Categorised | Columns

What’s wrong with Bersih 3.0?

Bersih rally in downtown Kuala Lumpur in 2007 (Pic courtesy of theSun)

Bersih rally in 2007 (Pic courtesy of theSun)

IF we were to believe everything the Barisan Nasional (BN) is saying about Bersih 3.0, the movement for free and fair elections is indeed problematic in several ways.

According to BN elected representatives, the planned 28 April 2012 sit-down protest at Dataran Merdeka, known as Bersih 3.0, is “unnecessary”. It has been hijacked by, or is in collusion with, the opposition coalition of Pakatan Rakyat and is manipulating the issue of free and fair elections for other agendas.

Perkasa goes as far as to claim Bersih 3.0 is inspired by “foreign powers”. Bersih 3.0, like Bersih 2.0 last year, is also going to be disruptive and should be held indoors. One BN Member of Parliament even charged that those who choose to demonstrate are “people who have lost their minds”.

Are any of these claims about Bersih 3.0 true? How can the rakyat judge for themselves if the BN’s description and analysis of the movement is accurate? And what do these claims tell us about the individuals or groups behind these disparaging declarations of the Bersih movement?

Hijacked and infiltrated

Likely the most damaging criticism of Bersih is that it’s being used by the opposition for their own ends, namely to topple the BN government.

Perception is everything. It clearly didn’t help when the leaders of Bersih 2.0 appeared in a press conference together with PR leaders just before they attempted to march on 9 July last year. It also didn’t help that during the Bersih 2.0 rally, several key PR leaders were seen negotiating with the police on behalf of the throngs who were trapped by police and FRU trucks in several areas in Kuala Lumpur.

Still, are these evidence that Bersih is an extension of the PR and is doing its work to rally citizens against the BN?

The truth is, there is evidence that the Bersih leadership isn’t the PR’s lackey. A most convincing proof for me is the way Bersih co-chairperson Datuk Ambiga Sreenevasan so immediately and clearly put Opposition Leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim in his place last year when the politician attempted to suggest that he had influence over the civil society-led movement.

Politicians such as Anwar will, no doubt, attempt to piggyback on and co-opt successful people’s movements in their bid to wrest Putrajaya from the BN. And that is not something that any Bersih 2.0 leader can necessarily control.

What matters isn’t what the politicians attempt to do. What matters is how Bersih, which was specifically re-launched as Bersih 2.0 in November 2010 to be independent of political parties, responds to these attempts.

So far, I’m convinced by the response and actions of Bersih 2.0’s leadership that the movement is not dancing to the PR’s tune. And without any evidence that Bersih 2.0 is taking orders from or beholden to “foreign powers”, we should be able to identify a red herring when one is thrown our way.

Proof in the numbers

No matter who supports Bersih 2.0 and now Bersih 3.0, the proof that there is a need for citizens to express their dissatisfaction with the current electoral system is in the numbers.

BN politicians can declare all they want that the 28 April sit-in is unnecessary, or that Bersih 2.0 should be patient while the Election Commission attends to the recommendations by the Parliamentary Select Committee on Electoral Reforms. The fact is, the PSC’s recommendations aren’t good enough, not when the evidence is piling up that our electoral roll needs to be cleaned up and integrity returned to the electoral system.

Indeed, one of The Nut Graph’s columnists, Hwa Yue-Yi, recently found that the Election Commission website no longer shows any record of her previously gazetted voter registration.

The EC has also been bewilderingly reticent about being pro-active in ensuring free and fair elections. In fact, the EC has been complicit in gerrymandering that has benefited the BN and diminished the equality of each person’s vote. Hence, Bersih 3.0’s call for the EC to resign unless it takes measures to restore the public’s confidence in the agency.

Bad manners

I am constantly reminded of poor manners and sulky behaviour every time the BN says Bersih 2.0 has been infiltrated by the federal opposition. The truth is, Bersih 2.0 has opened its doors to all individuals, including the prime minister, organisations, and political parties who believe it is time to reform our electoral system.

The way the BN is acting right now is akin to guests who choose not to attend a party they have been invited to. And when others take up the invitation and start to benefit from being at the party, these uninterested guests start complaining and accusing the host of being puppets of the guests who turned up.

Police presence in downtown KL during the Bersih 2.0 rally on 9 July 2011

Really, what’s stopping the BN from joining the party? It could have just as easily ensured that the PR wasn’t the only coalition benefiting from the popular support Bersih 2.0 is enjoying. And yet, it chose to stay away from the 9 July 2011 rally. Not only that, it treated Bersih 2.0 with an iron fist for hosting the cause for free and fair elections.

It’s no surprise, then, that the only reason I can think of for the BN not wanting to associate with Bersih 2.0 is that the coalition does not support the call for free and fair elections. And that’s nobody’s doing except the BN’s. One just wishes the BN would have the honesty to say what its real problem is with Bersih 2.0 and the planned sit-in in Dataran Merdeka, rather than cast aspersions that attempt to distract from the real issues at hand.


Yes, in the days to come, the PR will ramp up its support just as we can expect the BN and all other state apparatus to disparage and cast doubts on Bersih 3.0. And yes, at Bersih 3.0, the PR’s presence will be visible and photos will show the movement’s leaders with those from the opposition coalition.

In many ways, that will be inevitable because of the way Malaysian politics is.

It will also be inevitable because few have the experience, resources and skills to manage large street demonstrations. The reality is, without the help of political parties like PKR, the DAP and especially PAS, it would have been near impossible for Bersih 2.0 to have ensured that last year’s 9 July rally was as peaceful as it was, police action notwithstanding.

Likewise, the organising expertise of these political parties will prove useful again in Bersih 3.0 unless the police and the BN administration can be trusted to ensure a smooth and safe sit-in in Dataran Merdeka.

Hence, in my opinion, seeking help from these political parties is a responsible choice, especially when in the past, the state and non-state actors have shown every indication of threatening violence, and with impunity, against peaceful citizens.

Thus, the question is, when the BN says that Bersih 2.0 and Bersih 3.0 have been hijacked by the opposition, are we smart enough to see beyond these simplistic declarations? Or will we let the state dictate to us which causes are worth supporting? 

Jacqueline Ann Surin thinks it’s rich of Home Minister Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein to tell the Bersih 3.0 organisers that its 28 April rally must be conducted peacefully. Over the past few months, Umno and Perkasa supporters have been the ones threatening and using violence against peaceful ceramah and rallies.

Post to Twitter Post to Google Buzz Post to Delicious Post to Digg Post to Facebook Post to StumbleUpon

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

30 Responses to “What’s wrong with Bersih 3.0?”

  1. Your problem is the proposition that the Barisan Government has no right to say what they say, and if they put forward their reasons, it is not to be believed.

    At the outset, the intelligence gathered about Ambiga Sreenivasan and her coalition was quite accurate. They have been financed by an external body, that body being George Soros’s civil societies.

    Ambiga herself has made the admission at various functions and in private records. In addition, she has admitted to receiving money given to her unlawfully by the Selangor state government
    (a matter that required disclosure and approval at the state assembly and not under the table to a political party parading as something else).

    She says on record the money is for another project (read overthrow of government and civil disturbances).

    It is not difficult to draw the conclusion that Ambiga, and by implication, Bersih, are the objects of destabilization of the state and civil government on a platform of fabrications and a foreign-financed campaign which she leads.

    If elections were not free and fair, why would her colleagues in the opposition not vacate their seats and give up government in those states where they had formed a majority in the last general elections, if it really were not “free and fair”?

    Why would it be legitimate for them to sit in governments formed out of elections that in her words were not “free and fair”, if that were the case. Otherwise, where is the proof that it was not “free and fair” and why does she not take it to court where such arguments and disputes belong? Is she not a lawyer and an officer of the courts, or is she saying otherwise.

    The government has a paramount obligation to crack a whip and crack it hard rounding up agent provocateurs like the Bersih mob and their leadership. There are other ways more civilized and democratic than Bersih’s to change the government. Clearly Bersih, Ambiga and the Opposition who have your ear and pen do not warrant such criticism. The BN does.

    • Samy says:

      Dear Gopal Raj Kumar,

      It’s Indian [Malaysians] like you who make this community as downtrodden as it is today. […] How can you not see the racial engineering that has disadvantaged the Indians and made us fall to the bottom of the social structure. You probably never went down to the lower ranks to know how difficult it is even to get admission to school or get their children registered with the NRD. People like you have caused this and we the people (Malaysians not Indians only) want to get control of our beloved country. […]

      • I am not Tamil, not Brahmin and not Ambiga nor you. Therefore your criticism is unwarranted and inaccurate.

        If a community is ‘downtrodden’ as you suggest the Malaysian Indians are for speaking the truth however hurtful that truth may be, then perhaps they do not deserve to rise above their stations of being downtrodden and should remain there wallowing in their self-made miseries.

    • Chze Lor says:

      Correct me if I am wrong, I never came through all this article (sic) before. I am pretty sure whatever assertion you said and commented [on] here will be big news if Ambiga herself admitted it especially in state-controlled media.

      • Ambiga’s admissions were made at a meeting in London later recorded on Malaysiakini and edited. A part of it is available on YouTube. It would not be big news because the embarrassment that is her opposition has no substance to it. It is something you choose not to see. The entire opposition mantra’s and allegations against government is a case of one finger of accusation pointed against government with the three remaining fingers of the accuser pointing back at the accuser.

        • Thanks for your comments 🙂 Could you pls provide the link to the YouTube report you refer to?

          Many thanks.

          • It is quite easy. Go to YouTube and punch in Malaysiakini Ambiga Bersih 2.0 or ask Malaysiakini. Failing that, I am happy to supply you with the link albeit the one Malaysiakini edited after the article appeared on my blog.

    • NSHINAH says:

      I agree with Gopal Raj Kumar.

      I have studied the history of how “Bersih” came into existence.

      You should too. Writing lengthy articles without facts are not worthy of praise and is not necessarily good journalism. Entertainment? Maybe.

      “Bersih” is foreign-funded. “Bersih” is inspired and orchestrated by foreign agencies which want to make use of local nationals to create chaos in their own country, and use the psy-war method to overthrow the legitimate government which they do not like.

      Read and look up artcles on NED, IRI, Council of Foreign Relations, Soros’ Open Society, etc.

      Read deeply. You, the author of your article in Nut Graph, must do research far beyond just listening to the superficial “noises”, snippets and speeches conducted by Anwar, Ambiga and company before you can be called a true journalist/writer worthy of any attention.

      Editor’s note: It might be of interest to read this article where Ambiga does admit Bersih received funds from two foreign organisations but they were for electoral delineation projects and NOT for the Bersih 2.0 rally.

    • KL Loo says:

      I don’t know where you got the so-called ‘admissions’ from but if all the accusations you threw at Ambiga were true then the police should do something about it. Why hasn’t it happened?

      Your ‘argument’ that the opposition should give up seats where they won the majority because the elections were not ‘free and fair’ is tantamount to the illogical argument that if the election had not been free and fair, the opposition would not have won big. Do you really think that a government would want to win every vote? How else to keep an appearance of democracy? They may be morons but they are not dumb. Try ‘opposition won DESPITE the unfair playing field’. If anything, they have more legitimacy compared to their BN counterparts.

      ‘There are other ways more civilized and democratic than Bersih’s to change the government.’ A peaceful sit-in demonstration is not civilized enough for you? If you meant election to change the government then you are invoking the chicken and egg circular argument again – tell me how to change the government when the rules make sure only minimum support is needed to win again and again? If you meant dialogue – I think people can tell when the government is insincere and that they are merely [using] delay tactics.

      • jebaok says:

        “Opposition won DESPITE the unfair playing field”. Precisely! My sentiments exactly. That being the case, PR would be the government now if elections were free & fair. Thanks Loo!

  2. Ng Ai Soo says:

    All democratic political parties should support free and fair elections. After all that is the basis of democracy… the use of free and fair elections to CHANGE the legislature if the public so deems at the ballot box. While it is not necessarily true that an uncorrupt democratic process will lead to a “good” government (there are good ones which are not democracies), it is absolutely true that a functioning democracy is required for the peaceful change of government by voters… that is the ONLY purpose of a democracy, to express the will of the people through the ballot box. I am therefore grateful for the author’s work to improve the integrity of our democracy and to keep our voting public truthfully informed.

    Equally I abhor any attempts to subvert our democracy or to spread self-serving lies or propaganda, more so when my tax money is used for these nefarious purposes. We should support anyone who resists this subversion, and if Bersih wants to clean up our electoral processes, then it is our DUTY to support Bersih. Further to this, I rather like the idea of having a permanent independent “Bersih” around to keep watch for us lest bad politicians be tempted to cheat us and subvert the system to preserve their rule. Perhaps we should incorporate a “Bersih”-type provision in our constitution.

  3. frags says:

    Right…the foreign influence bogey. I’m surprised so-called democratic governments still use it as an excuse to curtail the democratic rights of citizens…even after the Cold War. It is getting rather predictable, frankly.

    So where are the caches of weapons? The documents to prove they want to overthrow the monarchy? Or better yet, if upholding your stability is so important, why not abolish elections in the first place since opposition parties can be seen to be “creating chaos”.

  4. zamorin says:


    I must admit that you have perfected the art of turning mere conjecture into facts. Where is your proof that Ambiga is funded by foreign agents? And even if that was the case, that the agents have a dark agenda? Where is the proof that it was Soros who funded it? You then muddle the lake further by stating that the Malaysiakini article that has the info has been edited. Meaning, edited that info out? […]

  5. zamorin says:

    If these accusations were indeed true, you think BN will just keep quite and not arrest her? People have been arrested for much flimsier charges than that — for being communist agents and what not.

  6. izmora says:

    Looking back at the London riots and Bersih 2.0 and 3.0, it’s hard not to notice the differences between what happened there and here…Anyone..? Yup…in London most of the injured were police [officers] whereas here it’s the people who got clobbered…so what kind of policing is our police practising? No wonder they shot a boy…

    • Are you suggesting that where the police are injured in larger numbers, the riot is more justified or of a better quality? Is there meant to be a message in that statement of [yours]? The fact that the [Malaysian] police were able contain the mayhem and not get hurt is a sign of police professionalism. In the UK, they find it difficult to recruit people into the force. Not many pass the drug or criminal record check test there.

  7. Hearsay says:

    Come on guys…Everyone here seems to be commenting based on hearsay. If you so confidently say there is proof etc, where is it???!

    I.e. @NSHINAH — you studied the history? How sure are you that your sources are not just hearsay or twisted facts or in fact truth? Unless of course you were an ex-Bersih person, we can take you more seriously. But then again, this world is a world of scandals and cover-ups like what has been documented clearly.

    Next, foreign influences is just a simple excuse if true, yet it is hard to provide proof. The government shouts about it but when we ask for evidence they shudder and keep silent as a lamb, or at best reveal some but unbelievable, not-concrete evidence.

    Anyways, not saying you can’t comment and state your views but please do it with restraint. You don’t have to put people of other views down like you are the only one who is right. If you were, you’d be writing your own articles…not commenting.

  8. Dear Ms. Surin

    CONFIDENTIAL. for your eyes only. This is from the edited version which was a consequence of our article on Ambiga’s activities and those of Bersih’s.

    Malaysiakini withdrew it as quick as you could say Ambiga. The footage of Ambiga in full dialogue with her “friends” and “supporters in Australia, the UK and in Malaysia are part of our archives. They are not for public consumption”. Not yet at least.


    • Thank you.

      How do you know Malaysiakini withdrew the video “as quick as you could say Ambiga”? And you make it sound like the video is confidential and secret. If it’s available on YouTube, it’s clearly a public document and was not removed. Furthermore, Malaysiakini’s report on the video and the contents of the interview are also available on the site:

      I’d also like to know where you found the disclaimer you claim is part of the video footage i.e. The footage of Ambiga in full dialogue with her “friends” and “supporters in Australia, the UK and in Malaysia are part of our archives. They are not for public consumption”.

      Nothing in the video or the news report suggests that the Bersih 2.0 rally was foreign-funded. Indeed, a police investigation was launched and until today, there has been no evidence forthcoming to back up that claim despite the fact that police had access to Bersih 2.0’s computers and documents. I think it’s important to back up claims with evidence. If not, it’s merely conjecture and one has to wonder about the purpose of conjecture.

      • KW Mak says:


        From TNG’s comments policy: Making allegations or uncorroborated claims of any kind which cannot be proven will also not be entertained. Investigations of claims will only be conducted wherever feasible within The Nut Graph’s resources.

        Isn’t Mr Gopal’s statements categorised under “uncorroborated claims”? Not attacking nobody – just curious why Mr. Gopal gets special treatment… lol.


      • zamorin says:

        Here are some synonyms to describe the “proof” that is available from YouTube: conclusion, fancy, guess, guesstimate, guesswork, hunch, hypothesis, inference, notion, opinion, perhaps, presumption, shot in the dark, sneaking suspicion, stab in the dark, supposition, surmise, theorising, theory.

        Best would be: fiction.

        And has nothing to do with facts.

  9. Kong Kek Kuat says:

    It´s official then. Looking at the number of Umno & BN cybertroops [think “lackeys”] here on TNG, I suppose we can certainly say that Umno & BN believe that there is a real threat that they are going to get their thick hide skinned this coming elections.

  10. Dear Jacqueline Surin,

    I do not intend to indulge you further with information you require to cover your infantile reporting on this blog. What I know about how quickly Malaysiakini withdrew its piece on Ambiga’s admissions, then restored it (unless someone else did it which is also possible), has little to do with the fact that Ambiga did make the admissions.

    To take it further, what do you mean by the word “quickly?”. That is if the word “quickly” is at issue here. The facts remain irrefutable. Malaysiakini’s interview with the woman is but one. She has been taped, recorded (in more than electronic means) by a number of sources. The original issue was about you not knowing she had made admissions to receiving outside help and illegal funds(Selangor government).

    You now wish to expand the issues to cover the extent of your journalistic incompetence to other areas of the original topic of Ambiga’s disclosures.

    The original document by Malaysiakini was not for publication in the first instance. But as a journalist you ought to have known that rather than to have obtained the information about the document and its attendant circumstances from a third source like me. But then again this is The Nut Graph, is it not?

    You may be her mouthpiece or an apologist for her and that’s fine as it is your right to stand behind whosoever you see fit and to back whosoever you choose in this regard. But as a journalist? I ask you, where is your independence and balance?

    As to the rest of your groupies who use words like “hearsay” to rebut the evidence. “Hearsay” is what’s reported in a publication like this. “Hearsay” is not something to be excluded or ignored unless it falls within one of the few exceptions to admitting hearsay in a court.

    Ambiga will never take her claims against government and their agencies to court. She has no evidence of the claims she makes sufficient to sustain a good case against them.

  11. Vin says:

    I don’t get it. Regardless of how Ambiga is funded, isn’t the fact that our elections are not transparent and that the chief of our EC is [said to be] a member of UMNO (meaning to say it’s dubious that he’s neutral) enough grounds for us to fight for free and fair elections? I don’t think BERSIH has in anyway implied that our current government should step down. Only that the way our elections are carried out should be looked into. Whether BN or PR wins is entirely besides the point. The point is for a government that the majority wants to be in place.

    • Perhaps what’s required is independent evidence that supports the contention that the elections in Malaysia are not free or fair or transparent.

      There is an assumption that the flatulence of Ambiga and her followers about elections being not fair or free or rigged is the gospel truth.

      Infantile arguments and repeated slurs against individuals and a government of itself does not amount to anything but that.

      There are many in the community at large who agree and who support the notion that in a democracy we all have a part to play in keeping government honest (“Keeping the bastards honest,” said the late Don Chip founder of the Australian Democrats) and efficient.

      Ambiga assumes she is the anointed amongst us to undertake that role. Wrong. Each of us and collectively we all have a role to play and to play it responsibly.

      Ambiga does nothing more than to assemble a loose raft of fools to her anti-government, anti-Malay tirades in an effort to promote her own political career and ambitions.

      Ambiga has no valid mandate to speak for the rakyat. She may believe that she has one but she has none.

      And to assume that no one else is doing anything to promote good governance in government which is what she and her supporters would like the world to believe they are doing, is equally foolhardy.

      There are many silent individuals who have managed to get the attention of government and provide some input responsibly in order to effect change. They do not make headlines or cause riots.

      The old saying: “A good vine needs no bush”.
      Ambiga has muddied the water for herself and those who seek change (not necessarily by changing the party that rules).

      An attack on UMNO is necessarily an attack on Malays. So till you and Ambiga have the evidence that is both independent and admissible the allegations you make are for your own consumption in this regard and has no currency with the majority.

      The shoe is now on the other foot and I say she complains too loudly and too much.

      • Vin says:

        I dont think the issue at hand is Ambiga or her screaming rallies. I think the issue we’re currently facing is that some of us aren’t convinced of the integrity of our electoral system and are hence calling for audits and inspections to clarify and hopefully dispel our doubts. I was under the notion that Bersih supporters are supporting an organisation that provides them a platform to voice their doubts regarding the current electoral system and not a rally to support Ambiga. Bersih is made up of people and not Ambiga alone. Surely gathering peacefully to bring attention to something so many of us question is valid in a democratic country. I don’t see how Bersih is an attack on UMNO; I think everyone would be making as big a fuss if the chief of EC was presumably a member or supporter of PR or any other political party. I shudder to think of what we’ve come to if every time we question our electoral system, it is seen as being anti-Malay. If I’m not mistaken, there are Malays who support Bersih. I believe people supporting Bersih, and not Ambiga alone, are fighting for democracy and that is in no way a racial issue.

        Also, I think infantile arguments and slurs that “Ambiga does nothing more than to assemble a loose raft of fools to her anti-government, anti-Malay in an effort to promote her own political career and ambitions”, too, does not amount to anything but that.

        • If only. If only. If there were concerns and genuine concerns that we are playing with a stacked deck of cards then we need some proof of those assertions.

          To make allegations of a criminal nature, because that’s what it is, against the Election Commission without substantiating those claims other than through slurs, slogans and vilification of individuals and the government may impress you and Ambiga and her supporters. It does not impress the majority. If it did, they too would have been out baying for blood.

          But to make those allegations and then go to the streets in defiance of a court order says much more than what I have alluded to in my comments. She is a fool, a charlatan and one with a massive ego to boot. Pity as a lawyer she is unable to take that first fundamental step required of a competent lawyer to prosecute such allegations. The form for it is not the streets but the courts.

          The evidence is not her word or screaming slogans but evidence of the sort that can and should in such circumstances as she alleges be admissible in a court of law.

          What many fail to realise is that the rest of the nation is not asleep. Not unaware and not politically immature. And neither are the rest of the nation rabid enough to take to the streets over an individual’s great desire for sensationalism.

          Till now Ambiga has failed dismally as a lawyer, as a politician or a social activist to convince the vast majority of her far-fetched, unsubstantiated though controversial claims in respect of the Election Commission’s alleged misdeeds.

          • Says Who? says:

            Notice this Gopal Raj Guy always wants to have the last say on things.

            Obviously he keeps track of TNG a lot and comments everytime there is a reply.

            That means he values the impact TNG has generated. Why bother to reply if you are not interested!

            My comments would be short and quick.

            1) Keep up the good work Jacqueline Ann Surin! We from your alma mater in Penang are proud of you!

            2) Keep up the good work Datuk Ambiga!
            Burger sellers and their insensitivities, veteran army men who brought shame to themselves are no match for your courage of steel!

            3)I’m tired of armchair critics like Gopal Raj Kumar who are totally blind to what is happening at the ground. What are your comments on the harassment of Datuk Ambiga?

            (Anyway you are entitled to your opinion.)

            4) To the 350-400K people who took part in Bersih 1, 2, 3, Lynas, Bersih Worldwide, and Bersih in other states – I salute you!

            Yes, the rest of the nation is not asleep. We are aware of what is happening to our beloved country!

  12. zamorin says:

    More that that, he lives in his own delusionary bubble. None of his “facts” can be validated. It will not hold water in any serious debate. […]

  13. No, Gopal Raj Kumar does not want or does not have to have the last say. The last word on this subject is perhaps from the former Premier of the State of New South Wales Bob Carr, now foreign minister of Australia. Carr’s wife is a Malaysian woman of Chinese Indian parentage. He has a more intimate knowledge of Malaysia give or take a few slants based on his foreign policy briefs for the day to meet Australia’s own political objectives for the place.

    Car resoundingly approved of Malaysia’s electoral system, its democracy and its government and rejected Anwar’s calls for monitoring Malaysia’s parliamentary elections in 2013.

    Carr is foreign minister of Australia with an excellent and unblemished record for diplomacy and probity. Anwar and his party Bersih and Ambiga have nothing of that order to their credit. It may have once existed when Paul Wolfowitz and his neo cons ran riot in Washington.

    Anwar is not just spent, he is without credibility as is his party. The same applies to Ambiga to people like you who blindly follow these sloganeering policy free zones you call an Opposition.

    Let Ambiga and Bersih prove that there is corruption within the electoral commission and that elections in Malaysia are not free and fair.That call to her has been out since she made the allegations.

    As for what the Australians and the Americans now say about Ambiga and Bersih, Pakatan and Anwar, go digging for it. You are a “journal”, an alternative media piece presumably capable of the truth.

Most Read (Past 3 Months)

Most Comments (Past 3 Months)

  • None found




  • The Nut Graph


Switch to our mobile site