MALAYSIATODAY

THE REAL STORY OF MAY 13 Raja Petra Kamarudin

MALAYSIA-TODAY

Page: 2 / 32

Personal life：

Born in Surrey, England, 27th September 1950, Raja Petra was educated at the Alice Smith School. At the age of 13 he went to further his studies at the Malay College Kuala Kangsar, completing his education at the Victoria Institution. Raja Petra Kamarudin used to own a motorcycle dealership and rice distributor. He has been fascinated with motorcycles since he was young.

On April 14, 1973, at the age of 23 years old, he married Marina Lee binti Abdullah who was then 18 years old. Marina Lee Abdullah, of Siamese-Chinese extraction, is a book publisher. Raja Petra and Marina have five children (Raja Suraya 1974, Raja Azman 1977, Raja Shahril 1978, Raja Azmir 1983 and Raja Sara 1988) and two grandchildren.

Raja Petra is a member of the Selangor royal family. He is the nephew of the late Sultan Salahuddin Abdul Aziz Shah, the eleventh Yang di-Pertuan Agong (King) of Malaysia and the seventh Sultan of Selangor. His mother, Che' Bariya Kamarudin (née Barbara Mabel Parnell) is Welsh.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raja_Petra_Kamarudin

MALAYSIA-TODAY

Page: 3 / 32

Contents: Part 1 Part 2 Part 3

RPK detained by ISA. Justifications on the use of ISA.

MALAYSIA-TODAY

Page: 4 / 32

THE REAL STORY OF MAY 13 (PART 1)

They say those who forget history are doomed to repeat its mistakes. In light of the recent sabre-rattling by those in Umno and the warning by the Armed Forces Chief, Malaysia Today feels compelled to republish an old article by Raja Petra Kamarudin that was published in Harakah on 24 September 1999.

MALAYSIA-TODAY

Page: 5 / 32

NO HOLDS BARRED Raja Petra Kamarudin

This is Part One of an article I wrote almost nine years ago, which was published in Harakah, the official media organ of the Islamic Party of Malaysia (PAS). History is not something that should remain buried. History is something that should be a lesson to all or us so that we do not repeat the mistakes made by those before us.

In 1968, Umno fanned racial sentiments in a bid to 'unite' the Malays under its banner. Umno realised that the Malays were abandoning it in droves and it needed an issue to reunite the Malays. Further to that, the Prime Minister was being blamed for what Umno perceived as a loss of Malay support and the Young Turks in Umno wanted to also use this issue to pressure the Prime Minister into resigning.

Twenty years later, in 1988, Umno again went into turmoil with the emergence of Team A and Team B, which eventually split into Umno Baru and Semangat 46. Again, just like twenty years before that, the Malays had become disillusioned with the Umno leadership and there was a danger that Umno would suffer the same fate it did in 1969 if the general election was called.

The Umno leadership very cleverly got the Umno Youth and MCA Youth leaders to raise racial issues and bring the country to the brink of another ‘May 13’. This was when that infamous gathering at the TPCA padang in Kampong Baru was held and when Najib Tun Razak, the Umno Youth Leader, raised the keris and threatened to bathe it in Chinese blood. Of course, this second ‘May 13’ never happened. What did happen instead was that Operasi Lalang was launched and

more than 100 opposition leaders and activists were detained under the Internal Security Act. Najib and the MCA Youth Leader, Lee Kim Sai, however, were spared detention, although they were the two main players in the whole episode. The ploy did not quite succeed though. In the 1990 general election, half the Malays swung to the opposition and Umno lost most of the Malay heartland to Semangat 46 and PAS. Twenty years on and history is, again, being repeated. It appears like every twenty years Umno takes the country to the brink of a race riot in its effort to 'unite' the Malays and to ensure that it does not lose Malay support. And the 8 March 2008 general election, as well as the recent Permatang Pauh by-election, is proof that Umno

MALAYSIA-TODAY

Page: 6 / 32

has lost Malay support. “The current situation is a repeat of 1969,” said Umno in its brainstorming session held at the Umno headquarters to conduct a post-mortem of the election results. “Therefore, a 1969 ‘solution’ will also be required.”

This is very dangerous talk indeed. And Umno has been doing nothing but talking dangerously since March 2008, as evident in the recent episode in Penang. Maybe the culprit has since been punished. Yesterday, Umno’s Supreme Council decided to suspend Ahmad Ismail for a period of three years. But the damage has already been done and the suspension can’t turn back the clock. Racial sentiments have already been fanned and Malaysia, again, is being pushed to the brink of a race riot. Malays, Chinese and Indians need to know how May 13 started. They must be made aware of what May 13 was really all about. They must be made to realise that the current sabre-rattling is nothing but the same ploy that Umno used back in 1968 and 1988 whenever it felt that it was losing Malay support. May 13 was not about race although it is being touted as so. May 13 was about ‘reuniting’ the Malays and about ousting the Prime Minister from office.

To forget history would be to repeat its mistakes. Let us not be taken in by Umno’s shadow-play (wayang kulit). They know they are rapidly losing power and they want

MALAYSIA-TODAY

Page: 7 / 32

to retain power through foul means by raising the spectre of May 13. Malaysians need to be matured and clever enough to reject this ploy. Umno can try, but whether it can succeed will all depend on whether we get suckered into this very dangerous race game. Let me take you down memory lane and recap what I wrote nine years ago so that we may learn from this dark history and not repeat what went wrong. As follows is what I wrote in Harakah on 24 September 1999.

MALAYSIA-TODAY

Page: 8 / 32

*************************************************

A REPORTER’S ACCOUNT OF AN INTERVIEW WITH TUNKU ABDUL RAHMAN ON THE 13 MAY INCIDENT The following statement is a factual account of the above-mentioned event given to

me by the late Tunku Abdul Rahman (first Prime Minister of Malaysia) during an interview at his residence in Penang in 1972. I requested to discuss the above incident and was surprised when the appointment was given within three days. His Secretary, a Chinese gentleman, allotted me one hour and advised me not to go into too much detail as this would tire the Tunku unnecessarily. In fact, the interview lasted three and a half hours. Because of the very surprising details provided to me, I think it would be best to report in a first-hand manner based on my notes written immediately after the interview.

“It was clear to me as well as the police that in the highly charged political atmosphere after the police were forced to kill a Chinese political party worker on May 4th, 1969, something was bound to happen to threaten law and order because of the resentment towards the Government by the KL Chinese on the eve of the general election. This was confirmed at this man’s funeral on the 9th May when the government faced the most hostile crowd it had ever seen. Therefore, when the opposition parties applied for a police permit for a procession to celebrate their success in the results of the general election, I was adamant against it because the police were convinced that this would lead to trouble. I informed Tun Razak about this and he seemed to agree. Now, without my knowledge and actually “behind my back”, there were certain political leaders in high positions who were working to force me to step down as a PM. I don’t want to go into details but if they had come to me and said so I would gladly have retired gracefully. Unfortunately, they were apparently scheming and trying to decide on the best way to force me to resign. The occasion came when the question of the police permit was to be approved. Tun Razak and Harun Idris, the MB of the state of Selangor, now felt that permission should be given, knowing fully well that there was a likelihood of trouble. I suppose they felt that when this happened they could then demand my resignation.

MALAYSIA-TODAY

Page: 9 / 32

To this day I find it very hard to believe that Razak, whom I had known for so many years, would agree to work against me in this way. Actually he was in my house, as I was preparing to return to Kedah, and I overhead him speaking to Harun over the phone saying that he would be willing to approve the permit when I left. I really could not believe what I was hearing and preferred to think it was about some other permit. In any case, as the Deputy Prime Minister, in my absence from KL, he would be the Acting PM and would override my objection.

Accordingly, when I was in my home in Kedah, I heard over the radio that the permit had been approved. It seems as though the expected trouble was anticipated and planned for by Harun

and his UMNO Youth. After the humiliating insults hurled by the non-Malays, especially the Chinese, and after the seeming loss of Malay political power to them, they were clearly ready for some retaliatory action. After meeting in large numbers at Harun’s official residence in Jalan Raja Muda near Kampong Bahru, and hearing inflammatory speeches by Harun and other leaders, they prepared themselves by tying ribbon strips on their foreheads

and set out to kill Chinese. The first hapless victims were two of them in a van opposite Harun’s house who were innocently watching the large gathering. Little did they know that they would be killed on the spot.

The rest is history. I am sorry but I must end this discussion now because it really pains me as the Father of Merdeka to have to relive those terrible moments. I have often wondered why God made me live long enough to have witnessed my beloved Malays and Chinese citizens killing each other.” This was a conspiracy at the highest level and nothing short of a power struggle, with the ‘Young Turks’ then forming the pressure group. To achieve their ends, they very cleverly used race to make the Malays rise and push the Tengku aside.

Today, they are doing it again. This is dangerous politics. It may backfire and, instead, it may make the Malays rise against the non-Malays, like what happened in 1969 -- a fire raging out of control with no fire extinguisher in sight. We must never allow our country to be turned into a racial battlefield again. Let politics be issues concerning policies, civil rights, good governance and justice. Let us not allow anyone to bring race and religion into our politics lest we suffer the fate of many countries around us where mass murders of entire families are made in the name of ‘bangsa’ and ‘agama’.

MALAYSIA-TODAY

Page: 10 / 32

THE REAL STORY OF MAY 13 (PART 2)

They say those who forget history are doomed to repeat its mistakes. In light of the recent sabre-rattling by those in Umno and the warning by the Armed Forces Chief, Malaysia Today feels compelled to republish an old article by Raja Petra Kamarudin that was published in Harakah on 24 September 1999. NO HOLDS BARRED Raja Petra Kamarudin

UMNO is at it again! They are going round the country saying that keADILan and PAS have allowed the National Mosque to be used by non-Muslims to attack Muslims. UMNO politicians and Pusat Islam officials have likened the non-Muslims to “unclean” people because of their pork-eating and liquor-drinking; so they should not have been allowed into the mosque.

Maybe these narrow-minded people have not noticed the daily busloads of foreign tourists visiting the National Mosque as part of their itinerary? Have these foreign (non-Muslim) tourists been screened whether they eat pork or drink liquor before being allowed into

the mosque? I bet not! UMNO adopted this very dangerous strategy once, 30 years ago, back in 1969, which resulted in the infamous May 13 racial riots. Now they are doing it again. It was a

MALAYSIA-TODAY

Page: 11 / 32

very narrow-minded and short-sighted strategy then. It still is now -- maybe even more so now seeing that we have entered the borderless cyber age and are about to enter a new millennium.

Race and religion should no longer be used to separate Malaysians in the divide-and-rule policy of the Barisan Nasional government. The Malays, Chinese and Indians must protest strongly and reject this outdated racial politics that is extremely dangerous and can disrupt the peace and stability of this multi-racial, multi-religious country of ours. UMNO is saying

one thing to the Malays, and the opposite to the non-Malays. This is the height of hypocrisy.

Do any of you know the REAL story behind May 13 -- how is started, why it was started, and who started it? If not, then let me take you down memory lane. Contrary to what the (local) history books try to tell us, May 13 was NOT about Malay and Chinese rivalry. It may have eventually ended that way, but that definitely was not how it started out. May 13 was basically a Malay political struggle with racialism used as a camouflage. To understand May 13, we need to go back to the pre-Merdeka days

to see how independence was achieved and how the first leaders of independent Malaya were groomed to take over running the country. The British knew that, one day, they would have to grant independence to Malaya. India, Indonesia, the Philippines, and many countries around this region had already gained independence from their colonial masters. In 1946, the independence movement in Malaya had also started, giving birth to the first Malay political party, UMNO. It was a matter of time before the British would have to give in to the demands of the Malays.

MALAYSIA-TODAY

Page: 12 / 32

The British thought that the best way to grant independence to Malaya, yet still have some control over their old colony, would be to groom the leaders who would take over and educate them the British way so that they would soon become more English than the Englishman. In the mid 1940s, the British doors were thrown open to the Malays and the first batch of Malays was brought over to England to receive an English education. These were mostly the sons of the elite and royalty -- Tengku Abdul Rahman, Tun Razak, and many more future leaders of Malaya. Tengku Rahman was definitely given special treatment by the British to the extent he was the only student in Cambridge history ever allowed to own a car on campus (everyone else rode bicycles). He drove a MG sports car and spent his years enjoying the lifestyle of the rich and famous. Eventually these young graduates of an English education were brought back to Malaya and given government posts as part of their training to one day take over the reins of power. As an example Tengku became a District Officer in Kedah, a post

normally reserved for the "white man". Needless to say, these English educated Malays enjoyed all the trappings of England including cricket, rugby, tea-at-four, brandy-after-dinner, and so on, not to mention a day at the dog races. Eventually, Merdeka was won and, in 1957, the local Malays took over running the government. But it was merely a changing of the skin colour. The management

style remained the same. It was Merdeka without losing the English influence. In fact, as mentioned earlier, the Malays of this era tended to be more English than even the Englishmen. It was now twelve years after Merdeka and the "young Turks" in UMNO were getting restless and wanted a change of leadership. These young Turks such as Hussein Onn and Dr Mahathir Mohamad had no sentimental attachments to the British, as they were educated in India and Singapore respectively. They were also angry that Tengku

MALAYSIA-TODAY

Page: 13 / 32

Abdul Rahman surrounded himself with Chinese businessman. Mahathir made this point very clear in his letter to the Tengku which goes as follows: "You have become so powerful, both by virtue of your office and by popular acclaim, that UMNO has become subservient to you. UMNO is being held together, not because the members share your ideas on politics, but through a system of patronage and disguised coercion based on Government rather than party authority. A feeling of power normally grips those who wield patronage, a feeling that they can mould and shape people and opinions any way they please. The leaders of UMNO, the senior partners of the Alliance Government, have succumbed to this disease and, believing that they no longer need to heed the opinions of their supporters, they disregard them at every turn.

Laws have been hurriedly passed without prior consultation with the representatives who have had to "sell" these laws to the people. Tax innovations have been made and discarded with complete disregard for the disrupting effect on the public. In the main, Parliamentary sittings are regarded as a pleasant formality which afford members an opportunity to be heard and quoted, but which have

absolutely no effect on the course of the Government. The sittings are a concession to a superfluous democratic practice. Off and on, this strength is used to change the constitution. The manner, the frequency, and the trivial reasons for altering the constitution have reduced this supreme law of the nation to a useless scrap of paper.

Your Ministers and the Cabinet are vested with this decision-making authority. It is obvious that only the most capable and experienced should be made Ministers and be in the Cabinet. But independent Malaysia has chosen to treat membership of the Cabinet as a reward for loyalty to party chiefs and acceptability to the Prime Minister. Once appointed, no amount of dereliction of duty could affect the position of a Minister. On the other hand, even if the Minister performs well, failure to remain on good terms with the Prime Minister means removal from the Ministry.

Your Government of mediocre people is bereft of ideas, is unable to understand the limits of their authority, and is generally unable to rule. All the while, however, your Government is busy on devices to perpetuate itself. These devices are so transparent and so lacking in subtlety that they achieve just the opposite effect.

May I remind you, Merdeka has brought power and wealth to the new Malay elite. Politics is found to be the panacea. It provides a shortcut to everything. It makes possible the attainment of positions of immense power. These Malays are in a position to acquire riches.

MALAYSIA-TODAY

Page: 14 / 32

At first, this might seem grossly unfair. These few Malays - for they are still only a very few - have waxed riches not because of themselves, but because of the policy of a Government supported by a huge majority of poor Malays. It would seem that the efforts of the poor Malays have gone to enrich a select few of their own people. The poor Malays themselves have not gained one iota. With the existence of the few rich Malays, at least the poor Malays can say that their fate is not entirely to serve the rich non-Malays. From their point of view of racial ego, and this ego is still strong, the unseemly existence of Malay tycoons is essential.

The various races in Malaysia are differentiated not merely by ethnic origin, but also by many other characteristics. These characteristics are important. How these characteristics develop is another matter, but when races compete in a given field, these characteristics play an extremely important role. The Jews, for example are not merely hook-nosed, but understand

money instinctively.

The possession of these characteristics means little until different races come into contact with each other. Jewish stinginess and financial wizardry gained them the commercial control of Europe and provoked an anti-Semitism, which waxed and waned throughout Europe through the ages. The first thing that comes to mind is that the vast majorities of Malays are feudalistic and wish to remain so. A revolution, which starts off by preaching the destruction of the established monarchical order, will therefore fail. It will not win the support of the majority of orthodox Malays. In any case, the monarch has done no real harm to the Malays or to anyone else. The maintenance of the system is no doubt costly, but being separated from power, the ruler cannot constitute a tyranny. Besides, a Malaysia without rulers would mean the complete eclipse of the Malays. It is the rulers who have in the past furnished and continued to present the Malay character of Malaysia. Remove them, and the last vestige of traditional Malaysia would disappear. It is essential therefore that the monarchy remains.

To take on an adversary when it seems to be beyond one's capacity is courageous. To calculate and assess one's chances first is to exhibit cowardice. Time and again this inability or unwillingness to measure the odds against them has led to defeat and disaster for the Malays. The courageous or brave Malay is usually foolhardy, and because he is likely to do things without thinking of the consequences, the average Malay treats him with fear and respect. The ordinary man knows that it is not

MALAYSIA-TODAY

Page: 15 / 32

worthwhile to incur his displeasure and that it is safer to let him have his own way. The ordinary man therefore represents the other extreme when principle is easily set aside for the sake of safety. Even feudalism can be beneficial if it facilitates changes. The political Rajas of today can, therefore, institute change if they themselves are willing to change. Such a change would spread rapidly. If the indications are that there should be a change in the value system and ethical code, then the leaders can lead the way with the certainty that they will be followed by the masses. In a feudal society, if the leaders fail, then there is little hope for the masses."

MALAYSIA-TODAY

Page: 16 / 32

THE REAL STORY OF MAY 13 (PART 3)

They say those who forget history are doomed to repeat its mistakes. In light of the recent sabre-rattling by those in Umno and the warning by the Armed Forces Chief, Malaysia Today feels compelled to republish an old article by Raja Petra Kamarudin that was published in Harakah on 24 September 1999. NO HOLDS BARRED Raja Petra Kamarudin

The move to push Tunku Abdul Rahman aside had started. They needed something to trigger off some form of resentment against the government. They needed the Malays to rise, and what better platform to exploit than a racial platform?

Prior to that, 11 Chinese prisoners were sentenced to death for killing a Malay prison warden in Pudu Jail. This was subsequently turned into a Malay-Chinese issue. The Malays wanted the 11 Chinese punished. The Chinese wanted their death sentence commuted. And demonstrations were held in the Chinese dominated areas around Kuala Lumpur to pressure the government to pardon the 11. In one large demonstration outside Pudu Jail, the riot police had to be called in the break up the demonstration with teargas. That was my first experience with teargas, and I was only 19 then. The government had no choice but to back down, thereby angering the Malays.

In another incident, some Chinese demonstrated in front of the United States Information Service (USIS) office and one demonstrator was shot dead by a panicking Malay policeman -- interpreted as another Malay-Chinese thing.

MALAYSIA-TODAY

Page: 17 / 32

The Chinese wanted a funeral procession but the police would not grant them permission as they knew it would attract a huge crowd and the funeral would be turned into a demonstration instead. Tun Razak, however, told the police to grant them permission and ordered the police off the streets. The resulting "giant" parade built up tensions further. The May 1969 General Elections were held soon after and the Alliance Party won only 40% of the votes resulting in it losing its two-thirds majority in Parliament. It also lost a couple of

states to the opposition plus its two-thirds majority in others. The opposition parties held "victory parades" which turned into a mud-slinging and name-calling session. The Malays were now really angry and decided to hold a victory parade of their own. Dato Harun, the then Chief Minister of Selangor, was given the task of managing

this "event". On May 13, the entire cabinet withdrew to Frazers Hill while the Malays prepared for trouble. People in the top echelon of the government and commerce were tipped off to get out of

town or go home early and, by 3.00pm, the city was quite deserted of the elite except for the unknowing rakyat. That same evening, racial riots exploded. Parliament was dissolved, thereby saving the Alliance government that no longer had a majority in Parliament, and power was transferred to Deputy Prime Minister Tun Abdul Razak under the National Operations Council (NOC).

The Tunku was now powerless. Mahathir then increased his attacks on the Tunku using race as his platform. He also called for MCA's expulsion from the Alliance to "punish" the Chinese. Instead, Dr Mahathir was expelled from Umno as the Utusan Malaysia newspaper report of 6 June 1969 reveals:

MALAYSIA-TODAY

Page: 18 / 32

***************************************************

KUALA LUMPUR 5 June - Some leading members of UMNO's Supreme Council have voiced their support for the decision by MCA leadership to exclude themselves from the Cabinet. Among them are Tan Sri Syed Jaafar Albar, Dr. Mahathir bin Mohamad and Syed Nasir bin Ismail.

In a meeting with Utusan Malaysia, Tan Sri Syed Jaafar emphasised his disapproval of efforts made to ask MCA to re-enter the Cabinet. "I do not agree with the way some Chinese chambers of commerce have stated their confidence and support of Tun Tan Siew Sin and their asking

him to reconsider MCA's decision to withdraw from the Cabinet," he said.

According to him, the problem now was not the question of confidence towards Tun Tan Siew Sin as the MCA leader, but whether the Chinese supported the present policies of the Alliance.

"This is the matter that should be considered by these people who are making a big fuss about giving their support to Tun Tan Siew Sin today," he added. Tan Sri Jaafar Albar also stated that the support given to Tun Tan Siew Sin by the Chinese Chambers of Commerce was not sufficient because support had to come from the majority of the Chinese population. He stated that discussions about MCA's inclusion in the Cabinet should not be

MALAYSIA-TODAY

Page: 19 / 32

confined to the newspapers or to MCA alone because UMNO, as the backbone of the Alliance party, had not decided yet if MCA and MIC should be included in the Cabinet or if the Alliance should remain as it was then. He said: "It is not only the duty of MCA to discuss this matter as if it is its own peculiar problem, but it should be the responsibility of all the Alliance leaders from the UMNO, MCA, and MIC."

However, he did not want to give his final views before the party met to discuss the matter. Mahathir, who supported Tan Sri Syed Jaafar's statement, stressed that MCA leaders had to adhere to their earlier decision of not wanting to be included in the Cabinet.

He said that he agreed with the view of MCA leaders that they could not actually represent the people they claimed to represent.

According to Mahathir, the support given to Tun Tan Siew Sin by the Chinese chambers of commerce and other Chinese organisations could not be taken as support from the Chinese community as a whole to MCA because those organisations did not represent the desires of the Chinese community as a whole.

"If MCA wants to know whether they have the support of the Chinese, they have to wait for the next general election. Since this will take quite some time, it is no longer necessary for MCA to remain in the Cabinet," he emphasised. Mahathir also said that MIC's position in the Cabinet should also be reconsidered. Syed Nasir stressed that on the whole, the relationship between UMNO, MCA and MIC had to be reviewed to take in the changes which had taken place after the general elections. "The people have expressed their needs and desires, and there is little point in pretending that the policies of the Alliance party are the best acceptable to them," he said. In a Press Statement released by UMNO's Secretary General, Senu Abdul Rahman, reported by the Utusan Melayu newspaper on 6 June 1969, it said:

MALAYSIA-TODAY

Page: 20 / 32

"Mahathir Mohamad ceases to be a member of the UMNO Supreme Council with effect from today, 12 July 1969. This decision was taken following the wide distribution to the public of Mahathir's letter to Tunku Abdul Rahman, President of UMNO Malaysia. Letters containing important matters should first be discussed by UMNO's Supreme Council, especially in view of the present situation in the country. The action taken by Mahathir is seen to be in breach of the party's etiquette and is capable of damaging party solidarity and the government which the party supports."

***************************************************

Mahathir replied to this in his letter to the Tengku dated 17th June 1969. "Your opinions were based on stories you heard from people who surround you, and who tell you only what they think you like to hear or should hear. Permit me to tell you what the position, the thoughts and the opinions of the people are really, so that you can understand my motive for making that press statement. You yourself told me that you have prevented a riot by commuting the death sentence of the 11 subversive Chinese. In truth this very action sparked the riots of 13 May, which resulted in the deaths of many, many more. Your 'give and take' policy gives the Chinese everything they ask for. The climax was the commuting of the death sentence, which made the majority of the Malays angry. The Chinese on the other hand regarded you and the Alliance government as cowards and weaklings who could be pushed around. That was why the Chinese and the Indians behaved outrageously toward the Malays on 12th May. If you

had been spit in the face, called dirty names and shown obscene gestures and private parts, then you could understand how the Malays felt. The Malays whom you thought would never rebel went berserk, and they hate you for giving too much face. The responsibility of the deaths of these people, Muslim or Infidels, rests on the shoulders of the leader who holds views based on wrong assumptions. I regret writing this letter, but I have to convey to you the feelings of the Malays. In

MALAYSIA-TODAY

Page: 21 / 32

truth the Malays whether they are UMNO or PMIP supporters really hate you, especially those who had lost homes, children and relatives, because of your 'give and take' policy. They said you wanted to be known only as 'The Happy Prime Minister' even though others are suffering. They said that although the country was in a state of emergency you were engrossed playing poker with your Chinese friends. Even the policemen said that you were using official cars and police escorts to contact your poker gang. Lately, another disturbing factor came to light. The Malays in the Civil Service, from Permanent Secretary downwards, Army Officers and the Malays in the Police Force have lost faith and respect for you. I know that the majority of them voted for the PMIP through mail ballots.... I wish to convey what the people really think, that is that it is high time you resign as our Prime Minister and UMNO leader. I am fully aware of the powers you still hold and I remember too well the fate of AZIZ ISHAK. But I would be irresponsible if I do not explain what I have said earlier. Even if I am jailed, I have to say what I have already said. Once more I wish to repeat that the statement I made [on the continued exclusion of the MCA from the Cabinet] is to prevent the Malays from hating the Government more and to stop the Chinese from abusing the dignity of the Malays. A bigger riot will occur if this is allowed. The military itself will be beyond control. I pray to God it will open your heart to accept the truth bitter though it may be."

***************************************************

Soon after, the Tengku stepped aside and Tun Razak took over as Prime Minister. The opposition parties were invited to join the government and the Alliance gave way to the Barisan Nasional giving the government back their two-thirds majority in Parliament. Later on, of course, PAS left the BN to stay on as an opposition party.

------End of THE REAL STORY OF MAY 13 ARTICLES----

MALAYSIA-TODAY

Page: 22 / 32

RPK Lost Freedom

56 days 2 hours 10mins

(12Sep2008 1310 to 07Nov2008 1520)

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/sep/12/malaysia.pressandpublishing

Malaysia blogger arrested for posting anti-government comments

• Rowan Walker and agencies • guardian.co.uk, • Friday September 12 2008 17:53 BST

Malaysia's most prominent political blogger was arrested today at his home for posting anti-government comments on the Malaysia Today website.

Raja Petra Kamarudin, the British-born founder and editor of the site, could be detained indefinitely without trial under an emergency law brought in after a series of attacks on senior political figures.

"They came here and arrested him under the internal security act (ISA) for inciting hate in his articles on Islam," his wife, Marina Le Abdullah, told foreign press agencies.

A statement on Malaysia Today said police "ransacked RPK's bedroom and took away some documents and CDs".

Hours later, police made a second arrest. Tan Hoon Cheng, a Chinese reporter, was detained under the ISA in connection with comments in the Sin Chew Daily, where he

MALAYSIA-TODAY

Page: 23 / 32

reported that a member of the ruling party had referred to ethnic Chinese as "squatters".

The Malaysian home minister, Syed Hamid Albar, said authorities had been forced to act because Raja Petra had written numerous allegedly offensive pieces, including one that was claimed to ridicule Islam. "We have called and advised him many times about his statements, but he still continues writing in a way that could pose a threat," the minister told the national Bernama news agency.

Two weeks ago, authorities blocked the Malaysia Today website, in a move that was met with outrage from journalists and bloggers worldwide. Raja Petra continued to publish online via an alternative link.

On September 6, he predicted his arrest, saying he had been told by friends that he would be detained under the ISA if he persisted. His arrest came a day after the Malaysia Today block was lifted.

Articles calling for the release of Raja Petra and condemning the ISA have appeared on the site. Amnesty International urged the Malaysian government to revoke the ISA, under which more than 60 people are being held.

"The Malaysian government is using this law as a repressive measure to control dissent," said Donna Guest, the organisation's deputy Asia-Pacific director. "It should be revoked immediately, and Raja Petra, along with those others currently being held in indefinite detention, should be either charged with an offence and brought to fair trial or released immediately."

One blogger called for peaceful demonstrations and "planned vigils" to be held on September 15 in a show of support.

In May, Raja Petra was charged with sedition for allegedly implying that the deputy prime minister was involved in the killing of a Mongolian woman. His trial is due to begin in October. There is increasing political tension in Malaysia, with threats by the leader of the country's resurgent opposition, Anwar Ibrahim, to take power by September 16 - Malaysia's national day.

In March, the ruling National Front party, led by Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, lost its two-thirds majority as opposition parties made big gains in parliamentary elections. Abdullah has been in power since 2003.

MALAYSIA-TODAY

Page: 24 / 32

TUESDAY SEPTEMBER 23 2008

http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/index.php/malaysia/9444-raja-petra-detained-for-2-years

KUALA LUMPUR, Sept 23 — A prominent political blogger was jailed for two years under a

strict security law that can keep him in prison indefinitely, a lawyer said today.

Online commentator Raja Petra Kamarudin, known for his anti-government views, was

already in police custody and was served a detention order last night, said his lawyer Malik

Imtiaz Sarwar…………

MALAYSIA-TODAY

Page: 25 / 32

Raja Petra freed http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/index.php/malaysia/11957-raja-petra-freed

MALAYSIA-TODAY

Page: 26 / 32

http://mt.m2day.org/2008/content/view/15829/84/

MALAYSIA TODAY INTERVIEWS THE HOME MINISTER

Posted by admin

Tuesday, 09 December 2008 17:31

Today, Malaysia Today interviews the Home Minister to get his take on a range of issues that have been

the bone of contention with most Malaysians. This article is of course just a satire and any similarities

with persons still alive, already dead, or about to die is purely coincidental.

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Malaysia Today: YB, thank you for agreeing to an interview with Malaysia Today’s No Holds Barred column.

Yang Berhormat: Thank you for inviting me. It is very seldom that the alternative media would interview a

member of the Cabinet so that we can set the record straight and correct the lies and wrong perception about the

government, which are spread by the alternative media. Normally, the alternative media just reports rumours

without obtaining the government’s side of the story. I congratulate the alternative media for becoming more

mature in giving the government space to inform the public of the truth.

But before we start, I would like to offer my condolence to the Indian government on the recent tragedy in

Mumbai. I thank God that Malaysia does not suffer such acts of terrorism, primarily because we have the Internal

Security Act, which allows us to detain terrorist before they can cause any harm to society. This shows that the

Internal Security Act has been very successful in maintaining law and order and in safeguarding the security of

this country.

MALAYSIA-TODAY

Page: 27 / 32

MT: Since you have brought up the matter of the ISA, YB, can we start by talking about that?

YB: Sure.

MT: The people criticise the ISA and…….

YB: Which people? The alternative media always talks about ‘the people’. But which people are you talking

about?

MT: Well, I suppose the civil society movements and human rights movements.

YB: These people are in the minority. The majority of the people voted for the government. So this means the

majority support the ISA. If not they would not have voted for the government. It is the majority that counts, not

the minority. We can’t make laws or abolish laws just for the sake of the minority. We must do what the majority

wants. The ISA is to prevent terrorism. If, in 2001, the US also had the ISA, their Twin Towers would still be

standing. Malaysia’s Twin Towers is still standing because of the ISA.

MT: But the ISA is not used against terrorists. The government has always said that Malaysia does not have any

terrorists. The ISA is used to deny the people freedom of speech.

YB: There is still freedom of speech in Malaysia. Who says that there is no freedom of speech?

MT: It is not freedom of speech which does not exist in Malaysia. It is freedom after speech.

YB: That is different. Then you can’t say that there is no freedom of speech in Malaysia. There is freedom of

speech. Of course, if you say the wrong things, then you run the risk of being detained under the ISA. Berani

cakap, berani tanggunglah!

MT: Okay, then what would you regard as ‘saying the wrong things’?

YB: Well, like inciting the people to hate the government or saying something that may start racial problems.

MT: But we already have so many other laws like the Sedition Act, Criminal Defamation, PPPA, and so on, to

charge those who may have broken the law. Why the need to detain them under the ISA? Just charge them in

court.

YB: That would not be so easy. We will need evidence to charge them in court. Without evidence how to charge

them?

MT: But how do you know all those people who the government has detained under the ISA have committed a

crime? Is it not possible they are all innocent?

YB: No, we have evidence. That is why we detained them.

MALAYSIA-TODAY

Page: 28 / 32

MT: But if you have evidence then why not use this evidence to charge them?

YB: I already said there is not enough evidence to charge them.

MT: But there is enough evidence to detain them?

YB: Yes. The evidence is enough to detain them, only not enough to charge them.

MT: But when you sign the Detention Order you must first see all the evidence. Is this not so?

YB: That is true. Only when I am satisfied there is enough evidence will I sign the Detention Order.

MT: But you still feel that the evidence, though sufficient to detain them, is not sufficient enough to charge them.

YB: That is correct. But the detainee still has a chance to appear before the Advisory Board within three months

to argue his case. If the Advisory Board is of the opinion that the detainee is innocent then he will be released. So

we are quite fair.

MT: Have many people been released through the recommendations of the Advisory Board so far?

YB: Well, not many…..maybe none so far. But this only means we were not wrong in detaining them. If not, surely

the Advisory Board would have recommended their release.

MT: But there have been reports that, from time to time, the Advisory Board has recommended the release of

some detainees. However, the Home Minister has always overruled their recommendations.

YB: Yes, that is true. This is because the Advisory Board was mistaken and we did not agree with their

recommendations. So we overruled them.

MT: This would mean the Advisory Board is a lame duck and has no power. It is the Home Minister who has the

final say. Would this not be so?

YB: That is not true. The Advisory Board does have power.

MT: Power to do what?

YB: Power to recommend the release of the detainee.

MT: But the Minister does not follow their recommendation and overrules them. The Minister has the final say.

YB: But this does not mean the Advisory Board does not have power.

MT: If you say so YB. Okay, can we now talk about the Umno party elections and the numerous complaints about

corruption in the party?

MALAYSIA-TODAY

Page: 29 / 32

YB: What corruption are you talking about? There is no corruption in Umno.

MT: But the mainstream media has been reporting the many complaints of money politics.

YB: That is money politics, not corruption.

MT: Is there a difference?

YB: Of course there is. Corruption is when you pay to get something. Money politics is not corruption.

MT: What would you call money politics then?

YB: Money politics is……..well, money politics.

MT: And that is not corruption?

YB: Of course not.

MT: Okay, whatever. Now, on the matter of race relations, don’t you think that Malaysia is very dangerously being

pushed to the brink of racial problems?

YB: That is why we have so many times said that the opposition is stirring the sentiments of the many races.

MT: But it is not the opposition that is doing this.

YB: Then who?

MT: Umno.

YB: Umno is a responsible party. We do not play the race card. It is the opposition that is doing this.

MT: In what way is the opposition doing this?

YB: They are asking for the government to abolish Ketuanan Melayu and the NEP. This makes the Malays angry

and may cause the Malays to mengamuk. The opposition should stop all this nonsense before the peace and

harmony of this country is compromised.

MT: But is it not time we treat all Malaysians equal and no longer treat one race as having more privileges than

others?

YB: Aiyah, how can! That is the kind of talk that makes the Malays angry. It is dangerous to suggest such things.

We must maintain the harmony between the many races and not say things like that.

MALAYSIA-TODAY

Page: 30 / 32

MT: But what gives one race the right to have more privileges than others?

YB: That was the agreement when we gained Merdeka in 1957. How can we go back on what was agreed?

MT: What agreement?

YB: The Social Contract that was agreed by the Malays, Chinese and Indians.

MT: Many say that the Social Contract does not exist. Have you ever seen it? Can Malaysians see a copy?

YB: It was not a written contract. It was a verbal contract.

MT: When was it made and under want circumstances was it made?

YB: It was agreed upon when Umno, MCA and MIC jointly negotiated for Merdeka from the British.

MT: And what were the terms of the contract?

YB: That Malay would be the National Language and Islam the official religion plus the Malays would be

accorded special rights and privileges such as certain quotas in the civil service and in educational institutions.

MT: But has this not since been amended many times in breach of the original Social Contract?

YB: No! In what way has it changed? Everything still remains the same.

MT: The government imposes new rules such as companies must be 100% Bumiputera before they can get

import permits or APs and 30% of houses built must be sold to Bumiputeras according to the land area and so on.

This was not part of the so-called Social Contract agreed by Umno, MCA and MIC before Merdeka. They are new

rules made up as we went along.

MALAYSIA-TODAY

Page: 31 / 32

YB: True. But the non-Malays accepted them.

MT: How do you know they accepted them?

MALAYSIA-TODAY

Page: 32 / 32

YB: Because they continued to vote for the government. If they did not agree then they would not have voted for

the government.

MT: But they did not vote for the government. 49% of the Malays and more than 80% of the Chinese and Indians

did not vote for the government in the last general election. This means they do not agree with the government

policies.

YB: But we still won more than 60% of the Parliament seats.

MT: That is only because of Gerrymandering. Malay majority seats like Putrajaya, where the voters are 98%

Malay, have only 5,000 voters while seats that are 80% or more non-Malay have 120,000 voters or more. That is

why the government still won and not because the majority voted for it.

YB: That is beside the point. We still can’t deny the fact that we won 140 seats and the opposition won only 82

seats.

MT: Yes, but if the votes were evenly divided between constituencies with a variation of plus-minus 20% the

government would have fallen by now. It is only through Gerrymandering that the government managed to hold

on to power.

YB: That is your opinion. It does not mean it is true.

MT: Thank you, YB, for the interview. I am sure you have helped enlighten Malaysians with your view of things.

YB: Thank you. I hope I have managed to rebut the opposition lies and propaganda and I look forward to similar

sessions in future where the government can be given an opportunity to set the record straight.