مهاتير محمد's Blog, page 49

BOEING’S AUTO-LAND SYSTEM FOR AIRLINERS

Flightglobal.com, an online aviation news portal reported the following on Dec 1, 2006;

“Boeing last week received a US patent for a system that, once activated, removes all control from pilots to automatically return a commercial airliner to a predetermined landing location.” The rest of the news can be read HERE

RESPONSIBILITY OF AIRFRAMER

1. Boeing is the designer and assembler of all Boeing aircrafts. It also subjects the new aircrafts to rigorous test. It is totally responsible for the certification of the aircrafts and all the parts, avionics and safety features of the aircrafts.

2. The parts may be supplied by contractors and vendors but Boeing is responsible for the correct installation, testing and certification. Certainly the communication system is selected, tested and installed under Boeing supervision.

3. The communication system is the lifeline of the aircrafts. In any emergency the aircraft can speak directly with ground stations. Under no circumstances should communication equipment fail.

4. Currently the location and movement of all commercial aircrafts are monitored. Anybody can see on their hand phone the symbol of the aircrafts flying anywhere in the world. Their registered number, their makes, their owners, departure airports and destination can all be obtained through anyone’s mobile phone. Yet MH370 could disappear completely apparently even from the monitors of the countries owning sophisticated spy satellites.

5. In the case of MH370 the only thing that we know for certain is that after the co-pilot said “Alright, Good Night” there was no more communication. There was no call from the aircraft and ground station could not contact the aircraft at all. In other words there was total communication breakdown.

6. How was this possible! The pilot may disable it! Are the communication systems in a Boeing 777 so easily disabled? Is there no backup? Is there no fail-safe system for so important a facility? Or did a third party disable MH370’s communication system?

7. Whatever the stoppage of communication was sudden and total. One or the other of the pilots must have become aware of this communications failure unless of course both were responsible for disabling the system. At some stage the cabin crew must notice that the aircraft was not keeping to the correct flight path. Did they not try to ask the pilots why? If they fail to contact the flight deck, wouldn’t they be concerned?

8. All the cabin crew must be carrying mobile phones. Surely upon not getting explanations from the pilots as to the flight path change, they would be alarmed enough to call someone on the ground. But as far as we know they did not. Were their phones disabled? Or were they incapacitated in some way?

9. The passengers too, at some stage must feel alarmed. Did any of them try to phone their relatives? They did not. Were they also disabled or their phones disabled?

10. Some relatives on the ground in Malaysia rang up the passengers. They could hear the phone ringing but was not picked up. There was no answer. Could it be that the passengers have all been disabled?

11. As I said the position of commercial aircrafts are constantly monitored. They all appear on the screen of our phones. MH 370 disappeared from the screen. Why? What equipments do passenger aircrafts carry so that their position can be chartered and broadcast? If a plane disappears wouldn’t someone notice. Yet the plane vanished and no one seems to know. Can Boeing explain how this can happen? But Boeing is deathly quiet! No explanation at all as to how the communication system and monitoring of position can fail in a Boeing aircraft.

12. If this can happen to MH370, a 777 Boeing, is it safe to fly in such planes. When will another plane disappear??

13. The assumption is that MH370 fell into the Indian Ocean. Can a plane that heavy, made of glass, aluminium, titanium and composites, plunge into the sea and not break up, leaving broken parts and oil slicks. Even if the sea was calm a plane would break up. The engines too can break off and leave traces of oil etc. Whether the pilots were in control or not, when the fuel was exhausted the plane must drop. It cannot achieve a soft landing like the Hudson River case. It must drop into the sea violently. Even if the sea was calm, the plane must break up. But the suggestion is that the whole plane sank intact into the sea! Is this possible?

14. Until now nothing has been found to indicate the breakup of the plane.

15. Boeing has a lot to answer. Until the plane is found and the causes of the failure of communication equipment and the disappearance are fully explained, one must conclude that Boeing aircrafts are dangerous to fly in.

MCA IN CABINET

1. Helen Ang, in an open letter criticised me for welcoming MCA’s decision to rejoin the BN cabinet. She pointed out that the MCA won only 7 seats while DAP won 39 seats. The MCA therefore does not represent the Chinese.

2. The BN is a coalition of like-minded political parties. They may represent their race or they may not. But they believe in the creed of sharing the wealth and the political power of this country between the different races.

3. The DAP does not believe in sharing between the races. It believes in meritocracy – the best takes all, and the devil takes the hindmost.

4. DAP knows that for example on a basis of merit the indigenous people of Malaysia would stand little chance of winning a fair number of the scholarships. This will deny them the opportunity for improving their station in life.

5. Chinese parents can afford to send their children for university education at home and abroad. With Government scholarships largely going to them their numbers would even be bigger. Less number of indigenous people parents cannot afford to support their children for university education.

6. Currently the Chinese dominate the economy and own a large portion of the wealth. Even with the NEP the gap in wealth between Bumis and non-Bumis is very wide. Prior to the NEP, the Bumis who make up the 60% of the people own only 2% of the wealth. Even as Bumis’ wealth grows through NEP schemes, Chinese wealth with a higher base would grow faster. The disparity in wealth ownership would get worse.

7. At the moment the UMNO Malays seem to dominate politics. They are willing to share some political power with the Chinese and Indians. For this they are willing to give up some of their constituencies to their partners and to vote for them. Their political strength balances somewhat their lower economic power.

8. The DAP is bent on seizing political power from UMNO without giving up any economic dominance. It believes that through meritocracy and the split among the Malays it can do this.

9. The DAP does not want to join the BN coalition because of its Malay majority. In 1969 it was invited but when everyone else accepted, DAP refused. It rejects totally the concept of sharing with other races, unless the Chinese dominate completely in politics as they dominate in the economy.

10. Its willingness to work with PAS and PKR is simply because it needs their votes. It may even accept a PM from PAS or PKR. But as shown in the Pakatan Government in Perak, the DAP controlled the PAS-led Pakatan Government. The DAP will control the PM if Pakatan wins. PAS and PKR knowing what they are and will always be totally dependent on DAP and Chinese votes, will accept being subservient to the DAP.

11. The MCA maybe small. That is because it cannot counter DAP‘s racist politics. It knows very well that its commitment to share wealth and political power with UMNO Malays will cause it to lose Chinese support. But it still believes in the sharing concept of BN.

12. This is a multiracial country. No one race can have both economic wealth and political power. For so long as each, wish to retain their ethnicity, the sharing of political and economic power between races will be necessary. Until everyone is totally identified with this country, and everyone shares fairly political and economic power the fact of race cannot be ignored.

13. Whether the DAP has more Chinese support than the MCA is irrelevant. What is relevant and important is the rejection of dominance by any race and the willingness to share wealth and political power fairly between the races.

14. I therefore welcome the decision of the MCA to rejoin the BN cabinet.

RAJA NAZRIN’S SPEECH FROM THE THRONE

1. It is timely for Raja Nazrin (on April 18) to remind everyone, citizens, political leaders and rulers that ours is a parliamentary democracy with a constitutional monarchy. No one, but no one should for any reason think that absolute power rests with them, and that parliamentary democracy and constitutional monarchy can be ignored.

2. We see in other countries citizens trying to deny democratic majority rule by staging massive and continuous street demonstrations so as to overthrow a Government elected by the majority. We also see how often the generals seize power when civilian rule appears to be weak or overthrown by street demos or violence.

3. We also see the elected politicians abusing the powers conferred on them. And rulers too have been known to seize power and carry out unconstitutional rule even in democracies.

4. When the constitution is ignored and power is seized by anyone, sooner or later, the people will show resentment. This may lead to violence. Once violence is resorted to, it will not stop. And we have seen how demos and violence can overthrow Government whether elected or otherwise. Once such an overthrow is shown to be possible, resort to it will be made even for flimsy reasons. There will be no stability and anarchy may be the result. We are seeing this happen before our very eyes right now.

5. Malaysia is a peaceful and stable country. We are not prone to violence and assassinations to overthrown dictators or alleged dictators. It is the character of the people, a part of their culture if you like. But no one should invite such actions by abusing their positions.

6. We must respect the Constitutions and we must always ensure that in this blessed country the rule of law is upheld at a times. We may change the law as provided for by the Constitution. We may even change the Constitution if there is a need to. But we must not resort to extra-legal ways even though they may be non-violent. Nor should anyone take advantage of the reluctance of subordinates to refuse your demands.

7. Democracy is not perfect. It may result in weak or incompetent Governments. But democracy provides for changes in leadership. It may be through scheduled elections, it may also be through voluntary resignations. But no one should bypass the law and assume power supply because the elected Government is weak or incompetent.

8. Those in power must always remember that the power conferred on them is not for personal aggrandisement but for the performance of the duties for which they hold their positions.

9. As an old citizen I hope I am allowed to congratulate, the heir apparent to the throne of Perak for his willingness to say what the rakyat are unable or reluctant to say. The reminder is timely.

STREET DEMONSTRATIONS

1. Democracy is a great system, perhaps the best system for governing a country ever invented by man.

2. What can be better than a government of the people, by the people, for the people. And most of the developed countries are democratic, obviously benefiting from the system.

3. Does this mean that all countries which are governed democratically will be stable, prosperous and developed? The great democracies of the West seem to think so. Such is their faith in the system that they are willing to kill and destroy in order to promote democracy. They have now decided to bring about regime change in order to democratise the undemocratic countries. If you resist democratisation they will kill you and destroy your country. And so they did in Iraq and are doing so in the Arab countries and elsewhere.

4. It is assumed that the people, or at least the majority of the people would be wise enough to choose the most capable people to rule them. Unfortunately the people do not always choose the most capable. They may be influenced by race, religion, ideology and a host of other factors when electing their governments.

5. They may also choose because of money. In fact in most cases their choices are based on immediate personal gain rather than national interest.

6. Because of all these democracy has often failed to provide countries with good governance. Indeed it may result in dividing the people into parties and groups and pit them against each other.

7. If there are only two parties it is possible for one or the other to achieve a clear majority and to form the Government. But when there are more than two, it is entirely possible for no one party getting a clear majority of the seats in the legislature to form a Government.

8. In a two party system a small majority may weaken the Government due to fear of defection by its members. Only a Government with a big majority can provide stable and effective Governments.

9. As stated above when there are numerous parties it is likely that none would achieve a majority (50%+) to form the Government. A coalition may need to be formed in order to achieve a majority. Such a post-election coalition Government would always be threatened by defections of a coalition partner and so losing the majority. The Government would thus always be weak and unstable.

10. However, a pre-election coalition stands a better chance of winning a good majority especially if the coalition acts as a party fielding only one candidate in each constituency.

11. When this is done and the single coalition candidate is supported by all the coalition members it is likely that he will win. The chances are good for the coalition to win enough seats to form the Government. Such a coalition would be more stable and strong.

12. In Malaysia the Alliance and then the National Front coalitions which at times had as many as 14 parties have won in all the 14 elections held since independence. Such has been the success of the pre-election coalition formula that the opposition parties, despite their deep differences have decided to form their own coalition. The result is that in Malaysia there is now effectively a two-party system operating, It is therefore possible for a majority to be achieved by one or the other coalition in elections.

13. So far so good. But a basic principle in elections is for the loser to accept losing, to accept the result of the polls and wait for the next election. This is what happens in mature democracies. But parties in new democracies seem quite unable to accept losing. They dispute the result and they resort to undemocratic ways to overthrow the elected party or coalition.

14. Democracy upholds the rights of the minority. They must be protected. Therefore they are allowed to show their disappointment at losing in a variety of democratic ways. In Parliament they may stage walkouts when unable to block Government action. They may carry out active campaigning through the media and rallies to discredit the Government. Now they can make use of the alternative media to cause disaffection for the Government.

15. When sometimes they may resort to strikes and demonstrations.

16. All these are still permissible in a democracy. But now the strikes and street demonstrations have become so huge and prolonged as to paralyse the whole country.

17. In a non-democratic totalitarian state such massive demonstrations may be justified as there is no other way to change Governments. But now even when elections can determine changes in Governments, the losers in democratic elections have resorted to these disruptive acts.

18. We see in Egypt, Ukraine and even Thailand the opposition resorting to mass demonstrations in order to overthrow duly elected majority Governments. In Egypt and Ukraine the elected Government have been overthrown. Strangely even when new elections are agreed to by the majority elected Government, the minority opposition would not agree and choose to continue with street demonstrations. They claim the elections would be fraudulent.

19. The net result is continuous instability and sufferings by people and in particular the small businessmen. A situation akin to anarchy would prevail.

20. So far Malaysia has been spared the instability due to massive prolonged street demonstrations. But the signs are already there. Obviously there are Malaysians who would like to bring down the elected Government through demonstrations.

21. The series of Bersih demonstrations are obviously meant to excite public support to discredit the Government and eventually to bring it down. The Government is accused of cheating in previous elections so as to justify rejection of the coming elections should the Government party win. Massive and continuous demonstrations would then be held.

22. So far the numbers in the demonstrations are not big enough to paralyse the country. Though disruptive, the businesses, including the small street stalls have not been stopped. But the hope of the organisers of Bersih must be to attract millions to participate and to be daily affairs so that the usual daily life of the people would be disrupted.

23. A next step may be to occupy Government buildings.

24. The police would be provoked into taking violent actions. International news agencies and their television crew would then record the violence which would be broadcast throughout the world to discredit the majority elected Government. Of course violence on the part of the demonstrators would not be recorded or shown.

25. Malaysians have not responded to the call. Maybe they will in the future and Malaysia would join the ranks of unstable countries incapable of being governed and much less being developed.

26. The world needs to make up its mind. Do we elect Government by voting or do we install Government through street demonstrations?

27. Democracy as we can see is not perfect. But it is by far the best system of Government that we have. But like all systems, abuses can negate the objective.

28. If democracy is to survive and to serve the purpose for which it is devised, there must be some acceptance of the limits to the freedom that we consider democratic.

29. Free speech, free press, demonstrations and strikes must be circumscribed to some degree so that they will not destroy democracies in the name of democracy.

MH 370

1. I am very upset over MAS employees being held hostage in Beijing by the relatives of the passengers of MH 370. I am upset because they are blaming the wrong people. The loss of the plane is due to the makers Boeing.

2. How can Boeing produce a plane that is so easily disabled? Normally it is entirely possible for the crew, the pilots and co-pilots to communicate even with KLIA. Maybe the captain did not want to. But surely the co-pilot would want to inform ground stations that the plane was not flying according to the scheduled route.

3. The passengers may not notice but the co-pilot would. So would the cabin crew. They are all trained to deal with emergencies if not immediately, at least later.

4. But none of them seemed to have tried. It must be because the whole communication system has been disabled. It must take some effort if the pilot tried to disable the system. The co-pilot would notice and for his own life he would have tried to do something. Was he disabled? Were all the crew members and the passengers disabled?

5. The flight of all passenger planes can be tracked even on a personal mobile phone. I can do it on my phone. If the plane landed I can watch it landing and taxiing. I can even get information on any plane anywhere – what make and model, who it belongs to and where it is flying from and its destination.

6. I believe there are equipments on the plane which allows it to be tracked – probably by Global Positioning System.

7. Sophisticated cameras on the spy-satellites operated by some countries can actually photograph a man on the ground and even identify him. Surely the cameras can see and photograph a 63-metre aircraft.

8. But the aircraft disappeared completely. I think on everyone’s mobile it has disappeared. Some equipment on the aircraft must have been disabled. Even the backup must have been disabled.

9. Boeing built this aircraft. Boeing must explain how all these means of tracking the plane can be disabled, can fail. Either Boeing technology is poor or it is not fail-safe. I would not like to fly in Boeing aircraft unless Boeing can explain how all its system can fail or be disabled.

10. Remote control technology is now very sophisticated and powerful. Is it true that Boeing has installed remote control equipment on the aircraft to prevent hijacking? If it did why did it not direct the aircraft to land safely? Is it possible for third parties to take control of the aircraft remotely?

11. When a plane crashes on land or sea there would be debris or oil slick. None has been found so far. Can it be that the plane remained intact on crashing and sank with no trace and no one launching the lifeboat doors as we are told all these aircrafts are equipped with?

12. Can one believe this plane quietly floated down into the raging sea and sank conveniently in the deepest part (7miles deep) of the Indian Ocean?

13. It is standard practice that when a plane crashes, a team of experts would arrive at the scene soonest so as to find the cause of the crash. Boeing and the authorities in the manufacturing country should be looking out for the plane. Maybe the plane type should be grounded. But Boeing has shown no interest and had said practically nothing.

14. MAS has been flying numerous kinds of aircrafts and has a good record. The pilots are well-trained. Even if the pilot wants to commit suicide the co-pilot and the cabin crew would not allow him to do so without trying something. But no one, not even the passengers did anything. Maybe it is because they have been somehow incapacitated.

15. Boeing must answer all these questions. Boeing must demonstrate possible ways for the communications system to be disabled. Boeing must accept responsibility for building an aircraft that can disappear in mid-air so completely.

16. MAS is not at fault, lax security or not. MAS flew a plane fully expecting it to perform the task. But the plane has somehow behaved differently. Who is responsible? Not MAS but certainly the makers of the plane – Boeing Aircraft Corporation.

MEREKA YANG BERKUASA

1. Di mana Negara pun akan ada orang yang berkuasa. Mereka berada di berbagai peringkat. Di Negara yang demokratik pun terdapat orang yang berkuasa. Budaya orang Malaysia pula demikian sehingga orang yang berkuasa lebih berkuasa kerana tidak akan ada sesiapa yang akan menegur. Orang yang berkuasa boleh buat apa sahaja termasuk yang tidak dibenar. Hanya jika diadakan pemilihan oleh rakyat atau pengikut barulah ketidakpuasan hati mereka dilahirkan. Walaupun demikian faktor lain sering menenggelamkan faktor salahguna kuasa.

2. Saya mengaku bahawa inilah pengalaman saya semasa menjadi pemimpin yang berkuasa. Jarang terdengar teguran melainkan oleh musuh terutama parti lawan. Dan teguran oleh musuh jarang dapat diterima kerana ini memang sifat mereka. Saya dapati teguran pihak ketiga, pihak yang tidak punyai kepentingan biasanya lebih ikhlas dan perlu ditimbang secara serius.

3. Kebiasaannya ramai yang bersedia untuk menyokong dan memuji apa sahaja yang dilakukan oleh orang yang berkuasa. Sokongan mereka mungkin kerana mereka betul-betul dan ikhlas berpendapat apa yang dilakukan memang baik atau buruk. Tetapi ada juga yang menyokong dan mengiakan apa sahaja kerana ini akan disukai oleh yang berkuasa. Dan ini juga akan meningkat pengaruh mereka dan banyaklah nikmat yang akan dikecapi oleh mereka.

4. Mereka yang dapat mempengaruhi orang yang berkuasa sebenarnya mendapat sedikit dari kuasa itu. Lebih kuat pengaruh lebih banyaklah kuasa yang didapati oleh mereka. Dan ramailah mereka yang cuba mendekati dan mengelilingi seseorang yang berkuasa. Mereka akan cuba pengaruhi pihak yang berkuasa sehingga pendapat mereka sahaja yang diterima. Apabila ini berlaku maka kuasa yang didapati oleh mereka amatlah besar, begitu besar sehingga tiada pendapat atau nasihat lain yang akan diterima.

5. Jika pendapat mereka ini baik dan hanya untuk menjayakan pihak berkuasa tidaklah sukar untuk diterima. Malangnya yang kerap berlaku apabila sahaja seseorang atau sekumpulan orang keliling sudah dapat menguasai fikiran dan tindakan orang yang berkuasa, maka bermulalah usaha untuk memperalatkan orang yang berkuasa untuk kepentingan diri.

6. Ramai akan sedar dan melihat kesan buruk dari orang sekeliling pihak berkuasa. Ramai yang akan bercakap berkenaan perkara ini, Ramai yang tidak senang tentang apa yang sedang berlaku.

7. Tetapi di Malaysia mereka tidak sanggup untuk menasihat pihak berkuasa, takut dimarahi atau dipandang serong.

8. Tanpa teguran yang berani oleh mereka, maka akan lebih buruklah prestasi pihak berkuasa. Kemarahan orang akan meningkat menjadi kebencian.

9. Kita lihat dalam sejarah raja dan orang kuat pun akhirnya dihadapkan dengan tindakan keras dan ganas oleh rakyat untuk menjatuhkan mereka. Inilah yang berlaku kepada beberapa raja dan diktator di Timur Tengah.

10. Rakyat Malaysia belum tahu cara yang ganas. Mereka mungkin mengguna pilihanraya untuk memperbetulkan keadaan.

11. Tetapi janganlah kita terlalu yakin yang mereka terus berlembut.

12. Dalam sejarah raja yang berkuasa mutlak pun tindakan ganas untuk menyatukannya pernah berlaku. Sultan Mahmud dibunuh walau pun tabiat orang Melayu tidak menderhaka kepada raja.

13. Jika hendak berkuasa lama jangan salahguna kuasa yang diberi walaupun ada yang menasihat kita kebal dan segala salahlaku kita tidak akan diketahui dan jika diketahui pun tidak ada yang berani membuat apa-apa.

14. Pembodek diantara penasihat dan orang keliling ialah sebabnya yang berkuasa menyalahguna kuasa sehingga tersingkir.

15. Kuasa membawa kepada korapsi dan kuasa mutlak akan menyebabkan korapsi yang tidak terhad.

16. Bahasa Mat Salleh berbunyi “Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely”.

17. Mereka yang pegang kepada perpatah ini akan bertegas elak atau gugurkan sahaja kuasa. Bangsa yang korap dan negara yang terkenal dengan bangsa yang korap tidak mungkin maju, bahkan akan runtuh.

Kassim Ahmad – 80

1. Saya sedih melihat pegawai Jabatan Agama Islam dibantu oleh polis menangkap Kassim Ahmad, 80 tahun.

2. Kita ingin jadi Negara Islam yang sederhana, tidak keterlaluan. Tetapi acara ini memperlihatkan Malaysia, seolah-olah ingin menjadi Negara Islam yang suka mengguna paksaan bagi menentukan orang Islam hidup dalam ketakutan kerana mungkin ditangkap apabila melanggar fatwa pihak berkuasa.

3. Kassim yang tidak sihat, berumur 80 tahun ditangkap, dibawa ke mahkamah, dituduh menghina Islam, dituduh tidak akur kepada fatwa Pejabat Agama Islam dan dikurung sehingga dijamin.

4. Yang menghina agama Islam di Malaysia ramai. Ada orang Islam yang memperlekeh Nabi Muhammad s.a.w, menghina Allah s.w.t, membuat fatwa sendiri, bahkan mengembang ajaran sesat. Tetapi mereka tidak ditangkap. Tegur pun tidak. Tetapi Kassim yang sudah tua, yang berjalan bertongkat dituduh anti-hadis dan ditangkap.

5. Yang anti-hadis ini ramai. Mereka tolak hadis dalam amalan mereka, tidak menurut banyak sunnah Rasul. Mereka tidak berjanggut.

6. Tetapi kita tahu dalam Islam ada dosa besar dan ada dosa kecil. Yang sunnat tidak wajib, tidak berdosa jika ditinggal pun. Islam bukan keras, bukan begitu bengis. Islam agama nasihat, agama sederhana yang tidak bertujuan menjadi beban kepada penganutnya. Islam bukan agama paksaan.

7. Tetapi ada pihak yang tidak puas hati kerana Islam lembut, bertimbangrasa, adil. Mereka ingin menjadi Islam agama yang keras, yang bengis pun.

8. Ada di sebuah Negara Islam di mana yang tidak berjanggut disembelih. Ada yang merejam dengan batu, menembak mati wanita yang dituduh berzina. Tetapi tidak pasangan lelaki mereka. Lelaki boleh berzina, perempuan sahaja yang salah. Al-Quran menghukum kedua-dua. Tetapi ramai orang Islam mengecualikan lelaki.

9. Alhamudillah banyak amalan yang ekstrim ini tidak terdapat di Negara tercinta ini. Namun ada yang hendak lihat ini juga dilaksanakan, diamal di sini.

10. Mereka yang dipertanggungjawab terhadap agama Islam di Negara ini ternampak seolah-olah ingin supaya sunnah Nabi dijadikan lebih tinggi, lebih wajib dari firman Tuhan dalam Al-Quran.

11. Kuasa mudah pergi ke kepala dan kuasa tanpa had akan rasuk akal fikiran. Islam adalah agama yang sederhana yang bertimbangrasa, agama nasihat, yang adil. Kalau ia sudah jadi agama yang keras, zalim dan bengis dan mengutama mazhab lebih daripada ajaran Al-Quran, kerana mudah taksub dengan ajaran pemimpin atau guru maka akan berpecah dan bermusuhlah orang Islam sesama Islam.

12. Saya sedih. Saya sedih kerana Kassim Ahmad umur 80 tahun, bertongkat dan sakit ditangkap dan akan dibicara. Kenapa Kassim? Kenapa tidak orang lain? Wallahuaalam.

THE LOBBY SYSTEM

1.​We all know what a lobby is. But in the U.S. lobby refers largely to people specialising in influencing the Government through their contacts with the Congressmen and Senators and members of the Government including the President. We don’t have lobbyistsin Malaysia. They would be considered as cronies of the Government.

2.​In the U.S. the lobbyists are paid to work for certain interests. The Cuban lobby at one time lobbied successfully for the U.S. Government to purchase sugar from Cuba. There was also a lobby firm which was hired by Malaysia to influence the U.S. Government not to undermine the tin, rubber and palm oil markets. We were not very successful.

3.​But the most powerful lobby in the U.S. is the AIPAC (America Israel Public Affairs Committee). It can reach the President, all members of the American Government and all Congressmen and Senators as well as their staff at any time. This lobby which was responsible for U.S. support for the setting up of Israel and subsequent pro-Israel policies, is so powerful that candidates for President and other offices in the U.S. Government have to literally pledge support for Israel to his lobby or they would lose in elections.

4.​An American Congressman of five terms lost the election after he wrote a book exposing the influence of the Jewish lobby. So powerful is AIPAC that not only does it ensure U.S. support for Israel policies but also U.S. funding of billions of dollars to the Israel Government.

5.​For the U.S. the lobby system is totally democratic as ownership of firearms by all citizens is democratic. Malaysians would never think of condemning this system. For Malaysians, especially the liberal NGOs, and the opposition, everything and anything that is done by the U.S. and the West are regarded as democratic. They would never condemn the US for this blatant fee-based influence-pedalling.

6.​And of course we will agree to the TPPA irrespective of how much the majority of Malaysians are against it.

7.​Clearly while the West condemns us for not allowing freedom of the press and cronyism, the west is blatantly practising censorship and cronyism.

8.​I will not mention other undemocratic practises of the great advocates and crusaders for democracy and clean Government. Tapping phone calls and writing dossiers on their own citizens are now accepted democratic practices in the name of patriotism and national security.

NATIONAL SECURITY

This is a translation of the earlier posting KESELAMATAN NEGARA

1. During my time as Prime Minister, both the Prime Minister and the Deputy Prime Minister were jointly responsible for national security.

2. At times I held the post of Defence Minister while the Deputy Prime Minister is the Home Minister responsible for the police. At times as Prime Minister when I decided to assume the Home Minister portfolio, the Deputy Prime Minister would be appointed Defence Minister. There were only on a few occasions when the situation demanded it, ordinary Ministers were appointed to the Defence portfolio. This is because the issue of national security is of great importance.

3. On Nov 20, 1985, I led a massive private sector delegation to China because I believed there were abundant trade opportunities with China which had then only opened up to external trade participation.

4. I cannot recall Tun Musa (Hitam) coming up to me to ask me not to go to Beijing but he was, with many others, at the airport, to wish me well on my trip to China. Even at that time I cannot recall if he (Musa) had advised me against going abroad.

5. The Memali incident took place on 19 November 1985, a day before I left. In a police operation such as this, a tragedy could happen. In this case four policemen and 16 criminals were killed. Quite a number were wounded.

6. I was very confident in the ability of the Deputy Prime Minister to handle the situation that I appointed him as Acting Prime Minister. It was he who replied to YB Gooi Hock Seng (Bukit Bendera) in the Dewan Rakyat on Nov 20, 1985. YB Gooi had asked for a postponement of the Dewan Rakyat to discuss, the “Perintah Berkurung akibat Pembunuhan di Baling, Kedah” – (Handsard) – (Imposition of Curfew due to the killings in Baling, Kedah).

7. I returned home on Nov 28, 1985. When I was abroad, there were no incidents that could not be handled by the Deputy Prime Minister who was then the Acting Prime Minister.

8. Each portfolio came with its own set of responsibilities. In dealing with crimes, the responsibility was with the police. In terms of making a decision when there is a major threat to national security, the Minister is responsible, at least in endorsing the action to be taken.

9) Tun Musa admitted that it was his responsibility. In the system of Cabinet that we practise, all Cabinet members, especially the Prime Minister bears responsibility.

10) I don’t believe Musa foresaw the loss of lives resulting from his decision. As he had said in his reply to YB Tuan Gooi Hock Seng, “it is the duty and responsibility of the Government to ensure that security of the country exists at all times for the welfare of its citizens and for the overall stability of the country. This, the Government will not compromise…”

11) The issue with regards to me not being in Malaysia when the incident occurred was not spread by me. I did not mention this at all in my book. What is publicly known is that Dato Musa Hitam was the Home Minister and Deputy Prime Minister at that time. The Inspector General of Police discussed and reported to him as the Home Minister. The Home Minister is also involved in making the decision on actions that needed to be taken. It is surely unbecoming if when things were going well, only then one admits to the responsibility.

12) It has to be remembered that the policemen were killed before they returned fire. It is very unfortunate that while the deaths of Ibrahim and his followers are remembered and they were even declared as martyrs, the deaths of the members of the security forces are forgotten.

13) Yes, this incident should not have happened. But do we allow it to fester and spread before we act? Look at what is happening to other countries now. Look at what is happening in some other countries now because the police are not allowed to take act effectively.