Wednesday, September 22, 2010


As posted by Dr. Mahathir Mohamad at Che Det on September 21, 2010 1:50 PM

1. How much is 4 trillion dollars? Star Business picking a report from foreign source says it is the value of Germany's total output for one year.

2. I try to imagine the figure 4 trillion and wrote it down. It is 4,000,000,000,000. It is a lot, a great lot of money. But it is just the amount of dollars traded by the currency traders in just one day.

3. Yes, the currency traders are still at it, worldwide financial crisis notwithstanding.

4. Four trillion dollars worth of business in Germany in one year creates millions of jobs; spawns businesses big, medium and small; move millions of vehicles and trains, support a rich and highly developed Germany and the people of the country and much more.

5. But what does 4 trillion dollars in currency trade do? Apart from enriching a few players, nothing. No jobs are created, no businesses, big, medium or small spin off; no enhancement of international trade, no movements of goods or people, no sailing of ships or flights of aircraft, nothing.

6. 4 trillion a day and there are 365 days a year giving a total of 1,460 trillion or 1,460,000,000,000,000 in a year. So much money. But can we estimate how many of the earth's 6.5 billion people benefit?

7. But currency trading can also do damage to millions and millions of people, destroy whole countries, bankrupt businesses and banks and cause recessions. We know because it happened to us in 1997-98. We know because currency trading is one of the causes of the current crisis.

8. What kind of system is this that permits and protects a few people at the expense of millions of helpless people, their countries, their businesses, their societies and their well-being. Is this what capitalism and free trade is all about?

9. I saw Mike Moore's latest film, "Capitalism - A Love Story", and was appalled by the crudeness of people playing with money.

10. People free from financial problems are persuaded by banks to mortgage their fully paid up homes so that they can have money to invest and make more money. The investments fail and there was no money to redeem the mortgaged home. The banks took posession of the homes and the previous owners were forced to move out. But they had no money left and could not even rent a house, Thus a house-owner is rendered homeless.

11. This did not happen to one person. It happened to millions, The banks now own millions of houses. But nobody has enough money to buy them, nor can they borrow money to buy. Simply put the banks cannot get back the money they had lent and the banks fail. That is part of the story of the subprime loan failure which triggered the current crisis.

12. It is now nearly three years since the current crisis began. Every now and again the experts will claim that the crisis has bottomed out. But then news came that the crisis is still on.

13. Now there is talk of a double-dip, of the recession going on to another recession. This is very likely simply because nothing is being done to stop the activities which led to the crisis. As we can see currency trading is still going on, if anything, on a larger scale. Much of the bailout money, billions of dollars worth, has produced nothing worthwhile. The bankers and their people have used a goodly sum of the bailout money for hefty bonuses, the hedge funds are still active and so is presumably the "leveraging" and many of the gambling that lead to the crisis are still in place.

14. The leaders and their financial advisers in the great capitalist countries have learnt nothing. They continue to support the gambling and the manipulation. They are still influenced by their uncontrolled greed.

15. The worldwide recession will not end until Wall Street ceases to control whatever Government the United States and the United Kingdom may have.


As posted by Dr. Mahathir Mohamad at Che Det on September 17, 2010 9:52 AM

1. One reason advanced by the advocates of letting the Ringgit to be traded abroad is that it will encourage foreign direct investment.

2. There was a time when Malaysia practically pioneered encouragement for foreign direct investment. It was even before FDI became popular with many developing countries as a shortcut to economic growth. Malaysia wanted FDI for job-creating labour intensive industries because of the need to create employment opportunities for its workforce at that time. It was really not about growing the economy.

3. For Malaysia at that time, foregoing taxes and even local participation were not important. The Government did not rely on FDI to fill its treasury.

4. The policy of attracting FDI was so successful that it resolved the problem of unemployment until it created a problem of labour shortage. This led to an inflow of foreign workers and the expatriation of billions of Ringgit back to their countries. FDI no longer helped Malaysia's growth.

5. But being used to this easy approach we keep on inviting FDI believing that it would still help with our economy. But let us look at what really happens when there is foreign direct investment.

6. Most people think that there would be an inflow of capital. But actually only about 10 per cent of the capital needed was brought in. The rest is borrowed from local banks, preferably foreign owned banks. It is therefore Malaysian money that is invested.

7. Apart from tax exemption Malaysia also subsidised the operations of foreign owned companies through subsidised electricity, fuel and domestic transportation. Of course the Malaysian workers contribute through their cheap labour.

8. There is another type of FDI which is even less beneficial. This take the form of investments in the stock market. Usually the objective is not to benefit from profits and dividends but from capital gains.

9. When foreign investors buy Malaysian shares, the prices are likely to appreciate. Foreign institutional investors, especially pension funds can easily push up share prices with their repeated purchases.

10. When the prices are high enough the investors would dump the shares and collect capital gains. The local investors would lose money as prices depreciated.

11. During the financial cirisis of 1997-98, foreign investors dumped their shares so as to quickly change the Ringgit into foreign (US) currency before further falls in the Ringgit would give them less foreign currency in exchange. This invariably caused a steep fall in the share prices and Stock Market Index with consequent losses by local investors.

12. The Malaysian Stock Exchange makes money from commissions or the sales and purchase of shares. Consequently they are happy with more selling and buying on the Exchange. They therefore welcome foreign investors in the market. In fact they believe that if short selling is allowed they will make even more money.But these kinds of market activities do not benefit the nation.

13. FDI is double-edged and caution is needed when deciding on encouraging it. Today FDI is not coming into Malaysia because countries such as China, Vietnam, even Thailand and Indonesia offer lower cost of labour. Besides the economic recession in America and Europe mean less capital is available.

14. But what about the Ringgit? How will it affect the FDI? We need to know whether there was a lowering of FDI due to fixing the Ringgit exchange rate in 1998. If there was, was it directly due to the exchange control or other factors like increase in the cost of labour and competition with the above-mentioned low cost countries?

15. Actually when the Ringgit was fixed at RM3.80 to 1 US Dollar, the cost of investing in Malaysia was lower in terms of foreign currency. Now that the Ringgit has appreciated to RM3.20, the cost has appreciated. If we allow free trading of Ringgit abroad, two things can happen.

16. If the Ringgit strengthens then the cost of investment in Malaysia would increase, This would not facilitate foreign investments.

17. On the other hand the currency traders may once again cause the Ringgit to depreciate. This may result in increased FDI. But remember how we went into recession when our ringgit was devalued by foreign currency traders? Do we want to have that crisis again?

18. The present financial crisis in the world is due to the abuse of regulations in the financial market. No positive steps have been taken so far to regulate it. Certainly currency trading remains unregulated and selective.

19. The latest report says that every day currency trading is valued at four trillion dollars, equal to the total output of Germany in one year.

20. Whereas Germany's 4 trillion dollars yearly output creates millions of jobs, businesses big and small and much trade, the 4 trillion a day currency trade creates practically no jobs, businesses or trade. Of course the currency traders make tons of money. In the process we know that they can cause a repeat of the crisis faced by the world when they lose. Why should the world allow such greedy people to put the world at risk.

21. If we fully free our Ringgit the risk of being attacked by currency traders will once again be faced by us. Do we really want to have the financial crisis once again?

22. So I hope the Government will explain why it wants the Ringgit to be traded again. I hope it is not because we want to be good boys who will always do what we are told to do.


As posted by Dr. Mahathir Mohamad at Che Det on September 14, 2010 6:20 PM

1. Mr Lee Kwan Yew, the Minister Mentor of Singapore is three years my senior. That means he and I practically grew up in the same period of time. That also means that I have been able to watch the progress of Mr Lee, and in fact to interact with him on various occasions.

2. His assertion in his interview with the New York Times that "Race relations (would be) better if Singapore (had) not (been) "turfed out" (of Malaysia) is worth studying. Is it true or is it fantasy?

3. Before Singapore joined the Peninsular, Sabah and Sarawak to form Malaysia, there was less racial politics in the Federation of Malaysia. In 1955 the Malays who made up 80 per cent of the citizens gave a large number of their constituencies to the few Chinese and Indian citizens and ensured they won with strong Malay support. As a result the Alliance won 51 of the 52 seats contested.

4. The Tunku then rewarded this willingness of the Chinese and Indian citizens to support the coalition concept by giving them one million unconditional citizenship. This reduced Malay majority to 60 per cent.

5. In the 1959 elections the Alliance of UMNO, MCA and MIC won easily though Kelantan was lost. PAS with only Malays as members was rejected. Racialism even when implied failed.

6. In 1963 Singapore became a part of Malaysia. Despite having promised that the PAP will not participate in Peninsular, Sabah and Sarawak politics, Kwan Yew reneged and the PAP tried to displace the MCA in the Alliance by appealing to Chinese sentiments in the Peninsular. Of course the slogan was "Malaysian Malaysia" which implied that the Chinese were not having equal rights with the Malays. If this appeal to Chinese sentiments against the Malays was not racial, I do not know what is racial.

7. But the Peninsular Chinese favoured working with the Malays in UMNO. They totally rejected PAP in 1964.

8. Following the Malaysian Malaysia campaign a few UMNO leaders tried to rouse Singapore Malay sentiments. There were demonstrations in Singapore where before there were none. Kwan Yew accused Jaafar Albar for instigating the Singapore Malays. Although I never went to Singapore, nor met the Malays there, I was labelled a Malay-ultra by Kwan Yew himself.

9. By 1965 racism had taken hold and the Tunku was forced to end Singapore's membership of Malaysia. But the seed of Chinese racialism had been sown, so that even after the PAP left, the "Malaysian Malaysia" war cry was picked up by the DAP, an offspring of the PAP.

10. With the background of Singapore's activities in Malaysia in the short three years of its membership, can we really believe that if it had not been "turfed out" race relations would be better in Malaysia?

11. But proof of what would have happened was shown by the politics leading up to the 1969 Election. The MCA began to criticise the Sino/Malay cooperation especially on so-called special rights and demanded for a Chinese University. UMNO then began to clamour for a greater share of the economy of the country. The UMNO/MCA conflict resulted in the Alliance faring very badly in the 1969 Elections.

12. DAP and Gerakan, a new party largely made up of MCA dissidents made gains. The Alliance were shocked and rattled.

13. Then the Gerakan and DAP held their victory parade near the Malay settlement of Kampung Baru, hurling racist insults at the Malays. The result was the 13th May race riots.

14. Till today the racist slogan "Malaysian Malaysia" is the war-cry of the DAP. Racism in Malaysia is clearly the result of Singapore's membership of the country for just three years. Can we really believe that if Singapore had not been "turfed out" Malaysia would have no racial problem.

15. While Kwan Yew talks about his belief that all ethnic communities should free themselves from the shackles of racial segregation in order to promote fairness and equality among the races, he also said that "once we are by ourselves (out of Malaysia) the Chinese become the majority".

16. Singapore's population is made up of 75 per cent Chinese and they own 95 per cent of the economy. It is therefore not a truly multi-racial country but a Chinese country with minority racial groups who are additionally much poorer.

17. In Singapore dissent is not allowed, People who contest against the PAP would be hauled up in court for libel and if they win elections would not be allowed to take their places in Parliament. Whereas in Malaysia opposition parties invariably win seats in Parliament and even set up State Governments (today five out of the 13 States are ruled by the opposition parties) the PAP in Singapore has to appoint PAP members to represent the opposition.

18. Whether the PAP admits it or not, the party has always been led and dominated by ethnic Chinese and have won elections principally because of Chinese votes. The others are not even icing on the cake.

19. If Singapore is a part of Malaysia the PAP can certainly reproduce the Singapore kind of non-racial politics because together with the Malaysian Chinese, the PAP will ethnically dominate and control Malaysian politics. No dissent would be allowed and certainly no one would dare say anything about who really runs the country.

20. Amnesia is permissible but trying to claim that it is because Singapore had been "turfed out" for the present racist politics in Malaysia is simply not supported by facts of history.

21. Lee Kwan Yew and I saw the same things and know the reasons why.


As posted by Dr. Mahathir Mohamad at Che Det on September 14, 2010 8:50 AM

1. Izinkan saya jelaskan pandangan saya terhadap kegunaan dinar emas yang saya cadangkan.

2. Saya telah cadang dinar emas digunakan untuk dagangan antarabangsa sahaja. Saya tidak pernah cadang dinar emas diguna sebagai matawang mana-mana negara untuk kegunaan harian.

3. Walaupun harga emas lebih stabil daripada matawang, tetapi nilai emas juga bergerak. Semasa Perjanjian Brettonwoods satu auns emas bernilai $35 Dolar Amerika. Tetapi sekarang satu auns emas bernilai $1,300 Dolar Amerika. Ini bermakna nilai Dolar telah jatuh degan teruk. Namun untuk dagangan antarabangsa Dolar masih diguna.

4. Jika satu syiling emas diberi nilai 1 Ringgit hari ini umpamanya dan kemudian nilai emas meningkat maka sudah tentu pemilik syiling emas tidak akan gunanya untuk membeli-belah dengan bernilai satu Ringgit. Mereka akan guna wang kertas 1 Ringgit. Syiling emas akan disimpan.

5. Lama kelamaan semua dinar emas yang dikeluarkan oleh pihak berkuasa akan hilang dari pasaran. Walau banyak mana sekali pun pihak berkuasa mengeluar dinar emas akhirnya akan habis emas yang disimpan. Inilah yang berlaku pada Amerika Syarikat yang pada satu masa memiliki 80 peratus daripada simpanan (reserve) emas dunia.

6. Mekanisma yang lain akan diguna untuk dagangan antarabangsa dengan dinar emas. Simpanan matawang emas tidak perlu dalam bentuk syiling tetapi sebagai bata atau jongkong emas yang nilai-nilai akan mengikut harga emas dalam pasaran.

7. Bayaran untuk dagangan akan dibuat oleh bank pusat setelah dihitung nilai eksport dan nilai import antara dua negara. Jika import melebihi eksport maka negara berkenaan akan bayar dengan nota kredit bersamaan jumlah nilai emas sebanyak kelebihan nilai import tolak nilai eksport.

8. Jika pada bulan hadapan eksportnya ke negara berkenaan melebihi nilai import maka bayaran untuk kelebihan ini boleh dibuat dengan nota kredit bulan lepas.

9. Dengan cara ini tidak ada keperluan membayar dengan emas walaupun emas menentukan nilai barangan yang didagangkan. Hanya bayaran dibuat untuk lebih atau kurangnya eksport dengan import secara total dengan negara-negara berkenaan tiap bulan atau minggu. Jika nilai import adalah sama dengan eksport, bayaran tidak perlu dibuat. Ia menjadi dagangan secara barter (tukar barang).

10. Dengan menggunakan emas untuk menentukan nilai dagangan, Dolar Amerika yang jelas tidak stabil tidak perlu digunakan lagi. Permainan oleh penyangak matawang juga akan terhenti.


As posted by Dr. Mahathir Mohamad at Che Det on September 9, 2010 1:45 PM

Saya dan isteri saya mengucapkan Selamat Hari Raya Aidilfitri, Maaf Zahir Batin, kepada semua rakyat Malaysia yang berugama Islam, khususnya kepada pembaca blog ini.

Saya harap semua rakyat Malaysia akan dapat merayakan hari kebesaran ini dengan penuh ketenangan dan kegembiraan, dan tradisi kunjung mengunjung ke rumah terbuka akan diteruskan dalam semangat perpaduan yang erat antara kaum.

Bagi mereka yang pulang ke kampung berhari raya, pandulah dengan cermat. Biarlah lambat sedikit asalkan kita sampai ke destinasi yang dituju untuk beraya dengan orang yang dikasihi.

Saya juga ambil kesempatan ini untuk menjemput kepada yang berkesempatan ke rumah terbuka saya pada hari Ahad, 12hb September 2010 di kediaman saya di 58, Jalan Kuda Emas the Mines, Seri Kembangan bermula dari jam 10.00pg - 1.00tgh dan 3.00ptg - 5.00ptg

Mahathir dan Hasmah

1 Syawal 1431 Hijrah


As posted by Dr. Mahathir Mohamad at Che Det on September 9, 2010 8:30 AM

1. The Government has been urging Malaysian institutions and individuals to be innovative, to do research and invent. For this the Government has allocated over a billion Ringgit to help those doing research and inventing things which can contribute towards greater efficiency in the production of goods and facilitating all kinds of work.

2. I will not talk about how difficult it is to gain access to Government funds. That is a major problem for researchers, especially indiiduals and institutions in the private sector. But when the results are achieved, no one wants to use or apply them.

3. Malaysian business and people generally do not believe Malaysian products are any good at all. Often they would reject outright, simply because they are Malaysian inventions. Since theinventors are not business people and finding money to do the research had already been very difficult, they are not in a position to invest in their products in order to produce the quantities and the standards acceptable to the market. Producing something in the laboratory is not the same as producing on a commercial scale.

4. Sometimes products are rejected by Malaysians even when they are acclaimed in foreign exhibitions and journals. In fact even when foreigners accept these products, the Malaysian inventors cannot penetrate the local market, including Government institutions.

5. We need to have a change in our attitude to Malaysian inventions and products. It should begin with Government institutions. Malaysian medical researchers have produced stainless steel plates for bones. They have not been accepted by Government hospitals probably because they already have long contracts with foreign suppliers. They do not wish to break their relations even for a minor part of the supply. There may be other reasons.

6. The private sector behaves in the same way. They reject almost all the research results of Government research institutions. Private sector research also meet with the same rejection.

7. Obviously if the Government wants Malaysians to innovate, to do research and development, Government institutions should be directed to try out products, schemes or systems developed by Government and private individuals which have a reasonable chance to work. Following that the private sector must do the same.

8. There should also be rewards by the Government when a Government body or private company is prepared to try out inventions and systems researched and developed by Malaysians. The reward should be substantial when the trials prove successful. Tax holidays should be given.

9. As a public service I would like to set up a register of Malaysian inventors which have not been given opportunities to prove their products either by the Government or the private sector. I will try to contact relevant agencies or companies which may be interested in the inventions or systems.

10. For those wishing to register, please give;

a) Name and Address

b) Product

c) Stage of development

d) Funding and help required.

Please email all these details to

11. I cannot promise the results but I think the Government would be interested to know how people have responded to Government's call to innovate, invent and use Malaysian products. Knowing this perhaps the Government would instruct relevant officers and departments to be more accomodating when asked for help and consideration.


As posted by Dr. Mahathir Mohamad at Che Det on September 8, 2010 12:39 PM

1. The Sultan Abdul Hamid College in Alor Setar is the alma mater of many who have done well in life. Of course there are the two Prime Ministers, but there are also Ministers, business tycoons, professionals in every field and heads of many Government Departments at State and Federal levels.

2. All must remember the fun and games and the great days of schooling. And many must be nostalgic about those days of youth, uncomplicated by the need to struggle for a living. Of course there were exams to get through and that can be a bore - except when you happen to be a distinction kid.

3. I think it is payback time now. Not many schools have hit the century. But in 2008, SAHC became 100 years old.

4. To commemorate this event it was decided to build a Dewan Centennial. The only problem is money. We need money to make this dream a reality. But suddenly we are made aware that everyone, every old boy and (old) girl is poor. No donations have been forthcoming.

5. But I don't think we are so poor that we cannot donate a month's income over a period of 2-3 years.

6. Easy to say but what about you? Well my pension is half my last drawn pay. That makes it RM10,000 per month. In a generous mood I will give RM20,000. Maybe more later, Insya'allah.

7. So how about it? Don't pledge. Just give. Anything less than one million Ringgit will be accepted.

8. Please make out crossed cheque to SAHOCA Centennial Fund c/o Kolej Sultan Abdul Hamid, 05460 Alor Setar.

Mahathir bin Mohamad

Class of 1946


As posted by Dr. Mahathir Mohamad at Che Det on September 3, 2010 10:00 PM

1. America has a strong grudge against Iran ever since the Islamic revolution when personnel in the United States' embassy were incarcerated in Iranian jails for a very long period. Attempts to rescue them failed miserably when helicopters carrying a special force crashed.

2. Because America supported and sustained the autocratic and oppressive rule of the Shah, the Iranian revolutionaries labeled the United States as Satan.

3. As usual the US resorted to economic sanctions. Reserves belonging to Iran held in America were frozen.

4. However the sanctions could only be effective if the rest of the world followed suit. To get the world to back the sanctions, America has been building up a case against Iran for attempting to produce nuclear weapons.

5. Although Iran has a lot of oil, it does not have adequate refining capacity. It needs to import gasoline and Turkey has been one of the suppliers. Malaysia too has been supplying gasoline to Iran.

6. America would very much like to invade Iran and engineer a regime change. But America's experiences in Afghanistan and Iraq have shown that military invasion is not only extremely costly but will cause America to be stuck in endless war. So America is trying to do it on the cheap by strangling Iran economically.

7. America has been known to tell lies in order to launch attacks against weak countries. The stories about Iran being about to produce nuclear weapons are no different from the stories about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction. They are invented to get the world to support America's revenge against Iran.

8. Even the simple-minded must know that America has more than 10,000 nuclear warheads. Should any small country use nuclear weapons the Americans would not hesitate to erase that country from the world map with the nuclear weapons in America's arsenal. I don't think the Iranian leaders are so dumb that they would take this risk.

9. But the story that it might can convince the world that Iran is a threat and it must be strangled through sanctions so that it would not be able to develop such weapons. Sanctions against countries are inhuman. Sanction against Iraq caused the death of 500,000 children and thousands more were born deformed. Sanctions is a means of slow genocide. This is the preferred weapon of the United States since it dares not invade Iran. The United States' action is entirely in the interest of revenge against a country that had defied it in the past. It is not about saving the world from an Iranian nuclear war.

10. Governments of other countries should remember this background to America's anti-Iranian stance. They should not allow themselves to be used by the Americans to avenge their humiliation in the past. Governments of other countries should remember that in collaborating with the United States they are participating in the killing of children and innocent people of Iran. It is heartening to note that Turkey has now decided not to kill Iranians by lifting the ban on the export of gasoline to Iran.


As posted by Dr. Mahathir Mohamad at Che Det on August 30, 2010 1:00 PM


1. I dislike to return to this subject but I need to explain myself.

2. I was prompted to write about the racism in meritocracy because of the reaction to Malay criticisms against the ideas coming out of the Chinese Economic Congress.

3. The leader who made the statement on doing away with quotas etc said that cannot we discuss anything without (the Malays) raising racial issues. He apparently considers his call for meritocracy was not racial.

4. It is racial beause he was advocating taking away the protection afforded by the NEP and quotas from the bumiputras and not from any other race. Obviously he believes that without these protections the bumiputera would lose against the non-bumiputera.

5. As much as giving protection to one race is racial, taking it away from that race so as to benefit another race must also be racial. The suggestion coming as it did from a racially exclusive economic congress must be because it is in the interest of that race. That must be racial even though the demand is for meritocracy.

6. I am not proud of the protection afforded the bumiputera. It implies weakness. I don't think Malays and other bumiputera like to think that they are inferior in any way.

7. But the reality is that in Malaysia the bumiputeras need new skills and a new culture even. These cannot be had by them in a mere 20 years. The original planners of the NEP were too optimistic.

8. I had suggested merit for university entrance in order to shock the bumiputera into getting serious about their education and their own future. However it did not work.

9. In education whereas there is about 60% bumiputera in the Government universities, there are less than 10% in the private universities. And there are more private universities, university colleges and colleges than there are public (Government) universities. Even the 10% bumiputera are there because of scholarships by MARA. Take the scholarships away and there would be practically none.

10. Why is it that the focus is only on what is done by the Government? If the bumiputera in Government universities should be reduced, then the bumiputera in the private universities should be increased. Or else meritocracy would reduce the number of bumiputeras getting university education. Or is it the intention to deny bumiputeras higher education? They are not the best but they are qualified.

11. It is the same with foreign universities. Because they can afford it there are more non-bumiputera than bumiputera in foreign universities. This must increase the disparities in higher education between different races.

12. Lest I be accused of making unfounded assumption, a proper audit should be done by an impartial team.

13. When I was still PM, the Government decided to allow for private colleges and universities to be set up. They can twin with recognised foreign universities and should issue their diplomas and degrees. The reason for allowing private institutions of higher learning is to reduce cost of tertiary education so that the parents who could not afford to send their children abroad can have access to foreign qualification from local private institutions. You can guess who are the beneficiaries of this Government policy.

14. As for contracts even with the 5% advantage given to bumiputera contractors, many of the Government contracts do not go to them because of their lack of capacity. Even if they do get, non-bumiputera contractors get most of the sub-contracts etc.

15. Actually construction by the private sector is bigger than the public sector. In the private sector the bumiputera contractors get next to nothing. I suppose this is because the private contracts are given based on merit. Or maybe it is not. I don't know.

16. Take away the minor protection afforded by the NEP and the bumiputera will lose whatever that they may have. Then racial division will be deepened by wealth division. I don't think this would be good for the country. Remember it was the disparity between rich and poor in Europe which led to the violence of the Communist revolution.

17. I may be labelled a racist but fear of the label will not stop me from working for what I think is the good of the country. Nothing will be gained by dividing the people of Malaysia into poor bumiputera and rich non-bumiputera. The time is not right for disregarding the disparities between the races in the interest of equity and merit.

18. For 46 years this country enjoyed relative stability and consequently good growth. But today the races are more divided than ever. Everyone has become racist, talks about meritocracy notwithstanding. Everyone is thinking about his own race. If I am included it is because I think it is dangerous for the rich to take away what little the poor has.


As posted by Dr. Mahathir Mohamad at Che Det on August 24, 2010 5:28 PM

1. In 1964 Malaysia held its first elections. The Tunku had an understanding with the Chief Minister of Singapore, Mr Lee Kwan Yew that the PAP (People Action Party) would contest only in Singapore and would stay out of the rest of Malaysia. It was really not a smart kind of agreement. It was not put on paper at all. Only an understanding between two leaders.

2. It was not surprising that the PAP decided to contest in the peninsular. Lee had expected the Malaysian Chinese who had been represented in the Government only by the MCA could be persuaded to support him. If he defeated the MCA then the Tunku would replace the MCA with the PAP in the Alliance.

3. The PAP is a Chinese party largely. But it had always projected itself as non-racial. To win in Malaysia he had to appeal to Chinese chauvinism. However he could not do this openly.

4. Being the astute politician that he is, Lee came up with a slogan which did not sound chauvinistic but which played up Chinese sentiments to the core. The slogan was "Malaysian Malaysia".

5. While appearing to be appealing for all Malaysians the slogan was clearly suggesting that there was no equality between the Chinese and the Malays. He and his party was made out to be fighting for equality between the Chinese and the Malays, whereas the MCA represented only the Chinese towkays.

6. The Malays were alarmed at the prospect of the Peninsular Chinese combining with Singapore, Sabah and Sarawak Chinese to outnumber them. Split as they were between PAS and UMNO, their chances of continuing to dominate Malaysian politics was at risk.

7. Strangely the PAP bid failed against the MCA. But the Tunku was shocked and decided that Singapore's inclusion in Malaysia posed great danger. One year after the election Singapore was expelled. But the PAP chauvinistic legacy was taken up by the DAP. And the slogan "Malaysian Malaysia" continued to figure in Malaysian politics, evolving into a new catchword, "Meritocracy". If "Malaysian Malaysia" conjures equality between races, "Meritocracy" implies something stronger. It implies dominance by the race with the greatest merit in every field; in education, in business and in all fields of human endeavour.

8. When the Malays, understanding the implications, protest against meritocracy, they were condemned as racists. Faced with being labelled as such, most Malays dared not support even the NEP. Some, perhaps due to mistaken pride have begun to support meritocracy, undermining the Malay position further.

9. Today we see a lot of Malay NGOs trying to defend the Malay position. Invariably they have been labelled racists. The unfortunate truth is that those who labelled them are equally racists because of their advocacy of meritocracy.

10. It is the same with political party which appeal on the basis of the religion of Islam. In Malaysia the Malays are all Muslims. There are quite a large number of Indian Muslims in Malaysia but they do not figure in the political party said to be Islamic. The party, by using Islam, knows full well they are appealing to Malays almost exclusively. But the intention is not to defend the Malays but merely to gain their support. One can say they are not Malay racists. Rather they are Malay political opportunists.

11. That is why they find no difficulty in switching tactics in order to win the support of the non-Malays. Where before they condemn UMNO for working with non-Muslims, today their co-operation with non-Muslims knows no bounds.

12. The difference between UMNO and the other parties is that UMNO is openly partisan, not hiding its concern for the well-being of the Malays. Unfortunately because of mismanagement it has become weak. That is why today we have Perkasa and other Malay NGOs who are as openly concerned about the Malays as the UMNO once was. The condemnation by those said to be advocating meritocracy is because they see the racism of the meritocrats, just as the Malays of 1964 saw the racism of "Malaysian Malaysia".

13. What we are seeing today is not a campaign against racism but a campaign by racists against racists. The meritocrats are as much racists as the Malay NGOs, and Perkasa.

14. Incidentally by writing this I know the meritocrat racists will condemn me as racist. So be it.



1. Pada tahun 1964, Malaysia telah mengadakan pilihanraya umum yang pertama. Tunku dan Ketua Menteri Singapura Lee Kwan Yew bersetuju supaya PAP (Parti Tindakan Rakyat - People's Action Party pimpinan Kwan Yew) hanya bertanding di Singapura dan tidak di mana-mana kawasan di Semenanjung Malaysia. Ianya bukanlah satu perjanjian yang bijak. Tidak pun dimeterai secara rasmi. Hanya persefahaman di antara dua orang pemimpin.

2. Tidak mengejutkan PAP kemudiannya memutus untuk bertanding di Semenanjung. Lee menjangkakan yang kaum Cina Malaysia yang diwakili di dalam Kerajaan oleh parti MCA dapat di galakkan untuk menyokong beliau. Jika MCA Berjaya dikalahkan, Lee percaya Tunku akan gantikan MCA dengan PAP di dalam Perikatan.

3. PAP ialah sebuah parti yang didominasi kaum Cina. Tetapi ia sentiasa mengetengahkan ianya sebagai parti yang tidak berlandaskan kaum. Untuk menang di Malaysia dianya mesti menarik sokongan chauvinis Cina. Ini tidak dapat dilakukan secara terbuka.

4. Sebagai ahli politik yang cekap, Lee memperkenalkan slogan yang tidak terlalu berbaur chauvinis tetapi tetap menyemarakkan sentimen Cina. Slogan tersebut ialah "Malaysian Malaysia".

5. Sementara ianya ternampak menarik bagi semua rakyat Malaysia, slogan tersebut sebenarnya menarik perhatian kepada tidak adanya kesamarataan antara kaum Cina dan kaum Melayu. Dia dan partinya diketengahkan sebagai memperjuangkan kesamarataan antara Cina dan Melayu, manakala MCA hanya mewakili golongan towkay Cina.

6. Orang Melayu berasa cemas akan kemungkinan penyatuan kaum Cina di Singapura, Sabah dan Sarawak akan menyebabkan orang Melayu menjadi kaum minoriti. Perpecahan di antara PAS dan UMNO menyebabkan peluang orang Melayu untuk terus mendominasi politik di Malaysia menghadapi risiko.

7. Yang anehnya PAP gagal dalam cubaannya menentang MCA. Tetapi Tunku amat terkejut dan memutuskan yang penyertaan Singapura di dalam Malaysia membawa bahaya. Setahun selepas pilihanraya, Singapura disingkir. Tetapi legasi chauvinis PAP ini diteruskan oleh DAP. Slogan "Malaysian Malaysia" terus dimainkan di dalam politik Malaysia, dan berubah menjadi satu perkataan yang baru, "Meritokrasi". Jika "Malaysian Malaysia" membawa makna kesamarataan antara kaum, "Meritokrasi" membawa maksud yang lebih keras. Ianya bererti dominasi oleh sesuatu kaum yang mempunyai merit di dalam setiap lapangan; di dalam pendidikan, perniagaan dan semua lapangan yang diceburi manusia.

8. Apabila orang Melayu, memahami akan akibatnya, mula menentang meritokrasi, mereka dicerca sebagai bersifat perkauman. Kerana tidak mahu dilabel sedemikian, ramai orang Melayu tidak berani menyokong Dasar Ekonomi Baru. Ada sesetengah, mungkin kerana sikap bodoh sombong, mula menyokong meritokrasi dan menekan lagi kedudukan orang Melayu.

9. Hari ini kita lihat banyak NGO Melayu bangkit mempertahankan kedudukan orang Melayu. Dan semestinya mereka ini dilabel sebagai bersifat perkauman. Malang sekali, sebenarnya yang melabel mereka ini juga bersifat perkauman kerana sokongan mereka terhadap meritokrasi.

10. Sama juga dengan parti politik yang meraih sokongan menggunakan agama Islam. Di Malaysia, orang Melayu kesemuanya beragama Islam. Terdapat juga sebilangan besar kaum India Muslim di Malaysia tetapi mereka ini tidak berperanan dalam parti politik yang dikatakan parti Islam ini. Dengan mengguna Islam, parti ini sedar yang ianya hanya untuk menarik secara eksklusif sokongan orang Melayu. Niat mereka hanya untuk meraih sokongan orang Melayu dan bukan untuk mempertahan kedudukan orang Melayu. Mereka ini boleh dikatakan bukan bersifat perkauman pro-Melayu. Tetapi mereka mengambil kesempatan politik ke atas orang Melayu.

11. Itulah juga sebab kenapa mereka tidak punyai masalah menukar taktik untuk menarik sokongan bukan Melayu. Jika dulu mereka mencerca UMNO berkerjasama dengan bukan Islam, hari ini kerjasama mereka dengan bukan Islam tiada batasan.

12. Perbezaan di antara UMNO dan lain-lain parti ialah UMNO secara terang menyebelahi sesuatu pihak, tidak menyembunyi akan perjuangannya untuk kebajikan orang Melayu. Malangnya kerana kelemahan urusan pentadbiran ianya menjadi lemah. Sebab itulah hari ini ada Perkasa dan lain-lain NGO Melayu yang secara terbuka memperjuangkan nasib Melayu sebagaimana UMNO terdahulu. Pencercaan oleh golongan menyokong meritokrasi ialah kerana mereka melihat NGO Melayu bersifat perkauman, sebagaimana orang Melayu pada tahun 1964 melihat sifat perkauman dalam "Malaysian Malaysia".

13. Yang kita lihat hari ini bukanlah kempen menentang sifat perkauman tetapi kempen oleh pejuang perkauman menentang pejuang perkauman yang lain. Penyokong meritokrasi juga bersifat perkauman sebagaimana NGO Melayu dan Perkasa.

14. Sehubungan itu saya juga akan dicerca sebagai bersifat perkauman oleh pejuang meritokrasi yang bersifat perkauman. Biarkan.


As posted by Dr. Mahathir Mohamad at Che Det on August 19, 2010 4:40 AM

1. I hate to return to this subject but since the Malaysian papers carry no news about Blair, Malaysians generally consider Blair as another great Prime Minister of the United Kingdom.

2. Currently the British Government had set up an enquiry commission under Sir John Chilcot to look into the background of Britains war against Iraq.

3. Blair had been called to explain why he supported America in the war against Iraq. He claimed there was "some intelligence evidence about loose links between Al Qaeda and various people in Iraq - it would not be correct to say there is no evidence whatever of linkages between Al Qaeda and Iraq".

4. The former MI5 (Intelligence) Chief, Lady Eliza Manningham Buller, facing the same Chilcot Inquiry revealed that MI5 had sent a memo in March 2002 to the Permanent Secretary to the Home Office (Ministry of Home Affairs) telling him "that Saddam was not likely to use chemical or biological weapons unless he felt the survival of his regime was in doubt". The memo went on to say, "We assess that Iraqi capability to mount attacks in the United Kingdom is currently limited".

5. Manningham Buller also told the Chilcot Inquiry that "There was no credible intelligence to suggest that connection (Iraq and Al Qadea) and that was the judgment, I might say, of the CIA".

6. Blair had told Parliament on 10 April 2002 that "Saddam Hussein is developing weapons of mass destruction, and we cannot leave him doing so unchecked. He is a threat to his own people and to the region and, if allowed to develop these weapons, a threat to us also".

7. To this Manningham Buller said, "We regarded the direct threat from Iraq as low - we didn't believe he had the capability to do anything in the United Kingdom".

8. With regard to terrorist attacks in Britain, Blair had told a labour party conference, 26 Sept 2006 - "This terrorism isn't our fault. We didn't cause it. It is not the consequence of our foreign policy".

9. "If I am asked whether I believe we are safer, more secure, that Iraq is better, that our own security is better, I believe we are. The world is safer as a result".

10. To this the former head of MI5 said "Our involvement in Iraq radicalised a generation of young people (in Britain) who saw our involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan as an attack on Islam. We (MI5) were pretty well swamped - with intelligence on a broad scale that was pretty well more than we could cope with in terms of plots, leads to plots and things that we needed to pursue".

11. Manningham Buller also asserted that, "We gave Osama bin Laden his Iraqi jihad so that he was able to move into Iraq in a way that he was not before".

12. The British look down on Blair and forced him to resign because he is an inveterate liar. Some Malaysians think he is the fountain of wisdom!


As posted by Dr. Mahathir Mohamad at Che Det on August 16, 2010 7:55 AM

1. I am merely a Malay Muslim who once led a Third World country. I therefore do not understand democratic politics, the rule of law and justice.

2. And therefore when Anwar the great statesman and my deputy in the Government and the party, challenged me, I charged him with sodomy, beat him up severely and put him in solitary confinement for years.

3. Strangely for this cruel leader, when he was earlier attacked by another deputy who then collaborated with his own political enemy to challenge me in the 1986 elections, they were not charged with sodomy or anything and thrown into jail. One was actually made a special Malaysian representative to the United Nations with Ministerial rank while the other was free to form a splinter party, collaborated with opposition parties and contested against me in 1990 and 1995. This must have been an oversight by me. In fact one of them who supported the move to overthrow me, was actually chosen by me to be Deputy Prime Minister and succeeded me as Prime Minister.

4. Anwar was jailed by the courts for sodomy and abuse of power. But of course Malaysian courts take orders from me when I was Prime Minister.

5. Could it be that his "acquittal" after I stepped down was also due to influence? God knows.

6. And then Anwar was once again charged with sodomy during the time of the PM when he was "acquitted". It is very unimaginative of the Government of the time to make the same charge. A smart Government would think up of something else more credible.

7. But this was still a brown-skinned Malay Government which just cannot be smart. Or could it be that it was actually the victim of anal rape who decided to tell things as they happened? I would like to say we should wait for the court to decide, but that can take a very long, long time or even never. The delay must be due to Malaysian courts taking orders from the Prime Minister so that Anwar would be able ot challenge the Government Party in the coming election.

8. Whatever, Malaysians must take heed of the advice by the great leaders of the United States of America, a truly democratic country which democratically exercises veto power in the United Nations, ignored the UN on Iraqi invasion, lies about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, uses bombs and cluster bombs and depleted uranium shells and bombs, kill hundreds of thousands of innocent Afghans and Iraqis, arrests and detains just about any Muslim without trial and without benefit of any law, legalised torture of detainees, and supports internationally illegal acts by its allies. Malaysians must never reject the advice of the great leaders of the United States of America, a country dedicated to killing people so they can enjoy democratic rights.

9. Thank you Mr Gore and thank you Mr neocon Wolfowitz, Anwar's friend, adviser of Bush on the shock and awe invasion of Iraq which now enjoys so much peace and prosperity that thousands are regularly being blown to kingdom come.

10. We the Malay Muslims must democratically choose your bosom pal as leader of our country. After all he has been accused only of doing what you normally do in your great country.


As posted by Dr. Mahathir Mohamad at Che Det on August 12, 2010 2:21 PM

1. Israel has consistently refused to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. When accused of having nuclear weapons Israel refused to either admit or deny the fact.

2. The international edition of the Guardian (British paper) of 24th May 2010 under the headline, "Revealed : How Israel offered to sell South Africa the bomb" reported that secret document made available to an American researcher Sasha Polakow Suransky, revealed that "in 1975, South Africa's Defence Minister, P.W. Botha asked for the warheads and Shimon Peres, then Defence Minister, now its President responded by offering them "in three sizes."

3. This document proves that Israel has nuclear weapons. Israel claims that "if" it has nuclear weapon, it is a "responsible" power that would not misuse them, whereas countries such as Iran cannot be "trusted".

4. One wonders about Israeli claim to be a responsible power when the whole world knows that Israel very often attack Palestinian villages such as Jenin and the Gaza strip during which bombs, rockets and missiles are used and bulldozers destroy houses while the occupants are still in it. Israel also builds settlements on Palestinian land, completely ignoring the resolutions of the United Nations. It had also built a wall through Palestinian villages, roads through Palestinian land which the Palestinians are not allowed to use, mount road-blocks in Palestinian territory. Are these the acts of a "responsible power" which can be trusted not to misuse nuclear weapons.

5. And lately the attack against the Mavi Marmara and the brutal killing of nine Turkish aid workers in international waters illustrate the kind of that cannot be associated with responsibility for a nation.


As posted by Dr. Mahathir Mohamad at Che Det on August 9, 2010 8:04 PM

1. Recently I had occasion to talk to a group of former state and federal members of the Barisan Nasional.

2. I had extolled on the virtues of the BN coalition type of Government and the achievements under the BN Government at State and Federal levels.

3. Then came question time. Very sensible questions were posed by these ex-YB's and I managed to answer them reasonably well.

4. Then an ex-MP or State Councillor rose and pointed out that under the Opposition Government he sees more Chinese holding high posts in the Government. The component parties also seem to be working much closer with each other. As an example, PAS women members not only attended the funeral of a Chinese but also helped to fold the paper money usually scattered at Chinese funerals.

5. Why is it that the BN did not give more posts to the Chinese and appoint Chinese Deputy PM and assistants to the state MB's? Why is Umno less tolerant of Chinese religious ceremonies?

6. I was startled by this criticism of the BN by an ex-member of the State or Federal BN Government. Do I answer truthfully or do I skip and gloss over things in order not to sound racist? But then in asking the question, isn't the questioner being racist?

7. After the forum I debated with myself and finally decided that I must give the true reason for the fewer positions given to the Chinese in the BN Governments, and Umno appears to be less accommodating of Chinese religious practices.

8. The NEP has been on now for almost 40 years, far longer than originally planned. Admittedly the Malays had been at fault because they did not make correct use of the opportunities created for them in the NEP. But whatever the reason, the Malays have not gained for themselves the 30% target in corporate ownership even. But more than that if a proper audit is made their wealth is even less than 30% of total wealth of the people of Malaysia. Most of the wealth of the country belongs to the Chinese. It can also be said that the Chinese control the economy of the country.

9. In the political field the Malays appear to be in control. Most of the high posts i.e. PM, MB etc are held by the Malays. If these posts are held by the Chinese, then not only will the economy be under Chinese control but the political arena would also be under the Chinese. What will be the Malay stake in the country?

10. The NEP is about giving the Malays a fair stake in the economy of the country. Should they get this then they should be ready to relinquish a commensurate amount of control in the political field. Since they have not gained a fair share in the economy, then they should be allowed to retain this greater share in politics. If PAS appears to be more accommodating of Chinese religious practices, it is simply because it wants Chinese votes. Remember at one time PAS condemned Umno for having MCA as a partner. Now PAS is willing to accept DAP as a partner. It is political hypocrisy, not sincere partnership.

11. I am talking about racial issues simply because my questioner raised racial issues. It is said that the poor showing of the BN in 2008 was because the people of Malaysia were sick of racial parties and racial politics. I doubt it. Since 2008 there have been more talks about race than previously. And my questioner has illustrated this amply. Race is still very clearly an issue in Malaysian politics.

12. If PAS is extremely supportive of the Chinese today, it is not because the party has become disaffected with race and religion. It is simply because it wants to play up Chinese racial sentiments in order to win Chinese votes.

13. Hypocrisy is very much alive in Malaysian politics.


As posted by Dr. Mahathir Mohamad at Che Det on August 4, 2010 9:00 AM

1. There is something strange about the behaviour of Israel towards Gaza. Arrogance is of course a part of the Israeli character but beyond that they seem to have a long term plan. On the excuse that rockets had been fired at Israel from Gaza, Israel invaded that strip of Palestinian land, killing 1,400 Gazans, wounding many more and razing to the ground 20,000 homes, over 100 schools, hospitals and other Government buildings.

2. International pressure apparently forced Israel to stop the carnage and to withdraw from Gaza. A kind of peace appeared to have been established and numerous countries pledged billions to rebuild Gaza. After that, news about Gaza ceased to appear in the media and the assumption was that the pledges of aid were being honoured and rebuilding was in progress.

3. After months of silence in terms of media coverage, it was discovered that Israel had blocked aid material and aid workers from entering Gaza. Supported by Egypt, the border between that country and Gaza was closed. The crossing point at Rafah was guarded by Egyptian security personnel and only limited supplies were allowed to pass.

4. Then an NGO group called the Free Gaza Movement sent small boats to Gaza with supplies of food and medicine. Two or three boats got through but after that, of two other boats which tried, one was rammed by an Israeli naval ship, throwing the passengers and supplies into the sea. The other was boarded by Israeli commandos and forced to go to Ashdod port in Israel. The occupants were later released but nothing is known about what happened to the aid supplies.

5. It is clear that Israel with the support of Egypt was carrying out a siege of Gaza. Deprived of medical supplies and exposed in make-shift shelters to the harsh winters, many of the sick and wounded, the old and the small children died.

6. Hearing of the siege, the PGPO (Perdana Global Peace Organisation) of Malaysia suggested that a flotilla of passenger and cargo ships be sent to Gaza. In May 2010 the flotilla set sail but while the boats were still on the high seas, Israeli commandos attacked and killed nine Turkish aid workers on the Mavi Marmara, and injured many others.

7. The boats were forced by the Israeli warships to sail to Ashdod in Israel where the aid workers were detained but were subsequently allowed to make their way back to their own countries.

8. The boats remained at Ashdod. The Israelis reported that they themselves had sent the aid material to Gaza. How much of the material was sent is not known but certainly the Israelis found no weapons of any kind in the cargo carried by the boats. Otherwise they would have invited the world press to show these weapons as proof that the mercy workers were terrorists.

9. Since then Israel has threatened to regard any aid ship from Iran as warships and would attack them, while a Libyan ship with medicine and food is also threatened.

10. Why is Israel doing this? The ships never entered Israeli waters on the way to Gaza and there has been no evidence that weapons were carried. Nor were the people accompanying the cargo in any way connected with "terrorists". There were old women and babies among the people on the MV Mavi Marmara.

11. But it is not only Gaza that the Israelis have put under siege. All the territories that should be under the so-called Palestinian Authority have also been made inaccessible.

12. When I and my small entourage tried to go to Palestine to see the destroyed village of Jenin and to go to Jerusalem, Israelis manning the border between Jordan and Palestine delayed us for more than two hours and so prevented us from seeing Jenin or going to Jerusalem as we had to leave Palestine by 6.00pm. It seems that Israel does not want visitors to visit Palestine and see what the Israelis are doing to Palestinian land.

13. As is well known, Israeli settlements have been built all over Palestinian territory. In addition roads were built which the Palestinians were not allowed to use. A high wall has been built not to separate Israel from Palestine but to break up the villages of the Palestinians.

14. The Palestinian Authority is an anomaly. The UN in 1948 had divided Palestine between the Jews and the Arabs to create two states - Israel for the Jews and Palestine for the Palestinian Arabs. The Arabs were hounded out of Israeli territory through threats of massacre as happened in Deir Yassin.

15. There should therefore be two states on Palestinian land - Israel and Palestine. But after the 6-day war launched by Israel supposedly because it feared attacks by Arab States, much of the Palestinian territory, including Gaza and the West Bank were occupied by Israel.

16. Even then after the attacks were stopped there should still be a state of Palestine on the parts not occupied by Israel. Somehow or other the state of Palestine ceased to exist. Instead there was created the Palestinian Authority and the world seem to accept this as a fait accompli.

17. During World War II much of France was occupied by Germany but the state of France continued to exist having its capital in Vichy. There is no reason why the state of Palestine could not exist even if its territory is much diminished. But the fact is that there is now no Palestine but only a Palestinian Authority.

18. With this the state of Palestine ceased to exist. However, despite the many Jewish settlements built on the remaining Palestinian land, despite obvious evidence of Israeli rule over much of Palestine such as Israeli check-points and control of Palestinian borders together with roads through Palestinian land reserved for Israelis, the world still thinks that there is Palestine and Palestinian land.

19. Although there is a Palestinian Authority, it has in fact no authority over any Palestinian land at all. The Israelis are free to do what they like in places said to be under the Palestinian Authority. Even the collection of taxes are done by the Israelis. At one stage the Israelis refused to hand over the taxes they collected to the Palestinian Authority.

20. Democracy was promoted as a solution to the Palestinian issue after Fatah was persuaded to go along with U.S. plans for a peace solution. However when elections were held Fatah lost to Hamas. Despite all the beliefs in democracy, the U.S. supported Israel in not allowing Hamas to form the Government of Palestine. Instead Fatah was recognised as the Government.

21. Frustrated by U.S hypocrisy Hamas set up a government in Gaza. Even though the Hamas Government was denied jurisdiction over all Palestinian territories, there was no way to dislodge its rule in Gaza.

22. The implication is that whereas the Israelis can build settlements and rule the part of Palestine supposedly under the Palestinian Authority, it cannot do the same in Hamas controlled Gaza. Israel must therefore find other ways of bringing Gaza under its control via the Palestinian Authority.

23. The invasion of Gaza by Israel was therefore to be expected. But so brutal was the Israeli war of occupation of Gaza that the world was revolted by it and forced the war to be stopped. But the Israelis were not going to be so easily frustrated. Without regard for its peace undertakings and international law Israel immediately blockaded supplies and contacts with Gaza by the outside world.

24. The strategy appears to be to weaken the resolve and spirit of the Gazans, to render them so physically weak that the next time Israel invaded the strip the Gazans would be incapable of strong resistance. Eventually it would have to surrender. With this the Israelis would be able to build settlements and exercise authority over Gaza as it has done over the other parts of Palestine.

25. If there should be a negotiation for a two-state solution, it is unthinkable that the Israelis would vacate their settlements or subject themselves to rule by a Palestinian state. They would physically be under Israeli rule and de facto if not de jure be a part of Israel. The bits and pieces of the remaining Palestinian land would still be under Israel control. There would be no recognisable Palestinian state. In fact agreements notwithstanding, there would be only Israel occupying the whole of the land once known as Palestine. There would be no Palestinian identity. Palestine and its history would be lost.

26. This is a form of genocide. A whole people will have been made to disappear very much as if they have all been exterminated. The world will forget there even was a Palestine.

27. My fear is that while the world may forget, the Palestinians and their descendents will not. They will always remember. And remembering they will continue their struggle, probably in ways that the world may have to pay a heavy price for. We are seeing some of it now but what we will be seeing would render peace for the world meaningless.

** Links are meant as brief guide for readers. is not responsible for validity of content.


As posted by Dr. Mahathir Mohamad at Che Det on August 2, 2010 9:23 AM

1. Langkawi will see yet another international sports event from 6th to 8th August. This is not the Le Tour de Langkawi but this time the event, the Langkawi International Mountain Bike Challenge 2010, will be held entirely in Langkawi.

2. There will be participants from 16 countries including Malaysians. Others are from neighbouring Asian countries, Europe as well as from South Africa. It promises to be an exciting race and will be covered fully by the media.

3. I hope Malaysians will not miss this sporting event while enjoying the delights of Langkawi and tax-free shopping as well.

4. Come join the fun!


As posted by Dr. Mahathir Mohamad at Che Det on August 2, 2010 9:22 AM

1. Langkawi sekali lagi akan menjadi tuan rumah kepada satu pertandingan bertaraf antarabangsa dari 6 hingga 8 Ogos. Ia bukanlah pertandingan Le Tour de Langkawi. Kali ini, acaranya ialah Cabaran Mountain Bike Antarabangsa Langkawi 2010, yang akan diadakan sepenuhnya di Langkawi.

2. Peserta-peserta yang bertanding datang dari 16 negara, termasuk peserta Malaysia. Yang lainnya datang dari negara jiran Asia, Eropah termasuk juga dari Afrika Selatan. Acara ini menjanjikan satu pertandingan yang amat menarik dan akan mendapat liputan menyeluruh dari pihak media.

3. Saya berharap rakyat Malaysia tidak akan melepaskan peluang untuk menyaksikan acara sukan ini disamping menikmati keindahan Langkawi serta membeli-belah di kedai bebas cukai.

4. Jangan lepaskan peluang ini!


As posted by Dr. Mahathir Mohamad at Che Det on July 29, 2010 4:00 PM

1. The Government has announced the intention to make Malaysia a high income country. I assume this means people will receive high wages, salaries and profits.

2. But if wages and salaries are to be increased by the private sector, the cost of doing business would have to increase as well. To cover this increase, prices of products must be increased. This will mean that the consumers will have to pay higher prices for whatever they purchase. There would be, by definition, inflation.

3. The increase in prices of goods and services should cover the higher wages and salaries and the profit margins from the business. But this will not be all. The cost of transport, fuel and raw materials would all increase as these businesses will also experience increased overhead costs as they too will have to increase wages etc. So the increase in product prices must also cover these costs.

4. Generally the cost of living would increase as prices increase. The rise in income may not increase the purchasing power of the wage earners. Higher incomes would not mean anything then. We know of many countries where people get higher incomes in terms of currency units but are extremely poor.

5. If there is to be an increase in income, it must be carefully managed so that it would result in increases of purchasing power and not just more money.

6. This can happen because the added cost of doing business may trigger unreasonable increases of prices for raw materials, goods (products) or services. For example a 10% increase in wages and salaries should not result in an increase of 10% in the prices of goods and services. This is because wages and salaries do not constitute the total cost of production.

7. Their contribution to cost of production varies. This has to be determined by careful scrutiny of all the cost of production including material cost, power cost, transportation, advertisement and promotion costs etc. If it is found that wages and salaries at all levels make up 20% of the cost of production, then a 10% increase in wages should contribute only 2% to the cost.

8. Similarly the increases in the other costs i.e. power, material, transport etc may increase by a much smaller percentage according to their percentage contribution to the cost. Assuming that together they contribute 50% of the cost, but the increase in their prices is 5%, i.e. 5% of 50% = 2½ %, the total increase in cost inclusive of wages and salaries should be 4½ %, or say 5%.

9. Thus the increase in wages by 10% will not increase overall cost by 10% but will only increase by 5%, after including increases of other costs.

10. The margin of profit varies. For wholesale and fast moving items the margin can be as low as 2%, while for some slow-moving luxury goods the margin may be as high as 300%. Assuming that the cost of production increases by 5% for a 10% increase in wages and salaries, there can be justification for only a 5% - 6% increase in price of products and service for those with low profit margins. For high profit margins there should be no increase in price at all.

11. The wage earners with a 10% increase in income should therefore have a 5% increase in purchasing power only; not 10%. In other words their increase in income would make them only slightly richer. Still with increase in purchasing power they would be able to contribute more to businesses. Eventually the Government would earn more by way of taxes to pay for the increases in wages and salaries in the Government service. Generally economic activity would be enhanced and there would be growth as the salary bill in Malaysia runs into hundreds of billions every year.

12. The above are some of the ways for preventing unfair cost increases when wages and salaries are raised. But there are also many other ways of reducing costs so that the cost of goods and services to the consumer is not increased much as a result of increasing incomes.

13. In manufacturing, a careful study of cost can result in ideas on cost cutting. The Japanese "Just In Time" manufacturing process is a good example. In this system the parts and components are produced just in time for them to go into the assembly of the final products. This eliminates the cost of storage and holding costs.

14. Automation and robotics are costly but they can work 24 hours a day and would reduce the cost of the three shifts of work by workers in one day. In ship-building, whole sections of the ship can be produced separately and then assembled. A lot of time can be saved this way. And time means money.

15. The classic case of reducing cost was invented by Henry Ford - namely mass production on assembly lines. Economies of scale can also contribute to lowering costs. We see the progress in retailing goods. The single specialised shops have given way to the supermarkets. Now the supermarkets are being replaced by the giant wholesale hypermarkets. These help increase volume and lower purchasing costs. Self-service also help to reduce costs in restaurants and supermarkets.

16. Various electronic devices can help in reducing costs. Because of additional capital needed for these devices, they contribute much when the volume is big.

17. Incomes can also be increased by better education and training. It is said that the Korean worker is three times more productive than the Malaysian worker. This is not just due to education and training but more because of work ethics. Obviously when a worker is more productive he should be paid higher wages.

18. Most manufacturing activities add higher value to basic material. Generally exporting raw material gives less return than exporting manufactured products. But other costs have to be taken into consideration.

19. The Malaysian strategy on industrialisation is also not conducive to reducing costs. Japan and Korea acquire foreign technologies and set up their own companies to produce their own products.

20. Malaysia adopted a different strategy. To create jobs for a large number of the unemployed, foreign investors were invited to set up labour intensive industries. Naturally wages were very low. Increased profits for the foreign owned industries did not necessarily result in increased income for Malaysian workers.

21. Over the years Malaysians had acquired the skills in manufacturing and the capital to invest. Today there are a lot of successful Malaysian companies. Should the Government help these Malaysian industries to grow they can become world class players. This means better income for the Malaysian entrepreneurs and better wages for the Malaysian workers.

22. We must not follow the route taken by the developed countries of the West to achieve high income. In the days when technology was exclusive to the European countries and North America increases in wages were largely due to the demands of the workers. To cover the increased cost of production prices were raised quite indiscriminately. This was sustainable when the Europeans were the only producer of manufactured goods.

23. But then the countries of East Asia, began to produce almost all the products of the West at lower cost. The workers of the West continued to demand for continuous increases in their wages. Very soon the high prices for their products caused them to lose the market.

24. Malaysia must never take this route in order to achieve high incomes. Instead it should study the other ways of increasing incomes which will not lead to inflation and loss of purchasing power.


As posted by Dr. Mahathir Mohamad at Che Det on July 29, 2010 2:39 PM

1. When I wrote about the free market, I was not thinking of wanting to make money from the United States. It is good if we can but without the US market Malaysian palm oil is doing extremely well.

2. I just wanted to show the hypocrisy of America. We do not go around the world preaching free market, so if we are not so free as alleged, we are not being hypocritical. I had always been sceptical of ideas coming from the rich. They are all self-serving.

3. They preach and fiercely demand that all Governments stop regulating their trade. Yet they are the ones most guilty of protecting their trade.

4. In fact the US has gone beyond that. Trade is to them a political instrument for the promotion of their agenda for the world. By applying sanctions in trade they will try to force countries to submit to their policies. If a country does not support their sanction they have means of squeezing companies or banks from that country.

5. Sanctions is denial of free trade in totality and in Iraq before the 2003 invasion it caused the deaths of 500,000 children. That is how far the abuse of free trade is indulged in by the US. But they talk all the time that trade must be free. If this is not hypocrisy, then what is hypocrisy?

6. Incidentally they talk much about democracy i.e. the freedom to choose one's own Government. But they have no hesitation about warring and killing hundreds of thousands of Iraqis in order to force them to accept democracy. Is this the free choice as advocated by democracy?

7. Is there democracy in the United Nations where one country can negate the will of 190 other member countries? Yet this same country talks so much about democracy and the good that democracy will bring. Practise first, then talk.

8. In my time I had often enough said that Malaysia was not and did not aspire to be a liberal democracy. And when we did things which did not seem to be in keeping with liberal democracy it is because we did not promise to be a liberal democracy.


9. Some have asked me to comment on our education policy. While we have concentrated on making education available to almost everyone, the quality of education is obviously in need of improving.

10. It is not having examination which is wrong. It is the kind of examination we conduct which is wrong. We need to study the kind of examination and improve it rather than simply abolishing examinations.


As posted by Dr. Mahathir Mohamad at Che Det on July 28, 2010 2:39 PM

1. A long time ago when I was Prime Minister I met President Bush the father, at Boston University where he was conferring degrees for graduates. I met him in a side room and I told him of the unfair anti-palm oil campaign by America, blaming it for heart diseases.

2. We later submitted palm oil samples for three American chemical laboratories to examine the cholesterol contents. Their findings proved that although palm oil had more cholesterol than rival soya bean oil, the main edible oil in America, cooking reduced palm oil cholesterol but increased the cholesterol in soya bean oil.

3. The campaign against palm oil stopped but Americans still refused to use palm oil for cooking to this day. It was a case of non-tariff barrier. But that is the way America deals with competitions.

4. When the Vietnamese exported catfish to America, American catfish producers got their Government to declare that Vietnamese catfish is not catfish. The catfish farmers in Vietnam lost their business.

5. Malaysia-made rubber gloves were banned in the United States because out of the hundreds of millions used, one person had allergic reaction.

6. Foreign aircraft manufacturers wishing to export to the United States have to use American components and do part of the finishing in America. It is the same with the automobile. The Japanese and the Koreans have to put up plants in the United States and employ American workers in order to remain in the United States market.

7. Despite all these conditions Toyota's share of the world auto market grew. Then news came that Toyota was on the verge of becoming the No 1 automotive manufacturer in the world, displacing General Motors of the United States.

8. American's pride was hurt. Soon something was found to fail in the hybrid Toyota "Prius". Apparently one American user from tens of thousands was hurt because the brakes failed.

9. The news about the Prius failure hit the headlines in the American controlled world media. Toyota was forced to recall tens of thousands of the Prius model. The losses were enormous.

10. In order to put Toyota in its proper place the head of Toyota Corporation was summoned to Washington to face a congressional enquiry.

11. Toyota's position as a possible biggest automobile manufacturer in the world has been eroded. But while American auto manufacturers have to be put under Chapter II, i.e. as bankrupts, Toyota is still showing profits. In time Toyota will become the biggest automobile company in the world, the faults with the Prius notwithstanding.

12. There really is no free market. If tariff and other barriers fail to stop imports, the application of sanctions against countries, whatever may be the reason is also another form of non-tariff barrier. Free trade simply does not exist.

13. Truly hypocrisy prevails in the markets and in international trade. The greatest hypocrites are the very people who conceive and promote the idea of tariff free world trade.


As posted by Dr. Mahathir Mohamad at Che Det on July 26, 2010 5:49 PM

1. Sejak kecil lagi saya diajar tentang perbezaan antara sunat dan wajib dalam Islam.

2. Yang sunat saya diberitahu jika dibuat berpahala tetapi tidak dibuat tidak berdosa. Sebaliknya yang wajib perlu dibuat jika tidak akan berdosa.

3. Sudah tentu awal-awal lagi saya diberitahu sembahyang lima waktu itu wajib. Tetapi kelonggaran diberi jika tidak sihat, jika dalam perjalanan, dalam kecemasan.

4. Jika tidak dapat berdiri boleh duduk semasa sembahyang, dalam perjalanan boleh jamak. Demikian juga dengan ibadat puasa, mengeluar zakat dan mengerja haji.

5. Islam tidak membebankan penganutnya. Oleh itu banyaklah amalan yang sunat, yang jika dilakukan mendapat pahala tetapi tidak berdosa jika tidak dilakukan.

6. Ramai orang Islam yang tidak puas hati dengan kelonggaran-kelonggaran yang diberi oleh Allah Subhanahuwata'ala Mereka lebih suka jika yang wajib ditambah dan yang sunat diwajibkan.

7. Ada yang sampai memaksa yang sunat dilakukan dan jika tidak, tidak Islam atau kurang Islam. Tidak ada kelonggaran yang dibenarkan.

8. Walaupun ini mungkin tidak jadi masalah kepada yang sudah Islam, tetapi ada orang bukan Islam yang takut memeluk agama Islam kerana "wajib" disunatkan.

9. Tetapi ada yang begitu keras mewajibkan "sunat" sehingga sanggup tidak menerima yang tidak mahu disunat memeluk agama Islam. Ketakutan ini lebih terdapat dikalangan wanita bukan Islam. Dipercayai wanita yang Islam pun ramai yang tidak disunatkan kerana ini adalah perkara yang tidak diwajibkan. Tetapi pihak tertentu berkeras berkenaan "sunat" bagi wanita yang memeluk agama Islam.

10. Kenapakah kita begitu tidak puas hati dengan kelonggaran yang diberi oleh Allah s.w.t. sehingga menolak hukum yang telah ditentukan oleh-Nya. Sesungguhnya banyaklah hukum Allah yang dialihkan terutama berkenaan fardhu kifayah supaya yang wajib menjadi sunat dan yang sunat diwajibkan.