Leaders of DAP, PKR and PAS met in Petaling Jaya today and took the logical next step of the March 8 political tsunami – proposing the establishment of a new front of the three political parties to be tentatively known as PAKATAN RAKYAT.
A joint statement issued after the meeting reads:
The leaders of KeADILan, DAP and PAS met today in furtherance of the meeting held on the 18th of March 2008.
Today’s meeting was attended by, among others, Dato’ Seri Anwar Ibrahim, YB Lim Kit Siang, YB Dato’ Seri Tuan Guru Haji Abdul Hadi Awang and YB Datin Seri Wan Azizah Wan Ismail.
In today’s meeting, we have proposed to consolidate the cooperation between the three parties under the name “PAKATAN RAKYAT”. This name has been proposed pending confirmation by the respective parties.
Pakatan Rakyat pledges to uphold the rights and interests of all Malaysians, regardless of religion or race, as enshrined in the Constitution.
With the results of the recent elections, the state governments of Kelantan, Kedah, Pulau Pinang, Perak and Selangor will be known as Pakatan Rakyat state governments. The policies of these governments will be conducted in accordance with the policies of Pakatan Rakyat.
To further mutual understanding regarding such policies, a convention of all Pakatan Rakyat elected representatives of Parliament and State Assemblies will be held on the 27th of April 2008.
We have developed and strengthened the structure of Pakatan Rakyat by creating under the Leadership Council, consisting of the leaders of the three parties, a Joint Secretariat consisting of three leaders from each of the three parties. This joint Secretariat will be tasked with building the foundation and framework of the Pakatan Rakyat for ratification by the Leadership Council.
#1 by Godfather on Thursday, 3 April 2008 - 2:50 pm
Limkamput says:
“….What many are saying is that we have to be circumspect, not docilely agreeing to everything or lulled into complacency that everything is going to be happy and benign from now on.”
This is motherhood and apple-pie, and is as good as lecturing an old warhorse like LKS to suck eggs. We should give the DAP leadership some leeway to decide on the latest course of action, instead of telling them what they should be doing.
#2 by lakilompat on Thursday, 3 April 2008 - 2:55 pm
In ancient time, food are scarce as they don’t have pesticides or fertilizers company. In every war against the crusader, land are been razed, this has caused farmine and food shortage.
Many muslim man volunteered and fought bravely against the Mongolians and the crusaders, they also inflict heavy casualty. Those who are young and weak are left to attend the farm, many old farmers died as it is very tough job to re plough the land again.
The wise ruler saw this, summoned his scholars to find the solutions, finally design a plan to have 5 times rest per day to recover from rest. Praying to god, for good harvest. Actually during that time communication is not so advance, it will take very long to know the military news from the frontline, the only way to solve the anxiety and fear is to pray. Nowadays, the technology is so advance, almost every working ppl have a handphone, don’t you think it is time for change?
#3 by kelvin kang on Thursday, 3 April 2008 - 3:05 pm
Dear Mr. Lim,
If DAP want to join Pakatan Rakyat with PAS and PKR. It’s means DAP, PAS and PKR is rejected building Malaysia as a Islamic Country.
Firstly, in Kota Bharu, Kelantan, Kota Bharu is a Bandar Islam. Therefore i urge YB LIM to ask YB TOK GURU NIK AZIZ to change Kota Bharu by not name it as Kota Bharu Bandar Islam.
Second, for chinese drink beer, therefore, as a chinese who own a restaurant can sell beer straight away without apply for any special licenses. Chinese restaurant is for chinese. If Malay want to drink beer, that is their problem, why PAS have to strictly need chinese to apply for the beer and pork license?
Thirdly, i urges PAS to give license for the gambling betting station ie: Magnum, Sports Toto and Pan Malaysia Pools.
If these three agenda, is not solve, DAP is cheating against Malaysian by rejecting building Islamic Country.
#4 by lakilompat on Thursday, 3 April 2008 - 3:12 pm
To allasstra, i’m glad u checked the dictionary. Not everywhere in Singapore is city. They got residential village & commercial area.
Yes certain vice activity is legal in Singapore, try go Geylang and checked it out. Recently the 2 gambling licenses, the annual increase in sin tax will ultimately benefit the Sg. govt. Actually it benefit the man but it also create some social problems.
#5 by syncbasher83 on Thursday, 3 April 2008 - 3:18 pm
lakilompat,
your jokes for certain Islamic practices may have caused serious blasphemy toward ur muslims neighbours…
can u pls stop doing so…tq
#6 by Jong on Thursday, 3 April 2008 - 3:20 pm
limkamput,
There’s a saying, “it takes two to tango” and anger needs an opponent. So my advice is, ignore him and let this coward blah blah blah and make a fool of himself and he feels safe behind his ever-changing ID. Let others on this blog be the judge, if at all they care.
You cannot beat him, this despicable keeps changing IDs. I believe he uses no less than 6 IDs on this blog alone with the sole intention of upsetting geniune contributors’ picking on their slightest mistakes. I am sure regulars on this blog know who they are, and the sad thing is, do they care? …why not pass the buck to the moderator -racist, sexist and even derogatory, so what?!
This cybertrooper has stoop so very low as to impersonate me, and you in other blogs. There’s a recent entry with a racist comment, just go check.
#7 by kickbutt on Thursday, 3 April 2008 - 3:29 pm
“The US constitution said all men are created equal….” limkamput
There is just one word that could be said in response – bollocks!
#8 by allasstra on Thursday, 3 April 2008 - 3:30 pm
qoute : # lakilompat Says:
Today at 15: 12.20 (3 minutes ago)
To allasstra, i’m glad u checked the dictionary. Not everywhere in Singapore is city. They got residential village & commercial area.
then name ONE,i challenge u !. as long it’s not holland village,cos it’s way bigger than average town in malaysia,and it’s even bigger than a town.
Yes certain vice activity is legal in Singapore, try go Geylang and checked it out. Recently the 2 gambling licenses, the annual increase in sin tax will ultimately benefit the Sg. govt. Actually it benefit the man but it also create some social problems.
semantics note: casino *is* defferent from gambling.a casino licence is more than gambling licence,vv. prostitution is legal,and not vice activity as u had claimed earlier. learn how to use words.
“finally design a plan to have 5 times rest per”
—-another example of u talking without using ur brain. i challenge u to come up with anything that can back-up ur allegations. u rectum-orifices !
#9 by lakilompat on Thursday, 3 April 2008 - 3:49 pm
To allasstra,
Are u trying to say every part of Singapore is city and that there is no residential village for Singaporean to live?
In Malaysia gambling & prostitution is illegal and considered vice. There’s a special anti-vice team to curb these activities from booming, there’s one event just launched in Johore recently where more than 50 foregners vice workers were detained in Karaoke. There is only 1 legal license granted that’s to Genting Highlands others are considered illegal and vice.
#10 by Bobster on Thursday, 3 April 2008 - 5:07 pm
If “Hudud Law” can put a stop to the rot of the nation ie impose it especially on the hardcore pembelot-pembelot negara like the 42-billion-ringgit traitor/traitors and 4.6-billion-ringgit PKFZ running doggies, then, so be it. At our present so called Islamic country with the secular society, the thiefs/robbers/pembelots are getting away with billions in their overseas accounts. If “Hudud Law” can wipe out red tapes, power abuse and corruptions at the highest level, then, so be it. This country is heading towards bankruptcy judging from the way things are going if what Malaysia Today reported is accurate:- http://www.malaysia-today.net/2008/content/view/5339/84/
Why not as a beer drinker myself I would chose to adopt a healthier lifestyle and see those robbers be put to jail and have all their assets confisticated and returned to the country so that our children’s children can continue to find a place under the Malaysia sun? I’ll rather celebrate the good news with a cup of Kopi Jantan with all my abang adik than all alone with a can of Tiger beer .
“Hudud Law” especially for the pembelot-pembelot, that’s great news else nobody gives damn respect to the judiciary system, to the extend of saying it looks like me, sounds like me but it’s not me in the country highest court. By-products of the formal dictator. Should stripe off the titles Tun/Datuk/Tan Sri from a few traitors in the country, what a disgrace to the nation!
Yes, there are many issues need to be ironed out between PKR/DAP/PAS. More peaceful interfaith dialogs needed. But please don’t let these issues break the weakest link between PKR/DAP/PAS for a very simple reason, DAP can never standalone and rule this nation, neither can PAS. PKR may be as it is perceived to be a multiracial party but it needs time for recruitment. The very fact is in Pakatan Rakyat everyone needs to support one another irrespective of race and religion to break free from BN oppressive force that clinging on the nation for the last 50 yrs. No single party is strong enough to head on with BN at this present moment so a coalition is required like it or not. So learn to live and accept one another. Hey, we have been doing so for the last 50 yrs or more, so what so difficult about it?!
BN will win half of the battle if PR coalition fails. Many cybertroopers here will like to see the fall of PR too.
#11 by Godfather on Thursday, 3 April 2008 - 6:33 pm
Bobster:
Which cybertroopers are you referring to ? Before the elections, the only cybertroopers were those from BN but now we have cybertroopers from the “extremist” faction within the DAP who are clearly against the DAP joining the Pakatan Rakyat, and who would rather see the PR fail than to co-exist with the auld enemy.
#12 by kickbutt on Thursday, 3 April 2008 - 6:49 pm
“The US constitution said all men are created equal….” limkamput
There is just one word for this – BOLLOCKS!
You mean this one??
#13 by kickbutt on Thursday, 3 April 2008 - 6:52 pm
“I’ll rather celebrate the good news with a cup of Kopi Jantan with all my abang adik than all alone with a can of Tiger beer”.
I’ll drink to that!!
#14 by Bobster on Thursday, 3 April 2008 - 7:09 pm
Godfather:
Cybertroopers that are stirring racial and religion s*** trying to break the coalition. Member of public who read some of the comments in this blog might get into wrong perception of DAP. Worst if some of it came out from some prominent personal. Not referring to yourself don’t to worry.
#15 by Godfather on Thursday, 3 April 2008 - 7:23 pm
Initially, I was subscribing to the view that the minority has a right to be heard, no matter how obnoxious their narrow-minded views may be. I thought that the essence of democracy is to allow the minority to have their say. Then the outpouring of anti-PAS sentiment, and the continuous regurgitation of anti-PAS articles and slanted Islamic definitions from the wikipaedia made me think that we could be dealing with something different, and not from a mere minority.
The essence of democracy has to be that once you have had your say, the decision of the majority must prevail, and that we either move on with the majority decision or switch allegiances.
#16 by syncbasher83 on Thursday, 3 April 2008 - 7:46 pm
Godfather, bobster,
Agreed!
#17 by limkamput on Thursday, 3 April 2008 - 8:02 pm
Not that easy. May be these people love DAP like you and they want to see the party continues adhering to ideals that they hold dear. I think it is impolite to ask others to leave. They could turn around and ask you to leave if you can’t stand their views. With regard to whether it is majority or minority, I think the jury is still out. Today’s majority could be tomorrow’s minority as in the case of UMNO dominant policies prior to March 8. There is no outpouring of anti PAS sentiment here. Some are just keen to see their rights and way of life protected. We don’t want to go this far to go back to square one again.
#18 by LadyGodiva on Thursday, 3 April 2008 - 8:46 pm
“I think it is impolite to ask others to leave. They could turn around and ask you to leave if you can’t stand their views. ”
Did you, Godfather, ask Lee Wang Yen to leave??
#19 by LadyGodiva on Thursday, 3 April 2008 - 9:16 pm
You’re getting to be nasty, Godfather.
#20 by limkamput on Thursday, 3 April 2008 - 9:17 pm
Jong Says: Today at 15: 20.35 (5 hours ago)
There’s a saying, “it takes two to tango” and anger needs an opponent. So my advice is, ignore him and let this coward blah blah blah and make a fool of himself and he feels safe behind his ever-changing ID. Let others on this blog be the judge, if at all they care.
You cannot beat him, this despicable keeps changing IDs. I believe he uses no less than 6 IDs on this blog alone with the sole intention of upsetting geniune contributors’ picking on their slightest mistakes. I am sure regulars on this blog know who they are, and the sad thing is, do they care? …why not pass the buck to the moderator -racist, sexist and even derogatory, so what?!
This cybertrooper has stoop so very low as to impersonate me, and you in other blogs. There’s a recent entry with a racist comment, just go check.
#21 by Godfather on Thursday, 3 April 2008 - 9:19 pm
My goodness, limkamput. Can’t you go through this entire thread and find out for yourself how many are in favour of PR with no pre-conditions, and how many are in favour of DAP withdrawing from PR under the present circumstances ? Maybe there is the silent “majority” which favours the DAP withdrawing from PR which you are aware of.
I don’t ask people to leave – simply because this isn’t my blog. I did, however, ask Lee Wang Yen to stop harping on his anti-PAS views (and you must be living on a different planet if you don’t call his regurgitation of anti-PAS articles in various threads as an outpouring of anti-PAS sentiment) to which Lee replied that even the minority has a right to be heard. I don’t have an issue with that, but when the leadership of the party which you purport to support has made a certain decision, you as a supporter should not openly condemn that decision – particularly if it is one which can be seized upon by the BN thieves, spun in the mainstream media, and used to undermine the very foundation of PR.
#22 by Godfather on Thursday, 3 April 2008 - 9:21 pm
I think he is now referring to LadyG and Kickbutt as the one and the same cybertrooper.
#23 by syncbasher83 on Thursday, 3 April 2008 - 9:22 pm
Huh got meh somebody was asked to leave?
Is this another version of somebody said that his minority view was being repressed?
common be a bit mature lah…nobody stopping u, others also have their rights to respond to your view as you has the same rights to respond to their view…
#24 by limkamput on Thursday, 3 April 2008 - 9:32 pm
“……the decision of the majority must prevail, and that we either move on with the majority decision or switch allegiances.”
What does this mean? switch allegiances? who are you to tell others to switch. That is in fact worse than leaving this blog. I am been gentle here.
#25 by Godfather on Thursday, 3 April 2008 - 9:34 pm
“I am been gentle here.” Many have seen your gentler side.
#26 by syncbasher83 on Thursday, 3 April 2008 - 9:38 pm
wat the heck, its becoming more emotional…
common both men, chills…
cheers!
#27 by limkamput on Thursday, 3 April 2008 - 9:41 pm
I think the strength and vitality of PR is its ability to openly discuss issues that are protracted and difficult. Let BN says whatever they want. To think that the main stream media will undermine PR because of what we discuss here is farfetched (before election may be, but not now). Now we should try to get the best ideas to move forward. To me best ideas must be able to withstand vigorous test and challenge.
#28 by syncbasher83 on Thursday, 3 April 2008 - 9:44 pm
im adding 1 point into limkamput comment above…
….and realistic, based on political consensus, tolerant and compromise…thats sound better :-)
#29 by limkamput on Thursday, 3 April 2008 - 9:46 pm
if you have not noticed, i think you are completely unfair to Lee WY. But I think by nature he never fights back. Instead he just concentrate in putting up what he think others should read. If you are not interested, don’t read. Nobody compell you to. Yes, many know-all fellows have seen my gentler side.
#30 by Godfather on Thursday, 3 April 2008 - 9:49 pm
“…we should try to get the best ideas to move forward.” Now this is an acceptable doctrine, and one which any fairminded person would embrace.
Now, let’s talk about some readers in this blog who have openly stated that DAP should withdraw from the governing coalitions in Perak and Selangor, well before the formation of PR. The logical extension of this position AFTER the formation of PR would be to demand the withdrawal of DAP from PR simply because there can be no co-existence with PAS under the present circumstances. I can see that the majority of readers here don’t agree with this, and obviously the DAP leadership doesn’t agree with this, and they have gone ahead with the joint statement regarding the formation of PR. My questions are simple: (1) what else is there to discuss regarding DAP working with PAS and (2) why give ammunition to the BN thieves, irrespective of how low the probability might be, to undermine PR through the mainstream press or through other means ?
#31 by LadyGodiva on Thursday, 3 April 2008 - 9:49 pm
“I don’t ask people to leave – simply because this isn’t my blog. I did, however, ask Lee Wang Yen to stop harping on his anti-PAS views (and you must be living on a different planet if you don’t call his regurgitation of anti-PAS articles in various threads as an outpouring of anti-PAS sentiment)..” Godfather
That’s what I thought! It certainly does not sound like you to be asking commentators to leave the blog like it is your own. Not at all like you!
#32 by Godfather on Thursday, 3 April 2008 - 9:52 pm
The strength and vitality of PR is that we all row together in the same direction, and not have to worry about the 10 pct (or any minority percentage) who wants to row in the opposite direction. And yet refuse to get off the boat.
#33 by LadyGodiva on Thursday, 3 April 2008 - 9:56 pm
I was worse than unfair to LeeWY. I called him “that Cambridge brat” and someone full of “hollow sophistication”. And I apologised to him. I also apologized to Jeffrey. In fact I apologized to everybody. Even to myself!
#34 by LadyGodiva on Thursday, 3 April 2008 - 10:05 pm
“What does this mean? switch allegiances? who are you to tell others to switch. ”
Yes, who are you Godfather, to tell others to switch anything??
#35 by Godfather on Thursday, 3 April 2008 - 10:09 pm
LadyG:
Believe me, if I am doing my best to row on a boat together with 10 others, I don’t mind if one person just slacks off and stops rowing, but if one individual should decide to row in the opposite direction, then I am certain the remaining 10 of us would throw him overboard. Of course, we’d give him the option to jump off the boat before we throw him off.
#36 by Godfather on Thursday, 3 April 2008 - 10:17 pm
BTW, I read somewhere that your best friend on this blog accuses you of switching identities, and that you and Kickbutt and others are one of the same. Is the accusation true or was he smoking something ?
#37 by Godfather on Thursday, 3 April 2008 - 10:18 pm
sorry, I mean “One and the same…”
#38 by limkamput on Thursday, 3 April 2008 - 10:28 pm
Can’t count, simple arithmetic lah, if one individual should decide to row in the opposite direction………….the remaining 10 of us……, huh?
#39 by LadyGodiva on Thursday, 3 April 2008 - 10:29 pm
Godfather,
Puffin’ the magic dragon for sure.
#40 by syncbasher83 on Thursday, 3 April 2008 - 10:31 pm
i think if got 10ppl rowing a boat…
9 rowing north…
but 1 rowing south…
i guess the boat still going north rite?
just never mindlah that 1 want to row south, its his rights
dont throw him off the boat coz u r no longer 10ppl rowing a boat
:-)
#41 by LadyGodiva on Thursday, 3 April 2008 - 10:32 pm
Godfather,
Didn’t you get an ‘A’ in Stats when you were at MU? Who lectured you in Stats? Was it Paul Chan?
#42 by limkamput on Thursday, 3 April 2008 - 10:42 pm
“A” in stats, paul chan and MU, i think you guys have no idea who are reading this blog lah. So “action” for what? What stats, elementary stats for social science ar?
#43 by Jong on Thursday, 3 April 2008 - 11:00 pm
limkamput,
Why do you want to drop their water face? :D
#44 by waterfrontcoolie on Thursday, 3 April 2008 - 11:43 pm
come on, we are suppose to use this site to discuss social and political issues, not to insult each other. In life, whatever you may have achieved in your ‘learning days’ are hardly of use after you have worked for a couple of years. Your experience and street smartness become vital. so forget about all those As you may have acquired. Insult is easy to fling but the negative emotion created is bad for both of you! So let’s ease of on such trade!
#45 by Godfather on Friday, 4 April 2008 - 7:18 am
You don’t need an ‘A’ in stats to figure out that if you are in a boat with 10 others, then there must be 11 persons on the boat. Of course when you have an “attap” education, and a suspicious mind, then you start to imagine that it is a trick question, and that therefore the answer must be something else.
Respect must be earned, not forced.
#46 by Godfather on Friday, 4 April 2008 - 7:36 am
Badawi may have failed his entrance exam in stats, but I think he would have gotten the arithmetic right compared to the superior person writing in this blog who has eaten more salt that others have eaten rice.
#47 by undergrad2 on Friday, 4 April 2008 - 7:48 am
DISCLAIMER
Please be informed that I shall not be liable for aspersions cast on the character of one Lee Wang Yen by the above statement.
#48 by limkamput on Friday, 4 April 2008 - 9:16 am
Got “A” for statistics, PM failed, MU, Paul Chan, I have worked with this fellow and that fellow, hiding behind different IDs, including impersonating others in other blogs, fanatical, blind, supreme court judge attitude, peronality disorder, split personalities, great pretenders, collusion, ..cher….
My feather is just too bright for you ok despite my attap education and lack of “A”. Sorry, “A” in what again, elementary statistics? You mean calcualting mean, medium and mode and standard deviation? You know why you square the difference and then take the square root again or not?
#49 by lakilompat on Friday, 4 April 2008 - 9:56 am
To bobster, i’m not try to be biased to “hudud law” even “law” itself can’t handle to put rich & powerful Malaysian to justice. The Atlantuya case, Norita case, Canny Ong case and Lingam case. Like Canny Ong case, the guy admitted to kill her, but this man is not sentenced to death, while the victim died, the family members are in despair, is justice enough?
If a poor child steal for food, is it not cruel to chop his hand, if a young pretty girl committed adultery is it cruel to mutilate the genital? i don’t see such a cruel act can curb anything and bring justice?
I’m not saying all “hudud law” is not good, just hope religion don’t mix into law. Law should be free from all kind of bias, gender bias, religion bias, income bias etc.
In fact why blame on law? if the law enforcer or leader did not harness it, and practice proper implementation of law. It is the police we should blame, because the Rakyat pay taxes to them, they must effectively deliver results such as solving the criminal cases etc. Therefore, Law is independent from all kind of biasness, the police must be independent as well without siding to any coalition whether it is ruling or opposition.
#50 by lakilompat on Friday, 4 April 2008 - 10:02 am
Problem is in Malaysia police is [deleted] look at Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim case in 1998 Rahim was ordered to beat Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim while in cell. What Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim have done till Rahim (chief police) have to beat an armless man? It has clearly shows us that our police forces are not yet independent.
In order for PR to be successful, they must make sure “Law” is not bias toward religion, income group and parties. And 2nd, “Law” must be enforce by independent that is the Police. There should be a group of Police Commissioner, to monitor how effective Police carry out the law something like (ICAC).