Screenshots

I may not be comparing apple to apple, but can someone please tell me ONE good, beneficial thing Pak Lah has done to the general Malaysian public since he became PM? Not trying to compare him to Cek Det's contributions over the 20-over years of reign, but I have not seen one good thing coming from Pak Lah...

nope...nothing in the star as far as i glanced through...

ONE good, beneficial thing?

YES, I have ONE.
He makes quality foreign cars more affordable to me. Now I can go buy Hondas, Toyotas, Nazas....instead of Protons!

JEFF OOI says: Come on you buggers. Don't abuse my blog topic to make cheap potshot, like making your own individual interest, for example buying a Japanese car, as the centre of the universe. We have more fundamental issues to debate. Dr Mahathir - Abdullah's controversy is not only about cars. It's about how the country has been, and is being run. Wake up you buggers! Talk is always cheap.

Jeff,

You misunderstood my intention!
My intention is to point to you...that I have only ONE and ONE only...

For 3 years under AAB, only ONE good thing! Isn't it a shame?

JEFF OOI says: Stop making potshots at Abdullah or Mahathir. Instead, do what other learned Screenshots readers do, use the "THINKING ALLOWED, THINKING ALOUD" to share with us thoughts that are outcome of critical thinking. There is a big elephant out there. Don't just because you have touch one of the legs and start claiming you have embraced the entire elephant. Don't embarrass yourself, and embarrass all of us. I want to think our Internet community are capable of better things. But yours is a total wash-out however hard you want to justify yourself.

Sometimes is better to be silence, the moment these politicians and the 'has been' open their mouth, garbage came out. I don't buy any of their comment, no substance just lots of noise.

What happens to the " tell me the truth " and "work with me, not for me" the biggest temberang ever said by Pak Lah? Asking us to work with him and he straight away awarded the civil service a 5 days week and asking the nation to focus on agricultural for development, now this PM has gone nuts!

Depends on what you mean by beneficial.
I may consider the increase of petrol and electricity prices as a beneficial thing as it will reduce consumption of fossil fuels and increase utilization of renewable energy; hence indirectly saving the environment. So if thinking is allowed........

Depends on what you mean by beneficial.
I may consider the increase of petrol and electricity prices as a beneficial thing as it will reduce consumption of fossil fuels and increase utilization of renewable energy; hence indirectly saving the environment. So if thinking is allowed........

Dignity. Could that be a little something that seems to have come from Pak Lah? Is it a major item?

Often we say that the simple answer is very often the correct one, the one with genius. In todays environment, nothing is ever a short answer is it?

So ... we now have Screenshots to read, Aisehman, Malaysiakini, The Sun, Lim Kit Siang, Freedom in Solidarity and so many more. Is this simply because of broadband and the internet or also because it is being allowed to be utilised as a media i.e. a little more freedom of speech plus a little bit of broadband.

What is good and alive seems to be the increased activity of complaints of how things are run. Now ... that is indeed a golden nugget, it is a sign that Malaysians have not given up on Malaysia. A complaint means that a customer still wants to use your service. One does not complain when one does not intend to go back anymore to the shop or country.

The most important thing now is, will the complaints be treated a golden nuggets by the present administration?

No ... no simple answers. It takes so much to make it right. Even the most untangible thing that we are doing unconciously could mean the difference between our countries continued survival and dignity.

It must surely be too simplistic to say he was right or he was wrong. Because not all was wrong and not all was right.

It was for 30 years catch up growth ... we were all guilty of over exuberance. Why don't we all take part of the blame and move on. It is at present a post dotcom world ... The World is Flat. It is a world of conspiracies... The Confession of an Economic Hit Man.

It is a rat race. Do we really need to race according to the daily beat of the drum? Or is Pak Lah exactly suited for this diffent period that we may look back on hingsight and see that it was a period of consolidation from excesses that could not be avoided and set the platform for the next growth, but on solid foundations?

Just Thinking Allowed and Out Loud.

"Lawyer Mathias Chang, a former political secretary to Dr Mahathir when the latter was the country's Prime Minister, has challenged Kalimullah Masheerul Hassan and Khairy Jamaluddin to a debate to determine if the duo are not the people who cast Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi under their control and influence his decision-making."

I am confused. How is a debate going to determine what lawyer Mattias Chang intended?

"Kalimullah and Khairy are hypocrites as the duo have not walked the talk in preaching for anti-corruption and transparency. He also challenged Kalimullah and Khairy to declare their assets from the time before Abdullah's ascension as the Prime Minister in October 2003, up to the current period as at June 1, 2006.
Chang said Kalimullah has used his Sunday Column in The NST (download PDF here) to demonise Dr Mahathir, an act he considered as disrespectful and malicious to the elderly statesman.
Chang equated Kalimullah's act as that of a traitor to the Malay race as the latter has launched a malicious attack on Dr Mahathir, who is regarded as a Malay hero.Chang demanded Kalimullah to stop demonising Dr Mahathir because the former Prime Minister has contributed tremendously to the Malay race, and by right, the Malays should duly appreciate Mahathir's good deeds."

___________________

Hmm.... I don't trust this Chang fellow. Fine, if he wants Khairy and Kali to declare their assets then he should also demand that Mahathir also declare his assets, both direct and indirect assets. That would be only fair.

And the bit about Malay hero and for Kali and Khairy to shut up to show respect, could he be any more sycophantic? It's almost embarrasing. But at least he confirms what many have suspected for a long time - that Dr M was never a hero to the Malaysians, only to Malays. And yes, there is a difference. I also wish Chang had spoken up when Mahathir was demonizing the media, the judiciary, Jews, Singapore, "The West" and the person who dared challenge him in 1997.

how can a "do nothing, say nothing" person, do any better than one who can communicates. We are often left wondering what is going on in his head.

I for one wouldn't like my CEO to sit in the office and do nothing and say nothing

I thought the IPCMC was one thing that will show on PM record and that will cetainly be a feather in the cap..but he back tracked.

One thing he did better...He did better at the last election, got plenty of votes...after that his performance dismal...down hill all the way.

Vote him next election?. He won't get my vote.

The guilt of a young puppy does not prove that the old fox is innocent.

The old fox started the school teaching the followers how to siphon wealth from the country to private own pockets, and the young elites have learned it well and refined it to how to strip assets and sell them looking more legally.

For the past 22 years, the old fox has instilled such idea and tactics in the institution, UMNO, and he had chosen his own successor, second best as he claimed later. If not for the power and hence money, then why join UMNO, is exactly the aspiration of people who join the party. We can see it is very difficult for Pak Lah to reverse such corrupt thinking in such a short time within the party itself.

What else could we say? Just don’t touch our EPF money and screw up Petronas which is comparatively a well managed company paying a substantial due to the country- That is what Pak Lah does in the meantime for us so that we, our children and grandchildren do not have so much debt to pay later on -

Bio technology will be the next wave of knowledge-based economy after information-technology. Pak Lah has set the direction right. Weren't people say those involved in IT were nutz before it boomed? Malaysia has a very good platform for biotech development because it has many natural resources. If we starts only after it starts to boom, it will be too late.

But his recent decisions are rather disturbing. Had he been influenced? I think highly probable. Common sense, you don't make critical decision like this by your own! Especially the PM, he would have hundreds of advisers, but he has to be sharp and decides base on the most rationale and not based on majority opinions or somebody close to you. Even someone as close as your son can set you up for his personal agendas. Just my 2 cents!

I may not agree with all that Chang says, but I have to share his view that Kali and Khairy are too influential. Using the UMNO platform, Khairy has been seen in official government delegations and this is wrong.
Kali, on the hand has the best of both worlds, ie getting to "use" NST, and yet not having any executive duties and responsibilities there. ECM Libra, where he is Executive Chairman, has suddenly appeared out of no where to be a finance powerhouse.
However, TDM is no angel either, and his cronies are now crying, because the gravy has stopped flowing in their direction.

LJ

We Malaysians are always taking 1 step forward and then later 2 steps back.

1. Press freedom and the right to criticise the government

This happens so frequently in USA. Yet, we are just confused by the instability it can cause us. Later, everyone will opt for the mental peace but we are not progressing any further.

2. Police reformation

I live in Tokyo and see polite and strict police force at every street corner. Safety and strict civil control with a sound education system is what builds the country. The police force here in Tokyo is never corrupt but instead are polite and dilligent. During rainy seasons, they patrol neighbourhoods even in the rain when no one knows they are doing it.

3. Greater transparency and monitoring

While the PM ask for better monitoring from agencies such as the EPU (Economic Planning Unit), it baffles me that continually more blunder is made over decisions by the PM himself of the bridge.

The public just is confused of what is going on. When will the truth be out that the failed bridge was a cover up of corruption and that Khairy and Kalimullah be expelled and that is enforced by the PM. If that happens, the PM has my support and no matter what enemies he gets, he will not need to step down but will get my full support. Let us have a hero for once! That the PM will be willing to expel people who are his friends and his relatives for the sake of the good of Malaysia. These people have enough in their pockets anyway, and can do well stopping their vice now and be forgiven by the public.

Jeff, the news from Oriental is said to be dated 16th June 2006. Today is only 14th June. Is there a catch?

Pak Lah's administration is doing all the right things. An economics nobel peace price laureate stated that, " the effort of policymakers to raise the rate of growth per head are ultimately futile.."
ultimately, the country's development pace is actually decided by the rakyat, and not the PM. Therefore, the less inteference by the policymakers, the better and more efficient the country will be. Based on this alone, Pak Lah has made huge progress.

Long Jaafar has already put into words much of what was on my mind. For whatever reasons, good or bad, Khairy is far too influential (or at least perceived to be so) for the nation's good. The term "Abdullah's manipulator" is indeed an oft used and apt tag for the yound son-in-law.

Kalimullah? Hand-in-glove with Khairy? Hand-in-hand in ACM Libra? Even if all matters there are above board, I am personally not comfortable with the symbiotic relationship between the two, and its manifestations in the NST.

But the bigger issue is links Khairy has in the business world and the deals he has been involved in. Ditto for other members of the PM's family. MAS Catering. Scomi. Even the older ties with Dewina. And others?

Much mud was (and still is) hurled at Dr M for the deals and bailouts associated with his sons and cronies. The PM's family has been similarly targetted over the last couple of years. The troubling thing is, some of the mud may well stick.

If "TDM is no angel either, and his cronies are now crying, because the gravy has stopped flowing in their direction", then Mr Clean Pak Lah should take steps to rein in his family and be seen to be clean.

Just look at Matthias' challenge to Khairy to declare his assets "from the time before Abdullah's ascension as the Prime Minister in October 2003, up to the current period as at June 1, 2006".

It is true that Khairy, as with any other Malaysian citizen, has his right to seek his fortune. But he IS the PM's son-in-law. Any wrong-doing on his part will result in mud sticking on the PM. Especially with the questions already asked about the sweet deals like ACM Libra. He must be seen to be clean, not just claim to be so.

Pak Lah to me represents a chance for Malaysia to reverse much of the harm done over the last 22 years. Hope for tomorrow.

But his hold on power is tenuous, with UMNO warlords snapping at his heels and puppet masters tugging strings here and there. He is saddled with a Cabinet dominated by Dr M era dinosaurs, who are quite impervious to suggestions and demands that they step down in spite of strong accusations of serious improprieties and downright cases of incompetence. Even the IGP has shown open defiance in the PM's face, and seems to have got away with it.

But Pak Lah still embodies hope for a better Malaysia. Challenges like Dr M's stream of vitriol and Matthias' recent one have to be addressed and answered. And action taken to ensure that any chinks in the PM's armour are eliminated. I would advocate a good look at his own family's affairs and brutal excision of any deals which can appear to be, or are, questionable.

Dear Jeff,

Abdullah's test is not in how he answers to Mahathir's questions. I couldn't care less to how those answer come out.

JEFF OOI says: You don't. Others do, like Dr M and his like-minded echoes. This is where the noise come from -- like you, each thinks his/her viewpoint is the centre of the universe while the quagmire prevent the country from moving forward.

Corruption and politics are intertwined ever since politics have been around.

We cannot compare Mahathir to Abdullah. Mahathir hogged the spotlight for 2 decades. Mahathir fought globalisation. His gospel truth was that we are still fighting colonialism.

So far, what we've seen is that Abdullah is willing to give globalisation a chance. Abdullah's gospel truth is in fairness, justice, etc.

No doubt he bows to certain pressures. He is only human. But a man who is willing to learn is better than a man who thinks he knows it all.

His test, will be how he handles the US-Malaysia FTA. Will he bow to pressures from the west? Will he deny globalisation because of dwindling popularity? or will he do the right thing?

we shall see.

His greatest contribution will not be the biggest this, tallest that, or first this. But it will be whether he is able to empower Malaysian to compete in a global market.

It is of tremendous benefit to the people and the nation that TDM & Co is now crying out loud for transparency,accountability,checks and balances.etc

These are in fact long over due if Malayisa were to be considered a democratic nation more than 20 years ago.

Not only 4 questions need to be answered,many many questions need to be answered as well,such as the many billionaire sons of politicians and their incredible success story,for example.

Please prime minister AAB,start the ball rolling,and do yourself a great service to be the first true democrat of Malaysia,of course perhaps at some expense to some of yr own relatives.

HeHeHe

If Abdullah's only contribution throughout his tenure is that he has freed us from complacency... then that alone is good enough!

pemerhati_msia,

that one beneficial thing maybe:

now we are able to see the ugliest side of the Bolehland - where many Boleh things in the past look so un-Boleh now.

"I will not say there will never be a mega-project but the emphasis is on human capital," PM A A Badawi quoted in the The Sydney Morning Herald.

Check the full article at
http://powerpresent.blogspot.com/2006/06/dr-mahathir-grand-vision-getting-blurr.html

Dear Sydput

The economic equation by the nobel peace prize laurette does not include corruption, national disgrace and many other acts that are unthinkable for the love of money. If Khairy can sell the country's interest for some small profit on sand deals, what worst unthinkable betrayal is he capable of in the future? It is baffling how an Oxford smart ass can not envision this happening. Maybe it is more than just a sand deal or some of his dumber underlings got greedy. But again, I wonder if the elevated bridge will really make Malaysia a better port according to Dr M's theory.

Dr. M's greatest contribution to Malaysia - demanding greater transparency in the governance of the country and a more liberal media.
AAB's greatest contribution to Malaysia (akan datang) - implementing Dr. M's demands (which, incidentally, were also made by millions of Malaysians during Dr. M's and now.)

PS: Dr. M - Please start the road to transparency by opening up the Petronas books for the eyes of all Malaysians. You can do it. You are the Petronas advisor.

Not only open Petronas books...open all books,,that certainly will be a challenge..for a start..let's open MPPJ's books.

The Govt of AAB is not as clean as we would want to believe. Cosmetic cases of corruption sent to the courts are just for wayang..Big fishes are still running wild..

What about the "one eyed MP"..now all is quiet.
Maybe UMNO cannot proceed becos the accusers are also in the same dep sh*t. Better keep quiet or risk being dragged into it by the one eye jack.

Today's Lim Kit Siang blog is interesting.
Do we have 2 PMs or no PM?

Read http://blog.limkitsiang.com/?p=557#more-557

First of all, who is Matthias Chang that he can demand this and demand that?

Can I also demand that TDN declare his assets from the date of his "coronation" (sarcassm intended) to the date he stepped down?

Let's see, under TDM we had the following :
a) Ops Lalang
b) Judiciary crisis
c) De-registration of UMNO
d) The DSAI saga
e) AP abuse
f) NEP become NDP (with no expiry date)
g) Police mismanagement (why do you think we need IPCMC now? Because of AAB? Or because during TDM time police became arrogant and all-powerful?)
h) etc.

So sad to say, but AAB mistakes (if any) pale in comparison with the TDM.

Yet apparently now everyone is nostalgic for TDM's rule to such a point that some are calling for him to become Opposition leader.

Come on-lar!

HaHaHa,with the Tun vast experience(almost 22 years) in managing NON-transparency,Non Checks and balances,3K,he can surely do a good job for the opposition if he so decides.

I am absolutely sure that the Tun is the only one who can make Malaysia a truly democratic nation,the power rests wit him.

Of course I wish to caution that in the process,he and his own family might also be destroyed but that is not a subject close to my heart sir.

Be fair, let's also open the Bakun Hydroelectric Project books where more than 2 billion ringgit has been paid out and see what shit we can find out.

The current prime minister's reign of 2-1/2 years when compared with predecessor's 22 years it's about one eight the period (length of service), hence it's difficult to compare achievements and drawbacks. My verdict on Pak Lah is not yet IN; on Dr Mahathir it's been made but I won't list here because they can't be compared with the current incumbent.

But there's ONE thing that has been clearly shown today in that we have a more liberal media environment, more educated voices daring to speak up eg shown by IOpen Letter by Jacqueline Ann Surin, and a vibrant Blogsworld -- and this liberal environe has opened up Malaysian eyes' to the FACT that Malaysia's government is not defined by the Electorate, not even by the Barisan Nasional which has 15 compoennts (or is it 14 or 16 now?)BUT by UMNO, which represents but one dominant ethnic group in the country. UMNO General Assembly decides the country's policies, e.g revival of NEP at last Assembly...); Pak Lah's reversal of Tun Dr Mahathir's prrogrammes are basically dependednt on UMNO Cabinet's and/or MP support e.g. shown by MPs from UMNO only being briefed by Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi -- sesoundinly loud by its absence of MCA, MIC, Gerakan and other compoent parties from Sabah?sarawak -- poor chaps these two states are only remembered like distant cousins!

So can NegaraKU expect any "substantive" difference whether it's Dr Mahathir still reigning OR Pak Lah in the PM's seat? NO, because it's still UMNO putras fighting for the major portion economic cake, and the remainder thrown like kacang at those lesser monkeys who will grovel and swing their loyalties like Pavlov's dogs.

So Malaysians today witness a "Pretty Conundrum" of still being caught between the Devid and the Deep, Blue Sea, and the more free media today confirms it once and for all while previously under the olde regime, things were "controlled and regimented" -- and therefore the flotsam and debri did not show up so clearly in the Johor Straits and the South China Sea.

Folks

Mathias Chang is stating the obvious.He is just making it MORE obvious.

Chang is raising the ante on Pak Lah behalf of the Old Man. These are set pieces in the Old Man's strategy.

As I mentioned before, the Old Man is fixated, and correctly, that the son in law is having to much influence in Govt policies through the father in law and he sees that as a potential detriment to the nation's wellbeing. Who is to say the Old Man is wrong after being at the helm for 22 years and dragging Malaysians tooth and nails to be what Malaysia is today, warts and all. On balance, the Old Man got it right.

It is hard to stomach,as the Old Man gradually realize since his retirement, to know that a young upstart with direct line to the ears of the PM, can have so much influence in high stake politics and in the high flying corporate world.

I have indicated that it is below his status to go after the son in law or even the former NST journalist who seem to talk more than he should. So, the hatchet job on the son in law and the journalist goes to Mathias Chang.. its going for the jugular now, no more, wishy washy approach.

By the way, the Old Man does not venture into such high stake personal prestige outing such as this one,if he had not got his facts ready or not had his set pieces fully in placed.

The axe is not on Pak Lah, it is on the son in law, while the former NST journalist will be collateral damage. That is where the spotlight will shine on. For Pak Lah, its a real dilemma, being a religious man himself... whether to be PM first OR father in law first?

Well,Prime minster AAB should realise now that time has changed.

He might think that he could just simply follow suit-what has been done and practised before,but it is really not the case.

In the first place,he should ponder why did TDB left the top job to him,could be that TDM realised that the time has arrived and it was no longer possible the old tircks.

So perhaps AAB should think deeper and set himself up to be a true hero of Malaysia,with the old man on the side of justice and fairness,it is not an impossible task for him-in my humble view.

and as some have suggested here,stop his children business dealings which hurt the naion-once he does that,the rest are fairly easy.

Please let us not forget the following facts about KJ.

1) He is not in the Government. He is merely an UMNO Youth Deputy Head. He has no "official" power in the Government.

2) He is not elected by the people. He merely won the post "uncontested". That post is only for UMNO Youth, not even in the Supreme Council.

3) He is NOT an elected representative of the "rakyat" (not UMNO). He is neither an MP or State ADUN.

Why is this guy given so much power and influence? Pak Lah, please answer this too on top of the 4 questions posed by Dr. M

Jeff
It's futile isn't it? Too many people are seeing only strands of hair on the tail and talk as if they know the entire elephant like the back of their hand. Not only that, some are downright uncouth and insulting in their ignorance.
I have been following your blog only for 1 week. I admire and appreciate your efforts but some of your audience really put me off. I am sorry but this is not the place I want to go to to look for answers.
Ciao.

puddingarnab

I cannot believe you would be that naive to look for answers in this conversation on Jeff's blog. This is the place for you to share and pick ideas, venoms, insults and more useful, to expand your vocabulary beyond words like "frustration, disappointments, anger and helplessness."

If you want answers, you should go to this website:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page

F&H, that's very nice of you to be so forthright. So this is indeed a syiok sendiri forum, ain't it?

First, I have a feeling that this blog (screenshot) is no longer impartial. It is very clear to me, Mahathir is sort of 'pirate' and Abdullah is well.. unproven yet..but lets first talk about Mahathir.

JEFF OOI says: No apologies, but this blog and this blogger take a stand when it matters, and its stand needn't be populist. I still want to have questions answered about Executive overpowering Judiciary, and the lopsided terms awarded to the favour of IPPs -- two hallmarks of governance during the Mahathir era -- but that does not mean I reject Mahathir in total. On the other hand, I still prop on Abdullah to get the IPCMC established without delay, but that didn't mean that I take him as my generations messiah wholesale. This commenter aptly displays his simoplistic shallowness in critical thinking, that no doubt contribute greatly towards the naivete of the Malaysian race. Call this my bias? Perhaps. Expecting "Elegant Silence" from me? You bet.

I am pretty sure that the cause of Mahathir's wrath is when his (his cronies) mega project was being cancelled one by one. It is as simple as that, and this blog continues to highlight the 4 Mahathir questions to Pak Lah...

Good lorddd... I can ask back so many other 'direct questions' to Mahathir which shows his 'dark side' which is .. well known by us all.

It is very much like a thief who has been put into jail and ask the police, "Do you know what happened to my family now that I am in jail??? You are so cruel, you will cause my family to die starving blah blah". The obvious thing is he stole things (a thief) and should be put into jail, as simple as that.

Why should Pak Lah answer the 4 questions without questioning back? And.. They have already been answered but the super egoistic Mahathir had just simply brush them off - like always.

Dear syedhs

The PM needs supporters like you especially when he is struck by thunder and lightning. Please continue to give him shelter and protection. We have no objection.

You write this: “Why should Pak Lah answer the 4 questions without questioning back?”

Firstly, the PM has NOT answered the questions. Secondly, many people are dying to hear the answers. Thirdly, we will cheer him if he questions back.

So, I beg you to do us a big favour. Please find a bomoh to cure the PM’s elegant silence, so that he can begin to speak and ….. question back.

M'kini: Cabinet trips to 'Abilene'

KJ John Jun 13, 06 11:43am

'Harvey's Theory' - believe it or not, this is the title of Prof Jerry B Harvey's second book. His first was 'The Abilene Paradox and Other Meditations of Management'.

Jerry was one of the weirdest teachers I've met. His immediate response, after listening to my ideas about 'dignity in the workplace' - my dissertation topic - was "you do not want me to be your professor!"

He is an all-American Texan who speaks with a drawl and sits with his cowboy boots on the table.

I gently disagreed with him, but started working for him as a research assistant. After three years, I asked him to come on board my dissertation advisory panel as a proponent for my thesis. I had concluded that "some of us would rather learn some things the harder way".

After eight drafts and umpteen meetings, Jerry finally approved my dissertation proposal. Yet, after the proposal was tabled and reviewed by a committee of six, he was the only one to give conditional approval.

The chairperson and two other committee members told me to ask Jerry to leave as one of my advocates before the final presentation. The chairperson and I met Jerry in his room to make the request and he happily agreed with the parting statement that "this is the best decision you have made in your doctoral programme".

Then he continued: "As I have told you before, most students only want my advice but few really want me on their committee because, in your language John, I have God-like standards."

Jerry continues to be one of my favourite professors and someone I also consider to be a teacher. Jerry lived out what he taught and has since retired.

One day, I hope to send him something I've written, something to the level of perfection that he expects. I promised him that I would do it "before I turn 64", to borrow from an old song.

But I am also waiting for the round of golf he owes me from a wager of US$25, and hope to meet him again in Washington DC to claim my game.

Paradox applied

Now why would Jerry write a book which assumes that the fingerprints on the knife used to stab someone belong to that very person? To really appreciate his theory, one has to better understand the phenomenon he calls 'the Abilene Paradox'.

The paradox describes common actions of all groups and organisations that lead them in a direction in which they never really wanted to go - and after they get there, they end up blaming everyone else but themselves for their predicament.

In short, most people never admit their own failures or role in making the wrong decisions or defining the wrong directions. They do not accept full responsibility for not doing the right things in the right way and with the right attitude.

In fact, a Bowling Green University study has found that the Abilene Paradox was the most popular managerial metaphor among most CEOs in the US. They could readily relate to this metaphor and it helped them explain many issues in their work life. It even out-voted concepts like the Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs and Hertzberg's Two-Factor Theory.

Over my last 15 years of public service, I have been a witness to many phenomena related to such actions and decisions. I did not want to be a part of these, which is why I opted for early retirement from the PTD service. I did not want to take the trip to Abilene with my so-called bosses either.

Whenever we apply the Abilene Paradox to any managerial setting, we soon find out that there are many situations where members do not speak up for truth of their own feelings but allow either the noisy or loud few or the 'power rangers' to carry the day and the decision.

But in Jerry's lexicon, they are all equally responsible for the "trip to Abilene, including those who have kept quiet". The fingerprints are as much their own; there is no 'back-stabbing' if they knew about the issue but chose not to speak up, whatever the reason. Expanding on this, there can thus be no back-stabbing at all.

Last week's headlines in the New Straits Times reminded me of the Abilene Paradox, especially since our former prime minister implied that the current PM has stabbed him in the back by withdrawing many of the projects approved and agreed to by the cabinet that they both served.

Jerry would say that the cabinet took many trips to Abilene and that some of the bad decisions have come home to roost. He would argue that both are equally responsible for decisions past and present because they are part and parcel of a cabinet of the same government.

I personally do not see Abdullah Ahmad Badawi (Pak Lah) as a paradigm shifter in managerial terms. He is only continuing much of the same but with slight tinkering here and there. The fact that he has not paradigm-shifted is my pet peeve him today.

I hear from the corridors of power that "similar bad decisions" and "crony project awards" are being made; including the alleged closing of an eye to companies directly connected to the PM's son. I hope I am wrong, but I have heard from almost the horse's mouth.

Real paradigm shift

On Jan 13, 2004, I attended the PM's Dialogue with Industry made up of almost 500 CEOs and captains of private/public industry. The whole cabinet was there as well. I was privileged to ask the PM a question within the context of the public services delivery that he had promised to improve.

I asked him how he planned to shift paradigms when most civil servants sign off letters with the phrase Saya yang menurut perintah. I then suggested that unless we change the sign-off into the words Saya yang bertanggungjawab, there may not be any creativity or paradigm shifts in terms of public services delivery.

The PM agreed and commended me publicly for the suggestion and even privately promised to discuss the matter in the cabinet. Since then, on another occasion, the PM verbally allowed me to remind him about this suggestion until it is actually raised, discussed and agreed to in cabinet. This article seeks to remind the PM of the same.

Public services delivery has not improved as promised by the PM during the 2004 election campaign. Now, there is an even newer promise that the 9th Malaysia Plan will be the panacea for all our problems. In a word, the PM's analysis of the problem is 'implementation', or the lack of proper execution.

I like the 9MP agenda but am not convinced that it can merely be achieved by rearranging the furniture on the Titanic that we call the Malaysian Growth with Equity Model. I cannot see the "new value growth thesis" from the macro-model and framework used in the 9MP.

Where is the new value creation coming from? How are we going to remain attractive to FDI, the traditional financial injection for our economic development? In light of the performance of new giants China and India, do we seriously believe that outsourcing alone will attract the quantum of FDI needed under the 9MP?

Some of us have conducted alternative modeling and analysis but the real story related to a rising China is very much more serious than we have cared to admit. I am sorry but the current 9MP does not answer the question and core issues addressed by Kenichi Ohmae's original McKinsey Team in relation to the leapfrog factor. Their leapfrog factor was new 'K-value growth'.

What is Malaysia's new value creating industry? Outsourcing is only a body-shop role, not new value creation. Where is our new growth capital coming from? These questions remain unanswered by the 9MPs.

The Global Knowledge Malaysia team, formerly of the NITC Secretariat, has some of the answers. These have been presented but the ideas have yet to see the light of day. The current planners always seem to know better and therefore, our core ideas remain outside the 9MP.

Parochial interests

To my mind, the cabinet is taking and will continue to take a trip to Abilene. There is no serious alternative policy advice within the current public, private and civil society structure. Most ideas are only half-baked ones as argued by the former PM.

The cabinet is full of yes-men and women who, equally, surround themselves with other yes-men and women as advisors.

The former PM may not know this, but a George Washington University professor once wrote a paper about the "socio-psychological profile of disabled leaders" and defined them as "those to whom the policy advisors do not tell the whole truth because of the fear of losing their jobs".

My comment to Dr Mahathir Mohamad is this: it is not that you did not select good leaders to advise or replace you; it's just that all advisors, like the tailors in the story about the naked emperor, start telling one small lie (often in the name of a half-truth) and then spin out a whole yarn around the original lie until they are found out. In the meantime, they believe their own lie and live it out.

The cabinet is our key executive authority. If they are wrong, facts and figures can and must be used to prove them wrong. If not, we have to publicly debate and argue until we all can agree on the real issues at hand.

Pak Lah has opted for the 'servant leadership' model of administration. This uses influence rather than power and authority to make decisions. Such a model allows for open dialogue and rational debate. Therefore, he appears weak sometimes and appears to listen too much and make the wrong decisions.

I am concerned and have, in fact, called upon Pak Lah to be aware that he is losing traditional support because of loss of his integrity. But the abandonment of the half-bridge project (even if linked to the sovereignty issue) or of some pet mega-project cannot be used to accuse him of stabbing someone in the back. The fingerprints are very much your own and all ours as well, as Malaysians who elected the new government.

The real back-stabbing, in my view, is when the BN Whip is used to shut up Shahrir Abdul Samad on a matter of the integrity of Parliament.

Or when the Inspector-General of Police (IGP) is given free rein to speak against approved government policy on the proposed police watchdog body - or when he goes against public-service principles and forces non-Muslims to wear the tudung, even if only for ceremonial occasions.

How can we fight corruption if, at the level of local authorities, there is blatant disregard for the rule of law? And when most council heads behave like little emperors that are very naked!

It is amazing that today's cabinet has ministers accused of corruption but who have yet to be cleared by Anti-Corruption Agency; and ministers who have allegedly abused government policy for sectarian interests.

There are also 10 ministers (and leaders of political parties) whose memorandum on Article 11 of the constitution - a matter of serious national interest - was rejected by the prime minister, who is only primus inter pares.

Real back-stabbing in Jerry's language happens when the public interest of the majority of Malaysians is denied in favour of the interests of a minority. Mahathir should continue to speak up but should also not expect to be treated as more than an ordinary citizen.

Maybe he should write to express his views if there is no other way to make himself heard. Even the Tunku did that. The pen-name 'Che Det' still waits to be used.

--------------------------------------------------------------------
KJ John served in public service for 30 years and took optional retirement to work in his own consulting group. He hopes to see transparent and open, new governance practiced in Malaysia some day.
------------------------------------------------------------------
The Berita Malaysia / bmalaysia mailing lists

M'kini: Cabinet trips to 'Abilene'

KJ John Jun 13, 06 11:43am

'Harvey's Theory' - believe it or not, this is the title of Prof Jerry B Harvey's second book. His first was 'The Abilene Paradox and Other Meditations of Management'.

Jerry was one of the weirdest teachers I've met. His immediate response, after listening to my ideas about 'dignity in the workplace' - my dissertation topic - was "you do not want me to be your professor!"

He is an all-American Texan who speaks with a drawl and sits with his cowboy boots on the table.

I gently disagreed with him, but started working for him as a research assistant. After three years, I asked him to come on board my dissertation advisory panel as a proponent for my thesis. I had concluded that "some of us would rather learn some things the harder way".

After eight drafts and umpteen meetings, Jerry finally approved my dissertation proposal. Yet, after the proposal was tabled and reviewed by a committee of six, he was the only one to give conditional approval.

The chairperson and two other committee members told me to ask Jerry to leave as one of my advocates before the final presentation. The chairperson and I met Jerry in his room to make the request and he happily agreed with the parting statement that "this is the best decision you have made in your doctoral programme".

Then he continued: "As I have told you before, most students only want my advice but few really want me on their committee because, in your language John, I have God-like standards."

Jerry continues to be one of my favourite professors and someone I also consider to be a teacher. Jerry lived out what he taught and has since retired.

One day, I hope to send him something I've written, something to the level of perfection that he expects. I promised him that I would do it "before I turn 64", to borrow from an old song.

But I am also waiting for the round of golf he owes me from a wager of US$25, and hope to meet him again in Washington DC to claim my game.

Paradox applied

Now why would Jerry write a book which assumes that the fingerprints on the knife used to stab someone belong to that very person? To really appreciate his theory, one has to better understand the phenomenon he calls 'the Abilene Paradox'.

The paradox describes common actions of all groups and organisations that lead them in a direction in which they never really wanted to go - and after they get there, they end up blaming everyone else but themselves for their predicament.

In short, most people never admit their own failures or role in making the wrong decisions or defining the wrong directions. They do not accept full responsibility for not doing the right things in the right way and with the right attitude.

In fact, a Bowling Green University study has found that the Abilene Paradox was the most popular managerial metaphor among most CEOs in the US. They could readily relate to this metaphor and it helped them explain many issues in their work life. It even out-voted concepts like the Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs and Hertzberg's Two-Factor Theory.

Over my last 15 years of public service, I have been a witness to many phenomena related to such actions and decisions. I did not want to be a part of these, which is why I opted for early retirement from the PTD service. I did not want to take the trip to Abilene with my so-called bosses either.

Whenever we apply the Abilene Paradox to any managerial setting, we soon find out that there are many situations where members do not speak up for truth of their own feelings but allow either the noisy or loud few or the 'power rangers' to carry the day and the decision.

But in Jerry's lexicon, they are all equally responsible for the "trip to Abilene, including those who have kept quiet". The fingerprints are as much their own; there is no 'back-stabbing' if they knew about the issue but chose not to speak up, whatever the reason. Expanding on this, there can thus be no back-stabbing at all.

Last week's headlines in the New Straits Times reminded me of the Abilene Paradox, especially since our former prime minister implied that the current PM has stabbed him in the back by withdrawing many of the projects approved and agreed to by the cabinet that they both served.

Jerry would say that the cabinet took many trips to Abilene and that some of the bad decisions have come home to roost. He would argue that both are equally responsible for decisions past and present because they are part and parcel of a cabinet of the same government.

I personally do not see Abdullah Ahmad Badawi (Pak Lah) as a paradigm shifter in managerial terms. He is only continuing much of the same but with slight tinkering here and there. The fact that he has not paradigm-shifted is my pet peeve him today.

I hear from the corridors of power that "similar bad decisions" and "crony project awards" are being made; including the alleged closing of an eye to companies directly connected to the PM's son. I hope I am wrong, but I have heard from almost the horse's mouth.

Real paradigm shift

On Jan 13, 2004, I attended the PM's Dialogue with Industry made up of almost 500 CEOs and captains of private/public industry. The whole cabinet was there as well. I was privileged to ask the PM a question within the context of the public services delivery that he had promised to improve.

I asked him how he planned to shift paradigms when most civil servants sign off letters with the phrase Saya yang menurut perintah. I then suggested that unless we change the sign-off into the words Saya yang bertanggungjawab, there may not be any creativity or paradigm shifts in terms of public services delivery.

The PM agreed and commended me publicly for the suggestion and even privately promised to discuss the matter in the cabinet. Since then, on another occasion, the PM verbally allowed me to remind him about this suggestion until it is actually raised, discussed and agreed to in cabinet. This article seeks to remind the PM of the same.

Public services delivery has not improved as promised by the PM during the 2004 election campaign. Now, there is an even newer promise that the 9th Malaysia Plan will be the panacea for all our problems. In a word, the PM's analysis of the problem is 'implementation', or the lack of proper execution.

I like the 9MP agenda but am not convinced that it can merely be achieved by rearranging the furniture on the Titanic that we call the Malaysian Growth with Equity Model. I cannot see the "new value growth thesis" from the macro-model and framework used in the 9MP.

Where is the new value creation coming from? How are we going to remain attractive to FDI, the traditional financial injection for our economic development? In light of the performance of new giants China and India, do we seriously believe that outsourcing alone will attract the quantum of FDI needed under the 9MP?

Some of us have conducted alternative modeling and analysis but the real story related to a rising China is very much more serious than we have cared to admit. I am sorry but the current 9MP does not answer the question and core issues addressed by Kenichi Ohmae's original McKinsey Team in relation to the leapfrog factor. Their leapfrog factor was new 'K-value growth'.

What is Malaysia's new value creating industry? Outsourcing is only a body-shop role, not new value creation. Where is our new growth capital coming from? These questions remain unanswered by the 9MPs.

The Global Knowledge Malaysia team, formerly of the NITC Secretariat, has some of the answers. These have been presented but the ideas have yet to see the light of day. The current planners always seem to know better and therefore, our core ideas remain outside the 9MP.

Parochial interests

To my mind, the cabinet is taking and will continue to take a trip to Abilene. There is no serious alternative policy advice within the current public, private and civil society structure. Most ideas are only half-baked ones as argued by the former PM.

The cabinet is full of yes-men and women who, equally, surround themselves with other yes-men and women as advisors.

The former PM may not know this, but a George Washington University professor once wrote a paper about the "socio-psychological profile of disabled leaders" and defined them as "those to whom the policy advisors do not tell the whole truth because of the fear of losing their jobs".

My comment to Dr Mahathir Mohamad is this: it is not that you did not select good leaders to advise or replace you; it's just that all advisors, like the tailors in the story about the naked emperor, start telling one small lie (often in the name of a half-truth) and then spin out a whole yarn around the original lie until they are found out. In the meantime, they believe their own lie and live it out.

The cabinet is our key executive authority. If they are wrong, facts and figures can and must be used to prove them wrong. If not, we have to publicly debate and argue until we all can agree on the real issues at hand.

Pak Lah has opted for the 'servant leadership' model of administration. This uses influence rather than power and authority to make decisions. Such a model allows for open dialogue and rational debate. Therefore, he appears weak sometimes and appears to listen too much and make the wrong decisions.

I am concerned and have, in fact, called upon Pak Lah to be aware that he is losing traditional support because of loss of his integrity. But the abandonment of the half-bridge project (even if linked to the sovereignty issue) or of some pet mega-project cannot be used to accuse him of stabbing someone in the back. The fingerprints are very much your own and all ours as well, as Malaysians who elected the new government.

The real back-stabbing, in my view, is when the BN Whip is used to shut up Shahrir Abdul Samad on a matter of the integrity of Parliament.

Or when the Inspector-General of Police (IGP) is given free rein to speak against approved government policy on the proposed police watchdog body - or when he goes against public-service principles and forces non-Muslims to wear the tudung, even if only for ceremonial occasions.

How can we fight corruption if, at the level of local authorities, there is blatant disregard for the rule of law? And when most council heads behave like little emperors that are very naked!

It is amazing that today's cabinet has ministers accused of corruption but who have yet to be cleared by Anti-Corruption Agency; and ministers who have allegedly abused government policy for sectarian interests.

There are also 10 ministers (and leaders of political parties) whose memorandum on Article 11 of the constitution - a matter of serious national interest - was rejected by the prime minister, who is only primus inter pares.

Real back-stabbing in Jerry's language happens when the public interest of the majority of Malaysians is denied in favour of the interests of a minority. Mahathir should continue to speak up but should also not expect to be treated as more than an ordinary citizen.

Maybe he should write to express his views if there is no other way to make himself heard. Even the Tunku did that. The pen-name 'Che Det' still waits to be used.

--------------------------------------------------------------------
KJ John served in public service for 30 years and took optional retirement to work in his own consulting group. He hopes to see transparent and open, new governance practiced in Malaysia some day.
------------------------------------------------------------------
The Berita Malaysia / bmalaysia mailing lists

KJ's picture in the article above just makes me so mad! Look at that grin...

jigsawpuzzle..

you are not the only one that is mad...you have a friend that hates him too..that Toyo guy..but he is awfully quiet..once the dust settles on the PM and ex PM...we will have another round of fireworks. KJ vs KT???

syedhs

you said...this blog continues to highlight the 4 Mahathir questions to Pak Lah...

No. You got yourself totally confused between Screenshot's postings and what readers on this blog posts their views in the conversation thread.

Screenshot blogs an issue and ask the question, and the readers respond.

I don't see any partiality in Jeff's posting on the issue. But you cannot deny Jeff to have a position and opinion on a issue of national and public interest. Screenshot is a blog, not a Star Online or NST or BBC. NST and STAR are mor partial than you think.

If you want impartiality, the best place to get is Encylcopaedia Britannica On Line.

You are right if the readers are partial in asking Pak Lah to answer the 4 questions. And why not? Pak Lah is the PM, for God sake. The buck stops on his table. Not anymore on Dr M's table.

We had our chance to ask Dr M when he was PM, but none of us had the marbles to do that. The first course for any citizen is to ask Pak Lah to answer the 4 questions, BECAUSE he is the Prime Minister to the 4 questions that have national interest. I see nothing wrong and nothing partial about that. That is the right of citizens to ask.

Dr M as ordinary citizen, does not have to answer any questions, though morally he should. But that is another issue to debate.

You would appear partial,rather, my friend in your comments.

Surely, you are not subscribing to having the PM to maintain an elegant silence proposd by another Tun, Tun Musa.

dignity2u,

I donno if you will read this or not. But the 4 questions *have already* been answered - MV Augusta, Johor Bridge, Mahaleel (do you need this to be answered.. he he?.

Aiyoh come on la you have been living under the rock for how many years?

Now Sukmadermawan is getting some sort of retrial - this will of course anger Mahathir some more! If you read the situation correctly, this is exactly what angered Mahathir, and some people here are so clueless that they keep stressing incompetency of Pak Lah!

Frank&Honest,

It is true that this blog question, and people flock here and answer.

But here is the power of question, because people will always answer those 'questions qot questioned'. And those 'questioned questions' are the ones get limelight, so how about the other equally (or more) important questions?

Again, that is the power of question - and this blog continues to highlight mahathir's question.

You all have been deceived.. ha ha ha.

As CEO of malaysia, pak Lah can easily not answer the questions, put Mahathir, mathias and others in jail under ISA, or some sexual indecent charges, curtail news organisations to "toe the line' and move the whole government administration into prosecuting any emerging challenges.
The fact that he did not do the above, speaks volume of his character. Not even a threatening word to his opponents, who I am sure are being financed by TM's cronies.
On concern made by tokyo Lee, the best method of combating corruption is by promoting a more transparent system, with less government inteference, good moral education and a caring government. And Pak lah is moving in that direction.(So far)

Regarding impartiality, I see that this blog has produced comment like 'Dr M as open minded, like any other.' Here the 'architect of
mega project meant for cronies' is being pictured as 'open minded', and Pak Lah as incompetent. Actually I am not really keen on supporting Pak Lah, but looking at situation now it looks as if Mahathir is the savior, and Pak Lah is the crook.

For me, this is very clear - Mahathir is a definite crook, and Pak Lah is half-unproven yet - that is the best I can say. Now Mahathir is rallying all of your support because his cronies' project are being threatened, and Pak Lah's iteration of 'everyone regardless of *connection* will be prosecuted' certainly send the chill down to TDM.

That is all I can say.

sydput,

the reason why pak lah did not imprison Tun/Matthias and do as he wish to shut them up would make it too obvious that Pak Lah is the *bad guy* and that Tun was right all along ...

has pak lah really made it much more transparent with all those coporate governance crap and also less corruption ?

hell no; his *elegant* indifference towards the decision/indecision to allow/not to allow buying into ECM Libra by Avenue Capitals speak otherwise of this so-called transparencies ...

the media *blackout* on the bloody sunday by FRU against demonstrators also speak volumes on how open is the press freedom ...

It seems press freedom is only allowed to be *free* to promote these two jokers' agenda ...

Dear syedhs,

The way I look at this,you should also join in to insist that AAB must answer the 4 questions.

Unless you are also insistent that Malaysia should stay put with the TDM's era.

A newly reformed "transparency king" aged TDM has started the ball rollong and insisted that the governement must be transparent.

Isn't that what many of us have been wanting and shouting for years?

With a chap like TDM doing the dirty work for us,shouldn't we all be supporting his effort?

I believe that it is the end that is most important.

I want KJ and KaliPriest to declare their assets. At the same time, I want all the other ministers to declare their assets as well. Let's make this interesting, since Mathias challenged KJ and Kali, I wonder if Mahathir would be challenged to declare his assets as well.

Some ministers are rumored to have purchased million dollar cars....and im sure this is the tip of the iceberg.

syedhs

I would not put value-judgements on Dr M or Pak Lah whether they are crooks or not based on third party information.

But DELL has a point. This issue of PM standing accountable should start somewhere. Here we have a former PM who asked questions of national and public interest, why shouldn't we support that move, without digging dirt about the person. You are killing the messenger in an attempt to suppress the message. Then you are, as DELL rightly said, reverting back to TDM's 22 years of restrictive political climate, in which you now condemn. You can't have it both ways. That would be absolue hypocrisy on your part then.

If the four questions had been asked by Pak Lah if he had been out of Govt or by anybody, it is only right we as citizens in a democracy should support. Unless of course, you like the way North Korean regime operates.

Kepada semua yang kata AAB atau kabinet nya tak perlu jawab TDM:

Walaupun banyak soalan yang belum ada jawapan dari era TDM, ia tak bermakna kita tak seharusnya menyokong soalan soalan yang ditanya TDM sekarang.

Dan walaupun TDM tak pernah beri jawapan pada masa kepimpinannya, tak bererti kita boleh menerima tingkahlaku yang sama dari AAB.
Sikapnya membisu yang dikatakan elegan itu sebenarnya membodohkan sendiri saja - lebih-lebih lagi membodohkan rakyat jelata yang menyokongnya tahun 2004 dulu.

Kita harus bersyukur kerana TDM sanggup membahayakan kepentingan dirinya (kalau nak buat kepada orang lain, haruslah sedia menerima tindakan yang sama dari mereka) demi mencungkil penerangan kepada isu-isu nasional. Kan dia dah bersara? Kenapa pula nak buat kecoh dan bising bising?

Biar saudara saudari fikir baik-baik - adakah isu-isu ini akan di beri pengenalan yang sama kalau ia di bangkitkan oleh DAP, PAS ataupun abang Jeff?

Tapi, jangan tersilap - walaupun saya berterimakasih kepada TDM kerana usahanya sekarang, tak bererti saya boleh menerima hasil keburukan dari kepimpinannya. Saya tetap mahu jawapan dari TDM!

Selepas AAB dah menjawab TDM, harap-harap AAB akan membalas budi TDM - bukalah kes-kes lama dan siasat betul-betul. Biarlah mereka saling menyoal sesama diri mereka. Barulah syiok untuk rakyat jelata yang dah lama bingung, yang dah lama hidup dalam kegelapan. Jangan biar mereka membisu aje.

seeevil666,

i think Tun have a big file on AAB..so AAB pun tak berani sangat nak lawan balik. As it is now his son and son in law are under scrutiny. How they acquired so much wealt within such a short period. AAB certainly does not need to have any more spotlight on himself. Tun will never go in blind....He certainly have something in his pocket..sorry his files.

Kalau UMNO betul garang..they should expel Tun from the party for going against his party leaders

Dear Syedhs

AAB has equal rights in asking TDM to explain too but that doesnt make both of them now a tit for tat and thus no need to answer anyone anymore.

As rakyat, we want answers from both sides.

Add on to the list after Bakun, How abt the SUKOM accts?

http://www.malaysia-today.net/CorridorsPower/2006/06/no-quarters-asked-none-given.htm

read this. There is more to all this.