Sahabat Rakyat akan mengemukakan pendapat khusus mengenai situasi politik di negara kita selepas "Rampasan kuasa Sheraton" pada 9 September 2020 untuk tatapan rakan semua bangsa dan semua strata yang komited terhadap reformasi demokratik tulen negara kita. Kami bersedia bertukar pendapat dan saling belajar dengan semua rakan-rakan sehaluan.


Bersatu padu, mempertahankan reformasi demokrasi tulen, buangkan khayalan, menghalang pemulihan Mahathirism.

 photo 2021.png

人民之友恭祝各界2021新年进步、万事如意!在新的一年里,联合起来,坚持真正的民主改革! 抗拒'马来霸权统治'! 丢掉幻想,阻止马哈迪主义复辟!

 photo mahathir_PRU14_1.png


 photo LimChinSiongampArticle.jpg


 photo 513StudentMovement.jpg

新加坡“5•13学生运动” 有/没有马共领导的争论【之一】与【之二】

 photo the-new-phase-of-democratic-reform-reject-state-islamization.jpg

马来西亚民主改革的新阶段 / The New Phase of Democratic Reform in Malaysia / Fasa Baru Reformasi Demokratik di Malaysia

 photo Bannerv2blue_small.jpg

 photo Banner%2BForum.jpg

 photo Banner_WorkReport2016.jpg


 16 Anniversary.PNG



人民之友根据2017年9月24日发表的《人民之友 对我国第14届大选意见书 》的内容与精神以及半年来国内和国外的政治形势,对5月9日投票提出具体意见,供全国选民参考。



Thursday, 31 May 2012

Secret documents sold to French company

Secret documents sold to French company

Author / Source : Teoh El Sen / Free Malaysia Today

PETALING JAYA: A highly-confidential government document — an evaluation by the Malaysian Navy of the Scorpene-class submarine and contract details — was allegedly sold to a French defence company for 36 million euros (RM142 million), according to human rights NGO Suaram.

Lawyers acting for the Suaram in an ongoing French judicial inquiry said that the secret document was sold by Terasasi (Hong Kong) Ltd to French defence giant DCNS, ostensibly for “commercial engineering” works.
This was among the major aspects that the French investigative judge probing the case lodged by Suaram against Paris-owned shipmaker DCNS for alleged corruption are looking at.

According to French lawyer acting for Suaram, Joseph Breham, the French judge had inquired what those payments were and had demanded reports of financial transactions.

The lawyer had said it was even possible that Thales, a subsidiary of DCN, decided to pay the money to obtain the classified document so that it could better its bid for the project.

Directors of the Hong Kong-based Terasasi include Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak’s close ally Abdul Razak Baginda and the latter’s father Abdul Malim Baginda.

The secret document was allegedly sold to Thales International, also known as Thint Asia, which is a subsidiary of DCN (later known as DCNS).

DCNS is the company central in the legal suit filed by Suaram in 2009 in the French courts, which recently commenced a judicial inquiry at the Tribunal De Grande Instance in Paris.

The inquiry revolves around the RM7.3 billion deal to purchase two Scorpene submarines with DCNS and Spainish Navantia in 2002, when Najib was defence minister. Suaram’s complaint was based on the claim of corruption for a payment amounting to 114 million euros from DCNS to Perimekar.

Perimekar is also directly linked to Abdul Razak who was acquitted of abetting in the murder of Mongolian national Altantuya Shaariibuu; while two of Najib’s former bodyguards were convicted for the murder.
Speaking to FMT from Bangkok, Suaram director Cynthia Gabriel said that the selling of the secret document for 36 million euro amounted to an act of treason, on top of it being most probably a corrupt act.

“This is downright illegal. Clearly an act of treason as it is a breach of defence secrets by selling state secrets. It is classified as a confidential document by Royal Malaysian Navy for the government, supposed to be in internal document that comes under the Official Secrets Act, and you sold it to a French company? You are not supposed to do this,” she said.

Devious act

Cynthia said this was “one of the big scandals” that had surfaced from the Suaram trial, and the information was among the hundreds of French’s prosecution investigative documents that Suaram currently has privileged access to.

“Indeed a very devious act. There is clearly a possibility of money laundering, or the money could be channeled to various beneficiaries including political organisations in Malaysia. This is corrupt and we think it is a sweetener to buy off some people,” she said.

“We now want to ask who benefited from this? When we went through the Paris papers. these was among the most startling issues. Before this we only know of Perimeker, now there is the emergence of the company Terasasi was actually key many answers, to showing how the money trail became more complicated, involving another Asian country, in the transfer of monies,” she said.

Cynthia said everybody is “shocked at the scale of the robbery” and “there is no longer space for silence”.
“It has become incumbent on the Malaysian government to give a proper explanation on the money that has been dished out. They cannot keep all these away from the public. We believe that there are many more skeletons in the closets and many more secrets that need to be unraveled .”

Cynthia was together with Breham, lawyer Fadiah Nadwa Fikri and R Sivarasa in Bangkok to reveal ‘damning details’ on the Scorpene case. A press conference at the Foreign Correspondence Club of Thailand was held yesterday.

The conference was held in Bangkok as Breham was unable to get a proper visa to enter Malaysia. Another French lawyer acting for Suaram, William Bourdon, was last year deported from Malaysia.

Tuesday, 29 May 2012

Students Did Build The Momentum Towards BERSIH 3 - A Response to FOS Johor (Updated)

Students Did Build The Momentum Towards BERSIH3 - A Response to FOS Johor

By S.Arutchelvan (Secretary-General of PSM)
29 May 2012
(Updated Editor's Note and Picture)

S. Arutchelvan made comments on the 'anti-PTPTN and Free Education' action of a group of disillusioned students, which could hardly be acceptable (refer media statement released by FOS Working Committee on 19 May for details).

[Editor's Note] This article is from the Secretary-General of the Socialist Party of Malaysia (PSM), S. Arutchelvan in response to the media statement entitled "428 Sit-in Protest - Its implications and positive significance" released by Friends of Suaram (FOS) Working Committee Johor on 19 May.

As per email request from S. Arutchelvan, FOS Working Committee Johor decided to post the response article on this blog, for the benefit and reference of readers.

When Arul's response article is published on PSM's website, FOS Working Committee Johor does hope that our full media statement released on 19 May would also be published together, for the study and comparison purpose of readers.

Appended below is the full text of the response by Arutchelvan:

I would like to respond briefly on the Statement made by Friends of SUARAM working Committee dated 19 May 2012 : 428 Sit-in Protest- Its implications and positive significance Statement by Friends of Suaram Working Committee .

I refer to the following comments which has been singled out by the committee in a dramatic way which I find it to be malicious and out of context and does not gel well with the other parts of their analysis.

The Students have raised the bar in our democratic struggle”. He made the following comments which could hardly be acceptable:

“Few may realise that the student 'anti-PTPTN and free education' rally on 14 April 2012 is going to be a significant event, … the students declared that they were going to stay put or occupy Merdeka Square up to 28 April, to greet BERSIH 3.0; the Student occupy movement seems to brighten our days leading to BERSIH 3.0.” (Note: “our” here refers to Arutchelvan and those who advocated “Occupy Merdeka Square”).

The obvious mistake made by this PSM leader and the supporters of “Occupy Merdeka Square” was that they regarded as truth what they had observed, as if the public shared their views, and was prepared to act on them. This is an effort in futility!

Despite their good intention to merge both the May Day Celebration and the students' “Occupy Merdeka Square” rally into one, for the purpose of liberating the Merdeka Square, it came to naught.

Let me first clarify that the observation made by the Johore Friends of SUARAM not only does not paint the right picture of the actual situation leading to BERSIH3, it totally ignores what really took place in KL. It seems that the Committee who are based in Johor completely did not get the right scenario on what was happening in Kuala Lumpur on how this student’s action did motivate many people.

When BERSIH announced Bersih3, there was a sense that it was not catching fire and this is also due to the lack of reaction from the mainstream media as well as the police. Most people including the BERSIH steering Committee were very worried.

Everything seem to change when hundreds of students (not dozens) marched in Kuala Lumpur calling for free education. The students numbering between 500 to 800 went all round KL in a spirited manner. It was not a bunch of Malay but a there were students from different races who marched in Kuala Lumpur and declared that they will stay put until Bersih3.

The first person to get excited and release a sms to all groups were Hishamuddin Rais who was in charge of the mobilisation committee of BERSIH3. So the BERSIH3 steering committee indeed did see the student as an important catalyst to the huge mobilisation leading to BERSIH3 unlike the FOS group in Johor.

Every day since 14 April, leading to Bersih3, there were hundred of people who gathered every night (not a bunch ful), people came from other places outside KL and many also from other states came to Dataran Merdeka to support the students. University students from other states also took turns to occupy Dataran. There were many outside students who came a few days and stayed at Dataran Merdeka in solidarity. There was also a day, a bus of students who came from Kelantan to join the students at Dataran

Every night there were ceramahs attended by hundreds of people at Dataran Merdeka. The numbers kept increasing by the day until April 28.This really built the mood and the spirit towards BERSIH3.

Besides that, these student leaders also went all over the country during this period to talk about their role and to urge the people to come to Dataran Merdeka on 428. I think the Suaram Johor FOS is perhaps confused with another group which is called Occupy Dataran whose picture is posted in their story. This group also played a significant role but I was talking more about the students who occupied Dataran.

The student’s actions definitely did built the momentum leading to BERSIH3. In a big gathering in Kampong Baru a few days before BERSIH3, attended by many political party leaders and NGO leaders including Samad Said. Each and every speaker spoke about the bravery of the students including Pak Samad who urged everyone to attend the BERSIH3 rally. The student leaders also got tremendous applause each time they spoke. They brought fresh spirit to BERSIH3. In ceramahs leading to BERSIH3, the students brave move to occupy Dataran was used as an example for others to come and attend 428.

So the students action was admired by many and who came to support them. The numbers of people gathering every night at Dataran was increasing by the day, the students themselves played a role and were taken all over the country to rally support and many used them to motivate others to come. So definitely their action is not isolated in a small square as being portrayed by the article by FOS.

The students created such a momentum that it even people like Anwar Ibrahim, Kit Siang and Muhamad Sabu and many other key political leaders found their way to Dataran Merdeka to support this initiatives. If the students role were so insignificant, I do not see why so many significant people took time off to support them.

It is my believe that many young people who attended the BERSIH rally actually support the students and got motivated by the students. I think the public in large shared the aspiration of the students. Using the new social media, young people are well connected via facebook and twitter.

Therefore our views (PSM) and feeling were always grounded with the real situation on the ground. What the students did was just to built momentum but they cannot take the credit for the whole success of BERSIH3 where many other factors are involved. I think for FOS to suggest PSM has a grand plan or design to detour the original BERSIH plan is a bit farfetched and a bit mischievous.

When I mentioned that the students raised the bar in our democratic struggle, it seems there is yet another confusion by the FOS working committee. Prior to the students demonstration, most people in Malaysia normally have demo for a few hours and disperse. This has been the trend in recent years.

The students have raised the bar because they wanted to stay longer and it was now a protracted struggle because they said they wanted to stay put. This is what I meant by raising the bar.

There has been many discussion among groups that the level of people participating in struggle have yet to reach the height in Thailand, Indonesia and recently in Egypt where people stay put for a long period of time. Here it is nothing like that but the Students have put a challenge to new groups. Their method was an anti thesis which should not be taken lightly.

What I said should be seen in that right context and should be properly understood and interpreted by the FOS rather than taking a hastily put conclusion on what I said. Since the students have occupied, I am now seeing more groups are seeing demonstration as not just a few hours activity but rather a protracted struggle. Recently Paycon workers took similar steps and wanted to stay until they meet the Human Resource Minister. While I write this article, there is a group camping at the fountain at Brickfields in a hunger strike and it is day three and in the coming days, the Bukit Jalil plantation workers are also planning to occupy the Prime Minister office.Therefore the student action has created a new challenge to groups who want to conduct demonstration.

Credits should be given to the students who have raised the standards. They have made many Malaysian especially young people come to 428 as well as made many people think.

Having said that, PSM has always taken the position of peoples movement and we were very much involved in mobilisation as well as leading the BERSIH 3 movement. Just because PSM gave credit to the student movement, It is quite malicious for FOS to portray and say as if PSM believes in small group action or we read the situation wrongly.

On for the record, there was lots of coordination between the BERSIH committee and the May day committee. The May Day committee at all times felt that BERSIH Committee being the biggest democratic movement in the country should call the shorts. So any conspiracy theory being said by FOS is totally false and does not reflect what happen on the day.

The BERSIH committee on 428 decided not to break the barricade. This was a collective decision. My view has been if a vote was taken, people would have agreed to get into Dataran Merdeka not in the intention to occupy it but rather to prove peoples power. If the leadership of BERSIH decided to move into Dataran the other day, they would have achieved this but because that was not part of the plan, it was not executed.

PSM mobilised buses of people on that day. Never did we tell our people to bring tents to Dataran because that was not the plan. Never did the party issue any directive such as that. Being involved in mass movement work, we are not so naive on objective and subjective conditions.

Dataran Merdeka will definitely be liberated in the future. Syabas to the young students who played a significant role in building the momentum to BERSIH3. A movement cannot be built in an abstract situation and there are many factors leading to it. Our role is not merely to interpret the world but rather to change it.


Sunday, 27 May 2012

428 Sit-in Protest - Its implications and positive significance

428 Sit-in Protest
- Its implications and positive significance
Statement by Friends of Suaram Working Committee Johor
19 May 2012

[This media statement is the translation of FOS Working Committee's media statement in Chinese that was released on 19 May 2012.]

1. 428 sit-in protest is a continuation and development of Bersih 2.0 rally

The Malaysian people created a new chapter in our country's history on 28 April 2012. According to Bersih 2.0, about 250,000 people from all parts of the country found their way to converge on several major towns, especially the capital Kuala Lumpur, despite heavy police barricades. They assembled in 6 designated locations, waiting for the green light to march towards the Merdeka Square (Dataran Merdeka) of historic importance.

Empowered by the court order, the BN government deployed police force to cordon off Merdeka Square 48 hours prior to the sit-in protest. They set up razor-sharp barbed wire guarded by the police personnel, in an attempt to keep the Bersih organisers and protesters away from the Merdeka Square.

Despite the challenges posed by the authorities to thwart the protest, leaders of Bersih and Hinpunan Hijau adhered to the appropriate, justified, and legitimate principles by way of leading the people to a point closest to the Merdeka Square. People of all ethnic groups conveyed their strong aspirations for clean and fair electoral system, and for stopping Lynas from commencing operation.

Describing the sit-in protest as a complete success, and advising the people to disperse peacefully, Bersih 2.0 chairperson Ambiga demonstrated infinite wisdom in her leadership to prevent possible provocateurs from exploiting the situation with a view to causing pandemonium in “occupying Merdeka Square”.

In Bersih 2.0 rally, 50,000 people took to the streets, demanding for eight demands on electoral reform. Since then, UMNO-led ruling BN, has been persisting in disregarding the sensible, reasonable, and legitimate demands of the people, with the intention of pressing ahead with their plan to rig the electoral system, in an attempt to tighten their grip on the political power they have held for half a century. The BN-dominated PSC (whose chair and vice-chair are UMNO members) appointed for reforming the electoral system, put up 22 proposals on the electoral reforms, accepting only 1 out of 8 demands put forward by Bersih 2.0.

Bersih 2.0 has been consistent in putting up a mass struggle in the face of severe political challenges. The mass struggle was as peaceful as before. The sit-in protest in the capital Kuala Lumpur and seven other major cities (Kuching, Sibu, Miri, Kota Kinabalu, Penang, Ipoh, Johor Bahru) was decided upon towards the end of March, and announced on April 4, with an urgent call for full resignation of the Election Commission.

The call received positive response from the people of all ethnic groups, religions, classes, and political parties. In addition, Malaysians overseas and foreign democrats also gave their support by holding solidarity protests in their respective countries on the same day. The Bersih sit-in protest constituted the biggest popular mass movement against the BN regime in the history of this country.

The 428 sit-in protest is obviously a continuation and development of Bersih 2.0 rally. The number of participants was several times that of Bersih 2.0 rally, breaking the record of mass movements in our history. The mammoth turn out forced the BN government to abandon all pretence of democracy, by way of resorting to violent repression of the peaceful protesters and the journalists who were covering the event. All this was done in the name of reclaiming Merdeka Square from the occupants. The violent crackdown (using tear gas, high pressure water cannon, rubber bullets, arrests, beating, and stalking) resulted in clashes between the police and protesters. In fact, the police personnel were charging into the dispersing peaceful crowd and wantonly arresting protesters. That was why a somewhat chaotic situation ensued.

2. 428 sit-in protest - an excellent co-ordination of forces of current social movement

The number of people participating in the 428 sit-in protest was in the region of 250,000. There was an increase of 4 times of the number of people involved in Bersih 2.0 rally. That was record breaking. The number of protesters involved surpassed those of any mass struggle in Malaysian history. As in Bersih 2.0 rally, the participants of 428 sit-in protest came from all sectors of society, irrespective of race or class (including workers, farmers, petty traders, professionals, businessmen, academics, artists, important figures from political parties, and retirees), as wells as believers of various faiths (largely Muslims, Hindus, Christians, Buddhists and others).

There was a conspicuously reduced number of participants from the Indian community (mainly Hindus). Of late, the Indian community experienced internal dissension, inappropriate leadership, and loss of direction. Due to the mobilisation of various political parties, civil society, and religious groups, participants of other major ethnic groups increased dramatically, resulting in the formation of a formidable current of mass movement.

It clearly shows that after the 709 Bersih rally, the people realised that the BN government was intent on disregarding the aspirations of the people for realizing “8 demands first, then GE 13”. The BN ruling clique planned to resort to the dirty tactic of rigging the electoral process through the “Election Commission” controlled by their own party members, with a view to prolonging its hegemonic rule.

After having experienced the hegemonic rule under the UMNO-dominated Alliance and later BN, the broad masses were longing for launching another struggle of a larger scale than that of 709 rally. It is therefore understandable that 428 sit-in protest attracted a very much larger crowd. There was manifold increase in the number of participants. It indicates that the electoral reform campaign launched and led by Bersih 2.0 has entered into a stage of development of an unprecedented scale.

In addition to the 8 demands for electoral reform, 428 sit-in protest also carries the message of opposing the environmental hazards (such as the rare earth processing plant by Lynas). That is because the 428 sit-in protest was the common action taken jointly by the Bersih 2.0 steering committee and Himpunan Hijau. While Bersih 2.0 advocates for clean and fair elections, Himpunan Hijau calls for action to “Stop Lynas, Save Malaysia” and “Stop the rare earth production”. Although both appeals seemed different, combination of both appeals conveyed a political message that “rigged electoral process breeds a corrupt bureaucracy; a corrupt bureaucracy brings about environmental hazards”. 

Both appeals draw tremendous support from people of all walks of life. The two forces of social movement in different spheres of activity met to carry out a struggle, which had achieved great success. It has created a precedent of excellent cooperation between the different forces of social movement in distinct fields.

3. Non-partisan leadership plays a proactive role in uniting the people

The success of the sit-in protest is attributed to the non-partisan leadership persisted by Ambiga, chairperson of the Bersih 2.0 steering committee, as well as the independent and autonomous stance taken by NGOs.

It seemed that certain quarters within Bersih attempted to sideline the leadership of Ambiga and altered the independent and autonomous position taken by Bersih 2.0 coalition. But this was merely the wishes of a minority, and it was of no consequence. Ambiga again successfully led the sit-in protest by her sheer perseverance, calmness, and resoluteness.

The sit-in protest has again proved the wide acceptance of the non-partisanship and the people-oriented principle by the people from various ethnic groups, religions, classes, and political parties. 

While acknowledging the effort made by political parties in mobilizing their party members to participate in the protest, non-partisanship advocated by Bersih 2.0 as well as Himpunan Hijau does not in any way prevent these political parties (that uphold the principle of democracy and strive for social progress) from participating in the protest. 

On the contrary, it serves to unite a larger population by way of uniting all forces that can be united. In a media conference, Ambiga asserted that Bersih 2.0 would welcome any political party leader to participate in the protest in his capacity as a citizen. 

The protest would have been labelled by the ruling clique or someone having an axe to grind as “party politics” and “intending to seize power” if the protest were to be dominated by any political figure. This would have done more harm than good to the Bersih campaign. The proactive role played by the non-partisan leadership in uniting the people can be seen in the specific examples given below.

One, the Chinese Assembly Halls of 8 states in Malaysia issued a joint statement, urging those who genuinely show concern for environmental issues to gather in KLCC Park on April 28, to bear testimony to the commitment of civil society to fighting environmental hazards.

The joint statement was endorsed by the Chinese Assembly Halls in all the states (namely Selangor, Negeri Sembilan, Melaka, Penang, Johor, Perlis, Sarawak, Terengganu), except Pahang, Kedah, Perak, Kelantan and Sabah.

Although the joint statement made no mention of Bersih 2.0 and electoral reforms, it is clear from the statement that it impliedly endorsed Bersih's 8 demands, since the sit-in protest was a joint action of both Bersih and Himpunan Hijau. They were inextricably linked and inseparable.

Pressed by the Chinese community and the joint action of the Chinese Assembly Halls of several states, Mr. Pheng Yin Huah, chairman of the Federation of Chinese Associations (FCA) told the media: “FCA adopts a clear-cut stand against the construction of the rare earth plant as well as for clean and fair elections. These are the wishes of the Chinese community and the broad masses. As long as the spirit of democracy, law, and constitution is given due respect, ensuring social stability, FCA supports and respects the wishes of the people, and urges all quarters to do the same.”. (See the various media coverage on 23/4/2012)

As an important component party of BN, MCA forbade its members from participating in Bersih 2.0 rally. This time around, MCA was unable to proffer any convincing reasons for opposing the 428 sit-in protest. It therefore made an open announcement that it would not bar its members from participating in the protest. Perhaps MCA leaders finally realized that clean and fair elections and opposing Lynas's rare earth plant are the wishes of the people.

Another example is the media statement of 25 April, issued by the interfaith group - Malaysian Consultative Council of Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Sikhism and Taoism (MCCBCHST). It called upon the authorities to allow Bersih sit-in rally to proceed as planned. The police have the duty and the capacity to ensure that the assembly proceed peacefully without disruption from any quarter. We appeal to all parties to conduct themselves with decorum and honour.

BCCBCHST further stated that full support should be given to Bersih's demands for clean and fair elections. Bersih's call for electoral reforms is also in line with the universal religious values. All religions support, amongst others, principles of justice, fairplay, and transparency. No undue advantage is enjoyed by any party to the exclusion of the others.

There are many other reasons and facts to show that the success of the sit-in protest is attributed to Ambiga persisting in the non-partisan leadership, which plays a proactive role in uniting all the people in the movement, as well as the independent and autonomous position adopted by the NGOs.

4. The people's power exposes the true colour of the government

The Merdeka Square is a historic site where the proclamation of independence of Malaya took place on 31 August 1957. It symbolizes the end of the British colonial rule. It belongs to the people. The Merdeka Square, located in the heart of the city of Kuala Lumpur, was selected as a venue for the sit-in protest, to demonstrate the strong commitment for clean and fair elections.

The government and the police initially underestimated the momentum of the movement. Their response to the call for 428 sit-in protest was lukewarm. As mobilisation of masses gathered momentum, the authority anxiously barricaded the Merdeka Square for 48 hours with barbed wire and blockades, and heavily guarded by police personnel. No Bersih leaders or their supporters were allowed to enter the barricaded area.

However, as pressure mounted, the reaction of the masses grew. The authorities resorted to the state apparatus and “white terror” to threaten and deter the people from participating in the protest. In response, the turnout of protesters was much more than that in Bersih 2.0 rally. The mainstream media estimated a crowd of 100,000 while Bersih estimated a huge crowd of 250, 000. On April 28, protesters gathered at various specified locations, then marched towards the Merdeka Square. They displayed posters, banners, balloons, and had artistic performance, chanting slogans expressing the demands for clean and fair elections, as well as protesting against Lynas.

After 2 pm, the massive crowd flooded the roads and streets leading to and around Merdeka Square. The police never expected such a mammoth crowd, and they had to take some immediate counter measures. The sit-in protest was peaceful and the protesters were unarmed and orderly. At about 2.30 pm, Ambiga announced that the purpose of the sit-in protest had been achieved, and the protesters were advised to disperse peacefully.

But the police, on the pretext that a few people acted aggressively, began to take harsh actions against the dispersing crowd as well as the journalists who were on duty. (Details of the police brutality can be found in most of the media reports and video recording on the Internet.)

The police took harsh actions against the crowd participating in the peaceful sit-in protest, when the crowd was in the course of dispersing peacefully and the event was about to come to an end. The main reason for such police action was to create chaos.

This is to divert the people's focus of attention from a justified, legitimate and appropriate demand to a “violent conflict” alleged to have been caused by some out to stir up commotion with a view to toppling the government. Najib has so alleged.

Statements made by Najib and the police on or after 428 sit-in protest for the sake of justifying police brutality, were mainly based on the false allegation that, after Ambiga had made the announcement advising the people to disperse peacefully, some people broke through the police barricades, intending to “Occupy Merdeka Square” and “to cause chaos with a view to overthrowing the government”.

Can such allegation withstand scrutiny? No. Let us make some observations relying on facts and on the course of development of events.

1. It is a fact that before April 28, a small group of people occupied Merdeka Square. They were just some youths describing themselves as the “Occupy Merdeka Square” group.

On 14 April, a group of largely Malay university students gathered in Merdeka Square, to demand for the abolition of the National Higher Education Fund (PTPTN) as well as to demand for free tertiary education. Some of them who were willing to stay put in Merdeka Square, to persist in their struggle for their demands, in the hope of drawing public attention, stayed put in Merdeka Square together with the “Occupy Merdeka Square” group. But they were unable to persuade students from other universities or colleges to participate in their struggle, let alone getting the support from society at large.

On 19 April, the General Secretary of the Socialist Party of Malaysia (PSM), S. Arutchelvan, specifically issued a statement entitled “The Students have raised the bar in our democratic struggle”. He made the following comments which could hardly be acceptable:

“Few may realise that the student 'anti-PTPTN and free education' rally on 14 April 2012 is going to be a significant event, … the students declared that they were going to stay put or occupy Merdeka Square up to 28 April, to greet BERSIH 3.0; the Student occupy movement seems to brighten our days leading to BERSIH 3.0.” (Note: “our” here refers to Arutchelvan and those who advocated “Occupy Merdeka Square”).

The obvious mistake made by this PSM leader and the supporters of “Occupy Merdeka Square” was that they regarded as truth what they had observed, as if the public shared their views, and was prepared to act on them. This is an effort in futility!

Despite their good intention to merge both the May Day Celebration and the students' “Occupy Merdeka Square” rally into one, for the purpose of liberating the Merdeka Square, it came to naught.

The events mentioned above merely indicate that there is a minority of people, who have been subjected to brutal oppression, are rather anxious to be relieved of such suppression. They were influenced and encouraged by the vigorous mass movements taking place abroad, resulting in a strong desire to bring about reforms, thereby harbouring some unrealistic radical ideas. This is perfectly understandable. Imbued with radical ideas, they will on certain occasions, resort to such spontaneous collective action to “Occupy Merdeka Square”. That is not surprising.

Of course, if the government and the police were to make use of the radical action of this minority group as a pretext to relentlessly carry out brutal suppression of the unarmed broad masses who participated in the 428 sit-in protest, such oppressive action certainly cannot stand up to scrutiny.

2. About 3 pm on April 28, shortly after Ambiga announced that the purpose of 428 sit-in protest had been achieved and advised the crowd to disperse peacefully, a tiny group of people on their own volition removed some of the barricades and road blocks set up by the police. They rushed into Merdeka Square in high spirit. This is a fact.

These protesters acted out of frustration caused by the government and the police in cordoning off the Merdeka Square, curbing the populace of their freedom of assembly. It was the natural reaction of the awakened people who have long been subjected to the relentless and brutal suppression of the hegemonistic ruling clique. They had summoned up the courage to overcome the confines of the legal restrictions.

But to label such action of breaching barricades and moving into Merdeka Square as an act to “Occupy Merdeka Square” is devoid of logic for the following reasons:

(1) 428 sit-in protest was under the leadership of Bersih 2.0 steering committee headed by Ambiga. At all times, the committee never insisted that 428 sit-in protest was to “Occupy Merdeka Square”. In this connection, Ambiga stated clearly: “The Police had locked down Merdeka Square, we shall go near Dataran to express our voice”;

(2) It was estimated that at least 100,000 people were surrounding Dataran on April 28. The vast majority of the protesters brought only small bags containing small personal items and drinking water. Some even came empty-handed. No one brought camping materials like, tents, sleeping bags or large bags with daily necessity, etc. ;

(3) The massive flow of people flooded all the roads surrounding Merdeka Square. Practically, the masses had occupied the whole of the KL city centre. In such circumstances, occupying Merdeka Square itself was of not much significance.

5. 428 sit-in protest has achieved a new height for democracy and human rights movement in Malaysia

In brief, the 428 sit-in protest is a struggle largely organized and led by BERSIH and Himpunan Hijau. It strives for a clean and fair election. And it is also a form of protest against the environmental hazards brought about by LYNAS.

It is not a sudden outburst of collective action by a certain group of people, nor a political conspiracy planned by any political leader, or by political parties to create disorder for the purpose of overthrowing the government.

In fact, it is a pre-planned and organized political struggle having a clear-cut objective in mind and under proper leadership. People of all ethnic groups and from all walks of life participated in the protest on their own volition. Their demands were for electoral reforms and to ward off environmental hazards.

The experience of such struggle is of practical importance, being a vital component part of democracy and human rights movement in this country in this era.

Since late 19th century to the 1950s of the last century, the peoples of various ethnic groups from Peninsular Malaya, Singapore, Sabah, Sarawak and Brunei came under the British colonial rule. They suffered oppression and lived in bondage.

As a result of the anti-imperialist movement, the British colonialists were compelled to grant Malaya independence in 1957, and allowed Singapore to have self-government in 1959, with a view to preserving their long-term interests in political, economic and military spheres.

In 1963, the British allowed a merger of the 5 territories to form Malaysia. Brunei and Singapore withdrew subsequently, leaving only Peninsular Malaya, Sabah and Sarawak to form Malaysia. Since then, the British remained as the back-seat driver.

From then on, “Malaysians” came under the domination of the Malay feudal aristocracy and the landlord class as well as the UMNO-dominated Alliance ruling clique buttressed by the British colonialists.

In 1974, the Alliance Party brought some opposition parties (which had crossed over) into their fold to become the present Barisan Nasional (BN). Adopting a political system of “constitutional monarchy”, BN exercises direct control over Malaysia.

For over 50 years, Malaysians of various ethnic groups [Malay, Chinese, Indian (Tamil), Iban (Dayak), Kadazan, Dusun and other minority groups] and of all classes (working class in the various sectors, labourers, farmers, fishermen, hawkers, small manufacturers, petty bourgeoisie, national capitalists, etc.) have become the victims of communalism and racial policies implemented by the Alliance government, and later by the BN government. The extent of suffering experienced by each of them varies. The downtrodden and the marginalized ethnic groups suffered the most.

From practical experience gained in general elections over the past 50 years or so, the Malaysian people have been made aware of the unreasonable and deceptive nature of the “rules of the game” in parliamentary elections introduced by the BN government (like legislation on elections, electoral system and procedures).

They have also realized that the continual existence and implementation of the “rules of the game” of parliamentary elections, favouring the ruling clique of the day, would never bring about a popularly-elected government, genuinely representing and protecting the interests of the people.

BERSIH, a coalition representing the people' aspirations was eventually formed to strive for clean and fair elections. On 10 November 2007, a huge crowd of 40,000 strong, under the leadership of BERSIH gathered in Kuala Lumpur, demanding for electoral reforms.

This has had a major impact on the general elections result in the year 2008. After the 2008 general elections, BERSIH 2.0 steering committee headed by Ambiga, was formed by a coalition of 62 NGOs, in order to play a better and a more important role. The committee adopted a non-partisan stand to unite every force possible, for the purpose of pushing for electoral reforms.

Both 709 rally and 428 sit-in protest, were organized under the leadership of BERSIH 2.0. The 428 sit-in protest, in particular, has deeply inspired the Malaysian people. It has caused democracy and human rights movement in Malaysia to reach a new height. This is clearly shown in the following aspects:

1. As many as 250,000 people participated in the 428 sit-in protest. The large number of participants and the unprecedented scale of the gathering are record breaking. It was also far better organised than any political gathering whether by the ruling party or opposition parties in our country. 

2. Bersih's demand for a clean and fair election is justified, legitimate and appropriate. Its publicity campaign has raised the awareness of the masses. The people now understand the legality of wearing yellow T-shirts with BERSIH logo. They have shown their disdain for the “unlawful prohibition” on wearing Bersih yellow tees imposed by the government and the police. 428 sit-in protest has created a new situation, where the people achieved victory in a legal struggle over the “unlawful prohibition” imposed by the government and the police.

3.The BERSIH 2.0 committee adhered to the principle of struggling in a rational and advantageous manner and with restraint. The protesters were advised to end the protest after having achieved its purpose, so as to avoid chaos and destruction likely to be caused by the over-zealous crowd. 428 sit-in protest has created favourable conditions for organizing a campaign of a larger scale and of a higher level in time to come. It sets an excellent example for NGOs to maintain their independent and autonomous stand in the struggle.

Finally, we wish both BERSIH 2.0 and the electoral reforms a bright and successful future.

Do not underestimate Malaysians, says Ambiga

Do not underestimate Malaysians, says Ambiga 
Author/Source: Hafiz Yatim/Malaysiakini

The Bersih 3.0 rally may be three weeks old, but for the organisers co-chairperson Ambiga Sreenevasan it is still not too late to pay tribute to Malaysians for coming out in strength to show support.

Asked by Malaysiakini what had she learnt from the rally, Ambiga's quick response was do not underestimate Malaysians.

She said Bersih is not about herself, in reality it is a ground-up movement.

NONE"It is not mine, it's not Pak Samad Said's. We did not pay for them to come, and in fact they paid on their own for the T-shirts and transport. Some designed them on their own. The people have taken ownership of Bersih.

"It just captured the imagination of the people. What I have learnt from Bersih 3.0 is that do not underestimate Malaysians. It was a far bigger crowd than we had anticipated and we have to learn to be better prepared.

"I have also learnt that the authorities can actually go berserk. I am still reeling from the extent of the violence and this is a government which is looking liberal and yet they do this.

"My fear is to what extent they are prepared to go to curb dissent. I'm a bit disquieted about that," she said.

Ambiga said the incident had deepened her faith in Malaysians, standing together in solidarity purely in support of each other is a wonderful thing.

In not taking credit for what had happened, the former Bar Council chairperson said Bersih had awakened and sparked off something positive in the people.

bersih 3 rally 180512 04"We are not looking for differences but looking at unity for a common purpose (clean and fair elections). This is hard to fight back.

"They cannot fight this, and they should not fight as this is powerful stuff," she warned, though elections may be boring stuff for some.

Mind you, Ambiga said, the rally did not taken place only in Malaysia but in 80 other places worldwide, too, including people putting up the Bersih flag at the base camp of Mt Everest, and at Mount Kinabalu.

Eye on what comes first

She said Bersih's immediate task is not to organise Bersih 4.0 but to gather all those hurt at the rally to compile a report.

"I know people are pushing for another rally but we have unfinished business - violence in relation to the people, apart from voter education. We must bring justice to the people who were hurt," he said.

On the number hurt, she said the reports are being compiled and non-governmental organisation like Lawyers for Liberty and Suaram had recently sent a report that around a 100 had been injured to the Malaysia Human Rights Council (Suhakam).

abdul aziz spr ec chairman 300509"We are hoping that Suhakam will hold an inquiry into police brutality. We owe it to the public for the facts to come out and let them out," she said.

Besides this, Ambiga said Bersih 3.0 is also pressing on with its efforts to seek the resignation of the Election Commission members.

The Bersih co-chairperson said she cannot understand the slow response to allegations that EC chairperson, Abdul Aziz Mohd Yusof (right) and his deputy Wan Ahmad Wan Omar are Umno members.

Why EC should step down

"It is clear that we should know either they were or were not members and surely UMNO should know. The response should've been immediate. Why is there such a fudging of the issue. There should be clarity whether they are members or not. There's no two ways about it, if they are members of a political party they cannot be EC chair and deputy," she said.

She said the July 9, Bersih 2.0 rally had seen the successful setting up of a parliamentary select committee (PSC) where many civil society groups have been calling for the liberalisation of certain legislation, and it is a good step for the government.

"But we have not seen the PSC report, and we do not think the recommendations cover Bersih 2.0's eight demands. Hence, we do not think the PSC has achieved its purpose."

On her views on several quarters, including former Kuala Lumpur CID chief Mat Zain Ibrahim, calling for a tribunal against Abdul Aziz and Wan Ahmad, she said Bersih would not go as that far as that, all they want is for the two to leave and not only they but the rest of the EC members, too.

"The reason we are asking for their resignation is because the public has lost confidence in them but over and above all that is they are members of Umno They should resign," she said, adding they also want international observers for the 13th general election.

However, she commended the government for withdrawing the amendment to the Election Offences Amendment Bill.

Demands left hanging

On how many of Bersih's demands had been met since the PSC was set up, Ambiga said out of eight only one and that, too, not completely - the indelible ink.

pulau ketam village head election 310711 indelible ink 02She said that indelible ink use had been gazetted but Bersih is still in the dark over how it would be applied whether the finger will be dipped in ink or only applied to it.

"As to the calls of free and fair media as pledged, I do not know how the press is going to transform overnight from being partisan to non-partisan.

"There is still the problem of the postal voters and this is being dealt with by Tindak Malaysia.

"In reality not many of our demands have been met," she said. She also referred to the issue of overseas voters, she could not understand why it cannot be implemented.

She noted that Indonesia has enfranchised its citizens abroad but not Malaysia.

When questioned, they shoot back  who asked you to leave the country, Ambiga said, adding what they should do is make it worthwhile for them to return home.

"They really need a lesson on winning the hearts of the people," she said.

Ambiga disagreed with the notion that the Bersih protest represented a minority group as alleged by Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak.

"Look, even if 10,000 people took a stand you have to listen. Are you saying because we are a minority our push for clean and fair elections is not legitimate.
"Look at our background, Malaysians had been brought up in fear and they stood up in Bersih 2.0.

"Bersih 3.0 is even bigger. The premier (says) he has a silent majority and I would say we also have a silent majority which did not come out just as theirs.

"These are really silly arguments. The very fact 250,000 came up, it is certainly something they should pay attention to and if they don't they would end up making a silly mistake," she said.

The interview was jointly conducted by Hafiz Yatim, Hazlan Zakaria, Lee Way Loon and Abdul Rahim Sabri.

Ambiga: Tear gas aftermath, police responsibility

Ambiga: Tear gas aftermath, police responsibility

Author/Source: Hafiz Yatim/Malaysiakini

The April 28 violence erupted when police began firing tear gas at the historic Bersih 3.0 rally participants, said Besih co-chairperson Ambiga Sreenevasan.

In an exclusive interview with Malaysiakini  on the Bersih 3.0 rally, she said that she was glad the organisers did not accept the stadium Merdeka offer, as things may have turned differently if that type of incident had occurred there, people would have been trapped.

The lawyer and former Bar Council president said four hours earlier between 10am and prior to the firing of the tear gas in the afternoon, the 250,000-strong crowd had been well behaved.

"In any such public assembly it is the joint responsibility of the government and the organisers. Look we do not have batons and we do not have the means (weapons) to go to the extent the police can.

NONE"As far as we are concerned, we did our best as things were under control until the tear gas.

"Even if the barricades were breached they (police and our volunteers) could have stopped it. However, when the tear gas was fired you cannot hold us responsible.

"What happens after police take action is their responsibility. I am not condoning violence but everything happened after that it is their responsibility. Everything went berserk after that," she said.

She added that police started shooting tear-gas canister after canister all over and continuously as the people were retreating. No warning given, she claimed.

Ambiga said she had earlier issued instructions three times for the crowd to disperse as the organisers felt that they had already achieved their objective and although opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim had come-out to talk, we were moving the crowd towards Jalan Tuanku Abdul Rahman.

She said as there was a huge turnout, we knew it would take some time for them to depart.

"It was true we wanted to be there until 4pm and there were events lined up, but the crowd was huge.

"It was beyond our expectation as you can see Jalan Tun Perak and Jalan Tuanku Abdul Rahman filled (with people wearing yellow t-shirts) and we could not see to the end of the roads.

"I made a judgment call because of the (huge) numbers, I was worried people would start to faint as it was hot, people had been to the event for a long time since 10am, and we had achieved the purpose. I know I am being criticised for that and I accept that," she said.

Independent inquiry necessary

Ambiga said she or the organisers did not lend support to the breaching of the Dataran Merdeka barricades as certain areas were open, giving the crowd the impression that they could go in.

Asked as to their location, Ambiga said they are still gathering more information on this, and for that reason they wanted an independent inquiry.

bersih 3 rally 020512 lma009She said the police were initially all right with the crowd having fun and a wonderful atmosphere with the ages of  the attendees ranging from 20 to 70.

"I told you we control it fine - it is after firing the tear gas - it is their responsibility - I had already asked the crowd to disperse - you should have left them alone and they would have left."

As to conflicting reports over some leaders alleged to have urged the supporters to move forward, she emphasised she had indeed asked them to disperse, and she cannot answer for the leaders.

"When Anwar arrives as he is an elected MP we allow him to talk. If BN MPs were also there, they would also be given an opportunity to talk as Bersih is for everyone, and we cannot stop people from supporting it.

"Anyway as Anwar came, people were not dispersing quickly as we moved towards Batu Road (Jalan Tuanku Abdul Rahman). Then I saw someone run towards the barrier.

"Police then started firing tear gas. My bodyguard and I then ran towards Masjid India with two other steering committee members and we stayed there for one and a half hours. I heard the beatings done outside," she said.

In yellow ‘we took KL'

Ambiga said if the program had been allowed at Dataran Merdeka, it would have been different.

bersih 3 rally 090512 03 fru at dataran merdeka"I think it would have been fine there would've been no issue. There were standing crowds of Malaysians in yellow at each street, then there is a patch of green representing Dataran - you did'nt give us Dataran - but we took KL," she laughed.

"But there were one patch of green (Dataran) - they (the authorities) were so stubborn in not allowing entry. I am still try to find answers to why we were kept out of Dataran Merdeka."

She also criticised the mainstream media for its misreporting of Bersih that day.

Ambiga said just look at the New Straits Times and TV3 describing it as Bersih riots.

"They did not give the whole story as they showed images of people lifting the police patrol car.

"What happened was the police patrol car had ploughed through the protesters and the public was worried that there could have been someone below the patrol car.

"I guess the agenda is to vilify Bersih as they must have been shocked by the numbers.
"But how do you undermine 250,000 people who were there. They have to change their tactics," she said, adding if you meet people in the streets they would know someone who had gone to the rally.

No basis for comparison

When asked about Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak comparing the Umno 66th anniversary celebrations at the National Stadium in Bukit Jalil with Bersih's, Ambiga questioned its basis, pointing out that the police were on their (Umno's) side.

"What is the difficulty (with Umno) as police facilitated those events as compared with ours," she said.

Najib had in his London speech contrasted Umno gathering aspeaceful in contrast to the Bersih rally.

Ambiga said the freedom of assembly issue is that you can go to any public space. 

"The stadium is not freedom of assembly as it is half of what you are entitled to. You go out to the street peacefully and gather.

"Furthermore, Umno had also done this in the past in the street demonstration (with the Malayan Union)," she pointed out

bersih 3 rally 160512 10She said the Bersih rally had raised public awareness as people are tuned into electoral reform, not just locally but also Malaysians abroad.

For her, she said there has been a real shift of the middle ground, as people leading comfortable lives in the comfort of their houses took a stand,

"These people took a stand as they want to see free and fair elections. All of society, they were there that day.

"Everyone, knows someone who went to Bersih. It wasn't just KL as there were numbers in Penang, Johor, Kuantan, Kuching and also worldwide," she said.

The interview was jointly conducted by Hafiz Yatim, Hazlan Zakaria, Lee Way Loon and Abdul Rahim Sabri.

Friday, 25 May 2012

Wednesday, 23 May 2012

Kua Kia Soong on his latest book

Kua Kia Soong on his latest book - "The End of Barisan Nasional"

Video by: Alan Chai

拟下周访马汇报军购案发展 法国律师正申请工作入境证


ops scorpene dinner 220711 willian bourdon


根据人民之声董事仙蒂娅,代表律师威廉波顿(William Bourdon,右图)或约瑟布里亨(Joseph Breham)计划在下周访马商讨有关案件。


经过长达两年的准备工作,此军购案终于在法国巴黎高级初审法院开审,承审法官是罗杰卢瓦尔(Roger Le Loire)和希尔多奈(Serge Tournaire)。







suaram french submarine case 280410 cynthia gabriel此外,仙蒂娅(右图)披露,法国律师现正在申请工作准证进入大马,尽管根据移民条例,他们仅需要处理社交访问准证。







1)鲉鱼潜艇舞弊案巴黎调查文件:马来西亚政府必须解释——— TERASASI公司所扮演的角色
3)法国以刑事角度调查潜艇案 法官或传召纳吉巴金德作证
4)纳吉名字出现在潜艇案文件 与纳吉会面须支付10亿美元
5)我国购买两艘鲉鱼型潜艇丑闻 4月19日 在法国法庭开庭调查

Scorpene case: French lawyers apply for work visa

Scorpene case: French lawyers apply for work visa

French lawyers representing Suaram in the human rights group's suit against defence giant DCNS for alleged corruption involving top Malaysian officials will be coming to the country to brief their client on the case.

ops scorpene dinner 220711 cynthia gabrielAccording to Suaram director Cynthia Gabriel (left), either Joseph Brehem or William Bourdon plan to visit next week to discuss the case involving the RM7.3 billion purchase of two Scorpene-classs submarines by Malaysia in 2002.

The controversial case, which involved the alleged payment of illegal commissions amounting to 114 million euro (RM540 million), was recently heard and accepted by investigative judge Roger Le Loire in the Paris Tribunal Grande Instance.

"However, it all depends on whether they are able to enter the country," Gabriel told Malaysiakini in a telephone interview.

"After all, Bourdon was detained at the KL International Airport last year and deported, after he spoke at a closed-door dinner in Penang," Gabriel recalled.

Alternative plan

The Immigration Department had then said that Bourdon - attached to Sherpa, a Paris-based non-profit legal outfit - was deported on July 22 last year for violating the conditions of his visit to Malaysia.

NONEBourdon (left) denied that he had abused his entry permit as he entered the country on a social visit pass.

This time, Gabriel said the lawyers are applying for a working visa to enter Malaysia despite the immigration requirement that they only require a social visit pass.

The French lawyer who comes, she added, also plans to hold a press conference in Kuala Lumpur to provide an update on the case - if he is allowed to enter the country.

While Gabriel is optimistic about the visit, she said Suaram has an alternative plan should the lawyer be barred from entering the country.

"We might have to go to them instead, but we are hopeful that the Malaysian authorities will grant them their working visa," she said.

"After all, they are here to meet their client, and we have the right to meet them. There is nothing wrong in this," she added.

Press conference cancelled

Suaram had planned a press conference at its Kuala Lumpur office today, but it was put off due to "technical matters".

French court papers recently revealed that Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak, who was defence minister then, had sought US$1 billion (RM3 billion) for local company Perimekar from DCN's subsidiary DCNI.

NONEPerimekar is owned by Najib's associate Abdul Razak Baginda, who was acquitted on a charge of abetting in the 2006 murder of Mongolian translator Altantuya Shaariibuu without his defence being called.

Najib (right) has refused to comment but had denied involvement in the case, while Defence Minister Ahmad Zahid Hamidi said he cannot be summoned to attend the hearing in Paris, reversing his previous offer to testify as a witness.

Related posts:
4) Submarine Scandal: Inquiry Commence 19 April 2012 at Paris Tribunal de Grande Instance (TGI)

通告 Notification


人民之友工委会2020年9月27日常月会议针对徐袖珉(英文名: See Siew Min)半年多以来胡闹的问题,议决如下:



[ 漫画新解 ]




尤其是在新冠病毒疫情(COVID-19)课题上,她公然猖狂跟人民之友的政治立场对着干,指责人民之友服务于中国文宣或大中华,是 “中国海外统治部”、“中华小红卫兵”等等等等。她甚至通过强硬粗暴手段擅自把我们的WhatsApp群组名称“Sahabat Rakyat Malaysia”改为“吐槽美国样衰俱乐部”这样的无耻行动也做得出来。她的这种种露骨的表现足以说明了她是一名赤裸裸的“反中仇华”份子。



[ 漫画新解 ]

注:这“漫画新解”是与<人民之友>4月24日转贴的美国政客叫嚣“围剿中国”煽动颠覆各国民间和组织 >(原标题为<当心!爱国队伍里混进了这些奸细……>)这篇文章有关联的。这篇文章作者沈逸所说的“已被欧美政治认同洗脑的‘精神欧美人’”正是马来西亚“公知”及其跟班的精神面貌的另一种写照!

[ 漫画新解 ]

编辑 / 来源:人民之友 / 网络图库

注:这“漫画新解”是与《察网》4月22日刊林爱玥专栏文章<公知与鲁迅之间 隔着整整一个中国 >这篇文章有关联的,这是由于这篇文章所述说的中国公知,很明显是跟这组漫画所描绘的马来西亚的“舔美”狗狗,有着孪生兄弟姐妹的亲密关系。


Malaysia Time (GMT+8)