Monday, February 15, 2010

Event: 16/2/2010, 2nd year Anniversary HINDRAF Rose Campaign.

In rememberence of the Rose Rally 2008, we will have a prayers at the Court Malai Pillayar Temple, Puduraya, KL on 16.2.2010 at 7.30pm.

Please join.

“Valga HINDRAF Makkal Sakthi”
Thanks & Regards


No heritage for hindu temples.

Whilst at least a few Christian churches, and almost all mosques can be of historical and heritage and in fact even the ruins of a non functioning church can be made a heritage site (refer The Star 23/1/10 at page N33).

But the last Indian Railway settlement in Sentul KL, the Kg Pandan Indian settlement both settlement in Penang Island – Kg Buah Pala, the thousands of hindu temples in the plantations which was the economic backbone of Malaysia, hundreds of Tamil schools hundreds of hindu crematoriums etc are not preserved as the history and heritage of Malaysia.

one-malaysia9In fact on a day to day basis these Indian structures as reported in the Tamil press are either demolished to be demolished or relocated just because it sits on prime land and big monies to be made by both UMNO and also PKR, DAP and PAS as the Indians are the soft targets without much political or economical clout.


MRSM 817 Bright Indian UPSR students excluded also from fully residential schools

one-malaysia8On the 1st Februari 5,900 students only would be taken into the 39 Mara Junior Science Colleges throughout the country. Another 6,600 places in fully residential schools for high achieving malay muslim UPSR students.

But at least the 817 Indian students from the 523 Tamil schools who all scored 7As’ should be given places at MRSM, as these Indian students might be negatively influenced and converted to Islam in residential schools is a valid fear that parents have. So we ask for one Tamil MRSM like the MSRM, PDRM, MRSM, ATM and MRSM Felda that the malays have. (Note : Malay muslim students can only get a maximum of 5As whereas the tamil students have obtained 7As).

P. Uthayakumar


Malaysian Indian minority and human rights violations annual report 2009 to 150 countries (NST 8/1/2010 page 12)



PKR Selangor State land denied, 45% of Selangor Tamil Schools pupils fare poorly in UPSR

By the stroke of the pen of the PKR Selangor Menteri Besar, (MB) all 98 Tamil schools in Selangor could be given state government land by government land by virtue of Section 76 of the National Land Code (refer The Sun 6/1/2010 page 6). But this PKR M.B would not do it. But he has the cheek to pretend that he is concerned that 45% of Selangor Tamil School pupils fared poorly in UPSR. But he blames the parents and hands out some peanuts to these Tamil schools. This MB uses his Indian mandores like the previous UMNO regime (ref Sinar 6/1/2010 page S3). How then is PKR, DAP any different from the previous UMNO regime?

P. Uthayakumar


Kg.Medan: UMNO hide’s truth of “ethnic cleansing”

Court rejects bid to quash ban on Kg Medan book (Malaysiakini)


The Kuala Lumpur High Court today rejected an author’s application to quash the government’s decision to ban his book on the Kampung Medan riots, almost nine years ago.

NONEIn his decision, Justice Mohamad Ariff Md Yusof ruled that the then-deputy home minister’s decision to ban the Tamil language book, titled ‘March 8′, was valid as he (deputy minister) considered that the circulation of the book would be prejudicial to internal security and public order.

He said, the deputy minister in this case, had absolute discretion to exercise the powers of the minister in prohibiting the publication and the printing of the book, after considering views from the police and the ministry that the book would be prejudicial to internal security, and “poison the minds of the readers, especially the Indian community”.

In dismissing the judicial review application, he, however did not order for costs because the case involved public interest.

Mohamed Ariff is the same judge who overturned the banning of the book, ‘Muslim Women and the Challenge of Extremism’ by the home ministry on Jan 25.

He said, each case had different facts of the case, and to arrive at a decision, he had to consider all factors.

Mohamed Ariff said, there was a need for balancing, in exercising the judicial function, and that he also took into account, cultural and sensitivity factors before making the decision.

On Feb 23, 2007, engineer-turned-lawyer K Arumugam filed an application for a judicial review, seeking to declare null and void the order made by the government on Nov 21, 2006, prohibiting the publication, sale and distribution of the book on grounds that it was a threat to national security.

In his application, Arumugam, 51, named the internal security minister and the deputy internal security minister at that time, as well as the Malaysian government, as respondents.

Earlier, Arumugam’s counsel Edward Saw argued that the decision to ban the book was irrational and unreasonable to the right of freedom of expression.

He also said the deputy minister failed to adduce evidence that the circulation of the book could be prejucial to internal security as the book was in circulation with 3,000 copies before it was banned on Nov 21, 2006.

Senior federal counsel Azizah Nawawi had submitted that the deputy minister at that time (Fu Ah Kiaw) had considered all views and information before prohibiting the book’s circulation.

Arumugam, when met by reporters, said he respected the court’s decision and would consult his lawyer on whether to appeal or otherwise.

- Bernama