If I were the Home Minister

Yo everyone, I'm back ;-)

Have been catching up with the news, and I see lots on HRP, Interlok and the usual police antics.

You know, if I were the Home Minister, I would NOT have permitted the police to jump on HRP as had happened. Instead I would have allowed HRP to protest, rally or rave and rant, do what it wants (short of perpetuating violence). Really, how much political impact could HRP make?

Likewise with other kacang putih protests such as candlelight vigils by small or fringe elements. Much as the participants might be sincere, the likelihood of such protests making political tsunamic waves were minimal. I know the average Malaysian. Most have already made up their minds so such politicking won't change their allegiance. The perceived brutality of the police towards such peaceful rallies would instead evoke sympathies for the poor anehs and tambis.

But then I’m not the Min of Home Affairs. Hishamuddin is.

Why he has allowed (or instructed) the police to come down heavy on those HRP rallies continues to puzzle me? He has played directly into Uthayakumar’s hands, the dumbo (Hisham that is, not Uthayakumar!)

Dear Uty, mandore master, craves attention more than ever, and dumbo Hisham has granted him his very wish.

Just ignore HRP for 6 months and I bet the party will turn out to be nothing more than a public nuisance, shunned by the average Malaysian. Just look at how the Penang government has ignored Uthayakumar’s attention-craving raves and rants. And how Pakatan has ignored his bullying blackmailing threats for 30 seats or HRP would split the Indian votes.

Thinking …

Now, if I were Home Minister, I would do a number of things quite differently.

For a start, I would place Hisham in Kem Kamunting wakakaka. But why? Being vindictive? No, no, no …

It’s actually to protect the good name and reputation of his illustrious dad and granddad. Hisham is an absolute disgrace to Tun Hussein and the magnificent Onn Jaafar. Usually the acorn doesn’t fall far from the oak tree but this particular acorn must have kicked itself wakakaka right across the field, into the cesspool.

Secondly … hmmm, maybe tomorrow ler ... ;-)

The yucky's

Dear readers, help kaytee on this.

I’m not sure whether I can continue to stand the yucky stuff on the media. I need to ‘boycott’ reading the muck. But my problem is there are so many yucky stuff, and for practical reasons I can’t afford to avoid all of them as I still need to read the news, yucky as some may be.

So if you can help me decide which is the yuckiest, I’ll avoid that one.

OK then, which of the following do you consider to be the pits:

(1) The sodomy case where each day we are cursed with yucky descriptions of peri-anal swabs, no-shit for 2 days, arse-holes, semen stains, genitals/rectal regions, oral bee-bop-a-lula, football team shagalag specimens, and other various shitty (pun not intended) stuff. Just f* spoil my appetite.

(2) The sleazy shameful sinful lies of Penang UMNO and its cohorts, those wishful wannabe (UMNO) wankers, against the current Penang Pakatan government. Most have been sheer fabrications. Don't they realize that Allah swt won't be pleased with their blatant lies for secular (political) purposes? One example has been the manufactured and instigated furore against a non-issue, a new exco portfolio to handle non-Islamic religious affairs, a portfolio exactly similar to the one the current Perak BN government had already set up.

Why don't those wishful wannabe (UMNO) wankers go over to Perak to make noise against their mate Zambry, and remain there! wakakaka.

(3) The pile of shit that’s called the PKFZ corruption scandal has been fermenting, rising and stinking to high heavens since the change of MCA Transport Minister, from Ong Tee Keat to CSL's buddy, Kong Chu Ha.

After Ong had the multi-billion dollar scandal investigated, he adopted the advice of external professional bodies and implemented several reform mechanisms, such as:

(a) an internal whistle-blower policy,
(b) requirement for contract bidders to sign an integrity pact, and
(c) most importantly, the appointment of three independent directors on the PKA board to ensure its integrity and competency. The independence of these directors can be assured if the minister stays clear of their appointment, but acts on the recommendation of the Board.

There are now deep concerna that these measures may be gradually dropped off particularly on the three independent directors.

Out of the original 3 independent directors, only one is left; one left for a new appointment while another, M Rajasingam, saw his term expired in November last year. When the Board recommended that Rajasingam be re-appointed, the new Transport Minsiter inexplicably refused.

Malaysiakini reported: Transparency International Malaysia president Paul Low, who chaired the PKA ad-hoc committee on governance, said Kong's decision has defeated the purpose of having independent director, averring:

"We (the committee) defined the independent director as someone recommended by the board without influence by the minister."

Shit all around!

RCI on Teoh's death - 9 inches could possibly be 11.5 inches?

In the RCI on Teoh Beng Hock’s mysterious death in the Selangor MACC building while the deceased was there (supposedly) as a witness in an alleged RM2,500 corruption case against his boss, a DAP ADUN, Selangor police forensic expert Chief Inspector Mazli Jusoh testified he found no evidence that Teoh had jumped to his death.

Golly be, this naturally shifted the spotlight on a cause of possible murder, manslaughter or, at the very least, an act of God.

But today, The Malaysian Insider reported:

Ultra-violet light showed a shoeprint on the window frame of the building where Teoh Beng Hock fell to his death, the royal commission of inquiry (RCI) heard today. DSP Sharul Othman Mansor who was part of the police forensic crime scene investigation team said he found a nine-inch shoeprint on the window frame on the 14th floor of Plaza Masalam Shah Alam.

Conducting officer Kwan Li Sa then pointed out that since the length of Teoh’s shoe was 11.5 inches (based on Sharul’s measurements of the court exhibit at the inquiry), that fact eliminated the shoeprint as belonging to Teoh.

But RCI chairman James Foong rejected that conclusion, chiding Kwan: “It is not your duty to prove one thing or another. It could be the shoe is slightly longer or concentrated part is shorter.”

A reader of The Malaysian Insider commented that Foong, in dismissing the conducting officer's point, sounded like he was cross examining the conducting officer.

But thank god in all his infinite wisdom that we are blessed with an observant still-serving judge as chairman of the RCI. Kaytee would have said the same thing as Kwan, that a 9 inch shoeprint obviously would not have belonged to a 11 inch size shoe. It does seem the logical conclusion to arrive at. But then, I’m not a judge so what the f* do I know!

RCI = Regrettable Conflict of Interest?

The Malaysian Insider - Teoh’s family boycotts RCI.

What can I say for the prestige and various expected values of a RCI when the Teoh family, who had pushed so hard for its formation, now withdraws in protest at the decision of the Chairperson to allow officers from the AG’s Office to serve as conducting officers?

The AG has recently lodged an appeal against the coronial inquest's open verdict, asserting that Teoh Beng Hock's death was suicide. Yet the RCI has confounded us by accepting officers from the AG's Office, an interested party in the cause of Teoh's death, as conducting officers for the inquiry into Teoh's still unexplained death.

The conflict of interest is so bloody obvious that I am amazed (on second thoughts, maybe not) that regardless of the personal integrity of those officers from the AG's Office, surely James Foong, the Chair of the RCI, would have heard of that old adage “Justice must not only be done but be seen to be done”, but yet has not only persisted in using members of the AG's staff but also rejected the Teoh family's appeal on this very grave issue.

Alas, so in his inexplicable decision, justice now won't be seen to be done, as it ought to be. His decision to disregard the Teoh family’s concerns over the obvious, glaring and flagrant ‘conflict of interest’ flies in the face of convention, perceptions of fairness and raises deep concerns about the RCI itself.

This regrettably comes after the Teoh family’s unsuccessful appeal for the RCI to include 4 additional personalities of the highest caliber and integrity. No, they didn’t ask for Lim Kit Siang or kaytee. In an earlier post RCI for Teoh BH's death - Najib fighting against public perception I wrote:

The Teoh family after consulting 126 NGOs had earlier proposed (a) former national police chief Tun Hanif Omar, (b) former Bar Council president Datuk Ambiga Sreenevasan, (c) former Court of Appeal judge NH Chan, and (d) former Deputy Prime Minister Tun Musa Hitam. But Najib has failed to appoint even one of them to the RCI. Why?

Surely these four are Malaysian luminaries with impeccable credentials and reputations of integrity, with even an UMNO man in Musa Hitam. The only person, also of exceptional integrity and courage, former Justice NH Chan, may perhaps be seen by the Najib administration as being anti-government. If that is the case, kaytee suggests he be replaced by former Justice Gopal Sri Ram, who is also retired.

Most right thinking people would understand and support fully the decision of the Teoh family to withdraw from participating in the RCI.

Besides, as I also wrote in the same post, quoting The Malaysian Insider’s editorial Ensuring justice for Teoh Beng Hock:

All those named to the panel headed by Federal Court judge Tan Sri James Foong are people who are still serving in the government service. None are from outside the service as has been done in previous royal panels. Justice must be seen to be done. So it is hard to understand why no representative from the Bar Council or respected individuals are on the panel.

In other words, people who could (and the public suspicion is, they would) be beholden to the government, as the magistrate of the inquest, the government pathologists and the police have been suspected by the public to be, rightly or wrongly. And the street axiom about “never hold an inquiry unless you already know the finding” is already running wild among the public. Such is the public distrust of the BN government.

The Malaysian Insider’s editorial continues:

Perhaps it’s too early to judge the panel but the collection of judges, former judges and civil servants will have to show that they are interested in giving justice for Teoh Beng Hock, his family, the MACC and the country.

The thing is in the US, Australia and the United Kingdom, the presence of judges or former judges guarantees independence and impartiality. Unfortunately the judiciary in Malaysia has been under a dark cloud since 1988. Thus there is a danger that justice might not be served. This is something for the Najib administration to consider.

The editorial said exactly what has been on our minds.

Today The Malaysian Insider’s editorial Seeing justice done for Teoh Beng Hock ripostes succinctly to James Foong’s pompous statement to the Teoh family on Monday when he plain refused their appeal to change conducting officers: “Do not forget this is far bigger and wider in scope than just you and your family. The whole nation wants the truth. This inquiry is not just to appease you.”

The editorial stated: “True. This inquiry is not just to appease the family or to pay lip service to the pursuit of justice. It is more than that. It is about a country taking all the necessary steps to ensure no one ever goes in for questioning alive and leaves dead again.”

That's precisely what Ong Tee Keat (former MCA president) wrote in a letter to Malaysiakini, stating:

The loss of life, especially while in the custody of government enforcement officials, is always a serious matter of public concern.

There cannot be no answers for this particular case.

It's simply not acceptable that one can die in the MACC's custody without knowing what had happened.

Teoh voluntarily stepped into the Selangor Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC)'s office to give a statement as a witness. He failed to come out alive, while under MACC's custody.

And The Malaysian Insider concluded that: “The Teohs walked out today because they are not sure if justice will be served For Teoh Beng Hock and for Malaysia.”

Indeed and Amin to that.

Haris Ibrahim's MCLM candidates - a threat to Azmin Ali?

Why is MCLM offering its de-frog-itized candidates to only PKR but not DAP or PAS, or for that matter, the BN?

It’s not just a matter of minimising the froggie tendency of recent (and perhaps among existing) PKR politicians, but also of ensuring the credentials and competency of the PKR candidates for the next general election are up to speed.

Haris Ibrahim, conceptualizer and prime mover of MCLM’s current program to vet and offer PKR a list of 30 de-frog-itized and highly qualified candidates for PKR, has often voiced his utter amazement at PKR (in fact more Anwar Ibrahim’s personal) choice of candidates in the last election.

The prime example Haris had raised was Loh Gwo Burne, a person ‘renowned’ for his fame of “14 minutes from (video) photographer to parliamentarian” – for more of this ’14 minutes’ see my post Bahasa Mělayu - a letter to Yang Běrhormat wakakaka.

Anwar Ibrahim ‘invited’ him at the eleventh hour to stand in the Kelana Jaya federal seat. Haris challenged PKR to justify Loh’s nomination (though wakakaka, very successful election as the federal representative for Kelana Jaya) – see Haris’ PKR, why, why, why?

To be fair to Loh, he has remained faithful to PKR despite gibes and jeers that he would leapfrog over to BN. Loh also redeemed himself somewhat (though not to the anwaristas wakakaka) when he wrote a letter to Malaysiakini lambasting Azmin Ali during the party’s recent poll. Incidentally, Loh also was punched in the face by one of Anwar’s faithfuls during an argument on what I remember (vaguely) to be a squatter issue, so perhaps he might have shown some passion in his duties as a federal MP to earn the wrath (and fist) of his party colleague ;-).

We all know, and PKR members themselves do too, that the party is the weakest link in Pakatan Rakyat, with its problems mainly self-induced. A significant part of these problems has been due to its inability to sever itself completely from its UMNO past, practices and proclivities.

Haris obviously has an interest in seeing PKR develop into a party that is not a mere clone of UMNO, as it currently is (with a small appendix formerly called PRM, thanks to Dr Syed Husin’s misguided belief in Anwar Ibrahim’s reformasi).

This has been why, as reported by The Malaysian Insider in its Toe party line to get our seats, says PKR: “MCLM said that its candidates will decide on issues based on their conscience rather than the coalition’s consensus”.

However, I wonder why MCLM refers to the “coalition’s consensus” when it has been PKR it is worried about. Surely if the coalition, namely Pakatan, has reached a consensus, what then would be the issues which would so concern MCLM that its 30 candidates would vote on their conscience?

I can understand MCLM’s concerns with PKR, but what possible common grounds that DAP, PAS and PKR might have that could possibly worry MCLM? Can anyone help shed some light on Haris’s thoughts on this?

Meanwhile, Rafizi Ramli, PKR chief strategist, voiced his wariness of accepting MCLM-offered candidates because it wanted to avoid making the same “mistake” of 2008 where it had picked candidates who could not withstand the pressure and challenges of being a lawmaker".

But that’s precisely why MCLM is offering PKR 30 good and vetted candidates, because the reality is PKR is just incapable of selecting good candidates - a proven fact!

I’ve not an iota of doubt each and every MCLM-offered candidates will definitely be far superior in all respects to those erstwhile PKR MPs and members who defected to the BN, people like Zahrain. Tell me Rafizi, how far worse can MCLM’s candidate be compared to those your party had? When you’re at rock bottom, the only way has to be up! So, stop giving poor excuses.

Rafizi then went on to shoot his foot by stating: “While we are open to suggestions, the candidates must subscribe to our struggle. We are a political party with structure and rules. We have already gone through a painful experience with the ‘frogs’ where in the past we took people who were less experienced and they jumped at the first given opportunity. What was missing was the appreciation of the party struggle.”

This was precisely the reason some PKR leaders (those in the Anwar-Azmin camp) gave in supporting Azmin Ali as the preferred deputy presidential candidate over Zaid Ibrahim – essentially a ‘no’ to parachutist but 101% to those who ‘came though the reformasi struggle’.

But alas, not unlike our amazing judiciary, where on one day, white is right while on the next, black is correct, PKR has shown its double-standard cakap ta’serupa bikin in the Gobalakrishnan versus Surendran case. Nothing against innocent Surendran, but wouldn’t Gobalakrishnan be the one who had subscribed faithfully to the party struggle for the last 15 years? For more, see my posts The Poison within PKR - Part III and Gobalakrishnan leaves the poison behind.

So, Rafizi, what do you have to say? Your words have been totally inconsistent to the way your party has ill treated Gobalakrishnan.

But why is there this hypocritical UMNO-like bullsh*tting double-standard inconsistency?

Simple – because poor Gobala didn’t support Azmin Ali. He was in Zaid Ibrahim’s camp. And refusal to support Azmin Ali is not an acceptable status in PKR. Recall the furore over its party’s recent polling process, where there were 162 complaints about polling irregularities in the party race for the deputy president's position, but there was nary a twitch from the JPP PKR, the party body which is supposed to manage the party polls but which surrendered that management to ..... you can work that out!

Worse, and the absolute pits, there was the shameful silence of its President Dr Wan Azizah to Jonson Chong’s immaculate letter of appeal – see Dr Wan Azizah ignores Jonson Chong's plea?

Haris Ibrahim praised Jonson for his constructive approach but alas, not so Dr Wan as she ignored him completely - yes, we would like to know whether Dr Wan had even replied to Jonson?

Why did a party president ignore a constructive proposal from a sensible, fair and balanced gentleman like Jonson Chong which would have put to rest all complaints if the polls had been conducted fairly, unless of course she …..

Since that day, my once-respect for the lady plummeted to zilch. Yes, she may be a nice and kind lady but she is not fit to be the president of a political party.

So it’s hardly surprising Azmin Ali and Rafizi Ramli (no doubt supported by Anwar Ibrahim) have worriedly brought out ‘loyalty’ re the MCLM-offered candidates, meaning they don’t want them because they might not be (gasp gawd omigosh) loyal to Azmin Ali.

Speculative footnote: For Loh Gwo Burne who's no doubt in Azmin Ali's black book, I suspect his future candidacy for Kelana Jaya (or any other post – perhaps Pekan, wakakaka)) may well depend on the size of his dad’s contribution to PKR funds (which incidentally is NOT illegal). But in all likelihood, he will be what I said in my earlier post Loh Gwo Burne & Gobala - one-term MPs?

Visionary betrayed by himself

Malaysiakini - Private varsity 'squanders' RM100 mil gov't grant

If you read the above MIKINI article you will see that the wannabe-premier postgraduate technical university of Malaysia, named by the exciting inspiring acronym of MUST (Malaysian University of Science and Technology) was a concept conceived by Dr Mahathir when he visited the world famed Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT).

As I have written before, Dr Mahathir as PM was a visionary. Certainly MUST like the Multimedia Super Corridor, etc were worthy projects. But alas, a visionary or strategist’s concept could only be realized if he had the correct and competent people or staff to put flesh to his idea.

Many had been the times Dr Mahathir was let down by his blue-eyed boys. Remember MAS, Sime Darby, BIMB? Hey, in fact, once Anwar Ibrahim too was one of his blue-eyed boys wakakaka.

Let me share with you a couple of other stories that I heard recently from my elders during the Chinese New Year celebrations. I have no idea whether they’re true, but hear me out anyway ;-)

Once upon a time wakakaka, it was said that Dr Mahathir, when he became PM, was downright pissed off with the way the development and beautification of Kuala Lumpur was going. He saw so many f*ups that his blood pressure must have shot up with such force it would have easily escaped Earth’s gravitational pull.

I bet he must have been grinding his teeth at the thought of LKY down south nyah-nyah-nyah-ing him. Obviously in those days, when one talked about the ‘greening’ of a modern city, Singapore would have been a prime model. And there was nothing that pissed Dr M off more than for KL to be upstaged by that (to him) f*ing lil’ red dot down south wakakaka.

Things came to such a frustrating stage for him that it was said he hired a bus (aircon, of course wakakaka) and ordered the top KL civil servants including the Datuk Bandar into it. He then went around KL with himself in the role of (let’s put it in simple terms) a ‘tour guide’. As he passed each place or item of f*up in the greening/beautification program he would lecture his public service ‘generals’ on where they had gone wrong and how they should have done it correctly.

One related incident I still remember from the recent CNY gossip was Dr M’s admonition to the person in charge of greening the city. Words to the effect, he said that if one wanted to plant a tree or plant in a city, one should have the commonsense to choose a tree or plant which didn’t continuously shed its leaves off as that would have required more cleaning up.

When I was a kid I hated the star fruit (belimbing) tree in my garden. That arboreal monster shed and shed and shed its leaves everyday to my utter frustration, disgust and despair, because as the only kid left in my household I had the responsibility of sweeping the leaves each and every evening, finally escaping the Sisyphean ordeal only after I left home for KL when I completed my schooling.

Thus, if the story is true, Dr M was very correct in his admonition of the civil servant. Why add on unnecessarily to the cleaning cost and the untidy look of KL, when a little thought in selecting the correct plant could have help? But it’s a reflection of the lack of competency in his officers. The man had to turun padang himself to provide detailed directions. How many Dr M's would we need to spoon feed his underlings?

Another story gleaned from the gossip – again, I’m not sure whether it’s true but let’s treat it just like a story for the moment.

One day (or, once upon a time wakakaka) when Dr M went to America (which part is not important) he saw something he thought interesting and possibly useful for Malaysia. It was a Grumman Albatross (designation HU-16), a seaplane, taking off and landing on a lake.

The story went that Dr M thought such a plane could be used to land on, say, the Ringlet lake, and take off from there. He was always thinking of new ways to expand on the mode of transportation. So I presume he must have mentioned this to a staff.

So the staff went about his or her way (could it be a young 'no-crucifix' HK? wakakaka – well, a clone then) into getting ('ordering' was more like it) the TUDM to operate a couple of seaplanes. But this is the stupid part - it was not any modern seaplanes (say, like the Donier Seastar) but the Grumman Albatross, yes, that HU-16.

Just ponder on that moronic buy, or robotic mindlessness of the staff, because the Grumman Albatross was developed and produced in 1949, with its production ending in 1961. The last flight by the Americans was made in 1976.

Our southern neighbour Indonesia who had a few in its air force (or navy) had by then consigned theirs to the scrap yard long before the two HU-16’s were ordered by our Wonder for the TUDM sometime after mid-1980, a quarter of a century after production of the plane had ended.

Did those Yanks sell us some leftovers from their war museum, or more likely, a scrap yard? So, imagine how successfully(?) the TUDM operated those WWII relics? My Unc heard one nearly sank at sea but was fortuitously rescued by a RMN vessel which came upon the HU-16 wannabe-submarine and towed it back to land, wakakaka. I bet the Indonesian Air Force must have had a good laugh at Malaysian stupidity.

All these stories, if true, tell us that while Dr Mahathir had great vision and good ideas he was severely let down in the implementation by his so-called ‘generals’.

The MUST debacle is merely another example of poor implementation to a great idea by Dr M.

But in the final analysis, Dr M must bear the greater responsibility because he failed in the 3 necessary steps to ensure his ideas brought forth the correct fruit, namely:

(a) have the correct and competent people to implement his ideas or vision,

(b) ensure they conduct their business in accordance with good practice, governance and ethics, and

(c) most important of all, hold the implementers totally accountable.

Had he ever? Just think Tajudin, former CEO of MAS!

Anwar's Indian bid - too little too late

The Malaysian Insider - Anwar in bid to win back Indian support.

Nallakaruppan, Jenapala, Gobalakrishnan, etc!

A stupid case of stopping the Indian temple bells from ringing (in PKR), as Anwar had threatened when he was DPM.

But I reckon his survival-driven bid, galvanized by the recent collapse of his Sabah house of cards, may be too little too late. Anwar’s dream of Putrajaya is becoming more of a nightmare.

As I had mentioned in my 3-part The Poison within PKR, that so long as Anwar Ibrahim blindly supports Azmin Ali to the extent of unfairly sweeping the latter’s competitors aside or stacking the odds up for Azmin’s supporters, this poisonous policy will eventually destroy his party.

The lamentable Sabah situation for his party is yet another case of this poison. Does anyone really believe Dr Wan Azizah has her heart in settling the Sabah issue, or the ability to do so? She’s nothing more than a puppet of either Anwar or Azmin, or both. The poison continues to prevail.

The Anwar-Azmin poison has affected more than just the Indians. Zaid Ibrahim has been the biggie, but soon we may see Jonson Chong, Chegubard and other good people leaving the ‘party-for-two’ in sheer frustration, as Zaid Ibrahim and Gobalakrishnan, the latter once his biggest supporter, had recently done.

And then Anwar doesn’t have to worry about stopping the Indian temple bells from ringing, because there won’t be any Indians (including a number of good non-Indians) in PKR anymore.

The 'Extra-Milers'

In Malaysiakini’s Ex-US envoy launches broadside at M'sia's racism we read of former US Ambassador to Malaysia, John Malott, shooting down Najib’s 1Malaysia as a policy reeking with hypocrisy, when the PM failed to unreservedly repudiate the many racist-bigoted incidents/utterances conducted or perpetuated by his UMNO colleagues, media mouths or staff.

But the one which most shamed me, yes me!, was the instruction that no crucifix be displayed at the residence of the Catholic archbishop of Kuala Lumpur when Najib visited the cleric during a Christmas Day open house.

The person who issued that instruction was a top Najib aide, Hardev Kaur, though she claimed that she 'had made it clear that it was a request and not an instruction'.

But for f* sake, no crucifix in a Catholic archbishop's house? Where did she f* come from?

John Malott sneered at her excuse, questioning the ridiculous notion that any Malaysian would or could say no to a request from the prime minister's office.

Though I was ashamed by our ‘country woman’ for her totally needless & moronic 'extra mile', way way way beyond the 'call of duty', in reality I wasn’t surprised. It’s the non-Malay aides of Malay ministers who would be more likely to try to do such stupid things to either please or 'protect' the boss.

She reminds me of a certain DNA Denier who always write “Kita Melayu ...”. when the more appropriate (& far more dignified) declaration for him should have been 'Kita orang Muslim ...'.

Just bloody make the hair on my neck stand up, but alas, these 'nons' just love to go that 'extra mile'.

Bangsa Malaysia & bangsa malaysia

Tun Dr Mahathir was the Father of Bangsa Malaysia or 'Bapa Bangsa Malaysia'. We Malaysians like to confer our leaders with ‘Father’ of this and that. Tunku was ‘Bapa Merdeka’, Razak was ‘Bapa Pembangunan’, etc. Maybe Anwar Ibrahim hopes to be a ‘Bapa’ something too wakakaka.

But alas, when our Bapa Bangsa Malaysia talks about a national identity, where all Malaysians would be able to identify themselves with the country, speak Bahasa and accept the Constitution (presumable Article 153), he actually has many categories of Bangsa Malaysia in mind.

Initially, he wanted to create an inclusive national identity for all Malaysian citizens, full stop.

When the concept of Tun's Bangsa Malaysia was raised some years ago, the Johor MB, Ghani, was furiously against it, insisting that the Malays must continue to be the ‘pivotal’ race, whatever that word means, though of course we know Ghani’s concerns (and those of many others in UMNO) about Malays continuing to hold key positions in the Malaysian political leadership, such as PM, DPM, Finance Minister and various crucial ministries, and the most important part (his crucial concerns), that the gravy train steams jolly fully forward for selected UMNO members.

Well, after all, Dr Mahathir himself admitted that UMNO today is just a party of contracts.

Then last year Dr Mahathir qualified his call for a Bangsa Malaysia. As I recall, he said his concept of Bangsa Malaysia had been premised on the Malays doing well, when he then claimed they hadn’t. In other words or rather his words, Malaysia’s social-economic situation wasn’t ripe yet for the implementation of Bangsa Malaysia. Malays must continue to have special privileges and benefit from the official socio-economic engineering program.

It would seem then that he came to agree with MB Ghani about the latter's pivotal race.

But then, when will Malaysia's socio-economic situation be ripe for the acceptance and emergence of his wonderful Bangsa Malaysia?

No one knows, nor will there ever be an agreement on the achievement of that nirvana-like socio-economic state, because it all depends on the Malay share of the economic cake.

Unfortunately, the fact on Malay economic equity has been yo-yo-ing from a measly 19% to well over 45% and down again, depending on who made the assessments.

It’s no point arguing who had been right or who was bullsh*tting, because politics rather than statistics have dictated that Malay share of the economic kueh is still low, and therefore the NEP must continue.

Thus the less-than-happy socio-economic assessment, according to the gospel by Dr Mahathir, requires that the concept of Bangsa Malaysia be postponed further.

But wait, he has now changed his mind. The Malaysian Insider just reported in its Malaysia is Tanah Melayu, says Dr M that Dr Mahathir is revisiting that rather smelly ikan kembong called Bangsa Malaysia. Apprently he wants to have his cake and eat it as well.

Wondrously and wonderfully (well, initially) Dr Mahathir asserted that “… non-Malays must accept the concept of “Bangsa Malaysia” (Malaysian nation) to help strengthen national unity. … the communities must place country before race and identify themselves as Malaysians.”

Yay! High-5's!

But alas, he then spoiled it when he qualified the above noble aspiration. The Malaysian Insider quoted him as saying that Malaysians (presumably non-Malays) today must accept/admit that the country belongs to the Malays. He reminded us that Malaysia used to be called Tanah Melayu.

Hmmm, I wonder how Sabahans and Sarawakians would say? Besides, I thought Malaysia would belong to Malaysians, all Malaysians [sigh].

He urged non-Malays to accept the culture and language of the dominant community, which I personally believe that’s not only okay but already a given. I love wearing my sarong and eating nasi lemak, and certainly look forward to dating some sarong-kebaya-ed nyonyas (or nonas in Indonesian, which defines nyonyas as married women).

Then he launched into that old tired argument that the Malays gave the Chinese and Indians citizenship because they expected the communities to respect Malay sovereignty. Thank goodness he didn't use the 'grateful' word.

But what does he mean by ‘Malay sovereignty’?

The rulers? No problem, I sembah their HRH with utmost respect and loyalty.

But I suspect he wants the non-Malays to accept that the rights, privileges and whatever of Malays must take precedence over nons. Something like what is/was practised in Israel, White Zimbabwe and White South Africa? Okay, maybe not as bad, but certainly we can forget about equality.

In other words, there are Bangsa Malaysia and (in lower cases or uncapitalised) bangsa malaysia.

But he said: [the] Malays will feel less threatened if the country adopts the concept of Bangsa Malaysia. Former Philippine President Corazon Cory Aquino is Chinese but she identified herself as a Filipino. Former Thai Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra is Chinese but he speaks the Thai language and lives the Thai culture.

It is different in Malaysia. We still introduce ourselves according to our race. This is why the question of race will continue to haunt us.

I have to admit he’s right in the above second paragraph, but alas, Tun didn’t probe a bit deeper and ask why so?

Tun, I think the answer for you lies in fact in the above first paragraph, where ethnic Chinese like Corazon Cory Aquino and Thaksin Shinawatra could become the top political leaders of their respective countries.

Could that happen in Malaysia?

As Tun had alluded, there are Bangsa Malaysia and bangsa malaysia [sigh again].

The more cynical political observers have analysed his pitch to the non-Malays, particular the Chinese after the Tenang by-election showed that BN-UMNO, even in its (MCA) heartland have lost Chinese support. They suspected Tun has strategized, in an apparent willingness to accord a common national identity to the nons but one which would be spelt with lower cases - bangsa malaysia.

PKR - a sinking ship?

Today I feel like having a bit of PKR bashing, mind you, not Anwar bashing but PKR bashing wakakaka! Apart from Anwar Ibrahim, PKR was noticeably conspicious by its absence in Tenang. This party is in deep disarray, and I don't have an iota of sympathy for it.


The Malaysian Insider - Azmin says Tenang a victory over MCA

Now, since when has he appointed himself as Pakatan spokesperson?


The Malaysian Insider - Pakatan wants local elections in KL

My dear Tian Chua, considering your party is in deep spin (downwards), shouldn't you be focussing on far more important things than to ask for the currently impossible? Incidentally, when were you appointed to speak on behalf of Pakatan?


Malaysiakini - PKR goes on a roadshow to repair dented image

So … attempting to close the stable doors after the horses (Zaid, Gobala, and soon a few more) have bolted! How about first answering the complaints about the party polling irregularities by Chegubard, Jonson Chong and Mustaffa Kamil, if not those by Gobala and Zaid? And what about the Jenapala scandal?


Malaysia-Today - The sour grapes syndrome

RPK wrote: Whenever anyone resigns from PKR or Pakatan Rakyat, the opposition supporters always say it is because these people are ex-Umno or ex-Barisan Nasional people; so what do you expect? These ex-Umno or Ex-BN people are not reliable or honest and eventually they betray the opposition cause and go back to their old party, is the argument we are given. Does this argument apply to all ex-Umno or ex-BN people in the opposition who are yet to leave the opposition to go back to the ruling party?

Wakakaka … see my related post Gobalakrishnan leaves the poison behind

The truth behind the US' Egyptian nightmare

The US Administration had hoped Mubarak would continue to remain in power, which lead Hilary Clinton to foolishly say something she must now be regretting: "Our assessment is that the Egyptian government is stable and is looking for ways to respond to the legitimate needs and interests of the Egyptian people."

Stable? Yeah, as stable as a pyramid made of jelly!

Now those US authorities are weaving and weaseling their way around the Egyptian imbroglio. As the Chinese would say, those Yanks have each foot on a different papyrus sampan.

They still hope for Mubarak to come up tops but realizing that is a fast fading dream they are now ready to dump him for, best case scenario, another strong man to ensure US-Egyptian business runs as normal, and worst case scenario, to ingratiate themselves into the good books of the revolutionary forces as a beacon of freedom and democracy which had 'supported' them, yes, the type of 'freedom and democracy' they had allowed their strong man Mubarak to demonstrate in the last 30+ years.

Why all these farce? Why not truly support local democratic forces? Silly question, because the Americans had and will never care about freedom or democracy for the people of the Middle-East – for examples , consider Iran under their local strong man the late Shah, Iraq under their buddy Saddam Hussein, Afghanistan under their bosom friends the Talibans, Saudi Arabia and Jordan under their clients the respective rulers, and today their nominated and propped up local dictators in Iraq and Afghanistan.

On the other side of the coin, the Americans have demonized two true democratic forces there, Hamas and Hezbollah, both of which came to power genuinely through the ballot boxes. So much for the US hypocritical call for democracy.

The answer to the American hypocrisy can be summarized in one word, Israel.

They’re worried about the fall of Mubarak only because of Israel’s security.

For the last 30 odd years, since post Yom Kippur War of 1973, the Yanks have pumped at least 2 plus billion dollars per annum into Egypt (4 billions for Israel) to ensure the Egyptians remain in its pocket. That’s to ensure Israel could enjoy its ‘peace’ with Egypt.

Egypt is the only Arab nation which has the potential to cause grief to Israel. In 1973 in the Yom Kippur War it came close to defeating Israel. It was reported that Golda Meir was already contemplating suicide.

Alas, the Egyptian army then, under an innovative commander, while having an impressive start, failed in its finishing – typically of the Malaysian ‘style mahu, kalah ta’apa’.

There were many reasons analyzed for its poor finishing, but suffice to say, with a better trained Israeli army and massive infusion of American aid via its Operations Nickel Grass, using the formidable USAF Strategic Airlift Command, the USA poured weapons such as F4 fighter-bomber aircraft, tanks, advanced (then) weapons such as Maverick, Tow etc, into an embattled Israel. That turned the tide. Golda Meir personally awarded each pilot of the USAF Airlift Command an award.

Ops Nickel Grass

The prioritization of Israel's needs over its own (American) interests in Vietnam, as demonstrated in Ops Nickel Grass, nearly brought about the near-resignation of then United States chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS) General George Brown.

Wikipedia said: Brown was reportedly livid that American weapons and munitions were being sent to a foreign country at the same time that the American command in Vietnam was protesting a lack of supplies in its theater of operations.

Maybe the US would not have suffered as many as 58,000 dead in Vietnam if those weapons had gone there instead?

That’s the lamentable story of the USA vis-à-vis Israel, such as witnessed in its recent sacrifice of over 4,000 young American lives and several thousands wounded to fight an Iraqi war (Gulf War II), ostentatiously against Saddam's non-existent WMD, then the hypocrisy about 'regime change', for oil as a second dupliticious mask (to fool its own American people), but in reality, deep in the heart of its agenda (as manipulated by the American neocon Zionists), purely for Israel’s regional interests.

It very nearly and foolishly did that again with Iran, until the American military advised against getting embroiled in Iran. But it's not off the hook yet on this one. The Israelis and their American supporters have a way of getting what they want from the US Administration, and they want Iran emasculated like Iraq, the two nations in the region (when Iraq was under Saddam) with the money, will, and hatred of Israel to cause Israel sleepless nights.

It’s all about Israel. That’s the millstone around each American Administration, perhaps forever. I had hoped President Obama would be different from previous US presidents but alas, he is in many respects worse than them.

Dr M: Malaysia is more democratic than Singapore

I know I’ll be banging my head against a steel-reinforced wall when I say I agree with Dr Mahathir’s statement wakakaka, as reported in The Malaysian Insider:

Malaysia was a more democratic country than Singapore, and argued that the island republic’s “disciplined” image was at the expense of the freedom of its citizens.

Dr Mahathir had said the reason why Malaysians were not as disciplined as Singaporeans was because Malaysia did not resort to extreme measures in governing the country.

Now, don’t confuse the non-corruptibility of the Singapore government with greater democracy. There’s no denying that on a scale of 1 to 10 for non-corruptibility (with 10 being excellent), Singapore as one of the 3 top national authorities in the world to be 'cleanest', the Island State certainly merits a 10.

Alas, I am far too embarrassed to rate Malaysia at all. The corruption of the government and its agencies is just pathetic, and worse, with the lil’ Napoleons (officials) not ashamed of or even arrogant in their malfeasance.

But when it comes to democratic practices, Malaysia, warts and all, is by far superior. Mind you, it's just relative.

The reason for this seeming incongruity is that a long long time ago, LKY and his cabinet decided for a Singapore without any resources other than its people, and which aspires to survive by becoming a financial centre, not just of the region but one of the tops in the world, and a shipping, trading, commercial etc centre, it has to be absolutely squeaky clean, a bastion of law and order and super efficient in every which way to assure, motivate and encourage foreign investments and the use of the island as their regional base.

LKY being LKY, intellectually arrogant as a father-who-knows-best for his Sing children went about ruthlessly achieving that status. Any namby pamby opposition would be crushed if they stand in his way towards achieving this planned status. And just as an example of its assurance to western investors that law & order would be its hallmark, many years ago it even allowed western lawyers to practise in Singapore. Another step in its wish to be a serious global competitor was its non-nationalistic policy of (deliberately) having foreign (orang putih) pilots in SIA, because this would provide assurance to the much needed orang putih passengers.

Malaysia was at its economic peak when we had Dr Mahathir as the PM. Now, did he go about ensuring a Malaysia that was squeaky clean, a bastion of law and order and super efficient in every which way?

I think in some ways, the abundance of our non-human resources has lulled him and his government into neglect in the above fields. Why bother whether foreign investors want to come or not? They can f*-off if they didn’t like our style of government. Result? A typical example in stark contrast to the Sing's practice was our very own amazing Adorna shame, where the judiciary and the ruling it passed disgracefully supported fraud and wholesale cheating.

Of course it cannot be denied that the Malaysian government always have a far more difficult job to do than the Sing’s. There’s social engineering to consider, as in the various reincarnations of the NEP and its various permutations in the implementation. Also, there are far too many political warlords to appease.

Additionally, Dr Mahathir was personally driven by an obsessed fear, that the Malays won’t be masters in their own land. I have a lot of sympathy for his fear but I think his tactics to address this fear (his strategy) were flawed. Yes, his strategy was noble but his tactics weren't.

One of his tactics was to choose a bunch of Malay entrepreneurs to fast track achievement of his strategy, but those wonders let him down, humongously. He compounded the flaw by not getting rid of them. Instead he molly coddled them, and they responded by going into greater disasters. He allowed his fear to blind him into not seeing his chosen ones were far from qualified for the roles he assigned to, or provided for them. His generals let him down badly in the field.

Coming to democracy, because of a ‘relat lah’ attitude, unlike LKY’s uptight don’t-f*-around-with-father-knows-best mentality, I dare say that was what made Malaysia far more democratic in many ways than Singapore.

But as I said, don’t confuse Singapore’s super-duper efficiency and non-corruptibility with greater democracy.

Gobalakrishnan leaves the poison behind

So the virtually impossible has happened - Gobalakrishnan, once PKR’s chief bodek-er of Anwar, has resigned from PKR in disgust. Who would have ever predicted this prior to the recent party polls - a poll which had led many party stalwarts as well as notable and neutral socio-political observers to question the integrity of its process.

Silence from the party leaders, or their caught-with-pants-down inability to reply the challenges by the complainants have invited the inevitable destructive implosion.

And instead of pressuring the party leaders to be fully accountable, predictably, the moronic PKR fanatics lambasted Gobala as a snake, frog, UMNO-MIC mole, running dog and with various animal appellations. Will they do likewise to other complainants like Chegubard, Jonson Chong, Mustaffa Kamil as they did to Zaid Ibrahim, Gobala, Nallakaruppan, etc?

As I mentioned in my previous post The Poison within PKR - Part III:

Gobala might have hailed from MIC, supposedly a stigma that anwaristas have been hurling at him since he spoke out against Anwar Ibrahim. That’s the infantile stupidity of anwaristas. They seem to have forgotten that their very own icon and his blue-eye boy hailed from UMNO, and as another example, Chua Jui Meng was from MCA, etc.

Dismissing Anwar’s critics by pointing to their original political affiliations (Gobala from MIC, Zaid Ibrahim from UMNO, etc) while ignoring those of Anwar and Azmin (and Chua JM) is childish, double-standard, not objective, self deceiving, and can even eventually lead/escalate to accusing-stereotyping people like Gobala of being a “typical Indian”. Bet you that label has already been voiced within some groups in PKR.

and also

And haven’t party seniority and living the party's ‘trials & tribulations’ been the Azmin Ali camp’s arguments on why Azmin was far more deserving than Zaid Ibrahim of the post of party deputy president?

The blind double-standard hypocrites they are, their argument of ‘no to parachutist’ in the Azmin versus Zaid Ibrahim election tussle obviously doesn’t apply to the Gobala vs Surendran case.

Such double standard hypocrisy and Machiavellian manipulation to marginalize those members posing a threat to Azmin Ali have been the deadly ingredients which brew the poison with PKR.

Just double-standard fanatics, blind to their own follies, without the ability to think independently.

I believe it has been Anwar’s blind devotion for and non-negotiable support of Azmin Ali that have fermented the poison within PKR which will eventually kill the party off like Roundup does for lallangs.

Yes, perhaps Gobala may not be an intellectual, as some snobs in PKR suggested and thus better out of the party, but how many intellectuals does PKR have? Is Azmin Ali an intellectual? wakakaka! In reality he is nothing more than a pretty boy, a relative lightweight in the intellect department. His only strength in PKR is that Anwar Ibrahim backs him up 101% - nothing else.

Gobala was a loyal PKR member and an erstwhile staunch supporter of Anwar Ibrahim. The reason for him leaving PKR with such anger is no different to that of Nallakaruppan, where Anwar and the party had done him grave injustices. For Gobala, they were a mix, namely, the questionable party polling process and the refusal or inability of the party leaders to answer the challenges of the complainants, the deliberate snubbing of him in favour of Surendran (showing PKR's double standard where Surendran is okay as a parachutist but not so for Zaid Ibrahim), the outrageous 45-page show-cause letter with a demand to respond within an unreasonable 7 days, etc. Any reasonable man would have been driven off by such rot.

Gobala wasn’t the first to exit PKR with animosity; he won’t be the last. So, will you anwaristas again blame those who leave, or will you open your eyes wide and recognize the Anwar-Azmin poison? It's time PKR members wake up from their mesmerized hypnotized hallucinations, and stop imagining your icon and his blue-eye boy are infallible.

Anwar Ibrahim's terrorist links?

Malaysiakini - Hisham: Cops probing Anwar's 'terror links'

Anwar Ibrahim's terrorist links? Talk of town?

You know something - kaytee believes that in Malaysia, where we haven't suffered any terrorist bombing (praise be to Allah swt, Jehovah, Siva, Vishnu and the Jade Emperor), the allusion (not yet an accusation) to Anwar Ibrahim having some form of links to Islamist terrorists, whether true or otherwise, won't do him any harm in the heartland. It may yet earn him some sympathies or even admiration.

And he doesn't have to worry about the non-BN Chinese, because they don't believe it anyway.

kaytee reckons it's a non-issue, with even a plus point for Anwar in the heartland.

And the westerners don't vote here anywhere, wakakaka!

RCI for Teoh BH's death - Najib fighting against public perception

Obviously PM Najib Razak must have sensed the political dangers of allowing the Teoh Beng Hock’s unsolved death to become a weighty millstone around his neck …

… which has been why he subsequently changed the terms of reference of the Royal Commission of Inquiry (RCI) to include the examining of the cause of Teoh's death, a term of reference which was neon-light conspicious by its very absence in the original terms of reference, alluding to the government deliberate avoidance of it ...

... but which becomes absolutely necessary when the inquest issued an unbelievable open verdict of ‘dunno’. As former MCA president Ong Tee Keat had written in a letter to Malaysiakini (extracts):

The loss of life, especially while in the custody of government enforcement officials, is always a serious matter of public concern.

There cannot be no answers for this particular case.

It's simply not acceptable that one can die in the MACC's custody without knowing what had happened.

Teoh voluntarily stepped into the Selangor Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC)'s office to give a statement as a witness. He failed to come out alive, while under MACC's custody.

Regardless of the facts, the public believes, especially in the light of the tap dancing verdict by the coronial inquest, the harassment of the Thai pathologist Dr Pornthirp, and the initial & limited terms of reference for the RCI, the government is hiding something, protecting someone and avoiding the truth.

The revised and expanded terms of reference has ameliorated this suspicion somewhat, but only slightly.

What is denying the Teoh family full satisfaction has been the composition of the RCI. As The Malaysian Insider pointed out in its editorial today Ensuring justice for Teoh Beng Hock:

All those named to the panel headed by Federal Court judge Tan Sri James Foong are people who are still serving in the government service. None are from outside the service as has been done in previous royal panels. Justice must be seen to be done. So it is hard to understand why no representative from the Bar Council or respected individuals are on the panel.

In other words, people who could (and the public suspicion is, they would) be beholden to the government, as the magistrate of the inquest, the government pathologists and the police have been suspected by the public to be, rightly or wrongly. And the street axiom about “never hold an inquiry unless you already know the finding” is already running wild among the public. Such is the public distrust of the BN government

The Malaysian Insider’s editorial continues:

Perhaps it’s too early to judge the panel but the collection of judges, former judges and civil servants will have to show that they are interested in giving justice for Teoh Beng Hock, his family, the MACC and the country.

The thing is in the US, Australia and the United Kingdom, the presence of judges or former judges guarantees independence and impartiality. Unfortunately the judiciary in Malaysia has been under a dark cloud since 1988. Thus there is a danger that justice might not be served. This is something for the Najib administration to consider.

The editorial says succinctly what has on our minds.

The Teoh family after consulting 126 NGOs had earlier proposed (a) former national police chief Tun Hanif Omar, (b) former Bar Council president Datuk Ambiga Sreenevasan, (c) former Court of Appeal judge NH Chan, and (d) former Deputy Prime Minister Tun Musa Hitam. But Najib has failed to appoint even one of them to the RCI. Why?

Surely these four are Malaysian luminaries with impeccable credentials and reputations of integrity, with even an UMNO man in Musa Hitam. The only person, also of exceptional integrity and courage, former Justice NH Chan, may perhaps be seen by the Najib administration as being anti-government. If that is the case, kaytee suggests he be replaced by former Justice Gopal Sri Ram, who is also retired.

But the other three are highly respected people and should be included in the RCI. Teoh Lee Lan, the late Beng Hock’s intrepid sister, has called upon Najib to expand the RCI into a commission of nine by including the four outstanding citizens.

If Najib doesn’t, then there is going to be suspicions on the RCI findings, unfair as this may be to the five current appointees. Nosirree, Najib, the millstone isn’t going to go away unless you satisfy the Teoh family’s very reasonable request.

Obama the Israeli whore

Thanks to his hypocrisy and cowardly cringe to Israel, President Barack Obama has betrayed the Palestinian authority (Fatah), who has once again been marginalized by the US to be made subservient to the Israeli overlord. In turn Fatah has betrayed the Palestinian people to serve its own party political interests, in acts reminiscent of quislings, collaborators and running dogs.

Read the Palestinian Papers which tell us all about the useless US-sponsored pseudo-negotiations between an Israel, backed blindly by the US, and the Palestinians (Fatah) forced to the negotiating table (knowing they won’t get anything from the Israelis) just for Obama’s photo-op self aggrandizing glory. Fatah had to obey or else. Learn of Fatah's sad selfish treachery to its own Palestinian people.

In particular, read Deep frustration with Obama, where the US President showed he has been worse than the Bush Administration, refusing to honour even one of the previous Administration’s key promises to the Palestinians, that of the 1967 cease-fire line as the basic starting point for negotiations.

The Obama Administration forced the Palestinian Authority to negotiate from the current situation where Israel has already illegally gobbled up vast tracts of the West Bank to turn into Jewish settlements, as well as manipulated through purchases and illegal actions, to grab the majority of the areas around Jerusalem.

It has been precisely this sort of sickening US bias (for Israel and against the Palestinians) that there can be no any useful Israeli-Palestinian negotiations, or will there ever be one. Also, the USA cannot be considered as an impartial broker, ever!

Because of this invincible US bias, Robert Grenier, a former CIA operative drafted a notional letter for President Obama to send to the Israeli people, to inform them that the USA will henceforth withdraw from ever mediating in any negotiations between them and the Palestinians.

As an example of Grenier's succinct points in the notional letter on why the US is not (and can never be) an impartial broker of peace between the Israelis and Palestinians, he mentioned (just extracts):

It pains me to make this admission. But the clear and sustained record of the last 63 years, greatly amplified in the last 20, tells us that the passionate attachment to Israel of many of my fellow citizens, however noble and well-intentioned, has blinded us, and has made us incapable of defending either our interests or yours.

He also chided Israel for its brutal arrogance (extracts):

In fact, the peace process, as currently understood, has already ended. A two-state solution in the Holy Land is no longer possible. The policy of creating settlements throughout the West Bank, illegal under international law, has had its intended effect. […]

Moreover, I must tell you, again as a friend, that there lurks in these formulations, in the linking of citizenship and race, and in the insistence of some on gaining recognition of Israel as a “Jewish state,” a grave danger – not a physical one, but a moral one. The strength of Israel and its legitimacy in the community of nations rests not on its military might, but on the humane and democratic values which it has always espoused – even if, where some are concerned, those values are observed in the breach.

Now, recent revelations tell us that the head of your largest political party, and a long term participant in negotiations with the Palestinians, has made clear that a redrawing of the 1967 borders would perhaps not be a simple matter of trading land for occupied territory annexed by Israel, but instead a sinister effort to rid Israel of a significant number of its Arab citizens, by transferring the territory they inhabit, without their consent, to a newly-created country. This is unworthy of you, and leaders who promote such ideas betray your values. Indeed, they pose a dire threat to the moral legitimacy of the state.

The Israelis are just like Nazis.

Read his proposed notional letter for the US president in full here - A letter to the Israeli people.

According to Wikipedia, Robert Grenier is a longtime CIA officer who served as the CIA's top counter-terrorism official for about a year, was fired from that position on 6 February 2006 by CIA director Porter Goss, because (as reported by the London Sunday Times he opposed detaining Al-Qaeda suspects in secret prisons abroad, sending them to other countries for interrogation and using forms of torture such as 'water boarding'.

UMNO's mercenary disease

If you’re from UMNO, I’ll understand if you feel deeply depressed after reading Sakmongkol AK47’s article in A potential rude awakening, published in The Malaysian Insider.

Apart from Sakmongkol's complaint of the dearth of talent in UMNO, the frustration of its grassroot troops by the parachuting in of people like its current candidate for Tenang, and the likelihood of such frustrated locals sabotaging the support for the parachutist-candidate(s), Sakmongkol also wrote on what we have long been aware of:

I am apprehensive of the trends regarding Umno. And here are my reasons for being nervous. How does the public feel about Umno and BN? To be more specific how does the Malay public feel about Umno.

Some days ago Umno Setiawangsa convened a meeting. It is preparing a list of election speakers to campaign for the next parliamentary candidate. They are speculating that Zulhasnan will be replaced by the anak mami from Penang but now residing mostly in KL.

Shahrizat’s name is being mentioned as a possible replacement for Zulhasnan because she stands no chance at all in Lembah Pantai.

How was the response to that meeting? It was lacklustre said my source. I think I know the reasons, I said. Was there any mention of money? Allocations? None, said my source.

There you are! Umno people in general respond as though in a Maslow experiment. They respond favourably when there are financial incentives. Of course that kind of response isn’t a crime or inherently wrong. But it shows one thing - Umno can lose because it depends mainly on mercenary-like behaviour. Rome fell because it entrusted its defences to paid mercenaries. Mercenaries fight with dedication as long as they get paid.

There exists the notorious money politics in UMNO for the precise reason UMNO politics enable its leaders to put their snouts into the trough. It’s not just ministers or parliamentary secretaries; division, branch and whatout party leaders have been (and no doubt will be) given untendered/uncontested contracts, a virtual guarantee to profits in the millions of ringgit. And don’t worry about business ability, let alone acumen, because the party will ensure failures will be bailed out.

That’s the disease in UMNO, so what Sakmongkol tells us about UMNO now relying mainly on mercenaries is not in the least revealing. What is revealing has been an UMNO man like him brave enough to tell it as it is!

As I've said before, UMNO should have been the preferred Malay party and having the Malay leaders for non-Malays because of its now-lost moderate politics. But somewhere in the last couple of decades, the Tunku-like moderate Malay nationalists (no denying the old UMNO consisted of Malay nationalists but at least they were moderates) like Khir Johari, Gaafar Baba, Hussein Onn, etc gave way to avaricious successors who only wanted to make money.

Mind you, not just money but humongous piles and piles of millions. As the years of such unfettered god-sent privileges were enjoyed, their avarice realized no bounds, upgrading their expectations from mere millions into the billions. And they want all these very quickly too. Everyone wants to have his/her own palace, Porsche, and overseas holiday homes, etc. And why not, since that bloke down the street is already enjoying them, in obscene ostentatious style too!

UMNO politics enable that, provided one is a leader. The way to rough-shoulder one's way up the ranks is to be seen as a super-ultra (the tautology is apt here) Malay nationalist, meaning an ethnic hero, in the vanguard of the ketuanan brigade. The more extreme one is, the better the prospects of moving up.

Soon ethocentric ultraisms (pretend or otherwise) became prerequisite qualifications to be an UMNO leader, and from such a political culture, invariably the unhappy fallout on the ‘nons’, leading to immense dissatisfaction, would usually be UMNO leaders' hurtful, arrogantly insensitive and bigoted statements, policies and behaviour, and/or their refusal to take correct action on their supporters who demonstrated similar racist conduct.

These have not only alarmed but deeply offended the non-Malays to an extent that they are now prepared to offer their political support to PAS, an unthinkable possibility prior to 2008.

Once the reserves of tolerance have been depleted, it's no longer a case of 'better the devil you know', but rather 'let's kick those arrogant, racist, corrupt bastards out'.

Money politics also abet the deterioration of UMNO political culture, which we see or hear in the way top UMNO politicians have been ‘investing’ big bundles buying up party support, in the expectation of course that these investments will be recovered plus plus when they are in a position to put their snouts into the trough.

So the UMNO body politics suffer from a vicious circle, propelled principally by the personal greed of its leaders - political mercenaries, as Sakmongkol has succinctly pointed out.

Can Najib tame the beast? Can he be the Iskandar to cut the UMNO Gordian knot?

But alas, there doesn't seem to be any sign he has succeeded, or even tried!

However, Pakatan needs to watch out they do not succumb to the same disease. No party, regardless of how many saints they currently have, can be immune from the UMNO type of personal greed!

The Poison within PKR - Part III

Concluding my final part to The Poison within PKR and The Poison within PKR – Part II:

Read The Malaysian Insider’s PKR hits Mustaffa Kamil with show-cause letter.

Mustaffa was one of the disgruntled deputy presidential candidate in the recent party polls, where together with Zaid Ibrahim, he complained against irregularities in the party polling process. Zaid Ibrahim has since left the party to form his own, KITA.

Several others, like erstwhile Anwar-bodek-er but now Anwar-disparager, Gobala has similarly complained about what they perceived as gross dodgy-ness in the party polls. They included popular Badrul Hisham Shaharin, better known as Chegubard. Even leng chai Jonson Chong, a party moderate, exposed the alleged party polling nonsense openly in his inimitable polite style.

The list of party dissenters is fairly long, stretching all the way to Sabah. Anwar's last-minute candidate for the federal seat of Kelana Jaya, Loh Gwo Burne, he of the videoclip fame wakakaka, also was among those dissatisfied and wrote a letter to Malaysiakini criticising Azmin Ali - see my previous post Loh Gwo Burne & Gobala - one-term MPs?

Additionally, well-known political activist Haris Ibrahim has on several occasions presented evidence of the alleged party polling irregularities in his blog The People’s Parliament. So did RPK.

The most laughable part about Mustaffa’s show cause letter must go to PKR secretary-general Saifuddin Nasution, who when asked by the press, said he … could not “remember” if the party leadership had issued the letter on Mustaffa.

His excuse? The Malaysian Insider reported that … "He however indicated that the party could have issued show-cause letters to more than one dissident leader” and that he signed over a hundred of these show-cause letters, thus he couldn’t remember if Mustaffa Kamil was one of them.

Bull! Mustaffa is not one of the party’s hoi polloi. He was one of only three deputy presidential candidates, and post-election the party even offered him a position in the party hierarchy, presumably to mollify him. So, how could Saifuddin claimed he can’t remember whether his secretariat had issued a show cause letter to a top party personality like Mustaffa Kamil. Looks to me like a sad case of payback time!

Remember, Saifuddin Nasution was the person who claimed P Jenapala was already sacked and thus a non-member when the latter raised complaints about his denied candidature for the party’s deputy presidential posts. Jenapala had followed due process and written 162 complaints to the party but none was entertained.

Associated with Saifuddin's claim of Jenapala's alleged non-membership was the by-now ‘notorious’ letter supposedly testifying to Jenapal's sacking - a claim which sent the normally moderate Jonson Chong ballistic. Jonson wrote in a long public letter of why that was just sheer bull (my words, Jonson is far too refined and polite).

The disgraceful scandal of the so-claimed sacking of Jenapala was so notorious (in its alleged fabricated letter of dismissal) that former PKR sec-gen Salehuddin Hashim emerged to sign an affidavit in court on 23 Nov 2010 that he, supposedly the one who signed that letter of Jenapala's dismissal, had no knowledge of the letter dated 2 Feb 2009. Salehuddin stated in his affidavit that the letter of dismissal was ‘not authentic’ as (quoting him) ‘the language, format and style of the letter is not mine’.

Additionally, Salehuddin asserted that the party sec-gen did not have the power under the party constitution to sack a member, where such power is exclusively vested with the party's supreme council. In other words, how could he (Salehuddin) have signed it?

So, when Saifuddin Nasution claimed he wasn’t sure whether a show cause letter had been issued to Mustaffa, I merely yawned. It seems Saifuddin doesn't know much about letters wakakaka.

Recently, Gobala was also issued a show cause letter, numbering a War & Peace-sized 45 pages. He was given only an unrealistic 7 days to respond. When he ignored that, claiming he wasn’t provided enough reasonable time to read and reply, he was given another 7 days (or so). Understandably, Gobala ignored it again.

When a show cause letter resembles a tome, the least the party people responsible for its issue should have given Gobala a month if not 6 weeks. That would in fact be what is meant by 'due process'.

Can you all recall how, in contrast, Anwar Ibrahim and the party leadership tap-danced around for agonizing months instead of issuing Zul Noordin such a show cause letter when the Kulim Wonder was running amok against party policies and undermining the party’s stand? Yet they provided poor Gobala only 7 days to answer to a 45-page show cause letter!

Maybe there’s some truth in Indians in PKR being discriminated – Nallakaruppan, Jenapala, Gobala - but let’s leave them for a while and move on to Zaid Ibrahim.

In spite of my hero Karpal Singh condemning Zaid, I have written in support of the latter – see my previous post Zaid Ibrahim - suffers no fool gladly.

When he was in PKR at the time leading to the party polls (before he tossed his hat into the election ring) Zaid Ibrahim was criticised for being erratic because one moment he said he would not challenge the deputy presidential post IF (initially) Nurul Izaah took up the challenge*, then IF (subsequently) Khalid Ibrahim did so, and the next (when both didn’t) he took up the challenge.

* Azmin Ali went into a panicky tizzy when Nurul causally mentioned her interests, and ‘advised’ Nurul against it because people would talk. Bet you Anwar had a few private words with Nurul

The standard anwaristas' cries against Zaid Ibrahim were his inconsistencies (in supporting Nurul, then Khalid, before standing as a candidate himself), and their accusations unimaginatively attacked Zaid for his lust for power.

But I didn’t see any inconsistency in Zaid’s manoeuvrings. In fact there was a very consistent objective in his support for firstly, Nurul, and subsequently for Khalid Ibrahim, before he personally challenged Azmin Ali in the party election. That objective was to prevent Azmin Ali from coasting home on an Anwar-provided free ticket into the deputy president post. He wanted Azmin Ali stopped!

Yes, Zaid was invincibly against Azmin Ali, the man for whom Anwar Ibrahim instructed Nallakaruppan to stand aside in a party VP contest some years back, and which drove Nalla out of the party in angry frustration. Nalla would have easily won that VP position because of the strength of his Indian supporters in PKR.

Count Ezam in as well among those frustrated by the Anwar’s blind support of Azmin Ali.

But no dount the anwaristas would say of Ezam and Nalla (and perhaps even Chandra Muzzafar) as they said of Gobala when the last criticised Anwar. Let us revisit the Gobala’s example which I wrote in The Poison within PKR – Part II:

Gobala might have hailed from MIC, supposedly a stigma that anwaristas have been hurling at him since he spoke out against Anwar Ibrahim. That’s the infantile stupidity of anwaristas. They seem to have forgotten that their very own icon and his blue-eye boy hailed from UMNO, and as another example, Chua Jui Meng was from MCA, etc.

Dismissing Anwar’s critics by pointing to their original political affiliations (Gobala from MIC, Zaid Ibrahim from UMNO, etc) while ignoring those of Anwar and Azmin (and Chua JM) is childish, double-standard, not objective, self deceiving, and can even eventually lead/escalate to accusing-stereotyping people like Gobala of being a “typical Indian”. Bet you that label has already been voiced within some groups in PKR.

and also

And haven’t party seniority and living the party's ‘trials & tribulations’ been the Azmin Ali camp’s arguments on why Azmin was far more deserving than Zaid Ibrahim of the post of party deputy president?

The blind double-standard hypocrites they are, their argument of ‘no to parachutist’ in the Azmin versus Zaid Ibrahim election tussle obviously doesn’t apply to the Gobala vs Surendran case.

Such double standard hypocrisy and Machiavellian manipulation to marginalize those members posing a threat to Azmin Ali have been the deadly ingredients which brew the poison with PKR.

Just double-standard fanatics, blind to their own follies.

Sure, the unfortunate outcome of Nalla and Ezam's unhappy encounters with the Anwar-only-for-Azmin stand has been their joining BN. But like the saying goes, 'Hell hath no fury like (someone) scorned' and Nalla and Ezam, both loyal to Anwar before the breakup, having suffered at the hands of BN because of him, were scorned by their former idol, in both cases because of Azmin Ali. They sought to vent their fury at him, and where better than from positions in BN.

There’s no doubt an issue of pesonal judgement in them deciding to join BN, but be that as it might be, let’s not forget or dismiss the underlying motivation (the cause), namely anger at Anwar Ibrahim, perhaps even hatred of their former leader who was seen to be disloyal to them. Loyalty has to flow both ways, or it won’t flow at all. But in Anwar’s case, it didn’t because of his non-negotiable support for Azmin Ali. He was seen to be only loyal to Azmin!

So Zaid tried his best to stop Azmin from becoming party deputy president, a post which is a mere heartbeat away from party president, which he would be when Anwar either retires, goes voluntarily into exile or is sent to jail. He challenged Azmin for the post. But Zaid withdrew midway when he saw he was going to fail, not because of lack of support but because of questionable polling process, a process queried not just by him but by several neutral notables like Jonson Chong, Haris Ibrahim etc.

This is the poison within PKR. So long as Anwar Ibrahim exerts an overpowering authority in the party, or even by remote control from, say, within jail, and continues to ‘clear the way’ for his Azmin to ascend to the top of PKR or have his way within the party, the poison in the party will continue to exist.

As I often said that change in UMNO must come from within, so I now say, change in PKR must likewise come from within. It’s up to the PKR people to deal with this plague of theirs.

Related:
(1) PKR without Anwar Ibrahim & Azmin Ali
(2) PKR party election - the horror stories continue

Dream No 2 – the God spoke, very precisely!

Just posted Dream No 2 – the God spoke, very precisely! over at my other blog KTemoc Kongsamkok.

It’s my second instalment on dreams of gods. ;-)

Not tenang in Tenang

In Malaysiakini’s Hadi shrugs off MCA's Islamic state bogey, Pak Haji Hadi Awang has been very modest, only claiming a possible 50% chance for PAS to win the Tenang by-election, but he has been openly gleeful as victory is more than just possible; it’s very very probable …

… which has been why MCA has gone into overdrive in its scare campaign about a future Islamic State with full implementation of the hudud if the Chinese in the Tenang state constituency, comprising 39% of the registered voters, were to vote for the PAS candidate - see Malaysiakini's MCA unleashes race-religion leaflet campaign.

As if matters couldn’t be made worse for UMNO, DPM Muhyiddin has incurred the unmitigated wrath of the Indian community on his ‘statement’ about the use of the Interlok book. Malaysiakini reported in Muhyiddin lied, say Indian groups that The Federation of Indian NGO Associations has called Muhyiddin a liar and a traitor for suggesting that the ministry has reached consensus with the Indian community on the use of the Malay literature textbook 'Interlok'.

I am not sure about the label of 'traitor' (may be a bit overboard), but certainly calling the DPM a liar, just as for the DPM to be called a liar, are both very serious matters which cannot be left unchallenged, one way or other. The DPM must now either sue the the Federation of Indian NGO Associations or ... live forever as a liar.

With kaytee's self-awarded licence to fiddle around with a well-known idiom, we can now describe the federation's information chief AP Raja Retinam's call to Tenang Indian voters to give their backing to PAS, as adding potential injury to insult. What a double-barrelled shot at poor Muhyiddin.

Wait, there's more (as they say, 'when it rains it sure as hell pours') - even the normally compliant MIC has shown great anger at Muhyiddin’s attempt to sweep the Interlok affair under the carpet - see Malaysiakini's Endorse 'withdraw Interlok' demand, MIC told.

Sorry Muhyiddin, the Interlok’s story won't just go away ….. unless you do the right thing and remove that book from use in the Form 5 curriculum …

… which has been why Pak Haji has been beaming away. The Chinese and Indians in Tenang together constitute 51.15% of the registered voters. And of course UMNO alone cannot claim all of the 47.54% of Malay voters.

Sorry if my comments have been on the racial equation of the Tenang by-election – but don’t blame kaytee for raising them. Apart from UMNO having already done the damage, it has together with its mouth pieces like Utusan, Perkasa and various nationalist NGOs kept reminding us even until today of our ethnic ‘differences’ and ketuanan Melayu.

Strangely enough, UMNO (the UMNO of Tunku Abdul Rahman) would have been the natural Malay party for Chinese and Indians to back in a vote of preferred political party or political leadership, but in the last couple of decades it has lost its strongest point, its moderate bearings.

Worse, even more than its betrayal of the secular Malaysia we had when it proclaimed Malaysia as an Islamic State, its crude corrupt conduct has repulsed many Malaysians …


… to such an extent that PAS, though never ever wavering from its political Islamic ideology and its intent to implement the hudud in Malaysia's legal system, has now become the superior Malay party for many Chinese.

(I’ve to admit I’m not sure about the Indians, what with people like the Great Glorious Uthayakumar confusing the support base by attacking DAP instead of UMNO and MIC).

It's obvious Chinese Malaysians ta'boleh tahan lagi (cannot tolerate any further) UMNO's arrogance, abuse of powers and gross corruption. They are now prepared to take a chance with an Islamic party. At this stage, I cannot yet comment on whether the Chinese 180-degree political turnaround is wise.

ON UMNO's conduct, it’s noteworthy that currently there has been a coordinated attack on Singapore by Dr Mahathir, Dr DNA Denier and Doctor-ed Ethnic Warrior. I see this campaign as connected to UMNO's political strategy.

My take - UMNO is worried about its polling chances if it keeps on annoying or/and attacking the Chinese voters in Malaysia or frightening them by demonstrating its ultra-ness. But it has to do so to ensure its so-called relevance to the Malays and thus to retain their continuing support. Since Singapore is Chinese, it’s convenient to show to the heartland the ‘evils’ of the Chinese ruled neighbouring country and how it supposedly suppresses the Malays there.

Therefore attack Singapore leadership. Singapore leadership is bad, Singapore leadership is Chinese, thus Chinese leadership is bad!

Though Singapore may on the surface appear as a completely different/foreign target, in the reality of our historical-cultural-social context it serves as an surrogate-attack on the local (non-BN) Chinese leadership and their alleged 'iniquity', and a reminder to the heartland not to vote for DAP or any coalition that has DAP as a member, namely Pakatan and thus PAS and PKR.

As UMNO blogger Sakmongkol AK 47 noted sadly, the current UMNO leaders don’t seem to be able to cope with Malaysia’s modern political landscape. They still believe in the supremacy of force and the employment of mischievous tactics like the undemocratic and shameful Khusrin affair.

A week ago he wrote: UMNO hasn't shed off its arrogance and bully tactics. It's showing it is incapable of dealing with dissenting views and does not have the credentials to deal with the future. How has UMNO approached dissenting views and opposition? By making endless police reports. The police should not be used as an oppressive tool by UMNO.

Much earlier he penned: Just recently, the appointment of the Selangor SS was also seen as being made possible by the intervention and involvement of the king of Selangor. The two events [earlier he mentioned a similar situation in Perak] resulted in a loosening of people's inhibitions. People are becoming emboldened to question the proper role of the constitutional monarchy. Let us be clear to what is happening here. People are pointing out to the fact that ours is a constitutional monarchy. It's not a call for the overthrow of the institution or a call for rebellion. It is suggestive of a larger desire by an increasing number of the population, to see that the proper rule of law and the sovereignty of the rule of law need to and should be observed. Pointing that out is not intended to derhaka to the monarchy. [...]

UMNO doesn't seem to have what it takes to manage the loosening of the social and cultural milieu. Nor does it seem to have the presence of mind, the verve so to speak, to manage the change.

When UMNO sponsored or indirectly supported those wild eyed young men and women to shout violent outbursts and threatening verbal abuses against the so called traitors of certain Malay institutions, it only points out to one fact- that UMNO has lost its grip on the loosening and uninhibited future culture.

Since it doesn't understand and lacked the tools to manage the new social milieu, it can lose in the next GE.

Alas, his advice to UMNO seems to have fallen on deaf ears, though I see a slight change in tactics by some notable UMNO personalities shifting the attack over to the surrogate Chinese target, Singapore, as a so-called iniquitous and oppressive Chinese-ruled country with a Malay minority, obviously a tactic to drive home the fear of Chinese political leadership into the minds of Malays, as MCA is attempting to do to the Chinese Malaysians on PAS leadership.

I fear that the short and long term fallout from the UMNO-MCA style of political campaign for the Tenang by-election will be far from being tenang (calm). They can only concretize, if not exacerbate our already existing and very lamentable communal schism.