Screenshots

the fact that Tun Mahathir is now crying foul shows he is still finding it hard to let go of the countrys administation.

in The Star today, he is questioning why we need permission from Singapore to build a bridge in our own territory. May I point out, that this is not the major problem.

I put it to you, Tun, what are we going to do with a bridge that is only half done? With no agreement on the link, why should we be satisfied by half a bridge, that does not bring any good whatsoever?

I do not agree with the members being so hypocritical about how the ex-PM is reacting. However, I do wish that he would explain why he is so fixed on the bridge issue...

this aab vs tm is getting interesting by the day. but there can only be one ending to this whole sandiwara, SEMUANYA OK!!

The reality is it takes a "half-past-six" man to build a "half-past-six" bridge.
The politics, as it deepens!
Why TDM? Why TDM? What's the real issue? Clearly, it's not what you said are the reasons.
You have blown away so much of the taxpayers money. Deprived the poor of the nation's wealth distribution with all the mega projects. Who benefited most? Those who overnight became filthy rich. Those who committed CBT were never charged. Bail-outs that were obscenely outrageous! Giving sub-standards services and products. All at the expenses of the rakyat below who were black-out of information. Using ISA and OSA as threats.

According to George Bernard Shaw, sometimes patriotism is the refuge of the last scoundrel when all else failed.

when is the next election? what are my choices if i didn't want to go with BN this time?

Spaceman,

Just vote anyone else! Be it Pas, DAP, Keadilan, Indepedent, Kucing but not Dacing.

As I mentioned in numerous other posts. Once the parliament is split 50-50 either way.

All corruption, ineffciency, Problems, half-cooked bridge, "semuanya ok", forest rapes, Press freedom, u name it......will correct itself.

At that point, nobody dare to make any mistake however small. Try figure it out.

megahyper,
The day the country is subjected to a 50-50 parliment is the day that the race card will be played. There'll be no holding back as national interest and long term stability concerns will be thrown out of the window in the interest of survival..it'll be 1969 all over..
Personally I'll settle for a 65-35 distribution..

In a way I do agree with TDM that Singapore as usual is being unreasonable although the rumour mill and TDM's affirmation that there was initial agreement on the bridge ( albeit conditional I am sure).
But after all that building half a bridge to secure national 'face' isn't the answer either.
Seriously being called an unequal by the S'pore leaders over what was raised by their Mr.Chiam is indeed un swallow-able by me neither is half a bridge ! Just my 2 sen and between AAB and TDM I will stick with AAB as at least he is more open in style which after 20+ years of TDM we have come to associate it with weakness!

AAB lost

Mithos,

1969 situation is totally different from 2006. 1969 umnoputra have nothing to lose in terms of wealth and "faedah".

In 2006, they have everything to lose if something like that breaks out. In fact, they will be the one losing big time if that happen. Wealth will evaporate, who stand to lose more?

I agree that you have your reason for concern, but I think 50-50 is more ideal to fast-track Malaysia to be a really developed country in terms of wealth and mentality.

Coming to think of it. If the bridge was to be build. What happens?
1. Singapore does not want to build/join the bridge on their side.
2. So the bridge is left hanging there useless like one part of the flyover bridge along Jalan Kuching just after BNM. Crooked bridge becomes an eye sore.
3. Foreign journalists will be mocking.
4. So Malaysia is pressured to negotiate with Singapore. Being kiasu they will not budge.
5. So malaysia side must lay on the table something palatable to singapore. Air space and sand.
6. In the end, Malaysia lost her sovereignty and face.

concern-lah,

There are 2 options to build our scenic bridge.

Option 1: Build half of the bridge and link it to the Singapore side of the causeway. Theoretically, our half of the bridge would have to connect to our existing last 50 meters of causeway (Malaysia portion) to ensure uninterrupted traffic during “connection”. So basically Malaysian side of the bridge would have 6-lanes and Singapore would maintain its 4-lanes causeway which will cause bottleneck for traffic from JB to Singapore.

Option 2: Build half of the bridge next to our existing causeway and wait for Singapore to build their portion of the bridge. This option is less favourable like what you mentioned earlier.

Based on Dr. Mahathir’s letters with Singapore leaders, he is referring to the first option.

Since AAB took over at PM, he did three wise things.

1) Withdraw the contract for the double-track railway running the entire length of the peninsula.

2) Withhold support for Proton and revamp the AP system.

3) Abolish the crooked half-bridge project.

For the first item, there was hardly a whimper from TDM. For the second item, there were quite a bit of noise from TDM. But for the third item, there lots of noise together with smoke, fire and brimstone.

All three aborted projects shared the same characteristics - mega projects of doubtful economic value that were started so that those involved are rewarded handsomely.

Why such a ruckus over the item 3?

dtsv above hit the nail on the head ///According to George Bernard Shaw, sometimes patriotism is the refuge of the last scoundrel when all else failed.///

By appealing to sovereignty, patriotism and what not, TDM hopes to have a common enemy - a bogeyman.

Most Malaysians are against all 3 projects. For the first 2 projects, without an external element, it would not be easy for TDM to raise a ruckus. However, for the crooked bridge, by appealing to patriotism, it would be harder for Malaysians to call TDM's bluff without sounding unpatriotic.

Oh WrathofGrapes,
In regards to your Issue 2 (Proton) I think TDM would have bazooka'd that matter out of the water if VW had gained management control. The patriotism of Proton's board would have been questioned and it would have been the Germans who would have trampled upon our "sovereignty."
However that deal fell through and we were spared TDM's ranting and raving...until of course a certain bridge came along..

Read this article from the edge by radzuan halim. It highlights the bridge from all angle and calling it a bridge too far!

http://www.theedgedaily.com/cms/content.jsp?id=com.tms.cms.article.Article_cbb1b5d0-cb73c03a-cb42cf00-d7b61dce

We should only ask one question that Jeff mentioned:

What made Badawi to decide in between 19 January 2006 (date of reviving bridge project) and on 12 April 2006 to cancel the bridge project, thereby only to compensate RM100million to Gerbang Perdana.

Could Singaporean demanded for air space and sand use in between 19 January 2006 and 12 April 2006?

If so, please tell or show proof...