthiness of MB Selangor in Talam land deal has been confirmed when MCA Young Professionals Bureau chief Datuk Chua Tee Yong said in December last year that Kumpulan Hartanah Selangor Bhd (KHSB)‘s  announcement on Bursa Malaysia shows discrepancies in the Selangor government’s debt recovery exercise involving Talam Corporation Bhd. The announcement confirmed that the amount owed to KHSB by Talam Group had been reduced from RM236mil to RM115mil and the reasons are still pending further investigation by auditors.

It is disappointing to say that with election so near, there are many unanswered questions regarding the Talam land deal and there is more to be unravelled and unearthed.  How could we expect to see a change for a better tomorrow?