Pray For MH370

Pray For MH370


Congratulation to YAB Tan Sri MB Selangor for his fast decision and action in writing to the Registrar of Societies as well as to the Registrar Of Societies for acting according to the book. What' s cooking in Selangor for the next few months. Hurry, don't miss the action. If you had missed the free edition of the SUN for 24/04/08 and 25/04/08, not to worry. We have included the full report for your perusal. Well done Nadesan and Fernandez once again for the enlightening reports.


BAKTI was founded in 1977 by YABhg. Tun Suhaila with the purpose of utilising the combined efforts of the wives of our country’s leaders to provide assistance to individuals who need assistance and attention.

The members of BAKTI consist of the wife of the Prime Minister, the wife of the Deputy Prime Minister, wife of the Speaker and the Deputy Speaker of Parliament, wife of the Speaker and the Deputy Speaker of the Senate, and wives of the cabinet ministers and deputy ministers. Wives of former leaders currently not holding any office are made associate members.

Balkis, however, is the association of wives of state assemblymen and MPs in Selangor.


Rosmah (left) Jeanne looks on

The Sun web edition reports

RM10m gone in 3 days
R. Nadeswaran and Terence Fernandez

PETALING JAYA (April 24, 2008): Three days after their husbands lost power to rule Selangor, the wives got into the act – plotting to dissolve a welfare body and remove almost RM10 million from its bank accounts.

But their attempts have been thwarted by Mentri Besar Tan Sri Abdul Khalid Ibrahim who wrote to the Registrar of Societies (ROS) to question the validity of the decision to dissolve the Association of Wives of State Assemblymen and Members of Parliament in Selangor (Balkis).

It is learnt that Abdul Khalid has ordered a thorough investigation and audit into the affairs of the association which was set up in 1985 to undertake welfare work.

According to documents sighted by theSun, Datin Seri Zaharah Kechik, the wife of former mentri besar Datuk Seri Dr Mohamad Khir Toyo had on March 11 convened an extraordinary general meeting of the committee to dissolve Balkis and close its bank accounts. The following day, the accounts were closed, with the money transferred to another account and then to Bakti – the federal Organisation of Wives of Ministers which Balkis is affiliated to.

On March 13, the former exco members of Balkis issued a notice of dissolution to the ROS, which included amending the constitution of Balkis and establishing a new organisation – Balkis-BN, is among the names suggested.

“This was to prevent the Balkis premises (Kompleks Wawasan Balksi - KWB) and the association itself from being taken over by the new state government,” said an insider.

“Once this was done, then the money will be transferred back to the new organisation,” the insider added.

However, the ROS in a letter stated that Balkis' application for dissolution was incomplete and gave it 30 days to furnish additional information.

The constitution of Balkis states that the mentri besar's wife should be the president. Sources in the state government argue that since Mohamad Khir is no longer MB, Zaharah is no longer the president and has no power whatsoever to dissolve the association or liquidate its funds. Incidentally, the constitution also states that the organisation must remain apolitical.

Legal experts say by right, following the events of March 8, the exco headed by Zaharah should have convened an emergency meeting to discuss the handing over of Balkis to a new exco – with the new president being Abdul Khalid’s wife Puan Sri Salbiah Tunut.

Bakti, meanwhile, according to minutes of a recent meeting it held, had under advice of a sitting judge received the RM9.9 million from Balkis, which it has placed in a fixed deposit. The money would then be transferred back to the new organisation set up by the former Balkis members.

Bakti would also take over a Special Education Project involving millions of ringgit until the “new” Balkis is formed.

This is clearly goes against Balkis’ constitution which states that in the event of a dissolution, all monies must be transferred to the government or a similar fund, with the approval of the Inland Revenue Board director-general.

Meanwhile, it is learnt that Abdul Khalid had in his letter to the ROS on Wednesday (April 23) said of the amount in Balkis’ accounts, about RM850,000 was donated by state government companies – Kumpulan Darul Ehsan Bhd which gave RM268,862 last year and Perbadanan Kemajuan Negri Selangor (PKNS) which contributed RM590,379.50 between 2006 and 2007.

It is understood that Abdul Khalid is also investigating the transfer of 43,560sq ft of land in Section 7, Shah Alam, which the state government had in 2002 offered to Balkis at a nominal cost of RM250,000 (RM5.74/sq ft) for the setting up of a shelter home for women that cost RM5 million

It’s ‘our’ money, not yours

R. Nadeswaran

TWENTY-EIGHT days before Datuk Seri Dr Mohamad Khir Toyo was unseated as Selangor mentri besar, he asserted that the Selangor Economic Development Corporation (PKNS) was a private company and that its money and assets do not belong to the people.

At a pow-wow over lunch with this writer and his colleagues, he charged: “You wrote that the fine paid by PKNS was people’s money. No, PKNS is a private company.” (For the record, PKNS was imposed fines totalling RM330,000 for illegal clearing of land around the Bukit Cahaya Agricultural Park and at all material times, Mohd Khir was its chairman.)

Then he made a remarkable statement: “The fine goes back to the state coffin! (I’m sure he meant “coffers” but those at the lunch looked stunned when he used the word a second time). The money comes back to us.” Not wanting to argue with someone who has little knowledge of where the fines imposed by a court of justice end up and not wanting to give him a free lesson in financial procedures, I reserved my comments.

Today, PKNS is in the news again. Here’s a summary of what it paid out to Balkis, the organisation of wives of state assemblymen and MPs in Selangor.

RM218,719 for the opening ceremony of Komplex Wawasan Balkis;

RM200,000 for the Balkis dinner;

RM10,000 for a table at the same dinner; and

RM161,660 for programmes organised by Balkis.

If you thought that people’s money – not a private company’s money as Mohamad Khir sees it – was being handed out like candy, PKNS also sold 43,560 sq ft of land in Section 7 in Shah Alam at RM5.74 per sq ft – a bargain whichever way you look at it.

But no money changed hands. A contra deal for amount payable – RM250,000 – was made. The amount was off-set as a loan from PKNS to the state government and this was duly endorsed at the meeting of the State Financial Committee on Oct 19, 2000. Has this loan been settled?

And the deal was between PKNS and the state government. How did Balkis come into the picture?

Balkis for all intent and purposes was an organisation that received funds and other forms of financial help from the state government. The mentri besar’s wife occupies the seat of the president and the members of the committee are elected among the wives.

Just like Mohamad Khir deemed PKNS a private entity, his wife Datin Seri Zaharah Kechik saw Balkis as a “sendirian berhad”. How else could she call for a meeting and dissolve the organisation and transfer funds running into millions?

Doesn’t the constitution say that the president should be the mentri besar’s wife? As of March 9, her hubby was no longer the mentri besar and therefore, she automatically relinquishes her post. But no, giving up power and influence does not come easy.

Leaving that issue aside, where else did our money, (oops! PKNS money as Mohamad Khir sees it) end up? Special number plates for its officers, for one. Should the people pay for their employees to drive around in cars with fancy number plates? It can be argued that this exercise involved a few thousand ringgit, but it’s the principle that matters.

On a larger scale, PKNS built what was termed as a public golf course, which has since been privatised. Since it was built with people’s money running into millions, why should the rakyat pay commercial rates at the Seri Selangor Golf Club? Were open tenders called for the privatisation deal or was it handed on a platter to some uncle or brother-in-law’s sister’s son?

What about the joint-venture deals and other questionable agreements which could have committed us? Shouldn’t we, the rakyat be entitled to know? Or should we remain silent with folded arms as those who raped and plundered the state coffers get away scot-free?

That is why there is a dire need for accountability and transparency in all matters involving public money. Mentri Besar Tan Sri Abdul Khalid Ibrahim has done the right thing by ordering an audit of Balkis, but what about the state-owned companies and agencies, who are flaunting our money as if it is theirs?

The goings-on within Balkis are just the small fish that’s visible on the surface in shallow waters. Deep down, there are even bigger ones who have used our money without having to account for it and even stolen our money. Shouldn’t these thieves be brought to book? Shouldn’t we file civil suits to recover what rightfully belongs to us?

Abdul Khalid, on taking office, promised reports every quarter or 100 days. The clock is ticking, and by the end of next month, can we expect that report and see a few heads roll?



It seems to be a popular tactic in order to avoid or delay subpoena, summonses, arrest, ISA, police investigations and any embarrasing situations is to go for Umrah or overseas trip. According to the Police, it's not up to them to drop the case, but the Attorney General Chamber has received her statutory declaration. It is now the acid test for police integrity and the legislative's impartiality whether to proceed with the case. Let us wait and pray for the outcome.
Read on..

Probe into molest claim to continue

KUALA LUMPUR: Police will not drop investigation into a molest allegation by a woman against a former minister, despite the victim's retraction of the report.

City police chief Datuk Muhammad Sabtu Osman said the police would continue investigating the case and were waiting to talk to the former minister, who was currently overseas.

"It is not up to us (police) to drop the case. We will record a statement from the VIP when he returns to find out what transpired," he said yesterday.

Muhammad Sabtu said police were interviewing eyewitnesses and would forward the investigation papers to the deputy public prosecutor's office soon.

The 30-year-old woman had, on Wednesday, retracted a report she lodged last week alleging molest by the former minister, in his 50s.
The woman's lawyer, Datuk Shafee Abdullah, said his client had given him a statutory declaration to retract the police report, claiming that the whole situation was a misunderstanding.

The statutory declaration has been handed over to the Attorney-General's Chambers and the police.

In her report on Friday, she alleged that the former minister hugged her last Thursday while she was at work in a cigar shop at a five-star hotel in Kuala Lumpur Sentral, Brickfields.

It was lodged at the Brickfields police headquarters.

Muhammad Sabtu said police may recommend that the woman be charged with lodging a false report if the investigation leads to this.

Meanwhile, lawyer Karpal Singh said yesterday the woman could not withdraw the report, according to the law.

"A person who lodges a report cannot at his whim and fancy withdraw it by way of a letter of statutory declaration. A person who lodges a report runs the risk of lodging a false report.

"He is bound by the contents of the report."

Karpal said action against the former minister should be taken if the contents of the report were found to be true, even though the report had been withdrawn.



The Federal government is setting up the long awaited guidelines for the construction and demolition of places of worship. It has taken BN government 50 odd years to realize the importance of such a guideline in a multi religious country like ours. The incidence in Rimba Jaya in Klang whereby a temple was demolished on the eve of Deepavali was said to be a factor in the downfall of Selangor BN government headed by Dr Khir Toyo. This incidence highlighted the importance of common sense in running the state or our life for that matter.

Clearer rules on places of worship in the works
By : Marc Lourdes

KUALA LUMPUR: The government is planning a streamlined set of guidelines to govern the construction and demolition of places of worship.

Unity, Culture, Arts and Heritage Minister Datuk Shafie Apdal said though such policies existed now, there was a need to polish them and ensure they were acceptable to all religious groups.

Speaking after chairing a meeting with the Malaysian Consultative Council of Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Sikhism and Taoism at the ministry in Jalan Sultan Ismail yesterday, he declined to reveal when the guidelines would be completed, but said it would not be too long.

"It doesn't make any sense to build a mosque where there aren't many Muslims, or a house of worship in the middle of nowhere," he said.

Reaching an understanding between all religions, said Shafie, was vital, as was making sure laws and regulations have been clearly set down by local authorities.
He also did not rule out amending laws and enactments should the need arise. "If there is a need in the interests of the nation for them to be amended, why not?"

However, he stopped short of giving an assurance that there would be no recurrence of the temple demolition incident in Kampung Jawa, Selangor, on the eve of Deepavali last year, which raised the ire of Hindus around the country.

"I won't say that because I am not in a position to do so. It is for each respective state authority.

"But I do hope we will be sensitive towards issues like that and apply some common sense in doing things because respecting religions and racial groups in the country is most important."

He said he would be meeting menteris besar, both from Barisan Nasional and Pakatan Rakyat, regarding the issue because they were the people in charge of issues like land approval, as well as consult other government departments.

Council president Datuk A. Vaithilingam said other issues discussed included conversions, bringing in of foreign priests and family laws.

"We had a good meeting. We look forward to many things being looked into by the authorities concerned."

Vaithilingam said the council had written to Home Minister Datuk Seri Syed Hamid Syed Albar requesting a meeting to discuss the issue of foreign priests.

"He announced that the cabinet allows foreign priests in, but the Immigration Department told us that they did not receive any directive. We want to meet him to iron out the issue," he said.

Shafie, in his capacity as minister in charge of fostering unity, has been going all out to meet religious groups.

Last week, he met nine Muslim non-governmental organisations to seek their views on religious issues in the country, where many of the similar issues were discussed.

Shafie also responded to questions of whether his ministry's funding would be slashed in view of the increased government expenditure due to increase of global food and fuel prices.

"This is a very important ministry. Culture and heritage are important because we are leaving something for future generations."



Jikalau sebelum ini, untuk mendapatkan lesen perniagaan amatlah sukar, antara lain memerlukan sokongan ADUN , mengisi borang keahlian UMNO/BN dan sebagainya, tetapi kini YAB Tan Sri MB telah mengeluarkan arahan kepada Pihak Berkuasa Tempatan agar menpercepatkan pengeluaran lesen berniaga. Maka selepas ini, diperlukan pula kerja memperbanyakkan tempat peniaga berniaga seperti arked, gerai, tapak pasar malam, pasar tani, bazaar ramadhan dan sebagainya. Ini merupakan salah satu agenda negera berkebajikan PA (Pakatan Rakyat). Tahniah dan syabas.

Lesen Perniagaan Bagi Penjaja Dimudahkan

Sumber: Suara Selangor Maju

SHAH ALAM, 24 April – Dato’ Menteri Besar, Tan Sri Abdul Khalid Ibrahim hari ini meminta semua pihak berkuasa tempatan (PBT) di Selangor memberikan lesen perniagaan kepada semua penjaja di negeri ini yang masih belum mendapat kelulusan berniaga.

Perkara ini dinyatakan beliau dalam pertemuannya bersama badan-badan bukan kerajaan (NGO) Cina di Dewan Annex, Pejabat Dewan Undangan Negeri, petang tadi.

Bagaimanapun katanya, pemberian lesen itu hanya melibatkan penjaja yang sudah menjalankan perniagaan lebih daripada tiga tahun.

“Saya telah meminta majlis tempatan untuk berbuat demikian,” katanya ketika ditemui selepas majlis dialog itu.

Dialog bersama Tan Sri Abdul Khalid itu dihadiri kira-kira 100 anggota NGO antaranya dari Persatuan-Persatuan Kaum Seg Hwa dan Persatuan-persatuan Penjaja Seg Hwa.

Antara perkara yang dibincangkan ialah bagaimana kerajaan negeri boleh mempercepatkan urusan mendapatkan lesen perniagaan selain hal-hal berkaitan pendaftaran tanah.

Tambahnya, bagi memudahkan segala urusan berkaitan perkara itu, pihak penjaja atau peniaga boleh menyelesaikannya terus di pejabat PBT.

“Kita sudah membuat beberapa rancangan supaya kelulusan-kelulusan ini boleh dibuat di majlis tempatan sahaja tanpa perlu dibawa ke Pejabat Setiausaha Kerajaan Negeri atau Menteri Besar,” katanya.- MURIZA ABDUL HAMID



Pejabat ADUN Selat Klang yang beralamat di No 2, Lorong Telok Gadung 1, Tmn Emas 41250 Klang Selangor telah mula beroperasi pada 11hb April 2008. Pejabat ADUN ini terletak di sebuah rumah teres dua tingkat di tepi Jalan Sungai Bertih berhampiran dengan Pasaraya Econmart dan berdepan dengan kedai Perabot Bee Teck. Menurut Pegawai Khas ADUN Selat Klang Tn Hj Kamaluddin bin Hj Rahmat, pejabat ini dibuka dari jam 0900 pagi hingga 0500 petang setiap hari bekerja.

No tel : 03-33723919 dan No fax 03-33723923.

ADUN Selat Klang telah menjadualkan hari Jumaat antara jam 0300 hingga 0500 petang untuk berjumpa dengan penduduk Selat Klang. Selain dari waktu tersebut, ADUN boleh dihubungi di:

Pejabat Exco Pendidikan, Pendidikan Tinggi dan Pembangunan Modal Insan
Tkt 12, Bangunan SUK, Shah Alam.
No tel: 03-55447215 atau 03-55447216
No fax: 03-55107308
Imej keratan akhbar bertarikh 25hb April 2008 yang menceritakan peranan dan program yang telah dan sedang berjalan di kawasan DUN Selat Klang. Tn Hj Kamaluddin bergambar dengan Tn Hj Shaari dan seorang sahabat lain.
Pemandangan di depan pintu masuk Pejabat ADUN. Kelihatan Saudara Jamuliddin Alias, bekas Wakil Calon N45, merangkap Naib YDP PAS Kawasan Kapar dan Naib Pengerusi YAM sedang berucap pada malam majlis kesyukuran pembukaan Pejabat ADUN 10hb April 2008.
Kelihatan Tn Hj Kamaluddin dan isteri beliau, Hjh Zaharah Awang di Pejabat ADUN.
Pemandangan di ruang tamu Pejabat ADUN.

Kelihatan, wakil-wakil ADUN sedang bermesyuarat: Hj Mahmuddin, Hj Bahari, Hj Shaari dan Hj Paad.
Kelihatan En Abd Razak, S/U MTD Selat Klang merangkap wakil ADUN untuk Bagan Hailam, Tn Hj Shamsul ( Timb pengarah MTD) dan Hj Saroni, wakil ADUN untuk Pulau Ketam.
Kelihatan En Zaaismail bin Zahari selaku bendahari MTD N45.
Kelihatan Tn Hj Paad,ketua cawangan PAS Kg Delek merangkap wakil ADUN di kawasan Kg Delek, Tn Hj Azmi Talib, Pegawai Khas Exco Pendidikan merangkap wakil ADUN di kawasan Sg Bertih Utara dan Selatan (Jln Tepi Sungai).



Sumber: Agenda Selangor

SHAH ALAM, Khamis 24 April:
Kerajaan negeri sudah menghantar surat kepada Pendaftar Pertubuhan sepaya tidak melulus permohonan pembatalan Badan Kebajikan Isteri-Isteri Selangor (Balkis) bagi membolehkan siasatan mengenai pemindahan dana pertubuhan itu sebanyak RM9.9 juta.

Menurut kenyataan Pejabat Menteri Besar Selangor hari ini, siasatan itu perlu setelah kerajaan negeri mendapati dana berkenaan telah dipindahkan kepada Badan Amal dan Kebajikan Isteri-isteri Menteri (Bakti).

Malah, Balkis juga memohon Bakti mengambil alih projek Pendidikan Khas pertubuhan itu.

Kenyataan itu menyatakan, pemindahan dana itu dibuat selepas Balkis mengemukakan permohonan pembubarannya kepada Pendaftaran Pertubuhan pada 11 Mac lalu selepas keputusan Pilihan Raya Umum Ke-12. Yang Dipertua Balkis sebelum itu adalah Datin Seri Zaharah Kechik yang juga isteri bekas Menteri Besar Selangor, Datuk Seri Dr. Mohamad Khir Toyo. Dana berkenaan adalah sumbangan daripada anak-anak syarikat kerajaan negeri kepada Balkis untuk menjalankan program kebajikan dan kemasyarakatan seperti Kumpulan Darul Ehsan (KDEB) yang menyumbang sebanyak RM268,862 pada tahun 2007 manakala Perbadanan Kemajuan Negeri Selangor (PKNS) sebanyak RM590,379 di
antara tahun 2006 hingga 2007.

“Kerajaan negeri tidak meluluskan pembubaran berkenaan kerana Zaharah ketika
mengemukakan permohonan pembubaran pertubuhan itu tidak lagi memegang jawatan Yang Dipertua Balkis ketika itu,” menurut kenyataan itu..

Mengikut perlembagaan pertubuhan itu, jawatan tersebut diduduki oleh seorang isteri Menteri Besar melainkan beliau menolak, uzur atau Menteri Besar
berkenaan tidak mempunyai isteri.

Selain itu, kerajaan negeri juga akan mengenalpasti dana-dana serta bantuan yang diterima Balkis dari anak syarikat kerajaan negeri termasuklah aset-aset di bawah pertubuhan itu.

Dalam pada itu, kenyataan tersebut turut membertahu bahawa kerajaan negeri memandang serius perkara itu kerana ia melibatkan soal tanggungjawab serta ketelusan.

ULASAN: Satu lagi cerita penyelewengan setelah kalah PRU 12. Apa lagi agaknya penemuan selanjutnya? Sama-sama kita lihat.



Karpal: She cannot legally withdraw report

Star online

KUALA LUMPUR: The woman who lodged a police report alleging a former cabinet minister had outraged her modesty at her workplace in a hotel in KL Sentral cannot in law withdraw the report, said Gelugor MP Karpal Singh.

Karpal, a lawyer, said a person who lodged a police report could not at her whim and fancies withdraw a report by way of a letter or statutory declaration. The person ran the risk of lodging a false report and was bound by the contents of the report, he added.

"The police have to investigate the woman's report despite withdrawal of same by her. If the allegations against the ex-minister, as set out in the police report, are true, then the police have no alternative but to take action," he said.

Karpal said this was a serious offence under Section 354 of the Penal Code, which carried imprisonment of up to 10 years or fine or whipping or with two of such punishments.

He said that if it was revealed in the course of the investigation that the contents of the police report was false, then the woman concerned should be charged for giving false information to the police.

This was an offence under Section 182 of the Penal Code, which provided for an imprisonment for a term which may be extended to six months, or a fine which may extend to RM,2000, or both.

Karpal thus called on the police to carry out an in-depth investigation to determine the culpability of the ex-minister for allegedly outraging the woman's modesty, or the culpability of the woman concerned for giving false information to the police.

This would be in the public interest, he said.

The woman retracted the report lodged against the ex-minister, saying that she misunderstood the incident.

Ex-minister had no intention of outraging my modesty, says lounge promoter

Ex-minister had no intention of outraging my modesty, says lounge promoter


the Star online

KUALA LUMPUR: The woman who alleged that a former Cabinet minister had outraged her modesty now wants to withdraw her report, claiming she “misunderstood” the incident.

The 30-year-old promoter at a lounge in a five-star hotel here, in a statutory declaration sent to Attorney-General Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail through her lawyer Datuk Muhammad Shafee Abdullah, said she was “sensitive and moody” at the time of the incident last Thursday.

She said she had known the former minister over the past five years, and that he had acted in jest without any bad intention. However, she said she felt offended at that time due to her “complicated mood which led to her lodging a police report the next day.

“I realise now that I may have misunderstood the entire episode that took place last Thursday.

“When he jokes, he sometimes likes to touch my shoulder or arms but it is something that I accepted as normal among friends especially those we have known for a long time,” she said in her statement.

The woman also said she regretted lodging the police report, as there was no intention on the part of the former minister, who is still an MP, to outrage her modesty or act inappropriately.

She said she was used to the VIP’s jokes and “rough ways” and had never objected to his actions nor felt offended by it previously.

“I cannot remember exactly the conversation between me and the VIP although in my statement to the police I may have said something else.

“I am afraid I may have misinterpreted or misheard (him). The VIP concerned is known to always joke like that and it is normal for him to be like that,” she said, and apologised for lodging the report.

Gani confirmed he had received a fax copy of the statutory declaration from Muhammad Shafee.

“I will forward this request to the police and it is up to them to investigate and get back to me,” he said.

CONCLUSION : Crime doesn't pay.

MORAL OF THE STORY: (1) The ex-minister had low or no moral for behaving immorally in public, no matter what the his intention was at that time. Anyway April fool was over.

(2) If the ex-minister (still a member of Parliament) has any element or trace of self decency or modesty, he should tender his resignation.

(3) The woman claimed that the ex-minister is known to behave "in rough ways" in their 5-year relationship, implying the incident that night was nothing.

(4) Before making any Police report of any untowards incidence, think carefully, because once a Police report has been lodged, no letter or statutory declaration can reverse it.

(5) The Police on their part has to investigate any report lodged from any individual.

(6) If during the course of Police investigation, the content of the report is proved to be false, the woman can be charged with giving false information to the Police.

(7) Outraging modesty of someone carries imprisonment of up to 10 years or fine or whipping or with two of such punishments.

(8) Giving false information provides for an imprisonment for a term which may be extended to six months, or a fine which may extend to RM,2000, or both.



MQA audit 57 IPT mulai Jun ini

Utusan online

PETALING JAYA 21 April - Agensi Kelayakan Malaysia (MQA) yang dahulu dikenali sebagai Lembaga Akreditasi Negara (LAN), akan mula melaksanakan Audit Pencapaian Akademik terhadap 57 buah universiti dan kolej tempatan, Jun ini.

Menteri Pengajian Tinggi, Datuk Seri Mohamed Khaled Nordin berkata, audit tersebut amat penting bagi menilai kedudukan dan kemantapan akademik 57 buah institusi pengajian tinggi (IPT) itu.

Menurut beliau, MQA telah pun memulakan kerja-kerja penyediaan dokumen Kod Amalan Jaminan Kualiti Audit Institusi dan memberikan latihan kepada para penilai.

Katanya, pelaksanaan audit itu juga satu daripada aktiviti yang dikenal pasti untuk memperkasakan IPT seperti yang terkandung dalam Pelan Strategik Pengajian Tinggi Negara.

''Audit ini atau kita boleh sebut sebagai 'rawatan perubatan' ke atas 57 buah universiti dan kolej ini penting untuk memperkukuhkan kualiti pengajian tinggi negara dan menjadikan Malaysia pusat kecemerlangan pendidikan tinggi serantau,'' katanya.

Beliau bercakap pada sidang akhbar selepas mengadakan kunjungan rasmi ke pejabat MQA di sini hari ini.

Mohamed Khaled juga meminta agensi tersebut meneliti semula pelaksanaan Sistem Penarafan Institusi Pengajian Tinggi Awam (SETARA) yang dimulakan pada tahun lalu.

Beliau meminta MQA membuat kajian sama ada penarafan yang kini dilaksanakan ke atas IPT awam (IPTA) boleh diperluaskan ke semua IPT bertaraf universiti serta kolej awam dan swasta.

''Saya berpandangan sistem penarafan ini amat penting untuk mengukur daya saing IPT tempatan berbanding dengan universiti luar negara,'' ujarnya.

Mohamed Khaled juga meminta MQA mempertimbangkan cadangan sama ada mahu mewajibkan semua mata pelajaran yang ditawarkan oleh sesebuah universiti atau kolej itu perlu mempunyai akreditasi daripada agensi tersebut.

''Ini cadangan saya sahaja. Saya hanya minta MQA mempertimbangkannya.

''Jika mereka mahu berbuat demikian maka cadangan itu boleh dimasukkan dalam Akta Pengajian Tinggi Negara yang akan dibentangkan di Parlimen tidak lama lagi,'' katanya.

ULASAN: Lembaga Akreditasi Negara (LAN) kini bertukar nama kepada Agensi Kelayakan Malaysia ( MQA , Malaysian Qualification Agency). Kita dapati banyak IPTS berjaya memenuhi syarat-syarat yang dikenakan oleh dulunya LAN, tetapi kursus yang ditawarkan di IPTS berkenaan tidak diiktiraf oleh Jabatan Perkhidmatan Awam (JPA). Jadi graduan kursus berkenaan akhirnya menjadi penganggur sekiranya jawatan dalam bidang pengajian berkenaan amat terhad di sektor swasta. Sebagai contoh, kursus pengajian maklumat atau Library Science yang ditawarkan oleh UiTM belum lagi diiktiraf oleh JPA, maka ramai graduan terpaksa memohon kursus KPLI (kursus Perguruan Lepas Ijazah) setelah gagal mendapatkan pekerjaan.

Sebuah Kolej Universiti swasta di Shah Alam ada menawarkan kursus juruteknologi makmal. Maka ramailah pelajar mendaftar masuk. Pada hari pertama sesi pengajian para pelajar telah bersemuka dengan pihak kolej tentang status LAN dan pengiktirafan JPA. Inilah jawapan pihak kolej: " Kita kena buat kursus dulu dan LAN akan datang untuk menilai kita". Ini bermakna kursus harus dijalankan dahulu dan pihak berwajib akan datang menilai kemudian. Pelajar akan jadi "guinea pig" (bahan ujikaji). Jika gagal mendapat LAN, pihak kolej akan tutup kursus berkenaan dan pelajar-pelajar yang terlibat terpaksalah bertukar kursus atau tempat belajar. Nasib merekalah, setelah menghabiskan wang serta masa selama enam atau dua belas bulan, mereka akhirnya diberitahu bahawa kolej gagal memperolehi status LAN. Sampai di situ sahajalah kursus yang ditawarkan di kolej berkenaan.

Read More “LAN DULU KINI AKM (MQA)”  »»


Jangan jual banglo Exco

SHAH ALAM 23 April - Pengerusi Jawatankuasa Tetap Perumahan, Pengurusan Bangunan dan Setinggan Selangor, Iskandar Abdul Samad mahu 10 buah banglo rasmi anggota Exco di Seksyen 7 di sini tidak dijual seperti yang pernah dicadangkan sebelum ini.

Katanya, meskipun belum ada sebarang keputusan mengenai perkara itu, beliau berpendapat adalah amat wajar banglo-banglo tersebut dikekalkan sebagai aset kepada kerajaan negeri.

Menurut beliau, kos penyelenggaraan yang ditanggung kerajaan negeri seharusnya tidak dilihat dari sudut pembaziran semata-mata kerana pelbagai faedah boleh diperoleh jika premis berkenaan dapat dimanfaatkan sepenuhnya.

Jelas beliau, antaranya ialah dengan menyewakan kepada mana- mana individu atau organisasi yang berminat sekali gus menjadi sumber pendapatan kerajaan negeri.

''Pada pandangan peribadi saya, banglo-banglo ini kalau boleh jangan dijual kerana ia sepatutnya menjadi aset kerajaan negeri.

''Bagaimanapun, terpulang kepada Menteri Besar Selangor, Tan Sri Abdul Khalid Ibrahim untuk memutuskan tindakan selanjutnya,'' katanya ketika dihubungi Utusan Malaysia di sini hari ini.

Sebelum ini, para pemimpin PKR Selangor mencadangkan supaya kerajaan negeri menjual 10 buah banglo berkenaan kerana kos penyelenggaraan yang terlalu tinggi selain wakil-wakil rakyat sudah mempunyai rumah sendiri.

Mereka berpendapat hasil penjualan banglo-banglo itu dapat disalurkan untuk tujuan pembangunan lain.

Iskandar turut bersetuju supaya banglo tersebut tidak digunakan sebagai kediaman rasmi Exco memandangkan semua Exco kini mempunyai kemudahan elaun perumahan.

Pembinaan 10 banglo yang dilengkapi sebuah rumah kelab itu pernah mencetuskan kontroversi tiga tahun lalu apabila Ahli Dewan Undangan Negeri (ADUN) Sungai Pinang, Teng Chang Khim mendakwa pembinaannya menelan kos kira-kira RM40 juta termasuk kos tanah, pembinaan dan kelengkapan.

Bagaimanapun, Menteri Besar Selangor ketika itu, Datuk Seri Dr. Mohamad Khir Toyo menafikan dakwaan tersebut dan menegaskan kos sebenarnya adalah RM21 juta.

ULASAN: Memandangkan lokasi strategik banglo-banglo Exco legacy Dr Khir Toyo, kerajaan Negeri Selangor dicadangkan agar membuat kajian terperinci termasuk melakukan penilaian semula ("valuation") oleh Jurunilai hartanah dan penilaian keseluruhan isi rumah banglo berkenaan sebelum sebarang keputusan dibuat. Sekiranya banglo-banglo berkenaan akan dilelong, pastikan ia dilakukan dengan telus dan profesional. Sekiranya hendak dikekalkan sebagai aset negeri, adakah ini akan memberi pulangan yang munasabah kepada kerajaan dalam jangka masa terdekat.


Mesyuarat Standing Committee On Education pada 24/04/08

Kelihatan Ketua-ketua Jabatan atau wakil mereka di mesyuarat berkenaan.

Read More “Mesyuarat Standing Committee On Education pada 24/04/08”  »»

Surau Sek 8 Shah Alam Dibuka Semula untuk Jamaah pada Maghrib 24/04/08

Masjid Sek 8 Shah Alam yang bermasalah telah dibuka semula kepada Qariah sekitar Sek 8 se telah ditutup kepada awam untuk tempoh beberapa bulan oleh YAB Tan Sri MB Selangor. Marilah kita mengimarahkan masjid dan surau serta menjadikannya nukleus aktiviti penduduk setempat, sesuai dengan peranannya.

Read More “Surau Sek 8 Shah Alam Dibuka Semula untuk Jamaah pada Maghrib 24/04/08”  »»

Wakil Penduduk Kg Sg Sireh P. Klang adakan Perbincangan dengan ADUN pada 24/04/08

Read More “Wakil Penduduk Kg Sg Sireh P. Klang adakan Perbincangan dengan ADUN pada 24/04/08”  »»

Kunjung Hormat dari The United Chinese School Committees Association of Malaysia (Dong Zong)

Read More “Kunjung Hormat dari The United Chinese School Committees Association of Malaysia (Dong Zong)”  »»


Most history of the Jews in the Netherlands was generated between the end of the sixteenth century and World War II, when approximately 75% of Dutch Jews were killed.

The area now known as The Netherlands was once part of the Spanish empire but in 1581, the northern Dutch provinces declared independence. A principal motive was a wish to practise Protestant Christianity, then forbidden under Spanish rule, and so religious tolerance was effectively an important constitutional element of the newly-independent state. This inevitably attracted the attention of Jews who were religiously oppressed in many parts of the world.

History of Jews in the Netherlands

Early history

Jews seem not to have lived in the province of Holland before 1593; but a few references to them are in existence which distinctly mention them as present in the other provinces at an earlier date, especially after their expulsion from France in 1321 and the persecutions in Hainaut and the Rhine provinces. The first Jews in the province of Gelderland were reported in 1325. Jews have been settled in Nijmegen, the oldest settlement, in Doesburg, Zutphen, and in Arnhem since 1404. In 1349 the Duke of Gelderland was authorized by the Emperor Louis IV to receive Jews in his duchy. They paid a tax, granted services, and were protected by the law. In Arnhem, where a Jewish person is mentioned as a physician, the magistrate defended them against the hostilities of the populace. When Jews settled in the diocese of Utrecht does not appear. (However, rabbinical records regarding kashrut - Jewish dietary laws - speculated that the Jewish community in Utrecht dated back to Roman times.) In 1444 they were expelled from the city of Utrecht, but they were tolerated in the village of Maarssen, two hours distant, though their condition was not fortunate. Until 1789 no Jew might pass the night in Utrecht; for this reason the community of Maarssen was one of the most important in the Netherlands. Jews were admitted to Zeeland by Albert, Duke of Bavaria.

In 1477, by the marriage of Mary of Burgundy to the Archduke Maximilian, son of Emperor Frederick III, the Netherlands were united to Austria and its possessions passed to the crown of Spain. In the sixteenth century, owing to the persecutions of Charles V and Philip II of Spain, the Netherlands became involved in a series of desperate and heroic struggles. Charles V had, in 1522, issued a proclamation against Christians who were suspected of being lax in the faith and against Jews who had not been baptized in Gelderland and Utrecht; and he repeated these edicts in 1545 and 1549. In 1571 the Duke of Alba notified the authorities of Arnhem that all Jews living there should be seized and held until the disposition to be made of them had been determined upon. In 1581, however, the memorable declaration of independence issued by the deputies of the United Provinces deposed Philip from his sovereignty; religious peace was guaranteed by article 13 of the Unie van Utrecht. As a consequence the persecuted Jews of Spain and Portugal turned toward Holland as a place of refuge.

Marranos and Sephardic Jews

The Sephardim (so-called Spanish Jews) had been expelled from Spain and Portugal years earlier, but many remained in the Iberian peninsula, practising Judaism in secret (see crypto-Jews or Marranos). The newly independent Dutch provinces provided an ideal opportunity for the crypto-Jews to re-establish themselves and practise their religion openly, and they migrated, most notably to Amsterdam. Collectively, they brought trading influence to the city as they established in Amsterdam.

In 1593 these Marranos arrived in Amsterdam after having been refused admission to Middelburg and Haarlem. These Jews were important merchants and persons of great ability. They labored assiduously in the cause of the people and contributed materially to the prosperity of the country. They became strenuous supporters of the house of Orange and were in return protected by the stadholder. At this time the commerce of Holland was increasing; a period of development had arrived, particularly for Amsterdam, to which Jews had carried their goods and from which they maintained their relations with foreign lands. Thus they had connections with the Levant and with Morocco. The Emperor of Morocco had an ambassador at The Hague named Samuel Pallache (1591-1626), through whose mediation, in 1620, a commercial understanding was arrived at with the Barbary States.

In particular, the relations between the Dutch and South America were established by Jews; they contributed to the establishment of the Dutch West Indies Company in 1621, of the directorate of which some of them were members. The ambitious schemes of the Dutch for the conquest of Brazil were carried into effect through Francisco Ribiero, a Portuguese captain, who is said to have had Jewish relations in Holland. As some years afterward the Dutch in Brazil appealed to Holland for craftsmen of all kinds, many Jews went to Brazil; about 600 Jews left Amsterdam in 1642, accompanied by two distinguished scholars - Isaac Aboab da Fonseca and Moses Raphael de Aguilar. In the struggle between Holland and Portugal for the possession of Brazil the Dutch were supported by the Jews.

With various countries in Europe also the Jews of Amsterdam established commercial relations. In a letter dated November 25, 1622, King Christian IV of Denmark invites Jews of Amsterdam to settle in Glückstadt, where, among other privileges, the free exercise of their religion would be assured to them.

Interior of the Amsterdam Esnoga, the synagogue for the Portuguese-Israelite (Sephardic) community which was inaugurated at August 2th 1675 and is still being used by the Jewish community.
Interior of the Amsterdam Esnoga, the synagogue for the Portuguese-Israelite (Sephardic) community which was inaugurated at August 2th 1675 and is still being used by the Jewish community.

Besides merchants, a great number of physicians were among the Spanish Jews in Amsterdam: Samuel Abravanel, David Nieto, Elijah Montalto, and the Bueno family; Joseph Bueno was consulted in the illness of Prince Maurice (April, 1623). Jews were admitted as students at the university, where they studied medicine as the only branch of science which was of practical use to them, for they were not permitted to practise law, and the oath they would be compelled to take excluded them from the professorships. Neither were Jews taken into the trade-guilds: a resolution passed by the city of Amsterdam in 1632 (the cities being autonomous) excluded them. Exceptions, however, were made in the case of trades which stood in peculiar relations to their religion: printing, bookselling, the selling of meat, poultry, groceries, and drugs. In 1655 a Jew was, exceptionally, permitted to establish a sugar-refinery. One particular Sephardic Jew also stood out during that time: his name was Benedictus de Spinoza (or Baruch Spinoza). He was excommunicated from the Jewish community in 1656 after speaking out his ideas concerning (the nature of) God in his famous work Ethics.


Many Ashkenazim (so-called "German Jews") were also attracted to the newly independent Dutch provinces, especially near the end of the 17th century. However, the majority were displaced migrants escaping persecution in other parts of northern Europe, in particular the violence of the Thirty Year War (1618-1648) and the Chmielnicki Uprising in Poland in 1648. Because most of the immigrants were poor, they were less welcome. Their arrival in considerable number threatened the economic status of Amsterdam in particular, and with few exceptions they were turned away. Generally, they settled in rural areas where they subsisted typically as pedlars and hawkers. The result was that a large number of small Jewish communities existed throughout the Dutch provinces.

Over time, many of these German Jews attained prosperity through retail trading and by diamond-cutting, in which latter industry they retained the monopoly until about 1870. When William IV was proclaimed stadholder (1747) the Jews found another protector like William III. He stood in very close relations with the head of the DePinto family, at whose villa, Tulpenburg, near Ouderkerk, he and his wife paid more than one visit. In 1748, when a French army was at the frontier and the treasury was empty, De Pinto collected a large sum and presented it to the state. Van Hogendorp, the secretary of state, wrote to him: "You have saved the state." In 1750 De Pinto arranged for the conversion of the national debt from a 4 to a 3% basis.

Under the government of William V the country was troubled by internal dissensions; the Jews, however, remained loyal to him. As he entered the legislature on the day of his majority, March 8, 1766, everywhere in the synagogues services of thanks-giving were held. William V did not forget his Jewish subjects. On June 3, 1768, he visited both the German and the Portuguese synagogue; he attended the marriage of various prominent Jewish families.

The number of Jews in the Netherlands grew substantially from the early 19th century up to World War II. Between 1830 and 1930, the Jewish presence in the Netherlands increased by almost 250% (numbers giving by the Jewish communities to the Dutch Census).

Number of Jews in the Netherlands 1830 - 1966[1]
Year Number of Jews Source
1830 46,397 Census*
1840 52,245 Census*
1849 58,626 Census*
1859 63,790 Census*
1869 67,003 Census*
1879 81,693 Census*
1889 97,324 Census*
1899 103,988 Census*
1909 106,409 Census*
1920 115,223 Census*
1930 111,917 Census*
1941 154,887 Nazi occupation**
1947 14,346 Census*
1954 23,723 Commission on Jewish Demography***
1960 14,503 Census*
1966 29,675 Commission on Jewish Demography***

(*) Derived from those persons who stated "Judaism" as their religion in the Dutch Census

(**) Persons with at least one Jewish grandparent. In another Nazi census the total number of people with at least one Jewish grandparent in the Netherlands was put at 160,886: 135,984 people with 4 or 3 Jewish grandparents (counted as "full Jews"); 18,912 Jews with 2 Jewish grandparents ("half Jews"), of whom 3,538 were part of a Jewish congregation; 5,990 with 1 Jewish grandparent ("quarter Jews")[2]

(***) Membership numbers of Dutch Jewish congregations (only those who are Jewish according to the Halakha)

The Holocaust

In 1939 there were some 140,000 Dutch Jews living in the Netherlands, among them some 25,000 German-Jewish refugees who had fled Germany in the 1930s (other sources claim that some 34,000 Jewish refugees entered the Netherlands between 1933 and 1940, mostly from Germany and Austria [3]). The Nazi occupation force put the number of (racially) Dutch Jews in 1941 at some 154,000. In the Nazi census, some 121,000 persons declared they were members of the (Ashkenazi) Dutch-Israelite community; 4,300 persons declared they were members of the (Sephardic) Portuguese-Israelite community. Some 19,000 persons reported having two Jewish grandparents (although it is generally believed a proportion of this number had in fact three Jewish grandparents, but declined to state that number in the fear they would be seen as Jews instead of half-Jews by the Nazi authorities). Some 6,000 persons reported having one Jewish grandparent. Some 2,500 persons counted in the census as Jewish were part of a Christian church (mostly Dutch Reformed, Calvinist Reformed or Roman Catholic).

In 1941, the majority of Dutch Jews were living in Amsterdam. The census in 1941 gives an indication of the geographical spread of Dutch Jews at the beginning of the Second World War (province; number of Jews - this number is not based on the racial standards by the Nazis, but by what the persons themselves declared to be in the population census):

In 1945 only about 35,000 of them were still alive. The exact number of "full Jews" who survived the Holocaust is estimated to be 34,379 (of whom 8,500 were part of a mixed marriage and thus spared from deportation and possible death in the Nazi concentration camps); the number of "half Jews" who were present in the Netherlands at the end of the Second World War in 1945 is estimated to be 14,545, the number of "quarter Jews" 5,990[4]. Some 75% of the Dutch-Jewish population perished, one of the highest percentages of all Nazi-occupied countries - despite the fact that Dutch Jews seemed to be more tolerated by and more integrated in the Dutch population than for example the Jews in Poland in the Polish population. Factors that influenced the great number of people perished were the fact that the Netherlands was not under a military regime, because the queen fled to England, and a shortage of hiding places. The Netherlands is a dense populated country, so there was less opportunity to survive in forests or other natural hidingplaces, for example.

During the first year of the occupation of the Netherlands, Jews were forced to register with the authorities and were banned from certain occupations. Starting in January, 1942, some Dutch Jews were forced to move to Amsterdam; others were directly deported to Westerbork, a concentration camp near the small village of Hooghalen which had been founded in 1939 by the Dutch government to give shelter to Jews fleeing Nazi persecution, but would fulfill the function of transit camp to the Nazi destruction camps in Middle and Eastern Europe during World War II.

Monument at Westerbork: Each single stone represents a single person that had stayed at Westerbork and died in a Nazi camp
Monument at Westerbork: Each single stone represents a single person that had stayed at Westerbork and died in a Nazi camp

All non-Dutch Jews were also sent to Westerbork. Additionally, over 15,000 Jews were sent to labor camps. Deportations of Jews from the Netherlands to Poland and Germany began at June 15th of 1942 and ended at September 13th 1944. Ultimately some 101,000 Jews were deported in 98 transports from Westerbork to Auschwitz (57,800; 65 transports), Sobibor (34,313; 19 transports), Bergen-Belsen (3,724; 8 transports) and Theresienstadt (4,466; 6 transports), where most of them were murdered. Another 6,000 Jews were deported from other locations (like Vught) in the Netherlands to concentration camps in Germany, Poland and Austria (like Mauthausen). Only 5,200 survived. The Dutch underground hid a large number of Jews, as many as 25,000-30,000; eventually, an estimated 16,500 Jews managed to survive the war by hiding. Some 7,000 to 8,000 survived by fleeing to countries like Spain, the United Kingdom and Switzerland, or by being married to non-Jews (which saved them from deportation and possible death). At the same time, there was substantial collaboration as the Amsterdam city administration, the Dutch municipal police, and Dutch railway workers all helped round up and deport Jews. It is said that in many cases, from arrest to deportation from Westerbork to the destruction camps in Poland and Germany, all work was done by ethnic Dutch. The last couple of years the Dutch media has spent considerable time and effort to debunk the widespread myth among the population that the Dutch Jews were met with considerable support and help from both the Dutch population as well as from the Dutch government during the Second World War; instead, more than 75% of the Dutch Jewish population died between 1940-1945, with the help and support of thousands of ethnic Dutch, while the majority of the population seems to have had a fairly indifferent view towards their Jewish compatriots during the war.

However, survivor rates differed in certain parts of the Netherlands. In Groningen, more than 90% of the Jewish population was killed; in Eindhoven, this number was just above 40%. Contrary to popular belief, Jewish survivors were met with hostility and indifference on the part of the Dutch government in the years following the Second World War.

One of the best known Holocaust victims in the Netherlands is Anne Frank. Along with her sister, Margot Frank, she was killed by the Nazis in March 1945 in the concentration camp Bergen-Belsen. Anne Frank's mother, Edith Frank-Holländer, died in Auschwitz. Anne Frank's father, Otto Frank, survived the war. Dutch victims of the Holocaust include Etty Hillesum and Abraham Icek Tuschinski.

In contrast to many other countries where all aspects of Jewish communities and culture were eradicated during the Shoah, a remarkably large proportion of rabbinic records survived in Amsterdam, making the history of Dutch Jewry unusually well documented.


There are approximately 41,000 to 45,000 people in the Netherlands who are either Jewish as defined by halakha (Rabbinic law), defined as having a Jewish mother (70% - approximately 30,000 persons) or who have a Jewish father (30% - some 10,000 - 15,000 persons; their number was estimated at 12,470 in April 2006).[5] [6].

Anne Frank
Anne Frank

Most Dutch Jews live in the major cities in the west of the Netherlands (Amsterdam, Rotterdam, The Hague, Utrecht); some 44% of all Dutch Jews live in Amsterdam, which is considered the centre of Jewish life in the Netherlands. In 2000, 20% of the Jewish-Dutch population was 65 years or older; birth rates among Jews were low. An exception is the growing Orthodox Jewish population, especially in Amsterdam.

The Jewish-Dutch population after the Second World War is marked by certain significant changes: emigration; a low birth rate; and a high intermarriage rate. After the Second World War and the devastations which were caused by the Holocaust, thousands of surviving Jews migrated to Israel (still home to some 6,000 Dutch Jews) and the United States. In 1947, two years after the end of the Second World War in the Netherlands, the total number of Jews as counted in the population census was just 14,346 (down from a count of 154,887 by the German occupation force in 1941). Later, this number was adjusted by Jewish organisations to some 24,000 Jews living in the Netherlands in 1954 - nevertheless an enormous decrease compared to the number of Jews counted in 1941 - a number which was also disputed as the German occupation force counted Jews on basis of race, which meant that for example hundreds of Christians of Jewish heritage were also included in the Nazi census (according to Raul Hilberg in his book 'Perpetrators Victims Bystanders: the Jewish Catastrophe, 1933-1945', "the Netherlands ... [had] 1,572 Protestants [of Jewish heritage in 1943] ... There were also some 700 Catholic Jews living in the Netherlands [during the Nazi occupation] ...")

In 1954, the geographical spread of Dutch Jews in the Netherlands was as follows (province; number of Jews):

The sixties and seventies of the 20th century saw a lowering birth rate among Dutch Jews, while intermarriage increased; was the intermarriage rate among Jewish males 41% and among Jewish women 28% in the period of 1945-1949, figures from the nineties saw an increase of intermarriage to some 52% of the total number of marriages among Jews. Among so-called father Jews, the intermarriage rate is as high as 80%[7]. Some within the Jewish community try to counter this trend, creating possibilities for (single) Jews to come in contact with other (single) Jews, like the dating site Jingles, Jentl en Jewell. According to a research by the Joods Maatschappelijk Werk (Jewish Social Service), a large number of Dutch Jews has received an academic education, and more Jewish Dutch women are in the labor force compared to non-Jewish Dutch women.

The Jewish population in the Netherlands also seems to become more and more internationalised, with an influx of mostly Israeli and Russian Jews during the last decades. Approximately one in three Dutch Jews has a non-Dutch background. The number of Israeli Jews living in the Netherlands (concentrated in Amsterdam) runs in the thousands (estimates run from 5,000 to 7,000 Israeli immigrants in the Netherlands, although some claims go as high as 12,000 [8]), although only a relatively small number of these Israeli Jews is connected to one of the religious Jewish institutions in the Netherlands. Some 10,000 Dutch Jews have emigrated to Israel in the last couple of decades.

Large Jewish communities in the Netherlands are found in Amsterdam, Rotterdam and The Hague; smaller ones are found throughout the country, in Alkmaar, Almere, Amersfoort, Amstelveen, Bussum, Delft, Haarlem, Hilversum, Leiden, Schiedam, Utrecht and Zaandam in the western part of the country, in Breda, Eindhoven, Maastricht, Middelburg, Oosterhout and Tilburg in the southern part of the country, and in Aalten, Apeldoorn, Arnhem, Assen, Deventer, Doetinchem, Enschede, Groningen, Heerenveen, Hengelo, Leeuwarden, Nijmegen, Winterswijk, Zutphen and Zwolle in the eastern and northern parts of the country.

There are currently some 150 synagogues present in the Netherlands, of which some 50 are still used for religious services[9].


Nederlands Israëlitisch Kerkgenootschap

A majority of the affiliated Jews in the Netherlands (Jews part of a Jewish community) are affiliated to the Nederlands Israëlitisch Kerkgenootschap (Dutch Israelite Church) (NIK), which can be classified as part of (Ashkenazi) Orthodox Judaism. The NIK has approximately 5,000 members, spread over 36 congregations (of whom 13 in Amsterdam and surroundings alone) in 4 jurisdictions (Amsterdam, The Hague, Rotterdam and the Interprovincial Rabbinate), making it considerably larger than the Union of Liberal Synagogues (LJG) and thirteen times as large as the Portuguese Israelite Religious Community (PIK). In Amsterdam alone, the NIK governs thirteen functioning synagogues. The NIK was founded in 1814, and at its height in 1877, it represented 176 Jewish communities. This went down to 139 communities prior to World War II, and 36 communities today. Besides governing some 36 congregations, the NIK also holds responsibility for more than 200 Jewish cemeteries throughout the Netherlands (on a total number of Jewish cemeteries of 250).

Nederlands Verbond voor Progressief Jodendom

Though the number of Dutch Jews is decreasing, the last decades have seen a growth of Liberal Jewish communities throughout the country. Introduced by German-Jewish refugees in the early 1930s, nowadays some 3,500 Jews in the Netherlands are linked to one of several Liberal Jewish synagogues throughout the country. Liberal synagogues are present in Amsterdam (founded in 1931; 725 families - some 1,700 members), Rotterdam (1968), The Hague (1959; 324 families), Tilburg (1981), Utrecht (1993), Arnhem (1965; 70 families), Enschede (1972), Almere (2003) and Heerenveen (2000; some 30 members); six rabbis are present to serve the several communities. The Verbond voor Liberaal-Religieuze Joden in Nederland (LJG) (Union for Liberal-Religious Jews in the Netherlands) (to which all the communities mentioned above are part of) is affiliated to the World Union for Progressive Judaism. On October 29th 2006, the LJG changed its name to Nederlands Verbond voor Progressief Jodendom (NVPJ) (Dutch Union for Progressive Judaism). The NVPJ has six rabbis: Ruben Bar-Ephraïm, Menno ten Brink, Sonny Herman, David Lilienthal, Awraham Soetendorp and Edward van Voolen

External links


In the late 19th Century, at Oss in Brabant, the Netherlands, Jurgens and Van den Bergh – two family businesses of butter merchants – have thriving export trades to the UK.

In the early 1870s, they become interested in a new product made from beef fat and milk – margarine – which, they realise, could be mass-produced as an affordable substitute for butter.

Later, over in the North of England in the mid-1880s, a successful wholesale family grocery business run by William Lever starts producing a new type of household soap. The product contains copra or pine kernel oil, which help it lather more easily than traditional soaps made of animal fats. Unusually for the time, Lever gives the soap a brand name – Sunlight – and sells it wrapped in distinctive packs.

1904 In the UK, Lever Brothers launch another product to make housework easier - Vim, one of the first scouring powders.

The company is incorporated in South Africa.

1906 By now Lever Brothers has a thriving export trade and factories in three European countries as well as one each in Canada, Australia and the US. It has also started enterprises in the Pacific.

The same year Lever Brothers comes to an agreement with three other manufacturers to limit competition for raw materials, but is attacked by the press who, dubbing them 'The Soap Trust', accuse them of driving up prices. Lever Brothers subsequently sues the Daily Mail and in 1907 wins £50 000 damages – a massive settlement by the standards of the time.

1908 Jurgens and Van den Bergh strike a deal to form an association and share profits while continuing to compete against each other.

1909 Lever Brothers develops a palm plantation in the Solomon Islands and at the same time Jurgens and Van den Bergh set up a joint palm-planting venture in German Africa

1910 Lever Brothers buys its first company in West Africa, WB MacIver Ltd, to secure supplies of palm oil for Port Sunlight.

1911 Lever Brother's first purpose-built research laboratory is constructed at Port Sunlight.

1912 The first profit-sharing deal between Jurgens and Van den Bergh is terminated but the two companies continue to work together.

1913 Leading businesses in the Europe join forces to create the Whale Oil Pool.

1914 In the year that war breaks out, companies controlled by Lever Brothers are making about 135 000 tons of soap a year, while in the Netherlands Jurgens and Van den Bergh have both acquired a number of smaller businesses and each also controls seven margarine factories in Germany.

Lever Brothers acquires Pears Soap, a company founded in 1789, and Jurgens forms an alliance with Kellogg's in preparation for expansion into North America.

Around this time Jurgens and Van den Bergh both establish factories in England, with one in Purfleet, Essex still manufacturing margarine today.

Lever Brothers also expands into the margarine market with the launch of Planters, increases operations in South Africa and sees its American business start to move into profit

1920 Lever Brothers gains control of the Niger Company, which later became part of the United Africa Company.

1922 Lever Brothers buys Wall's, a popular sausage company which is beginning to produce ice cream to sell in the summer when demand for sausages falls.

1923 The collapse of the German economy creates even harsher trading conditions for Jurgens and Van den Bergh.

1925 Lever Brothers buys British Oil & Cake Mills, one of its major competitors and the manufacturer of New Pin Soap.

1926 Lever Brothers launches its Clean Hands Campaign. Part of its child health policy, it educates children about dirt and germs and encouraging them to wash their hands 'before breakfast, before dinner and after school.'

1927 Jurgens and Van den Bergh, who have already teamed up with two European businesses, Centra and Schicht, join forces to create Margarine Unie - the Margarine Union. The union quickly gains new members, creating a large group of European businesses involved in the production of almost all goods created from oils and fats.

Planters Ltd, a Lever Brothers company, launches the first vitamin-enriched margarine - Viking.

1928 Margarine Unie acquires the French-Dutch Calvé-Delft group with factories in the Netherlands, France, Belgium and Czechoslovakia. The following year the Union also acquires the firm of Hartog's.

1930 On 1 January Unilever is officially established.

1930 Procter & Gamble enters the UK market with the acquisition of Thomas Hedley Ltd of Newcastle and becomes one of Unilever's largest rivals.

Mid 30s Soap production moves further from hard soaps to flakes and powders designed to make lighter work of household cleaning. This leads to expansion in the soap market.

1935 Vitamins A & D are added to margarine, to levels equivalent to those found in butter.

1938 After a campaign to improve public perceptions of margarine and the growth of vitamin-enriched brands including Stork in the UK and Blue Band in the Netherlands, sales of margarine rise to levels close to the highs of 1929.

Late 30s With the advent of the World War II, exchange controls and frozen currencies make international trading increasingly complex. In Germany, Unilever is unable to move profits out of the country and has to invest instead in enterprises unconnected with oils and fats including public utilities.

On 2 September Lever Brothers and Margarine Unie sign an agreement to create Unilever. The businesses initially aim to negotiate an arrangement to keep out of each other's principal interests of soap and margarine production, but ultimately decide on an amalgamation instead.

1941 During the Blitz, Lifebuoy soap provides a free emergency washing service to Londoners. Lifebuoy vans equipped with hot showers, soap and towels visit bomb-struck areas of the capital to offer much-needed mobile washing facilities.

1943 Unilever becomes the majority shareholder in Frosted Foods which owns Birds Eye and the UK rights to a method of food preservation new to mass markets - deep-freezing. Years later, freezing will enjoy a resurgence of popularity when it's shown to be one of the best ways of naturally preserving the goodness of fresh food.

Around the same time Unilever acquires Batchelor's, which specialises in freeze-dried vegetables and canned goods.

1945 At the end of the war, Unilever is able to regain control of its international network although remains shut out from Eastern Europe and China. The decentralisation of the business that was unavoidable during wartime is continued as a policy decision.

1946 Birds Eye launches the first frozen peas in the UK. At this time meat, fish, ice cream and canned goods account for only 9% of Unilever's total turnover

1954 Sunsilk shampoo is launched in the UK and will become our leading shampoo brand - by 1959 it's available in 18 countries worldwide.

1955 On the 22 September Unilever airs the very first advertisement on UK commercial TV, which is for Gibbs SR toothpaste.

Fish fingers are introduced in the UK and within a decade they account for 10 percent of British fish consumption.

Dove soap is launched in US.

1956 Unilever Research establishes its Biology Department, which in the 1980s will become the BioScience, Nutrition and Safety unit.

The PG Tips chimps make their debut appearance on the UK's newly launched commercial TV station. Aired on Christmas Day, the commercial is inspired by London Zoo's chimpanzees' tea party. It results in PG Tips becoming the UK's biggest selling tea brand.

The first Miss Pears is crowned in the Pear's Soap famous beauty contest celebrating the beauty of natural, clear complexions.

1958 In the Netherlands Unilever expands into frozen foods and ice cream through the acquisition of Vita NV, which was later to become the Iglo Mora Group.

1959 Unilever launches its first margarine in a tub, replacing the traditional block wrapped in greaseproof paper, with Blauband in Germany followed by Flora in Britain.

1960 All washing-related brands are placed under the control of a single company, Lever Brothers and Associates. Becel, the pioneering 'health' margarine, is launched after the medical community asks Unilever to develop a cholesterol-lowering food product. Initially it's only available from pharmacies.

1961 Good Humor ice cream is acquired in the US.

1963 Cornetto, the first packaged and branded ice cream cone, begins its launch in Europe. Becel is repositioned as a diet margarine and distribution is widened to include the grocery sector.

1965 Unilever forms its own specialist packaging business, the 4P Group, turning an internal service provider into a profit earning business. Cif is first launched, starting in France.

1967 Captain Birds Eye/Iglo/Frudesa makes his first appearance in TV commercials.

1968 Unilever attempts unsuccesfully to merge with Allied Breweries, one of the UK's largest brewing companies.

1969 Unilever airs the UK's first ever colour TV commercial, which is for Birds Eye peas.

1982 Viennetta ice cream gateaux is first launched, starting in Britain as a Christmas speciality.

1983 Axe body spray for men (Lynx in the UK) is first launched, starting in France.

1984 Unilever announces its Core Business Strategy and large acquisitions and disposals follow over next decade.

Brooke Bond is acquired in Unilever's first hostile take-over.

1985 Unipath launches a home pregnancy testing kit Clearblue, which is sold through pharmaceutical outlets in Britain.

1986 The acquisition of Naarden doubles Unilever's business in fragrances and food flavours. Chesebrough-Pond's, which owns Pond's and Vaseline, is acquired in the US.

1987 Dove is relaunched in Europe, starting in Italy.

1989 Calvin Klein and Elizabeth Arden/Fabergé are acquired while Magnum ice cream is launched in Germany.

1992 Unilever enters the Czech Republic and Hungary, and establishes UniRus in Russia.

1993 Breyers ice cream is acquired in the US and Organics shampoo is first launched in Thailand. By 1995 Organics is sold in over 40 countries.

1994 The disposal of United Africa Company, Unilever's huge West African trading, brewing and textiles company, is completed.

1995 Unilever publishes its Code of Business Principles.

The unprecedented decision is taken to practically eliminate trans-fats from food production in a rapid response to new research suggesting that their effect on blood cholesterol is at least as adverse as that of saturated fats.

1996 Unilever makes an ambitious commitment to source all fish from sustainable stocks and starts working with the WWF to establish a certification programme for sustainable fisheries known as the Marine Stewardship Council (MSC).

Hindustan Lever and Brooke Bond Lipton India merge to create India’s largest private sector company, and the Helene Curtis hair care business in the US is acquired.

The Unilever Nutrition Centre is created.

Annapurna iodised salt is launched in India and starts to make a big impact on redressing iodine deficiency.

1997 Kibon ice cream is acquired in Brazil. Unilever's chemicals businesses including National Starch and Quest International are sold.

1999 Shareholders authorise a special dividend of €7.4 billion and a share consolidation to reduce the number of shares per issue.

2000 Bestfoods is acquired in the second-largest cash acquisition in history. Other acquisitions include Slim.Fast Foods, Ben & Jerry's and the Amora-Maille culinary business in France.

Becel/Flora pro.activ spreads with cholesterol-lowering plant sterols are launched and become the first functional food to win FDA and EU approval.

The Unilever Health Institute – a centre of excellence in nutrition, health and Vitality – is launched.

Unilever screens the first interactive advertisement: it’s broadcast on Sky's Open channel and promotes Chicken Tonight.

2001 By 2001 Unilever has cut its brands from 1,600 to 900. DiverseyLever, Elizabeth Arden and Unipath are sold.

Unilever Bestfoods establishes its Global Nutrition and Health Network.

Unilever screens the first interactive TV commercial on a mainstream terrestrial channel in the UK; it promotes Colman's and Olivio.

2002 The portfolio is reshaped and enhanced through acquisitions and the sale of 87 businesses without acceptable growth or margin potential, generating €6.3 billion of sale proceeds.

The Skin, Hair and Deodorant businesses grow by nearly 11%, partly through the continuing success of Rexona, Lux and Dove. Dove sales are well in excess of €2 billion and its extension into the hair category is rolled out across Europe and Latin America.

Unilever Australia wins a Cannes Media Lion Grand Prix award in recognition of excellence in advertising for Magnum's Seven Deadly Sins campaign.

The successful launch of Becel/Flora pro.activ continues.

2003 Unilever Health Institute opens regional centres in Bangkok and Accra, Ghana.

Unilever is consulted by the WHO regarding the development of a Global Strategy on Diet, Physical Activity and Health (published May 2004).

Our Nutrition Policy and Nutrition and Health Academy are launched.

Unilever leads a UK cross-industry initiative to reduce salt levels in soups and meal sauces and the Healthy Heart Brand signs a three-year sponsorship deal with the World Heart Federation.

By the end of 2003 the business is buying half its fish from sustainable sources and water consumption per tonne of production is down by 13%.

2004 The Vitality mission is launched and the new Unilever brand rolled out, including the new logo which represents the diversity of Unilever, our products and our people.

At the end of Q3, Unilever revises its earnings guidance for the year to low single-digit earnings per share growth (beia) and announces that the development of leading brands is likely to be lower in Q3 than Q2.

A variety of factors have led to this, including further decline in Home & Personal Care markets in Western Europe and competition remaining intense in Laundry and Hair in Asia. Unilever’s popular weight management system, Slim.Fast, is also hit by huge new consumer interest in low-carbohydrate diets, particularly in the US.

Simplification and cost-saving activities proceed and Unilever chairmen Antony Burgmans and Niall FitzGerald comment that “We are stepping up our marketplace activity, including putting additional A&P funds behind a number of high priority marketplace initiatives.”

Axe Touch is launched with great success in the US and Sunsilk is rolled out in Europe.

2005 In February, Unilever announces a series of changes to streamline its management and leadership. Antony Burgmans becomes non-executive chairman of both Unilever N.V. and Unilever PLC while Patrick Cescau takes on the new role of group chief executive, responsible for all operations. A review of the Group structure is also announced.

The changes are designed to provide greater clarity of leadership and a platform for Unilever to focus on the needs of customers and consumers, and so reignite growth.

In May, Unilever sells its global prestige fragrance business, Unilever Cosmetics International (UCI), to Coty Inc, of the US. The sale is in line with Unilever’s strategy to focus on core categories.

The Nutrition Enhancement Programme is completed, through which 16,000 products have been assessed for levels of trans fats, saturated fats, sodium and sugars, and where necessary, action taken.

Filem Pendek "FITNA"

Part 1

part 2

Ahli Parlimen Belanda Geert Wilders telah mencetuskan kontroversi serta kemarahan umat Islam seluruh dunia apabila beliau berkeras dan menyiarkan filem di atas.


CONCLUSION: Malaysia shouldn't get mixed up in this messy business with the international jews. We can try, is it worth it?





Popular Posts


View My Stats

pautan lain

  • - Mesyuarat Agung Khas AMALNITA perihatin Pelancaran Tabung PDS AMALNITA dan anda
    8 years ago
  • "Paciaru" atau breakfast. - Yb Meru bersama Mr.Maniam turun padang memantau jalan2 berlubang di susur keluar highway Setia Alam ke Jln Meru dan Jln Korporat Kawasan Meru ...
    8 years ago

Ab myspace graphic comments



Recent Comment



Search in the Quran
Download | Free Code