NUFAM brewing plans for MAS Cabin Crew – Part II

This week would see a disastrous opportunity for Mr. Lipas man a.k.a. Mr. President of NUFAM on annihilating a group of innocent MAS Cabin Crew whom have zero ideas of what NUFAM is brewing. NUFAM IS A HOAX. A strategy formed by Zahrah Zaid – MAS Human Remains Director to destroy the workers’ in entirety. Zahrah Zaid works secretly for Tony Fernandez – Malaysia Airlines must be cautious with her movement and planning for its workers due Zahrah’s action may destroy MAS images.

Our previous posting here – Part I provided some insight on NUFAM plans on cheating MAS Cabin Crew via its so-branded “NUFAM SECRET BALLOT“.

NUFAM – National Union Flight Attendant Malaysia is brewing plans sabotaging huge employment opportunities for many innocent MAS Cabin Crew who only seek decent employment and security with Malaysia Airlines.

The planning between Zahrah Zaid and Mr. Lipas man were cooked on getting rid of 500 to 1,800 cabin crew in Malaysia Airlines and reducing their benefits; terms and conditions altogether.

Malaysia Airlines has been serving the public as National Carrier for the past 40 years. We find it very cruel to have such a huge organization allowing the imported proxies of Tony Fernandez sitting on top of the management ruling the workers who have contributed their entire life building this National Carrier whilst the imported proxies are tasked to cease the workers’ tenure of employment with Malaysia Airlines.


This week, Nufam, in a notice posted on its website and a copy made available to StarBiz, said: “Nufam will stage a full public protest against the Human Resources Ministry over the delay of the MAS Nufam secret ballot.” The day has been set for March 28, the time; 1pm, and the place; the entrance and courtyard of the Human Resources Ministry. MORE read HERE.

ZAHRAH ZAID the evil woman has another anti-union double agent – Mohd Fauzi Mahayadin aiding and abetting her in assisting NUFAM providing Mr. Lipas man the most confidential document belonged to Malaysia Airlines whilst instigated NUFAM to protest outside Ministry of Human Resource before the upcoming General Election is held to embarrass the Prime Minister.

This planning was reported already in the pipe-line laid by all NUFAM Executive Union Officers collaborated with Zahrah Zaid and her double agent last year in 2012.  The staging of protest is to push for the Ministry of Human Resource particularly its deputy cougar Minister Maznah Mazlan for her gavel to end the conflict on NUFAM secret ballot for MAS Cabin Crew.

Despite knowing the wrong is with the deputy Minister of Human Resource – Maznah Mazlan when approving NUFAM; there’s nothing much for the Ministry of Human Resource to correct the wrong doing conducted by his deputy.

As a matter of fact; Mazlan Maznah who have been reportedly meeting Tony Fernandez have been providing assistance to NUFAM for its attempt penetrating into Malaysia Airlines as stakeholders representing Tony Fernandez’s views and policies.

One of the policies from Tony Fernandez is to cease all traveling privileges for MAS workers in exchange for the workers to opt for Air Asia staff and family scheme and all MAS terms and conditions would drastically be arranged in parallel to Air Asia’s present terms and conditions for its Cabin Crew if NUFAM is to take the lead in negotiation for MAS Cabin Crew.

Whilst MASEU the in-house union for MAS Cabin Crew might not keep too quiet about NUFAM interference in its negotiation process; have ignored the whine and cry that does nothing for MAS workers.

We are updated NUFAM have no track records on achieving improvement for MAS Cabin Crew accept for disuniting among its members and non-members. Of late; NUFAM have been forcing some young MAS Cabin Crew harassing them for signing up as members and paying upfront of up to RM400 per sign-up for two memberships fees.

NUFAM have also sought the assistance from the Director of Trade Union Affairs – Mustafar Bin Ali and Roslee Sabaruddin for special advice on staging the picket outside the building of MOHR at 1 pm on 28th March 2013.

This warning of protest by NUFAM only serves as drama for doing something for its NUFAM members. Our reliable informants alerted Malaysiaairlinesfamilies that the protest by NUFAM on 28th March 2013 is a hoax as it will be cancelled on that morning due all NUFAM Executive Union Officers will be providing excuses away for work and running errands; on sick leave or in hospital seeking treatment or even “late attendees” their name should be.

In the meantime, we are well-informed NUFAM “trashing forum” would be updating all lies and flies buzzing around the bush to keep its members spirit high and strong. Strangely, how is it possible for a National Carrier to have employed such crooks sabotaging Malaysia Airlines’ images particularly when Malaysia Airlines has just joined ONEWORLD ALLIANCE.

Stay tuned to our updates from Malaysiaairlinesfamilies. We are currently investigating more stories on Tony Fernandez and his scammy businesses and his conceiving tactics luring investors into buying his bankrupting business – Air Asia.


Goodbye to P-noy dreams on claiming Sabah

It looks like the Sultanate of Sulu will lose to Malaysia in their ownership fight over Sabah.

The cards are stacked up against the family of the ailing 74-year-old Sultan Jamalul Kiram III:

  • Malaysia is in physical control of that disputed 73,630-square-kilometer corner of Borneo that it rents from the sultanate for P70,000 a year. Occupation means 99.99 percent of winning the case.
  • Malaysia’s vastly superior forces — dominating the sea, land and air — are hunting down with deadly ferocity the ragtag “royal forces” of the sultanate that have been reduced to less than 200 guerillas on the run.
  • In a 1963 referendum sponsored by the United Nations under the principle of self-determination, majority of Sabah residents reportedly elected to stay with Malaysia.
  • Kiram family members themselves do not agree on what route to take.
  • And President Aquino appears to have taken the side of Malaysia. That clinches it.

But the Kirams are not likely to go down alone. President Aquino, his senatorial Team PNoy and the entire country are bound to suffer collateral damage.

If the President is not able to work out before May a resolution mutually satisfactory to Kuala Lumpur and the sultanate, that could mean:

  • Goodbye to a Bangsamoro sub-state for the Moro Islamic Liberation Front replacing the Autonomous Region of Muslim Mindanao created for the Moro Islamic Liberation Front.
  • Also goodbye to that dream that the Bangsamoro deal would end the strife in Mindanao and inspire Mr. Aquino’s nomination for a Nobel Peace Prize.

From the time he started scolding the Kirams in public, telling them to surrender unconditionally and face the law, President Aquino hardly had any word of comfort or assurance for them.

On the contrary, the President and his spokesmen are sometimes caught mouthing the same lines as Malaysia Prime Minister Najib Razak and his foreign minister.

Last time he spoke on the subject, at the Philippine Military Academy, the President said, correctly, that the “complicated” dispute cannot be resolved by force of arms but by peaceful dialogue.

However, it is important that the Kirams and the government get together, move in a common direction and face Malaysia with one voice.

But how can this happen when the Kirams cannot agree among themselves, while the President and his boys sound almost like Kuala Lumpur’s spokesmen?

Sen. Miriam Santiago, incoming member of the International Criminal Court, suggested that the Philippines and Malaysia appoint a third party to conduct “inquiry and fact-finding” on the fighting in Sabah.

Under the 1907 Hague Convention for the Pacific Settlement of Disputes, she said, these peaceful options can be used to resolve disputes by clarifying the facts through an “impartial and conscientious investigation.”

According to her, “the method of inquiry and fact-finding does not involve the investigation or application of the rules of law.”

She added that “under international law, impartial fact-finding facilitates peaceful settlement of disputes, particularly settlement by negotiation, mediation, good offices, or conciliation.”


Santiago underscored the urgency of the government giving “diplomatic protection” to Filipinos in distress.

There is an unwritten exception to the prohibition on the use of force, she said, such as when a state acts to protect or rescue its nationals in the territory of another state.

But before the Philippines can undertake rescue operations in Sabah, she said the government must observe these conditions:

  1. The life of Filipinos should be genuinely in danger and Malaysia is unwilling or unable to ensure their safety.
  2. The Philippines does not pursue any other purpose during the rescue.
  3. The scale and effects of the military force used are adequately suited to the purpose and conditions of the operation.

It is obvious, however, that even with the above conditions, President Aquino’s ordering a rescue is out of the question, given his frame of mind.


The 1878 Deed over Sabah executed by the Sulu sultan in favor of two Europeans is described as a “deed of pajak,” meaning lease.

Santiago said that since it was a lease, the sultan never transferred sovereignty to the Europeans, who later formed the British North Borneo Co., which transferred sovereignty to the British crown and then to Malaysia.

“Since no transfer of sovereignty was involved in the 1878 Deed, no transfer of sovereignty has ever passed to Malaysia,” she said.

The senator quoted statements of the British foreign minister at the time, Lord Granville, that sovereignty remained in the Sulu sultan.

Sulu Sultanate’s Quixonic Quest – Money and Title

By James Hooway from Wall Street Journal

The Royal Sultanate of Sulu and North Borneo isn’t much to look at. It’s a two-story house in a ramshackle Manila neighborhood where beggars jostle for sidewalk space with elderly ladies selling baskets of dried fish and teenagers running photocopier stalls.

OB-WS726_sultan_D_20130318065317James Hookway/The Wall Street Journal

Jamalul Kiram III, the 74-year-old self-declared Sultan of Sulu, has made a centuries-old claim to the Malaysian state of Sabah.

But this is the operations hub for Jamalul Kiram III, the 74-year-old self-declared Sultan of Sulu whose audacious attempt to enforce his family’s centuries-old claim to the Malaysian state of Sabah has so far claimed over 70 lives, and put his tiny kingdom at the center of Asia’s confusing and deadly mosaic of overlapping territorial claims.

“Everybody knows I’m the rightful owner of Sabah. All we want is for Malaysia to recognize it, too,” Mr. Kiram said during a break in discussions with supporters here recently.

Wearing a bright sarong and a grubby “I Love Kuala Lumpur” T-shirt, he explained that he doesn’t really want to govern Sabah. Rather, he says he just wants the same status accorded to other sultans in Malaysia, such as the Sultan of Johor or Sultan of Perak – and some money to help him lead a royal lifestyle.

So, last month Mr. Kiram dispatched around 200 followers, many of whom were heavily armed, to make the short hop from his ancestral stamping grounds in the Sulu archipelago of the southern Philippines to Malaysia-controlled Borneo.

Celia Kiram, the self-declared sultan’s wife, signs for the receipt of a subpoena from the Philippines’ National Bureau of Investigation to help with their inquiries.

After a lengthy stand-off in a coastal village, Malaysian security forces launched air strikes and sent in ground troops to flush out the intruders. In the following days, 62 Filipinos, nine Malaysian security personnel and one civilian were killed in clashes while governments in Kuala Lumpur and Manila scrambled to contain the political fallout in both countries. Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Razak, with an election due soon, said he had to act swiftly to protect Malaysia’s territorial integrity, and many of the Kiram family’s supporters are still on the run in Sabah as Filipino prosecutors wonder whether they can charge Mr. Kiram with violating any Philippine laws.

As bizarre as all this seems, Mr. Kiram’s quest isn’t as Quixotic as claiming to be the rightful monarch of, say, France.

OB-WS730_sultan_D_20130318071311The Royal Sultanate of Sulu and North Borneo is in a ramshackle Manila neighborhood.

Despite having no formal political power, the Sultanate of Sulu commands considerable respect among many Muslim Filipinos. In the past, it helped unify warring tribes in the fractious southern Philippines. The family also believes it has a legitimate claim to Sabah, after the Sultan of Sulu granted the territory to the Kirams in 1704 in return for helping to crush a rebellion, and the Philippine government has never fully relinquished its claim, either.

Looking on at the carnage from his crumbling Manila home, Mr. Kiram reckons his mission has partly succeeded. Among other things, the Sabah invasion has helped put his family’s claim back on the international map alongside other disputes, such as a border row between Thailand and Cambodia and China’s tussles with Vietnam and other countries over which nation controls parts of the South China Sea.

The Philippine government, meanwhile, says it is now examining how it can revive the Sabah claim peacefully. “I have a responsibility to dissect history in search of these truths, and from there, to lay down the direction that our country will take as regards Sabah – a direction that I guarantee you will not involve the use of violence,” President Benigno Aquino III said Monday.

And as far as Mr. Kiram is concerned, it’s not a moment too soon.

Family members say Mr. Kiram is running out of time. He undergoes kidney dialysis at least twice a week at a cost of $120 per session. The 5,300 ringgit, or about $1,700, that the Malaysian government pays his family each year in an archaic form of rent doesn’t come close to covering it, and his poor health is depleting his savings.

His siblings are also aging – an important consideration given that the line of royal succession in the Sulu sultanate passes from brother to brother like in Saudi Arabia, rather than father to son, as in Britain. The brother commanding the Sabah invasion and now on the run, for instance, is 70-year-old retired woodwork teacher Agbimuddin Kiram.

“A lot of us want to see something happen now before it is too late,” says Celia Kiram, the sultan’s wife. “We’ve made proposals to Malaysia and to Malacanang,” she said, referring to the Philippines’ presidential palace. “But nothing has happened.”

A succession of governments in the Philippines has struggled with the Kiram family’s claim to Sabah. In 1902, American writer George Ade wrote a comic opera called “The Sultan of Sulu” that poked fun at the U.S.’s efforts to govern its new colonial possession after winning the islands from Spain in 1898. The musical revolved around Sultan Jamalul Kiram I’s colorful appetites, including his clumsy attempts to woo the schoolmarms sent by U.S. President William McKinley to help educate the islanders about American ways.

In 1915, Sultan Jamalul Kiram II abdicated his formal powers, and in 1963 Sabah, which the Kiram family had leased to the British North Borneo Company, was formally folded into modern-day Malaysia – enraging the Kiram family for generations to come.

The modern-day Philippine government has occasionally raised the claim to Sabah, too. In 1968, former president Ferdinand Marcos hatched a plan to train Muslim soldiers to invade and annex Sabah, but it was aborted when the recruits rebelled. Dozens were massacred.

Last year, current President Benigno Aquino III appeared to put the dispute to bed by describing the country’s claim to Sabah as dormant. Malaysia, meanwhile, helped broker a breakthrough peace agreement between the Philippine government and the Moro Islamic Liberation Front, the largest of the Muslim rebel groups operating in the south of the predominantly Christian Philippines.

Those events raised fears among senior members of the Kiram family that Manila would relinquish the Philippines’ claim to Sabah, and also sideline the clan from a new power structure forming in the chaotic islands of the southern Philippines that would be dominated by the Islamic Front.

But by making an armed invasion of Sabah, some members of the Kiram clan fear Mr. Kiram has blown the family’s chances of getting a settlement, as well as complicating life for some 800,000 Filipinos who live and work in the state, who now fear being viewed by Malaysian security forces as potential collaborators with the intruders.

“This isn’t going to help. It will only harden attitudes,” says Muedzil Lail Tan Kiram, Mr. Kiram’s cousin, who also claims to be the legitimate Sultan of Sulu.

SABAH is Malaysia! Sulu self-proclaimed idiots must learn how to respect Sabahan’s human rights and Get out & Get lost!

This article is reprinted for our readers’ update on the Sabah crisis – Even if the broke Sultan Sulu wanted to reclaim it after 70 years of rents to Malaysia – still people of Malaysia whom are also the Suluk Community and now the Sabahan residence would not want the BROKE Sultan Sulu to rule the state.

Ask anyone? Who wants to be ruled under a BROKE Sultan who lives in a run down two store-y house? We want to know if the BROKE Sultan Sulu is educated or uneducated? The self-proclaimed PRINCESS – if caught really; anyone please slap her 1000 times on our behalf. Our gratitude in advance.

“Did Brunei actually give Sabah to the Sulu Sultanate?” From OutSyed the Box.

Brunei 1I received the following Brunei Times article from A. Sharizal Jimin  who said :FYI. Food for thought. Obtained it from the Brunei Times. If true, this effectively flushes down the loo all claims by the Sulu’s (and the Philippines). I’m reproducing the article below.Regards,

A. Sharizal Jimin

Here is the article:

THE 1968 Programme Book for the Coronation of His Majesty Sultan Haji Hassanal Bolkiah Muizzaddin Waddaulah as the 29th Sultan and Yang Di-Pertuan of Brunei Darussalam, had two interesting documents inserted inside. The documents were reproduction of two treaties taken from microfilm kept at the Public Record Office in London.

The first treaty was signed by Brunei’s 24th Sultan, Sultan Abdul Momin, appointing Baron de Overbeck as the Maharaja Sabah, Rajah Gaya and Sandakan signed on 29th December 1877.

The second treaty was signed by Sultan Jamalalulazam of Sulu appointing Baron de Overbeck as Dato Bendahara and Raja Sandakan on 22nd January 1878, about three weeks after the first treaty was signed.

That begs the question: Who was responsible for Sabah or North Borneo as it was known then towards the end of the 19th century? That probably has a bearing on the event now unfolding in Lahad Datu in Sabah, where a group of armed men supposedly from the Sultanate of Sulu and North Borneo is claiming that they are the rightful owners of Sabah.

Many of the early modern accounts of written history in Brunei noted that Sulu was given possession of Sabah or parts of Sabah for help rendered to Sultan Muhydin, the 14th Sultan of Brunei who fought a civil war against the 13th Sultan of Brunei, Sultan Abdul Mubin.

Sultan Abdul Mubin usurped the throne after killing Sultan Muhammad Ali when the latter tried to stop Sultan Abdul Mubin from taking his revenge for the death of his son killed by the son of Sultan Muhammad Ali.

Sultan Abdul Mubin appointed Sultan Muhydin as Bendahara but eventually Sultan Muhydin tricked Sultan Abdul Mubin into leaving Brunei for Pulau Cermin and appointed himself as the new Sultan of Brunei.

The two Sultans fought against each other and Sultan Muhyidin finally triumphed, said to be due to the assistance provided by the Sulu Sultanate.

Sir Hugh Low, writing in the Journal of the Straits Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society (JSBRAS) published on 5 June 1880 entitled ‘Selesilah (Book of Descent) of the Rajas of Bruni’, wrote that “by the assistance of a force from the Sultan of Soolok, the forts on the island (Pulau Cermin) were captured”.

Earlier Sir Hugh Low described the negotiation between Sulu and Brunei: “the Bataraa of Soolok went up to Bruni and met the Sultan Muaddin and having feasted and drank, the Sultan asked the Batara for his assistance to destroy the enemies at the island, promising that if the island should be conquered, the land from the North as far as westward as Kimani should belong to Soolook”.

HR Hughes-Hallett writing in the Journal of the Malayan Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society published in August 1940 entitled A Sketch of the History of Brunei wrote: “by the beginning of the 18th century, the kingdom (Brunei) had been territorially diminished by the cession to the Sultan of Sulu in the north”.

CA Majul in his book Muslims in the Philippines (1973) referred to a letter from Sultan Jamalul Azam of Sulu to the Governor General of Spain on 17 September 1879 that the coast area from Kimanis to Balikpapan was to pay tribute to the Sultan which he said proved that the Brunei territory facing Suluk was ceded to Suluk.

Interestingly enough, Pehin Jamil Umar writing in his book, Tarsilah Brunei II: Period of Splendour and Fame (2007), countered all of the above. Pehin Jamil did not deny the fact that the Sulus were invited and promised the northern Brunei territory by Sultan Muhydin if they helped him win the civil war against Sultan Abdul Mubin.

However, during the battle for Pulau Cermin, the Sulu forces who were supposed to attack the island from Pulau Keingaran and from the sea, did not do so. They were terrified by the resistance of Sultan Abdul Mubin’s forces in Pulau Cermin. It was only after Sultan Muhydin had won the battle did the Sulu forces landed and took the opportunity to seize a number of war booties.

According to Pehin Jamil, Sultan Muhydin refused to cede the territories claimed by Sulu. Pehin Jamil noted that the area was only “claimed” and not “ceded”, as Sir Stamford Raffles, in his book “History of Java” (1830), had noted “on the north-east of Borneo proper (Brunei) lies a very considerable territory (Sabah), the sovereignty of which has long been claimed by Sulu Government”.

Pehin Jamil further noted that according to the oral tradition, Sulu continued to press their claim. In 1775, one of their chiefs came to Brunei pretending to seek fresh water. What they really wanted was to seek an audience with the Sultan regarding Sabah. However, the Sultan ordered one of the chief wazirs to see them and he threatened that if they wanted to pursue their intention, he will kill them all. The Sulus immediately left. Despite that setback, the Sulus continue to maintain their claims.

The argument that Brunei has not ceded Sabah to Sulu is supported by LR Wright in her book The Origins of British Borneo (1970). She wrote: “indeed, the legitimacy of the Sulu claim to the territory (North Borneo) is in considerable doubt partly because of the unreliability of tarsilas such as ‘Selesilah’, which in many cases are nothing more than written-down legends to enhance the status of the royal house which produced them.

Succeeding Sultans of Brunei have denied that northern Borneo was given to Sulu, and only the weight of Sulu tradition supports the claim. The weight of Brunei tradition challenges it”.

The Sulu claim is currently resting on that treaty which was mentioned at the beginning of this article signed by Sultan Jamalalulazam of Sulu appointing Baron de Overbeck as Dato Bendahara and Raja Sandakan on 22nd January 1878.


jamalul alam

But at the beginning of this article, there is, in fact, another treaty which was signed earlier by Sultan Abdul Momin appointing Baron de Overbeck as the Maharaja Sabah, Rajah Gaya and Sandakan signed on 29th December 1877. In 1877, the Brunei Sultanate then still believed and maintained that the territory was in fact still under the control of the Brunei Sultanate.

Another interesting document is the British North Borneo Treaties Protocol of 1885 signed in Madrid, which is also known as the Madrid Protocol of 1885, a copy of which can be found on Sabah State Attorney General’s website. It was signed by the British, Germany and Spain who was the predecessor government of the Philippines.

The two most important articles are Article I British and Germany recognizing the sovereignty of Spain over the Sulu Archipelago and Article III Spain relinquishing all claims to Borneo.

Next post – How Tony Fernandez cheats his customers and the investors?

A tale of two airlines in Malaysian skies – Episode 2 “Exposing Against Tony Fernandez’s proxy”

He who has the history of bankrupting and DE-listing a private corporate company – Malakoff Corporation Berhad; who successfully and viciously terminated thousands of workers during his tenure with Malakoff Corporation Berhad; and he who had declared for Malaysia Airlines the first massive losses of RM2.52 billion during the share swap and collaboration framework with Air Asia.

WE believe MAS present CEO is either incompetent or intentionally collaborating with Tony Fernandez of Air Asia to save Air Asia from bankruptcy at the expense of Malaysia Airlines by giving away MAS routes to Air Asia terminating Johannesburg that generated 80% of revenue for Malaysia Airlines; Dubai that generated almost 95% of revenue for Malaysia Airlines and Haneda that merely started to generate revenue for Malaysia Airlines. He fails in his fiduciary duty recovering the loss of MAS routes from Air Asia. The longer he sits as MAS CEO position; the more routes will be lost to Air Asia through his plannings. His claims were those routes were not profitable and bleed MAS to dry and by contrast he has granted Air Asia many opportunities to open new routes into those routes MAS had lost under the corporate leadership of Ahmad Jauhari – a.k.a. The Clueless CEO. The truth is Ahmad Jauhari secretly approved the giving away of Johannesburg, Dubai, Haneda and Taipei for Air Asia.

Ahmad Jauhari has been lying to his workers of the performance of Malaysia Airlines and we caught his evil collaboration with Tony Fernandez and proxies i.e. Azahari Dahlan and Zahrah Zaid for fixing up the workers from the inside of Malaysia Airlines.

Let us brief the public the ingredients to destroy Malaysia Airlines by Tony Fernandez’s proxies;

  1. Ahmad Jauhari’s special skill is to shrink the operation; DE-listing the corporation like what he did to Malakoff Corporation Berhad and planting more corporate espionage of Air Asia into Malaysia Airlines establishing the platform of insecurity for the workers. His plans were to DE-list Malaysia Airlines and possibly bankrupt it at one ringgit value for Tony Fernandez to buy over. His best performance is playing PRETENTIOUS GAME with MAS workers seemingly portray a good man with vision to save Malaysia Airlines. Time for Ahmad Jauhari to tender his resignation as soon as possible or face the invincible wrath – FIRED and HUMILIATED.
  2. Azahari Dahlan will work on recruiting Air Asia’s loyal workers into Malaysia Airlines Aerospace Engineering with intention to sabotage Malaysia Airlines’ aircraft where he successfully responsible for engines on fire and emergency landing. His further mission is to ensure Air Asia’s aircraft could be serviced for FREE on the house when Air Asia sends all of its Airbus aircraft for major overhaul maintenance this coming August 2013. The last head of division in MAE had responsibly asked for CASH TRANSACTION from Tony Fernandez; was terminated by Ahmad Jauhari.
  3. Zahrah Zaid’s mission is to crush the workers’ rights and fixing the workers for fast termination. She is to break up all MAS unions and associations before her contract ends with MAS. Whilst she sat as the director for MAS Human Resource Division; she quickly fixed the remuneration for the top management using the budget that was meant for the workers and today she had her salary hiked up 150% from RM40,000 right up to RM100,000. Read here for more information on Zahrah Zaid’s infamous history.

The TRIO have planned well for fixing all the workers using their available sources, relatives and connection. Especially Ahmad Jauhari – he has a relative working as Deputy Director  of Anti-Corruption Agency to frame up those who were against the collaboration with Air Asia with the help from NUFAM, NUFEM (that is yet to be formed) and NUFOAM (that is under way to be formed).

Tony Fernandez desperately wanted Malaysia Airlines more than any other businesses. He sees MAS as a very SEXY LADY and wishes to re-marry MAS through the Malaysian tycoon – Syed Mokthar Al-Bukhari buying over Malaysia Airlines. Syed Mokthar Al-Bukhari does not have the expertise to run Malaysia Airlines and we believe he is being used by Tony Fernandez to purchase Malaysia Airlines from the ladies in RED.

However, in this Episode 2; you will learn the comparison on the performance between Malaysia Airlines and Air Asia where Malaysia Airlines’ shares is expected to rise up to RM8.50 than of Air Asia’s shares which has more limitation in ratio of profit to value and cash return on investment.


MORGAN & STANLEY analyzed on prospective F2008 P/BV, both MAS and Air Asia are trading at undemanding multiples of 1.2-1.3x, comparable to the Tier-1 airlines multiple of 1.3x. We do not look at P/E multiple as Air Asia’s earnings are boosted by deferred income tax credit, and contribute to the low artificial P/E multiple.


Investment Conclusions. Morgan and Stanley conclude with three investment observations.

  • Closing the Efficiency Gap. We believe MAS has successfully restructured its business model and has a new business transformation plan to grow operating revenues. By focusing on delivering value to passengers and cargo/MRO customers and taking out non-essential costs, MAS is building a lean cost structure to compete more effectively with low-cost airlines and the regional network airlines. Air Asia, which viewed MAS as a non competitive threat in the past because of its gross operational inefficiency, is now re-defining its product to create added-value services to compete with MAS. The net impact is the operational efficiency gap between the two airlines has narrowed significantly over the past two years, as highlighted by the operating and pretax margin trends (see Exhibit 2).
  • Sharp Divergence in Cash Position. MAS raised its cash reserve through a rights and loan stock issue last year and had accumulated a cash position of RM5.3 billion at December 2007. In a very tight liquidity credit market, MAS had net cash of RM4.4 billion while Air Asia had net debt of RM3.3 billion at December 2007. As funding costs start to rise with increasing credit default risk, we think Air Asia’s plans to seek to fund its aggressive capital expenditures of RM2-3 billion for the next five years might encounter difficulties in a tough credit market. In F2008, we estimate Air Asia would need to raise about RM3 billion to fund the estimated capital expenditure of RM2.8-3.0 billion, whereas we estimate MAS’ capital expenditure would not be more than RM1.0 billion.
  • Potential Derivative Losses. We are particularly concerned about Air Asia’s fuel hedging position. We view the directional bet on oil positions via its sold call options – currently exposed on its F2009 and F2010 oil positions – as potential derivative losses that could severely undermine the company’s cash flow to service both the interest and fixed contractual payments. If WTI oil prices remain above US$90/bbl for the next two years, the underlying operational losses, and more importantly, reduced cash flow generation for Air Asia could have a substantial impact on its franchise value. In contrast, MAS has adopted a conservative fuel hedging strategy whereby it will benchmark its hedging ratio to the average hedging ratio of the Asian airlines to reduce oil volatility.

On a risk-reward tradeoff for the Malaysian aviation sector, we believe MAS shares offer much better risk-adjusted upside potential than Air Asia shares, and we recommend investors switch from Air Asia to MAS. Given MAS’ franchise value of less than 1.0x EBITDA, we believe MAS is attractively valued for deep-value investors.














Morgan Stanley research on Air Asia

Investment Thesis

  • Tough corporate restructuring builds a strong platform for MAS to compete effectively with the top airlines in Asia.
  • Active yield management drives up operating revenues and enhances operating margin.
  • Falling oil prices boost near-term earnings and contribute to positive earnings surprises.

Key Value Drivers

  • Network rationalization enhances operational efficiency and load factors.
  • Focus on profitable routes and maximize yield to enhance value for shareholders.
  • Surplus cash reinvested for earnings growth to enhance shareholder value.

Potential Catalysts

  • Yield surprise. Higher fares achieved despite lowering fuel surcharges due to active yield management.
  • Positive earnings surprise could arise from Airbus compensation, falling oil prices, or higher yields.
  • Jet fuel prices below US$95/bbl would lower MAS’ operating costs to 31% vs. 34% currently, and substantially improve net earnings.

Key Risks

  • Slower global GDP growth. If US and global economies slow significantly, the weak global travel outlook would be negative for the carrier.
  • Threat of low-cost airlines. If LCCs aggressively lower fares to increase market share, MAS and other airlines would likely cut their own fares to protect leisure passenger segments.
  • Strong competition from Gulf carriers. Gulf carriers are expanding their fleets aggressively to take advantage of open skies in Asia. Long-haul routes at risk for MAS.

Investment Thesis

  • Low-cost airlines (LCCs) in Asia have the potential to increase passengers at a CAGR of at least 20% for the next five years, by our estimates.
  • Air Asia has the first-mover advantage in the LCC industry, and the carrier has built a proven and successful LCC business model in Asia.
  • If WTI crude oil prices stay above US$90/bbl in 2009 and 2010, Air Asia would be exposed to substantial derivative fuel contract losses and lack of cover for the high jet fuel prices, and this could lead to negative earnings surprises.

Key Value Drivers

  • Factors driving the high LCC growth are liberalization of ASEAN and Asian skies, doubling of aircraft orders by Asian LCCs in four years, and low market penetration by LCCs in the Asia/Pacific market.
  • High operating earnings CAGR supports high EV/EBITDA, and is a key support for Air Asia’s share price, in our view.

Potential Catalysts

  • Fast track in ASEAN aviation liberalization.

If ASEAN skies are liberalized ahead of the 2008 deadline, we see additional regional cities as an upside option for the carrier.

  • Network route rationalization.

We see significant incremental growth potential from the domestic and international routes, particularly from capacity expansion to India and China, two of the fastest-growth aviation markets in the world.

Key Downside Risks

  • Restructured and recharged Malaysia Airlines (MAS).

We think the revamped national carrier could prove to be a formidable competitor to Air Asia. Impact of high fuel surcharges on underlying fares. The higher ticket fares, which incorporate the increased fuel surcharges, could have negative implications for passenger travel.

  • Inflated equity.

We think net equity for Air Asia was inflated by 30% at June 2007, and possibly by about 35-40% for the next 2-3 years, due to mounting deferred tax credits and deferred associate losses on the balance sheet.

Malaysiaairlinesfamilies will continue to expose Ahmad Jauhari’s illegal activities inside Malaysia Airlines – so Ahmad Jauhari better equip with battalion or leave before your are fired and arrested.  You shall continuously declaring profits for Malaysia Airlines and promoting MAS shares transparently.

Stay tuned for more updates on Tony Fernandez is making a comeback to Malaysia Airlines using MAS gullible workers and the billionaire tycoon.

Tracing the roots of Sabah claims – Dr. Paridah Abd Samad wrote…

We are taking a short break on researching Air Asia’s fraud to focusing on Malaysia’s intrusion by former President Marcos of Philippines that had recruited 300 Sulu trained army just for terrorising the Sabahan. Next post – The tale of two airlines – Espisode 2.

This article is written by Dr. Paridah Abd Samad;

INITIATIVE: Philippine leaders have, since Marcos, taken the effort to resolve the sovereignty issue; THEN Philippine president Ferdinand Marcos made a dramatic move towards normalisation of bilateral relations in 1976, just prior to an Asean summit meeting, when he stated that the Philippines no longer intended to press its claim to sovereignty over Sabah, though he did not officially drop it. The pronouncement, however, was never followed by any concrete action.

The dispute dragged on into the Corazon Aquino administration, which tried to resolve the problem through revising legal and constitutional provisions to drop the claim. The Philippine Constitution of 1987 no longer includes the phrase “by historical and legal rights” as part of the definition of the national territory. Also, Senate Bill No. 206, redefining the archipelagic boundaries of the Philippines, called for amendments to Republic Acts 5546, and it particularly excluded Sabah from Philippine territory.

However, Sultan Jamalul Kiram III’s denouncement of Aquino’s government for endorsing the bill without consulting him and bungling by the newly installed administration kept the bill from getting through the Senate, denying Aquino a diplomatic victory of the Asean summit in December, 1987.

The Philippines cannot just drop its claim to Sabah to patch up differences with Malaysia, as it must first consider the repercussions of such a decision on the politically unstable Sulu Archipelago. Sabah and Moro are interrelated in prolonging settlement of the dispute and in deepening the security concerns of the Philippine government.

The transmigration of mostly Filipino Muslim refugees to Sabah has put the Philippines in a favourable position because this has significantly contributed to reducing the Muslim population ratio and its resistance strength.

In 1970, Tunku Abdul Rahman played an important role in promoting international support for the Moro cause. As secretary-general of the Organisation of Islamic Countries (now Organisation of Islamic Cooperation), he endorsed the Moro case submitted to him in 1972 and asked King Faisal of Saudi Arabia and (Libyan) president (Muammar) Gaddafi to help in persuading other OIC member states to support it.

But Malaysia’s optimism and hope for a new and brighter chapter in Malaysia-Philippines relations remain unfulfilled. While the Aquino administration made the effort and took the initiative to drop the sovereignty claim on Sabah, it was unable to push through its initiative because of stumbling blocks. Senate Bill 206, which excludes Sabah from Philippine territory, remains unenacted.

Since no law has yet been passed on the dropping of Sabah claim, the Philippine government still has the option to actively pursue the claim through internationally accepted norms. By pursuing the claim, the Philippine government could promote the Philippines’ historic rights and legal title over Sabah, as well as the proprietary rights of the heirs of sultan of Sulu.

However, the 1930 treaty between the United States and Great Britain drew a precise boundary to separate their island possessions off the northeast coast of Sabah. The allocation of islands defined in these treaties was enshrined in Article 1 of the Philippine Constitution of 1935.

The Philippine claim has no known international support while Malaysia is morally supported by Great Britain and the Commonwealth of Nations in rejecting this claim. Even the US has assumed a position of neutrality. The other Asean countries, though discreetly distancing themselves form the issue since it involves two of their fellow members, also seem to silently acknowledge Malaysia’s right to the disputed territory.

For the Philippines to drop its claim to Sabah without concessions would mean outright recognition of Malaysia’s sovereignty over Sabah. Taking this position might also jeopardise the proprietary rights of sultan of Sulu. In general, choosing this option appears to be damaging the national integrity.

Malaysia gave a solemn commitment to satisfactorily resolve the proprietary claim with recognised Sulu heirs once the sovereignty claim is legally and finally dropped. It sees no linkage whatsoever between the two claims. Malaysia has always insisted that sovereignty and proprietary rights over Sabah are two separate questions.


It is hoped that President Benigno Aquino will resolve the Sabah issue amicably. AP pic

The writer is a former lecturer of UiTM Shah Alam and International Islamic University Malaysia, Gombak.

Malaysiaairlinesfamilies and AirAsiafamilies – Many Malaysians are still in the dark of the history on Sabah claims – However; do Malaysians still think BABI doesn’t know this or does he know much early when BABI met with the rebels of Sulu (AP picture)?

Misuari Buncit

Read this – An Autonomous Sabah promised by BABI if he becomes the next Malaysia Prime Minister.  The rebel in the picture with BABI declared war is imminent if Malaysia kills his fake Sultan Jamalul Kiram III’s brother.

The self-proclaimed Sultan Jamalul Kiram III

The descendants of the Sulu Sultanate have condemned self-proclaimed Sultan Jamalul Kiram III for instigating violence in Sabah.

Mudarasulail Kiram who is the son of the late Sultan Mahakuttah Kiram, and fellow claimant to the Sulu throne Sultan Bantilan Muhammad Muizzuddin II condemned Jamalul for putting the lives of the Tausug people in danger for his selfish agenda.

They called on their countrymen to immediately retreat and stop following the orders of Jamalul as he was not the real Sultan of Sulu.

It is wrong and un-Islamic to terrorise Sabah, especially as Malaysia has never oppressed the Tausug community, said Mudarasulail.

“Our target should be the Philippine Government which has oppressed us for so long,” he added.

Stressing that Sabah rightfully belonged to Malaysia, Mudarasulail said the Tausug community in the state risk being victimised because of Jamalul’s actions.

He also called on the self-proclaimed sultan to stop using the name Jamalul, as people like him who perpetrate violence should not use the sacred names of former sultans.

He said Jamalul had proclaimed himself sultan despite not being the biological grandson of Sultan Mawalil Wasit (who was the designated Sulu sultan after Sultan Jamalul Kiram II who did not have any direct heirs).

Malaysia and Philippines unnatural relations – Who’s the target? A must to read…


The Philippines’ claim on Sabah has remained unresolved for nearly 50 years, writes Dr Paridah Abd Samad;

THE level of irritation in the relationship between Malaysia and the Philippines is considered unnatural for two immediate neighbours who belong to a common regional grouping. The Philippine’s claim on Sabah, one of Malaysia’s 13 states, is an issue that has remained unresolved for nearly 50 years.

Once a part of the Sultanate of Sulu, Sabah’s land area exceeds 29,000 square miles, smaller than neighbouring Mindanao by about 8,000 square miles. Its centuries-old ties with the Philippines are indicated by the fact that inhabitants of both came from the same racial stock and have similar customs and traditions.

The Sultan of Brunei originally ruled this part of Borneo, but in 1704, the Sultan of Sulu helped suppress an uprising there and, as a reward, North Borneo was ceded to Sulu. Subsequently, Europeans came to Southeast Asia for the valuable minerals, spices, and other rich sources of revenue, and in 1878, two of these enterprising merchants leased North Borneo from the sultan. Soon the British North Borneo Company was formed and awarded a royal charter.

In the course of laying the groundwork for Philippine independence, the treaty signed in 1930 by the US government and the British Crown, circumscribed the territorial jurisdiction of the Philippine Republic. It did not include Sabah within the boundaries of Spanish, American, or Philippine jurisdiction.

Six days after the Philippines was granted independence (July 10, 1946), the British North Borneo Company turned over all its rights and obligations to the British government, which in turn asserted full sovereign rights over Sabah through the North Borneo Cession Order.

There was no advancement of Philippine claims to Sabah from 1946 to 1962. Within that period, successive Philippine administrations conducted low-keyed investigations on the merits of such a claim, and a study of these and other documents convinced Diosdado Macapagal, then chief of the Legal Division of the Philippines’ Foreign Affairs Department, that a claim on North Borneo could be filed.

The first official Philippine act on the matter — House Resolution No. 42 adopted on April 28, 1950 — stated explicitly that North Borneo belonged to the heirs of the Sultan of Sulu and authorised the president to conduct negotiations for the restoration of sovereign jurisdiction.

But it was June 1962 before the Philippine government notified the United Kingdom of its claim on Sabah, and the following December the two agreed to hold talks on the issue. The promulgation of the claim brought the Philippines into diplomatic conflict with the British, who regarded it as a nuisance in relation to their own plan to change the status of North Borneo from a colony into a state of an expanded federation of Malaysia. The British government rejected the Philippine position in view of the overriding need to form the Federal Republic of Malaysia, ostensibly to contain communism in Southeast Asia.

Meanwhile, since Sabah has a total land area of 74,398 square kilometres and is only 16km from Sulu, it was a Philippine security concern. Such concerns, may have moved President Macapagal on April 20, 1963 to write to President John F. Kennedy stressing the importance of North Borneo as vital to the security of the Philippines.

At the first ministerial conference on the claim, held in London in 1963, a joint communiqué was issued by the foreign ministers of Malaysia, Indonesia, and the Philippines stating that the inclusion of North Borneo in the Federation of Malaysia “would not prejudice either the Philippine claim or any right thereunder”. This joint statement was ratified by the leaders of the three countries when they met later that year in Manila, and Macapagal’s participation in it, jeopardised the Philippine claim to Sabah.

In any case, the Federation of Malaysia came into being on September 16, 1963, and due to the physical possession of Sabah by Malaysia, the Philippine government refused to accord diplomatic recognition, contrary to its solemn commitment in the Manila Agreement. When Soekarno started his “confrontation” against Malaysia, Manila reduced its representation in Kuala Lumpur to consular level.

The claim was relegated to the sidelines when it became entangled within the wider context of the Republic of Indonesia’s “confrontation” with Malaysia and the Sukarno regime’s threat to resort to military means to crush the fledgling nation. Upon termination of the confrontation, the dispute over Sabah was carried to Bangkok, where bilateral negotiations aimed at its resolution were abruptly aborted. In the United Nation’s General Assembly, the disputants exchanged contentious charges and countercharges.

Various unsuccessful efforts were made to reconcile Philippines and Malaysia until the two finally agreed to restore full diplomatic relations in June 1966. Ironically, President Ferdinand Marcos recognised the formation of Malaysia, after he took over political power in the Philippines.

With the inception of the five-member Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean), there was a tacit agreement between Malaysia and the Philippines that the issue be shelved in the interest of regional solidarity, and they agreed that it should be finally resolved through Asean.

In March 1967, the Philippine government was invited to send observers to witness the first direct elections in Sabah, but Manila refused on the ground that this might prejudice its position on the claim. The refusal did not, however, impede the participation of the Philippines and Malaysia in the formation of Asean in August 1967, and the following January President Marcos and his wife paid a state visit to Kuala Lumpur.

But deterioration in bilateral ties, again involving Sabah, led to a rupture in relations in 1969. The Philippines’s institutionalisation of the claim through enactment of Republic Act 5546, incorporating Sabah as part of the territory of the Philippines, triggered Malaysian suspension of diplomatic ties. However, in the spirit of regional cooperation, relations were restored on Dec 16, 1969, during Asean’s third ministerial conference.

Written by : Dr Paridah Abd Samad is a former lecturer at UiTM Shah Alam and IIUM Gombak

Tomorrow: PART II of this article.

image Sabah Chief Minister of Sabah, Mr. Donald Stephens (second from left), in national Kadazan costume, being sworn into office by the Chief Justice at the Malaysia proclamation ceremony in Jesselton, Sabah, on Sept 17, 1963. On the right is the Malaysian Deputy Prime Minister Tun Abdul Razak Hussein, representing the central Federal Government.

Malaysiaairlinesfamilies see the target is the present Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak because his father was the former deputy Prime Minister of Malaysia (above bare right) who represented the central Federal Government of Malaysia in 1963. Coincides with the upcoming Malaysia 13th General Election; there is no doubt the opposition leaders may have been behind the curtain planning Sulu invasion to suppress the voters in Sabah particularly the Suluk Community that have been very loyal to the Yang DiPertuan Agung and the State Federal Government helm by the present Prime Minister of Malaysia – Najib Tun Razak.

Those opposition supporters still speculating behind the ruling coalition for defending the country responsibly and preserving a peaceful nation for Malaysians as we write by spreading false rumors accelerating the tension between the opposition parties and voters – please go and eat BABI’s shit and lick the whole affair as you like till its cleaned-up!

We see BABI is so desperate to be the next Prime Minister of Malaysia but today is the history of BABI in Malaysia politic. BABI is entirely wiped out from Malaysia map because BABI has Sulu’s bloodline; a manipulator par excellence so skilled that he can convince several hundred fighters from Sulu to die for his cause so to be the next Malaysia Prime Minister.

Read Reuters – Sabah Politician allied with Anwar met Sulu Sultan before Lahad Datu standoff.

Read also Malaysia Insiders – 10 reasons why BABI is behind the Sulu saga.

Stay tuned for Part II of this article.