Thursday, December 22, 2011

Dr Mahathir penaung Terbuka Malaysia 2012

Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad dilantik penaung kejohanan tenis Terbuka Wanita Malaysia BMW 2012.

Dalam satu kenyataan yang dikeluarkan penganjur, Pengarah Urusan BMW Malaysia, Geoffrey Briscoe berkata Dr Mahathir adalah penyokong kuat dalam membawa acara kejohanan sukan antarabangsa ke Malaysia.


Edisi ketiga kejohanan ini yang juga kejohanan Persatuan Tenis Wanita (WTA) akan berlangsung dari 27 Februari hingga 4 Mac di Bukit Kiara Equestrian & Country Resort.

Juara tujuh kejohanan Grand Slam, Venus Williams (gambar) dari Amerika Syarikat adalah antara bintang tenis handalan dunia yang akan mengambil bahagian dalam kejohanan yang menawarkan hadiah wang tunai keseluruhan sebanyak AS$220,000 (RM690,172).


Turut mengambil bahagian ialah pemain nombor sembilan dunia Marion Bartoli dari Perancis dan bintang dari China yang sedang meningkat Peng Shuai.


Persatuan Lawn Tenis Malaysia (LTAM), Tan Sri Abdul Razak Latiff berkata beliau teruja untuk menjadikan Dr Mahathir sebagai penaung kejohanan kerana pembabitannya akan menambah elemen penting kepada kejohanan dan mengukuhkan usaha persatuan itu untuk menarik perhatian lebih ramai masyarakat tempatan dan luar kepada kejohanan tenis di Malaysia.

SUMBER - Bernama

Tuesday, December 20, 2011

Tun M hasilkan 3 aspek kepimpinan besar



Tun M hasilkan 3 aspek kepimpinan besar


Datuk Seri Najib Razak berkata, bekas Perdana Menteri, Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad berjaya menghasilkan tiga aspek kepimpinan penting yang sangat besar dalam pembangunan negara.

Perdana Menteri berkata, tiga aspek itu ialah mewujudkan misi nasional iaitu Wawasan 2020, menyelamatkan ekonomi negara ketika krisis kewangan dunia pada 1997 dan menggalakkan rakyat menanam semangat keyakinan diri yang tinggi melalui slogan ‘Malaysia Boleh’.

“Bila Tun (Mahathir) ungkapkan ucapan visi Malaysia jadi negara maju, ia cetuskan satu semangat di kalangan rakyat dan hari ini kita berdiri di pusingan akhir.

“Saya boleh menyokong apa yang Tun (Mahathir) sebut bahawa dia tentu sekali tidak akan menyerahkan negara kita ini kepada penguasaan IMF dalam apa jua keadaan, sebaliknya kalau ada orang nak tuduh dia (Tun) menulis surat itu, saya fikir itu mengarut belaka,” katanya.

Beliau berkata demikian ketika berucap pada Majlis Makan Malam Gala Tun Dr Mahathir: Legasi Tersohor dan Pelancaran Program Kepimpinan Ulung Mahathir (MDIP) di Pusat Dagangan Dunia Putra (PWTC) di sini malam ini.

Majlis turut dihadiri Dr. Mahathir dan isteri, Tun Dr. Siti Hasmah Mohamed Ali serta isteri Perdana Menteri, Datin Seri Rosmah Mansor.

Najib menambah, kesemua usaha yang dilakukan Dr. Mahathir itu memberikan kesan yang besar dan berjaya meletakkan Malaysia ke arah visi negara maju dan memberikan keyakinan kepada rakyat.

Dalam pada itu, Dr. Mahathir dalam ucapannya memberi jaminan akan terus menyumbangkan pengalaman dan pendapatnya untuk kemajuan negara selagi diperlukan.

Sementara itu, MDIP diwujudkan bertujuan memberikan penghormatan atas jasa dan kepimpinan Dr. Mahathir terhadap pembangunan Malaysia.

Program itu memberikan geran penyelidikan kepada golongan profesional berumur 35 tahun ke bawah dari luar negara untuk mengkaji pemikiran Dr. Mahathir dan disebarkan ke negara asal mereka.

sumber : UTUSAN

DR M : Permohonan pinjaman ketika Anwar Menteri Kewangan



Permohonan pinjaman ketika Anwar Menteri Kewangan



Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad berkata, semua permohonan pinjaman yang diluluskan Bank Dunia kepada Malaysia pada tahun 1999 bukan dibuat oleh beliau, sebaliknya permohonan itu dibuat lebih awal iaitu pada 1997 ketika Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim masih menjadi Menteri Kewangan.

Bekas Perdana Menteri itu berkata, rundingan terakhir mengenai permohonan tersebut membabitkan tiga projek iaitu pinjaman untuk sektor pendidikan (AS$244 juta), sektor sosial (AS$60 juta) dan sektor teknikal (AS$100 juta) juga dibuat pada tahun 1997 (Anwar dipecat pada 1999).

Malah, beliau berkata, pinjaman AS$300 juta untuk program makanan, pendidikan tinggi serta mikro kredit yang ditandatangani pada Jun 1998 antara Bank Dunia dan Malaysia, beberapa bulan sebelum ringgit ditambat juga ketika Ketua Pembangkang itu masih lagi bergelar Menteri Kewangan.

Sehubungan itu, Dr. Mahathir sekali lagi mengulangi kesediaan untuk bersumpah dan mencabar Anwar mengambil tindakan sama jika ketua pembangkang itu gagal mengemukakan bukti yang beliau pernah memohon pinjaman daripada Bank Dunia serta Tabung Kewangan Antarabangsa (IMF).

“Krisis mata wang berlaku pada 1997. Secara semula jadi setiap pinjaman tidak akan diluluskan sehingga 1999 bila krisis sudah berakhir. Setiap permohonan pinjaman yang dibuat harus diikuti dengan rundingan dan kelulusan hanya akan diberi selepas segala urutan itu dilalui.

“Semua pinjaman yang dibuat pada 1997 oleh Kementerian Kewangan pada masa itu akhirnya diluluskan pada Mac 1999 tetapi kerajaan telah membuat keputusan untuk menghentikan segala pinjaman tersebut,” kata beliau dalam blognya, http://chedet.cc, hari ini.

Menurut Dr. Mahathir, pada 31 Mac 1999, pinjaman yang dibuat semasa era Anwar menjadi Menteri Kewangan bagi menangani masalah Y2K, projek pendidikan dan sektor sosial telah dihentikan selepas sebahagian daripada dana pinjaman tersebut diserahkan kepada kerajaan Malaysia.

Tambahnya, walaupun Malaysia tidak meminjam daripada IMF, tetapi Anwar semasa menjadi Menteri Kewangan melaksanakan dasar IMF apabila menaikkan kadar faedah dan mengurangkan tempoh pengisytiharan pinjaman tidak berbayar daripada enam bulan kepada tiga bulan.

“Seluruh dunia tahu mengenai perkara ini dan walaupun Anwar tidak menentang langkah kawalan mata wang, tetapi Gabenor Bank Negara dan timbalannya (orang kanan Anwar) enggan melaksanakan dasar tersebut dan meletak jawatan,” katanya.


SUMBER :UTUSAN

Dr M: Saya nak tanya Bank Dunia, betulkah?

Dr M: Saya nak tanya Bank Dunia, betulkah?



Bekas perdana menteri Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad hari ini sekali lagi menafikan bahawa beliau pernah meminta bantuan kewangan daripada Bank Dunia, sama ada semasa krisis kewangan tahun 1997 atau selepas itu.

Mengulas mengenai pendedahan Pengarah Strategik PKR Mohd Rafizi Ramli yang mengemukakan tiga dokumen yang didakwa sebagai bukti beliau pernah membuat pinjaman itu, Dr Mahathir berkata beliau perlu membuat pengesahan dengan Bank Dunia untuk melihat sama ada dokumen itu asli atau tidak.

"Saya nak tengok...Saya nak pi (pergi) tanya World Bank betul ka ini...pasal sekarang ni taulah gambar manusia dengan badan lain pun boleh buat.

"Sepanjang yang saya ingat dan saya tidak lupa, saya tidak pernah menghantar sebarang permintaan bagi sebarang wang, tidak semasa krisis kewangan atau malah selepas itu. Saya (ketika itu) baru saja kecam World Bank, lepas tu nak minta duit kat dia buat apa? Bodohlah saya," katanya kepada pemberita selepas perjumpaan dengan 26 peserta program realiti Adik-Adikku di Yayasan Kepimpinan Perdana di Putrajaya.

Dr Mahathir turut mempertikaikan mengapa dokumen seperti itu tiba-tiba muncul, sedangkan Ketua Pembangkang Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim mengatakan beliau tidak mempunyai dokumen itu sebelum ini.

"Kenapa baru hari ni, dah berapa tahun dah, baru keluar? Pasal politiklah, pasal pilihan raya, nak burukkan orang lain," katanya.

Anwar ketika berucap pada majlis makan malam membincangkan Program Transformasi Ekonomi (ETP) yang turut dihadiri wakil kedutaan asing baru-baru ini dilaporkan mendakwa Dr Mahathir ada menulis kepada Bank Dunia untuk bantuan dana semasa krisis kewangan.

Dr Mahathir kemudiannya mencabar Anwar bersumpah dengan memegang al-Quran bagi membuktikan perkara itu.

Program realiti Adik-Adikku merupakan program Radio Televisyen Malaysia (RTM) untuk mencari bakat si cilik dalam berdakwah. Episod akhir program itu akan diadakan pada Mac tahun depan dengan hanya lima orang peserta akan terpilih.

sumber - Bernama

Sunday, December 18, 2011

MENGENANG MASA DULU

MENGENANG MASA DULU

oleh Dr. Mahathir bin Mohamad





Pulau Pinang negerinya baru



Kapten Light menjadi Raja



Bila terkenang zaman dahulu



Duduk mengalir air mata



1. Pantun ini dikarang oleh “tukang karut” pasukan boria di Pulau Pinang di zaman British.



2. Kita jarang mendengar pantun ini sekarang, Tetapi semasa saya masih budak belasan tahun, saya sering mendengarnya. Sedikit sebanyak saya rasa sedih juga. Air mata tidak mengalir tetapi ia menghantui fikiran saya.



3. Orang Melayu Pulau Pinang pada zaman itu sudah hilang kedudukan mereka dalam pulau yang membangun dengan pantas hasil daripada pengisytiharannya sebagai pulau bebas cukai oleh British. Sementara deretan kedai dan rumah batu seperti mahligai diduduki oleh orang lain, mereka, orang Melayu terpaksa pindah melarikan diri daripada pembangunan bandaraya Pulau Pinang kerana tawaran untuk menjual hartanah mereka begitu tinggi, dan mereka semua miskin dan tidak mampu membeli atau menyewa bangunan kedai atau rumah kediaman yang didirikan, selepas menjual tanah mereka.



4. Kemudian apabila pembangunan sampai ke kawasan di mana orang Melayu telah lari, mereka sekali lagi menjual tanah dan berpindah jauh daripada pembangunan.



5. Lama-kelamaan mereka tenggelam dalam masyarakat asing yang semakin bertambah dan mewah. Itulah nasib mereka, menjadi kumpulan orang yang terasing di negeri sendiri. Maka mengalirlah air mata mereka.



6. Sukar bagi mereka yang dilahir di zaman ini, zaman peluang bertimbun-timbun, zaman serba mudah, zaman tersohor bangsa Melayu, zaman kuasa di tangan Melayu, sukar bagi mereka menggambarkan kehidupan orang Pulau Pinang di zaman British.



7. Apa perlunya kita diperingati akan kedudukan orang Melayu Pulau Pinang di zaman itu? Sebenarnya tidak perlu. Setelah mencapai kejayaan, tidak mungkin kita ditimpa nasib orang Melayu Pulau Pinang.



8. Sekali berjaya tetap berjaya, sekali merdeka, tetap merdeka. Bukankah Hang Tuah telah berkata tak akan Melayu hilang di dunia. Ini jaminan yang diberi kepada bangsa Melayu. Kita akan terus Melayu walaupun hanya menjadi pemandu kereta, buruh kasar, budak pejabat. Kita Melayu juga. Tak perlu mengalir air mata.


sumber : chedet.cc

Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad Has Received The ICT Lifetime Achievement Award From PIKOM




source : http://www.pikom.my/

Saturday, December 17, 2011

Dr. M cabar Anwar bersumpah



Dr. M cabar Anwar bersumpah


Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad mencabar Ketua Pembangkang, Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim bersumpah dengan memegang al-Quran bagi membuktikan bekas Perdana Menteri itu pernah menulis surat kepada Bank Dunia untuk meminta bantuan semasa krisis kewangan pada 1999 seperti yang didakwa.

Dr. Mahathir berkata, beliau tidak pernah berbuat demikian sebaliknya menolak permintaan daripada Bank Dunia yang datang untuk menawarkan bantuan.

"Saya minta dia (Anwar) tunjukkan surat itu kalau ada. Saya yang menolak semasa wakil Tabung Kewangan Antarabangsa (IMF) datang nak tawarkan bantuan dana.

"Saya nak suruh dia bersumpah menjunjung al-Quran bersama saya jika benar saya menulis surat itu," katanya.

Beliau berkata demikian kepada pemberita selepas majlis Multaqa Wedatul Ummah Ketiga anjuran Persatuan Kariah-Kariah Masjid Negeri Pulau Pinang di sini hari ini.

Hadir sama Yang Dipertua Persatuan Kariah-Kariah Masjid Negeri Pulau Pinang, Datuk Seri Mohd. Yussof Latiff.

Sementara itu, Menteri di Jabatan Perdana Menteri, Tan Sri Nor Mohamed Yakcop memberitahu, beliau ada bersama Dr. Mahathir ketika wakil IMF tersebut datang menemui mereka.

"Tun (Dr. Mahathir) menghalau mereka keluar dari pejabatnya," katanya yang ketika itu merupakan Timbalan Gabenor Bank Negara.

Laman portal propembangkang semalam melaporkan, kelmarin ketika berucap pada majlis makan malam membincangkan Program Transformasi Ekonomi (ETP) yang turut dihadiri wakil kedutaan asing, Anwar mendakwa Dr. Mahathir ada menulis kepada Bank Dunia untuk bantuan dana semasa krisis kewangan 1999.

Anwar berkata, pada tahun 1993, beliau juga pernah menulis kepada Bank Dunia atas kapasitinya sebagai menteri kewangan ketika itu untuk menolak bantuan kewangan.

Katanya, walaupun beliau mempengerusikan jawatankuasa pembangunan IMF dan Bank Dunia, beliau berpendapat Malaysia tidak memerlukan dana itu.

Bagaimanapun, dakwanya lagi, pada 1999, Mahathir menulis kembali kepada Presiden Bank Dunia dan merayu untuk dana dan pinjaman.


sumber :Utusan

Perbezaan fahaman politik punca umat Islam berpecah

Perbezaan fahaman politik di negara ini menyebabkan umat Islam dikatakan berpecah belah dan bukan kerana agama, kata bekas Perdana Menteri, Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad.

Beliau berkata, umat Islam di negara ini kini berpecah kepada tiga puak dan telah “berperang” sesama sendiri walaupun tidak menggunakan senjata seperti di beberapa negara Islam yang lain.

“Umat Islam di Malaysia berpecah bukan dari segi agama tetapi dari segi fahaman politik yang mempengaruhi ahli-ahlinya,” kata beliau.

“Semata-mata untuk menjayakan fahaman politik mereka, umat Islam di negara ini tidak sanggup solat di masjid yang sama dan mempunyai tanah perkuburan yang berbeza, katanya kepada pemberita selepas merasmikan Majlis Multaqa Wehdatul Ummah ke tiga di sini hari ini.

“Kalau kita sedar, ajaran agama Islam ini adalah persaudaraan dan kita harus memupuk sikap perpaduan lagi-lagi dalam satu agama yang sama,” kata Dr Mahathir.

"Umat Islam perlu bersatu padu dan tidak berpecah belah serta bermusuh-musuhan sesama sendiri kerana perpaduan itu adalah asas hidup masyarakat Islam,” katanya yang juga Yang Dipertua Pertubuhan Kebajikan Islam Malaysia (Perkim).

sumber – BERNAMA

Monday, December 5, 2011

Dr Mahathir saran Umno letak ramai calon pelapis

Dr Mahathir saran Umno letak ramai calon pelapis

Bekas Perdana Menteri Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad berkata Umno perlu mencalonkan pelapis muda dalam pilihan raya umum akan datang bagi memberi peluang kepada mereka memegang jawatan dalam parti.

NONEBeliau berkata wakil rakyat yang sudah berumur perlu berundur secara sukarela bagi memberi ruang kepada golongan muda yang berkebolehan dan berbakat untuk menyandang jawatan dalam Umno.

"Kita masuk Umno bukan kita nak dapat jawatan, kita masuk Umno adalah kerana bangsa, agama dan negara. Yang penting perjuangan perlu diteruskan dan parti menang," katanya kepada pemberita pada "Wacana Transformasi PBT Melangkah ke Hadapan: Apa kata Tun M" di Dewan Bandaran Ipoh hari ini.

Turut hadir isteri beliau Tun Dr Siti Hasmah serta Menteri Besar Datuk Seri Zambry Abdul Kadir dan isteri Datin Seri Saripah Zulkifli.

Ketika diminta mengulas kenyataan Setiausaha DAP Perak, Nga Kor Ming, yang menghina Zambry pada satu ceramah baru-baru ini, Dr Mahathir berkata parti itu tidak mempunyai idea selain mengeluarkan kata-kata yang tidak sepatutnya.

azlan"Perkara itu menjadi kebiasaan kepada pemimpin-pemimpin DAP dengan memaki hamun serta menghina orang lain. Sepatutnya pemimpin tunjuk perkara yang baik dan apa boleh mereka lakukan kepada rakyat," katanya.

Ditanya mengenai kenyataan Ketua Umum PKR Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim yang berjanji untuk menurunkan harga minyak sekiranya pakatan pembangkang mentadbir negara, Dr Mahathir berkata itu hanya janji kosong untuk meraih undi rakyat.

"Dia nak buat macam mana? Dia janji macam-macam dalam kempen. Bila dah jadi pemimpin baru kata tak boleh," katanya.

Mengenai Menteri Pembangunan Wanita, Keluarga dan Masyarakat Datuk Seri Shahrizat Abdul Jalil yang diminta melepaskan jawatan ekoran isu Perbadanan Fidlot Nasional yang melibatkan suami beliau, Dr Mahathir berkata itu terpulang kepada Shahrizat.

azlan"Kalau dia rasa dia patut berundur, dia patut berundur," katanya.

Dalam ucapannya pula, Dr Mahathir berkata negara tidak akan mencapai kemajuan sekiraya masih dibelenggu demonstrasi setiap masa.

"Sekiranya politik sering huru-hara dengan perselisihan faham, pergerakan untuk menjadikan negara maju akan terbantut (kerana) pentadbir terpaksa menumpukan perhatian untuk meredakan keadaan," katanya.

Sumber - Bernama

Pemimpin perlu undur beri peluang kepada muka baru



Pemimpin perlu undur beri peluang kepada muka baru

IPOH: Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad berkata, pemimpin parti, terutama UMNO perlu mengundur diri dan melepaskan jawatan jika tindakan itu mendatangkan faedah kepada parti.
Bekas Perdana Menteri itu berkata, mereka seharusnya dapat membuat keputusan terbaik dan memberi peluang kepada gabungan muka baru kerana kepentingan parti perlu diutamakan melebihi kepentingan peribadi.

Beliau berkata demikian ketika mengulas desakan pemimpin UMNO dan pembangkang yang meminta Menteri Pembangunan Wanita, Keluarga dan Masyarakat, Datuk Seri Shahrizat Abdul Jalil meletakkan jawatan berikutan pembabitan ahli keluarganya dalam isu pusat ternakan lembu Pusat Fidlot Kebangsaan (NFC).

“Terpulang kepada dia, kalau dia patut undur, dia undur. Kita minta mereka yang berpendapat dengan pengunduran mendatangkan faedah kepada parti, mereka harus undur," katanya selepas menghadiri program Bicara Negawaran Bersama Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad bertajuk Transformasi Pihak Berkuasa Tempatan Melangkah Ke Hadapan – Apa kata Tun, di Dewan Bandaran Ipoh, di sini semalam.

Dr Mahathir berkata, setiap pemimpin seharusnya sedar tempoh sepatutnya mereka berundur dan memberi peluang kepada barisan generasi muda menunjukkan kebolehan menerajui parti.

“Kita patut tahu bila patut undur diri. Saya dulu undur diri juga, saya boleh teruskan, bukan tidak boleh. Saya ingat kalau saya terus orang nak kata apa juga, tapi kita sudah lama dan harus bagi tempat kepada orang lain,” katanya.


Sumber :Berita Harian

Sunday, December 4, 2011

Kuala Lumpur tribunal: Bush and Blair guilty


Kuala Lumpur tribunal: Bush and Blair guilty

A war crimes tribunal in Malaysia offers a devastating critique of international criminal law institutions today.


A tribunal in Malaysia's capital found George W Bush and Tony Blair guilty of war crimes in Iraq

In Kuala Lumpur, after two years of investigation by the Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Commission (KLWCC), a tribunal (the Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Tribunal, or KLWCT) consisting of five judges with judicial and academic backgrounds reached a unanimous verdict that found George W Bush and Tony Blair guilty of crimes against peace, crimes against humanity, and genocide as a result of their roles in the Iraq War.

The proceedings took place over a four-day period from November 19-22, and included an opportunity for court-appointed defense counsel to offer the tribunal arguments and evidence on behalf of the absent defendants. They had been invited to offer their own defense or send a representative, but declined to do so. The prosecution team was headed by two prominent legal personalities with strong professional legal credentials: Gurdeal Singh Nijar and Francis Boyle. The verdict issued on November 22, 2011 happens to coincide with the 48th anniversary of the assassination of John F Kennedy.

The tribunal acknowledged that its verdict was not enforceable in a normal manner associated with a criminal court operating within a sovereign state or as constituted by international agreement, as is the case with the International Criminal Court. But the KLWCT followed a juridical procedure purported to operate in a legally responsible manner. This would endow its findings and recommendations with a legal weight expected to extend beyond a moral condemnation of the defendants, but in a manner that is not entirely evident.

The KLWCT added two "Orders" to its verdict that had been adopted in accordance with the charter of the KLWCC that controlled the operating framework of the tribunal: 1) Report the findings of guilt of the two accused former heads of state to the International Criminal Court in The Hague; and 2) Enter the names of Bush and Blair in the Register of War Criminals maintained by the KLWCC.

The tribunal also added several recommendations to its verdict: 1) Report findings in accord with Part VI (calling for future accountability) of the Nuremberg Judgment of 1945 addressing crimes of surviving political and military leaders of Nazi Germany; 2) File reports of genocide and crimes against humanity at the International Criminal Court in The Hague; 3) Approach the UN General Assembly to pass a resolution demanding that the United States end its occupation of Iraq; 4) Communicate the findings of the tribunal to all members of the Rome Statute (which governs the International Criminal Court) and to all states asserting Universal Jurisdiction that allows for the prosecution of international crimes in national courts; and 5) Urge the UN Security Council to take responsibility to ensure that full sovereign rights are vested in the people of Iraq and that the independence of its government be protected by a UN peacekeeping force.

Mahathir Mohamed's anti-war campaign

These civil society legal initiatives are an outgrowth of a longer-term project undertaken by the controversial former Malaysian head of state, Mahathir Mohamed, to challenge American-led militarism and to mobilise the global South to mount an all-out struggle against the war system.

This vision of a revitalised struggle against war and post-colonial imperialism was comprehensively set forth in Mahathir's remarkable anti-war speech of February 24, 2003, while still prime minister, welcoming the Non-Aligned Movement to Kuala Lumpur for its thirteenth summit.

Included in his remarks on this occasion were the following assertions that prefigure the establishment of the KLWCC and KLWCT:

"War must be outlawed. That will have to be our struggle for now. We must struggle for justice and freedom from oppression, from economic hegemony. But we must remove the threat of war first. With this sword of Damocles hanging over our heads we can never succeed in advancing the interests of our countries.?War must therefore be made illegal. The enforcement of this must be by multilateral forces under the control of the United Nations. No single nation should be allowed to police the world, least of all to decide what action to take, [and] when."

Mahathir stated clearly on that occasion that his intention in criminalising the behavior of aggressive warmaking and crimes against humanity was to bring relief to victimised peoples - with special reference to the Iraqis, who were about to be attacked a few weeks later; and the Palestinians, who had long endured mass dispossession and an oppressive occupation. This dedication of Mahathir to a world without war was reaffirmed through the establishment of the Kuala Lumpur Foundation to Criminalise War, and his inaugural speech opening a Criminalising War Conference on October 28, 2009.

On February 13, 2007 Mahathir called on the KLWCC to prepare a case against Bush and Blair, whom he held responsible for waging aggressive warfare against Iraq. Mahathir, an outspoken critic of the Iraq War and its aftermath, argued at the time that there existed a need for an alternative judicial forum to the ICC, which was unwilling to indict Western leaders. Mahathir was in effect insisting that no leader should any longer be able to escape accountability for such crimes against nations and peoples. He acknowledged with savage irony the limits of his proposed initiative: "We cannot arrest them, we cannot detain them, and we cannot hang them the way they hanged Saddam Hussein." Mahathir also contended that, "The one punishment that most leaders are afraid of is to go down in history with a certain label attached to them ... In history books they should be written down as war criminals and this is the kind of punishment we can make to them".

With this remark, Mahathir prefigured the KLWCC register of war criminals that has inscribed the names of those convicted by the KLWCT. Will it matter? Does such a listing have traction in our world?

In his 2007 statement, Mahathir promised that a future KLWCT would not, in his words, be "like the 'kangaroo court' that tried Saddam". Truly, the courtroom proceedings against Saddam Hussein was a sham trial excluding much relevant evidence, disallowing any meaningful defense, and culminating in a grotesque and discrediting execution. Saddam Hussein was subject to prosecution for multiple crimes against humanity, as well as crimes against peace, but the formally "correct" trappings of a trial could not obscure the fact that this was a disgraceful instance of victors' justice. Of course, the media, to the extent that it notices civil society initiatives at all, condemns them in precisely the same rhetoric that Mahathir used to attack the Saddam trial, insisting that the KLWCT is a "kangaroo court" or a "circus". The Western media, without exception, has ignored this proceeding against Bush and Blair, presumably considering it as irrelevant and a travesty of the law, while giving considerable attention to the almost concurrent UN-backed Cambodia War Crimes Tribunal prosecuting surviving Khmer Rouge operatives accused of genocidal behavior in the 1970s. For the global media, the auspices make all the difference.

Universal jurisdiction

The KLWCT did not occur entirely in a jurisprudential vacuum. It has long been acknowledged that domestic criminal courts can exercise universal jurisdiction for crimes of state wherever these may occur, although usually only if the accused individuals are physically present in the court. In American law, the Alien Tort Claims Act allows civil actions provided personal jurisdiction of the defendant is obtained for crimes such as torture committed outside of the United States.

The most influential example was the 1980 Filartiga decision awarding damages to a victim of torture in autocratic Paraguay (Filartiga v. Peña 620 F2d 876). That is, there is a sense that national tribunals have the legal authority to prosecute individuals accused of war crimes wherever in the world the alleged criminality took place. The underlying legal theory is based on the recognition of the limited capacity of international criminal trials to impose accountability in a manner that is not entirely dictated by geopolitical priorities and reflective of a logic of impunity. In this regard, universal jurisdiction has the potential to treat equals equally, and is very threatening to the Kissingers and Rumsfelds of this world, who have curtailed their travel schedules. The United States and Israel have used their diplomatic leverage to roll back universal jurisdiction authority in Europe, especially in the United Kingdom and Belgium.

To a certain extent, the KLWCT is taking a parallel path to criminal accountability. It does not purport to have the capacity to exert bodily punishment, and stakes its claims to effectiveness on publicity, education, and symbolic justice. Such initiatives have been undertaken from time to time since the Russell Tribunal of 1967 to address criminal allegations arising out of the Vietnam War, whenever there exists public outrage and an absence of an appropriate response by governments or the institutions of international society.

In 1976, the Lelio Basso Foundation in Rome established a Permanent Peoples Tribunal that generalised on the Russell experience. It believed that there was an urgent need to fill the institutional gap in the administration of justice worldwide that resulted from geopolitical manipulation and resulting formal legal regimes of double standards. Over the next several decades, the PPT addressed a series of issues ranging from allegations of American intervention in Central America and Soviet intervention in Afghanistan to human rights in the Philippines' Marcos dictatorship, the dispossession of Indian communities in Brazil's Amazonia state, and the denial of the right of self-determination to the Puerto Rican people.

The most direct precedent for KLWCT was the World Tribunal on Iraq (WTI), held in Istanbul in 2005, which culminated a worldwide series of hearings carried on between 2003-2005 on various aspects of the Iraq War. As with KLWCT, it also focussed on the alleged criminality of those who embarked on the Iraq War. WTI proceedings featured many expert witnesses, and produced a judgment that condemned Bush and Blair, among others, and called for a variety of symbolic and societal implementation measures.

The jury Declaration of Conscience included this general language:

"The invasion and occupation of Iraq was and is illegal. The reasons given by the US and UK governments for the invasion and occupation of Iraq in March 2003 have proven to be false. Much evidence supports the conclusion that a major motive for the war was to control and dominate the Middle East and its vast reserves of oil as a part of the US drive for global hegemony… In pursuit of their agenda of empire, the Bush and Blair governments blatantly ignored the massive opposition to the war expressed by millions of people around the world. They embarked upon one of the most unjust, immoral, and cowardly wars in history."

Unlike KLWCT, the tone and substance of the formal outcome of the WTI was moral and political rather than strictly legal, despite the legal framing of the inquiry. For a full account see Muge Gursoy Sokmen's World Tribunal on Iraq: Making the Case Against War (2008).

Justifying tribunals

Two weeks before the KLWCT, a comparable initiative in South Africa was considering allegations of apartheid directed at Israel in relation to dispossession of Palestinians and the occupation of a portion of historic Palestine (this was the Russell Tribunal on Palestine, South African Session, November 5-7 2011).

All these "juridical" events had one thing in common: The world system of states and institutions was unwilling to look a particular set of facts in the eye, and respond effectively to what many qualified and concerned persons believed to be a gross injustice. In this regard, there was an intense ethical and political motivation behind these civil society initiatives that invoked the authority of law. But do these initiatives really qualify as "law"? A response to such a question depends on whether the formal procedures of sovereign states, and their indirect progeny - international institutions - are given a monopoly over the legal administration of justice. I would side with those that believe that people are the ultimate source of legal authority, and have the right to act on their own when governmental procedures, as in these situations, are so inhibited by geopolitics that they fail to address severe violations of international law.

Beyond this, we should not neglect the documentary record compiled by these civil society initiatives operating with meager resources. Their allegations almost always exhibit an objective understanding of available evidence and applicable law, although unlike governmental procedures, this assessment is effectively made prior to the initiation of the proceeding.

It is this advance assurance of criminality that provides the motivation for making the formidable organisational and fundraising effort needed to bring such an initiative into play. But is this advance knowledge of the outcome so different from war crimes proceedings under governmental auspices? Indictments are made in high-profile war crimes cases only when the evidence of guilt is overwhelming and decisive, and the outcome of adjudication is known as a matter of virtual certainty before the proceedings commence.

In both instances, the tribunal is not really trying to determine guilt or innocence, but rather is intent on providing the evidence and reasoning that validates and illuminates a verdict of guilt and resulting recommendations in one instance and criminal punishment in the other. It is, of course, impossible for civil society tribunals to enforce their outcomes in any conventional sense. Their challenge is rather to disseminate the judgment as widely and effectively as possible. A Permanent Peoples Tribunal publication can sometimes prove to be surprisingly influential in book form, given the extensive factual basis it presents in reaching its verdict. This was reportedly the case in generating oppositional activism in the Philippines in the early 1980s during the latter years of the Marcos regime.

The legalism of the KLWCT

The KLWCT has its own distinctive identity. It has the imprint of an influential former head of state in the country where the tribunal was convened, giving the whole undertaking a quasi-governmental character. It also took account of Mahathir's wider campaign against war in general. The assessing body of the tribunal was composed of five distinguished jurists, including judges, from Malaysia, imparting an additional sense of professionalism. The chief judge was Abdel Kadir Salaiman, a former judge on Malaysia's federal court. Two other persons who were announced as judges were recused at the outset of the proceedings, one because of supposed bias associated with prior involvement in a similar proceeding, and another due to illness. There was also a competent defense team that presented arguments intended to exonerate the defendants Bush and Blair, although the quality of the legal arguments offered was not as cogent as the evidence allowed.

The tribunal operated in strict accordance with a charter that had been earlier adopted by the KLWCC, and imparted a legalistic tone to the proceedings. It is this claim of legalism that is the most distinctive feature of the KLWCT - unlike comparable undertakings that rely more on an unprofessional and loose application of law by widely known moral authority personalities and culturally prominent figures, who make no pretense of familiarities with legal procedure and the fine points of substantive law. In this respect, the Iraq War Tribunal (IWT) held in Istanbul in 2005 was more characteristic. It pronounced on the law and offered recommendations on the basis of a politically and morally oriented assessment of evidence by a jury of conscience. The tribunal was presided over by the acclaimed Indian writer and activist Arundhati Roy, and composed of a range of persons with notable public achievements, but without claims to expert knowledge of the relevant law, although extensive testimony by experts in international law did give a persuasive backing to the allegations of criminality. Also, unlike KLWCT, the IWT made no pretense of offering a defense to the charges.

Tribunals of 'conscience' or 'law'?

It raises the question for populist jurisprudence as to whether "conscience" or "law" is the preferred and more influential grounding for this kind of non-governmental initiative. In neither case does the statist-oriented mainstream media pause to give attention, even critical attention. In this regard, only populist democratic forces with a cosmopolitan vision will find such outcomes as Kuala Lumpur notable moves toward the establishment of what Derrida called the "democracy to come". Whether such forces will become numerous and vocal enough remains uncertain. One possible road to greater influence would be to make more imaginative uses of social networking potentials to inform, explain, educate, and persuade.

This recent session of the Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Tribunal offers a devastating critique of the persisting failures of international criminal law mechanisms of accountability to administer justice justly, that is, without the filters of impunity provided by existing hierarchies of hard power.

Richard Falk is Albert G. Milbank Professor Emeritus of International Law at Princeton University and Visiting Distinguished Professor in Global and International Studies at the University of California, Santa Barbara. He has authored and edited numerous publications spanning a period of five decades, most recently editing the volume, International Law and the Third World: Reshaping Justice (Routledge, 2008).

He is currently serving his third year of a six year term as a United Nations Special Rapporteur on Palestinian human rights.

The views expressed in this article are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera's editorial policy.

SOURCE : AL-JAZEERA

Friday, December 2, 2011

Dr M: Saya sokong Najib, beliau yang terbaik.

Dr M: Saya sokong Najib, beliau yang terbaik


Bekas Perdana Menteri Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad memberi satu tip politik yang ringkas dan padat bagi pengundi rakyat Malaysia.

Sambil memuji Perdana Menteri Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak kerana "membetulkan kesilapan" dalam sistem politik, beliau berkata Najib perlu diberi peluang untuk memimpin negara.

"Beliau semakin popular, beliau membetulkan kesilapan yang telah dilakukan oleh pengganti saya.

"Saya sokong Najib, beliau adalah yang terbaik, beliau layak diberi peluang," kata Dr Mahathir pada sidang akhbar di New Delhi, hari ini.

Negarawan yang berumur 86 tahun itu berada di sini untuk menghadiri sidang kemuncak tahunan pemimpin Hindustan Times di mana beliau menyampaikan ucaptama.

Dalam ucapannya, beliau memberi amaran terhadap pemimpin global untuk memerhatikan perubahan besar yang sedang berlaku - kegagalan rancangan ekonomi pusat, pengaruh media sosial dan kerancakan orang ramai menyeberangi sempadan.

"Ini merupakan perubahan radikal yang berlaku dalam abad ke-21. Semua ini akan memberi kesan terhadap apa yang kita lakukan, bidang politik, ekonomi, sosial atau kewangan.

"Jika kita enggan mengakui perubahan ini, kita tidak akan mampu menghadapi cabaran-cabaran ini," katanya.

Dalam ucaptamanya bertemakan "Cabaran Perubahan Dalam Abad Ke-21", beliau berkata demokrasi bukan satu sistem yang buruk tetapi bukan satu penyelesaian bagi semua kelemahan politik.

"Demokrasi merupakan satu bentuk terbaik sesebuah kerajaan, bukan mudah untuk mentadbir kerana rakyat tidak faham mengenai batas-batas demokrasi," katanya.

Sumber - Bernama

37 juta pengunjung Chedet.cc




Tahniah Tun!

UMNO yang bukan lagi UMNO

UMNO yang bukan lagi UMNO

May 29 2008

Written by chedet

Saya ucap terima kasih kepada beberapa ahli UMNO yang mahu saya kembali menjadi ahli.
Sebenarnya
sejak saya melantik Dato Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi sebagai Perdana
Menteri dan dianya mengisi jawatan itu, UMNO tidak pernah layan saya
sebagai ahli UMNO, jauh sekali sebagai bekas Presiden UMNO.

Dari
awal lagi Menteri-Menteri UMNO, pemimpin-pemimpin UMNO dilarang
daripada berjumpa dengan saya atau menghadiri apa-apa majlis di mana
saya mungkin berucap.

Menteri yang saya lantik dahulu, sekarang mengecam dan mengeluar kata-kata kesat kepada saya.

UMNO
tidak dibenar menjemput saya dan jika sesiapa cuba jemput juga, mereka
dipanggil oleh Menteri Besar dan juga polis supaya tarik balik
jemputan. Selepas 14 jemputan dipaksa tarik balik tiada siapa yang
berani jemput saya lagi. Ahli-ahli UMNO tidak dibenar hadir apa-apa
majlis di mana saya akan berucap, dan mereka pun patuh akan arahan ini.

Ahli
Bahagian Kubang Pasu yang saya menjadi ketuanya selama 22 tahun diarah
dan disogok dengan wang supaya tidak mengundi saya sebagai wakil
Bahagian ke Perhimpunan Agong UMNO 2006. Dan saya pun kalah.

Timbalan
Perdana Menteri pun tidak dibenarkan berjumpa saya sehinggalah saya
dedah perkara ini. Kemudian barulah beliau dibenar berjumpa saya.

Ada juga pemimpin UMNO yang mencadangkan saya disingkirkan daripada parti.

Sikap
dan layanan terhadap diri saya selepas saya letak jawatan jelas
menunjuk bahawa sebenarnya saya bukan sahaja bukan ahli UMNO tetapi
saya adalah musuh UMNO.

Justeru itu keluarnya saya daripada UMNO hanya “merasmikan” kedudukan saya sebagai bukan ahli UMNO.

Ini
semua tidak menjadi sebab saya keluar daripada UMNO. Sebab saya keluar
ialah kerana kepimpinan UMNO sudah membawa parti keramat ini dan
Kerajaan pimpinan UMNO keluar dari landasan asal perjuangan UMNO dan
Barisan Nasional. Parti UMNO tunduk kepada negara-negara asing terutama
Singapura. UMNO juga tunduk kepada tuntutan puak ekstremis kaum dalam
negeri.

Barisan Nasional dan UMNO kehilangan pengaruh di
kalangan pengundi, termasuk ahli dan penyokong kuat UMNO sehingga kalah
dalam Pilihanraya Umum ke-12.

Pemimpin UMNO membiarkan
negeri-negeri yang tidak pernah dikuasai oleh parti lawan jatuh ke
tangan parti lawan – termasuk Kedah negeri saya sendiri. UMNO dan BN
tidak menang 2/3 daripada kerusi Dewan Rakyat, UMNO tidak lagi
dihormati oleh Raja-Raja Melayu dan bermacam-macam lagi.

Saya sedih kerana terpaksa keluar daripada parti yang dikenali sebagai UMNO tetapi sebenarnya sudah tidak lagi UMNO.

Arah tuju UMNO ditentukan oleh pemimpin tertingginya. Apa yang berlaku kepada UMNO mesti dipertanggung-jawabkan kepadanya.

Kerana
saya percaya bahawa Dato Seri Abdullah bukan sahaja sudah rosakkan UMNO
yang sebenar tetapi akan terus menghancurkannya, dan saya percaya ahli
dan pemimpin UMNO yang lain tidak berani membetulkan UMNO maka saya
terpaksa keluar daripada parti ini.

Saya sedih bukan sahaja
kerana meninggalkan parti tetapi kerana ahli-ahli UMNO rela terima
segala perbuatan Dato Seri Abdullah yang menjadikan Malaysia dihina
oleh negara-negara lain termasuk negara-negara OIC (Pertubuhan
Persidangan Negara-negara Islam – Organisation of Islamic Conference)
dan NAM (Pergerakan Negara-Negara Berkecuali – Non Aligned Movement).
Daripada negara yang menjadi contoh kepada negara membangun lain kita
sudah dianggap sebagai negara sekutu Amerika Syarikat. Kita tidak lagi
berani menegur kejahatan Barat, sebaliknya kita membisu.

Saya
percaya selagi Dato Seri Abdullah memimpin UMNO, pengundi-pengundi UMNO
dan penyokong UMNO tidak akan kembali menyokongnya walaupun mereka
tidak akan mengaku secara terbuka pendirian mereka dan undi mereka pada
parti lawan seperti yang berlaku dalam Pilihanraya Umum 2008.

source :

http://chedet.cc/

DEMOCRACY AND OLIGARCHY

DEMOCRACY AND OLIGARCHY

Nov 24 2011

Written by chedet


1. America and Europe are the great proponents of Democracy. It is the greatest system of Government. It will make countries great. Democracy guarantees there will be no oppression of the citizens (oppressing and killing other people is okay of course).

2. But now they have demanded that Italy be governed by an unelected Government of technocrats headed by Mario Monti, an economist.

3. So democracy is not the panacea for all political and economic problems. So the will of the majority cannot always be permitted to wield power. In the end democracy has to depend on oligarchy to rescue it from the capitalist abuses.

4. But then we know democracy has failed when the European democrats are looking at oligarchic China to help them out in the present financial crisis.

5. Now that the West has realised that democracy is not the perfect system it is touted to be, please stop killing people so as to democratise them.

source :

http://chedet.cc/

THE KUALA LUMPUR TRIBUNAL ON WAR CRIMES

THE KUALA LUMPUR TRIBUNAL ON WAR CRIMES

Nov 29 2011 Dr Mahathir Mohamad



1. Not many Malaysians are aware that from 19th November to 22nd November a trial on war crimes was held in Kuala Lumpur.

2. Many would say what is the use of a trial by a tribunal which is not recognised by any Government. And in addition the accused persons were not present although the summons were legally served on them.

3. But think again.

4. It is a legal and moral principle that everyone must be equal before the law. In Malaysia even the reigning Sultans are not above the law.

5. It follows that no one, no country should be above international law.

6. In the charter of the United Nations no country is accorded the privilege or status of being above the laws, rules and regulations of the UN.

7. We frequently read reports of tribunals being set up by the UN and also by the victors in war to try war criminals. In Nuremberg and Tokyo the “war criminals” were sentenced to death by the tribunals.

8. However, it has become obvious that the powerful countries and their leaders have never been tried for the crimes they have committed. They are clearly above the law.

9. Do we accept this? If we do then we would be accepting what is a travesty of justice.

10.The general assembly of the United Nations and the weak nations of the world have found no way for applying the laws, international or otherwise, against powerful leaders of powerful countries who are clearly involved in international crimes.

11. The UN and the international community have failed.

12. The world should not accept this failure. Somehow some punishment should be meted to countries and leaders guilty of international crimes. Their deeds must be put before a court of law and the verdict pronounced, After that the world body would be informed as will the different agencies concerned with the maintenance of world peace.

13. This is the age of the NGOs, the Non-Governmental Organisations. Like it or not the Government must recognise the NGOs seriously and consider their views.

14. The Tribunal set up by the people is an NGO. It behoves Government and international institutions like the UN to take srious note of the Tribunal as an international NGO.

15. The general public also should take note of the verdict of the Tribunal. Otherwise they will, in one way or another, be honouring criminals, international criminals.

source :

http://chedet.cc/

ASEAN BUSINESSMEN

ASEAN BUSINESSMEN


by Dr. Mahathir bin Mohamad on Monday, 31 October 2011

1. Asean businessmen wants to know about the European Union and the Eurozone and the financial crisis plaguing them.

2. For this they invited Tony Blair – the failed Prime Minister of Britain. Blair is the least educated about Europe and its management.

3. What he did as PM of the United Kingdom was to trot at the heels of President Bush. When Bush lied, he came up with an even more amazing lie. He claimed that Iraq could attack Britain with missiles etc within 45-minutes, using weapons of mass destruction which he declared Iraq had.

4. To prevent this attack Britain must, together with the United States, attack Iraq in a pre-emptive war.

5. Then after occupying Iraq and searching for weapons of mass destruction, none were discovered.

6. Unfazed Blair declared that the attack on Iraq was to remove “dictator” Saddam Hussein.

7. After he was removed as PM, the British set up a Commission to go into the misdeeds of Blair. The British regarded Blair as the worst PM of Britain. They made it clear he was a liar. His lies resulted in British soldiers being killed and wounded. (That a hundred thousand plus of innocent Iraqis were also killed is of course acceptable).

8. This liar is apparently looked upon by Asean businessmen as a sage, as a man whose words must be listened to in order to understand the problems faced by the EU.

9. The only thing they can learn from the liar Blair is how to lie. This man is guilty of war crimes, of mass murder. He should be tried and punished. And businessmen should not learn how to lie.


source :


http://chedet.cc/blog/

THE FAILED COUNTRIES

THE FAILED COUNTRIES

by Dr. Mahathir bin Mohamad on Friday, 11 November 2011


1. At the beginning of America’s war on terror, President Bush categorised several developing countries as failed countries.

2. I wonder whether Bush thinks a country like Greece, which is totally incapable of paying its debts after irresponsible financial management, is a successful country.

3. The debt of Greece has not only destroyed the country but it has dragged down all the European countries as well. Such is the disaster brought on by Greece’s impecunious ways that Europe is threatened with the possibility of financial collapse. So far the great economic and financial minds of Europe have not found any real solution. Instead there is the possibility that the failure would spread to Italy, Spain and Portugal.





4. Why has this happened to Europe? To find the answer one has to look into the European economic history, to look at how the European countries became so rich.

5. In the days of European imperialism, only Europe could make use of their engineering and technological skills to export manufactured goods to the rest of the world.

6. Feeling secure that they would be able to sustain this superiority in industry and trade and often benefitting from cheap raw material from their colonies and captive imperial markets, they allowed wages and profits to spiral up. Accordingly their GDP and per capita appeared to be high and they enjoyed ever higher standards of living. They classify their countries as developed.

7. Democracy and socialism forced the introduction of all kinds of social benefits. They acceded to demands for less work and more pay. They introduced pension schemes, paid leaves and holidays, double and quadruple pay for overtime, costly medical benefits and unemployment benefits. Very early workers were given the right to form unions and to strike. These were to prevent exploitation. But the rights were abused so that the remunerations and perks demanded had nothing to do with being exploited.

8. Soon the demand for higher remunerations and perks spread to the higher grades of workers and then to the executives. Bonuses for all were no longer related to profits made. They became actually delayed salaries, paid half-yearly or yearly.

9. The top executives were given stock options, bonuses exceeding their yearly pay, cars, houses and numerous allowances including golden handshakes even when they failed.

10. Naturally all these cause all their products and services to become very costly. With this comes an increasingly higher cost of living. Wages and perks were revised every now and again. With each round of wages and perks increase, there would be increased cost of living which in turn lead to demands for more increase in wages and perks.

11. All these would have gone on indefinitely but for the emergence of new industrial countries in the East. Japan, followed by Korea and then China industrialised and their low-cost high quality products pushed practically all the manufactured goods of the West off the shelf.

12. Threatened with the possibility of lower standard of living they created a financial market. Non-tangible products were invented for them to speculate and gamble. And they or at least the moneyed people and the game-theory experts made considerable amounts of money. With this no more capital was invested in the real business of producing goods and supplying services.

13. Then, they became very greedy. They started creating money to finance their gambling. To cut a long story short, the bubble burst. They lost all their money. Unable to go back to doing real business, to producing goods and supplying services, they began to fiddle with the monetary and banking systems.

14. They succeeded with Iceland and Ireland. But Greece proves intractable. This country enjoyed high life on borrowed money. Less work, more pay and more social benefits ate into Government revenue. Unwilling to face the wrath of the people the Government borrowed to finance the national budget. Unable to pay or service debts the lenders refused to give any more loans.

15. Actually the country became bankrupt. There is no way for the country to become solvent again. Its bankruptcy would in turn bankrupt European banks. This would be disastrous for Europe.

16. Basically the countries of Europe have failed. Their claim to be the showpiece of capitalism and democracy becomes hollow after they are forced to look at socialist undemocratic China for help.

17. But all efforts will fail unless they admit that they, like the developing countries, are poor. Poor people must live like poor people. Their bonuses, share options, perks, high pay and less work creed etc must be given up. The gambling in the financial market must also be stopped.

18. They have to go back to working, to producing goods and supplying service with lowered wages. They must sell off most of their assets (Greece is trying to do this now). But industrial discipline would be needed for foreign investors to buy the assets and run them.

19. Printing money and writing cheques will not help. They must cease to be in denial. They must admit they have failed, their creed and their systems have failed.

20. Many developing countries have failed. But many European countries including the United States of America have also failed.











source :


http://chedet.cc/blog/

SEKSUALITI MERDEKA

SEKSUALITI MERDEKA


by Dr. Mahathir bin Mohamad on Friday, 18 November 2011


1. Masyarakat mana-mana pun tahu adanya orang yang dilahirkan dengan jantina tidak menentu. Ada yang memiliki tubuh badan lelaki tetapi bahagian-bahagian tertentu lebih mirip kepada perempuan. Mereka dikenali sebagai pondan atau ponen dan ada yang sebaliknya, iaitu tubuh badan perempuan tetapi mirip lelaki.

2. Mereka diterima oleh masyarakat sejak dahulukala lagi tanpa banyak masalah.

3. Tetapi di Barat, kerana gerakan bagi mendaulatkan kebebasan (freedom), mereka ini digesa untuk menuntut hak supaya diiktiraf sebagai sejenis yang berlainan. Mereka juga manusia dan manusia mesti diberi kebebasan untuk melakukan apa sahaja.





4. Yang menjadi masalah ialah mereka yang tidak ada apa-apa kecacatan tetapi menuntut supaya larangan agama dan undang-undang terhadap perbuatan seks di luar tabii seperti meliwat dihalalkan.

5. Dari sini tuntutan diteruskan untuk bukan sahaja dihalalkan seks songsang tetapi juga perkahwinan sejenis, lelaki dengan lelaki, perempuan dengan perempuan. Akhirnya perlakuan seks dibebaskan di Barat sehingga apa sahaja diterima oleh masyarakat sebagai hak seseorang manusia. Anak perempuan dan anak lelaki belasan tahun pun boleh tidur dengan siapa sahaja, melakukan apa jenis seks sesuka hati mereka. Tidak ada lagi anak dara atau teruna semasa berkahwin.

6. Kita banyak terpengaruh dan menerima pendapat dan nilai hidup serta adat resam Barat. Kita hidup dalam dunia yang berpusat kepada Eropah (Eurocentric). Kita terima sistem pemerintahan demokrasi umpamanya.

7. Tetapi perlukah kita turut dan terima segala-galanya yang dilakukan di Barat? Sebenarnya budaya dan nilai hidup Barat sudah runtuh, runtuh kerana terlangsung taksub dengan kebebasan (freedom). Apa sahaja yang hendak dilakukan oleh seseorang individu tidak boleh dilarang kerana larangan bermakna menidakkan hak asasi individu atau kumpulan.

8. Sesuatu yang dilarang oleh agama memang mempunyai sebabnya. Mungkin kita tidak kenal atau tahu sebabnya. Tetapi kita harus ingat penyakit HIV Aids dahulu tidak ada. Ia mula dikenali dikalangan mereka yang mengamalkan seks songsang di California, Amerika Syarikat, secara pilihan walaupun tidak ada kecacatan apa-apa. Sehingga kini tidak ada ubat yang boleh menyembuh penyakit HIV Aids. Mereka yang mengidap penyakit ini bukan sahaja akan musnahkan diri sendiri tetapi juga isteri, suami dan anak cucu. Mereka tidak akan hidup sempurna.

9. Manusia yang bertamadun tidak menurut nafsu semata-mata. Budaya Barat menggalakkan manusia mengikut nafsu. Kebebasan bagi mereka bermakna apa sahaja yang didorong oleh nafsu tidak boleh ditegah oleh agama atau undang-undang manusia.

10. Sifat ini adalah sifat haiwan. Manusia memiliki akal fikiran. Orang yang bertamadun menggunakan akal fikiran untuk menghalang diri dari terikut-ikut dengan nafsu. Sebabnya nafsu perlu dibendung ialah sesuatu yang tidak baik akan menimpa mereka yang mengikut nafsu. Tamadun yang utamakan nafsu akan runtuh akhirnya.

11. Kita sedang melihat keruntuhan akhlak dalam masyarakat Barat. Sementara agama mereka melarang seks songsang, paderi mereka secara terbuka mengamalkan seks songsang. Mereka ditugaskan untuk mengahwini sepasang lelaki dan perempuan. Apakah maknanya apabila mereka menasihati pasangan itu supaya setia kepada masing-masing. Sesungguhnya institusi perkahwinan dan kekeluargaan sudah luput dalam masyarakat Barat. Ramai daripada mereka tidak tahu siapa bapa mereka. Kemungkinan besar akan berlaku perkahwinan atau hubungan seks antara adik dengan abang, kakak dengan adik, bapa dengan anak, anak dengan ibu.

12. Mereka yang taksub dengan kebebasan akan berkata apa salahnya jika ini berlaku. Percayalah, masyarakat selepas ini akan dipenuhi dengan manusia yang cacat tubuh-badan, cacat akal fikiran dan besar kemungkinan aneka jenis penyakit baru akan menyerang msyarakat itu.

13. Sementara kita akui ada manusia yang jantina mereka tidak jelas, janganlah kerana ingin tidak memencilkan mereka, kita terima amalan Seksualiti Merdeka atau Free Seks dalam masyarakat kita. Amalan ini bukan sahaja berdosa tetapi akan runtuhkan masyarakat kita.



source :


http://chedet.cc/blog/

PELAJARAN SAINS DAN MATEMATIK

PELAJARAN SAINS DAN MATEMATIK

by Dr. Mahathir bin Mohamad on Tuesday, 15 November 2011

1. Saya telah cuba menjelaskan berkali-kali bahawa penggunaan Bahasa Inggeris untuk mengajar sains dan matematik bukan untuk mempelajari Bahasa Inggeris atau memperbaiki penguasaan bahasa itu. Tujuannya ialah untuk menguasai ilmu sains dan matematik.

2. Sains dan matematik (hisab) bukan seperti mata pelajaran lain. Fakta sejarah, geografi, sastera tidak berubah dengan pengaliran masa. Fakta dalam sejarah, geografi dan sastera kekal dan tidak bertukar.

3. Sains sebagai ilmu berkembang melalui penyelidikan dan kajian sepanjang masa. Sains yang saya belajar di sekolah dan di universiti tidak sama dengan sains masa kini. Dahulu tidak ada sains elektronik, komputer sains, sains angkasa lepas, “nano” sains, sains pembedahan dada, sains perubatan stem cell dan berbagai-bagai lagi. Semua ini di kenali dan diperkenal dari masa ke semasa melalui penyelidikan oleh pakar-pakar sains.



4. Mereka merekod dan menulis hasil kajian dan kaji selidik, perkataan dan ciptaan mereka sepanjang masa. Hampir tiap hari dikeluarkan kertas baru yang ditulis oleh penyelidik yang memperkenalkan teori dan discovery baru yang perlu diteliti dan difahami oleh ahli-ahli sains untuk mengemaskini ilmu mereka. Tanpa mengetahui ilmu yang terkini maka pengetahuan dan penggunaan ilmu baru ini tidak boleh dimanfaatkan baik semasa mengajar atau untuk diguna dalam ciptaan dan rekaan produk yang baru.

5. Contohnya telefon. Dahulu dawai menyambung alat telefon dengan operator yang akan menyambung panggilan. Kemudian operator diganti dengan memutar dail yang menyambung panggilan secara otomatik, kemudian disambung melalui radio, kemudian diguna disk dan satelit yang mampu menyambung telefon bimbit terus kepada telefon bimbit di mana sahaja.

6. Kita hanya menjadi pengguna kerana tidak tahu teknologi untuk mencipta dan mengeluar telefon bimbit. Yang tahu hanyalah yang belajar dalam bahasa Inggeris. Sampai bilakah kita hanya akan menjadi pengguna semata-mata. Bolehkah kita jadi bangsa maju bertamadun tinggi selagi kita menjadi bangsa pengguna?

7. Kita akan berkata orang Jepun, Korea, Jerman tidak guna Bahasa Inggeris. Ini tidak benar. Mereka perlu ada ramai yang memahami Bahasa Inggeris untuk membaca kertas-kertas dari penyelidik walaupun untuk memahami perkataan-perkataan baru untuk bahagian-bahagian tertentu supaya dapat memahami fungsi dan mengguna perkataan itu sebelum ditulis dalam bahasa mereka.

8. Mustahil mereka boleh memahami makna sesuatu perkataan atau sesuatu proses atau fungsi jika mereka tidak faham secara menyeluruh ayat bahkan rencana berkenaan. Kita faham perkataan “nano” umpamanya kerana kita faham diskripsi dalam Bahasa Inggeris yang menyebut perkataan “nano”. Jika kita jumpa perkataan ini tanpa konteksnya kita tak mungkin faham apa dianya “nano” dan tak mungkin kita gunanya dalam bahasa kita. Demikian jugalah dengan perkataan-perkataan yang dipinjam dari bahasa-bahasa lain termasuk Bahasa Arab.

9. Orang Arab dahulu mempelajari Bahasa Yunani (Greek) untuk menguasai ilmu yang diterokai oleh orang Greek. Ilmu orang Greek tidak banyak dan akhirnya ilmu mereka diterjemah sepenuhnya kepada Bahasa Arab. Untuk mengalih bahasa mereka perlu faham bahasa Greek.

10. Lepas itu orang Arab menambah kepada ilmu ini melalui kajian mereka dalam bahasa mereka. Dalam jangkamasa seribu tahun, orang Arab berupaya dan dapat membuat kajian dan menambah kepada sains yang diperolehi dari orang Greek dan membukukannya.

11. Kemudian orang Eropah semasa Zaman Gelap (Dark Ages) mempelajari dan menguasai Bahasa Arab untuk mendapat ilmu yang dikumpul, diterokai dan dibukukan oleh Orang Arab. Dengan menguasai ilmu sains Arab maka sains dikembangkan pada mulanya dalam Bahasa Latin, dan kemudian bahasa-bahasa Eropah. Proses ini mengambil masa, walaupun jumlah ilmu yang diperolehi dari orang Arab tidaklah begitu banyak seperti sekarang.

12. Kita berada diperingkat mencari ilmu bangsa lain yang dibukukan dengan begitu banyaknya dalam bahasa mereka. Proses penyelidikan dan catitan atau pembukuan ilmu baru ini berlangsung sepanjang masa. Hampir tiap-tiap ilmu baru diperkenalkan dan kadang-kadang ilmu lama diganti dengan ilmu baru kerana yang lama tidak dapat dipertahankan lojiknya.

13. Hampir semu ilmu baru ini diperkenalkan dalam Bahasa Inggeris. Ia terlalu banyak untuk diterjemah kedalam Bahasa Melayu. Tidak mungkin kita adakan penterjemah yang mencukupi yang fasih dalam Bahasa Melayu, fasih dalam Bahasa Sains Inggeris dan pakar dalam bidang sains berkenaan. Jika ada seorang dua, tak mungkin mereka sanggup menghabiskan hayat mereka menterjemah sains yang datang dlam bahasa Inggeris.

14. Sebenarnya universiti-universiti di kebanyakkan negara mengguna buku teks Inggeris untuk pembelajaran perubatan. Sebabnya ialah oleh kerana sukar mendapat buku teks sains diperingkat tinggi dalam bahasa mereka sendiri.

15. Untuk melancar sebuah kapal angkasa dari daratan supaya bertemu dengan Stesen Angkasa Antarabangsa (ISS) memerlukan perkiraan dan perhitungan yang amat kompleks. Ini disebabkan dunia yang menjadi tempat melancar sedang berpusing mengikut axis (paksi) utara selatan dalam 24 jam. Tempat pelancaran ada kalanya siang dan ada kalanya malam. Dimasa yang sama axis itu juga bergerak mengikut musim. Juga dunia sedang bergerak mengeliling matahari.

16. Stesen angkasa juga bergerak dengan pantas supaya lokasinya tetap relatif dunia. Demikian juga kapal angkasa perlu dilancar naik mengikut satu trajectory yang serong dengan kelajuan tertentu supaya dapat bertemu dengan stesen angkasa pada jam, hari dan saat tertentu. Jika tidak bertemu kerana perkiraan tersilap, kapal dan anak kapal akan hilang di angkasa.

17. Semua perkiraan ini memerlukan kecekapan dalam bidang algorithm. Siapakah diantara kita yang menguasai ilmu ini tanpa menguasai bahasa Inggeris yang mampu membuat perkiraan ini?

18. Pelajaran bukan hanya bertujuan menjadi fasih dalam bahasa pengantar – baik Bahasa Melayu mahupun Bahasa Inggeris. Pelajaran adalah untuk memperoleh dan menguasai ilmu. Hanya bangsa yang berilmu sahaja yang akan mendiri tamaddun yang tinggi.

Bahasa Jiwa Bangsa

Ilmu Menegak Bangsa


source :

http://chedet.cc/blog/

THE TRAGEDY OF LIBYA

THE TRAGEDY OF LIBYA

by Dr. Mahathir bin Mohamad on Friday, 28 October 2011


1. One is always shocked when someone one knows suffers a tragic end. Maybe for the enemies of Gaddafi, he deserves what he got. But that does not lessen my sadness over the manner of his demise.

2. As Prime Minister I met Gaddafi several times. He was always hospitable. Much of my time with him was spent in answering questions explaining about Malaysia. He seemed to want to learn about developing a country. I believe he wanted to do the same for Libya.

3. In his early years he had plans for improving the lives of the Libyans. He, it was, who initiated the irrigation of the fertile coastal areas through building the great artificial river. A Korean contractor undertook the job, building a huge pipeline to carry underground water from the distant interior to huge tank storage farms and then to irrigate the land.



4. I was much impressed by this project. Obviously he cared enough for his country and people to do this. But beyond that nothing much was done. Despite huge revenues from oil exports the country remained poorly developed. The people were relatively poor for a country with huge oil reserves.

5. The Western press reported about his alleged cruelty against his detractors and enemies. But I have always been leery of the Western press. According to them I am also a great dictator who imprisoned hundreds of my political enemies. I know this is not true. And so I discounted much of the western press reports about Gaddafi.

6. But he was certainly deficient in understanding the purpose of Government. He had no real plan for developing his country and prospering his people. He did not travel much to see how the other countries were developing. But his house where my wife and I had lunch with him and his wife was no palace. It was not even luxurious.

7. Most of the time he was reclusive and after the western attempt to kill him, he feared for his life. He met visitors in a tent in a walled compound.

8. I do not know about the cruelties perpetrated by him or his people. During his retreat recently I did not read about his prisoners being liberated or mass graves of the victims of his cruelty. Maybe these will be discovered later.

9. In war cruelty is to be expected. In fact war legitimises cruelty, including killings. Still to see the cruelty, the killing inflicted on someone you know, shocks and saddens you.

10. I am saddened by the killing of Gaddafi. He should be arrested and tried for his crime. But I know that is not the way today. Osama bin Laden was also executed by the United States’ soldiers. There are contracts made by “civilised democratic” Governments on several people as there were in the past I fear the fate of Gaddafi will befall others who fail to see the writing on the wall. The powerful, with vested interest in a regime change will ensure that this will happen. They have much to gain.

11. I hope and pray that Libya will get a good Government after this, headed by leaders who truly believe in good Government, who will be prepared to lose in clean elections which will not be manipulated.


source :

http://chedet.cc/blog/

Najib Berjaya Kembalikan Sokongan Rakyat Kepada UMNO - TUN M

Sembang Online: Bersama Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad






Watch here :

http://ww2.utusan.com.my/utusan/special.asp?pr=umno2011&pg=more_video.htm