Dr M VS LKY, again ?

Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad dismissed in a recent book Lee Kuan Yew’s achievements as the founding father of Singapore, and accused the island republic’s minister mentor of once wanting to be prime minister of Malaysia.

“The fact remains that he is the mayor of Singapore,” the former Malaysian prime minister was quoted as saying in “Doctor M: Operation Malaysia — Conversations with Mahathir Mohamad”, written by US journalist Tom Plate based on interviews with Dr Mahathir over the last two years.

“This is something he doesn’t like. He wants to be big, you see and he feels that we took away his opportunity to lead a real country.”

Dr Mahathir also described Lee as “a big frog in a small pond” whose ambitions of being prime minister of Malaysia resulted in Tunku Abdul Rahman, Malaysia’s first prime minister, “realising he had to move Kuan Yew out.”

Singapore had joined Malaya, Sabah and Sarawak to form the Federation of Malaysia in 1963 when Tunku was still prime minister.

Parliament voted to expel Singapore in 1965 following conflict over pro-Bumiputera policies favoured by Umno but rejected by Lee’s People’s Action Party (PAP).

Although their terms as prime minister only overlapped for nine years, Dr Mahathir and Lee have been at loggerheads for as long as Malaysia and Singapore have existed.

The two statesmen have clashed ever since both were in the Malaysian Parliament in the 1960s and the feud has continued up to now, with two books published recently that contain attacks on each other’s legacies.

“People look at him as an intellectual, as something more than just an ordinary politician, so he is always invited to give his views on things, and to that extent he is something bigger than Singapore,” Dr Mahathir, who was prime minister from 1981 to 2003, added in the latest book....more

Letter to Lee Kuan Yew for a change of heart

Mr Lee Kuan Yew
Minister Mentor

Dear Mr Lee,

As you grieve over the loss of Mdm Kwa Geok Choo, many Singaporeans grieve with you. Everytime someone dear to us passes away, the pain is deep. Losing a loved one is the cruelest act that life can inflict on humans.

Even as you mourn the loss of Mdm Kwa, I am certain that you think of the happier moments that the both of you shared and that you, of all the people in this world, were the one to have had the pleasure of spending a lifetime with her. That, at least, is to be celebrated.

But while you had Mdm Kwa on whom you cultivated your affection, there were others who were deprived of that very same joy. They were not separated from their loved ones by that surly grasp of death, but by political power with which you wielded, and wielded so ruthlessly and unjustly.

You had Mr Chia Thye Poh locked up for most of his adult life. He was incarcerated when he was only 25 and regained his freedom only when he turned 57. Even Nelson Mandela spent less years under detention. The best years of Mr Chia’s life was so inhumanely taken away. He had a girlfriend who could not wait for him and who left him when he was still in prison.

Dr Lim Hock Siew married Dr Beatrice Chia. When I met them recently, I saw the love – unspoken but abiding – that they had for each other despite the fact that you had kept them apart for 20 years.

Then there is Mr Said Zahari whom you also imprisoned for years, 17 years to be exact. He spoke lovingly of his late wife, Salamah, whom he adored. She faithfully and lovingly tended home while waiting for her soulmate to return and to hold her and to talk with her. She struggled with their four children, running a foodstall to eke out a living while Said languished in prison. Their children often had no money to go to school.

To this day, he asks for God’s forgiveness for breaking the oath he made with Salamah to be together when they married each other. When she died in 2004, his heart must have broken into a thousand pieces, just like yours is breaking into a thousand pieces.

While you loved your wife, they loved theirs too.

There are scores of others who cannot be reunited with their families because you have made it so. Ms Tang Fong Har, who was detained in 1987 and who subsequently fled to Hong Kong, has been wanting to return to Singapore to see her ailing mother. But she cannot because there is still the threat of her being re-arrested if she returns.

Others like Mr Tang Liang Hong are also separated from their families because they cannot return to Singapore without facing incarceration.

I, too, have family. My wife wishes for me to return to Taiwan with her to be with her family. I cannot fulfill that obligation because you have made it so. I did go to Taiwan last year, but only to attend my father-in-law’s funeral. He had asked about me before he died but by the time I got to his bedside after I managed to get the Official Assignee’s approval to leave the country, he had lost consciousness. I never got to say goodbye.

It pains me to think that the only time I can be with my wife and children in Taiwan is when someone in the family dies.

You have taken away much of what I have but despite all that you have done to me and mine, I bear you no ill-will. As I said to you during our trial in 2008, you are an intelligent man, I only hope that you will become a wise one. I meant it then and I mean it now. Love and the relationships we have with family and friends are what matter most. Riches and power mean little when those dearest to us leave us.

I extend to you my deepest sympathies on the demise of Mdm Kwa. I want to express my condolence in the sincerest manner I know how. While I commiserate with you on your loss, I would be remiss if I did not take this opportuinity to tell you, if you don’t already know, how much pain you have inflicted on your political opponents and whose families you have torn apart, the same kind of pain that you presently feel.

In the remaining time while you still walk this earth with us, turn from your ways. Free yourself from the prison of wealth and power that keeps you from cherishing that most precious of life’s qualities – humanity. It is still not too late.

Sincerely,

Chee Soon Juan

(from THE TEMASEK REVIEW)
Dr. Chee Soon Juan is the Secretary General of the Singapore Democratic Party (SDP).

MALAYSIA ACCORDING TO LKY, SINGAPORE ACCORDING TO DR M

Singapore’s founding father Lee Kuan Yew still strongly believes that Malaysians would be enjoying his city-state’s brand of nationalism and multi-racialism today, if both nations had not been split in 1965.

In an interview with the New York Times, the 86-year-old Minister Mentor reflectively expressed that the first regret he had of his colourful career was having been “turfed out” of Malaysia.

In his conversation with the New York Times, Lee claimed that if Malaysia’s founding father Tunku Abdul Rahman had decided to keep both nations together 45 years ago, much of what Singapore had achieved today in terms of equality among the races would be likewise be achieved in Malaysia.

“I think if the Tunku had kept us together, what we did in Singapore, had Malaysia accepted a multiracial base for their society, much of what we’ve achieved in Singapore would be achieved in Malaysia,” he said, according to the transcript of the interview, conducted on September 1.

Lee, Singapore’s longest serving prime minister, claimed that if Singapore had not seceded from Malaysia, the country would have improved inter-racial relations and an improved holistic situation today.

“Now we have a very polarised Malaysia — Malays, Chinese and Indians in separate schools, living separate lives and not really getting on with one another. You read them. That’s bad for us as close neighbours,” he said.

He pressed on with 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.

Meanwhile, according to Dr Mahathir, 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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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?

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".

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.

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.

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.

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.

The smart autocrats of Singapore & Malaysia, the two 'MM'

Dumb autocrats use the army, goon squads and guns to repress the opposition. Smart autocrats use the law courts to do it. Indonesia's Soeharto was a dumb autocrat. Singapore's MM Lee Kuan Yew and Malaysia's MM Mahathir Mohamad were smart autocrats.

The Lee-Mahathir model keeps the outward facade of a functioning democracy, with elections, a parliament and supposedly independent courts. Behind it, the systems are gutted to guarantee the ruling party remains ruling.

In Singapore, where Lee's People's Action Party has been in power for 50 continuous years, the government simply sues opposition politicians for defamation. A tame court hands down ruinous damages, opponents end up in bankruptcy, jail or exile.

When a meddlesome foreigner, the deputy director for Asia of Human Rights Watch, Phil Robertson, said last month that ''Singapore is the textbook example of a politically repressive state'', the government just shrugged and said: ''Singapore is a democratic state with a clean and transparent government.''

The army is in its barracks and there are no goon squads smashing through people's front doors at 3am. It's all legit, see? The foreign investors and governments play along. So what if the ruling party holds 98 per cent of the seats in parliament? It has an elected parliament, and surely that's good enough.

In Malaysia, Mahathir was never as subtle or as smooth as Lee. But Mahathir was still a smart autocrat who kept control through his puppetry of the judicial system. The pivotal moment was in 1988 when Mahathir complained that the courts were ''too independent''.

He purged the chief judicial officer, the Lord President, and suspended the five chief justices of the Supreme Court. The court system has never given any further trouble to the Barisan Nasional, or National Front, since. Together with its predecessor, the BN has ruled Malaysia continuously for 54 years.

It's infinitely smarter to use legal instruments to purge judges than to use guns against protesters. A judicial massacre makes lousy TV. You won't see one live on CNN. So it remains hidden from international view. Yet it can be every bit as repressive. So when Mahathir faced a power struggle in 1998 with his deputy prime minister and heir apparent, the charismatic Anwar Ibrahim, he naturally turned to the courts to purge his younger rival.....more here

Singapore Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew :“good thing” to welcome so many Chinese immigrants as Singaporeans have become less “hard-driving”

In an extensive interview with the National Geographic, MM Lee Kuan Yew continues to support the ruling party’s liberal immigration policies though he is aware that many Singaporeans are unhappy with the influx of immigrants.

“Over time, Singaporeans have become less hard-driving and hard-striving. This is why it is a good thing that the nation has welcomed so many Chinese immigrants.” Lee was quoted saying.

Lee describes the country’s new subjects as “hungry,” with parents who “pushed the children very hard.”

“If native Singaporeans are falling behind because the spurs are not stuck into the hide, that is their problem,” he quipped.

Desperate to boost Singapore’s flagging birth rate, the government opened the floodgates to immigrants which have changed the island state’s demographics radically over the past few years.

Foreigners now make up 36 per cent of the population, up from 14 per cent in 1990.

According to Home Affairs Minister Wong Kan Seng, there were over 90,000 PRs and 20,000 new citizens last year.

A majority of these newcomers hail from China and India with Malaysians, Filipinos, Indonesians making up the rest.

There are few immigrants from developed countries like Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong, Australia or New Zealand.

Even for Chinese immigrants, most of them originate from the poorer inland provinces instead of affluent coastal cities like Shanghai, Guangzhou, Shenzhen and Tianjin.

In a recent poll conducted by Gallup in July, Singapore is not even featured among the top five destinations for immigration for college students. Their first choice is United States, followed by France and South Korea.

Due to the difficulty in attracting the most talented immigrants to settle in Singapore, the ruling party has “lowered” its standards to such an extent that even construction workers, cleaners and masseurs are offered PRs and citizenship.

The state media reported a Chinese construction worker whose son just passed out as a SAF officer. He became a PR and citizen within 12 years of arrival in Singapore.

Another China national and Singapore PR, Mdm Song Jin, was sentenced to nine weeks imprisonment for torching the fish farm of a lover.

It is not sure how these China nationals are classified as “talents” in the first place and if they are really “hungrier” than locals.

Lee has long eschewed social welfare benefits, claiming that it will create a “crutch” mentality which will cause Singapore to go down the slippery slope of Western-style “welfarism”.

Under Lee’s draconian rule, Singaporeans are expected to work for as long as they can to support themselves without burdening the state.

On the other hand, the government is flushed with cash accumulated from years of budget surpluses.

Lee is the Chairman of Government Investment Corp and his daughter-in-law Ho Ching is in charge of Temasek Holdings, both of which are giant sovereign wealth funds owned by the Ministry of Finance.

A Wall Street Journal article in September reported that “Government of Singapore Investment Corp suffered a loss around 59 billion Singapore dollars (US$41.6 billion) in the fiscal year ended March.”

Public opinion counts little for Lee who always thought of himself as the only person fit to govern Singapore.

As early in 1962, he warned Singaporeans of what to expect under his one-man rule:

“If I were in authority in Singapore indefinitely without having to ask those who are governed whether they like what is being done, then I would not have the slightest doubt that I could govern much more effectively in their interests.”

Lee’s authoritarian style of governance can only survive in Singapore. He would have been booted out of office a long time ago if he was in Hong Kong, Taiwan or Malaysia.

In a famous quote, Lee said,

“If you are going to lower me into the grave, and I feel something is wrong, I will get up.”

He should know that this is impossible even when he is being taken care of by the best physicians in Singapore.

The National Geographic also interviewed renowned Singapore psychiatrist Calvin Fons who gave an interesting analogy:

“When the country was young, there was a need for wise oversight. A firm hand. Now we are in adolescence, which can be a questioning, troublesome period. Coming into it without the presence of the patriarch will be a test.”

Young Singaporeans are ready to show Lee what they really think of him and his rubber-stamped party. The question is whether he will still be around then to witness Singapore’s very own “political tsunami”.

- Source

Singapore's Lee Kuan Yew pisses off Chinese netizens

Singapore's ever so feisty and sprightly 86 year old Minister Mentor1 Lee Kuan Yew has gone halfway around the globe to meet US President Barack Obama in Washington ahead of his debut Asian tour that will include China, Japan, South Korea and Singapore. Lee's tour also saw him meeting two key Cabinet members of the Obama administration - Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner.

In his various meetings rubbing shoulders with very important minds, the sage-like Lee who has often been counted on to interpret Asia to the west did not hesitate to tell the Americans what he saw in his crystal ball.

"The 21st century will be a contest for supremacy in the Pacific because that's where the growth will be," said Lee. "If you do not hold your ground in the Pacific you cannot be a world leader."

Prior to his meetings with Obama and Clinton, Lee received a lifetime achievement award from the US-ASEAN Business Council in a high profile event witnessed by the likes of Henry Kissinger. In his keynote address delivered at the gala dinner last Thursday in Washington, Lee urged the US to remain engaged in Asia:

The size of China makes it impossible for the rest of Asia, including Japan and India, to match it in weight and capacity in about 20 to 30 years. So we need America to strike a balance.

Those comments had the effect of rubbing up Chinese netizens the wrong way. Within a few hours of the Global Times 《环球时报》report hitting the interwebs, Lee's comments attracted the fury of hundreds of Chinese netizens, but wait a minute, there's more.

In building any new East Asian architecture, Lee said the United States must be "an important part" of it, adding that "it would be a serious mistake for the region to define East Asia in closed or, worse, in racial terms."

Here is a snippet from a Global Times blogpost summarising the reactions of Chinese netizens (with translation from the Malaysian Insider):

Many of those who responded were upset and said that Lee had treated the Chinese as outsiders although they had treated Singaporeans as “among their own”.

“Lee Kuan Yew spoke for the feeling of those in the West who fear China’s rise would harm their vested interests,” said one netizen.

Another described Lee as “a political animal”, saying that while he “relies on China to develop his country’s economy, he is ushering wolves here to deal with China”.

A third posting said: “Just because he has achieved some success in Singapore, he dares to play the guiding light that shows US the way. If he has the stuff, he should go to Africa and offer tips on how to shake off poverty and achieve wealth.”

Another posting brushed off his comments as insignificant as Singapore was a small country.

“Lee Kuan Yew had made such comments likely because Singapore is a small country that needs an interplay of balances in the international arena,” said the netizen.

“However, what significance do his words carry when the reality is that for a voice to be heard and the views realised, one needs to be truly powerful,” the netizen asked.

A few highly vitriolic essays written by netizens have been given prominent positions in the blog sections of mainstream media portals. Here are just two of them:

李光耀的言论暴露新加坡是美国围堵中国的桥头堡
"Lee Kuan Yew's comments reveal that Singapore is but a pawn of the US in countering China"

无耻梦想：李光耀想让新加坡统治整个东盟当以色列！
"Shameless dreams: Lee Kuan Yew wants Singapore to rule ASEAN like an Israel!"

The response by the Chinese mainstream media has been somewhat more measured. Most reports underscored the online fury among netizens, and then weighed in on political scientists to reflect sentiment on the ground. Here are a few headlines:

李光耀谈话显示东盟信任美国胜过中国 [China News Agency]
"Lee Kuan Yew's comments show that ASEAN trusts the US more than it trusts China"

石齐平：李光耀为何建言美国制衡中国 [Phoenix TV]
"Shi Qiping (political commentator): Why Lee Kuan Yew wants the US to counterbalance China"

李明波：李光耀说啥不必太在意 [Guangzhou Daily]
"Li Mingbo (Guangzhou Daily columnist): No need to pay any heed to what Lee Kuan Yew says"

李光耀亲美言论激怒中国网民 新加坡多家媒体辩解 [Guangzhou Daily]
"Lee Kuan Yew's latest comments anger Chinese netizens, Singapore media offer an explanation"

Footnotes:
1 Prior to this appointment, Lee Kuan Yew held the title of Senior Minister when he passed over the prime ministership to Goh Chok Tong. In 2004, when Lee Kuan Yew's son Lee Hsien Loong became the nation's third prime minister, Goh Chok Tong became the Senior Minister and the new title of Minister Mentor was created for Lee Senior. Together, the three are often referred to as the "Father, Son and Holy Goh" of Singaporean politics.

( Source: "Singapore's Lee Kuan Yew pisses off Chinese netizens" )

Umno would rather ‘burn bridges’ than sell sand ?

Umno leaders say if Singapore wants sand as part of the deal for the third bridge, it’s a “no go”.

For them, whatever the benefits the construction of the third bridge may bring must not come at the expense of the country’s sovereignty.

This issue came up when Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew said that it would not make sense for Singapore to agree on a third bridge if Johor does not lift its ban on the export of sand to the republic, which has been in place since 1997. He was speaking at a press conference during his recent trip to Malaysia.

Government officials say Najib’s administration is willing to resolve outstanding bilateral issues with Singapore and consider lifting the ban on sale of sand to the republic.

And Umno is not the only one with this view. It’s got a friend from the most unlikely of places – its arch-rival PKR is also against the sale of sand to Singapore.

PKR leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim rejected the idea outright.

But for some, the third bridge proposal is an idea too far-fetched and the government should not even waste time discussing the sand issue.

Datuk Shahrir Samad who is the Umno parliamentarian for Johor Baru, said the government should think of ways to improve the existing bridge that links his constituency and the country to the republic instead of hollering about the third bridge.

“It’s bullshit. The government should address the many problems facing the existing bridge, like traffic congestions and so on, and not waste time on something totally unnecessary,” he said.

Meanwhile, Singapore Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew said the Singapore Government had seen the change in its two closest neighbours, Malaysia and Indonesia, with rising religiosity where more Muslims were now praying five times a day and covering themselves.

Singapore government's concern is not with specific developments in either of these countries, but with the broader and longer-term trend of Islamic resurgence, he said.

He traced the resurgence to the influence of the oil states, in particular Saudi Arabia for the Sunnis and Iran for the Shi'ites, which have set their more austere versions of Islam as the “gold standard” for other Muslim countries to follow.

Lee asked Nik Aziz what PAS's attitude to Singapore would be if the opposition party were to take over the federal government one day.

The Mentri Besar said he would treat Singapore as he treated the Chinese and Indians who live in Kelantan.

Lee also spoke to Datuk Husam Musa, Kelantan's Executive Councillor in Charge of Finance and an up-and-coming PAS leader.

Husam told the Minister Mentor that Islam treats all human beings as equal.

“Then he says: 'Well, we hope one day you will accept Islam as a part of your religion, and we will cooperate',” Lee said of his conversation with Husam.

“I told him that the Chinese have had their Muslims since the invasion of Genghis Khan... and they're still not converted, so we left it at that.”

Malaysia's MM Vs Singapore's MM

Mahathir Mohamad, Malaysia's MM pulled no punches today and called the Singapore leader “a little Emperor … of a tiny Middle Kingdom” lecturing Malaysian leaders on how to run the country in his recent “triumphant visit to Malaysia”

“During Lee Kuan Yew’s triumphant visit to Malaysia, he made it known to the Malaysian supplicants that Singapore regards the lands within 6,000 miles radius of Singapore as its hinterland. This includes Beijing and Tokyo and, of course, Malaysia,” Dr Mahathir said in posting at his popular www.chedet.cc.

“Of course this self-deluding perception places Singapore at the centre of a vast region. It is therefore the latter day Middle Kingdom. The rest are peripheral and are there to serve the interest of this somewhat tiny Middle Kingdom,” he added.

Dr Mahathir pointed out Kuan Yew’s explanation that Singapore Chinese would control the “Iskandar whatever” was not justified as Malays could work there, sarcastically saying “It is good to know that Malays can also work in their own country. I wonder as what? Maybe someone should make a study of the Malays of Singapore just to know what it is like to be a Malay minority in their own country”

He also made a stinging observation about Kuan Yew’s visit to Kuala Lumpur, Seremban, Ipoh, Penang, Kota Bharu and Kuantan with his delegation in the past week.

“All those who met the great man from the little country were lectured on how Malaysia should be run. We should not have any more problems now. We have been told the direction to take. MCA must help Umno to win because Singapore does not want an Islamic party like PAS to win. We must ensure this.

“Sorry, PAS. Working with the DAP, the offspring of PAP has not endeared you to Mr Lee,” he wrote.

But he promised this was not the end of his diatribe against Kuan Yew.

“I have a lot more to say about this little Emperor but I will reserve it for later,” Dr Mahathir vowed.

Do you still remember, the querulous Mahathir once said, "Singapore is a tiny country. Don't talk big."

What sparked off the controversy that time was MM Lee's comment that the attitude of Malaysia and Indonesia towards the Republic was shaped by the way they treated their own ethnic Chinese minorities

He added: "My neighbours both have problems with their Chinese. They are successful, they're hardworking and therefore they are systematically marginalised, even in education"

"And they want Singapore, to put it simply, to be like their Chinese, compliant"

Mr Lee said Singapore must have a government which must be "firm but polite", able to deal with difficult neighbours "who want to pressure us to build pretty bridges without giving us commensurate benefits".

"You need a government that will be able to not only have the gumption but the skill to say no in a very quiet, polite way that doesn't provoke them into doing something silly," he said.

Surely Dr Mahathir can’t agree to Najib giving in to Singapore’s demands like what is currently happening. Are we going to see Dr Mahathir going berserk like back in 2006 with all these concessions Najib is granting Singapore?



THE MODERN MIDDLE KINGDOM

1. Ancient China considered itself the centre of the world and called itself the Middle Kingdom. And well it should. It was far more advanced in every way than Europe of the Dark Ages. Maybe China is thinking of making a comeback.

2. But we already have a new Middle Kingdom now. During Lee Kuan Yew's triumphant visit to Malaysia he made it known to the Malaysian supplicants that Singapore regards the lands within 6000 miles radius of Singapore as its hinterland. This includes Beijing and Tokyo and of course Malaysia.

3. Of course this self-deluding perception places Singapore at the centre of a vast region. It is therefore the latter day Middle Kingdom. The rest are peripheral and are there to serve the interest of this somewhat tiny Middle Kingdom.

4. Kuan Yew also explained that the fear Singapore Chinese would control Iskandar whatever is not justified. Malays can also work there. It is good to know that Malays can also work in their own country. I wonder as what? Maybe someone should make a study of the Malays of Singapore just to know what it is like to be a Malay minority in their own country.

5. As for the 3 sen per 1000 gallons of raw water supplied to Singapore Lee says it was absurd for the former Prime Minister of hinterland Malaysia to ask to increase it to RM8 per 1000 gallons. I don't know where he got this. Some Malaysian officers did suggest this figure but we were ready to bargain and maybe settle for RM3. And why not? Johore sells raw water to Melaka for 30 sen, 1000% higher than to Singapore. And Melaka is, I believe, a part of Malaysia! Some Malaysians may see the irony of this.

6. The great 5th Prime Minister has decided that since the people of Johore did not want to sell sand to Singapore, Malaysia would not build any bridge, straight or crooked, or negotiate and settle the other issues like the Central Provident Fund, the Railway land. Maybe the 5th Prime Minister thinks he is punishing Singapore. Actually he is giving Singapore what its wants including the 3 sen per 1000 gallons water until 2061. Think of how many grains of nasi lemak we can buy with 3 sen in 2061. Imagine what 1000 gallons will earn for Singapore at that time. Can't think of a more astute PM for Malaysia.

7. All those who met the great man from the little country were lectured on how Malaysia should be run. We should not have anymore problems now. We have been told the direction to take. MCA must help UMNO to win because Singapore does not want an Islamic Party like PAS to win. We must ensure this. Sorry PAS. Working with the DAP, the offspring of PAP has not endeared you to Mr Lee.

8. I have a lot more to say about this little Emperor but I will reserve it for later.

- taken from Chedet.co.cc