The Sun usually carries Bernama reports, and concentrates on columns and the like. The Star carries what the MCA leadership thinks and, knowing that the government could ban it as happened in October 1987, it is careful about what it publishes.

DIFFERENCE OF OPINION, ESPECIALLY, in conflict is normal. To suggest the Al Qaeda is split, as the Guardian suggests yesterday (26 October), is not unusual. Just as there is a split between the United States and its allies on how to conduct the war in Iraq. But this is information war and one side is told its opponent is split. As if both sides are not. We see the split within the leaders and between the leaders and the people. The splits are reported in loving detail by the people who started as handmaidens of the war but the splits, mistakes, and doubts and their own credibility caused them to take a neutral stand. So, the United States and its allies assume the worst in their enemy, and reporters voice them in their colums. They do not bother with the insurgents who do not give press conferences as the Americans do. The Al Qaeda network has shown a sophistication in its operations, that how can you be sure that its split is deliberately fed to the Western journalists? What we have learnt of Al Qaeda and the insurgents are suppositions from Washington, London and other capitals, usually in the course of a propaganda onslaught. Those who are not on either side of the fence in Iraq and elsewhere see through this propaganda battle, and those directly not involved in Iraq take a neutral if not a partisan stand against the United States. This propaganda battle is to reassure their own people that all is well. The level of propaganda rises as the insurgents, in reality the Iraqi nationalist and the Sunni who detest, among other things invaders in their midst, make havoc of the invaders and gain support around the world. The US assistant secretary of public diplomacy recently toured the Muslim nations to gain support of the war, which she did not get whatever Malaysian newspapers wrote of the visit.

PRESIDENT JALAL TALABANI HAS left the "security" of the Green Zone for the "security" of London. He wanted to tell the British Prime Minister, Tony Blair, of his government's plan for the referendum on October 15. But neither he nor members of his government has visited the people of Iraq of what the referendum brings. It is too unsafe. He and his ministers have not ventured out of the Green Zone for fear of being killed by the people. In President Talabani's terms, those people who are against the referendum and those who create mayhem in Iraq are terrorists, and should be eradicated, preferably by the United States or Britain or by the other countries who are part of the US-established multi-lateral force. But the insurgency would not last if locals do not support it, as President Talabani should know by now. First the country is invaded, then the election is set so that the elected are kept isolated in the Green Zone, and those elected ask those who put them in power to remain. President Talabani was "thankful" in London for the multinational effort in Iraq. He blamed Iraqis for protesting against the US-led invasion, as "Saddam Hussein as a bad man". But the United States dealt with the "bad man" for nearly 30 years, had made him a prime CIA source, like Osama bin Laden, and then turned against him, because he did not agree with Washington's plans for the region. President Talabani now faces Saddam Hussein in this attempt to turn Iraq into a US colony. The British tried it earlier, turning the Kurdish, Sunni and Shia provinces of the Ottoman Empre, and called it Iraq after the first world war. They knew their Middle Eastern history, and made sure the Sunnis, who formed 20 per cent of Iraq, as the rulers. They formed Iraq to defeat the French colonial power, who took Syria earlier, and established a Shia president there although he was from a minority Shia sect, the Aluwaites. Nearly 80 per cent of Syrians are Sunnis. The Prime Minister of Iraq, dressed in a woman's dress and flayed alive in Baghdad in 1958 was a Sunni Muslim. The governments that followed is Sunni, of which the latest is Saddam Hussein, which the Americans, like a bull in a China shop, erased, and brought about the present civil war.

PARLIAMENT HAS BECOME A charade. The MPs from the ruling National Front are not given a free vote in the Rafidah Aziz affair. The two NF MPs who voted with the Opposition in referring Datin Seri Rafidah Aziz to the Committee of Privileges comes up for mention in newspaper reports and in Paliament as if they had done something terrible. It now seems the National Front never had any intention to put Rafidah Aziz through the hoop. She knows it, and almost every NF MP knows it. The result was predictable, although Parliament was allegedly given a free hand by the NF. The NF's majority in Parliament would see, as it turned out, that Datin Seri Rafidah would get into no trouble. And indeed she did not. She is in the New Straits Times today (6 October 2005) talking about her role in nation building, and that she viewed her international role more important than turning up in Parliament. Parliament is not important, she avers in the interview with New Straits Times. The leader of the Opposition, Mr Lim Kit Siang, is irrelevant, so his questions are less important than the Cabinet's. But in the Parliamentary system of government in force, it is more important than the cabinet. Tun Mahathir used to have cabinet meetings in Parliament. He at least paid lip service to the primacy of Parliament. The Natioanl Front does not. There is pressure on the National Front to penalise the two MPs who voted with the Opposition. And there is a collective sigh of relief that she is scot free. That was only possible by the massive majority the NF has in Parliament.

THIS IS THE INFORMATION war. Lance Price, who has published a book of his role in lying to journalists in Great Britain under Tony Blair, said he routinely lied to journalists and the press on Tony Blair and his government. Those of the journalists who knew them as lies were immediately dubbed "conspiracy theorists", as I was for my piece yesterday (04 October 2005). It is conspiracy theory in 1965 to say that Ho Chi Minh and the Vietcong would win. But not ten years later. But journalists take the line of least resistance, and write what they are told. John Kenneth Galbraith summed it well years ago: "The conventional view serves to protect us from the painful job of thinking." We are not allowed to question what we are told. The United States do not want us to think too deeply on Iraq. It was Gen. Tommy Franks who told us that the United States do not 'do body counts'. But it is the United States which does so, to tell the world it is winning the war in Iraq and the war on Islamic terror. But it forgets one very important facet of life among the insurgents: they do not like their country to be invaded, they will do anything to drive out the invader at much cost, they will get foreigners to support it as the United States will only after armtwisting. It tells us, daily, of how it is winning the war, and it cannot tell that without telling us of how many insurgents they have killed, how many Iraqis they have misplaced, how many cities they have displaced. They spin the story around, and we lap it unquestioningly, that the United States is winning the war in Iraq. And the only way it can tell the world that 'good' news is by telling us how many Iraqis, insurgents and locals, they have displaced or killed.

That man is Anwar Ibrahim, the jailed former deputy prime minister, who resumes a political career after his recent release from prison. He emerges larger-than-life. He is ignored by the Malaysian government and media. The opposition, which once made him its mascot, now look askance at his indelible presence. He cannot re-enter politics until April 2008, the legal restraint of any man released from prison, but is feted here and overseas as a man to watch. After his surgery in Munich, world leaders called on him, telephoned or sent messages. The Yang Dipertuan Besar of Negri Sembilan, a former king, and his consort had lunch with him in Munich. So the Sultan of Brunei in Jeddah. A few sultans either spoke by telephone or sent emissaries. He moved to Saudi Arabia after his surgery, as guest of the King, and returns on 31 October.

In the second part of his interview in The Star (18 October 2004, p28-29), he suggests UMNO leaders cannot stop money politics, however abhorent it was, because no one would come forward with evidence. UMNO leaders address money politics with a cynicism that beggars belief. Produce the proof and we would act, is the common refrain. It would not bring the anti-corruption agency to investigate. Its disciplinary committee is toothless, and few UMNO members expect it to be anything else, even if members come forward and the evidence is overwhelming. It suggests this uproar over money politics, amongst the leaders, is to hide its rampancy, for fear that in a thorough investigation, many leaders, from the president down, could be guilty. And having done their good deed for the day, they move on in hope it would disappear from the public eye.

By M.G.G. Pillai - Friday, October 8, 2004, 06:07 pm

But that is not how it is perceived in the Malaysia which began on 31 October. In that world, the reign of Bapak Kamaludin is all that matters. Bapak Merdeka is an anachronism. If he disagreed with what happens around him, there is always the Internal Security Act to put some sense into him. That is not as far-fetched as you might imagine. In the 1980s, a few years before he did, Dr Mahathir's thought that was not a bad idea. Instead, it was the Star that was shut down; it got its licence back after a few months on the condition, amongst others, that Bapak Merdeka should be banned from its pages. If that was when he was alive, why are we surprised it is now that he is dead and gone? Even in the world of the father of Mr Kamaludin Abdullah, he whose company was an inadvertent link to a Pakistan-led Islamic international nuclear technology transfer programme.

IN October, PARLIAMENT SENT INVITATIONS to MPs, Senators, present and former cabinet ministers and others for a grand farewell dinner for Malaysia's prime minister of 22 years, Tun Mahathir Mohamed, on Saturday, 06 December 2003. The dinner was not held. On Thursday, 04 December, MPs and senators were telephoned by the Parliament Secretary, to cancel it. Why? The Prime Minister, Dato' Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, had promised to be in Malacca, could not wriggle out of it, and regretfully could not attend the dinner. But Pak Lah's aides and supporters have a different reason: The Parliament Secretary did not remind Pak Lah of the dinner early and is admitted to hospital for an illness unknown. It is as lame excuse as any.

THERE IS NOTHING SURPRISING at the immediate sacking last week (20 November 2003) of the New Straits Times Press group editor-in-chief, Tan Sri Abdullah Ahmad or Dollah Kok Lanas as he is more well-known. The new UMNO president wants his own around in key positions. The NSTP is its public relations arm. Pak Lah does not want his predecessor's men around, certainly not a 'loose cannon' his aides believe Tan Sri Abdullah is. When I asked him at a diplomatic function early October, how long he had left at the NSTP. He enigmatically shrugged his shoulders. Within a month he is out. The official reason of a Saudi Arabian objection to an article he wrote about the monarchy is at best specious. The government, not UMNO, would have complained to the NSTP board. He was sacked after the UMNO management committee met. I heard of it a few hours later, in the middle of the night. Since the article appeared a week earlier, why this rush to sack a man without giving him a chance to be heard? He was in Hong Kong when he was sacked.

THE MAHATHIR EPOCH COMES TO rest this week - finally - after 22 years and with it the fiction of a Malaysia in fine fettle and in good hands after him. He leaves a spotty legacy of an autocracy, arrogance, capriciousness, imperiousness which cannot stand muster. As he lost his grip on the administration - his political impotence had its beginnings in 1987 when he engineered the destruction of UMNO to hang on to power, and worsened a decade later when he sacked the man who could have given him a more fitting memorial in history. As October 31 nears, the facade crumbles, he is ignored, his cronies and friends would rather be somewhere else when he meets them. Some friends planned a grand subscription dinner to farewell him in style. It would not now take place. They realised soon enough that it ought not to be held for fear that their friend could be insulted if it was. It had happened once. The civil service held a dinner in his honourf last year. All tickets were sold, but after arms were twisted. Many gave their tickets to the staff instead. An orderf that this is not allowed was ignored. The metaphoric slap in the face was not reflected in the euphoric account in the newspapers the next day, but the Old Man never forgot it.

THE TENTH OIC SUMMIT IN Putrajaya (11-18 October 2003) has come and gone. Malaysia as host spared no expense to hold it in surreal surroundings. Twentyone heads of state and government - six monarchs, seven presidents, seven prime minister, one provisional head of government - turned up. But those who mattered - President Hosni Mubarak of Egypt and Col. Muammar Ghadhafi of Libya, for insance - did not. One unspoken fear of those who attended is if, and how far, they could cross the United States over itgs Middle East policies and still qualify for US aid and protection, and be invited to either or all of the White House, Camp David, or Crawford, Texas. Nothing was done at this conference which could upset the United States, now poised to bring into its orbit ironclad control of several OIC members. When it should have taken a strong stand - the US invasion of Iraq - it quietly acquiesced. By allowing the US-nominated provisional governing council from Iraq to take its seat, it implicitly accepted Washington's right to invade Iraq. The OIC representative in the UN Security Council, Syria, acquiesed with the Anglo-American proposal to bring a mercenary force to keep peace in a country they earlier invaded. Just as in 1991, when another OIC member, Malaysia, voted with an earlier Anglo-American proposal to have the UN invade Iraq. The OIC has given up the ghost in Afghanistan, where another US-installed president is in office and in much the same straits.

He told reporters yesterday (14 October 2003) the EC should not have misled him - mark you, not Parliament but him in person - on its appointment of Puteri UMNO members as temporary election staff. Then he makes another mistake. It demeans Parliament's role but it is really the government's problem not his. When the minister in the Prime Minister's department, Tengku Adnan Tengku Mansor, refused to apologise as PAS demanded for an error of his ways. When PAS protested, he refused to intervene but threatened the questioner with sanctions. He has no power to act against the minister, he said. He is wrong. The minister in the House is as equal to the most lowly of MPs. He could have suspended the cabinet minister, ordered him out of the House, and take any action he could against MPs. But he chose not to.

AS DATO' SERI MAHATHIR MOHAMED PREPARES to retire at the end of October after 22 years as Prime Minister, he is haunted by his failure and missteps than his successes. He knows in his heart that for all the adulation he is regularly greeted with, he leaves office a lonely man, with no friends and no supporters. He blames that on his protege and former deputy prime minister, Dato' Seri Anwar Ibrahim. But Malaysia and Malay culture would not forgive him for that political and physical destruction. Indeed, since he sacked Dato' Seri Anwar in 1998, the good he did is forgotten, his years in office count for nothing. So he reinvents himself, rewriting events to put him in a good light. But he is still not believed he did right.

THE NATIONAL FRONT (BN) GOVERNMENT RECENTLY denied the right of Parti Keadian Nasional (the National Justice Party), enlarged after its merger with Parti Rakyat Malaysia (PRM), to call itself KeADILan when it applied for registration under the law. A party which contested the 1999 General Election as KeADILan is now told it cannot. The Registrar of Societies is not bound to say why, and that is that. But a visit last night (10 October 2003) to Putrajaya showed it had to do with one man's megalomania and shared by UMNO and BN. The building which houses the appellate courts - the Court of Appeal and the Federal Court - is known incongruously as "The Palace of Justice" in English and not Istana Keadilan, as it should be. Official names of buildings must be vetted by the Dewan Bahasa dan Pustake (the Language and Literature Agency). An UMNO politician heads it. He approved it. So this stands out like a sore thumb. Every other ministry department along the Bouleward - with the Prime Minister's Office at one end and National Convention Centre at the other - and Putrajaya have Malay or Arabic names - the finance ministry, for instance, is Khazanah, from the Arabic, not Perbendaharan, the Malay word.

In one sense, it forces BN to act in confusion. It wanted to hold elections first in Sabah before parliamentary and other state assembly elections in August, postponed its plans to September then October, then gave it up. The Opposition matched its threats with PAS deciding to dissolve the Kelantan and Trengganu state assemblies it controlled at the same time. Now BN is fearful that when general elections are called, Kelantan and Trengganu might not. The BN has lost the initiative. It must call for elections this year or at the latest by February 2004. The new prime minister, Dato' Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, as he would be by then, had wanted it in April. But he must rush it through and hold it as early as possible. It is not clear if an election this year could strengthen his position. When once the BN could dictate, it cannot now. The Opposition has matched every BN plan with one of its own. The BN is not home safe and free. It is challenged at every turn.

THE PRIME MINISTER, DATO' SERI MAHATHIR Mohamed, has given up the ghost. He tried his best, succeeded thrice, to replace his deputy prime ministers, and met his match in the fourth. It is not for want of trying. He nominated Dato' Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi after he despatched Dato' Seri Anwar Ibrahim to what he thought was political oblivion, found him wanting soon enough and looked around for another. But UMNO, more than the National Front (BN), had had enough of it, and rallied around Pak Lah. The Old Man would not give way, and ambushed Pak Lah whenever and wherever he could. He hoped in hope a draft would allow him to continue beyond 31 October 2003. All it did was to ensure Pak Lah could only continue the skewed policies of the Old Man, with some cosmetic changes, and Malaysia needs major reconstructive surgery to right the wrongs of the Old Man's policies in office. Besides, Dato' Seri Anwar in jail has destroyed UMNO's and BN's raison d'etre. If he is not pardoned and released from jail with a free pardon, UMNO and BN march sure-footedly into oblivion.

THE MERDEKA DAY 2003 PARADE IN PUTRA Jaya was not, as it turned out, to mark Malaya's 46th or Malaysia's 40th anniversay, but a 'proper and fitting" sendoff for Malaysia's long-serving Prime Minister. He retires, against his will, in October. There are misguided souls out there who believe that Dato' Seri Mahathir Mohamed at 78 is far better leader for Malaysia than Dato' Seri Abdullah Badawi at 64. And a move is afoot, if cocktail party talk is believed, for a Malaysia-wide appeal to the Conference of Rulers to ask him to stay on - and this is where one begins to disbelieve - for "a few more months, or at least until the general elections". There are still people, especially who benefited most under his 23-year-old rule and face bankruptcy and worse when he goes. And well-meaning people who cannot countenance life without him at the top. He has been such a great leader, a man who made Malaysians stand tall, that without him we would all be orphans, is their refrain.

SOMETHING IS AFOOT. DATO' SERI Mahathir Mohamed does not accept he has about a month as Prime Minister. The packers and movers have not cleared his desk and official residence. He is in control. His successor, Dato' Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, has to defer to him on policy and party, which makes him look a man who does not or cannot assert his authority. Nothing he did in recent months suggest he is about to give up power. He cannot remain Prime Minister after October without untold political damage to UMNO, the National Front (BN), and the government he leads. So he would resign as scheduled. But he would also remain in charge. He is paranoic about the skeletons in his cupboard, which if made public or if he is forced to confront them, what little respect future historians and generations have for him would be washed away.

Pak Lah (1364)   United States (636)   Straits Times (412)   Samy Vellu (224)   Putra Jaya (200)   Chief Justice (200)   Saddam Hussein (188)   Vincent Tan (164)   Civil Service (154)   Parti KeADILan (148)   Islamic State (118)   Johore Bahru (100)   Sungei Buloh (94)   Bukit Tinggi (88)   Abdul Razak (80)   Pengkalen Pasir (68)   Ting Pek (64)   Armed Forces (59)   Soviet Union (58)

Malay Dominance (58)   Yong Teck (56)   Hong Kong (56)   Human Rights (56)   Syed Hamid (54)   Puteri UMNO (52)   Islam Hadhari (52)   Royal Commission (51)   Hussein Onn (51)   Rafidah Aziz (48)   Indian Congress (48)   Open House (44)   Vision Schools (44)   Shah Alam (44)   Malay Unity (42)   Chua Jui (42)   Abdul Taib (42)   Ampang Jaya (36)   Ras Adiba (36)

Osama Bin Laden (36)   Nik Aziz Nik (20)   Ling Liong Sik (18)   Lee Kuan Yew (18)

High Court Judge (14)   Wan Azizah Wan (9)   Lim Kit Siang (9)   Megat Junid Megat (8)

Mahathir (2960)

Anwar (2399)