Pussy Riot and Malaysian foreign-funded NGOs

Bizarre as it seems, two prominent Malaysian NGOs have something in common with Pussy Riot – the support of the US National Endowment for Democracy.

WHO loves Pussy Riot? Paul McCartney, Red Hot Chili Peppers and Sting are in the long list of celebrities supporting the so-called Russian feminist punk rock outfit.



But Madonna appears to have made the biggest impact with her brazen display of endorsement.

Midway through her 1984 hit Like a Virgin during a concert in Moscow last month, she stripped to exhibit the words “Pussy Riot” written across her back.

Her show did little to prevent three members of the group – Maria Alyokhina, Nadezhda Tolokonnikova and Yekaterina Samutsevich – from being jailed for two years.

They were found guilty of hooliganism and inciting religious hatred in an orthodox Moscow cathedral.

There has been much global media frenzy over their perceived persecution.The international condemnation has come from Amnesty International, the White House, the European Union, the British and German governments and an assortment of human rights groups.

Among the latest to join the chorus are Yoko Ono, wife of ex-Beatle John Lennon, and Myanmar opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi.

The story as being spun by the mainstream global media is that of three young innocent women who were merely expressing their freedom being jailed by the dissent-silencing president Vladimir Putin (ex-KGB, remember?) and as such, need the support from all the outraged freedom-loving, justice-seeking and human rights-embracing people of the world.

After presenting the Lennon Ono Grant for Peace award to Tolokonnikova’s husband, Ono said: “I thank Pussy Riot in standing firmly in their belief for freedom of expression and making all women of the world proud to be women.”

Oh yeah? Let’s look at what they did to earn such an honour. On Feb 21, they stormed the altar of Cathedral of Christ the Saviour wearing balaclavas and bright outfits to “perform” what has been reported as a “punk prayer to the Virgin Mary”.

In reality, it was a grossly blasphemous parody of a Latin hymn, the English lyrics of which read: Holy, Holy, Holy, Lord God of Hosts 


Heaven and earth are full of your glory. Hosanna in the highest, Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord. Hosanna in the highest

What they yelled during their “performance” was this:

Holy s***, s***, Lord’s s***! Holy s***, s***, Lord’s s***! St Maria, Virgin, become a feminist ...*Patriarch Gundyaev believes in Putin *(The Russian Orthodox Church’s Patriarch Kirill of Moscow and All Russia, whose secular name is Vladimir Gundyaev)
 B****, you better believe in God!

The group is an offshoot of another known as “Voina”, or “War” in Russian, which has since 2008 staged several offensively shocking events in the name of “performance art”, including painting a mural of a penis on a bridge, having group sex in a museum, throwing live cats at workers of a McDonald’s outlet, overturning of police cars and firebombing buildings. They also stole a chicken from a supermarket and performed a lewd act with it.

It’s highly doubtful that the information would be revealed by the Western media when the case comes up for appeal on Oct 1.

Imagine the repercussions if such a group entered a mosque, church, or a Hindu or Buddhist temple in Malaysia to similarly “express their freedom”.

People who commit such acts in the US or in most European countries would also be arrested, charged and jailed, so what’s the big deal about these women?

For one thing, they seem to have powerful backers, in the form of the US National Endowment for Democracy.

Yes, the same entity supporting Bersih and Suaram, which is now being probed over its sources of foreign funding.

According to conspirazzi.com, Pussy Riot and Voina have open links to the NED through Oksana Chelysheva, who is deputy executive director of the Russian-Chechen Friendship Society funded by the NED and George Soros-funded outfits.

The NED was created in 1983, seemingly as a non-profit-making organisation to promote human rights and democracy but as its first president Allen Weinstein admitted to The Washington Post in 1991, a lot of what it does overtly used to be done covertly by the CIA.

In the words of ex-CIA officer Ralph McGeehee, it subsidises and influences elections, political parties, think tanks, academia, publishers, media and labour, religious, women’s and youth groups.

Russia has since introduced a new Bill to label NGOs that get foreign funds and are involved in politics as “foreign agents”, with their accounts subject to public scrutiny.

Paul Craig Roberts, a former Assistant Secretary of the Treasury, says the US, too, has laws which require foreign interests to register as foreign agents but this does not always apply to all Israeli lobby groups.

“There are no political parties in the US that are funded by foreign interests. No such thing would be permitted. It would be regarded as high treason,” he was quoted as saying by Pravda.

So, if outsiders are not allowed to fund and interfere in US politics, why should we allow its agencies to meddle in ours?

ALONG THE WATCHTOWER
By M. VEERA PANDIYAN

> Associate Editor M. Veera Pandiyan sees the wisdom in this quote from Danish philosopher Soren Kierkegaard: People demand freedom of speech as a compensation for the freedom of thought which they seldom use.

Related post

Foreign funding for political purposes in Malaysia

Sep 22, 2012

A promising Malaysian tax budget for 2013 this Friday?

Broadening income tax bracket will benefit the rakyat as a whole

IN the next few days, the Finance Minister will share with the rakyat the financial health of the country and the Government’s proposed budget for the next 12 months.

With the mission of “Driving Transformation Towards a Developed Nation”, the Government would have the unenviable position of balancing the economy of the country amidst the uncertainties in the external market, as well as ensuring that the plight and wishes of its rakyat are not forgotten, especially in these challenging times.

As tax consultants, we have the opportunity to hear from our clients their expectations and hopes for the upcoming budget. This article aims to analyse some of these expectations as well as the writers’ views as fellow taxpayers and as a rakyat.

Lower taxes

Looking back at the past four budgets, the Government has introduced various ways of lowering the taxes for resident individuals. (See graphics)

While a reduction in tax rate is always a welcome relief to any taxpayer, it would still depend on which level the rates are reduced as it may only benefit certain taxpayers as can be seen in 2010 whereby only those in the highest tax bracket benefited from the 1% tax rate reduction.

What the Government has not introduced is the broadening of the income tax bracket, especially at the lower rates, which will not only benefit those from the lower and middle-income group but the rakyat as a whole, with a higher disposable income. (See tables)

The tax relief available in respect of premiums for education or medical insurance has not been reviewed since 2000. Further, the RM3,000 tax relief limit covers both education and medical insurance.

As education and healthcare are essential for every rakyat and his family, the Government should consider granting tax relief for each category of the insurance premium separately – one for education and another relief for medical insurance.

The Government has also not reviewed the child relief, which has remained at RM1,000 per child below 18 years of age since 2004. Any parent will vouch that providing for a child’s wellbeing is neither easy nor cheap. Any increase in child relief for tax purposes would be welcomed.

Affordable homes

Over the last few months, the news of spiralling property prices has been hitting the media.

Currently, the Real Property Gains Tax (RPGT) regime for residents and non-residents are the same, i.e. tax is charged on the gain from sale of real property depending on the duration of ownership of the real property regardless of the residence status of the seller.

Genuine resident home buyers, particularly young families who do not yet have high disposable income, are usually at the losing end compared to non-resident buyers, who are usually buyers with higher purchasing power and who perhaps have more speculative intentions.

In the past, the Government has introduced incentives such as stamp duty exemptions. However, the threshold to qualify for the exemption is limited to those properties which have value not exceeding RM350,000, thus leaving young city folks hard-pressed to find homes within this range given the spiralling property prices.

An effective measure previously introduced by the Government was the deduction in respect of interest expended by individuals to finance the purchase of residential property.

Unfortunately, this incentive was only valid for purchases whereby the sale and purchase agreement was executed within a specific period of time, which has since lapsed. The Government could re-introduce this incentive.

The Government could also consider imposing different RPGT rates for residents and non-residents. If there is a concern that foreign investors will shy away as a result, conditions could be put in place for non-residents to be eligible for the resident rates, for example:

 

• having stayed in Malaysia for a number of years or
• set up business operations in Malaysia for a number of years, etc.

Alternatively, to quell speculative transactions, the Government could consider increasing the RPGT rates for disposals made within five years from the date of acquisition of the property, which is currently at 10% and 5%, to perhaps the present corporate tax rate of 25%. Disposal after five years will be exempted from RPGT. Genuine home buyers should not be adversely affected by this measure.

A similar measure, although from a stamp duty perspective, was adopted by a neighbouring country whereby affected buyers are required to pay an Additional Buyer’s Stamp Duty on top of the existing Buyer’s Stamp Duty. The affected buyers are mainly foreigners and non-individuals, or individuals who owned more than one or two residential properties. This is also an avenue for our Government to consider.

By NEOH BENG GUAN and NG SUE LYNN

·Neoh Beng Guan is executive director of KPMG Tax Services Sdn Bhd while Ng Sue Lynn is director.

Team building is a balancing act in an organization

It is important to remember that there are no bad competencies or bad profiles
 

BUILDING teams in an organisation is becoming an increasingly complex and challenging task.

Many organisations are employing the use of assessment tools to give another perspective of the individuals being considered for the purpose of recruitment or even succession planning, which is often an integral part of building a cohesive team. As an executive search consultant and coach, I have found such tools to be very insightful in many instances. One of the biggest lessons for me as a result of using such assessment tools is that bringing together diverse groups of competencies often result in stronger teams.

Most people would choose to work with people who are like themselves. It is a common perception that people with similar personality types will likely be on the same wavelength and get along well together. However, I had the opportunity to work closely with a colleague who is very frank and direct in her communication and work style. My personal style of communication is almost a direct opposite of hers whereby I gravitate to being a lot more diplomatic. Both of us work well together because we can bridge the gaps in each other's work style and cover a lot more ground when collaborating on projects. In most cases when dealing with savvy clients, they want to know the truth but the tactful delivery of facts are also equally important.

As a leader, I am not keen on finding someone exactly like me, as I know I am not perfect and having clones of myself would only magnify my faults. By understanding my own personality profile better, I am able to surround myself with people who are able to bring other competencies to the table and by working together, we would be able to support each other to produce better results and more holistic solutions and better results.

I have noticed that more and more leaders are becoming aware of the need for diversity in their workspace. A decade or two ago my clients often wanted me to look for people who were almost identical to themselves or someone within their organisation. “Just find me someone like John,” or “Don't you have any candidates like my deputy?”

However, employers and leaders are now becoming savvier when it comes to building teams. They are realising that by building diverse teams they are able to address more of their customers' needs and reduce their blind spots. Even clients who have not been exposed to any psychometric assessment tools are able to splice together a profile by using terminology that they are familiar with. For example, I spoke with a client who wanted me to find him a chief operating officer who could think strategically like his head of corporate strategy but the individual also needed to be literate with numbers like his finance director and able to deep-dive to fix problems. Whilst this may seem like a tall order, this description was able to provide another perspective and added another dimension to the job description, which in most cases is only a two-dimensional document. Hence, it became a lot easier to understand the client's requirements from that point onwards.

The results of an assessment project can sometimes be an eye-opener and a driver for change. One such organisation, a multinational company in the manufacturing sector, discovered through an assessment project that the majority of their managers were classified as innovators. Being innovative is a highly desired skill in many organizations, especially in leadership roles. On the other hand, innovators are generally out-of-the-box thinkers and are not very likely to analyse pitfalls well or they may be less detail oriented when it comes to implementation. Faced with the study results, their top management embarked on a development program to build up the other competencies their managers were lacking in. At the same time, they also made a conscious effort to hire more detail-oriented managers who could be more effective on areas of the business that called for more precision. They also created a role for a risk manager to mitigate potential risks that the innovative managers may have missed in their eagerness to try new and different approaches.

I have also come across leaders who have the misconception that their subordinates cannot be better qualified than the leaders themselves. These were usually leaders who enjoyed having their own “kingdoms” and didn't want to “rock the boat.” They tend to hire “yes” men who would carry out instructions without questioning or offer any kind of resistance. As a result, the organisation is likely to stagnate at some point, as there will usually be a bottleneck when it comes to making decisions. The calibre of the managers hired would be of a lower level, as the leader would not want to have subordinates that may outshine them as leaders. As such most decision-making will have to be directed to the top management, as these managers would not be empowered to make decisions.

Although it is not ideal, the leader preferred this approach and this might even work well until the business grows beyond the tipping point whereby the leader will eventually need to empower some capable managers to take on more of the decision-making tasks. As an employee and team member, it is useful to know what our competencies are as this will pave the way for us to develop ourselves in areas that we may not be as proficient in. We can align ourselves to mentors who may have a profile that complements ours or who can help us develop these competencies. It is also handy to know your colleagues' profiles where possible so that we can use the right communication style to get our message across.

For instance, some people prefer receiving emails as this gives them time to craft an appropriate response whilst others may want to have a face-to-face discussion so that they can obtain immediate feedback. At times, this information also tells us why we are unable to get along with certain people in our organisations.

At the end of the day, it is important to remember that there are no bad competencies or bad profiles. Nobody is perfect. We all possess competencies; some are similar and some different from the people we work with. It is more important to know what our competencies are and to what degree they influence our communication with others. It is not just the truth but knowing the truth that makes the difference, as this is the starting point for building effective teams.

by Talking Hr with Pauline Ng

Pauline Ng is the consulting director and head of BTI Consultants. She believes that we need to understand what makes a person tick so that we can build more effective teams