High fat diet more effective than low calorie diet

This is fat though. Not cholesterol.
Don't take sugar or carbohydrates such as rice, bread etc. Just eat
oily food. Fish oil, olive oil etc.

http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1662484,00.html

Can a High-Fat Diet Beat Cancer?
By Richard Friebe Monday, Sept. 17, 2007
Click here to find out more!

Istockphoto

Print
Email
Reprints

share

The women's hospital at the University of Würzburg used to be the
biggest of its kind in Germany. Its former size is part of the
historical burden it carries — countless women were involuntarily
sterilized here when it stood in the geographical center of Nazi
Germany.

Today, the capacity of the historical building overlooking the college
town, where the baroque and mid-20th-century concrete stand in a
jarring mix, has been downsized considerably. And the experiments
within its walls are of a very different nature.

Since early 2007, Dr. Melanie Schmidt and biologist Ulrike Kämmerer,
both at the Würzburg hospital, have been enrolling cancer patients in
a Phase I clinical study of a most unexpected medication: fat. Their
trial puts patients on a so-called ketogenic diet, which eliminates
almost all carbohydrates, including sugar, and provides energy only
from high-quality plant oils, such as hempseed and linseed oil, and
protein from soy and animal products.

What sounds like yet another version of the Atkins craze is actually
based on scientific evidence that dates back more than 80 years. In
1924, the German Nobel laureate Otto Warburg first published his
observations of a common feature he saw in fast-growing tumors: unlike
healthy cells, which generate energy by metabolizing sugar in their
mitochondria, cancer cells appeared to fuel themselves exclusively
through glycolysis, a less-efficient means of creating energy through
the fermentation of sugar in the cytoplasm. Warburg believed that this
metabolic switch was the primary cause of cancer, a theory that he
strove, unsuccessfully, to establish until his death in 1970.

To the two researchers in Würzburg, the theoretical debate about what
is now known as the Warburg effect — whether it is the primary cause
of cancer or a mere metabolic side effect — is irrelevant. What they
believe is that it can be therapeutically exploited. The theory is
simple: If most aggressive cancers rely on the fermentation of sugar
for growing and dividing, then take away the sugar and they should
stop spreading. Meanwhile, normal body and brain cells should be able
to handle the sugar starvation; they can switch to generating energy
from fatty molecules called ketone bodies — the body's main source of
energy on a fat-rich diet — an ability that some or most fast-growing
and invasive cancers seem to lack.

The Würzburg trial, funded by the Otzberg, Germany–based diet food
company Tavartis, which supplies the researchers with food packages,
is still in its early, difficult stages. "One big problem we have,"
says Schmidt, sitting uncomfortably on a small, wooden chair in the
crammed tea kitchen of Kämmerer's lab, "is that we are only allowed to
enroll patients who have completely run out of all other therapeutic
options." That means that most people in the study are faring very
badly to begin with. All have exhausted traditional treatments, such
as surgery, radiation and chemo, and even some alternative ones like
hyperthermia and autohemotherapy. Patients in the study have
pancreatic tumors and aggressive brain tumors called glioblastomas,
among other cancers; participants are recruited primarily because
their tumors show high glucose metabolism in PET scans.

Four of the patients were so ill, they died within the first week of
the study. Others, says Schmidt, dropped out because they found it
hard to stick to the no-sweets diet: "We didn't expect this to be such
a big problem, but a considerable number of patients left the study
because they were unable or unwilling to renounce soft drinks,
chocolate and so on."

The good news is that for five patients who were able to endure three
months of carb-free eating, the results were positive: the patients
stayed alive, their physical condition stabilized or improved and
their tumors slowed or stopped growing, or shrunk. These early
findings have elicited "very positive reactions and an increased
interest from colleagues," Kämmerer says, while cautioning that the
results are preliminary and that the study was not designed to test
efficacy, but to identify side effects and determine the safety of the
diet-based approach. So far, it's impossible to predict whether it
will really work. It is already evident that it doesn't always: two
patients recently left the study because their tumors kept growing,
even though they stuck to the diet.

Past studies, however, offer some hope. The first human experiments
with the ketogenic diet were conducted in two children with brain
cancer by Case Western Reserve oncologist Linda Nebeling, now with the
National Cancer Institute. Both children responded well to the high-
fat diet. When Nebeling last got in contact with the patients' parents
in 2005, a decade after her study, one of the subjects was still alive
and still on a high-fat diet. It would be scientifically unsound to
draw general conclusions from her study, says Nebeling, but some
experts, such as Boston College's Thomas Seyfried, say it's still a
remarkable achievement. Seyfried has long called for clinical trials
of low-carb, high-fat diets against cancer, and has been trying to
push research in the field with animal studies: His results suggest
that mice survive cancers, including brain cancer, much longer when
put on high-fat diets, even longer when the diets are also calorie-
restricted. "Clinical studies are highly warranted," he says,
attributing the lack of human studies to the medical establishment,
which he feels is single-minded in its approach to treatment, and
opposition from the pharmaceutical industry, which doesn't stand to
profit much from a dietetic treatment for cancer.

The tide appears to be shifting. A study similar to the trial in
Würzburg is now under way in Amsterdam, and another, slated to begin
in mid-October, is currently awaiting final approval by the ethics
committee at the University Hospital in Tübingen, Germany. There, in
the renowned old research institution in the German southwest, neuro-
oncologist Dr. Johannes Rieger wants to enroll patients with
glioblastoma and astrocytoma, aggressive brain cancers for which there
are hardly any sustainable therapies. Cell culture and animal
experiments suggest that these tumors should respond particularly well
to low-carb, high-fat diets. And, usually, these patients are
physically sound, since the cancer affects only the brain. "We hope,
and we have reason to believe, that it will work," says Rieger.

Still, none of the researchers currently studying ketogenic diets,
including Rieger, expects it to deliver anything close to a universal
treatment for cancer. And none of them wants to create exaggerated
hopes for a miracle cure in seriously ill patients, who may never
benefit from the approach. But the recent findings are difficult to
ignore. Robert Weinberg, a biology professor at MIT's Whitehead
Institute who discovered the first human oncogene, has long been
critical of therapeutic approaches based on the Warburg effect, and
has certainly dismissed it as a primary cause of cancer. Nevertheless,
he conceded, in an email, for tumors that have been affected by the
ketogenic diet in animal models, "there might be some reason to go
ahead with a Phase I clinical trial, especially for patients who have
no other realistic therapeutic options."

Richard Friebe is executive editor of the German science magazine SZ
Wissen

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1662484,00.html#ixzz1TNts5H2E

Non-networked biometric system to be introduced by EC

How can it prevent phantom voting? Now I understand what is meant by
Aziz's statement that there is absolutely no double voting. He refers
to voting at a single polling station.

Indelible ink is much cheaper and more effective.
Saying that there are chemicals to remove it is just that, a stupid
accusation. Just prove it first before you make any stupid accusation.
You have to remove your skin in order to remove the ink.

http://www.theborneopost.com/2011/07/26/spr-chief-biometric-system-to-weed-out-phantom-voters/

SPR chief: Biometric system to weed out phantom voters

by Simon Ingka Crown reporters@theborneopost.com. Posted on July 26,
2011, Tuesday

USING THUMB IDENTIFICATION: Abdul Aziz (left) gestures to reporters as
he explains about the biometric system. Next to him is Takun.

KUCHING: Phantom voters will no longer 'exist' in electoral lists once
the biometric system is used to verify registered voters' identity,
said Election Commission (SPR) chairman Tan Sri Abdul Aziz Mohd Yusof.

"Over the years, SPR has been receiving allegations and accusations on
the existence of phantom voters and it has never stopped.

"In fact there is no end to this. This system will demolish its
existence," he told a press conference after chairing a briefing on
the biometric system, postmortem on the recently-concluded state
election and SPR's monthly meeting yesterday.

He added that the system was not a new invention as it was presently
used by the Home Ministry, National Anti-Drugs Agency (AADK)
Immigrations and Police.

Abdul Aziz also pointed out to claims that some voters voted more than
once and allegations of the existence of dead voters' names in the
electoral roll.

Saying that SPR had tried to use indelible ink, Abdul Aziz said the
move had to be shelved as the system unfortunately could not
accurately determine the identity of voters.

"For SPR, we just want to see the documents, whether the bearer of the
identification card (IC) is genuine, carried by the owner and not
forged. Voters also cannot carry other voters' IC and register for
that matter. By this way voters cannot cheat the system," he said.

Abdul Aziz said the system would be a standalone, whereby it would not
be connected to online networking to prevent it from being sabotaged.

"The system will have no networking and stand alone. It would be very
expensive to make it online as well."

He said the introduction of the system was part of an effort mooted by
Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak to seek the best possible
way for a fair and just election process in the country.

He added that the system was on its final phase and more trial tests
and demos would be conducted to ensure its smoothness.

However, Abdul Aziz said it needed to be further enhanced before it
could be used for the coming general elections, indicating a mock
election would be conducted soon to test its efficiency.

To a question, he said SPR welcomed queries from individuals, groups
or political parties who want to know more about the system, adding it
had a fruitful meeting with Parti Islam SeMalaysia (PAS) leaders
recently.

"They (PAS) are fully supporting the idea and soon more political
parties will come and discuss with us," he said.

The cost of the system has yet to be determined.

State SPR chairman Takun Sunggah was among those present during the
press conference.

How sugar/honey increases cancer/heart diseases

Glucose reduces immune system by mimicking Vitamin C. More sugar, less
Vitamin C in cells, making white blood cells less efficient. 120 level
reduces white blood cell efficiency by 75%.

This also explains the research results on mice that ingestion of
honey after cancer increases cancer, but not before. Taking honey can
prevent cancer because honey has anti cancer ingredients but may be
destroyed by heating to make honey so clear.

http://www.healingdaily.com/detoxification-diet/sugar.htm

Sugar's effect on your health
The average American consumes an astounding 2-3 pounds of sugar each
week, which is not surprising considering that highly refined sugars
in the forms of sucrose (table sugar), dextrose (corn sugar), and high-
fructose corn syrup are being processed into so many foods such as
bread, breakfast cereal, mayonnaise, peanut butter, ketchup, spaghetti
sauce, and a plethora of microwave meals.
sugar

In the last 20 years, we have increased sugar consumption in the U.S.
26 pounds to 135 lbs. of sugar per person per year! Prior to the turn
of this century (1887-1890), the average consumption was only 5 lbs.
per person per year! Cardiovascular disease and cancer was virtually
unknown in the early 1900's.

The "glycemic index" is a measure of how a given food affects blood-
glucose levels, with each food being assigned a numbered rating. The
lower the rating, the slower the absorption and digestion process,
which provides a more gradual, healthier infusion of sugars into the
bloodstream. On the other hand, a high rating means that blood-glucose
levels are increased quickly, which stimulates the pancreas to secrete
insulin to drop blood-sugar levels. These rapid fluctuations of blood-
sugar levels are not healthy because of the stress they place on the
body.

One of sugar's major drawbacks is that it raises the insulin level,
which inhibits the release of growth hormones, which in turn depresses
the immune system. This is not something you want to take place if you
want to avoid disease.

An influx of sugar into the bloodstream upsets the body's blood-sugar
balance, triggering the release of insulin, which the body uses to
keep blood-sugar at a constant and safe level. Insulin also promotes
the storage of fat, so that when you eat sweets high in sugar, you're
making way for rapid weight gain and elevated triglyceride levels,
both of which have been linked to cardiovascular disease. Complex
carbohydrates tend to be absorbed more slowly, lessening the impact on
blood-sugar levels.
Sugar depresses the immune system.

We have known this for decades. It was only in the 1970's that
researchers found out that vitamin C was needed by white blood cells
so that they could phagocytize viruses and bacteria. White blood cells
require a 50 times higher concentration inside the cell as outside so
they have to accumulate vitamin C.
There is something called a "phagocytic index" which tells you how
rapidly a particular macrophage or lymphocyte can gobble up a virus,
bacteria, or cancer cell. It was in the 1970's that Linus Pauling
realized that white blood cells need a high dose of vitamin C and that
is when he came up with his theory that you need high doses of vitamin
Cicon to combat the common cold.
sugar and lymphocytes

We know that glucose and vitamin C have similar chemical structures,
so what happens when the sugar levels go up? They compete for one
another upon entering the cells. And the thing that mediates the entry
of glucose into the cells is the same thing that mediates the entry of
vitamin C into the cells. If there is more glucose around, there is
going to be less vitamin C allowed into the cell. It doesn't take
much: a blood sugar value of 120 reduces the phagocytic index by 75%.
So when you eat sugar, think of your immune system slowing down to a
crawl.

Here we are getting a little bit closer to the roots of disease. It
doesn't matter what disease we are talking about, whether we are
talking about a common cold or about cardiovascular disease, or cancer
or osteoporosis, the root is always going to be at the cellular and
molecular level, and more often than not insulin is going to have its
hand in it, if not totally controlling it.

The health dangers which ingesting sugar on an habitual basis creates
are certain. Simple sugars have been observed to aggravate asthma,
move mood swings, provoke personality changes, muster mental illness,
nourish nervous disorders, deliver diabetes, hurry heart disease, grow
gallstones, hasten hypertension, and add arthritis.

Because refined dietary sugars lack minerals and vitamins, they must
draw upon the body's micro-nutrient stores in order to be metabolized
into the system. When these storehouses are depleted, metabolization
of cholesterol and fatty acid is impeded, contributing to higher blood
serum triglycerides, cholesterol, promoting obesity due to higher
fatty acid storage around organs and in sub-cutaneous tissue folds.

Because sugar is devoid of minerals, vitamins, fiber, and has such a
deteriorating effect on the endocrine system, major researchers and
major health organizations (American Dietetic Association and American
Diabetic Association) agree that sugar consumption in America is one
of the 3 major causes of degenerative disease.
Honey is a simple sugar

There are 4 classes of simple sugars which are regarded by most
nutritionists as "harmful" to optimal health when prolonged
consumption in amounts above 15% of the carbohydrate calories are
ingested: Sucrose, fructose, honey, and malts.
Some of you may be surprised to find honey here. Although honey is a
natural sweetener, it is considered a refined sugar because 96% of dry
matter are simple sugars: fructose, glucose and sucrose. It is little
wonder that the honey bear is the only animal found in nature with a
problem with tooth-decay (honey decays teeth faster than table sugar).
Honey has the highest calorie content of all sugars with 65 calories/
tablespoon, compared to the 48 calories/tablespoon found in table
sugar. The increased calories are bound to cause increased blood serum
fatty acids, as well as weight gain, on top of the risk of more
cavities.
sugar and honey

Pesticides used on farm crops and residential flowers have been found
in commercial honey. Honey can be fatal to an infant whose immature
digestive tracts are unable to deal effectively with Botulinum Spore
growth. What nutrients or enzymes raw honey does contain are destroyed
by manufacturers who heat it in order to give it a clear appearance to
enhance sales. If you are going to consume honey, make sure it is raw,
unheated honey. Good to use in special cures, but not as an every day
food. It is not much better than white or brown sugar.

Fasting cures cancer

These are facts but not necessarily true for all types of cancer.
There are valid reasons why fasting helps in combating cancer but more
research needs to be done.

Just because it is not well understood, with little systematic
research being done, does not mean that fasting does not work. It
should be the first attempt at curing cancer instead of surgery and
chemotherapy because these procedures have lots of side effects.
Fasting also has side effects and can be dangerous as well.

To fight cancer, a lot of advice by people who have gone through
cancer, is not to fast completely but to fast against sugar/glucose,
protein and fat, because these are the building blocks of cells in our
body. Vitamins and fluids must still be taken. If you don't take
sufficient minerals, your immune system will suffer and you become so
weak.

http://www.freedomyou.com/fasting_book/Healed_Of_Cancer.htm

Healed Of Cancer

By

Sammy Hoffard

I embarked on a journey that I would have laughed at before my
diagnosis.

A life of decadence and neglect, that's what mine was. For the first
34 years of my life I didn't give any thought to what sorts of toxins
and pollutants I surrounded myself with – or ate. Then I got a
reality check.

I was diagnosed with cancer. Stage four ovarian cancer. Four
distinct carcinomas visible without a microscope. And I found a
resolve within that I didn't know I had – a determination to see my
children grow up. I signed a waiver with my doctor, which gave me six
months to try alternative healing methods, knowing that I was taking a
chance that the cancer would advance to the stage that she could no
longer help me.

I embarked on a journey that I would have laughed at before my
diagnosis.

She told me to start by boosting my immune system. An Internet search
repeatedly came up with the word, "fasting". Was that a joke? How
could starving myself cure cancer?

First, I found a reputable website which not only taught members the
proper and safe way to fast, it also offered ongoing support,
encouragement and a means of having all my questions answered along
the way. It also had a great leaning towards Christian spiritual
matters, but at the time I paid no attention to that. I began with a
five day juice fast, then later did a seven, ten, and a fifteen day
fast: becoming more able to handle the detox symptoms, and
familiarizing myself with the challenges which come with adopting a
whole new system of nutrition. I learned exactly how the body begins
to heal itself and how the very building blocks of the human body are
actually restored and renewed through proper fasting and changes in
lifestyle and outlook. My immune system was super-charging.

It was during my 10 day fast that I began to notice the changes. Skin
cleared, small facial lines began to disappear, I felt strong and
invigorated, my energy levels were high, and I felt positive and
enthusiastic about life in general. I began paying attention to the
spiritual aspects of the site, and with a renewal of my dedication to
Christ came a release – the knowledge that God held me close.

My next biopsy appointment came and the doctor was astounded to report
that there was now only one remaining cluster of cancer cells. I was
not surprised. Fasting, prayer, love, and learning to relax had done
its work. I did have surgery on April 27th, 2001 to remove all traces
of cancer, and as of today I am still cancer free.

God willing – I will be here to see my grandchildren and great-
grandchildren. And if by sharing my experience and my enthusiasm for
adopting a healthy, God-conscious lifestyle, I can help one more
person to believe and to achieve their own healing then perhaps I will
be fulfilling God`s purpose for me.

Someone who wants to get married, also want to commit suicide?

It is illogical. Especially when it is repeated for the 2nd time. This
time, a devout Muslim, who is ready to go for a pilgrimage(Haj) is
also accused of committing suicide. This is in a place that only has a
small window that is extremely difficult to climb up to, especially
for an old man. And these two are willing WITNESSES. They are not even
accused.

The only logical explanation is that they were both murdered and then
disposed off. Due to the lack of evidence, and the huge amount of
illegal activities committed by MACC.

The lesson is very clear to all citizens. If you are called as a
witness by any government agency, REJECT. Even if you have to pay huge
fines. What is money compared to your life?

Imagine, if these 2 people, with things to look forward to can be
accused of committing suicide, what will happen to ordinary people
like us.

http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2011/7/22/nation/9152808&sec=nation

Friday July 22, 2011
Teoh driven to suicide; MACC trio singled out over 'intensive
grilling'
Reports by MAZWIN NIK ANIS, NG CHENG YEE, FLORENCE A. SAMY, ZUHRIN
AZAM AHMAD, ISABELLE LAI, SHAUN HO, A. LETCHUMANAN, RASHVINJEET S.
BEDI, TEH ENG HOCK, WONG PEK MEI, RAHIMY RAHIM, ALLISON LAI and SARBAN
SINGH

Report released: Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Datuk
Seri Nazri Aziz holding the RCI report on the death of political aide
Teoh Beng Hock (inset) at Parliament House in Kuala Lumpur yesterday.
— SIA HONG KIAU / The Star

PETALING JAYA: The much-awaited Royal Commission of Inquiry report has
concluded that Teoh Beng Hock was driven to commit suicide and blamed
intensive interrogation by three Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission
(MACC) officers.

The report singled out three MACC officers, saying that personnel were
prepared to go to great lengths to lie and form a "blue wall of
silence" in the spirit of brotherhood.

The 124-page report also made numerous recommendations to improve the
MACC, including amending the law to prevent further abuse.

Teoh's family refused to accept the commission's findings that the
political aide to Seri Kembangan assemblyman Ean Yong Hian Wah
committed suicide.

Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz
promised that the recommendations would be implemented and expressed
the Government's regret and sadness to Teoh's family.

Election Commission Excuses in UNJust voting

It is good that the EC chairman admits these blatant violation of fair
election rules, such as the BN using government machinery to campaign
but admitting to this unfair practises, and yet INSIST on 7 days of
campaigning is just utter nonsense and shows clearly that the EC is
completely biased. Anyone who believes that the EC is still fair must
be the most stupid human being and deserve the fate that Malaysia is
in at the moment, especially Sabah, the POOREST REGION ON EARTH.

What was the excuse for the 7 days campaigning period? PEACE!!!

During the 1969 riots, it was 42 days, but why reduce it to just 7
days. It does not even give time for the EC to prepare properly. It
shows clearly how dishonest the EC is and yet people still want to
vote for the BN that has allowed such an unfair election practise.

Are Malaysian such stupid and unjust people to have supported such a
corrupt and lying government?

The answer is that BN has used voters who can vote more than ONCE,
called GHOST VOTERS.

Aziz is so confident that there has never been any incident of a voter
voting more than once, EVER. He is so confident of this, as though he
is A GOD. If this is the case, he is already an INFIDEL, for sure.
Nobody knows everything for sure, except ALLAH.

There is only one sure way of ensuring that duplicate voting can be
stopped, using INDELIBLE INK. It was already bought at great expenses,
and suddenly withdrawn. Why was it? The explanation was that it was
against the constitution.

Strangely though, Aziz knows that the BN has been using government
machinery for its election machinery which is against the
constitution, and yet cannot do anything about it. So why should he be
bothered about using the INDELIBLE INK??? If someone really want to
challenge the results in a court of law, then let the court decide on
a case by case basis.

Now there is a promise from Mr. Aziz that biometric systems be
introduced to prevent multiple votings. What chance is there that it
will be carried out when Aziz already believes for SURE, like a GOD,
that there is no multiple votings occurring?

Sunday July 17, 2011
Beefing up the voting process
By SHAHANAAZ HABIB and RASHVINJEET S. BEDI
sunday@thestar.com.my

The Election Commission and the conduct of elections have come under
scrutiny recently. Here EC chairman Tan Sri Abdul Aziz Mohd Yusof
addresses some of the issues

Q: How has the interest in elections and the electoral process evolved
over the years?

A: In 2008, the number of registered voters was 10 mil while the
number of eligible voters not registered was 4.3mil which is quite
high.

But now the number not registered has dropped to 3.7mil and registered
voters has increased to 12 mil. So based on that indication, I can see
there is improvement in terms of interest to register as voters.
Secondly, EC has the details of voters on our website so anybody can
go to the website, key in their IC number to check if their status as
a voter is accurate. They can also check the status of family members
provided they know their IC numbers.
No hanky-panky: Abdul Aziz is convinced the electoral process in
Malaysia is fair.

If you don't have a computer, you can telephone to find out, or sms or
email for an almost immediate response.In the first 15 days in July,
19,000 have checked their details and polling centres. Usually the
number is not that high.

Q: Can I check if people I don't know are registered as voters at my
address because I wouldn't know their IC number?

A: We are in the process of putting the complete address on the
website. Sometimes like in (PKR deputy president) Azmin Ali's case
(who found four Chinese voters registered as voters at his mother's
address), addresses are very similar. Azmin's mother stays in 1A
Kampong Klang Gate Baru but there is also a 1A Jalan Genting Klang
Gate close by which is a Chinese house with the same postal code.

There was a slip up when we put the locality because the addresses are
so similar. According to Azmin's sister, even today, letters meant for
the Chinese house are mistakenly sent to their house and letters for
Azmin's mother's house get wrongly sent to Chinese family's house
because of the similarity of address.

Q: But doesn't this show that mistakes like this happen?

A: All these happened before July 16, 2002 where anybody can register
anybody at any address back then. I can bring 20 others to register
and the officer will ask them what address they want to use and
register them as voters at that particular address. That resulted in
some addresses having 20 or 30 registered voters. Sometimes it is also
because the house was rented out (and tenants used the rented house
address to register as voters).

There was this one address in Penang a no 1155, where 88 people used
that address to register as voters. When we checked, we found it is a
squatter area with only one legal shop house which is the no 1155 so
everyone who lived in the area used that address.

This is not something planned by EC that made many people stay in one
house or have the same address but it happened.

After July 16 2002, they can't do that anymore because they have to
use the address on their IC. One problem is many Malaysians don't live
at the address stated in their IC. Under the constitution, the place
you cast your vote should be the place where you live. If I live in
Shah Alam, I shouldn't go back to Penang or my hometown to vote.

I estimate about 30 to 40% of our voters live somewhere else but vote
somewhere else.

I have no power to force them to vote where they live. The most I can
do is explain and persuade them to change the address with the
National Registration Department (NRD). This is not hard to do. All
they need to do is bring their utility bill to show where they are
staying and the change of address will be made.

Q: But sometimes people feel attachment to their hometown and want to
go back to cast their vote. Surely that is okay?

A: That shouldn't be. Under the NRD law, if you live in one particular
area more than 3 months, you should change your address. Once you
change your address, you tell EC. We don't it automatically.

You know why? Because we don't want it to be abused and misused. So an
individual should do it by himself by filling in the Borang A' . We
don't want the situation to be like before 2002 where anybody can
register anybody and anybody can change the address of anybody.

Q: What is the problem of people voting somewhere else?

A: No problem but people say these are phantom voters. That is the
perception they create. Both Barisan Nasional and Pakatan Rakyat say
there are phantom voters on the electoral roll. For example, in the
Permatang Pasir by-election, there were accusations there are 3,000
phantom voters. But the accusers cannot name these people or trace
them. When we checked, these people are not phantom voters but legally
registered voters. When they moved somewhere else, they didn't change
their address and didn't inform EC. If they don't change the address
or inform us of the change, how would we know?

Q: People move to the city to cari makan but ultimately they want to
return to their hometown to retire so the attachment is still strong
with where they come from and they want to vote there?

A: But the law is law. You can't put sentiment there. The only thing
here is that we don't enforce that law. If there is any election or by-
election, there are massive traffic jams back to the state where
people go back to vote.

Q: Why is it so dififcult to clean the electoral roll?

A: Under the law, EC can't clean information of a voter such as
changing the address, name, gender, status of citizenship without his
consent. Those changes must be done by the voter himself. He has to
fill up the changes in Borang A', sign it and submit the form. And if
people die and don't inform the National Registration Department
(NRD), how would we know they are are no longer around? If somebody is
poor and dies without property or assets, the next of kin doesn't
bother to let NRD know of the death.

If they inform NRD, we automatically will get to know because we are
work very closely with the NRD. If a relative of a dead person doesn't
report to NRD, NRD can't update the information. When I was the
permanent secretary of Home Ministry, I asked the NRD DG at that time
to cut out the names of people aged 150 and above but he told me under
the law he can't do that because NRD needs a report of the death.

But I said come on lah use common sense'. If the person is supposed to
be 150 surely he is already dead. Now, they do remove those aged 150,
140, 130, 120. But when it comes to about 110 NRD has to be careful
because these people might still be alive.

There were cases where based on NRD information, we deleted the
voter's name from list but on polling day they came who said I am
dead?'.

It happened to even the wife of a former minister. Tan Sri Leo
Moggie's wife kena. You know why that happens? Because there are
thousands with the same or similar names.

There are 28 Abdul Aziz Mohd Yusof spelt exactly like my name and I
haven't even included those who go by Aziz Yusof, Abdul Aziz Yusof. So
imagine how many Aminahs or Hasnahs there are.

Sometimes with the elderly, we tried looking for the person but the
home is no longer there it might have become a petrol station and no
one in the area knows where the person is.

So we depend very much on a relative to report a death to the NRD and
for that information to come to us. Do not confuse this with the
burial permit which is issued by the police. A burial permit is not a
death certificate. It would be ideal if the police would work with NRD
on deaths.

Q: How clean is the electoral roll?

A: It's difficult to give a percentage. I can't say it's 80 or 90%
percent. I admit the electoral roll is not perfect and that's why we
always display the electoral roll so that people can check the names.
It's transparent. They can see the information online, phone us, sms
or email for an almost immediate response. I dare not give the
percentage because I don't know if the detail of each and everyone
registered voter is correct. Typically Malaysians like to wait till
the last minute to check their details.

Q: A court hearing the election petition on the Likas 1999 election
declared it null and void because there were illegal immigrants and
those convicted of IC fraud on the electoral roll yet in the 2004
election, those names are still on the roll? Why wasn't that cleaned?

A: Really? I really do not know about that. If the IC is all fake,
sure we have to get rid of those names. Because once we get the
details, we check with NRD whether the names are there or not. If NRD
says the name is there and the IC is genuine, we have to retain it.

But if we find the IC is not genuine and the IC number is not correct
and belongs to somebody else belongs to somebody else, then the name
will have to be dropped.

Q: In Sabah, there are cases where illegal immigrants are given an IC
to vote, paid some money and after they vote return the IC to the
party which gave it to them which would use it again?

A: I do not know about this.I wouldn't know how these people get the
names and IC numbers because they have to be working closely with NRD.
If that happens, this means these people are impersonating someone
else. That's why we need the biometric system because then they can't
get away with such a thing. Sometimes these are just allegations and
when we ask for evidence and check, the ICs are genuine.

Q: What do you say to those who say that EC is in cahoots with NRD to
make sure that the ruling party wins the elections?

A: I don't agree. The role of EC is to register voters. To register
with us, they must have genuine IC. Before we confirm the application,
we check with NRD's agency link up system (alis) if the the applicant
is genuine. If it's not genuine, we reject it. Even after everything
is confirmed, we display the names in public for one week in over
1,000 places. If there are objections, we will have a public hearing
where we call the one who objected and the person being objected.
Those who live there can complain I have never see this name, this
address or person in this area'.

Q: In 2007, blogger and journalist Ahiruddin Atan aka Rocky's Bru who
has never registered as a voter or voted in an election found his name
and IC as a registered voter with an address in Perak in the electoral
roll when he has never even lived there. How do such things happen?

A: Maybe somebody used his IC and his particulars. To encourage people
to register as new voters, EC has appointed assistant registrars to
help. We are the only EC in the world that appoints political parties
to assist us in registering new voters.

We appoint an average of 2 assistant registrars for each state seat.
Because they have an interest, they work very hard to register new
voters.

They fill up the forms, get them signed and submit these to us. But
whether that application is approved will depend on the EC. And we
will check with NRD if the information is correct.

About 40% of the applications at state level are not genuine. The
registered voters are dead, underaged or are already registered
voters. A lot of people simply register. Even NGOs too do this. It is
tiring for my director to check and re-check. We pay RM1 for each
clean confirmed registration so these people think they can just fill
up and submit the forms and get the money.

Q:Q: Some argue that EC shouldn't franchise voter registration because
this open the system to abuse?

A: That is why it takes 3 months to verify the registration and then a
month and a half to display it.

The fact is political parties help us a lot in registering new voters.
They make up the highest number compared to government departments,
compared to universities, youth organisations, NGOs. EC does voter
registration ourselves through our office, through our outreach
programme but the response is not very good.

We also go for Jom Heboh, and sometimes political parties ask us to
come to register voters and we do.

But it is difficult for people to come forward to register as voters.
This has to do with attitude.

They ask themselves what benefit they get by registering as a voter.
They ask what happens to them if they don't register and when they
find out no action is taken they leave it as it is.

Only those who really love the country and would like to choose their
own leaders would register as voters voluntarily.

That is why we make the process easy and simple. They can go to the
post office, youth bodies, universities, colleges, government
departments, NGOs and political parties.

When I mention in the EC seminars that political parties help us
register voters, other EC are astounded.

But I am very happy with it because although my officers have to work
very hard to get all the details but in terms of numbers, we get the
highest numbers from political parties.

For May, 52% which is more than half of the new registration came from
political parties.

We have to get rid of the names which are not genuine.

That can be quite tedious. But even after doing that, they are still
the highest. The second is the post office, then our office counters,
followed by government department, NGOs, youth organisation etc.

If they submit 1,000 names and after we clean up and verify, we find
only 600 names are genuine new voters, then we pay them RM600 which is
RM1 for every clean genuine new voter.

Q: In every election, there are complaints from voters they have been
transferred to another voting constituency. EC has said nobody has the
power to change address except for the voter himself but how come this
still keeps happening?

A: Legally speaking, nobody can change your address. But sometimes
there is a wrong locality. For example, a voter might think he stays
in a particular constituency but in actual case the area he lives in
falls under another constituency.

For example in the Hulu Selangor by-election, there was a group of
people who thought they stay in Hulu Selangor.

They have voted in Hulu Selangor for a number of elections but when we
use Geographic Information System (GIS) which is a computerised
system, they do not come under that constituency. In the past, rivers
or roads were used for demarcation but when we introduced GIS, we
discovered in terms of locality these voters are in the wrong place.

For example, a voter might live in Gombak or Selayang and pay his
water bill there but he is a voter in Hulu Selangor. That's wrong.

We find there are a number of such cases and EC has the power to
correct these errors. There are a lot of this in Perak, Penang and
Malacca.

And by correcting the error, the person might end up as a voter in a
different constituency.

But because this is very sensitive, the EC has decided to hold off
correcting these errors until after the next redelineation exercise.

The EC does not need to do the redelineation immediately. Once we
start on the redelineation, we have to complete it within two years.

But with next general elections having to be called less than 2 years
time, we have decided to wait until after elections to do the
redelienation. Because if we start to do the redelineation and the PM
decides to ask for parliament to be dissolved and for election, then
we are caught. If the correction still means that the person votes in
the same constituency but is in a different polling centre, then we
will go ahead with the correction, and inform the political leaders,
the kampong leaders and the affected voters.

Q: In 2007 Bersih asked for electoral reforms. Fast forward 4 years
later, Bersih is still asking for electoral reform. Why is EC so slow
to act?

A: It is not easy to clean the electoral roll. EC can't change the
particulars of any voter so we have to depend entirely on voters to
come forward and change whatever wrong information.

They can't change the address online because we are afraid it will be
misused so they have to be physically present at the EC counters or
the post office to make the change.

Bersih, tell me how else to clean the roll.

I told (Bersih 2.0 chairman) Datuk S. Ambiga when we met last year to
help us encourage people to register and to ask voters to update their
information. She wanted to see me again in March and April but because
of by-elections and the Sarawak state elections, we were very busy. In
this parliamentary term, there have been 16 by-elections.

And when Bersih comes to meet us, it is not just two or three people
who show up but a whole group of them. So I too have to bring a number
of senior officers and panel members to attend the meeting. So I asked
them to hold on until after the Sarawak state elections but they
seemed to think that the general election is so close and decided to
go to the streets to demonstrate.

Q: The Sarawak state election was months ago but the Bersih rally was
on July 9, why didn't you meet them after the elections?

A: Because we didn't get any request from them. They were planning
demonstrations.

Q: It's been 4 years since their demand for electoral reforms and you
mention cleaning up the roll, what about Bersih's other seven demands?

A: When Bersih 2.0 came to see me at the end of last year, they
brought 17 demands. We discussed and I explained in detail why
automatic registration of voters can't be done and why we can't reduce
the voting age to 18 because all this is subject to amendments of the
federal constitution. I explained and they reduced the demands from 17
to 8. About 60% of the demands were gone in one meeting.

Out of the eight demands put up by Bersih 2.0, the last four (free and
fair media, reforming public institutions, getting rid of dirty
politics and corruption) do not come under EC.

Q: You say dirty politics and corruption do not come under EC but
Section 10 of the Election Offence Act does have give powers to EC to
act against the bribing of voters?

A: Under the act, we can only report. We can't investigate or arrest.
When people report to us, we report this to the Malaysian Anti-
Corruption Commission (MACC) or the police. To investigate, we need a
lot of people trained in the area. But our expertise is registration
of voters, carrying out elections and redelineation of election
boundaries. How can we investigate corruption?

People these days are very smart and it is not easy to prove that
someone is corrupt. Even MACC is often disappointed.

They investigate a matter so long, gather evidence and witnesses but
when it gets to court, the case is thrown out.

We report if we find there is a transfer of cash from one person to
another and we check at times and we find the recipient isn't even a
voter.

In the Hulu Selangor by-election, Barisan made announcements of
projects and (the PKR's candidate who lost) Datuk Zaid Ibrahim filed
an election petition to have the election declared null and void for
corruption. But when it came to court, the case was kicked out. It
might seem like bribery but to prove in court is not easy. And you are
asking us the EC to handle this? Cannot! This should be done by
experts. But even experts have a tough time.

Q: So what kind of offences can EC act on under the Election Offences
Act? Dirty politics?

A: What is dirty politics? The only person that can clean politics are
politicians. Who makes politics dirty? The politicians.

Because to them, the most important thing is to change the voters'
perception. So politicians will say or do anything to get people to
believe them. How do you control this?

The only ones who can control it is the politicians themselves.

Q: What about corruption?

A: I don't like corruption. Whoever wins, if there is proof he won by
corruption, the results will be declared invalid. But you can't expect
EC to enforce this. We don't have an enforcement wing to do this. So
we depend on the MACC on matters with corruption because they are
trained and equipped. And they mingle around with EC during elections.
If there is a corruption matter reported to us, we will report it to
MACC.

Q: If EC knows on the ground that a candidate had spent more than
maximum expenditure allowed for an election, what can EC do?

A: When we ask, they say that is not the candidate expenditure because
it is the party that is paying for it. So what can you do? They throw
a dinner and say it is the party's expense.

What a political party can do is bring this up to the court in an
election petition

Q: What do you think of a caretaker government using government
machinery and state facilities to campaign?

A: They can't do that. They can't use government helicopters or
government cars for campaign.

We mentioned that when we meet the party leaders, candidates and party
agents and the code of ethics and the do's and don't during elections.
Politicians are politicians. In front of me, they say "okay, no
problem Tan Sri" but that very night they do it anyway.

Both sides are the same because they want to influence the voters as
much as possible.

If they adhere to the rules of EC, code of ethics, and the
instructions of the police, politics would be very clean.

Q: If parliament is dissolved, does this mean the caretaker PM can't
use the government helicopter to go around?

A: He can. His official duties as Prime Minister will still have to go
on but what I meant is that ministers when it is not an official
function, they can't use the government facilities in campaigning.

That would be wrong. If someone complains, the matter can be brought
to court and if there are facts, it is left to the court decide.

Q: But when a minister goes and announces a project, he would claim he
is doing it in his official capacity as minister but surely that is
campaigning?

A: For example, the Finance Minister announces a few million for a
flood eradication problem in Sungai Sibu. Is that corruption? I don't
know because it is uncertain if the one who hears it and benefits is a
voter. Even if he is voter, it still doesn't mean he will
automatically vote for the party that offers this.

For the Sarawak election, there were some who wanted to offer air
fares back to Sarawak to voters so that they will cast their vote and
I said no that is corruption'.

But my officer said how can you say it's corruption because we use the
political parties' vehicles to get voters from their homes to the
polling centre'. But I said that is small but the officer said it was
the same thing.

So I called by the MACC head to ask if it was corruption and he said
if a person gave a voter money to pay for the ticket to go home and
insists that the voter should vote for a particular party and provide
proof that he voted that way and the voter obliges, that is
corruption. But if the person gives the voter money to fly back to
Sarawak to carry out his duty as a voter and the voter is free to
choose whoever he want, that is not corruption.

And don't forget one's vote is secret. If someone gives money and asks
a voter to vote for a particular party and the matter goes to court
and the voter admits to taking the money but insists that he voted for
the other party and not the one that he was asked to vote for - is
that corruption?

Q: Doesn't EC bear responsibility for the July 9 street demonstration
because people took to the streets only because EC was dragging its
feet on electoral reform?

A: That is perception. Like I said, four of the eight demands do not
fall under EC. With regards to free and fair elections, I can't
dictate to the media whom they should give coverage to. I did meet the
owners of the mainstream media and I did ask them to give media space
to the opposition. Then Barisan complains that the alternative media
focuses on only the opposition and doesn't give Barisan space.

If I have authority under the law, I can force but I don't have that.
So who am I to tell the media?

Persuasion doesn't work. It is up to shareholders and owners of the
newspapers.

In comparison, in the Philippines during the elections, the police,
army, Attorney-General, the media all come under under the EC
chairman. Q: So EC is a toothless tiger?

A: We have to ask other agencies to assist us.

Q: Can EC can ask parliament to amend the Federal Constitution to
allow indelible ink to be used in voting?

A: I have merisik (put feelers out). I know for a fact if we bring
this matter up, one group of MPs will oppose it and we will not be
able to get the two-thirds majority to change the constitution. So
because of that, we proposed something else instead, the biometric
system, which is more reliable and hi tech and doesn't require
amending the constituition.

And it can get rid of the problem of phantom voters. You scan your
thumbprint, it verifies if you are the genuine holder of the IC and
once you have voted, you can't vote anywhere else.

And if you bring someone else's IC, it won't match the thumb print in
the biometric machine.

Q: There are tens of thousand polling stations so won't you need tens
of thousands of biometric machines for elections which would be
expensive and not practical?

A: We can keep some of the machines for by-elections. The rest can be
handed over to the immigration and Home Ministry to use. But we
haven't finalised using biometric. This is our plan. I still think
it's the best way to get rid of phantom voters.

Q: If EC can't get the biometric system in place in time for the next
general election what system can be put in place to make sure a voter
doesn't vote twice?

A: No one has voted twice in an election. There has never been any
election petition which claims that voters voted more than once. They
want to create perception that EC cannot be trusted. That's all. Based
on the 16 by-elections (since the 2008 general election), I conclude
that if voters like a candidate or a party that person will win the
elections even if the other side gives out aid and development
projects.

One example is Bagan Pinang by-election, Barisan put Tan Sri Isa Samad
to challenge the PAS candidate and PAS did everything to win the seat.
But the voters, regardless of race, like Tan Sri Isa and he won the
votes in all streams.

Q: What about reform of postal votes?

A: There make up only 200,000 of the 12 mil voters. For postal voters,
the system is very rigid because they have to use three envelopes so
there are many technical mistakes that can happen. For the Hulu
Selangor election, 150 postal votes were rejected on technical
grounds.

We are planning on advance voting where we get the postal voters to
gather in one area and allow them advance voting three days before
polling day.

Those at the borders where they can't have advance voting because they
are manning the borders, we will allow postal votes on polling day
itself.

Bersih does not want special postal votes for the army and police but
the police and armed forces are of the view that on polling day, they
are deployed all over the country to maintain security and public
order. I can't force them to go to the polling booth to vote. I have
to listen because these concern security matters.

We are also cleaning up the postal votes because some soldiers and
police have been transferred.

Postal votes also do not have such a significant impact. There are
only 200,000 which makes up only 1.8% of the total votes.

The opposition is so worried about postal votes but in 19 seats with a
lot of postal votes, the opposition won 14 of the 19 seats. So it
doesn't mean that the opposition loses a seat because of postal votes.

Generally the postal votes do go to Barisan but in Permatang Pauh,
1,367 of the postal votes went to PKR while the Barisan got only
1,002.

They accuse EC of being not democratic and helping Barisan but look at
KL, the opposition won 10 out of 11 parliament seats.

Q: EC is proposing that postal votes be cast 3 days in advance but
what about suspicion that these ballot boxes can be stuffed?

A: The political parties' agents are there to monitor the balloting.
When the polling ends, they count how many ballot papers have been
cast and they sign off and sealthe ballot box after that. And it is
impossible to cheat or even add an extra ballot paper. If the party
agent wants to sit in the lockup and sleep with the ballot box to
guard it until it is taken to be counted, he is free to do that.

As for the counting of votes, it is all done at the polling centre on
election day. If there is a difference of less than 4% in the margin,
the loser can ask for a recount. But this has to be done at the
counting centre but not after the result has been sent to the tally
centre. In the Sibu and Manek Urai by- elections, Barisan asked for a
recount, I said sorry because it was already at tally centre.' It was
the same with the Senadin by-election when PKR asked for a recount and
this was denied. As I said recounting must be done at the polling
centre and not at the tallying centre.

Q: If a Malaysian working abroad is not allowed to cast his vote while
civil servants, their spouses, soldiers working abroad and Malaysians
full time students in overseas universities are, isn't that denying
the right of some to vote?

A: We are quite open and we look at that as something that can improve
integrity but the problem is overseas it is very difficult to monitor
where they live and stay. Sometimes the ballot paper gets to them only
after the elections because we allow candidates to withdraw late. But
the impact of overseas postal votes is very insignificant because it
is a very small number.

Q: What do you think of a 21 days campaigning period?

A: We are considering that. 14 days might not be enough but don't tie
us down to 21 days. In the 1969 riots, there was seven weeks of
campaigning and many racial and religious issues close to the heart
came up. Even senior leaders of some of the parties asking for 21 days
have come and tell me not to give 21 days because it is very tiring
and costly.I am looking at a possible 15 days of campaigning.

Q: What do you say to perception that EC takes orders from the ruling
party?

A: That's only perception and it's not true. The PM does not even call
me. If there are any calls from the ruling party, it is with regards
to suggestions and anyone can make suggestions.

Q: What about an independent commission appointing those who head EC
so that it is perceived as being truly independent?

A: I have no objections to that. If people don't like me, the King can
get rid of me. I am waiting for the memorandum to be handed to the
King. But the PAS deputy president Mohamad Sabu has already challenged
me saying Bersih would take to the streets again if EC doesn't agree
to its 8 electoral reforms demands. They did a street demonstration
because they wanted to submit the memorandum to the King and they
haven't handed it over to the King. The King is the one who appoints
EC and the panel and he has the right to call us and I am waiting for
that. My conscience is clear.

Q: Should there be a proportional representation system in election?

A: Ours is the first past the post system and if there is any change
to the proportional system it is the government that should change it.
I just came from Thailand. I saw the combination of both. I think
proportional representation is a good idea where if the party gets 20%
of the votes that would be translated into seats and it has a voice in
parliament. We are looking into this. For the first past post, if you
win by one vote, you take everything.

Q: Aren't free and fair election something good?

A: Yes but are the elections here not free and fair? Aren't Malaysians
free to vote whom ever they want. There are many seats where Barisan
has not won for years.

In KL, 10 out of 11 seats parliamentary seats were won by the
opposition. As for the 16 by-elections, Barisan won eight and the
opposition won 8.

In the Sarawak state elections, DAP got a 100% increase in the number
of seats it won and PKR a 200% increase.

So does it mean that only if the opposition wins that the election is
free and fair? The opposition parties praise us sky high when they win
a by election or a seat. But when they lose, they always look for an
excuse and a scapegoat.

I think elections in Malaysia is fair. Whoever the voter likes during
that time will win.

In 2008, the situation is different from the coming election. The 1999
election result was different from the 2004 general election result.
In 2004 election, the results for Barisan under the then Prime
Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi was different from the 2008
election which also under Abdullah. Doesn't this show that elections
are fair?

If people like the opposition in an election, they will win and vice
versa. And if people don't like a candidate, that candidate will lose.
It's simple as that.

ALIRAN BERSIH 2.0 WALK

http://aliran.com/5985.html

Bersih 2.0 – A day trip to Kuala Lumpur
By Aliran, on 11 July 2011
[Translate]
email
print
Digg Digg

Sembang-sembang recalls a memorable day-trip to KL on 9 July 2011 and
describes what he saw and heard.

I had to make that trip. Najib had been promoting it the whole month
while Khairy and Ibrahim Ali had been so inviting. The police and that
fat cat at the transport company had made it look like an obstacle
challenge run in KL city. I'd always wanted to try that new sport.

The bus dropped me off at Pudu Station on the eve. No check points
along the North South highway.

People from the East Coast got it tough. Every car was checked. People
were questioned why they wanted to go into KL and had to give the
addresses where they were going to stay in KL. Many cars were sent
back. Gombak had a four-hour long queue. No buses were running from
Bentong. A couple paid RM72 each for a taxi ride from Bentong to KL.

I decided to stay in China Town as it is near the Merdeka Stadium –
though I knew full well that the stadium was by then a police fortress
and possibly a mass detention centre on the day of the rally.

Most hotels in China Town were full. I checked into a room and soon
had an old pal and two new friends sleeping in. By midnight we heard
that the Special Branch were checking the hotel guest lists and were
going from room to room looking for Bersih T-shirts. We were not
raided.

When the morning of the big day arrived, nothing had been finalised as
to when and where to meet for the rally. Smses were flying around. The
three original meeting places were heavily blockaded. Kampong Baru
mosque was blocked off by midnight. Sogo and Dewan Bandar KL had
hundreds of police. The National Mosque was shut down. Nine persons
were arrested nearby at the Masjid Jamek area later in the morning.

People were milling around in China Town. Police and SB were by now
everywhere. Nobody showed much concern about them. Only a few shops
were opened. By noon, Jalan Sultan and Petaling Street were jam
packed. Then we heard that the Unit Amal, the advance group of Pas,
had started to march from Pasar Seni just a block away. Some groups
from across the river were blocked from joining us. Tear gas was
fired.

By 1.00pm Jalan Sultan had become another starting point. The streets
were full and people had to move towards the Kota Raya-Pudu junction.
The crowd filled the junction to the brim for half an hour but could
not move towards Bukit Bintang as the FRU (riot police) had blocked
the road in front of Tung Shin Hospital. Khairy Jamaluddin and his
gang were at Bukit Bintang. A helicopter was hovering above us.

Soon another police team with acid-laced water cannons and tear gas
arrived at the Maybank building, sandwiching the crowd in between.
Acid-laced water was sprayed into the crowd, reaching as far as the
main entrance of Maybank. Police fired tear gas right into the crowd.
A boy was badly gassed and had to be rushed into the hospital.

The crowd retreated into the back alley opposite the Pudu Bus Station
and behind Tung Shin Hospital. More tear gas was fired into the back
alley. I saw four cannisters fired into a compound next to the
hospital. A group of 20 or so police personnel began to shout and
arrest people. I was among the last few to run into the the waste land
in front of the Bursa Malaysia building with the police chasing us.

It had started to rain and that eased the stinging tear gas a bit. The
mass of people walked along Jalan Raja Chulan and Jalan Sultan Ismail,
and at each junction they were joined by more groups that had been
split earlier. We soon grew into a one-kilometre long crowd along the
road, attracting onlookers from hotels and their staff. Some tourists
joined us. By now the crowd had regained their spirit, shouting
"Bersih, Bersih!", " Hidup Rakyat!", " Reformasi!", "Allah Akbar!".

A dozen policemen nearby smiled and had their photos taken by the
crowd when they were told, "Senyum, muka akan naik Facbook
nanti!" ("Smile, your face will be in Facebook later on!") A traffic
policeman stopped his big Suzuki bike at the junction and let the
crowd walk into Jalan Ampang.

Here we were met by another equally long crowd. We had regrouped! In
jubilation, everyone yelled in joy and clapped. That was the highlight
of the march. A police van carrying officers was given right of way
while the crowd clapped and laughed while someone shouted, "Turun,
Turun!" to invite them to join us.

By now the crowd stretched further than the eyes could see both ways.
It looked like a two-kilometre long crowd. We stopped at the KLCC
junction and sang the 'Negara Ku' and shouted more slogans. We felt
that we had had a successful march: we had walked in the centre of KL
for four hours, withstood numerous brutal attacks by the police – and
finally regrouped and re-united as one determined people.

KL was ours to walk. No cars. The rain had cleared the polluted air of
KL. Women and men of all races and ages, stung by tear gas attacks and
acid water, had been giving one another salts and sharing water to
wash off. Some argued and held off the police while letting others
escape. Others shared biscuits while asking one another about their
home-towns; we were just glad that we shared the same aspirations.

Half an hour later, another acid water cannon truck appeared and
started spraying while the crowd ran into the KLCC garden, Avenue K
and further down the road. Police fired tear gas into the crowd again.
A dozen mounted police on their horses, complete with riot gear and
batons, trotted down the road. At Ampang Park, another team of FRU
were waiting across the road. The crowd began to disperse and head
home. We had made our point.

On the bus back, we received an sms that 59-year-old Encik Baharuddin
bin Ahmad, husband of Puan Rosni Malan (head of the women's section of
Setiawangsa PKR), had collapsed and died after tear gas was fired into
the crowd at KLCC. Earlier we also had news that Anwar Ibrahim was
injured and felled while his bodyguard was hit in the face by a tear
gas cannister fired directly at them.

Throughout the rally, the rakyat had been orderly and peaceful. We
bear witness to the widespread violence committed by the police.

Sembang-sembang is the pseudonym of a Penang-based activist.

BERSIH 2.0 RALLY: Economical analysis

http://seniorsaloud.blogspot.com/2011/07/he-says-she-says-they-say-and-i-say.html

Sunday, July 10, 2011
HE SAYS, SHE SAYS, THEY SAY, AND I SAY
Face-off. The only 'weapon' the protestors had was defiance against
the FRU who were in full anti-riot gear, with full-face helmet and
shield. (Front page of Sunday Star)
It's the day after. A quick browse through the print and online news
media can leave the casual reader very much confused as to where
things stand at the moment.

Despite the massive clampdown and blockades, the government failed to
stop the protestors from amassing in several areas of the city. The PM
said "no serious harm was caused" and in the same breath also said
"street demonstrations not only bring hardship to the people, it could
also lead to possessions being destroyed". Isn't he contradicting
himself? There have been no reports of damage to property.

Fodder for the government to use in accusing Bersih of being used by
the opposition. (The Star)
Dato Ambiga says that it was "mission accomplished" although Bersih
2.0 didn't quite achieve its original objective of marching to the
palace to deliver a memorandum to the King. It didn't look good that
she was flanked by leaders of the opposition parties at the press
conference. She had always insisted that Bersih 2.0 was apolitical.
She did, however, explain that she marched with the opposition instead
of 'alone' for security reasons.
Proof that tear gas was fired into the hospital compound, despite the
IGP's denial. (Malaysiakini)
The IGP said the police succeeded in dispersing the demonstrators who
numbered only a mere "5000 to 6000", and not 100,000 as claimed by the
organizers. He denied the police fired tear gas into the compound of
Tung Shin hospital, despite photos that show otherwise.

Outside KLCC yesterday afternoon.
Getting ready for the protestors.
Shoppers 'locked' inside Suria KLCC. This was to prevent protestors
from seeking refuge in the mall.
The scene outside Pavilion at 5pm. People resumed their shopping as if
the protests never happened.

Over at Lot 10 junction, traffic was slowly getting back to normal. No
signs of damage to property anywhere.
And I say again, all the show of force from the police, FRU, General
Operations Force, and Light Strike Force was totally unnecessary as
the protestors were unarmed. Shopowners, paying heed to the
government's repeatedly warnings of chaos and destruction resulting
from the rallies, closed their shops. Massive traffic congestion
outside the city centre was caused by police road blocks and road
diversion. People movement was restricted as buses couldn't enter the
city, and several stations along the Ampang and Kelana Jaya lines were
closed. We can point the finger directly at the government for causing
all this inconvenience and loss of earnings for the rakyat.

Bersih supporters shaking hands after the rally in Jalan Ampang. No
hard feelings?
Those who were arrested were questioned and then released - after a
buffet meal courtesy of the police at Pulapol. Faces have been blotted
out. (Photo: PDRM)
If only the government had given Bersih what it had asked for in the
first place, or to gather in Merdeka Stadium from 2-4pm, there would
have been no arrests, and no need for tear gas or water cannons. It
would have been a peaceful walk enroute to the istana or stadium, with
the police lining the route on both sides to provide security and
safety. It's possible to hold peaceful protests in the streets. But,
of course, the government has so little faith in the people, and so
much fear of losing power that they would rather 'play safe' and bring
out all they have in their arsenal to counter any threat, real or
perceived, to protect their status quo.

At the start of the walk to the stadium - peaceful until confronted by
riot police backed by water cannons. Shops could have remained open.
The huge crowds would have generated business for stalls selling food
and drinks, and for buses, trains and taxis. (Photo: Malaysiakini)

BERSIH 2.0 RALLY is the most multiracial

http://patriotikoslogos.blogspot.com/2011/07/soul-searching-for-malaysia-post-bersih.html

Sunday, July 10, 2011
Soul-searching for Malaysia post-Bersih rally
6:31 PM Gay video

Jul 10, 2011
In the morning of July 10, 2011, Petaling Street- the Chinatown of
Kuala Lumpur- is once again bustling with activities. In local
coffeeshops, families sit around one another, while enjoying a typical
Cantonese breakfast of fried noodles and sipping hot cups of kopi-O,
or local black coffee with sugar, as part of their Sunday routine.

If there were any indication that more than 50,000 Malaysians have
marched on the same street seeking for free and fair elections, well,
there are none. There are no reports of public property damage and any
trash left by the prostestors are quickly cleaned up by themselves.

The march on July 9, known as the BERSIH 2.0 rally, has gone down to
history as the country's largest demonstration to-date. It is also, as
many Malaysians have observed; the most multi-racial one. In a country
whereby its political system is largely race-based, this is a big
piece of news to the nation.

Political activists and analysts believe that BERSIH's largest success
is not just its ability to draw a compelling number of citizens to
join in the rally on July 9, but also created awareness to the public
on nation-centric issues that involve Malaysians regardless of creed
or color.

Despite a 22-hour clampdown in the city and crackdown on BERSIH that
saw the arrests of more than 200 individuals before the rally was
held, an estimate of more than 50,000 people were out on the streets
in Kuala Lumpur waving Malaysian flags and chanting "Hidup
Rakyat" (Long Live the People) as they tried to make their way to the
Independence Stadium, which was the main meeting point of the rally.

"We are at the turning point of democracy and a maturing Malaysian
society," says Wong Chin Huat, a political activist and member of the
steering committee of BERSIH, which is made up of a coalition of 62
non-governmental organizations in the country.

BERSIH, which means 'clean' in the Malay language, had its first rally
in 2007 with about 50,000 turnout. The rally became a bellweather of
Malaysian politics and was seen as one of the factors that caused the
ruling coalition, the National Front, to lose five states to the
opposition parties, and be denied two-thirds majority of votes.

Ambiga Sreenevasan, the head of BERSIH 2.0 steering committee and
attorney, says BERSIH 2.0 was formed because of the extensive reports
and evidences found on vote-buying and rigging during the Sarawak
state elections held in April 2011.

"We are not making any headway into any kind of reform to the
country's electoral process. If you want to enjoy public confidence,
you have to make a stand," she says in a foreign press briefing two
days before the rally.

Nevertheless, the ruling government sees BERSIH 2.0 as a head-on clash
and defiance by the people, although the organizers have repeatedly
denied that the purpose of the rally was anti-government.

The crackdown on the rally was most stark on the day itself, which saw
the arrests of 1,667 individuals, including minors. Ambiga and several
politicians were also among those that were arrested. Meanwhile, on
the streets of Kuala Lumpur, police fired tear gas and used water
cannons with chemical-laced water at the demonstrators to stop the
march.

In some instances, the scene turned ugly when the police were caught
on tape firing tear gas into a hospital where some 1,000 demonstrators
were taking refuge. One man died after he had a seizure but citizens
reported that the police refused to remove the cable that was binding
his hands.

In the aftermath of the rally, mainstream media also played down the
event, with some saying that turnout for the rally was insignificant,
while others put the blame on the demonstrators for the chaos in the
city.

Now that the rally is over, a relevant question post-BERSIH is, what's
next?

For BERSIH, as of yesterday, it has yet to submit its memorandum to
the King, although the organizing committee has pledged to keep
pushing for an overhaul in the country's electoral system.

On the other hand, the government may now have some soul-searching to
do. The crackdown on BERSIH, if anything, does the most damage to the
current administration, led by Prime Minister, Najib Razak. Najib has
openly criticized the rally and denied BERSIH the permit to hold the
rally, although BERSIH had already been given the greenlight from the
King.

Had Najib dealt with the situation differently, he could have garnered
support from among the demonstrators for being a reformist, compared
with his Malay peers; and the rally might not have enjoyed as much
prominence.

With the BERSIH 2.0 rally likely to stay etch on voters' minds for
some time, Najib may now have to rely even more on the United Malays
National Organization (UMNO)- the party that he is leading- to
consolidate his power within the party than to win new votes among the
people. And he has started doing so, by giving a fiery speech
denouncing the BERSIH rally the day after.

Najib is likely to still stand a good chance within UMNO and rural
votes as well as from East Malaysia, but this is becoming more of a
case of him winning the war, but losing the battle.

What is most ironic out of this rally is that, BERSIH has managed to
unite Malaysians that Saturday in the name of love and justice for the
country- a feat that Najib's 1Malaysia campaign is still trying to
achieve.

Ulasan Situasi Sebenar Perhimpunan Bersih 2.0

Even more complete analysis of the BERSIH 2.0 MALAYSIAN RALLY

http://oasisofheart.blogspot.com/2011/07/ulasan-situasi-sebenar-perhimpunan.html

Ulasan Situasi Sebenar Perhimpunan Bersih 2.0
atas keizinan tuan punya entry Solihin Zubir, aku copy paste semua ni
untuk bacaan umum. semua orang bercakap tentang Bersih 2.0 sejak
seminggu lalu. aku tak sokong sapa sapa. lantak hang la nak pakai
baju kuning ka merah ka biru ka. bukan niat nak berpolitik di sini
tapi sekadar nak berkongsi apa yang perlu diketahui oleh semua.
please, free your mind.

seperti yang dijanjikan semalam, aku akan buat sedikit ulasan dan
kesimpulan mengenai situasi sebenar perhimpunan Bersih 2.0 yang
diadakan 9 Julai semalam. Sebelum tu, aku nak terang dulu kepada
makhluk-makhluk yang hanya tahu condemn membabi buta tetapi tak tahu
langsung apa itu Bersih 2.0 dan tuntutan yang ingin dilakukan.

Apa itu BERSIH 2.0?

BERSIH adalah singkatan daripada Gabungan Pilihanraya Bersih dan Adil.
BERSIH bukannya sebuah parti politik yang akan bertanding dalam
pilihanraya. BERSIH hanya ingin menuntut proses pilihanraya yang adil.
BERSIH merupakan badan bebas dan tidak mewakili mana-mana parti
politik. BERSIH tidak peduli siapa yang menang dalam pilihanraya,
asalkan ia dijalankan secara adil, saksama, telus dan menurut lunas
perlembagaan. Secara logiknya, orang yang berprinsip sepatutnya
menyokong 8 tuntutan tersebut, samada dari pihak parti pemerintah
mahupun di pihak parti pembangkang.

Kenapa Ambiga?

Ramai yang mempersoalkan kenapa Datuk Ambiga dipilih sebagai pengerusi
Bersih sedangkan dia pernah terlibat dengan isu murtad Lina Joy.
Sehingga ada yang mendesak Ambiga dilucutkan kerakyatan.

Nak tanya.. Adakah jika kita menyokong BERSIH, bermakna kita menyokong
akidah Ambiga? Iran menentang US. Adakah menyokong Iran bermakna kita
menyokong dasar syiah mereka yang sesat? Adakah kita menyokong kelab
bola sepak Manchester United bermaksud kita menyokong akidah player MU
yang kafir itu?

Kita hanya menyokong Ambiga menuntut pilihanraya adil. Jika orang
bukan Islam pun mahukan keadilan, adakah kita sebagai umat Islam hanya
mahu jadi tunggul dan rela dipijak serta ditindas pemerintah zalim?
Malu la sikit.

Kenapa perlu adakan perhimpunan untuk serah memorandum?

Memang boleh jika mahu terus menyerahkan memorandum kepada Sultan
secara individu. Tetapi, pasti akan ada pihak yang mengatakan itu
adalah tuntutan bermotifkan peribadi. Jika mengumpulkan rakyat dalam
satu perhimpunan dan perarakan menyerah memorandum tersebut, impaknya
lebih besar. Kebangkitan rakyat juga dapat dilihat sekaligus memberi
tekanan kepada pemerintah untuk melaksanakan tuntutan tersebut. Selain
itu dapat memberi amaran kepada orang ramai jika tidak mahu situasi
tersebut berulang, haruslah turut sama menyokong tuntutan BERSIH itu
agar dilaksanakan segera. Bukannya memaki hamun.

Perhimpunan aman menjadi huru-hara

Pada mulanya, perhimpunan BERSIH berjaya dijalankan dengan aman.
Rakyat berarak dengan penuh disiplin tinggi. Tidak ada kerosakan,
keganasan dan rusuhan yang berlaku seperti digembar-gembur media.
Tidak ada yang membaling objek atau batu, dan tidak ada siapa pun yang
mencetuskan provokasi. Akan tetapi, pencetus ketegangan dan huru-hara
yang sebenar adalah pihak polis dan FRU, bukannya rakyat. Ramai yang
ditangkap walaupun mereka belum berhimpun.

Apabila rakyat berjaya berhimpun secara aman dan hanya melaungkan
slogan, mereka ditembak dengan gas pemedih mata dan dimandikan dengan
water canon. Sekaligus membuatkan perhimpunan menjadi kucar kacir.
Semestinya mereka terpaksa lari mencari perlindungan. Kemudian, mereka
dikejar, ditangkap dan dipukul tanpa belas kasihan. Dan paling
menyedihkan, ada yang meninggal dunia akibat sesak nafas kerana bom
asap. Inilah punca sebenar keadaan menjadi tegang. Sedangkan kalau
dibiarkan, rusuhan tidak akan berlaku.

Walaupun Yang di-Pertuan Agong perkenan menerima memorandum tersebut,
tapi usaha itu dihalang oleh pihak berkuasa. Siapa yang derhaka pada
Sultan sebenarnya? Kasihan polis dan FRU yang terpaksa bertindak
mengikut arahan pemerintah zalim. Terima kasih kepada sebahagian polis
yang masih berhati perut.

Jalan Sesak / Peniaga Rugi Besar

Semua nak salahkan jalan sesak sebab BERSIH. Yang sebenarnya, jalan
sesak sebab polis buat roadblock, tutup jalan-jalan utama. Perjalanan
LRT juga dihalang. Sama juga dengan rungutan peniaga yang mengadu
mengalami kerugian. Kalau jalan tak ditutup, mesti hasil jualan
melambung dek puluhan ribu penyokong BERSIH yang lapar dan dahaga.
Adakah semua peserta demonstrasi membawa bekal nasi goreng? Sangat
tidak logik mahu mengatakan peniaga rugi besar disebabkan lautan
manusia memenuhi ibu kota. Pintu-pintu masjid pula dikunci sebab apa?
Hingga orang ramai terpaksa solat di merata-rata. Mujur bumi Allah itu
luas. Kewajipan tetap dilaksanakan.

Media Propaganda Putar Belit

Jika dilihat di berita TV3 suku dan akhbar pro-kerajaan, jumlah yang
dilaporkan menyertai perhimpunan tersebut hanya sekitar 5 ribu orang
sahaja. Tujuannya mahu membuktikan usaha kerajaan menghalang rakyat
menyertai perhimpunan tersebut membuahkan hasil. Pujian melambung
diberikan kepada pihak polis dan FRU yang kononnya dapat mengawal
keadaan dengan penuh etika.

Hakikatnya? Perhimpunan tersebut berjaya mengumpul lebih 50,000 rakyat
walaupun pelbagai sekatan, rancangan dan fitnah menggagalkannya
dilakukan. Sakitnya hati bila melihat liputan media propaganda dan
komen-komen pencacai yang sentiasa memutarbelit dan meracun fikiran
rakyat yang tidak mahu ambil tahu hal sebenar dan hanya menyokong
membabi buta. Sangat kasihan.

Semangat Juang Rakyat

BERSIH 2.0 berjaya dilaksanakan walaupun dihimpit dengan pelbagai
halangan termasuk rampasan baju-baju kuning, ugutan daripada pihak
polis dan dolak dalik pemerintah yang sekejap mahu beri permit,
sekejap tidak. Provokasi daripada Perkasa, Patriot dan Pertubuhan
Silat Lincah juga tidak melunturkan semangat. Sedangkan mereka-mereka
itu yang lantang bersuara kononnya mahu duduk di barisan hadapan untuk
menentang BERSIH, tapi langsung tidak kelihatan ketika hari
perhimpunan. Manakala Patriot pula hanya mampu mengumpul sekitar 300
orang sahaja. Itupun terpaksa berlindung di belakang FRU?

Dengan melihat gambar-gambar serta video perhimpunan tersebut, kita
mendapat gambaran bahawa rakyat Malaysia yang mempunyai kesedaran
benar-benar inginkan keadilan dan menyuarakan hak mereka di negara
demokrasi yang dinafikan rejim pemerintah.

An excellent analysis of the BERSIH 2.0 RALLY in Kuala Lumpur

In order to fully understand the issues, you must also know what
BERSIH stands for.
It stands for just electoral reforms.

Especially the removal of clear and proven, proven voters such as dead
people, people in addresses that are confirmed to be not residing
there because it belongs to others voters not related to those
registered, especially when it is the house of the relative of one of
the Member of Parliament. EC has refused to remove that saying that it
is beyond its power.

Since EC cannot remove these names, failure to implement the indelible
ink when it was already bought and delivered is certainly criminal in
intent. Replacing it with a biometric system is just an excuse because
the current system already uses the biometric system but criminally
implemented so that phantom voters are still allowed to vote. Current
Malaysian Identification Cards(ID) uses biometric systems by storing
their thumbprints inside smart cards. Smart cards that are not at all
secure and had been proven to be easily defeated by the numerous fake
identification cards.

Whatever biometric systems that the EC proposes will never be as
effective as the indelible ink, that is already widely used in many
democratic elections without any problem at all.

The fear of indelible ink shows very clearly that phantom voters exist
and the current government uses it widely in order to retain its
power, and worse still, the Election Commission is helping the
government to cheat in all the previous elections.

The leader of BERSIH is Ambiga, a lawyer who defends apostates of
Islam, and wants to introduce laws to allow apostasy among Muslims.
This will be opposed by the majority of Muslims including Anwar's PKR
and the Islamic Party of PAS.

http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/2011/07/10/bersih-rally-revealed-lots-of-truth/

Bersih rally revealed lots of truth
Jeswan Kaur
| July 10, 2011

Going into denial seems to be the only way Najib could think of in
reacting to the Bersih 2.0 rally.
COMMENT

The rakyat who turned up for the Bersih 2.0 rally yesterday were no
criminals. Yet, the police and the Federal Reserve Unit officers
treated them as such, kicking and punching some of the supporters of
the rally.

An eyewitness shared an incident where a young man in his 20s was
pounced upon by no less than 10 policemen who wrestled him down,
twisting his arm.

The ambience that day was one of fright and intimidation with the
police going berserk in preventing the huge crowd from walking up to
the rally venue, the historical Stadium Merdeka.

Everywhere, the environment was polluted with tear gas and water
cannon which the cops splashed with gay abandon at the crowd to force
them to disperse. But all these failed to scare the people.

Indeed, conundrum would best describe the July 9 scenario in the city
centre of Kuala Lumpur. The palpable chaotic situation was certainly
not the people's doing. The rakyat had turned up in good faith to
support the Bersih 2.0 'Walk for Democracy'. The event was messed up
by none other than the police.

Bersih 2.0 in respecting the Yang di-Pertuan Agong Tuanku Mizan Zainal
Abidin's call to maintain peace and harmony agreed to keep away from
the streets and take the rally indoor, to Stadium Merdeka. But no
thanks to the lies and manipulation by Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak,
the Bersih 2.0 organisers were refused all access to the stadium.

The police meanwhile at the 11th hour offered to issue Bersih 2.0 a
permit for the rally provided it was held outside Kuala Lumpur. Why
did Najib and his 'boys' stab Bersih 2.0 in the back, an act typically
reserved for the cowards?

It is not the Bersih 2.0 coalition but the Barisan Nasional government
under Najib and the police who are to be blamed for the chaos that
shrouded Kuala Lumpur for over eight hours on July 9.

From the streets to a closed environment – Bersih 2.0 was cooperating
with the call to stay away from the roads. In fact, Ambiga even asked
the police to map out the routes for it to walk on July 9 but the
thuggie-styled police refused to cooperate.

Was Bersih 2.0 asking for much by requesting that the police cooperate
with it? Why did Najib turn the entire rally into a topsy-turvy affair
and get the Bersih 2.0 key players including chairperson Ambiga
Sreenevasan arrested?

Had Ambiga harboured malicious intentions, she could have ambushed the
government and sprung a surprise by bringing her supporters to the
streets to rally.

However, for all intent and purposes, the 'Walk for Democracy' was
paved with good intentions, that of wanting to raise public awareness
and call for a reform of the electoral system.

Stop blaming Bersih 2.0

The mainstream media went to town reporting how businesses in the city
centre were paralysed because of the rally. Motorists stuck in traffic
jams were quick to blame Bersih 2.0 for the endless hours of delay
they had to endure.

The truth is Bersih 2.0 is not to blame. The truth also is that the
entire scenario was scarred by the police, when it blocked all entry
points to Kuala Lumpur.

How could Najib forget that all Bersih 2.0 wanted was to walk in
solidarity and hand over their memorandum for reforms to the electoral
system Yang di-Pertuan Agong?

The fact of it all is that all that happened on July 9 was dictated by
fear, that too on the part of the BN government and Najib. The fear
of not being able to manipulate the electoral process and find
themselves losing out to their arch enemy, the opposition Pakatan
Rakyat prompted Najib to undertake the least intelligent measure to
halt the rally.

Had the coalition been allowed to use the Stadium Merdeka, there would
have been no complaints from traders of businesses being affected. Why
then conveniently pass the blame to Bersih 2.0 and ask the coalition
if it would shoulder the losses suffered by the traders?

Also, had the police the decency to oblige Ambiga and plan out the
route for the walk, the supporters of democracy could have been spared
the tear gas, water cannons, punching and kicking.
Bersih 2.0 rally a success

The Bersih 2.0 steering committee estimated that 50,000 people had
turned up for its 'Walk for Democracy'. Maybe such a huge turnout is
too much of a failure for the Inspector-General of Police Ismail Omar
to admit, so he went on to claim it was a mere 6,000 who showed up.

To Najib, the number was small. Just how did he deduce this, when the
entire city of Kuala Lumpur had come to a standstill and the IGP had
to bring in just about all his men to unleash their terror on the
supporters?

Going into denial seems to be the only way Najib could think of in
reacting to the Bersih 2.0 rally. Instead, he heaped praise on
participants of the National Cooperatives Day 2011 held in Putrajaya
and said:

"It's obvious that the thousands present today are against the illegal
rally planned by a section of our community. If there are people who
want to hold the illegal rally, there are even more who are against
their plan."

But what a surprise that the premier could not even reveal the number
of participants who attended the National Cooperatives Day 2011. Yet,
it pleased him that they stayed put in Putrajaya, maybe against their
will.

A lot of the truth which the Bersih 2.0 rally has revealed will never
be acknowledged by the Najib administration. One truth is that the
Bersih 2.0 rally succeeded in getting its message across to the
rakyat.

The other truth is that the people are no willing to tolerate the
abuse and corruption the BN government indulges in during elections.

Another truth is that the persecution and repression used by Najib to
get things his way is now passé. The rakyat is all out to seek the
truth and as the July 9 walk showed, the truth is out there.

The chaos and fear of July 9 was all Najib's doing. His band of
Umnoputeras were out to create nothing less than ruckus, as seen from
the showdown at Menara Maybank between Umno Youth and Bersih 2.0 on
the day of the rally.

Likewise, all talks that the 'Walk for Democracy' was spearheaded by
the opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim is bullocks. It was a walk to
reclaim what rightfully belongs to the people, an electoral system
free of manipulation.

As far as Bersih 2.0 is concerned, it is innocent. And it has
succeeded in its mission, all thank you to the rakyat who turned up in
full force yesteday.

FMT photo gallery on Bersih 2.0 rally

Lagi fitnah UMNO terhadap Anwar

Kononnya inilah bukti bahawa Anwar pura pura cedera.
Saya fikir apa tadi. Kalau doktor perlu menggunakan CT, MRI dan 6 jam
pemantauan, ini bererti serious lah ini.

Cuba bayangkan kecederaan yang akan terjadi kalau anda terkena peluru
gas pemedih mata, lalu tersungkur kejalan raya. Kalau ini bukan
percubaan membunuh, apa lagi.

Sila baca komen dalam blog ini. Semuanya mengancam untuk membunuh
Anwar. Konon sudah pasti bahawa Anwar bersalah? Kenapa pula perlu
dibunuh. Gunakanlah mahkamah. Tidak sabar lagi?

Mana dia tuntutan bahawa Anwar gila mahu jadi PM? Kalau mati boleh
jadi PM kah?
Bodoh betul.

http://empayar-pemuda.blogspot.com/2011/07/panas-18sg-cerita-paling-sadis-dalam.html
Nuffnang Ads

* Home

Saturday, July 9, 2011
PANAS 18SG : CERITA PALING SADIS DALAM PERHIMPUNAN BERSIH...

Penasihat Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR)Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim yang
dimasukkan ke Hospital Pantai pada Sabtu disahkan berada dalam keadaan
sihat tanpa mengalami kecederaan serius.

Menurut anaknya Nurul Nuha, perkara itu disahkan doktor selepas ketua
pembangkang itu menjalani ujian pengimbas tomografi berkomputer (CT
scan) dan Pengimejan Resonans Magnetik (MRI).
"Bagaimanapun, doktor memerlukan enam jam lagi untuk memantau
keadaannya," katanya ketika ditemui pemberita di Ibu Pejabat Polis
Kontinjen (IPK) Kuala Lumpur, di sini.

Anwar dikatakan cedera semasa polis cuba meleraikan perhimpunan haram
di KL Sentral yang dihadiri beliau pada Sabtu bersama pengerusi
penganjur Datuk S. Ambiga dan Presiden PAS Datuk Seri Abdul Hadi
Awang.Ambiga dan Abdul Hadi ditahan polis tetapi dibebaskan kemudian. -
BERNAMA

**Confirm kecederaan Anwar ini memerlukan masa untuk sembuh.....dapat
tangguh kes liwatnya lagi...