The first “Fight Rising Crime” public hearing of the Parliamentary Caucus on Human Rights and Good Governance will be held in Johor Baru on Sunday, 8th July 2007 at 2.30 p.m. at Tropical Inn, Jalan Gereja.
Please help to pass the word, by all means available, including blogs, SMS and word of mouth, to have a capacity attendance.
Let this be a people-centred, people-driven and people-empowered event.
http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/07/02/news/india.php
“Everyone wants to loot this country. The only deterrent is to hang a few corrupt persons from the lamp post…” Is this the reason the government wants to control bloggers? If India can do it, why not this country? See http://fightcorruption.wikidot.com/
Very good. Invite Singaporeans too.
Uncle LIm,
Altantuya’s case, one question remains unanswered, can you bring this to parliament and demand answer – why on earth would the government, or a government owned company(ies) for that matter appoint a third party consultant for purchase that they can negotiate directly (bilaterally). How many contracts are done this way, how much monies are actually paid to these middleman/women? I need to know how much taxpayers money have been wasted over the last 5 years. Thanks
It’s a sad irony that the opposition parliamentarians have to spend so much time fighting crime……
….. whilst BN parliamentarians condone (and even perpetrate crimes such as corruption)…..
….and the Police…..well, the police……yes, the police…………. what on earth is the police doing?
Now BN politicians busy fighting CTOS becos CTOS was alleged to have cause some Bumi businessmen to have loans rejected. Why would anyone fear CTOS unless he had a “history”. There are some business men who open sdn bhd which borrow and go bust; open another one get contract, go bust et infinitum. These are the directors who fear CTOS and BN is trying to protect them.
CTOS is necessary in business world, they obtain their information from public domain! heck if it in public domain why the minister so kiasu one?!
Whoa, ini macam also can ah? What is the Internal Security “Saya tak tahu” Minister gonna do about this?
http://the-malaysian.blogspot.com/2007/07/altantuya-murder-trial-i-was-confined.html
…her cautioned statement to the police was not true as it was made under duress. She also claimed the police had recorded her statement on matters which she did not mention. …the threat came from a Malay man on June 11. However, she could not recognise the caller’s voice and his telephone number registered on the screen of her handphone. “The caller said don’t be a witness or you’ll be shot,” said Rohaniza.
Kool!
Izrafeil or whatever,
Whenever the government enters into a defense contract, there is always a bumiputra company which acts as intermediary between government and UMNO and the foreign vendors or suppliers. Why? Because of the commission. Be it aircraft, navy vessels or any other military hardware, there is a commission to be earned for UMNO. How else do they get the money to spend during the elections?? Of course individuals involved are free to line their pockets and they include the PM and DPM and Minister of Defense and their wives and mistresses as unofficial representatives of UMNO in the transaction.
Gentlemen, the businessmen having suffered from CTOS are not only bumis – even non bumis. CTOS has its sources in companies and registry and the courts to check who and who have been sued and CTOS upload this information into database and for a fee give information to (mainly) the banks checking credit. When a person sued, settles out of court or in court his liability, this piece of information of withdrawal of the writ/summons or consent judgment is somewhat more difficult for CTOs to obtain from the courts as compared to (say) who suffers a writ/summons to be filed against him. Hence its database records a person being sued without the concomitant record of the claim being withdrawn or discharged against that person. So when that person whose claim against him has been withdrawn goes to any bank for a loan or credit card he suffers his application being rejected. Now that person cannot hold the bank responsible because its the bank’s prerogative to deal with whom it is comfortbale. Neither can the bank take recourse against CTOS whose incomplete records causes it to lose business because CTOS’ provision of such services is subject to clear disclaimer that it is not responsible for accuracy of data due to changing circumstances.
It is the public who suffer. It can happen to you and you may even be rich – eg a guarantor against whom a creditor makes legal claim againt the debtor and you as guarantor, files papers in court and your name gets into CTOS, and then shortly after that your debtor whom you guarantee settles with the creditor in full, meaning your liability under the guarantee is correspondingly discharged. The creditor takes his time to file the discontinuance of claim but whether or not it is filed, somehow the infiormation on discharge of liability does not get into CTOS database and every other bank relying on CTOS data will subsequently reject your application for credit (even though you are rich and have ample evidence to show it). Wouldn’t you blame CTOS? Can you blame Kayveas for his campaign against CTOS?
Just because a person has settled a loan does not mean he is a good credit risk. In fact if I am a lender I would be very wary of him until he has rebuilt his credit history. The fact that a bank needs to sue to recover a loan usually means that this person is pokai or has bad habits; maybe he has money but has a bad habit of not wanting to pay his bills on time and want to drag until the last possible minute. forced into a corner, he pays up. He will probably do the same if given a new loan.
if one really has cleaned up his act, he should be able to convince a loan officer by providing the necessary documents etc.
If you assume that a loan officer purely base his approval on CTOS like a robot and do no further enquiries, then I suppose CTOS is a bane. But I do not think this is the case.