Sunday, October 28, 2012

Dont Be fooled by MCA Free Dinners.

Chinese voters should not be fooled by MCA recent strategy of giving free dinners.Attend those dinners if its free but dont pay for them.Take whatever gifts they give you but dont buy them.There is no such thing as a free lunch. MCA members and leaders think that giving free lunch or dinners will in return get votes for them.

Young voters who recently register to vote should also persuade their parents not to vote for MCA candidates.Remember that every vote for MCA is a vote for UMNO and every chinese worth his salt should know that a vote for UMNO is a vote for corruption and croynism.
Our country is now at a cross road..If we make the wrong decision to vote MCA again we will continue to be governed by the same racist policies that have plagued this country.And MCA being subservient to UMNO will continue to support that policy.

Look at all the past MCA Presidents. Most if not all are embroiled in scandals that have blemished the chinese community and yet despite such frailities MCA members elected a President who was video taped in a porno movie.. What kind of role model is he providing for our young?This only shows that MCA is morally bankrupt. Their own purpose of existence is to continue to cling to the coat tails of UMNO so that those few MCA members could continue to enjoy the cabinet position and some lucrative contracts that UMNO choose to throw to them.If they have vested interest and are so beholden to UMNO how can they look after the interest of the chinese community?

Chinese and other Malaysians must abandon the idea that only a chinese or their own race can look after their welfare and interest.We must support any leader of any race if that person can look after the interest of all Malaysians.For too long we have been programmed by the B.N govt that only MCA can look after chinese welfare, UMNO can only look after malay interest amd MIC can only look after indian interest. That divide and rule concept can no longer be accepted and allowed to continue. Such a concept will only divide our country into racial and religious compartments which in the end will result in a nation fragmented and disunited.

If you love this country, if you love and cherish the future of your children I urge all Malaysians not to cast one single vote for MCA..Let us bury this MCA monster so that it will not continue to fool the chinese people..

Friday, October 26, 2012

MACC, Bank Negara and B.N Govt Must explain $40 Million cash Transit in Hong Kong.

In Malaysia whenever you exit the country you will notice a sign warning travellers that you have to declare to the customs if you carry cash in excess of $10,000. That is also applicable in most countries to restrict travellers from carrying big amounts of  cash out of the country..Perhaps the only difference is the quantum allowed to be taken out.The sign warning travellers of this notice is not an advisory. It is a criminal offence punishable with a fine ,confiscation and in some circumstances even imprisonment.
Under such circumstance, the Hong Kong ICAC should be transparent and inform publicly the manner and nature of the apprehension of the $16 Million (Singapore Dollars) that was discovered by the Hong Kong's ICAC. And more importantly it should revealed its subsequent investigation as to the fate of the $16 million cash that was purportedly to be taken out from Hong Kong.If indeed there was any transgressions of Hong Kong currency laws then why was no action taken to confiscate , fine or even charge Michael Chia who was the bag carrier.The ICAC is doing a great disservice to its own reputaion by remaining silent on such an important transgression of its currency law.It does not augurs well for its integrity if it is seen to be protecting some important political figure by forgoing further investigation of the money exiting illegitimately from Hong Kong.The ICACC should also provide clarificarion whether there are any provisions in its currency law to defer or exempt prosecution of the offence if the money was for political donations as claimed by our Malaysian Govt?In short, Hong Kong's ICAC cannot evade responsibility in this whole sordid episode by merely refusing to comment . This will only serves to confirm the widely held belief that the ICAC was also a party to the concealment and evasion of the transgression which till todate was not satisfactorily explained.

On our local front, it is unfathomable how our de facto Law minister Nazri could proclaimed proudly that the money was a political donation meant for the coffers of Sabah's UMNO. By declaring the status of the $16 million as political donation , Nazri was naive to think that such a flimsy and idiotic excuse could avoid the guilt of receiving such a huge amount..Did Nazri ponder for a moment that in order to receive such a huge donation, the political party UMNO has to perform certain task in order to earn that money.?And its no secret that UMNO is the power behind the govt. That in essence clearly meant that the money received by Musa Aman or Sabah UMNO was money obtained from corruption.
Our Central Bank, should also be castigated for its flagrant neglect of duty. If they can act swiftly on a $10,000 transgression by ordinary mortals exiting the country why is it dragging its feet on an amount of $16 miillion taken into the country?Does Bank Negara has two laws in the country? One for UMNO and one for the  ordinary rakyat?
Lastly, what can you say when our P.M himself can defend the whole sordid episode by  regurgitating what Nazri had trumpeted. It was for a political donation. It was for Sabah UMNO , he said. That sums up what calibre leader we have at the helm of our country..

Wednesday, October 17, 2012

$23,760,000 a day for the Two AES company?

The recent hasty decision to implement the AES system has caused many Malaysians to wonder which side of the political divide is telling the truth. The Road Transport Department (RTD) has denied that the implementation of AES was aimed at enriching political cronies but instead was for the noble aim of reducing road fatalities and accidents.

Before prejudging the issues Malaysians should focus on some of the pertinent issues and demand an explanation from the Minister of Transport regarding the implementation of the AES system.

1. Why was the AES system implemented in such haste?Were stakeholders consulted prior to implementation?

2. Was any due diligence done to determine the cost and profitabilty of the AES system?

3. Was there any open tender conducted to award the AES contract to eleigible companies?

4. How and on what basis was the ratio of profitabilty being shared between the private company and the govt.?

5.Who are the real owners behind the two companies awarded the contract?

6. Which party initiated the AES system? Minister of Transport or the Road Transport Department. There are many instances where political cronies will approach the minister to implement a scheme and certain portion of the profits will accrue to the minister on the success and implementation of the system.

Among the most pertinent issues that we should pursue with regards to the AES system is the cost and profit that will result in the implementaion of the AES system. Since no statistic has been forthcoming from the Road Transport Department as regards its contract with the two companies we should for the sake of simplicity make estimates that at best reflect the true situation.

Taking Penang as a guide where there are 2.2 million registered motor vehicle owners, let us extrapolate this figure and times the 12 states ( including Federal Territory) to determine the number of registered vehicles. We take the average of 2.2 million ( Road Transport Dept figures) as the average representing all states although some may have more and some perhaps less. At best this is a very conservative estimate. Since our estimate is very conservative it follows that our final result will also be conservative. Since there are 12 states and each state has 2.2 registered motor owners , the total registered owners totalled 26.4 million. Let us further assume that at any point of time 50% of the registered vehicles are mobile on the road.That means an average of 13.2 million vehicles will be plying the road at any given time in all the 12 states where the AES system is implemented.From the 13.2 million let us assume that 2% have committed traffic offence under the AES system. That translate into a figure of 264,000 traffic summonses daily. At the non negotiatiable rate of $300 per summon that translate into a daily figure of $79,200,000 of money collected under the AES system. The share of the two private companies on a daily basis will be 30% of $79,200,000 which translate to an income of $23,760,000 per day. On a yearly basis the income accrued would be $ 8,672,400,000 . And for the duration of the contract which is 66 months the total amount earned would be $47,698,200,000 ( i.e $47billion ,six hundred and ninety eight million and two hundred thousand.)

Please remember that the above figure for the traffic offenders taken was a lowly figure of 2%. If the figure had been 5%, the income earned would be astronomical.

Based on the above figure , is the Road Transport Dept telling us the truth when they say that the implementation of the AES system was not to reap exorbitant profit but to reduce road fatalities.? Let Malaysians be the judge.