The corruption of Mahathir: SOROS' REPLY TO MAHATHIR

ladygaga

A few years ago Bangkok Post had published an article with the title as “The corruption of Mahathir by George Soros “ and its good to circulate this once in a while to remind people how the country has been damaged by Dr M, UMNO and his cronies.

George Soros is not only one of the best investors in the world but very well informed too. He has spelt clearly what Malaysians have known all the while.



The corruption of Mahathir:

SOROS' REPLY TO MAHATHIR

Adapted from Bangkok Post (Not published locally)

I have always said Dr Mahathir is a menace to his own people. Now only you can see the effects of his foolishness when the ringgit has halved its value overnight and your economy goes kaput. Single handedly you have caused hardship to millions of your own people. You have built useless mega projects at tremendous cost to the country.

The telecoms tower in Kuala Lumpur and the highest building in the world show how stupid you are. Not only does it cause massive traffic jam, it has totally no purpose.If you need high ground for telecoms antennae a nearby mountain is there for free.

This tower has no purpose from the ground up to 300 metres. The satelites make this totally unneccesary. A fool and his money are soon parted. The only thing is you are the fool and the money belongs to Malaysians. You make 20% in every project, you have real estate in Japan and billions of shares corruptly acquired.

Your 3 sons are worth 8 billion US$. Where do they get this money? Of course, corruption.

You are known as the Marcos of Malaysia, having enriched yourself to the tune of billions.

You dare to shed crocodile tears during UMNO delegates meeting about the ills of corruption.

Yet you are the most corrupt of all the prime ministers before you. A thief is crying thief and hopes people look the other way. Who dares to say anything when the chief is caught with his hands in the candy jar?

You said wisdom is not the monopoly of the West. So is foolishness. You have more foolishness than most people would believe. Billions are used to build two high rise Petronas buildings that benefit nobody. They now stand tall, a symbol of stupidity and irresponsibility. Instead they just add on to traffic jams. What is this reclamation of 10 islands off Kedah? Totally absurd and stupid. Of course your benefit is 20%. And the bridge across from Malacca to Sumatra across international waters?

Why not build a bridge to the moon? I am sure you still can get your 20%. You called me a Moron. How can a Moron make so much money. By allowing short selling and borrowing millions of shares from your banks we fund managers made millions out of your inexperience and poor regulations.

You lose all Malaysians' money, therefore you are the Moron. Now you know too late and start crying over spilt milk.

In Australia you are known as the recalcitrant ego maniac; in UKthe corrupt custard because of your stupid purchase of our movie studio and the 290 million ringgit Lotus racing car plant and the shady Pergau dam loans from the UK. They are useless to us and you still want to buy them.

What about buying British reject submarines through your agent, of course. The agent/ broker is designed to make millions out of the Malaysian government..
Your purchase of our battleships is at least 50% more than others are paying. Your purchase of 9 hospitals from UK lock, stock and barrel does not support your local architects or your industry and the British send you obsolete medical equipment. The design is atrocious, one end to the other is half a kilometer and there is no CT-scan, an absolute necessity.

In the UK your face appears in no less than 17 newspapers as a corrupt dictator. In Malaysia you are known as the (IBM) International Big Mouth. In Japan they call you the 'smallest one' (brain size). In Pacific islands, the Santa Claus (giving advice left and right). In south America they call you the parrot (he talks a lot but does not know what it is about). In Manila the living Marcos.

In Malaysia they are spending millions to lure tourists and you talk rubbish scaring every foreigner away. When he is dumb he is doubted a fool, when he opens his mouth it removes all doubt."

While I agree the West does not have the monopoly to wisdom, your actions are not the wisest either. Your EAEC has totally no support even in Asean. Your South-South dialogue meets with the same fate and what is this I hear of the Bridge from Peninsula Malaysia to Sumatra covering 20 miles across International shipping lane?
How crazy can one get? Even the Japanese don't have the money. This world's stupidity seems to be concentrated in one man's mind - yours.

The multimedia super corridor - MSC -. Well in USA its Most Stupid Concept because we Americans, would have thought of it light years before. Even if it makes money, we can copy this concept can't we?

Why do you want to spend your hard-earned money doing questionable projects? It will be like the Bakun project. Abandoned fund wasted and another white elephant. I always say politicians should not be involved in business. Your ministers are also businessmen and almost every official is enriching himself. Look at Rafidah Aziz, selling thousands of Approved Permits (APs) for cars each worth 20-30 thousand Malaysian dollars. Why not your government sell them and make the money? She has acquired millions of shares meant for bumis for free before she agrees to list them.

Look at your Selangor Chief Minister collecting millions for approving high rise buildings from businessman. He is worth a few billions. Unfortunately he was caught with a few million pocket money in Australia. Every Chief minister is awarding useless projects to his cronies then collecting secret pay offs on the side.

siawraet

bukan ke hari tu mereka berdua ni dah kamceng?...

mnaa

Errr.. bukan ke Soros ni yang sbbkan banyak negara ambek IMF, and matawang jatuh?

Al Lebam

berapa kali nak tepek artikel ni kat sini..?
dua minggu sudah dah ada satu forumer bukak thread yang serupa berasakan artikel yang sama..

kalau tak silap... artikel ni zaman tok kaduk punya..
sbb tu tak ada dateline...

MOD... saya yakin betul....
saya mahu konci lirik saya.... ehhh silapppp... konci jer thread ni..


MO

juwaini

berapa kali nak tepek artikel ni kat sini..?
dua minggu sudah dah ada satu forumer bukak thread yang serupa berasakan artikel yang sama..

kalau tak silap... artikel ni zaman tok kaduk punya..
sbb ...
Al Lebam Post at 12-1-2010 13:49

At least bidas la serba sikit hujah soros tu...

Habis-habis kuat pun, jawab la "ni adalah dakyah yahudi nasara yang dengki pada wira dunia ketiga"...

FussyPussy

This letter was first published in 1997. Ulang sekali, 1997. It was signed "Soros". Obviously it was a pseudonym as even George Soros himself never claim the letter was his.

Kalau baca content surat ni pun boleh tahu ni bukan surat dari George Soros. There are a lot of contradicting and inaccurate information in the letter that gave it away as not a letter from the real George Soros.

Contoh:

"In Australia you are known as the recalcitrant ego maniac; in UK the corrupt custard because of your stupid purchase of our movie studio..."

George Soros is not a British citizen, he is a Hungarian-American.

fezy

bukan ke bende ni dah di post ke bod ni?
aku de ja vu ke hapa?

Al Lebam

This letter was first published in 1997. Ulang sekali, 1997. It was signed "Soros". Obviously it was a pseudonym as even George Soros himself never claim the letter was his.

Kalau baca content sur ...
FussyPussy Post at 12-1-2010 14:01

betul tu FP...
I had wanted to do this but then.... aku malas nak go to the extend nak ulas panjang2 bagi explanation pada artikel zaman tok kaduk ni..
Dengan isi artikel yang tunggang langgang sebegitu... tak kan le soros nak mengakui artikel tu dari dia...

cmf_herrhughie

hahhaha...very well said...

the Mr 20% of malaysia...no wonder ekonomi makin tenat..

xy_daen

betul tu FP...
I had wanted to do this but then.... aku malas nak go to the extend nak ulas panjang2 bagi explanation pada artikel zaman tok kaduk ni..
Dengan isi artikel yang tunggang langgang s ...
Al Lebam Post at 12-1-2010 14:09

Errmmm...

Tapi jgn tekojut, ader org bukit gigih pecaya dowh....

Al Lebam

Errmmm...

Tapi jgn tekojut, ader org bukit gigih pecaya dowh....
xy_daen Post at 12-1-2010 14:23

spesis mcm ni depa swallow everything... hook, line and sinker...
kalau artikel tu kata mahathir romen mother teresa pun sure spesis mcm ni telan jugak...

juwaini

Kesimpulannya, arguments dalam artikel tu tak sah sebab tu bukan real soros yang tulis.

Gitu ke?

arnauld

1# ladygaga

marah sungguh soros...of course la bila kena currency control dia tak sempat cover short. beli ringgit kat pasaran haram mahal la. banyak la engkau punya pandai soros, ltcm pun dah bangkrap.

FussyPussy

Kesimpulannya, arguments dalam artikel tu tak sah sebab tu bukan real soros yang tulis.

Gitu ke?
juwaini Post at 12-1-2010 14:39

So, gunapakai reply anda, sebarang surat layang tentang misconduct kira sah lah? Kalau ada orang tempek surat tentang misconduct DSAI ke, LKS ke, TGNA pulak, just because it was published, does it make it right?

OsHiN_hOnEy

http://mforum2.cari.com.my/viewt ... &extra=page%3D2

juwaini

So, gunapakai reply anda, sebarang surat layang tentang misconduct kira sah lah? Kalau ada orang tempek surat tentang misconduct DSAI ke, LKS ke, TGNA pulak, just because it was published, does it ...
FussyPussy Post at 12-1-2010 14:48

Artikel tu dianggap surat layang ke? <-- ni soalan sebab aku tak tau

Adakah apa yang dia tulis tu tak betul dari segi faktanya? <-- ni pun soalan, sebab aku tak tau

warversa

junk...junk...and whole lots a junk...

OsHiN_hOnEy

Artikel tu dianggap surat layang ke?
juwaini Post at 12-1-2010 14:50

sudah di beri ulasan pada thread sebelumnya dik juw

mod pls humban or send to LP, ada juga kerja abg dtec kat sana

FussyPussy

16# juwaini

Aku jawab setakat yang aku tahu. Artikel ni diterbitkan pada page Letter to Editor@Surat Pembaca. Siapa2 pun boleh tulis dan hantar surat ke bahagian surat pembaca kan? Editor will use his own discretion to choose and publish any letters he wants for whatever reasons and rationale behind it kan?

Lain suratkhabar, lain fokus surat pembaca dia. Kalau baca Utusan, majoriti surat pembaca sokong polisi kerajaan, puji kerajaan tinggi melangit plus satu-dua surat aduan. Kalau baca paper Harakah, Rocket, Keadilan, penuh surat pembaca kutuk kerajaan, puji pimpinan parti pembangkang suci dan telus etc. To each its own.

Bagi aku surat ni surat layang la cos dia just sign "Soros". Then dia bukannya from the official column of the newspaper. About the contents, penuh dengan insuniations @ unproven claims. Tone pun macam sour grape je penulis ni.

Since kita dok ulang tayang surat zaman tok kadok, so it's only fair aku tempek surat zaman tok kadok yang ditulis oleh Paul Krugman dalam Slate, majalah akhbar The New York Times. Sapa Paul Krugman? Google it and find your own answer.

=====================

Capital Control Freaks: How Malaysia got away with economic heresy.
By Paul Krugman
Posted Monday, Sept. 27, 1999, at 3:30 PM ET

I didn't want to go to Malaysia. The Malaysian government would surely expect me to deliver a stronger endorsement of its heterodox economic program than I was prepared to offer. And, of course, it would try to use me politically--to provide a veneer of respectability to a regime that has lately developed the habit of putting inconvenient people in jail. But sometimes an economist has to do what an economist has to do.Since I had been the only high-profile economist to advocate the economic heresy that Malaysia had put into practice, sooner or later I would have to face the music. And so last month I agreed to spend aday--including a 90-minute "dialogue" with the prime minister--at the Palace of the Golden Horses, a vaguely Las Vegas-style resort outside Kuala Lumpur.

Some background here: Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad has been the wild man of the Asian crisis, blaming all his problems on manipulations by Jewish speculators, denouncing the prescriptions of the International Monetary Fund as part of a Western conspiracy to recolonize Asia, and so on. In the early days of the crisis, his position seemed absurd, and it was easy to make fun of him--which Idid, right here in Slate.But eventually it stopped being so easy to dismiss Mahathir's views.For one thing, the crisis turned out to be worse than anyone had imagined possible, and anyone with an open mind began to suspect that the IMF's initial policies had been misconceived. For another, while the vast conspiracy Mahathir envisaged was a figment of his imagination(I know the supposed conspirators, and they aren't that smart), a few hedge funds really did engage in concerted manipulation of Hong Kong's markets in the summer of 1998. Mahathir still has a distorted view of the way the world works--more on that below--but then so do the free-capital-market faithful.

Where do I fit in? In the summer of 1998, I began to reconsider my own views about the crisis. The scope of global "contagion"--the rapid spread of the crisis to countries with no real economic links to the original victim--convinced me that IMF critics such as Jeffrey Sachs were right in insisting that this was less a matter of economic fundamentals than it was a case of self-fulfilling prophecy, of market panic that, by causing a collapse of the real economy, ends up validating itself. But I also concluded that the threat of further capital flight would prevent Asian economies from simply reflating, that is, increasing public spending and cutting interest rates to get their economies growing again. And so I found myself advocating temporary restrictions on the ability of investors to pull money out of crisis economies--a curfew, if you like, on capital flight--as part of a recovery strategy.
  
Now,it turned out that just at the time that I went public with those views, Mahathir and his advisers were secretly working out a plan to impose capital controls as part of a recovery strategy. According to what I have been told, my own public statement played a small role in the final decision; essentially, some of Mahathir's advisers were worried by the absence of any support for such controls among mainstream economists, but the appearance of my August manifesto in Fortune silenced the doubters. Almost surely, Malaysia would have gone ahead with the plan anyway; but I had, inadvertently, found myself one of the few outsiders to express any kind of support. I quickly put out an open letter to Mahathir warning that the controls should not be abused, used as a cover for irresponsible policies;but I know from friends in Washington that people started referring to the "Krugman-Mahathir strategy" of recovery via capital controls. And so I really could not avoid going to Malaysia to discuss those controls, a year after they had been imposed.
  
I arrived at a moment of celebration. When the controls were put on, many Western analysts predicted disaster: a collapse of the economy,hyperinflation, rampant black markets. It didn't happen. Two days before I arrived, the latest statistics had confirmed that Malaysia was in fact experiencing a fairly strong economic recovery. The actual implementation of the controls had been careful and selective, and important economic reforms--such as strengthening the banking system--had, if anything, accelerated after the new policy was introduced. A few days after my visit, restrictions on removing money from the country were eased and hardly any money was pulled out. So, I guess the Malaysians expected me to join them in a mutual admiration society. Surely they were disappointed when I expressed some skepticism about the payoff from the controls.
  
What,then, are the lessons of Malaysia's recovery? In our staged"dialogue"--which was played out in semi-public, in front of a disturbingly obsequious audience of a hundred or so businessmen--Mahathir continued to sound a minor-key version of the conspiracy theme, insisting that capital controls were necessary to protect small countries against the evil designs of big speculators.That's an unfortunate emphasis: While there are big speculators, and they do sometimes make plays against vulnerable economies, they are not the main reason that controls sometimes make sense. In general,controls should be imposed to prevent panic rather than conspiracy, and the investors who panic are, if anything, more likely to be respectable bankers and wealthy domestic residents than nefarious rootless cosmopolitans. (Indeed, even the occasional market manipulation by big speculators wouldn't be possible if it weren't for the possibility of generating a panic among other investors; it is a familiar point in the academic literature that Hong Kong-type speculative plays can work only if the economy is vulnerable to self-fulfilling crisis in the first  place.) And the emphasis on big foreign speculators may encourage Malaysia to control too much for too long. Panic is a sometime thing,but hedge funds ye will always have with you.  

Nonetheless,Malaysia has proved a point--namely, that controlling capital in a crisis is at least feasible. Until the Malaysian experiment, the prevailing view among pundits was that even if financial crises were driven by self-justifying panic, there was nothing governments could do to curb that panic except to reschedule bank debts--part, but only part, of the pool of potential flight capital--and otherwise try to restore confidence by making a conspicuous display of virtue. Austerity and reform were the watchwords. The alternative--preventing capital flight directly, and thereby gaining a breathing space--was supposed to be completely impossible, with any attempt a sure recipe for disaster. Now we know better. Capital controls are not necessarily the answer for every country that experiences a financial crisis; sometimes confidence can be restored without the need for coercive measures, and even when calming words fail, "burden sharing" by banks and other lenders will often be enough. But it would now be foolish to rule out controls as a measure of last resort.
  

Mahathir can therefore claim a partial vindication for his economic heresies.That is not a political endorsement. Some right-wingers have claimed that anyone with a good word for Malaysian capital controls (me in particular) is also in effect an accomplice in the imprisonment, onwhat certainly sound like trumped-up charges, of Mahathir's former heir apparent Anwar Ibrahim--an advocate of more conventional policies.Well, I still remember the days when left-wingers used to claim that anyone with a good word for Chile's free-market reforms had bloodstained hands, because he was in effect endorsing Gen. Augusto Pinochet. The point is that economics is not a morality play. Sometimes bad men make good policies, and vice versa. And the job of economic analysts is, or ought to be, to assess the policies, without regard towho makes them.
  
The objective fact is that whatever you think of Mahathir, Malaysia has gotten away with its economic apostasy. You can question whether that apostasy was necessary, but you cannot claim that it has been a disaster--and you cannot disguise the fact that those who predicted disaster were letting politics and ideology cloud their judgment.

cmf_shone

pemimpin umno mn yg tak korup???.............