BLOG - BLOG PARTI PKR

Sabtu, 9 November 2013

Anwar Ibrahim

[PRESS STATEMENT] Stone cold silence in the face of damning allegations
Suhaimi Said: Perginya Seorang Pejuang Tulen Yang Gigih
The Evolution of a Muslim Democrat: The Life of Malaysia’s Anwar Ibrahim

[PRESS STATEMENT] Stone cold silence in the face of damning allegations

Posted: 09 Nov 2013 05:56 AM PST

The recent allegations by Tun Dr Mahathir that the AG's Chambers employed two CIA agents are shocking indeed and require an immediate response from the Prime Minister Dato Seri Najib Razak as well as the Home Minister Datuk Seri Ahmad Zahid Hamidi.

Coming in the wake of the reports exposing a global spying network by the United States, Australia and other countries conducted on Malaysian soil about which the PM till today has remained absolutely silent, this latest expose is nothing if not shameful and scandalous.

This wall of silence that has been surrounding the PM and his Home Minister is symptomatic of a larger problem that is afflicting the government of DS Najib Razak where demands for transparency and accountability continue to fall on deaf ears.

In the same vein, Attorney General Tan Sri Gani Patail, owes the public an explanation concerning these allegations as well as the series of other allegations regarding his illegal and conspiratorial activities linked to his office.

Numerous police reports have already been filed by former CID chief of
Kuala Lumpur Dato' Mat Zain containing damning allegations against the AG. His failure to deny them renders him culpable of the wrong doings alleged and at the very least warrant an immediate suspension of
duties.

The Prime Minister must not ignore public demands for answers and the AG must not be allowed to continue in office seemingly oblivious of the stark allegations of nefarious and criminal activities committed by him.

Anwar Ibrahim

Suhaimi Said: Perginya Seorang Pejuang Tulen Yang Gigih

Posted: 08 Nov 2013 11:54 PM PST

Oleh Syed Husin Ali

Seorang pejuang tulen yang gigih untuk keadilan rakyat sudah meninggalkan kita buat selama-lamanya pada 5hb November 2013. Haji Suhaimi @ Sulaiman bin Said menghembuskan nafas terakhirnya di Hospital Sultan Ahmad Shah (HSAS) kira-kira jam 6.08 petang, dengan disaksikan oleh isterinya Hajah Hendon Jaafar, anak-anak dan keluarga terdekat.

Pada hari itu saya mendapat mesej menyatakan keadaan Suhaimi tenat. Saya telefon Hendon dan apabila ditanya keadaan Suhami dia menangis dan hanya mengeluarkan perkataan "Teruk". Dalam tiga kali saya melawatnya di HUKM dan HSAS saya lihat keadaannya semakin membimbangkan. Jadi kali ini saya terus bertolak dari rumah bersama empat orang kawan ke Temerloh.

Kami sampai di HSAS kira-kira jam 4.15. Walaupun belum waktu melawat lagi, kami dibenarkan ke wadnya di tingkat 7. Saya lihat matanya pejam dan nafasnya kuat; pada hidungnya terletak alat membekal oksigen. Saya membisikkan nama pada telinganya, mengucap beberapa kali dan mengingatkannya supaya terus mengucap. Saya percaya dia mendengar.

Setengah jam kemudian kami turun untuk melapangkan tempat bagi keluarga dan sahabat yang menunggu hendak naik. Lepas jam 5 kami beredar dari hospital untuk pulang. Semasa berhenti di Lancang untuk menunaikan solat asar, kami ditelefon Suhaimi tiada lagi. Saya merasa pilu sekali.

Suhaimi dilahirkan di kampung Lubuk Kawah, Temerloh pada 8 Disember 1944. Beliau membesar dalam keluarga dan masyarakat yang kuat berjuang untuk kemerdekaan dari penjajah. Ayahnya seorang aktivis Angkatan Pemuda Insaf (API), sayap pemuda Parti Kebangsaan Melayu Malaya (PKMM). Bahkan boleh dikatakan seluruh kampung itu kuat dipengaruhi PKMM. Hampir semua anggota keluarganya terlibat dengan perjuangan parti kebangsaan itu.

Semasa dewasanya Suhaimi belajar di Koleh MARA dan ketika itulah saya sebagai pensyarah di UM mulai berkenalan dengannya. Kemudian Suhaimi bekerja di pejabat Menteri Besar Pahang, di bawah Datuk Razak Hussein. Beliau dapat memberitahu kami tentang banyak laporan bertulis SB (Cawangan Khas) kepada MB. Masa itu pengaruh Parti Rakyat (PRM) di Temerloh sangat kuat.

Suhaimi berhenti dari bekerja untuk melanjutkan pelajaran undang-undang di London. Semasa itu saya selalu berjumpa dengannya sebab saya juga berada di sana untuk membuat ijazah Ph.D. Di London beliau bergerak dalam PRM Ranting London dan cergas dalam gerakan pelajar. Beliau mengikuti juga pergerakan sosialis di sana.

Selepas dianugerah seorang anak perempuan dan berjaya mendapat ijazah, Suhaimi pulang ke tanah air dan tidak lama kemudian menceburkan diri dalam PRM. Dari masa itulah beliau mula bergerak di kalangan peneroka Felda. Di samping itu beliau cergas mendirikan atau menguatkan ranting-ranting PRM. Beliau seorang aktivis yang tidak kenal penat lelah.

Berikutan krisis dalam PRM Suhaimi meninggalkannya dan memasuki PAS. Beliau menghadapi masalah dalam Parti itu dan berhenti pula untuk pindah sekejap ke dalam UMNO, yang sentiasa dianggapnya sebagai kesilapan besar. Walaupun berpindah-pindah parti, beliau sentiasa berpegang kuat kepada asas perjuangan yang pro-rakyat. Beliau "bersara" dari politik seketika. Hanya pada 27 November 2007 Suhaimi memasuki Parti Keadilan Rakyat (KEADILAN), setelah diminta oleh Syed Husin, Anwar Ibrahim dan Nizam.

Beliau begerak dengan gigih hampir seorang diri mula-mulanya untuk terus membela nasib peneroka Felda dan menggerakkan jentera parti di Pahang. Beliau membuka Ranting Kuala Krau, yang ramai dianggotai oleh peneroka Felda dan Orang Asal. Selaku pemimpin Ranting itu, beliau tidur baring di rumah Orang Asal dan mempelajari bahasa mereka. Mereka sayangkannya, dan tidak peliklah ramai antara mereka hadir pada hari pengebumiannya.

Di dalam KEADILAN Suhaimi memegang beberapa jawatan penting di peringkat Negeri dan Pusat. Beliau dipilih menjadi Naib Pengerusi KEADILAN Pahang dan diangkat sebagai anggota Majlis Pimpinan Parti (MPP) dan Ketua Biro Peneroka Felda dan Orang Asal. Di bawah Biro ini beliau dan beberapa orang peguam, seperti Sivarasa, Kumar dan Latheefa telah memenangi beberapa kes saman mahkamah terhadap Felda untuk membela peneroka.

Suhaimi boleh dikatakan pekerja sepenuh masa Parti tanpa bayaran daripadanya. Baginya perjuangan dalam politik bukan untuk kepentingan diri. Kerana perjuangan beliau ditahan dua kali di bawah ISA pada 1985 dan 1987. Beliau mempunyai sebuah syarikat guaman dan tidak pernah menggunakannya untuk mengumpul kekayaan. Oleh kerana bergerak cergas, beliau menyerahkan syarikat untuk diuruskan oleh anak perempuannya yang lahir di London dulu. Beliau bertanding dalam pilihanraya ke-13 akan tetapi gagal.

Semasa berkempen dalam pilihanraya itu Suhami sudah mula mengalami sakit yang bertambah tenat selepasnya. Beliau kembali ke RahmatulLah tanpa meninggalkan harta benda. Sebagai harimau mati meninggalkan belang, beliau meninggalkan nama yang harum. Nama itu berkaitan dengan kegigihan dan keikhlasannya dalam perjuangan demi rakyat. Suhami harus dijadikan teladan dan ikutan paling baik bagi semua anggota KEADILAN dan pejuang rakyat.

Al fatihah.

The Evolution of a Muslim Democrat: The Life of Malaysia’s Anwar Ibrahim

Posted: 08 Nov 2013 07:57 PM PST

Amazon.com

Long before the recent «Arab Spring», when the topic of democracy with in many Muslim countries took center stage internationally, Malaysia's Anwar Ibrahim, an energetic and charismatic politician, had been one of the most vocal global proponents of the compatibility of Islam and democratic principles. Anwar, who at one time was asked to be secretary-general of the United Nations, has lived a life that is a compelling testimony of the growth and evolution of his love for his country and his faith. Anwar has been active at the highest levels of Malaysian politics for over thirty years, and though he has been jailed for his activism on several occasions, he continues to be a dynamic, passionate voice for the diverse cultures, religions, and peoples of Malaysia. Anwar's life story is told in a factual, impartial way, and his one-on-one interviews with this book's author add a personal component. This volume is essential reading for scholars and students interested in Islamic politics and South East Asian studies.

Review
«Few public figures have transcended their milieu more decisively than Anwar Ibrahim. Moving well beyond the turbulent politics of Malaysia, he has become a major force in modern Islam. Charles Allers meticulously and insightfully documents Anwar's unparalleled trajectory from intellectual and activist to political outsider and prime minister-in-waiting. This is an assured and sensitive biography that finds, in an exceptional life, the evolution of a liberal Islam in which inter-civilizational dialogue and cosmopolitan values are unexceptional.» (James Piscatori, Durham University)
«Anwar Ibrahim has been a pivotal figure in the intersection between Islam and politics in Malaysia, with an impact that has gone beyond the country's boundaries. Through this thoroughly researched book, Charles Allers provides insight into the dynamics of change and approaches to 'reform', using Anwar as a lens through which decades of discourse and activity can be reflected upon and interpreted. Allers makes an important contribution to research on Islam and Muslims in the contemporary world, not just in relation to Malaysia. The book will be of relevance to students and specialists seeking to develop their understanding of the complexities and controversies surrounding Anwar Ibrahim and his place in Malaysian society, as well as those interested in attitudes toward politics and religion in modern Islamic contexts.» (Gary R. Bunt, Reader in Islamic Studies, University of Wales, Trinity Saint David)

About the Author
Charles Allers earned his PhD in Islamic studies from the University of Wales Trinity Saint David and his D.Min. from Azusa Pacific University. Dr. Allers has been active in serving people in the capacity of church pastor and civic chaplain for over twenty years. He and his wife, Greta, reside in San Diego, California.

Jumaat, 8 November 2013

Anwar Ibrahim

GST will hurt middle-class, youths, poor the most, says think tank
ICNA expresses concern over Bangladesh tribunals
States of War: How the Nation-State Made Modern Conflict

GST will hurt middle-class, youths, poor the most, says think tank

Posted: 07 Nov 2013 11:17 PM PST

TMI

Think tank Penang Institute has rebutted Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Datuk Seri Idris Jala's claim that the Goods and Services Tax (GST) will mostly affect the rich.

The institute tabulated figures from Bank Negara's estimates of income and expenditure, and revealed in a study that the GST will instead strain the finances of the middle-class, youths and the poor.

It is a regressive tax, according to the institute, “a tax that takes a larger percentage of income from low-income groups than from high-income groups”.

The study showed middle income households will “suffer cash outflows of up to RM 1,123 per year, because of GST payments exceeding income tax savings”.

But the worst hit households are those earning about RM2,500 a month, including technicians, clerks, services workers, farmers and fishermen. They are expected to pay 2.67% of their income in GST.

And when the tax comes into effect on April 1, 2015, those residing in West Malaysia as well as single-person households are expected to bear a bigger brunt of the tax at 6%.

On low income households, the study showed that 2.35% of their income will be toward the GST, while high income households – those with an average monthly income of RM 30,815 – will bear only 1.32%.

Idris, who is also Chief Executive Officer of The Performance Management and Delivery Unit (Pemandu), said last month that the tax would affect mostly the rich as they are heavy consumers.

The poor, he said, would suffer less since they receive the Bantuan Rakyat 1Malaysia (BR1M) aid, and most necessities would be either zero-rated or exempted from the GST. These include basic food items, public transportation and education.

Putrajaya's decision to introduce the GST in its Budget 2014 last month is part of the government's efforts to reduce its deficit to 3.5% of the growth domestic product (GDP) by 2014.

Malaysia has a debt-to-GDP ratio of 53%, close to its debt ceiling of 55%.

ICNA expresses concern over Bangladesh tribunals

Posted: 07 Nov 2013 10:45 PM PST

ICNA

NEW YORK, NY (November 7, 2013) – The Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA) calls on the International Crimes Tribunal in Bangladesh to adhere to international legal standards. A number of death penalty sentences have raised severe concerns about ICT's violation of the law.

The tribunal was created by the Bangladeshi government to put to trial those accused of committing war crimes during the country's war of independence in 1971.

Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International have unequivocally stated that ensuring justice for the atrocities committed during the war requires fair trials and due process of law.

"Trying hundreds of people en masse in one giant courtroom, where the accused have little or no access to lawyers, is an affront to international legal standards," said Human Rights Watch. "The authorities should instead immediately initiate a credible and fair trial to get justice for the mutiny victims and their families."

"The many victims of horrific abuses during Bangladesh's independence war and their families have long deserved justice, but the death penalty is not the answer," said Abbas Faiz, Bangladesh Researcher at Amnesty International.

The crimes tribunal also appears to be a politically motivated action on part of the current government to curb the establishment of democracy in Bangladesh and hide its failure to address pressing issues including poverty, healthcare, and the dismal state of factory workers.

If ICT fails to adhere to international standards and conduct reliable investigations based on credible evidence, it will undermine the government's efforts to establish an effective rule of law, will increase the likelihood of violence and deprive people the opportunity for reconciliation.

The Islamic Circle of North America is a leading American Muslim organization dedicated to the betterment of society through the application of Islamic values. Since 1968, ICNA has worked to build relations between communities by devoting itself to education, outreach, social services and relief efforts.

—END—

States of War: How the Nation-State Made Modern Conflict

Posted: 07 Nov 2013 07:29 PM PST

Foreign Affairs

To explain recent conflicts in countries such as Syria or Sudan, observers have been quick to point their fingers at proximate causes specific to our times: the power vacuum created by the end of the Cold War offered opportunities for rebels to fill the void; the recent globalization of trade flooded the developing world with cheap arms; rising global consumer demand generated new struggles over oil and minerals; jihadist groups spread using networks of fighters trained in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Yet such explanations miss a bigger picture. If we extend the time horizon beyond the Cold War to include the entire modern period — from the American and French revolutions to today — we can see repeating patterns of war and conflict. These patterns are related to the formation and development of independent nation-states.

Until the eighteenth century, empires, dynastic kingdoms, tribal confederacies, and city-states governed most of the world. This changed when nationalists introduced the notion that every "people" deserved its own government. They argued that ethnic likes should rule over likes. In other words, Slovaks should be governed by Slovaks, not the House of Hapsburg; and Americans by Americans, not the British crown. Over the past two centuries, in wave after wave of nation-state formation, this new principle of political legitimacy transformed the world.

In most places, two distinct phases of conflict accompanied this transition: first, violence related to the creation of the nation-state itself, and second, an often bloody struggle over which ethnic or national groups would hold power in the newly established state, and over where the country's final borders would settle.

State formation has been the driving force behind civil and interstate war — a fact woefully missing from much of the popular debate about the violent conflicts of today.

BLEEDING BORDERS

Roughly a third of present-day countries have fought violent wars of independence that united, if only temporarily, the diverse inhabitants of colonial or imperial provinces against their overlords. But many of the resulting nation-states endured even worse violence after independence was won because the like-over-like principle bred further conflict among the victors themselves.

Imperial governments had often recruited members of specific minorities into the colonial army and bureaucracy. (The classic example was the Belgian preference for Rwanda's Tutsi minority over its Hutu majority to staff the country's colonial administration.) In other former colonies, the elites of the more assimilated and educated groups controlled the post-imperial state's nascent bureaucracies and security apparatuses, a fact that other groups resented as a break with the like-over-like principle. More important, many new governments lacked the political power and resources to reach out to the entire population and overcome colonial-era inequalities. This made nation building more difficult and ethnic patronage more likely. Large segments of the population thus remained politically marginalized.

Whatever its origins, ethnopolitical inequality was perceived as a scandal once nationalism had been accepted as the guiding principle of legitimacy. This made it easier for opposition leaders to mobilize followers and stage armed rebellions against exclusionary regimes. Data from every country in the world since 1945 demonstrates a tight correlation between such inequality and conflict: an increase in the size of the politically excluded population by 30 percent increased the chances of civil war by 25 percent. Almost 40 percent of independent countries today have experienced at least one ethnopolitical rebellion since World War II. It is important to note that these countries are not more ethnically diverse than those at peace. It is therefore not diversity per se, but political inequality, that breeds conflict.

Of course, other factors play a role as well, including the repressive capacity of the state: After all, it is much harder to organize a guerrilla army in northern China than in Somalia. Civil wars are also more likely to break out in poorer countries where it is more economically important to have connections to the government. Finally, not all politically marginalized ethnic groups have an educated leadership capable of forming a political movement or staging a rebellion.

New nation-states are also more likely to go to war with each other than established empires or dynastic states were. Empires drew loose and often arbitrary borders with little regard to ethnicity. Nation-states, on the other hand, care more about borders because these may divide a single national group across various states. This creates the risk that those who end up on the wrong side of the border are treated as second-class citizens in neighboring states dominated by other ethnic groups — another way that the like-over-like principle can be violated. Conflict between neighboring nation-states thus often erupts over territories where ethnic groups overlap or over borders that divide a single ethnic group. In the early 1990s, for example, the Serbian minority resisted integration into the newly founded state of Croatia. The government of Serbia, expecting that their co-ethnics in Croatia would be mistreated (and in pursuit of its own national unification project), intervened on their behalf. War between the two states followed, ending with the expulsion of the Croatian Serbs across the border.

The domestic struggle over who "owns" a new state does eventually come to an end — on average, after sixty years. It often comes violently, by way of expulsions, population exchanges, or forced assimilation that result in a more homogenous country. In other cases, strong central governments and well-established civil society organizations have made ethnicity irrelevant to the formation of political alliances (as in Switzerland) or encouraged voluntary assimilation into the core group (as in France and Botswana). In other instances, a power-sharing arrangement between the representatives of politicized ethnic groups helps to avoid future civil war (as in Canada).

MINORITY REPORT

In short, the spread of the like-over-like principle and the formation of nation-states have been driving forces behind civil and interstate war — a fact woefully missing from much of the popular debate about the violent conflicts of today.

Take Syria, whose history of conflict conforms closely to the pattern. The Arab uprising against Ottoman rule during World War I did not lead to the country's independence but instead to another round of colonial domination by France. After a series of failed anticolonial rebellions during the mid-1920s, Syria finally gained independence from France at the end of World War II. Much of the political turmoil in the postcolonial period concerned the distribution of political power among ethnic elites. After a number of coups, the al-Assad clan and its small Alawite sect emerged as the new owners of the state.

It is not diversity, but political inequality, that breeds conflict.

Syria thus became a classic example of an ethnocracy – where an ethnic minority dominates the entire state apparatus. As a consequence of this departure from the like-over-like principle, the government utterly lacks popular support and political legitimacy. The regime compensated by adopting pan-Arab rhetoric and anti-Israel policies, accommodating the Sunni economic elite, building a massive security apparatus that penetrated the entire fabric of society, and brutally suppressing any form of protest or rebellion, such as the Sunni uprising of 1982. Now, Syria's civil war is increasingly being fought along religious and sectarian divides, as was the case in neighboring Iraq after the U.S. invasion. Although the future remains unpredictable, it is safe to say that no durable peace will be achieved until the ethnocratic regime under Assad gives way to a power structure that integrates the country's Sunni majority. The Kurds, meanwhile, may perhaps end up in a Kurdish state sometime in the future.

Sudan has followed a similar path. A decades-long nationalist war finally led to the secession in 2011 of southern Sudan, where non-Muslims of African descent form the majority, from northern Sudan, which has been politically dominated by Muslim Arabs since its inception. Tensions between the two states run high over the exact demarcation of the boundary between them. In its present form, the divide leaves tens of thousands of non-Muslim Africans politically marginalized in North Sudan. In South Kordofan and the Blue Nile area, which are on the northern side of the demarcation, former fighters for an independent South have continued to attack northern troops with tacit support from the newly established South Sudanese government and army. Clashes between the two states' militaries have led many analysts to fear more violence in the future.

In the South, ethnopolitical inequality has led to domestic conflict as well. Shortly after independence, new complaints arose about the dominance of former Dinka fighters, who had founded and controlled the independence movement, in the recently formed bureaucracy and army. Armed conflicts erupted between government forces and various rebel factions claiming to represent Nuer or Murle constituencies.

What will the future bring for the two Sudans? Given that control over significant oil resources is at stake, their conflict is unlikely to be settled through a simple redrawing of boundaries. It is equally improbable that the current government in Khartoum will open its ranks to former independence fighters and their ethnic followers. A long-lasting, low-intensity conflict is far more likely — at least as long as the ethnocratic regime in Khartoum survives. As for the domestic conflict in South Sudan, given the state's low institutional capacity, it will be difficult to pursue a successful nation-building project by integrating the country's various ethnic constituencies and depoliticizing tribal and ethnic allegiances. One can expect that jostling for power in unstable coalitions and occasional infighting will continue.

Kosovo also conforms to the pattern. It became a sovereign country after decades of nationalist mobilization against alien rule by the Serbian state. The independence war of the late 1990s led to NATO intervention, followed by a decade of UN administration. In 2008, Kosovo was declared sovereign. Tensions between the young state's Albanian majority, empowered by independence, and its Serbian minority still run high. Without NATO protection, these Serbian enclaves would probably have been ethnically cleansed a long time ago. And if Serbia had not been under the threat of further NATO bombings, it most likely would have intervened militarily to protect its ethnic brethren across the border, bringing the two states to war. Intervening relatively early, then, can help prevent such conflicts from escalating to the level of full-scale war seen in Bosnia. The Bosnian episode also illustrates, however, that it is not a sustainable solution to force elites with opposing nationalist agendas to share power in a state they do not want.

This historical pattern is not without exceptions. Nor does it explain all of the wars in the world. Some ethnically heterogeneous nation-states, including Montenegro, have emerged without violence and have remained peaceful. Some of the most intractable conflicts have erupted in such long-established nation-states as Colombia and have nothing to do with nationalism or ethnicity. Still, far more examples could be cited that do follow the pattern: Think of the Kurdish struggle in Turkey, the shaky peace process in Northern Ireland, the Darfur drama, the sectarian violence still haunting Iraq, the series of Caucasian conflicts that have emerged since the dissolution of the Soviet empire, or resistance to Chinese rule in Tibet. More complicated cases are those in which ethnopolitical exclusion has led to a guerilla movement with a non-ethnic agenda, such as the Marxist fighters in Guatemala, or the Maoist ones in Peru, Nepal, and parts of India.

One can reasonably predict, then, that contemporary states that politically marginalize large portions of their population might well descend into protracted armed violence. A number of countries are at risk, including Rwanda, where a small group of Tutsi returnees from neighboring Uganda rules over the Hutu majority with an iron fist; Jordan, which might one day no longer be able to divert the political aspirations of its large, politically powerless group of Palestinian citizens to neighboring Israel; Peru and Guatemala, which, unlike Bolivia, continue to marginalize their large indigenous populations; and Guinea, where the party favored by the ethnic Peul, who make up roughly 40 percent of the population and have long been excluded from power, has protested rigged elections as recently as February.

These enduring patterns of violence demand policy solutions that sound simple in theory but are deeply challenging to put into practice. Building more inclusionary power structures — not necessarily through electoral democracy — represents the most viable strategy for new states to prevent armed conflict. Macedonia is often cited as a successful example of how institutional engineering, under intense international pressure, can lead to a relatively stable power-sharing arrangement. One can enlarge the list of successful strategies by calling attention to Tanzania, where a dominant nationalist leader built a far-reaching infrastructure of power that bridged ethnic divides. Botswana and Burkina Faso also provide examples of successful ethnic inclusion — in the case of latter, thanks to a strong network of trade unions that provided a platform for ethnic political integration. At the same time, the recent U.S. experience in Afghanistan shows just how difficult it is to foster political integration through occupation. Outsiders who provide public goods — schools, hospitals, and the like — undermine the legitimacy of the domestic government, rather than foster it. Nation building from the outside, then, is not just difficult but structurally impossible. The path to peace — toward an inclusionary state that does not violate the like-over-like principle — begins at home.

www.telokkemang.blogspot.com/

Mrs. Zahra Hami

Posted: 07 Nov 2013 12:46 PM PST

Dearest,

I am Mrs. Zahra Hami and I am married to Mr. Roshan Hami for 19 years
without a child and my husband died in just four days of his illness. I
am contacting you to let you know my desire to donate the sum of $3.5
million to charities in your country which I inherited from my late
husband. Due to my illness (cancer) I have been confirmed to leave for
just eight months by doctors, so it is my desire that this money is
invested and distributed to charity organizations of your choice like
orphanage homes, schools, Home for the homeless, Home for the elderly,
hospital and many other things that will be to the benefit of the less
privilege. I want you to send the following information so that I start
processing the affidavit that will prove you the new beneficiary to the
fund.

( 1 ) Your full name ....
( 2 ) Address ....
( 3 ) City and country ....
( 4 Age / Sex ......
( 5 ) Occupation .......

Once I receive your reply confirming your acceptance of the work, I will
give all relevant information and swear affidavit to authorize the bank
release and transfer the money to you as my duly appointed
representative.

Thanks,
Mrs. Zahra Hami

MEDIA Rakyat MALAYSIA

ANTARA HIKMAH BERKHATAN.......

Posted: 07 Nov 2013 04:50 AM PST

Khamis, 7 November 2013

Suara Sri Andalas

Jawatankuasa Perwakilan Penduduk Bertujuan Politik dan Rampas Kuasa PBT

Posted: 07 Nov 2013 01:30 AM PST

KUALA LUMPUR 7 NOV : Jawatankuasa Perwakilan Penduduk (JPP) yang ditubuhkan kerajaan pusat bagi menyokong program pembangunan masyarakat disifatkan mempunyai tujuan politik dan cubaan rampasan kuasa daripada kerajaan negeri dan Pihak Berkuasa Tempatan (PBT).

Ahli Parlimen Bayan Baru, Sim Tze Tzin, berkata fungsi JPP yang dicadangkan kerajaan pusat didapati sama dengan tugas ahli majlis dan mungkin melanggar Perlembagaan.

Katanya, JPP yang tertumpu di kawasan bandar itu akan mensasarkan PBT di negeri Pakatan Rakyat (PR) dan mungkin bertujuan bersaing dengan ahli majlis lantikan kerajaan negeri.

"Penubuhan JPP diputuskan selepas Barisan Nasional (BN) gagal meraih undi majoriti daripada penduduk di kawasan bandar ketika Pilihan Raya Umum ke-13 (PRU-13) lalu.

"Kami syak kerajaan pusat ingin memusatkan kuasa dengan menubuhkan JPP sebagai 'Ahli Majlis Lantikan Persekutuan' yang jelas bercanggah dengan Perlembagaan kerana PBT adalah di bawah bidang kuasa kerajaan negeri.

"Saya menyeru kerajaan tempatan dan kerajaan negeri mengambil perhatian terhadap inisiatif ini," katanya pada sidang media, di lobi Parlimen, di sini, hari ini.

Katanya, adalah lebih baik jika kerajaan mebenarkan pelaksanaan pilihan raya kerajaan tempatan diadakan untuk memberi mandat yang lebih besar kepada pentadbiran PBT.

Beliau berkata, pilihan raya itu dijamin akan menjadikan ahli majlis sedia ada lebih efektif dalam urusan pentadbiran dan perbandaran.

"Penubuhan JPP hanya membuang masa dan peruntukan kerajaan kerana akan menghadkan kuasa PBT yang sebenarnya terletak di bawah kerajaan negeri. Kerajaan pusat harus akur berkenaan kuasa PBT yang terletak di bawah kerajaan negeri dan elakkan daripada melanggar kuasa," katanya.

Perdana Menteri, Datuk Seri Najib Razak mengumumkan peruntukan bajet sejumlah RM63 juta untuk menubuhkan 24 zon JPP di setiap PBT, pada 25 Oktober lalu,

JPP akan bertindak sebagai satu entiti yang dianggotai wakil masyarakat setempat bagi menyokong program pembangunan masyarakat, di samping menangani isu perbandaran di kawasan PBT dan inisiatif terbaru itu adalah hasil maklum balas yang menunjukkan kebanyakna penduduk bandar tidak memahami dengan jelas berkenaan program dana dasar kerajaan, ketika PRU-13 lalu.

Sumber: SelangorKu

Malaysia Berdepan Saman Jika TPPA Dimeterai

Posted: 07 Nov 2013 01:26 AM PST

KUALA LUMPUR 7 NOV : Kerajaan Malaysia bakal berdepan risiko saman daripada firma gergasi jika berkeras melaksanakan penyelesaian pertikaian pelaburan negara (ISDS) dengan menandatangani rundingan Perjanjian Perkongsian Trans Pasifik (TPPA).

Ahli Parlimen Lembah Pantai, Nurul Izzah, berkata walaupun ramai berpendapat ISDS penting kerana digunapakai di banyak negara, namun mekanisma itu hanya menguntungkan pelabur asing dan menyebabkan pelabur tempatan jatuh ke kelas kedua.

Katanya, kerajaan disaran mewujudkan tabung khas jika Malaysia disaman syarikat gergasi berikutan kosnya yang tinggi, selain dinasihatkan bersedia menerima risiko pasca menandatangani TPPA.

"Ini adalah masalah serius jika perjanjian ini dimeterai tanpa mengetahui bebanan yang akan ditanggung negara dan menjejaskan generasi masa depan termasuk ekonomi Malaysia.

"Pimpinan Pakatan Rakyat (PR) sudah bertemu dengan pakar ISDS dan berpendapat kita tidak boleh terima tanpa teliti kandungan hitam putih setiap bab TPPA yang bakal ditandatangani Malaysia," katanya pada sidang media di Parlimen, di sini, hari ini.

Katanya, PR tidak pernah menolak sebarang urusan perdagangan, namun pelaksanaan undang-undang itu bakal menjerut ramai pihak dan tidak harus diterima pakai.

Beliau berkata, TPPA harus dihentikan terutama apabila Amerika Syarikat didapati membuat intipan menggunakan kedutaan dan suruhanjaya tinggi mereka di Kuala Lumpur ke atas Malaysia.

"Kita mesti hentikan ini terutama selepas mendapat tahu apa yang dilakukan Amerika ke atas Malaysia dan kerajaan perlu dapatkan penjelasan.

"Malaysia perlu mencontohi Kesatuan Eropah yang menghentikan akses perbankan Amerika selepas mengetahui mereka menjalankan intipan ke atas negara itu," katanya.

Sumber: SelangorKu

Anwar Ibrahim

Russell Brand: we deserve more from our democratic system

Posted: 07 Nov 2013 04:44 AM PST

The Guardian

Following his appearance on Newsnight, the comedian explains why he believes there are alternatives to our current regime

I’ve had an incredible week since I spoke from the heart, some would say via my arse, on Paxman. I’ve had slaps on the back, fist bumps, cheers and hugs while out and about, cock-eyed offers of political power from well intentioned chancers and some good ol’ fashioned character assassinations in the papers.

The people who liked the interview said it was because I’d articulated what they were thinking. I recognise this. God knows I’d love to think the attention was about me but I said nothing new or original, it was the expression of the knowledge that democracy is irrelevant that resonated. As long as the priorities of those in government remain the interests of big business, rather than the people they were elected to serve, the impact of voting is negligible and it is our responsibility to be more active if we want real change.

Turns out that among the disenchanted is Paxman himself who spends most of his time at the meek heart of the political establishment and can’t summons up the self-delusion to drag his nib across the ballot box. He, more than any of us is aware that politicians are frauds. I’ve not spent too much time around them, only on the telly, it’s not pleasant; once you’ve been on Question Time and seen Boris simpering under a make-up brush it’s difficult to be enthusiastic about politics.

The only reason to vote is if the vote represents power or change. I don’t think it does. I fervently believe that we deserve more from our democratic system than the few derisory tit-bits tossed from the carousel of the mighty, when they hop a few inches left or right. The lazily duplicitous servants of The City expect us to gratefully participate in what amounts to little more than a political hokey cokey where every four years we get to choose what colour tie the liar who leads us wears.

I remember the election and Cameron didn’t even get properly voted in, he became prime minister by default when he teamed up with Clegg. Clegg who immediately reneged (Renegy-Cleggy?) on his flagship pledge to end tuition fees at the first whiff of power.

When students, perhaps students who had voted for him, rioted they were condemned. People riot when dialogue fails, when they feel unrepresented and bored by the illusion, bilious with the piped in toxic belch wafted into their homes by the media.

The reason these coalitions are so easily achieved is that the distinctions between the parties are insignificant. My friend went to a posh “do” in the country where David Cameron, a man whose face resembles a little painted egg, was in attendance. Also present were members of the opposition and former prime minister Tony Blair. Whatever party they claim to represent in the day, at night they show their true colours and all go to the same party.

Obviously there has been some criticism of my outburst, I’ve not been universally applauded as a cross between Jack Sparrow and Spartacus (which is what I’m going for) but they’ve been oddly personal and I think irrelevant to the argument. I try not to read about myself as the mean stuff is hurtful and the good stuff hard to believe, but my mates always give me the gist of what’s going on, the bastards. Some people say I’m a hypocrite because I’ve got money now. When I was poor and I complained about inequality people said I was bitter, now I’m rich and I complain about inequality they say I’m a hypocrite. I’m beginning to think they just don’t want inequality on the agenda because it is a real problem that needs to be addressed.

It’s easy to attack me, I’m a right twerp, I’m a junkie and a cheeky monkey, I accept it, but that doesn’t detract from the incontrovertible fact that we are living in a time of huge economic disparity and confronting ecological disaster. This disparity has always been, in cultures since expired, a warning sign of end of days. In Rome, Egypt and Easter Island the incubated ruling elites, who had forgotten that we are one interconnected people, destroyed their societies by not sharing. That is what’s happening now, regardless of what you think of my hair or me using long words, the facts are the facts and the problem is the problem. Don’t be distracted. I think these columnist fellas who give me aggro for not devising a solution or for using long words are just being territorial. When they say “long words” they mean “their words” like I’m a monkey who got in their Mum’s dressing up box or a hooligan in policeman’s helmet.

As I said to Paxman at the time “I can’t conjure up a global Utopia right now in this hotel room”. Obviously that’s not my job and it doesn’t need to be, we have brilliant thinkers and organisations and no one needs to cook up an egalitarian Shangri-La on their todd; we can all do it together.

I like Jeremy Paxman, incidentally. I think he’s a decent bloke but like a lot of people who work deep within the system it’s hard for him to countenance ideas from outside the narrowly prescribed trench of contemporary democracy. Most of the people who criticized me have a vested interest in the maintenance of the system. They say the system works. What they mean is “the system works for me”.

The less privileged among us are already living in the apocalypse, the thousands of street sleepers in our country, the refugees and the exploited underclass across our planet daily confront what we would regard as the end of the world. No money, no home, no friends, no support, no hand of friendship reaching out, just acculturated and inculcated condemnation.

When I first got a few quid it was like an anaesthetic that made me forget what was important but now I’ve woken up. I can’t deny that I’ve done a lot of daft things while I was under the capitalist fugue, some silly telly, soppy scandals, movies better left unmade. I’ve also become rich. I don’t hate rich people; Che Guevara was a rich person. I don’t hate anyone, I judge no one, that’s not my job, I’m a comedian and my job is to say whatever I like to whoever I want if I’m prepared to take the consequences. Well I am.

My favourite experiences since Paxman-nacht are both examples of the dialogue it sparked. Firstly my friend’s 15-year-old son wrote an essay for his politics class after he read my New Statesman piece. He didn’t agree with everything I said, he prefers the idea of spoiling ballots to not voting “to show we do care” maybe he’s right, I don’t know. The reason not voting could be effective is that if we starve them of our consent we could force them to acknowledge that they operate on behalf of The City and Wall Street; that the financing of political parties and lobbying is where the true influence lies; not in the ballot box. However, this 15-year-old is quite smart and it’s quite possible that my opinions are a result of decades of drug abuse.

I’m on tour so I’ve been with thousands of people every night (not like in the old days, I’m a changed man) this is why I’m aware of how much impact the Newsnight interview had. Not everyone I chat to agrees with me but their beliefs are a lot closer to mine than the broadsheets, and it’s their job to be serious. One thing I’ve learned and was surprised by is that I may suffer from the ol’ sexism. I can only assume I have an unaddressed cultural hangover, like my adorable Nan who had a heart that shone like a pearl but was, let’s face it, a bit racist. I don’t want to be a sexist so I’m trying my best to check meself before I wreck meself. The problem may resolve itself as I’m in a loving relationship with a benevolent dictator and have entirely relinquished personal autonomy.

Whilst travelling between gigs I had my second notable encounter. One night late at the Watford Gap I got chatting to a couple of squaddies, one Para, one Marine, we talked a bit about family and politics, I invited them to a show. Then we were joined by three Muslim women, all hijabbed up. For a few perfect minutes in the strip lit inertia of this place, that was nowhere in particular but uniquely Britain, I felt how plausible and beautiful The Revolution could be. We just chatted.

Between three sets of different people; first generation Muslims, servicemen and the privileged elite that they serve (that would be me) effortless cooperation occurred. Here we were free from the divisive rule that tears us apart. That sends brave men and women to foreign lands to fight their capitalist wars, that intimidates and unsettles people whose faith and culture superficially distinguishes them, that tells the comfortable “hush now” you have your trinkets. It seemed ridiculous that refracted through the power prism that blinds us; the soldiers could be invading the homeland of these women’s forefathers in order to augment my luxurious stupour. Here in the gap we were together. Our differences irrelevant. With no one to impose separation we are united.

I realised then that our treasured concepts of tribe and nation are not valued by those who govern except when it is to divide us from each other. They don’t believe in Britain or America they believe in the dollar and the pound. These are deep and entrenched systemic wrongs that are unaddressed by party politics.

The symptoms of these wrongs are obvious, global and painful. Drone strikes on the innocent, a festering investment for future conflict.

How many combatants are created each time an innocent person in a faraway land is silently ironed out from an Arizona call centre? The reality is we have more in common with the people we’re bombing than the people we’re bombing them for.

NSA spying, how far-reaching is the issue of surveillance? Do you think we don’t have our own cute, quaint British version? Does it matter if the dominant paradigm of Western Capitalism is indifferent to our Bud Flanagan belief in nation? Can we really believe these problems can be altered within the system that created them? That depends on them? The system that we are invited to vote for? Of course not, that’s why I won’t vote. That’s why I support the growing revolution.

We can all contribute ideas as to how to change our world; schoolboys, squaddies, hippies, Muslims, Jews and if what I’m describing is naive then you can keep your education and your indoctrination because loving our planet and each other is a duty, a beautiful obligation. While chatting to people this week I heard some interesting ideas, here are a couple.

We could use the money accumulated by those who have too much, not normal people with a couple of cars, giant corporations, to fund a fairer society.

The US government gave a trillion dollars to bail out the big five banks over the past year. Banks that have grown by 30% since the crisis and are experiencing record profits and giving their execs record bonuses. How about, hang on to your hats because here comes a naïve suggestion, don’t give them that money, use it to create one million jobs at fifty grand a year for people who teach, nurse or protect.

These bailouts for elites over services for the many are institutionalised within the system, no party proposes changing it. American people that voted, voted for it. I’m not voting for that.

That’s one suggestion for the Americans; we started their country so we owe them a favour now things are getting heavy.

Here’s one for blighty; Philip Green, the bloke who owns Top Shop didn’t pay any income tax on a £1.2bn dividend in 2005. None. Unless he paid himself a salary that year, in addition to the £1.2bn dividend, the largest in corporate history, then the people who clean Top Shop paid more income tax than he did. That’s for two reasons – firstly because he said that all of his £1.2bn earnings belong to his missus, who was registered in Monaco and secondly because he’s an arsehole. The money he’s nicked through legal loopholes would pay the annual salary for 20,000 NHS nurses. It’s not illegal; it’s systemic, British people who voted, voted for it. I’m not voting for that.

Why don’t you try not paying taxes and see how quickly a lump of bird gets thrown in your face. It’s socialism for corporate elites and feudalism for the rest of us. Those suggestions did not come from me; no the mind that gave the planet Booky Wook and Ponderland didn’t just add an economically viable wealth distribution system to the laudable list of accolades, to place next to my Shagger Of The Year awards.

The first came from Dave DeGraw, the second Johann Hari got from UK Uncut. Luckily with organisations like them, Occupy, Anonymous and The People’s Assembly I don’t need to come with ideas, we can all participate. I’m happy to be a part of the conversation, if more young people are talking about fracking instead of twerking we’re heading in the right direction. The people that govern us don’t want an active population who are politically engaged, they want passive consumers distracted by the spectacle of which I accept I am a part.

If we all collude and collaborate together we can design a new system that makes the current one obsolete. The reality is there are alternatives. That is the terrifying truth that the media, government and big business work so hard to conceal. Even the outlet that printed this will tomorrow print a couple of columns saying what a naïve wanker I am, or try to find ways that I’ve fucked up. Well I am naïve and I have fucked up but I tell you something else. I believe in change. I don’t mind getting my hands dirty because my hands are dirty already. I don’t mind giving my life to this because I’m only alive because of the compassion and love of others. Men and women strong enough to defy this system and live according to higher laws. This is a journey we can all go on together, all of us. We can include everyone and fear no one. A system that serves the planet and the people. I’d vote for that.

BULETIN RAKYAT

USAHAWAN SEKITAR RAWANG BERBENGKEL BERSAMA GENERASI USAHAWAN HEBAT @ GEN-UH, HOTEL SAHARA, RAWANG 26 OKT 2013

Posted: 07 Nov 2013 04:30 AM PST

Bersama PKM Dun Rawang, Yb Gan Pei Nei dan Gen UH Generasi Usahawan Hebat mengadakan bengkel keusahawan di Hotel Sahara, Rawang..26 Okt Sabtu lepas demi ntuk mertabatkan peniaga dan usahawan kecil sekitar rawang. Tahniah kepada semua peserta bengkel Gen-UH..

PARTI KEADILAN RAKYAT NEGERI SEMBILAN

Naik caj Astro RM2, lagi beban kepada pengguna

Posted: 06 Nov 2013 08:17 PM PST

KUALA LUMPUR 6 NOVEMBER: Astro tidak seharusnya menambah beban pengguna dengan menaikkan caj untuk beberapa pakej yang disiarkannya memandangkan syarikat tersebut telah meraih keuntungan besar saban tahun.

Malah Pengerusi Biro Kepenggunaan KEADILAN, Yahya Sahri berkata, Astro yang diberi hak memonopoli khidmat televisyen berbayar seharusnya menyelesaikan terlebih dahulu isu melibatkan kepuasan pelanggan sebelum bertindak menaikkan caj.

"Astro ini sudah untung besar, sudah monopoli pasaran. Jadi tak wajarlah caj perkhidmatan kepada pengguna dinaikkan.

"Apatah lagi bila kita selalu dengar tentang rungutan berkaitan dengan mutu penyiaran Astro yang kurang memuaskan selain penyiaran rancangan yang berulang-ulang," tegas beliau yang mahu Suruhanjaya Komunikasi Malaysia (SKKM) mengkaji cadangan Astro itu.

Astro dalam laman sesawangnya memaklumkan akan mengenakan tambahan caj RM2 bagi pakej keluarga dan RM6 bagi pakej sukan bermula 24 November ini.

Yahya sementara itu berkata, monopoli Astro harus ditamatkan, Kementerian Penerangan, Komunikasi dan Kebudayaan seharusnya meluluskan lesen khidmat televisyen berbayar kepada syarikat lain.

Menurutnya ia bagi mewujudkan persaingan sihat di antara penyedia perkhidmatan seperti yang berlaku di antara pembekal perkhidmatan komunikasi selain memberikan lebih pilihan kepada pengguna.ni.

Short URL: http://www.keadilandaily.com/?p=56639

Anwar: Seluruh negara Asean harus bantah intipan Amerika

Posted: 06 Nov 2013 08:15 PM PST

JAKARTA 6 NOVEMBER: Seluruh negara Asean harus membantah keras intipan Amerika Syarikat (AS) ke atas beberapa negara terlibat, kata Ketua Pembangkang Malaysia, Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim.

Lapor Kompas.com, Anwar berkata, melalui penyatuan semua negara Asean, bantahan lebih mudah dan didengari.

"Kita harus ambil sikap (tindakan), harus tegas, terutama menuntut mereka untuk minta maaf. Segera keluarkan (ungkapan(kenyataan)) siapa saja yang terlibat," kata Anwar pada pertemuan dengan Ketua Dewan Perwakilan Daerah (DPD) Irman Gusman di Jakarta, semalam.

Katanya, negara-negara Asean seperti Indonesia dan Malaysia yang dikhabarkan diintip Amerika masih berlembut dan tidak tegas.

Menurut Anwar, Indonesia hanya sekadar melakukan bantahan tanpa tindakan lebih jauh.

Bagaimanapun, beliau menyifatkan, reaksi Indonesia itu lebih baik dibandingkan pemerintah Malaysia yang sama sekali belum mempamerkan bantahan.

"Sampai sekarang pemerintahan Malaysia belum ada pernyataan keras terhadap (isu) ini. Sering kali kita menemukan sikap yang lemah," kata mantan Timbalan Perdana Menteri Malaysia itu, lapor portal Indonesia itu dipetik.

Anwar selanjutnya membandingkan dengan negara-negara Eropah seperti Jerman yang juga menjadi sasaran intipan Amerika. Ini kerana Jerman menentang keras setelah mengetahui Kanselor Jerman, Angela Merkel diintip.

"Jerman sebagai negara tetangga (jiran) masih dicurangi, apalagi negara Asia. Untuk itu, kita harus memprotes keras. Harus tegas, terutama menuntut untuk (Amerika) meminta maaf," tegas Anwar.

Dilaporkan, Agensi Keselamatan Kebangsaan (NSA) AS diketahui mengintip komunikasi negara-negara sekutu mereka di Eropah. AS juga disebut mengintip komunikasi pemerintah Indonesia. Australia juga dilaporkan melakukan hal yang sama terhadap Indonesia.

Laporan terbaru di laman Sydney Morning Herald 31 Oktober lalu menyebut, pejabat Kedutaan Besar Australia di Jakarta turut menjadi lokasi intipan maklumat elektronik.

Sehubungan itu, Kerajaan Indonesia meminta pengesahan Kedutaan Besar AS dan Australia mengenai intipan yang diduga dilakukan kedua-dua negara tersebut terhadap negara itu tetapi hasilnya, AS mahupun Australia sekadar membisu.

Anwar dalam kenyataan sebelum itu menyelar sikap Perdana Menteri, Datuk Seri Najib Razak yang membisu terhadap tindakan tercela itu.

Short URL: http://www.keadilandaily.com/?p=56626

Rabu, 6 November 2013

Anak Muda Kampung Nak Senang

PIDATO RAKYAT

Posted: 06 Nov 2013 06:23 AM PST

Isnin, 4 November 2013

Anwar Ibrahim

[KENYATAAN MEDIA] Perutusan Ma’al Hijrah 1435H

Posted: 03 Nov 2013 11:32 PM PST

PERUTUSAN MA'AL HIJRAH 1435H OLEH DATO' SERI ANWAR IBRAHIM

Tatkala menghimbau peristiwa Hijrah, kita sewajarnya menginsafi iltizam dan tekad Rasulullah SAW yang tetap istiqamah dalam memacu dakwah dan proses perubahan ummah. Meski pun dihadapkan dengan pelbagai rintangan dan mehnah, namun umat Islam di bawah kepimpinan Rasulullah SAW tetap teguh berpegang kepada prinsip dan keimanan kepada Allah SWT.
Peristiwa Hijrah sememangnya telah membuka dimensi baru dalam sejarah ketamadunan Islam. Sentimen dan faham perkauman berteras semangat kabilah dan suku yang menebal di kalangan masyarakat Arab ketika itu telah berjaya dirobek dan dipecahkan.

Perpindahan umat Islam dari Makkah ke Madinah menyaksikan bermulanya era baru dalam perkembangan dakwah Islam. Penyatuan kaum Ansar dan Muhajjirin merupakan titik tolak kepada pembinaan sebuah masyarakat madani dan pemerintahan negara yang berteraskan prinsip al-adli wal ihsan.
Justeru penghayatan Hijrah seharusnya disemai menerusi pemahaman terhadap falsafah pembaharuan yang digagaskan oleh baginda Rasulullah SAW. Lompang besar dalam persoalan tatakelola yang mengabaikan prinsip kebertanggungjawaban dan ketelusan sewajarnya diatasi dan diperbaiki. Pembaziran dan ketirisan yang menjadi budaya dalam amalan tadbir urus mutakhir ini tidak boleh dibiarkan terus berlaku. Perubahan tidak akan dicapai seandainya kita terus bersikap laih dan lesu. Firman Allah SWT di dalam Al-Qur'an:

"Sesungguhnya Kami tidak akan mengubah nasib sesuatu kaum itu, melainkan mereka mengubah nasib mereka sendiri."
(Surah Ar-Rad: ayat 11)
Bagi pihak KEADILAN, saya mengucapkan Salam Ma'al Hijrah 1435 kepada seluruh umat Islam di Malaysia. Semoga Allah SWT terus melimpahkan rahmat dan hidayah untuk kita semua serta memberikan kita kekuatan untuk meneruskan perjuangan membawa perubahan di negara Malaysia yang tercinta ini.

DATO’ SERI ANWAR IBRAHIM
KETUA PEMBANGKANG PARLIMEN MALAYSIA
KETUA UMUM PARTI KEADILAN RAKYAT

MEDIA Rakyat MALAYSIA

SITI NORALIZA DAN DATUK K DI FINAL MALAYSIAN CUP

Posted: 03 Nov 2013 08:13 PM PST