Friday, May 12, 2017

End of PKR?

A post in M2Day asked Why is PKR so muddled up?

As one of the visitor to M2Day commented, rather succinctly:

A simple answer which you cannot find it. PKR is all about Anwar. Setup as a path for him to become PM and to escape conviction. 

It is filled with Anwar's family members, his cronies, warlords and also blue eye boys. 

So when Anwar is no longer there, their purpose shambled, they turn to each other to fight for whatever leftover. 

It is like a person with 4 wives. Once he is not there, the wives will turn against each other for the husband's leftover.

And wasn't it true that Anwar's loyal wife formed the (preceding) party in 1999 to help free him from incarceration. The rest is history.

Under Anwar, PKR was doing quite well but with his ouster and his 'big picture' (that he wanted to be PM), the vipers within that party not only attacked each other but stabbed their so-called Pakatan allies in the back.

And today the MM Online published PKR says ‘disappointed’ with PAS for ending ties.

For months every adult in Malaysia knows the split would be inevitable, undeniable and total. But trust PKR politicians to live on in delusion.

I must confess that years ago I was once approached by a rich towkay to join PKR at a high echelon. When I told 'Uncle' that apart from my distrust of Anwar, I have long been a DAP supporter, he responded that the DAP was too 'Chinamen-ish' and the future for Malaysia lies not with the DAP but PKR.

Recently I paid a courtesy visit to the rich 'Uncle' and asked what would his political opinions be today. He acknowledged I was right then, and am still right now, and just shook his head dismally at PKR and Anwar.


  1. The sad stages of development within pkr R not entirely Anwar-centric!

    At most, that's the altruistic & convenient upfront story for the Joe M'sians​ to see.

    Whatsoever pkr is - it's still a Melayu-first, indirectly a ketuanan mutant. This is WHY pkr COULDNT​ break cleanly with pas, despite the short-handedness given by the later.

    Two major forces r in play within pkr.

    The umno-gene infested players r playing 一脚踏两船, together with the dreamers of the political-correctness populism.

    One is redefining the past glory of the ketuanan, while the other is searching for an utopian co-existence in a multi-racial setup against a simmering religious turbulence.

    All the other bleeding hearts, within pkr, r just pawns when ketuanan is mixed with political-correctness!

    Without Anwar's charisma to hold fort, the setup is crumbling like sand castle against the coming tides.

    It's ONLY a matter of time before it splits​ into fractions.

    1. a matter of time is how long? or u r like the host that speculating the return of anwar to umno since day one until now?

      n find me a party in msia, perhaps except psm, that is less ketuanan.

    2. How soon???

      Hmmm...maybe just after ge14.

      I DON'T think Anwar would return to the old den. BUT there is a high possibility that a splinter faction of pkr from those umno-gene coded members would rejoin umno pending the distribution of the 'manna' from the power.

      So beware, when u vote for those pkr candidates!

      A party in M'sia that is less ketuanan???

      Ha...there r, IFF u can & want to distinguish yr definition of ketuanan & maruah bangsa.

      Relook yr dissertation (a short one pls) then see how confusing u r!

      Perhaps, in this regard, u r infested with the same silo dead end of that opinion singularity.

  2. there r many that left or return to umno from time to time. there r equally many that left umno, so what is the big deal?

    n pray tell how pkr demonstrates the tuan-ness? n be more specific which party r less ketuanan. then i let u know how i define this interesting label.

    1. Selangor saga shows PKR's ketuanan mentality? read


    2. selangor saga show the power struggling among 3 parties, would the same happen in bn?

  3. PKR's demonstrated ketuanan mentality - getting less seats than DAP & yet still want to claim the MB post.

    If those pkr clowns have meruah (尊严/dignity) they SHOULD have fought the unwritten rule of non Melayu & non Muslim can't be MB in Selangor.

    To safeguard the true maruah bangsa Melayu, they SHOULD partition the sultan for a DAP MB due to its numerics.

    TRUE 民族尊严/maruah bangsa/race dignity of a proud race demands that - just to uphold the intrigity​ of 老祖宗.

    Instead, they conveniently looked the other way & just coasted along with that ketuanan rule - sultan dictates, tak bolih buat apax2!!!

    When situation suits the (un)democratic requirement, they shout loudly for the world to hear, just like umno. Just to prove their KETUANAN mentality to the feudalistic blur-sotongs of the heartland.

    BTW, yr question - which party r less ketuanan?

    Didn't u answered it yr self? PSM mah!

    Blackhole singularity stretches any object into long & thin spaghetti before been consumed into the centre.

    Yr opinion singularity does likewise stubbornly about yr pkr obsession!

    Before u shoot off the tangent, pls read the Manchester egomaniac's latest racial rant;

    I sincerely hope that u wouldn't come up with a similar trashy argument just to please yr choirboys.

    1. rpk is a liar, we can ignore his lies pertaining to chinese school, but his criticism toward hew, n chinese like u, sound valid to me, it has nothing to do with chinese school though.

      if i am not wrong, the mb must be malay n muslim is enshrined in the state constitution, whether tis is fair or not is another subject.

      secondly dap never ask for the mb post. in term of numeric, umno won the most.

      i dun wish to debate u further on this subject bec i know most dap fanboy r idiotic on politics n malay psyche. in fact if people like u ponder a bit deeper, apart from dedak, u shd realise there r enought reason for pas to ask dap idiot like u to jump lake wakaka.

    2. your hatred for DAP and thus me have been overpowering, galvanising to talk cock

    3. “死鸡撑饭盖”!!!!

      1st - Do tell what's yr 'understanding' of the difference between maruah & ketuanan lah!

      DON'T beat around the bush like that Manchester liar.

      His criticism toward Chinese M'sian like me, sound valid to u????

      What criticism?

      If one replaces all the CinaBeng related phrases to ketuanan freak, the logic sounds similar!

      That piece of trash IS basically a reflection of his underplays between maruah & ketuanan.

      That's the reason why I asked u to read & hope u understand.

      It's a pick-&-choose & a cut-&-paste re-phrases of a KKK propaganda!

      So, still sound valid, bleeding heart?

      2nd - the mb must be malay n muslim is enshrined in the state constitution, whether this is fair or not is another subject.

      So the state constitution can be an ass & thus is NOT related to the discussion of maruah/ketuanan?

      Banyak pandai!!!

      U think most dap fanboy (me???) r idiotic on politics n malay psyche.

      What basis on yr syiok-sendiri rant?

      What about pkr bleeding hearts about politics idiosyncrasies​ n malay psyche?

      Lagi teruk - tak tau maruah just bcoz of political-correctness. Right?

      In fact if people like u ponder a bit deeper, u shd realise there r enought reasons for pas to ask pkr idiot like u to jump lake.

      Any wonder WHY those pas cowboys can mainx2 with the pkr idiots NOW?

      拍拍后脑, 好好反思, before u become the 牺牲品 of political-correctness!

    4. I wouldn't waste too much time on hy as he's a bitter old man who sees his party everyday growing grossly inferior to dap, wakakaka

    5. but i mostly copy my writes from that mt liar, y u never assert he is talking kok, u so cheap wan to bodek a liar?

    6. ck, i used to question the rational of our constitution when i debate one ellese. go whack the one that drafted, n agreed on it. kassim ahmad dare to said what he think is right, can anyone from dap tell the same, can i then claim dap have no dignity? is that so black n white? how old r u?

    7. Those who drafted the constitution were gone, history.

      They did what they did as a reflection of their time, done in with the influences of the prevailing thinkings & cultural background.

      In fact, TRUTH to be told - they were 'wise' enough to word the August agreement in such a way that's open to benevolent interpretation.

      It's ONLY in many of the subsequent amendments that some of the clauses were re-worded to favour the ketuanan freak, using the 2/3 majority.

      Many of these clauses were/are re-interpreted using the awaken ketuanan mentality, with the help of a ketuanan freak infested judiciary.

      Who were working in cahoots with the ketuanan freaks to do these amendments & drawing 'blood-tainted' personal benefits for their cosy miaox2 burring existence?

      In the early days, ONLY Lao Lee dared to voice out, resulting in the separation of the RedDot from the ketuanan umbilical cord & leading to the present prosperity of RedDot.

      There was NO political-correctness for Harry when dignity was at stake!

      So, know WHO to whack ke?

      The Nons r too small in number now to be effective, as changing any one of these clauses NEEDS 2/3.

      If the Melayu r truly MARUAH CONSCIOUS then they WOULD have to change these unjust provisions, designed to bandwagon their feudalistic siege mentality & thus forever holding them back from all sorts of new challenges & advances.

      It's a Sisyphus task as majority of the blur-sotongs have been too deeply poisoned​ by the ketuanan tongkat.

      There is also the agitation of the Melayu palsu, who r the main beneficiary of these ketuanan rules.

      The revival of the Islamofascism for a reminiscences of a fake caliphate resonates with the B40 of the blur-sotongs, who r the majority of the majority. It stirs the already chaotic mix making it even more difficult to resolve.

      Ketuanan + Islamofascism > maruah bangsa ??????

      Perhaps why the Melayu r slowly arabialized by white-washing their own culture is the answer!

      BTW, once u involve dignity, be it race or country, there is NO gray area. Everything is clearly black n white - no matter how u want to twist the subject!

  4. The MB must be malay and muslim is enshrined in the state constitution might not be dead set as there is an "escape" clause only it is for the Sultan to exercise :

    Article 53 Clause 4 "In appointing a Menteri Besar, His Highness may in His discretion dispense with any provision in this (Selangor) Constitutions restricting His choice of a Menteri Besar, if in His opinion it is necessary to do so in order to comply with the provisions of this article."

    Similarly it is also provided that in Article 51 Clause 1A, a Deputy Menteri Besar can be appointed but if I remember correctly someone pretended that there isn't such a provision and refuse to appoint one when the general expectation was there at that time calling for it.

    By the way HY, in term of numeric, umno DID NOT win the most.

    1. so peter, what is the chances the sultan would appoint a no single malay adun dap to become an mb? n btw, u agree with rpk the sultan have the final said who shd become the mb, in the context of law? or u just want to bring up this point when it suit u?

      if I recall correctly, 2008 umno did win the most. so u all wan to talk abt 2008 or 2013, base on which party won the most or which coalition won the most? what abt pas in 2013 then? is this how we chinese gain dignity? argue selectively?

  5. The problem really started with our forefather......

    First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
    Because I was not a Socialist.

    Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
    Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

    Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
    Because I was not a Jew.

    Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

    Replace those words Socialist, Trade Unionist, Jews with non's rights, more non's rights and even more non's rights and we end up no more rights.

    So that is what we want, political correctness?

    1. do u have a better way? just read the mt liar smear campaign against lks n dap, the writes n talk is much worst in the rural area during election. n some of u even expect a muslim politician to say no hudud forever?

      btw, if lky is really that smart, he would not only a pm of a small island.

    2. Yr personal dislike of Lao Lee IS blinding u no end!

      So, what's​ wrong as a PM of a small island.

      His international standing eclipses many of the so called world powers!


      U SHOULD revisit 朝诗人刘禹锡的古诗作品《陋室铭》!!!!

    3. the deity n dragon is definitely not that dictator lky, its the million diligent labors that work day n night that contribute to the success of spore. there is no lky in hk, u dun see any hongkonger being imprisoned for 30 over years, n still, hk growth is equally impressive, with much freedom in term of speech n press, n the best part is, many hongkonger can recite the poem u mention, unlike most sporean that could only murmur the pap propaganda, can we call them zombies kah?

    4. Should have said this:

      Many younger HKers would forever romanticize about her days under the Pommie rule w/o realising the past pains. Bcoz of this, there r many buttheads still want to be the people of the sunsetted 'empire'.

      HK is where it's bcoz it has grown out of hard-knocks along the way. Thus, the administrators r practical to the dot. They DONT have to plan in big picture, knowingly that just toiling along with the Mainland, they would ensure HK's well-being.

      Similarly, many younger Singies look towards US as a wonderland of choice w/o realising the geopolitical balancing act that Loa Lee had skillfully built.

      The ONLY fault that Harry made was he had unknowingly cultivated a crop of effecient managers to administrate the country.

      There is NO visionary leader within the current administrators. And possibly in a foreseeable future.

      And good & efficient administrators don't equate to good leaders.

      S'pore is NO HK.

      HK can survive with good administrators BUT S'pore cant!

      Thus, S'pore is having the current 两头不到岸 geo-political dilemma.

  6. “死鸡撑饭盖” to the dot!!!!

    U said "if lky is really that smart, he would not only a pm of a small island."

    Now, u twist to talk about HongKong!

    Which is which????

    Confused mind???? Or is yr opinion singularity working overtime again?

    YES - it's the million of diligent labors that work day n night that contribute to the success of spore.

    Similarly, there r millions of diligent labors that work day n night in bolihland & yet nowhere can bolihland matches the success of spore le!

    Pls tell! WHY???

    Is Bolihland infested with tak-bolih superficial 'worker' ants ONLY?

    Or r u going to quote the ketuanan myth of RedDot is too small NOT to be easily administrated!

    Or is it something else?

    Ditto with many others countries, big or small of vorious political hue, where there r million of diligent labors that work day n night & yet can ONLY live from day to day!

    Since u r talking about HK. Let me throw u a question.

    When that piece of smelly harbour was under the Pommie colonial rule, the HKers laboured along with open corruption & black societies threats for as long as they could tolerate that dog-eat-dog living for close to 100 yrs.

    Just before 97, suddenly things start to change with the establishment of ICAC, leading to the overall changes of the new administration that propels HK to new high. The black societies have been defanged & communal peace has been restored. Society is prosperous along a manageable track.

    Pommie has a change of heart? Suddenly HK is no longer a slanged-eye backwater to be exploited?

    I WON'T tell u the WHY - do some relevant readings & think something else for yr own good before u drown in yr silo pityness.

    Just to remind u - it has nothing to do with Communist China's taking over of the HK SAR!!!!

    Beware, not to bring in yr favorite Taiwan into this argument. U will be getting NOWHERE!!!

  7. i dun know what u r trying to tell. i see there is much similarity between hk n spore, both r city state, majority chinese, mainly moved from mainland, under british system, no affirmative action, approximate population n work force. major diff is one is without lky.

    i have no idea y icac, 1997 is relevant in our discussion. n of course hk enjoy the unique free port status when china remain close door, n that is part of mao n zhou strategy to ensure hk remain a capitalist state, just like how usa n britain support spore. what is so great about the dictator lky then?

    1. Lao Lee is definitely a dictator.

      But a benevolent leader he is.

      So dictator is bad.

      What then about a proven benevolent leader?

      One must judge a person from a BIG picture prospective.

      More so a leader.


      U don't get perfect saint in real human.

      Perhaps u should investigate WHY all the gods of the Greek, Hindu, Chinses & Mayan display human tracks, even though they r supposely to be all powerful & living in heaven!

      The ONLY 'odd man out' in this fairy tales is the 'omnipotent' god of Abrahamic faith.

      Perhaps, it's bcoz he is a loner with zero competition le.

      This COULD be the answer le!!!

      Coming back to the HK/S'pore comparison, do look into my takes about effecient manager vis-a-vis visionary leader to expand yr closed mind due to yr intensely​ 'dislike' of Harry.

      Wakakakaka...too much for u to absorb?????

    2. Ooop...forget to add HK has no lky but it has colonial Pommie then & Communist China now.

      Any differences, u tell me lah.

    3. if u agree that the british was a benevolent dictator while ruled hk, then i can understand y u call lky the same. n it was a cold war era when hk enjoy high growth, n china was remain a poor third world facing soviet, usa n bretain. so whats yr point, n what diff u tell me.

    4. Wakakakaka... proper frame of reference please.

      Pommie was never a benevolent ruler for HK. The initial period from 1842 till 1974, HK was the goose that the Pommie kept plucking w/o any decent sopo development. HKers had to fence for themselves!

      Cold war era when HK enjoyed high growth but the money was never reinvest into HK. HK remained an sopo backwater of the British empire!

      Thing started to change in the late 70s due to the approaching of 97 cutoff date. ICAC, formed in 74 was the greatest administrative changes that set HK off the chart.

      From that date onward, HK's sopo took off rapidly, leading to her current prosperity. But the PommieHK was ONLY behaving as a efficient administrator.

      Pommie's consideration was purely political bcoz the British pm then, Maggie, was ONLY thinking of strengthening the grip on HK via some developments & displayed British gentlemanship to win world supports for the continuous hold on HK via pre97 negotiations.

      After 97, the Communist China needs to convince the HK, & to Taiwan, about the promises laid down by the 1country2system policy. The central government has to implement workable policies to ensure the continuous well-being of HK. However, there r some issues that are considered sacrosanct, like independent, that's non-negotiable.

      The SAR government is also an efficient administrator carring out policies under central government's guidelines.

      Both Pommie then & China now r using HK as a sopo showpiece to prove their main body governing policy.

      Lao Lee administrated S'pore, right from the beginning, with the well-being of S'pore​ at his heart.

      No doubt he did it in a blunt way, just like a running train heading straight toward the station. Anything blocking his way would be removed/mow-downed high-handedly.

      Thus, his Draconian approaches to placate the survival of S'pore won him admirers & haters alike.

      His dictatorial policies brought S'pore to where she is today. There were collateral damages, especially many of his political opponents.

      So, the MAIN difference between HK & S'pore is;

      HK is the showcase of the competing political powers. While S'pore is an end product of single-mindedness that many, especially M'sia, was expecting her to fail.

      HK has big brother to fall back on governance, thus it needs good administrators to prosper. The later day Pommie admin & the current SAR admin provides the needed administrators.

      S'pore has No One to fall back during her initial forming years. Her continue survival depends on a visionary leader to provide direction & a set of good managers to drive her on. That's the undisputed works of Harry.

      Even now for an established & stable S'pore, there is still a need for a visionary leader to guide her on geo-political issues. Lsl has done a lousy job in this field, leading to S'pore's geopolitical dilemma now!

      I don't intend to continue arguing with a hard-headed with dead set opinion singularity about Lao Lee.

      But, from these discussions I would propose an advise for u.

      If u read something DO make sure u understand, digest & compare infos widely & diligently from reputable sources.

      Then, FORM an understanding that's truly yr own. Not regurgitate others!

    5. halo einstein, so the diff is dictator plus benevolent equal spore high growth, while dictator minus benevolent oso equal hk high growth. hmmmm fantastic logic.

    6. common denominator - innovative, diligent and never-say-die, the inhabitants were left alone to work out their businesses.

      it's only in the last colonial stage of HK that the Brits, who did NOT want 7 million Chinamen in Britain, sent Patterson with a bullshit promise of democracy for the Hongkies - in other words, stay here Chinapeks, it's your OWN wee lil' country, not Britain. Then he fucked off to Britain

    7. exactly my point, u allow them the freedom, they will prosper. just like when chiang ching guo loosen up kmt military approach, taiwan prosper. same apply to spore. the dictator way is to ensure pap hegemony, like what umno did. so benevolent my kok.

    8. not quite - in hk, the brits didn't care two hoots about the chinamen who in general lived in teh most appalling circumstances. those hongkies were quite happy to live in their own world minus the brits.

      in sing there was indeed a benevolent dictatorship. housing, transport infrastructure, security etc were designed for Sings in mind, unlike in the earlier days of hk

      taiwan was more like hk, though without the brits but an oppressive kmt. kmt was oppressive only on political issues and national security but left the residents to their own device

    9. it is a matter of scale n scope of capitalism n control economy. base on yr criteria, the communist ie ccp is the most benevolent dictatorship.

    10. Why r u wasting time to convince a hardcore Lao Lee basher?

      That mind has been calcified long long time ago. Such that a sense of apple-to-apple comparison doesn't apply!

      When yr grandfather leaves u a fortune, good or bad, u start with something. The lasting of that fortune depends on how well a manager u r.

      If u have no heirloom, then u have to built yr fortune with a workable vision & hardworks.

      See what's​ frame of reference implied????

      Real cockagroo!!!

      Dropping hints pun tak dapat faham. Memang macam zombie.

    11. using the same both u own logic, mahathir n umno is a racial benevolent dictator. the communist, the leftist, the dap, the chinese is all collateral damage. didnt the malay especially umno malay wealth increase by leaps n bounds. this is what i call apple to apple comparison.

    12. Really bea tahan!!

      Chiang CG was a spoiled brat that finally turned 'evangelical' for Taiwan in his late life.

      For the Taiwan freak - why later not when he tookovered from his father? Not need to go further into his transmogrification lah!

      The point of contention HERE is LKY's contribution to the FOUNDING YEARS of S'pore.

      So, who's that equivalent person in the founding years of HK &/or Taiwan.

      Sir Henry Pottinger, the HK territory's first governor in 1842?

      Pottinger ONLY had contempts for that smelly harbour! So what founding years effort r u talking about?

      That megalomaniac Chiang Kai-shek in 1949?

      What initial years of building has he done to that piece of rock?

      He ONLY dreamed of returning as king to mainland China, hopefully with the helps of the Yanks.

      Koxinga's (Zheng Chenggong) effort in rebuilding Formosa after retook the island from the Dutch, in some way matches Harry's. He was equally Draconian but benevolent, in a feudalistic manner. But Formosa didn't last after his passing! A clear case of initial vision with no subsequent effective managerial controls.

      So back to frame of reference - not necessarily for science BUT applicable in history equally.

      Lao Lee's tireless efforts in builting up S'pore CAN'T​ be disputed & whitewashed as a dictatorial way to ensure pap hegemony, like what umno did!

      There is NO equivalent in history as a small RedDot achieving solid nationhood foundation in FIRST try via a single-mindedness vision!

      The ketuanan freaks were dying for Harry to crawl back to them bcoz they thought the RedDot had zero chance to stand on her own without any natural resources, except the diligent & hardworking Cinapeks. How wrong & short-sightedness !!!!

      HK ke, Taiwan ke all reach their current state of sopo advancement through later day managerial fine tweakings. Along the way, there r many innocent sopo 'corpses' that could be minimized!

      Innovative, diligent and never-say-die, r contributing factors from the inhabitants. But these efforts r going down the drain if there is no visionary leader who set the 'correct' sopo environment in the FIRST place.

      India is the best example as a world largest democracy where the inhabitants were left alone to work out their businesses.

      What has India achieved from establishment till now?

      Massive poverty with an unequal economic disparity that's really malu lah for proponent of that 'free' sopo approaches!

      Perhaps, in this regard the CURRENT communist ccp is a benevolent dictatorship that some poor populous countries should emulate!

      There r many areas of Lao Lee's handling of S'pore I DON'T agreed & approved. He is definitely no saint.

      But Lao Lee's vision definitely has a big hand in S'pore's current stage of prosperity.

    13. 跌倒在地上还要捡把沙子,死要面子。

      Hooi...the subject discussed is Lao Lee's contribution to S'pore vis-a-vis HK/Taiwan le!

      Not - mahathir n umno is a racial benevolent dictator.

      Mana apple to apple?

      Stretching benevolent dictators, collateral damages relevancy here r short of rpk-ized yr manner of subject twisting a la carte his dap & Chinese vernacular education interplays.

      Tsk...tsk...banyak pandai!!!!!

  8. Talk about fake news;

    hk enjoy the unique free port status when china remain close door, n that is part of mao n zhou strategy to ensure hk remain a capitalist state


    HK's current status has NOTHING to do with Mao & Zhou le!

    Mana u baca? Ketuanan propaganda ke?

    HK's SAR status IS Deng Xiaoping's plan. By then Mao & Zhou have long dead!

    1. i copypaste but not appear, do some google on this, input "mao take control hk", in hanzi of course. yr knowledge on anything china is, surprisingly, pretty lacking wakaka.

    2. So u believe EVERYTHING u Google/Baidu from the internet!!!!

      Ya loh, in this case my knowledge, from the internet, is indeed lacking.

    3. no i dun, what i wrote here is not everything.