Wednesday, September 08, 2021

The good and bad prime ministers – by Mahathir (The "MOST HUMBLE" PM?)



The good and bad prime ministers – by Mahathir


A mural showing Malaysia’s previous prime ministers. (Instagram Pic)

PETALING JAYA: Dr Mahathir Mohamad, the country’s longest-serving prime minister and the only man to have held the post twice, has given his take on the others who have risen to the position – and it was mostly negative.

The first prime minister Tunku Abdul Rahman, he said, did nothing to develop the country. Mahathir said he managed to get independence for the country but failed to list measures to help the country grow.

“He was rejected by people because the Malays said they did not get anything. We are what we are, still poor,” he said during an interview with Great People Television.

The title of the talk was Leadership Reflections and Perceptions with Dr Mahathir Mohamad.

Mahathir said the Malays were angry with Tunku although he wanted to do good for the country. Mahathir also described Tunku as “the happiest prime minister in the world” because Malaysia did not undergo any revolution to get independence.

He said the second prime minister, Abdul Razak Hussein was more conversant but had problems while heading the National Operations Council (Megaran) after the May 13 riots.

“The government was weak. Even though Perikatan (the Alliance) had won the elections, it won with a small majority, and couldn’t form a government in Penang, Perak and Selangor,” he said, adding that this caused uncertainties.

Razak then invited the opposition to join the government to have a strong administration and introduced the New Economic Policy to uplift and benefit the Malays.

“How it was to be done, that was not spelled out,” Mahathir said.

Razak also had to change the political party’s name from Perikatan to Barisan Nasional because of the unity government.

“(After the changes) he was able to lead a strong government,” Mahathir said.

According to Mahathir, the third prime minister, Hussein Onn “did not function well because he was unhealthy and sick most of the time”.

Hussein then eventually appointed Mahathir as his deputy before resigning.

“I am grateful. Later, I wanted his son (Hishammuddin) to be the prime minister. But Hussein did not stay long enough to effect any change in the government,” he added.

During Mahathir’s 22-year tenure from 1981 to 2003, he knew he would be prime minister as long as he satisfied the needs of the rakyat.

After independence, he said people remained poor due to weak business activities. Due to that, Mahathir said he became business-friendly to create jobs by building infrastructure such as highways, railway tracks, airports, ports, among others.

He said he was called a dictator and there were claims that he practised cronyism but none of this was proven.

His deputy, Abdullah Ahmad Badawi then took over but earned Mahathir’s ire when he “did not keep to his promise” to continue with the double rail tracking and the “crooked bridge” projects between Malaysia and Singapore.

“After one week, he changed his mind. But he had promised to continue the double tracking (project),” Mahathir said.

He said he had been happy when Najib Razak took over from Abdullah in 2009.

“I was very happy. I thought he would be like his father but within a short time I realised he was not,” Mahathir said, referring to Najib’s “cash is king” approach and the 1MDB scandal.

He described Najib as a bad prime minister who destroyed the country’s finances and administration.

Mahathir became the 7th prime minister after GE14, but lasted only for 22 months with his right-hand man in Bersatu, Muhyiddin Yassin, taking over.

Mahathir also spoke on ex-prime minister Muhyiddin’s failure in handling the Covid-19 crisis, which led to over 20,000 new cases being reported daily.

As for future leaders, he said he would not be endorsing anyone and it was up to the people to choose clean and deserving leaders.

+++

kt notes:

The Old Eff-er pointed out “He (Tunku) was rejected by people because the Malays said they did not get anything. We are what we are, still poor.”

If Malays are STILL poor, as mentioned specifically by him, why hadn't the longest serving PM done anything to help them? 

Wait, that's not true - just look at his 3 sons.



10 comments:

  1. And all through these years the other parties in the Alliance and BN: MCA, MIC and Gerakan, were totally useless, bowing to the whims and fancies of UMNO. Ketuanan Melayu was born and allowed to grow until it is near impossible to get rid of now. This Monster is now so Big and Ugly and it's hunger cannot be satisfied.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. at most MCA was only with 28 seats, and indeed it did fck-all vis-a-vis ketuanan Melayu. But what about the 42-seat party? Wakakaka, even less when so many in 42-party were scrambling forward to carry Atuk's balls, and still are so

      Delete
    2. 42-seat party only had LESS THAN HALF A TERM, only 22 months.

      MCA had 13 FULL TERMS, GE1-13. They carried UMNO balls for 60 years.

      Delete
    3. In 1959 GE, MCA won 19 seats out of total Parlimen then was 104 seats, meaning 18%.

      Today DAP 42/222 = 19%.

      So Sama Sama Lah. But in 1959 no ketuanan disease yet. Today it is endemic ha ha ha. So why MCA so Boh Lam Phar back then?

      In 1964 GE, MCA won 27 out of 104 seats contested. So they were dam powerful. But still Boh Lam Phar. DPM pun tadak.

      Delete
    4. FACT CHECK. I DON’T BULLYSHIT.
      MCA % seats won in GE:

      1982: 24/154 = 16%
      1995: 30/192 = 16%
      1999: 29/193 = 15%
      2004: 31/219 = 14%

      So there were many occasions (during Toonsie 1.0) when MCA held percentage-wise as many seats as DAP today.

      Toonsie 1.0 years was when the Ketuanan Melayu was only starting, slowly at first, taking over all aspects of Malaysian politics. At that time there was still a chan to arrest this trend but MCA was carrying Toonsie’s balls, totally subservient to UMNO. Dapat Menteri Jaga Kereta cukuplah. Chan Kong Choy, Ling Loong Sik, Ong Tee Kiat etc etc etc.

      Now today KT blames everything on DAP when they only had less than half a term in office and by now the Green Monster is uncontrollable and insatiable. Every small move is construed as challenging the Ketuanan Melayu and the 3Rs.

      Delete
    5. carrying UMNO balls for 60 years is less onerous than carrying Atuk's balls for 22 months

      Delete
    6. MCA didn't thump tables nor boast whereas DAP did and still does. Mana UEC? Mana no toll? Mana this Mana that, only capati's! Worse, threatened only Chinese controlled college-UC with withholding of funds when LBGE was FM, and yet none of TAR-UC alumni (Teresa Kok, Chong Eng) spoke out against LGE's anti-Chinese educational balls-carrying

      Delete
    7. Whether they have 1 MP or 42 MPs, DAP has to Thump Table because MCA Boh Lam Phar, whether they have 20 or 30 MPs hide Under the Table, hiding behind the spittoon...ha ha ha...

      No With-holding of Funds for TARUC.

      https://www.malaysiakini.com/news/503793

      QUOTE
      RM40m grant for TAR UC transferred to trust fund today
      Geraldine Tong
      Published 16 Dec 2019

      The Finance Ministry has transferred the RM40 million grant it pledged to the education trust fund managed by TARCian Alumni Association (TAA), to be used for the benefit of Tunku Abdul Rahman University College (TAR UC) and its students.

      This was announced at a press conference called by TAA and Finance Minister Lim Guan Eng in Kuala Lumpur today...
      UNQUOTE

      Delete
  2. Ha ha..well we have now the bestest and the fuckerest PM giving his take on other PMs.

    For someone who claims not to bother about his legacy, he certainly tries his darndest best to "keep the record straight".

    We all know what comes out of his mouth are mainly filth and lies. So, I am not surprised with the report card of the other PMs he has conjured to make himself look good.

    The thing is he does it with a straight face and thinks Malaysians are idiots and cannot see the facts and truth.

    His one lasting eternal regret is possibly that he lost in every "competition" he had with the late LKY. That explains his animosity towards Singapore.

    As it is said, this old buffoon cannot smell LKY's fart much less compare against the great man.

    ReplyDelete
  3. If you have any strong evidence to claim Tun M was corrupted back then,why till today no one come forward with concrete evidence to charge him.Like “Bossku” the whole world knew his corrupted.

    ReplyDelete