Malaysia

Reuters denies reporting Malaysia as listed ‘terror state’ by the US

TODAY Reuters denied that it published a report that is going viral in Malaysia in WhatsApp groups, stating Malaysia is the first country in Southeast Asia (SEA) to be listed by the US as a state sponsor of terror.

The news agency confirmed these are false reports on X (formerly Twitter).

“Any claims that Reuters reported that Malaysia is the first country in Southeast Asia to be listed by the US as a state sponsor of terror are false. Reuters did not report this.”

The WhatsApp message claimed it is an article from Reuters and cites some US officials as saying Malaysia is being watched as a source of funding for terror organisations and Iran.

“US has imposed sanctions on four Malaysian-based companies, making it the first country in SEA to be listed as a state sponsor of terror, this comes after officials from the US State Department arrived in Malaysia over the week and held discussions with Malaysian officials including Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim,” the Whatsapp message reads.

The WhatsApp message also stated the conversation between US officials and Malaysian officials ‘were bitter and short’ as US attempts to curb Iran and its proxies of financing in the region, according to sources ‘who spoke under the condition of anonymity’.

It further added that US officials have requested Malaysian officials to tone down their support for Hamas and Gaza both publicly and privately and impose anti-terrorism measures.

“We have seen in recent months how Malaysia is playing a vital role in terrorist financing with Iran, Russia and Hamas,” it quoted sanctions official Nelson McBride as saying.

“This includes allowing terrorist individuals to access the Malaysian banking system for money laundering, allowing ship-to-ship transfers of oil in its waters, and promoting terrorist groups like Hamas in the country.”

He added that he found it strange how Malaysia can export more oil than it produces. – FocusM, May 11, 2024

Fahmi

Friday Jottings: Deflecting the troubles away

Friday, May 3rd, 2024 IN dealing with criticisms directed at the Government in handling contentious issues including the possibility of Najib Razak being placed under house arrest, a communicator for the Madani administration Fahmi Fadzil, has adopted the “deflection” strategy.

First of such instance was when former Prime Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin made some comments alluding that relations between the Pakatan Harapan and Barisan Nasional were strained due to the Najib issue.

Fahmi hit back at Muhyiddin saying that the Perikatan Nasional chairman had no moral standing to make comments regarding the country’s currents affairs including political issues because of his failure to cooperate with the authorities in urging his son-in-law, Muhammad Adlan Berhan, to return and face criminal breach of trust.

Such strategy was not only employed on Muhyiddin. A few days later, Fahmi used it to deflect Muar MP Syed Saddiq Abdul Rahman’s criticism of the Government’s keenness to act against its critics.

Describing the Muar MP hypocritical, Fahmi raised the spectre of the 1987 Ops Lalang and told Syed Saddiq, who was not yet born then, to ask his idol back then, and that if a comparison is to be made between then and now, the difference would be like heaven and earth.

Ops Lalang, an Internal Security Act swoop in 1987 saw the arrests of more than 100 politicians and activists. It was during Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad’s first round as PM.

No doubt Syed Saddiq may not have been born then, but he could have also reminded Fahmi that he was a bigger hypocrite as his current idol Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim had “idolised” Dr Mahathir since before the Ops Lalang, through it and for 11 more years until he was sacked in 1998.

Since Fahmi is keen to defend the present administration’s action, he should probably take a look at some old newspaper cuttings which reported how Anwar had defended the security measures taken by the Government then as well as praising Dr Mahathir for his firmness in dealing with groups and individuals threatening national security.

Anwar was then Umno vice-president and Education Minister.

In fact, much of the racial tension was attributed to Anwar, who, according to DAP stalwart Lim Kit Siang in his blog posting in 2007, had admitted he was wrong in 1987 for dispatching staff unversed in Mandarin to become principals and senior assistants of Chinese Primary schools which resulted in the subsequent Ops Lalang.

Of course, when Lim wrote the blog posting, he was defending Anwar’s changed position then and was all for justice and fair play for mother-tongue education.

But the fact remains that for Lim, Anwar who is Fahmi’s present day idol, is pretty much responsible for causing the racial tension then as much as the subsequent mass arrests.

And since Fahmi had decided to raise the Ops Lalang spectre, blaming Dr Mahathir and painting it as repressive, it is probably worth a visit and to look at the other side of the coin.

Firstly, the late Tun Mohd Hanif Omar was on record stating that the decision to conduct the Ops Lalang swoop was the decision of the security forces.

He had informed Dr Mahathir who was the PM and Home Minister then, that the operation was necessary if a blood bath was to be prevented.

Hanif, who was the Inspector General of Police, had taken full responsibility for Ops Lalang insisting that the arrets were necessary to defuse  tension.

His narrative was supported by the late Tan Sri J.J. Raj, whose last held position was as a Commissioner of Police, as written in his book “The Struggle for Malaysian Independence”.

Of Hanif meeting Dr Mahathir on Ops Lalang, Raj wrote that the IGP “impressed upon the PM that the responsibility for law and order lay in the hands of the police.

“The PM’s role would be deemed necessary if those arrested were to be detained for longer periods,” Raj wrote.

He further wrote that “through brilliant preventive action, the Royal Malaysia Police had averted what could have been, a major racial blood bath, far more severe than the May 13, 1969 riots.”

By and large, to the Malaysian society, both Hanif and Raj are model police officers whose integrity, commitment and dedication to the force and Malaysia’s security stands as a benchmark for those in the force and are indeed big shoes for them to fill.

Taken in that context, who is Fahmi, compared to these sterling Malaysians to demonise Ops Lalang and use it for his political expediency.

And while Fahmi is concerned with Syed Saddiq’s former idol Dr Mahathir, he should be concerned with the management of the nation by his idol Anwar.

When Dr Mahathir became PM for the second time, from 2018 to 2020, and several individuals were arrested of being supporters of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE).

He had asked the Home Minister then to reconsider denying bail for the suspects and to charge them in court if there were enough grounds. Otherwise, he wanted them to be freed on bail.

Juxtapose that to the recent arrests of social media activists who were charged under the Sedition Act 1948 by the administration under Anwar of which Fahmi is part of it.

Lest Fahmi forgets, abolishing the Sedition Act was one of the promises the self-styled reformists group he belongs to.

Instead of repealing it, the current administration had utilised it and whatever reason given does not dilute the level of hypocrisy the Madani Government is indulging in.

Further to that, if Fahmi and his ilk are still in denial, the latest 34 spots drop in the 2024’s World Press Freedom rankings should remind them of where they are at if local criticisms and reminders are dismissed and deflected.

And it is under his watch. Obviously, using the past to defend the present is only leading the nation further down the slippery path.

Especially when the past is nostalgic, while the present, hauntingly melancholic.

Shamsul Akmar is an editor at The Malaysian Reserve.

Madani

Friday Jottings: The fingers kept pointing back

Friday, March 29th, 2024 - THE Madani Government may not want to admit it, but their self-proclaimed reform credentials are being shredded almost daily.

Actually, its reforms agenda was a non-starter, a still-born when it decided to team up with the Ahmad Zahid Hamidi-led Umno.

It became apparent that the promised reforms were lip service for polls when Ahmad Zahid was appointed the Deputy Prime Minister. And when his 47 cases were given the DNAA (discharge not amounting to acquittal).

The Madani apologists were however quick to defend the presence of Zahid in their reform midst, that it was a necessary evil to thwart the rise of the green wave.

But the problem is that it did not end with Zahid.

Take the latest police reports that were lodged against Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim former political secretary Farhash Wafa Salvador when he secured substantial shares in Heitech Padu involving some RM40 million.

To add twist to the tale was that Heitech is one of three companies short-listed for a RM1 billion Government contract.

The reports lodged raised the spectre of cronyism and corruption, one of the clarion calls of Anwar and his political supporters.

Nepotism was the another but that became contentious very early in formation of the current Government when Anwar’s daughter Nurul Izzah was appointed to an advisory role in the Finance Ministry of which Anwar holds the Ministerial portfolio.

Anwar being the Finance Minister while being the PM too is a betrayal of the promised reforms as it was a point of beratement against former PM Mohd Najib Razak who held both positions.

It was concluded then that the 1MDB scandal became possible because of Najib being the PM and the finance minister simultaneously.

Then there are accusations of bailing out Government-linked companies with the Boustead Naval Shipyard (BNS) being renamed Lumut Naval Shipyard (Lunas) and injected with new funds was cited as an example.

What is interesting is that all the catchwords – cronyism, nepotism, bailout and corruption – were integral in Anwar’s efforts to dislodge previous leaders and Governments.

But for those who had observed Anwar’s political rise, his accusations against his political enemies may very well his own.

Lest his apologists forgot, at the height of the Asian Financial Crisis in 1997/98, the accusation of the then PM (Tun) Dr Mahathir Mohamad practising nepotism and cronyism were brought up by Zahid, then Umno youth chief, during the Umno assembly.

Except for the naïve, popular opinion was that Anwar, then Finance Minister and Deputy Prime Minister, had put Zahid up to it to further unsettle Dr Mahathir who had his hands full dealing with the crisis.

But not one to take things lying down, Dr Mahathir staged a counter attack, making public lists of recipients of Government contracts and preferential Bumiputra share allocations.

What was revealed showed that Anwar’s family and close allies were among the biggest beneficiaries of the Government wealth distribution agenda.

The sloganeering of cronyism and nepotism became muted almost immediately.

But after he was sacked, the sloganeering re-emerged and Anwar had by then re-branded himself as a reformist who was out to put an end to the evil practices.

And his supporters, civil societies and the Opposition parties bandied together to mount a challenge of the government but was unsuccessful and remained to be in the opposition until Dr Mahathir led them to the unprecedented victory against Najib in 2018.

But Anwar could not emulate that success and was substantially short to form the Government until Zahid and Umno decided on a post-electoral pact which resulted in the formation of the Government today and cause of numerous woes and contrary to the promised reforms.

Starting to be exposed for not being the reformist as he self-proclaimed, and unable to fulfil the many reform promises, Anwar persisted with his accusations of corruption, nepotism and cronyism on Dr Mahathir.

Against, Dr Mahathir, not one to take things lying down, sued Anwar for the accusations and asked him to prove all the allegations in the court of law.

After all, over years that had passed, Anwar and his agents had been claiming to have boxes of proof of Dr Mahathir’s shenanigans and all they had to do was to produce the proof in the courts.

Instead, Bloomberg’s report that the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission’s had ordered Mirzan and Mokhzani Mahathir to assist the agency with an investigation into their father, Dr Mahathir, revealed yet another twist to the tale.

It is probably the first public revelation that Dr Mahathir is the actual target and not the children despite them being ordered to declare their assets dating back to 1981, the year Dr Mahathir assumed the Prime Ministership in the first around.

So, instead of providing proof to the courts of law to prove the allegations of Dr Mahathir’s wrong-doings, the MACC is now deployed to conduct the “fishing” expedition to find “proof” of Dr Mahathir’s wrong-doings.

It is by any measures an extreme if not a ridiculous demand given that the records of assets were more than 40 years old and that Government agencies, including the Inland Revenue Department, only requires everyone to keep their records for up to seven years or thereabouts.

Regardless what may emerge or not, the whole exercise raises questions as to what happened to the boxes of proof which had been kept since 1998, which is less than three decades ago.

By any count, it would be easier to prove something kept more than 20 years ago than having to search for something, that may or may not be there, over a period of more than 40 years ago.

Simply put, if the proof were there as claimed, if they were submitted to the court in the suit filed by Dr Mahathir, and after that, submitted to the MACC.

By any measure too, if the boxes of evidence had been there all along, surely the custodians would have kept them well guarded and protected and surely the boxes would have at least been pest-proof. If it wasn’t, then the boxes held nothing or there were no boxes.

Somehow, the myth of the termites emerges.

---

• Shamsul Akmar is an editor at The Malaysian Reserve.

Agong

Agong angered over “Allah” socks issue, wants strict action taken

YANG di-Pertuan Agong Sultan Ibrahim has expressed displeasure over the recent controversy surrounding the sale of socks bearing the word “Allah” at a convenience store chain.

Calling for stern action to be taken against responsible parties, the Agong called for the enforcement agencies to investigate the matter and take strict action to ensure that such incidents do not happen again.

“Muslims hold the word Allah in high regard, and furthermore we are currently in the midst of the holy month of Ramadan. Such matters which incite anger should not arise,” His Majesty said in a statement on social media.

“Whether it was intentional or otherwise and whether (the sock) are imported or produced in local factories, I want the enforcement (agencies) to investigate this matter and take strict action so that this does not happen again.”

Sultan Ibrahim further noted that it is absurd for a company whose staff comprises Malaysian citizens to be insensitive to such matters.

“We have been living in a plural society for a long time. Such issues relating to religion and race are unacceptable and should not be allowed to reoccur,” His Majesty added.

The controversy came about after photographs of the socks bearing the word “Allah” sold at the Bandar Sunway KK Mart store appeared on social media last week.

On Saturday (March 16), KK Mart founder Datuk Seri Dr KK Chai said he publicly apologised to all Malaysians, especially those of the Muslim faith, over the incident.

Chai said an inspection of its 800 branches nationwide found that only three outlets carried the socks and 14 pairs had the word on them.

The vendor involved has since made a public apology, saying the goods were sold on a consignment basis and the company did not have any intention of disrupting public harmony.

In separate news, police have confirmed they are probing into KK Mart under two sections, namely Section 298A of the Penal Code for causing disharmony, disunity, or enmity on religious grounds, and Section 233 of the Communications and Multimedia Act 1998 for improper network facility use or service.

Meanwhile, UMNO Youth chief Dr Muhamad Akmal Saleh called for a boycott against KK Mart on the issue if the chain did not post banners apologising over the incident.

However, KK Mart said it would await advice from the authorities before deciding whether to put up apology banners at its outlets. – FocusM March 19, 2024

Bak Kut Teh

Why do we even need a national dish in the first place?

A NEW nation needs national symbols. National symbols are what makes a conceptual idea like a nationhood real.

When we say we are Malaysians, for example, we need something real to define our Malaysian-ness, and this is where things like the national flag, national song or national flower come in.

Things like the Jalur Gemilang, Negaraku and the bunga raya are useful symbols to manifest our identity as Malaysians.

It is because we do things like wave the Jalur Gemilang with pride, sing the Negaraku with spirit and give the hibiscus a special place, that we have a way to manifest our Malaysian-ness, and make being Malaysian not only something conceptual, but something that is real.

The purpose of having national symbols, in other words, is to consolidate and manifest a national identity.

Consolidating and manifesting a national identity is something that ought to be done during the formation of a nation. Malaysia was formed 60 years ago.

Considering that, why are we still making national symbols out of things like bak kut teh, when we are not even a new nation anymore, and when declaring things like bak kut teh as a national symbol is only dividing us further.

Declaring something to be a national symbol, especially when that thing is not exactly fit to be a national symbol, can be a troublesome affair.

Take MAS for example. It is because we made MAS into a national symbol that we are stuck with it, even if it is almost perpetually making a loss, because to part with it will be a shameful affair.

Making Proton the national car has also been a troublesome affair, because it has made the prices of cars expensive for all of us, and it is not exactly doing a very good job at making the country proud.

But as much as MAS and proton were not suitable national symbols, at least they were not divisive symbols.

The same however can’t be said about bak kut teh.

Today, we have something called a national heritage food which has named items like bak kut teh as a national symbol that doesn’t represent us all but divide us further.

The thing is, we don’t even need such a thing as a national dish.

Of the other national heritage food that were named, like kolok mee, burasak, nasi ambeng, dodol kukus tahi minyak, kuih genggang or kuih lapis, kuih karas, uthappam, jeruk tuhau, and air katira, I only recognise kolok mee, kuih lapis and uthappam.

What is the point of having a national heritage food that most of us cannot even recognise? I will bet my last ringgit that if you go down to the grassroots and ask them what things like dodol kukus tahi minyak or uthappam is, at least 7 out 10 Malaysians won’t know it.

Uthappam, by the way, which most Malaysians other than Indians don’t know of, is not even a Malaysian food but a dish from South India.

Not only are we creating national symbols that are weakening our concept of nation-hood but we are hijacking the food of some other people and made it ours for no other reason than to satisfy “Ali, Muthu and Ah Chong” arrangement which says that if you want to put something Malay and Chinese into something call it “Malaysian”, you have to add something Indian in it too, or it won’t be right.

A bad idea is something that doesn’t have a purpose and creates more problems the more you execute it. The national heritage food idea fits the description.

Suffice to say, none of us even wanted to have national heritage food. We were actually better off before this national heritage food concept was thrown before us.  The minute the concept was created however, all sorts of discord that need not have arisen amongst us have arisen.

All this for what? Nothing, absolutely nothing. – FocusM March 5, 2024

Nehru Sathiamoorthy is the author of “While Waiting for the World to End”. He was a columnist at FMT and a frequent contributor to the South China Morning Post, The Star, Malaysia Today, MalaysiaNow, MalaysiaKini and Focus Malaysia.

The views expressed are solely of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Focus Malaysia.

Hunter

Murray Hunter in hot soup for breaching 3R ban in his blog posts

INSPECTOR-General of Police (IGP) Tan Sri Razarudin Husain announced that Bukit Aman has initiated a 3R investigation into Australian blogger Murray Hunter, who is suspected to be in Bangkok, Thailand. The police said they are investigating the blogger over his online posts that allegedly attacked the Malay rulers.

“We have opened an investigation (against the blogger) related to 3R issues,” he said, as quoted by a news portal this morning.

The report did not mention which blog post is being investigated. Razarudin disclosed that at least three police reports have been filed against Hunter, who penned articles connecting the demolition of the Shah Alam Stadium and its redevelopment to the Selangor palace.

In a post dated Feb 26, Murray criticised the introduction of the new journalist code of conduct, alleging it emerged suddenly and could potentially serve as the government’s latest method to regulate and censor media coverage concerning the government and its commercial partners.

He also stated that the 3R issues are now used by the current government to stifle opponents, saying the 3Rs have taken censorship in Malaysia back to the post-May 13, 1969 era. – FocusM March 2, 2024

PMX

Is Anwar blessed with the good fortune of not being surrounded by capable opposition leaders?

LEGALLY speaking, Prime Minister (PM) Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim’s control of the unity government is likely unassailable. The sixth Bersatu MP has switched side to give his allegiance to Anwar.

The Dubai Move purportedly hatched towards end-2023 by the opposition to topple his government has fizzled. Malaysia Toda Raja Petra Kamaruddin (RPK) who is the editor of Malaysia Today has even thrown in the towel to argue that Anwar will likely continue to reign for another 10 years.

Among the public however, his approval rating is likely lukewarm at best. If you randomly ask the public regardless of race, class or age group what do they think about Anwar, you will have to ask many people before you find one person who will have something positive to say about him.

If I were to express it, I would say that Anwar’s current status in the eye of the public is as a politician and a man who has a score to settle.

Nobody believes that he is a hero or a reformist or even an above average leader. He is not seen as a figure worth emulating, hence doubts abound if he is capable of solving the nation’s problem or if we can count on him to bring about a meaningful change.

The only reason people abide by him is because (i) we don’t really have other better options; and (ii) we are to an extent supportive of his desire to settle old scores.

Anwar is lucky in that there is no Malay leader in either Pakatan Harapan (PH) or Perikatan Nasional (PH) who can challenge his position despite the undesirable standard of his leadership.

The other top Malay leaders in the country are all weak. As poor as Anwar is as a leader, UMNO’s president Datuk Seri Ahmad Zahid Hamidi, Bersatu’s head honcho Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin and PAS’ controversial chief cleric Tan Sri Hadi Awang are even worse.

Anwar is so weak that if incarcerated former premier Datuk Seri Najib Razak was pardoned or current podcast co-host Khairy Jamaluddin could run against Zahid today, he is at risk to lose his job tomorrow.

It is his good fortune that the former Health Minister is nowhere close to returning to UMNO and that Najib is not expected to be released for at least a couple more years.

While Anwar looks like he is just a step or two away from taking down his arch nemesis Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad, perhaps he should think twice before moving in for the kill.

At present, most Malaysians are likely to only see Anwar as worth it for his ability to take down the members of the ancient regime like Dr Mahathir and former finance minister Tun Daim Zainuddin who stubbornly refuse to go gently into the night. If Anwar takes them down now, perhaps it could be hard to see what worth Anwar has to offer the country anymore.

As long as Dr Mahathir is around, people might see the need of having Anwar around too for he is adamant to stand up against the almost a century old nonagenarian.

The minute Anwar takes down Dr Mahathir however, I will bet my last ringgit that all of us will start to look at Anwar while wondering to what purpose do we still have to have him around.

He is old, three quarters of the things he says have to be taken with a pinch of salt, he doesn’t know how to move the economy forward and he is not a uniting force who is capable of uniting the country.

If Anwar takes down Dr Mahathir and if PAS manages to install its technocrat vice-president Datuk Seri Dr Ahmad Samsuri Mokhtar as its PM contender, I dare say that the Malays might become more motivated to initiate a Perikatan Nasional (PN) take-over of the government while the non-Malays might not really be that motivated throw that big a fuss if Anwar is toppled.

I think the one saving grace that Anwar will have in the post-Mahathir Malaysia is the successful implementation of the targeted subsidies.

If Anwar’s government does manage to re-balance our economic landscape in a way that assists the poor as they plan to do beginning from the middle of 2024, then maybe Anwar might see the support of the working class which will be enough for him to sustain his administration.

If not, I reckon that it might be well for Anwar to stop desiring to settle his score with Dr Mahathir but instead prays for the twice former premier’s longevity. – FocusM Feb 18, 2024

 

Nehru Sathiamorthy is a roving tutor who loves politics, philosophy and psychology.

The views expressed are solely of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Focus Malaysia.