Marking RPK's final assignment

RPK shares with us his final assignment (maximum 1000 words) for his Oxford course in Philosophy of Religion. He selected the topic of What is a religion?

As usual, RPK has written well and in an interesting way, subtext included wakakaka. Yes, we could nitpick here and there but generally it flows well. However, there is a sentence that I believe won’t be accepted, that is, from an academic point. It’s likely to invite a red inked question mark (with lecturer’s comment: “you did not explain why!”) on the right hand margin of his paper.

I refer to the 3rd last paragraph which went as follows:

Had freedom of choice been allowed and had no one been forced to adopt the religion of his/her political masters, there is no guarantee that, say, Islam would be the dominant religion of the Middle East. Most likely the majority in the Middle East today would be Zoroastrians. The Nestorian/Coptic Christians plus the Jews of the Middle and Near East also faced persecution and were forced to embrace either Islam or the Roman version of Christianity.

The sentence is “Most likely the majority in the Middle East today would be Zoroastrians”!

In academic papers one can’t toss in an assertion like that without explaining why one believes so – in other words why does RPK claim such?

He could have stated, just as an example (with subtext included as well wakakaka):

Zoroastrianism was the state religion of Persia, which was the dominant superpower around 600 to 500 BCE, thus conferring enormous prestige on that belief and its practice.

symbol of Zoroastrianism

Zoroastrianism was not unlike the Abraham-ic faith which subscribes to monotheism. But Zoroastrianism did not support monasticism, which (based on our experiences) was a plus for the religion, because that would have omitted the most powerful but insidious element and its corrupting influence in any religion, the priesthood/monkhood wakakaka.

Without priests introducing their man-make (not God’s) laws of ‘prohibitions and punishments’, it would have kept the religion uncorrupted, simple and of love (rather than fear) and thus a joy to embrace.

There were two practices in Zoroastrianism which put it on par with the more atheistic Buddhism, namely, there was to be no proselytizing, which today would have prevented many heartaches in Malaysia, nor was slavery permitted, which would have made Malaysians more considerate, caring or at least careful of how they treat their Indonesian maids, wakakaka.

The no-slave policy was why Cyrus the Great released the First Diaspora Jews who were slaves in Babylon, from their Babylonian lords and allowed them to return to Judah.

Cyrus the Great

Bloke left such a lasting legacy on the Jewish religion through his Edict of Restoration, he is referred to by the people of the Jewish faith, as "the anointed of the Lord" or a "Messiah”, the only gentile so honoured by Jews as a Messiah, ever, and immortalised forever in the Bible.

"I will raise up Cyrus in my righteousness: I will make all his ways straight. He will rebuild my city and set my exiles free, but not for a price or reward, says Yahweh Almighty." - Isaiah 45:13, and

"In the first year of King Cyrus, Cyrus the king issued a decree: ‘Concerning the house of God at Jerusalem, let the temple, the place where sacrifices are offered, be rebuilt and let its foundations be retained, its height being 60 cubits and its width 60 cubits; with three layers of huge stones and one layer of timbers. And let the cost be paid from the royal treasury. ‘Also let the gold and silver utensils of the house of God, which Nebuchadnezzar took from the temple in Jerusalem and brought to Babylon, be returned and brought to their places in the temple in Jerusalem; and you shall put them in the house of God.’ - Ezra 6:3-5

Without Cyrus' benevolence there won't any 2nd Diaspora or Israelis in this world. I suppose this explains why Zionist Israelis today are the ungrateful feral beasts they have become for wanting to bomb Persia (now known by its modern name, Iran); maybe they want to erase a 2,500-year old I.O.U, wakakaka.

The Israelis’ ingratitude is exactly like that of their hero, the adulterous murderous King David who deliberately sent his most loyal general, Uriah, to the forefront of the battle to be killed because he (David) bonked Uriah’s wife and made her pregnant while the poor soldier was fighting valiantly for his King.

Beasts reward generosity and loyalty with adultery, murder and deaths!

Cyrus' tomb at Pasargadae, Iran

Cyrus the Great was a great bloke who respected the customs and religions of the lands he conquered (remember, no proselytizing permitted in Zoroastrianism). He founded the Achaemenid empire, which was very successful in its centralized administration that worked to the advantage and profit of its subjects.

History tells us that Cyrus is well recognized for his achievements in human rights, politics, and military strategy such that his influence is felt in both Eastern and Western civilizations.

Cyrus' Achaemenid Empire

Surely, with such a liberal religion under such an awesome and benevolent ruler, people of the Middle East, if they had the freedom of choice, would have willingly embraced Zoroastrianism, making the followers the majority in the Middle-East.

It would have screwed up RPK’s limit of 1000 words, but WTF, I enjoy helping him wakakaka.

Johor's silent Tionghua revolution

Dear Olde (though not too old) Hishamuddin Hussein is on panic mode. Politically accident-proned, the Home Minister has a natural talent in offending the Chinese and Indians, so even he would have realized by now, the Chinese and Indians won't be too fond of him.

Because his federal constituency of Sembrong has 40% Chinese voters wakakaka, he has correctly assessed he'll be stuffed in the next general election.

Hisham’s fear has found firm grounds in The Malaysian Insider’s (TMI) latest report that In Johor, Chinese set to snub BN in polls.

According to TMI, Professor Abu Hassan Hasbullah of think-tank Zentrum Future Studies (based at UM) revealed that “… its end-of-year surveys have seen Johor Chinese catch up with and possibly overtake their northern kin in terms of backing PR. Opposition leaders in the state estimate that they won 55 per cent of Chinese votes in the last election but ….. support from the community has surged to close to 90 per cent.”

90%! Now, can you blame Hisham for his QD (quiet despair)? Wakakaka!

The Prof described the massive political swing as a “silent Tionghua revolution”.

According to the Zentrum survey, Chinese approval of Pakatan in Johor rose to 68% after the last election, and climbed further to 79 per cent in 2010. With the lastest figures, this could effectively enable Pakatan to pick up 15 federal and 30 state seats in Johor (compared to 1 and 6 respectively on 08 March 2008).

There are now rumours of Hishamuddin cabut-ing (scooting off) from Sembrong to Kota Tinggi. I hope he doesn't forget to take his keris along with him.

Chinese Malaysians, even Penangites, are by nature political conservatives, desiring political stability and economic prosperity, which has been why Penangites tolerated Koh TK and his spineless Gerakan Party for almost 40 years.

But among Chinese Malaysians, those in Johor are probably the most conservative, preferring to stick with Tunku’s Perikatan and subsequently Tun Razak’s BN even as late as 2008. Unlike their Penang counterparts, who swept away both ruling parties in 1969* and 2008, the Johoreans seemed to be far more tolerant of Perikatan/BN excesses and arrogance.

* just a note on someone’s assertion (which I read somewhere) that Anwar Ibrahim was responsible for the change of government in Penang on 08 March 2008, let me as a Penangite say that’s taking hero-worship too far. Sure, Anwar Ibrahim played a major role in inspiring the 2008 political tsunami, but Penangites always have their own political say, with or without Anwar, as demonstrated in 1969 when Anwar was a mere Muslim student activist of 22 years old. Penangites change government when they themselves wish, and not because of any particular person.

Now, an example of Chinese pragmatism - UMNO ultras, whenever it suits them, like to accuse their fave punching bag, the Chinese, of being biadap (ill mannered) to the Malay rulers. But as former UMNO bloger, Sakmongkol AK47 wrote (words to the effect), that’s nonsense because Chinese would be more than happy to do the contrary, like hormat, ampu and even bodek the sultans (including ministers & MBs) so as to be able continue their commercial-economic ways unimpeded.

Some Chinese businessmen have been known to chase after and even 'purchase' datukships, not because they want to be datuks per se but because the datukships give them access into privileged circles to canvas, conduct and cari-makan business deals.

In short, most Chinese Malaysians aren’t really all that interested in politics (whether of the Mahathir, AAB, Najib or Anwar's variety) so long as the political system allows them to work hard and prosper. But when they are forced into a corner, as they were in 1969 and 2008, where allegations of corruption against Perikatan and BN were just too overpowering to close one eye to, they would vote 'wisely'.

In the latter case, especially during AAB's time and continuing into Najib's premiership, UMNO and its apparatus like Perkasa and Utusan, plus a reborn Dilemmatic Malay, became a frightening bigoted monster which troubled many Chinese enormously. There was too much yang which unbalanced the Tao, that was, the commercial-enonomic Tao.

The other factor that would (and had*) agitate Chinese Malaysians is their children’s educational rights, or more correctly, their rights to good quality (high standard) education. Education has been a central pillar of Chinese culture for thousands of years, seen by the Chinese proletariat as a means (then, probably the only avenue) of breaking out of their labourer/working class lot.

* in 1987, the Education Ministry under Anwar Ibrahim appointed 100 non-Mandarin educated senior assistants and principals to vernacular schools, leading Chinese to protest against what they perceived as a deliberate tampering of their education standard. The Dong Jiao Zong (Chinese educationists) protest was joined by MCA, Gerakan and DAP. UMNO Youth, then under Najib with his blood-dripping keris, wanted to counter-protest. It led to the draconian Ops Lallang.

Because successive UMNO Education Ministers turned the national education system into the lamentable political football it became, and consequentially with perceived abysmal standards, Chinese gave up on that and quietly sought alternative streams, leading them to Chinese vernacular education (in pre-Merdeka days and even some years after that, the gold standard in education was English medium schools).

As we have just read, the Johor Chinese have reached their political breaking point. They want to send BN out.

If we remember an election truism in most democracies, voters generally vote a political party out of power rather than vote it into power. This translates into an incumbent political party or candidate losing, while the challenger becomes the winner by default. Thus, the Johor Chinese will focus on giving the BN a belting the latter long deserve.

And Pakatan will by default pick up BN’s lost seats – according to Zentrum, 15 federal and 30 state seats in Johor (compared to 1 and 6 respectively on 08 March 2008).

If we accept that, I just wonder which Pakatan component party will pick up the rewards.

I ask because 3 online news portal, Malaysiakini, Sin Chew and wakakaka Malaysia-Today have reported a rift between PKR and DAP over some seats, two of which I can name right away, Gelang Patah and Johor Jaya, both currently held by wakakaka, MCA.

It hasn’t help that the PKR Chair in Johor is Chua Jui Meng, a PKR newbie who was formerly from MCA. He is under pressure to show his stripes, and in like fashion to what Tian Chua had attempted in the past, likely at DAP’s expense.

PKR wants a monopoly on mixed ethnic constituencies (on whatever nebulous basis it has claimed) while at the same has been avariciously eyeing the attractive blue ribbon seats with Chinese majority. DAP which has traditionally contested in the latter type also wants a share of the far more numerous mixed constituencies.

Ironically, we saw a perverted version of this in the last Sarawak election where sore loser PKR groused about DAP staying safe in urban areas instead of venturing forth into rural constituencies, conveniently forgetting that it was PKR itself which unilaterally and pre-emptively grabbed 52 (subsequently 49) seats out of an available 71 in the Sarawak State election.

As I wrote in May 2011 in a post PKR's green-eyed monster:

….. a disgraceful petulant sour grapes merajuking Baru Bian … told The Malaysian Insider PKR wants DAP and PAS to prove they’re multiracial, but obviously targeting the DAP.

He claimed that PKR “...wants its Pakatan Rakyat PR partners to contest in ‘black seats’ in the next general election and dismiss the notion that they cannot cross the racial divide.”

He also told reporters that PKR “... could not continue shouldering the burden of contesting in BN strongholds alone."

Shouldering the burden of contesting in BN strongholds alone? My bloody foot, don't make my toes laugh!

This is the state head of a party who pre-emptively grabbed 52 seats without even a thought for its coalition allies in an unrealistic expectation PKR could be the winning PR member with the majority of seats, with him as CM wakakaka.

Here’s a case of a greedy gluttonous grabbing beast which had refused to share and ate more than it could practically swallow, and now blames DAP for its tummy ache. Padan muka.

Of course in Johor it sings a different tune where it sure as hell doesn’t want DAP to “...to contest in ‘black seats’ in the next general election and dismiss the notion that they cannot cross the racial divide”

or

that PKR “... could not continue shouldering the burden of contesting in BN strongholds alone."

Wakakaka!

Anyway, Johor PKR election director Steven Choong admitted that the State PKR and DAP people stopped discussing seats allocation since July 2011, with the matter now escalated to the Pakatan presidential consultative council.

Man man lai – Johor's 'silent Tionghua revolution' is not only among the voters, wakakaka!

Followers of religions

Another light one for you at my other blog KTemoc Kongsamkok titled Religious divisions or divisive religions. It’s a rehash of 3 old posts in this blog, KTemoc Konsiders, which I have joined up together, updated and posted yesterday at my other blogsite.

As usual, it’s based on my personal experience wakakaka.

Sodomy II - the losers

Thank goodness the Sodomy II trial has ended, not that I had dedicatedly followed its twists and turns through its long tortuous course. I have no interest in the private life of Anwar Ibrahim, alleged or otherwise - none of my business. It’s his politics, performance and policies that I keep an eye on.

Who then is the winner and loser of the trial's outcome?

I leave that to the experts though I do know of only one loser, the Bench!

Alas, very few Malaysians have faith in the independence and integrity of our judiciary, and can you blame the majority?

As the Court dismissed the charges against Anwar Ibrahim, the Pakatan ‘experts’ are already analyzing, now get this, WHY the court had not found him guilty, instead of expecting that the verdict was, as Karpal Singh predicted, a natural outcome for the prosecutor’s paucity of solid evidence.

Look, even Anwar Ibrahim himself was surprised by the verdict.

For an example of the deep set suspicion by many about the motives of the court, and by the alleged nexus, therefore of UMNO, see Charles Santiago’s Seeing through the shadow play where he wrote:

We all know that regimes use ‘bark on’ intelligence to manipulate long-term favourable outcomes. Today, we saw this unfold in Malaysia when Anwar Ibrahim was acquitted of a sodomy charge despite the fact that he will certainly continue to be a thorn in the side of the BN-led federal government.

Anwar's potential to embarrass government, coupled with its hysteria and fears, mean that the father of six would have been better off in jail or at least convicted of sodomy.

Whichever way the verdict had gone, no one in Pakatan would praise the independence and integrity of the judge, and even if one has, he/she would only grudgingly express sympathy for a ‘foolish’ judge.

In a letter to Malaysiakini titled Anwar's acquittal: Why? and What happens next? Abdullah Junid wrote:

Or it could just be that Justice Mohamad Zabidin Mohd Diah really decided to acquit Anwar based purely on the (suspect) evidence. If that's the case, the good judge is a very brave and hopefully not foolish man.
… indicating his disbelief at the judge’s ruling.

Also do note my underlining of the word 'Or' indicating the writer's afterthought as to what he had surmised in the first place, which was, '... the Najib administration either gave in to fear or grabbed a high-profile opportunity to put the opposition off-balance and earn PR brownie points on a global stage ...'.

Charles Santiago summed it up best by stating: Likewise they must understand that Malaysians will not translate Anwar's acquittal to mean the judiciary is independent. They can see through the shadow play by Najib to regain the confidence of the people.

Today's judgment is a victory for the people. It demonstrates the power of the people.

If I were to translate the above statement in the worst possible light, then Charles Santiago (bearing in mind I’m a DAP supporter) has virtually stated, unwittingly if I may add, the judge gave in to mob rule, and not because the prosecution failed to make a case against Anwar.

Of course I'm being devilish, as in playing the 'devil's advocate', wakakaka.

As I mentioned at the top: Alas, very few Malaysians have faith in the independence and integrity of our judiciary, and can you blame the majority?

Incidentally, because the expectation, especially by PKR, was for a guilty verdict which would have seen Anwar Ibrahim sentenced, many prematurely went berserk when RPK pronounced that Anwar would receive a fair trial.

But in spite of the court finding in favour of Anwar Ibrahim, given the dominance of conspiracy theories that the ‘not guilty’ verdict has been Najib’s conniving plot, there won’t be any relief for, let alone an apology to RPK wakakaka.

Thus a correction to what I had said earlier about knowing one loser; we could say RPK, like the judiciary, is also a loser, but by default. My advice to RPK is a quote by Pat Riley:

"You have no choices about how you lose, but you do have a choice about how you come back and prepare to win again."

The man who would be PM

I gifted you the mortal world
To rule the lands and do as you please
And now you impious earth worm
You dare to claim your father's throne?

- Pretender To The Throne (opus I: The Usurper's Spawn)

Malaysiakini - If Ku Li can be PM, why can't I, jests Azmin

Anwar Ibrahim states that, should he be jailed after the 109 court verdict, Pakatan will have an interim prime minister until he (Anwar) is released by a Pakatan government.

Azmin Ali, when asked whether Tengku Razaleigh (Ku Li) will be headhunted to act as the interim PM, was reported to have ‘jested’ why shouldn't he (Azmin) be the interim PM?

May I just comment that I doubt he was jesting!

Just a reminder - this post is about Azmin Ali and not Anwar Ibrahim. However, in writing about Azmin’s ambition, it's not possible to avoid mentioning Anwar as well because really, without the latter’s unquestioning support and endorsement of Azmin, the question in Malaysian politics would likely have been: “Who in the world is this Azmin Ali?”

Anwar’s unreserved support of Azmin Ali is well-known to all, and thus I’m not revealing any State or PKR secret, nor am I bashing Anwar.

Azmin Ali’s ascendancy to become PKR’s No 2 has been charted by him personally (in this, he’s certainly ambitious) and endorsed unquestioningly by Anwar Ibrahim. Like a dodgem car, he had bulldozed both Nallakaruppan and Zaid Ibrahim aside in PKR party elections, naturally with the ‘help’ of Anwar and the inner coterie.

We have been told that in a PKR party election some years back, Anwar instructed Nalla not to contest the remaining VP position because the former wanted Azmin Ali to take up that post, a vital one for Azmin if he is to eventually ascend to the deputy presidency.

Naturally an outraged Nalla left PKR in acrimonious circumstances, not unlike Anwar himself when he was expelled unceremoniously from UMNO. Both felt a sense of grave injustice to their respective selves, perceived or otherwise. Given this, it's bizarre Anwar didn't consider Nalla's feelings, but then again, maybe not!

But I wasn’t surprised when the anwaristas pinned the label of traitor or UMNO Trojan Horse unjustly on Nalla, as they did REPETITIVELY on anyone who left PKR in unfriendly circumstances, usually in dispute or in disgust with Azmin Ali or/and Anwar Ibrahim.

It would not be too far-fetched to say, without that dictatorial and most un-reformasi marginalization, Nalla could well have been PKR’s No 2 today, what with the depth of the Indian ranks then in that party.

As for Zaid Ibrahim, I have always lamented his incorrect decision to opt for membership in PKR instead of DAP, but I suspect he wanted to provide himself as an alternative to Azmin, who was not well thought of by many in PKR but whose position has been so well entrenched because of his godfather’s favouritism.

As I had written in other posts, Zaid attempted to persuade, firstly, Khalid Ibrahim to go for PKR’s No 2 position, and then, when Khalid dared not challenge Azmin, encouraged Nurul Izzah to do so (a poor choice if I may say, because of her age, lack of seniority and inexperience).

Initially Nurul showed some interests, very much to Azmins’ alarm who ‘advised’ her not to because (the brazen hypocrisy of it all) people would ‘talk’ about her relationship with dad. She suddenly withdrew for reasons you may wish to speculate on. I would not be at all surprised to learn that Azmin is far far more favoured than her – no, most certainly not at all surprised!

Thus, when Zaid saw both Khalid and Nurul declining, he knew that unless he offered himself as a candidate for the No 2 position, Azmin Ali would have a free ride all the way to the top, and I mean the ‘top’ because we all know too well that Wan Azizah has been and still is a reluctant politician, thus making the PKR No 2 virtually the de facto president.

Obviously de facto-ism exists abundantly in PKR.

Azmin of course had long since seen Zaid as his most likely and dangerous opponent, a capable man of some standing, experience and competency who would be unlikely to stand aside for him (Azmin) on Anwar’s say-so.

From RPK’s Malaysia-Today - we read of the following in his post Denial:

PKR denies sabotaging Zaid Ibrahim in the Ulu Selangor by-election in spite of the reporters who leaked the story confirming that the doctored photograph of Zaid with the beer bottle was handed to them by Azmin Ali and not by Umno.

We’re also sadly aware of the scandalous shameful shambles that had been the last PKR party elections, which saw Azmin Ali established as the Deputy President of PKR.

In a post in December 2010, PKR without Anwar Ibrahim & Azmin Ali, I commented on a Malaysiakini news report titled 400,000 PKR members, where art thou? questioning the kosher-ness of PKR’s true membership figures, I wrote:

Questions have been raised about PKR’s real membership figures, especially as only 10% of the claimed 400,000 voted in the recent party’s election.

Prior to this MKINI report, a reason tossed about was that PKR had deliberately inflated its membership numbers to justify/stake its large share of the seat allocations among the three Pakatan component parties.

If that has been the case then PKR had fibbed to its Pakatan allies; if that wasn’t, then PKR has had an abysmal turnout for its party election, raising doubts about the legitimacy of Azmin Ali’s election as the new deputy president of PKR.

Out of 10% of the claimed 400,000 members who voted, Azmin only received slightly less than 20,000, a mere fraction (5%) of the total numbers.

Is 5% of membership support sufficient to justify his No 2 position in the party. With Dr Wan Azizah a known reluctant politician and a passive president (only in name), Azmin Ali is now virtually the leader of PKR, on the basis of the 5% members' support he received.

And even that 5% is questioned for being not kosher.

Because Azmin Ali has been supported, protected, endorsed and perhaps even pampered by Anwar Ibrahim for years, he usually got what he wanted. As Anwar has always supported him in what he desired, he would not be wrong in assuming he is Anwar’s natural heir.

But he should be mindful that impression is only good within PKR. Pakatan, unlike PKR, does not belong to Anwar. It’s not for Anwar to bestow his (agreed to) position in Pakatan to anyone in PKR, even and especially his blue-eyed boy, a junior within the Pakatan senior leadership ranks already packed with luminaries like the two Pak Haji's and various other personalities in PAS, and Karpal Singh, Lim KS, Lim GE and more in DAP.

To be fair to Anwar, I did read his response to a query about the 'interim PM" where he remarked that the next senior Malay Pakatan member is Pak Haji Awang.

However, Azmin Ali might be entertaining the fallacy that he automatically inherits Anwar’s position as Pakatan’s nominated PM in a Pakatan government, should Anwar be unavailable to take up that post.

I acknowledge that the current (lack of) political maturity among Malaysians won’t accept the idea of a non-Malay PM, thus it will be probably a PAS person who will most likely act as PM until Anwar is released by a future Pakatan government – note: I won’t go into ‘what if’ should PAS renege, which can be another post discussion.

While nothing in politics is impossible, I seriously doubt the PAS leadership will countenance an Azmin Ali’s presumptuously imperious expectation/demand to be interim PM (on behalf of Anwar Ibrahim).

2012 DAP

Malaysiakini - Battle-ready DAP heads for the high seas

Today, the DAP holds it annual convention in Shah Alam. Last year on 04 September 2011 I posted GE 13 - Multi-ethnic crossroad for DAP where I wrote:

Since March 2008, Chinese-majority constituencies have become blue chips for Pakatan politiicans, providing much higher assurance of victory for them, regardless of whether they’re DAP Malay or Indian candidates, PKR and even PAS.

PAS in fact is banking on the Chinese factor for victory in many of its staked 70 federal seats for GE-13. Such is today's lamentable lot for Tunku's UMNO when the Chinese (even MCA members) see UMNO as its least desired or (as the case may be) most despised/hated political representative to an extent that they would be willing to vote for PAS instead.

In other words, the ABU doctrine!

It is also timely and with joyous reception that I read of DAP’s bold preparedness to allocate 10 of its blue-ribbon seats to its Malay members, to ensure the face of DAP, post-13 GE, will physically reflect the multi-ethnic character of the party.

The time has come for the DAP to stop worrying too excessively about potential frogs, provided of course the induction process of any new members have been carefully based (as best as is reasonably possible) on the candidates’ character, competencies and commitment to democracy, C.A.T and putting the rakyat first.

There can be no frog-free guarantee in any party – I won’t go into notorious examples to prove this point. Besides, it’s highly racist to presume that frog-ological proclivity are confined only to Malay candidates when we have witnessed shameless examples among non-Malay politicians, both in BN and Pakatan, even in the DAP.

Even if the constituency doesn’t have a Chinese majority, the more Chinese voters there are, the better the chances of victory for PAS and PKR candidates.

That has been why PAS, PKR and now even PSM are drooling for such Chinese-majority seats, traditionally DAP’s turf [...].

A very recent example of this ‘drooling’ over a blue chip seat has been being Dr Jeya’s ambit claim for Jelapang.

I also wrote:

Back to Zulkifli Mohd Noor and his important and very relevant wish to have Malay candidates contest under the DAP ticket in Penang, which I strongly support, having expressed so in my earlier post Gerakan & DAP – the missing songkok factor.

I’m going to be fair and very bold.

As the DAP has now come of age as a prominent political party, to the extent of striking cold fear into UMNO, which until recently had considered DAP only as a minor irritant and a MCA-Gerakan problem, it should stop putting the same candidate in both a federal and state seat.

Today, UMNO considers DAP (not PKR or PAS) as its principal political foe.

Its days as a minor party with limited choices of good candidates for federal and state parliaments are over. I’m thinking of Lim Guan Eng as MP in Bagan and ADUN in Air Putih, and Teresa Kok as MP in Seputih and ADUN in Kinrara. […]

Let’s start with sweetie Teresa. […]

…….. I believe Teresa will serve better by dedicating her exceptional ability to federal parliament, so I would like to see her surrender Kinrara to a new DAP candidate. To be fair to Teresa, while she was/is/will be virtually invincible in Seputih, I recall she expressed her surprise in winning the Kinrara state seat, thus I don’t believe she’ll demand to cling on as the candidate for that state seat.

Now the radical and far more important proposal!

Lim GE must decide whether he wants to continue being CM Penang, a job which he does very well, and whether he is confident he will continue to be one in 2013, which I personally believe he will.

Without being too presumptuous or arrogant, I forecast Lim GE will be CM of Penang for at least another 30 years. Penangites like political stability and in this, had kept Gerakan in power for nearly 40 years despite its abysmal performance during the last couple of decades. Thus, 30 years would be a fair and moderate expectation, of course with the usual conditions (eg. DAP doesn’t become another Gerakan, once the brightest and mightiest non-UMNO party but which sadly deteriorated like an unsalvageable opium addict into a useless and despised political entity).

If so, he must surrender his federal role as an MP and thus his constituency of Bagan to Zulkifli Mohd Noor [or another Malay party member]. I am sure Zul will become one of the several DAP MPs after the next GE election.

Thus I don’t support Karpal Singh’s statement that the DAP would be making an exception in this regard for Lim GE.

I want to see Zul in Parliament as one of DAP’s MPs, if not the first one. My Penang Larng (fellow Penangite) has my complete support.

On 11 Oct 2008 I posted Gerakan & DAP – the missing songkok factor where I wrote:

As a DAP supporter (but not member) I have urged the DAP to rethink its Malaysian Malaysia ideology, which is afterall a policy that had originated from Lee Kuan Yew’s PAP when Singapore was part of Malaysia, and to also reconsider its campaign to abolish bumiputra privileges.

I suggest that the DAP looks at three issues:

(1) develop a new political vision to replace its Malaysian Malaysia that will ameliorate the fears of the Malay.

And I am pleased it has!

(2) develop a fresh strategic policy to accept the NEP but one that will be managed fairly and exclusively for bumiputera interest. This does not in any way disregard the currently marginalized Indians or the less fortunate Chinese. Preserve the NEP exclusively for the needy Melayu and other bumis.

And may I add, our highly marginalized fellow Indian Malaysians deserve urgent rescuing from MIC.

Forget about Anwar Ibrahim’s claim that he would get rid of the NEP or that the policy has outlived its usefulness. […]

I personally believe that the NEP still has use for a large segment of the Malay and Sarawak/Sabah bumis. It’s the misuse of this apparatus for affirmative action that’s the problem, not the NEP per se.

(3) get rid of its socialist label* – most Malays don’t understand what it stands for, other than it must be a part of the Satanic communist diabolical plot.

* at least in its label if not in ideology

I wish DAP and its members, especially the “new ones”, a successful convention to come up with proposals, strategies and programmes so as to serve Malaysia and Malaysians even better in the years to come.

Just a name!

Something light for you at my other blog KTemoc Kongsamkok – see What’s in a name! which is based on my personal experience wakakaka.

109

Okay, out of respect for my blog visitor, very-senior-citizen monsterball, who has a meeting with a Bhikkhu, a Buddhist monk, I won’t attack Anwar until at least after Monday wakakaka. I don’t want to earn demerits (bad karma) for disturbing his mental tranquility which he requires (but given his intrinsic character, is unlikely to achieve, wakakaka) when he meets a member of the Sangha.

Instead, I would like to raise a trivia question, on whether this Monday should be numerically referred to as 109 or 901? I have read of both being used in the last few days.

By Chinese tradition and American dating convention, it would be 109, where the month precedes the date, like 9/11 (surely you know this one), or 7/7 (don’t know? See bottom for answer).

The Chinese Taiwanese celebrates their national day on 10/10 or Double-Ten. Officially Chinese Taiwan celebrates this day in commemoration of the start of the Wuchang Uprising on 10 October 1911, which led to the collapse of the Manchu Qing Dynasty and the establishment of a republican China on January 1, 1912, but I suspect the founding fathers of Taiwan (previously calling itself the Republic of China) must have chosen the Double-Ten date to provide those auspicious very ‘ong’ (lucky) number for maximum luck, while the mainlanders do it on 10/1.

For more of such numerological calendaring please see my KTemoc Kongsamkok’s post Secret Society of Handsome Chinese Cryptographers wakakaka.


Postscript

7-7 or 7/7 = London bombings in 2005

Apple of discord by a rotten apple

As I have stated so often, I respect Haris Ibrahim very much. Currently Haris is pushing the current campaign mantra of ABU or ‘Anyone But UMNO’, urging the voters to vote for any candidate (from any political party) standing against an UMNO candidate in any federal or state electoral constituency.

However, as in any concept, policy or practice, there have to be exceptions. I do not apologise for raising this reminder, because of what I read in Malaysiakini’s Nik Aziz, Hadi for PM if Anwar convicted.

That pompous treacherous solar-powered Hasan Ali is at it again. At best I would say he’s sucking up to the two Pak Hajis, to ensure he retains a place in the list of PAS candidates for the next election, but I am not confident he is not, again, doing UMNO’s work again, by deliberately throwing into the Pakatan leadership ring, an apple of discord.

According to Greek mythology (from Wikipedia), Zeus held a banquet in celebration of the marriage of Peleus and Thetis, the parents of Achilles. However, Eris, goddess of discord was not invited (for she would have made the party unpleasant for everyone). Angered by this snub, Eris arrived at the celebration with a golden apple which she threw into the proceedings, upon which was the inscription καλλίστῃ (kallistēi, which meant ‘for the fairest one’).

Three goddesses claimed the apple: Hera, Athena and Aphrodite. They asked Zeus to judge which of them was fairest, and eventually he, reluctant to favour any claim himself, declared that Paris, a Trojan mortal, would judge their cases.

To cut the story short, Paris selected Aphrodite, who in turn blessed him with the love of the most beautiful woman in the world, Helen, who was the wife of Menelaus the Spartan King. Their adulterous elopement led to the Trojan War and numerous tragedies including the total destruction of Troy.

As I mentioned, there should be exceptions to any policy or campaign thrust. If PAS won’t get rid of Hasan Ali, then wherever he stands we must make an exception to ABU for he is the greater evil than an UMNO candidate.

Other possible exceptions to ABU would be his PAS pro-UMNO partner, Nasharudin Mat Isa, and also Zulkifli Noordin the Kulim Wonder, assuming he doesn’t stand as an UMNO candidate, and likewise our dear Ibrahim Ali.

Hasan won’t be able to stand as an UMNO candidate because his usefulness to UMNO is only valid if he remains in PAS to cause trouble among Pakatan. He'll be finished if PAS sacks him because UMNO will then not touch him with a ten-foot pole.

So, rather than ABU in his case, it should be ABHA – Asal Bukan Hasan Ali or Anyone But Hasan Ali.

How soon we forget, save for 3 good men

On Christmas Eve, 24 December 2004 (before I started my own blog here), I published a post titled 3 American Heroes at My Lai over at my other (then shared) blogsite, BolehTalk.

The title of that post was unusual because, and I have to ‘fess up, I abhor, despise and would usually condemn the USA’s neo-colonial imperialistic adventures in Vietnam, and in various parts of the world such as Afghanistan, Iraq (Gulf War II) as well as its various intrusive avaricious meddling in the Middle-East and South America.

So it would require a fairly humongous sea-change-type of effort by those 3 American soldiers for me to deem them as heroes.

In that BolehTalk post, I wrote:

Thirty six years (by now, 44 years) ago in My Lai, one of the most shameful episodes in US military history occurred when around 60 American troops massacred 400 to 500 Vietnamese civilians, mainly women and children at My Lai. They raped, mutilated and tortured their victims during the bloody mayhem. The only man court martial-ed for this terrible atrocity was Lt William Calley. He was sentenced to life imprisonment for the murders but released 3 years later, when pardoned by President Richard Nixon.

But a few among the US soldiers did refuse to participate.

On that dark bloody day, a few good men stood out like bright shining stars, as heroes, true American Heroes.

This Christmas Eve, as we celebrate the birth of Jesus, we remember the Three Wise Men who came from the East to honour Christ. We should also use this special occasion to honour and remember the Three Good Men from America. I post this in deep respect of the three US Army helicopter airmen for their incredible bravery, human decency and honour in carrying out their duties as courageous soldiers on that fateful day at My Lai.

I salute Hugh Thompson, Lawrence Colburn and Glenn Androetta.

For the story of courage, please read here, here and here.

Today, RPK, once a hero to many PKR supporters, is considered by them as a 'zero', cast afloat on an angry roiling sea, facing character massacre a la My Lai from his very same but erstwhile PKR admirers.

These wonders have already made up their minds, all because RPK had the blooming effrontery to criticize their Icon. I’m a bit sick of their mindless anwarista-ish fanaticism.

But on this dark bloody moment for RPK, a few good men stood out like bright shining stars, as sane, balanced, moderate and fair heroes, true to their own perceptions.

While not necessarily agreeing with RPK’s opinions of Anwar Ibrahim, and even chiding RPK for what they consider as his intemperate and untimely attack on Anwar, they have struck a generally fair path. Their comments have been:

But whether Anwar is convicted or not, and whether or not RPK is in the pay or the thrall of the government, it seems to me that both of these controversial figures have played important parts, indeed starring roles, in awakening major portions of the Malaysian public to the perfidies of Umno/BN.

And now it’s up to every Malaysian to be sufficiently inspired and emboldened by these shining examples, however tarnished they now may be or possibly have yet to become, to stand up as leaders rather than just followers; as fighters for their principles rather than passive supporters of public figures.

The above was by Dean Johns in his column Principles beat personalities at Malaysiakini – incidentally, the article’s title is also indicative of Dean’s high level view of the imbroglio.

Then we have:

RPK, whom I continue to respect and love as a brother and friend, even though we may be diametrically opposed in specific instances - and to whom I will always be grateful for his magnificent role as a powerful galvanizer of political awareness - may have decided that Anwar Ibrahim is "morally unfit" to be appointed our 7th prime minister. He has every right to his personal opinion.

The above was by my matey (wakakaka) Antares in his post at his blog Magick River - poor Antares gets annoyed when I address him as ‘my matey’ wakakaka, and I do apologise if my brief extract of his post conveys any incorrect picture of his views.

But the most touching came from a man I truly admire. He wrote:

Many of you may already have forgotten why RPK and Marina are now in exile.

I’ve linked 3 posts below.

The first and the second I wrote in 2008, whilst RPK was detained in Kamunting.

The last, before he and Marina took flight to go into exile.

Please read them all. Read the comments too. Who knows, you might just be reading now what you wrote then.

Have we misrepresented ourselves to RPK?

If a nation values anything more than freedom, it will lose its freedom: and the irony of it is that if it is comfort or money that it values more, it will lose that, too – W. Somerset Maugham

Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends



Many of you appear to be of the view that RPK has betrayed us, and has sold out.

I think you premise this on his interview with TV3 last March and his latest interview with NST and Utusan.

I do not share this view.

Mine is premised on the man and Marina that I believe I have come to know.

We cannot both be right.

Let us all hope and pray that the error is yours and not mine.

You have my word, though, that should I discover the error to be mine, I will not hesitate to disclose all that I know to you.

Meanwhile, this divergence of view aside, we are all committed to see the end of UMNO and BN’s reign of tyranny and rape and plunder.

Let not this difference of opinion distract us from the work before us.

In my last post I had said that by God’s will, we will, together, plant love, tenderness and respect in this land of ours.

To those of you who believe that this man who once served us all so selflessly has, for whatever reason, left us, I urge you to let the process of planting love, tenderness and respect begin now.

If you truly believe this, rather than hate, pray that God returns RPK to our course.

Whilst I do not advocate this, if you must hate, save it for all that UMNO and BN do.

For me, I will pray that I will never ever have to say sorry to you for being wrong. You might want to add this in your prayers, too.

The above are extracts from Brother Haris Ibrahim in his post Oh Lord, how soon we forget! at The People’s Parliament blogsite.



Indeed, Brother Haris, how soon we forget! But obviously your sense of friendship runs deep and long like Antares' Magick River

I salute Dean Johns, Antares and Haris Ibrahim.

Deconstructing the Perfect Man

Dr Azly Rahman, an academician who holds all sorts of mind-boggling degrees and sometimes writes for Malaysiakini, once propounded that the wayang kulit display of the Ramayana epic or the makyong is a form of neo-feudalistic indoctrination, the type that Hang Tuah suffered from and which Jebat gave two fingers to.

In his article for Malaysiakini Neo-feudalism of the cybernetic Malays he wrote:

In many an analysis of the transformation of the Malay society from the times of the Melaka Sultanate to the emergence of the Malay nationalism we find the conclusion of the idea of a good Malay subject is one who surrenders total obedience to his or her Ruler (the sultan or the Raja). The king is said to be ‘(Allah’s) representative on this earth’ and is thus bestowed with the Divine Rights.
Modernizing it even further, can we say “the idea of a good Malaysian subject is one who surrenders total obedience to his or her political leader (the PM, MB or party leader)”?

Blogger Sakmongkol (Dato’ Mohd Ariff Sabri bin Hj Abdul Aziz) alluded to the modernized ‘expectations’ in a certain way in his post hutang UMNO pada budi orang Melayu.

Azly Rahman proceeded on to say:

But the problem lies not in the here and now but in the past; one that needs to be de-constructed and reconstructed. It lies in the Malay psyche. It lies in the notion of hegemony as it relates to political-economy of totalitarianism and controlling interests that continue to cement the master-slave narrative/relationship of the ruler and the ruled.

That master-slave narrative has become a technology of psycholinguistic control and institutionalised as ‘culture’. The Portuguese, Dutch, Japanese, and British colonialists succeeded because the fertile ground of the slave mentality is already prepared historical- materialistically.

We can see this mentality in the idea that Malay political leader must not be challenged (such as in case of the presidency of the Umno) and this is a manifestation of this neo- feudalism hypermodern inner construct of the Malay in the Age of Cybernetics.

Wakakaka, I know I know, good olde Azly Rahman has been notable for using frightening words in his essays that makes you wonder whether your education has been an utter failure, or you’re an intellectual pygmy, or you're suffering from ataxaphasia, or perhaps you have just overeaten more than your share of pulut-nasi-lemak-cum-banana-santan-curry-ish literature. You suffer hours or even days of slow literary digestion.

Anyway, 500 years of such historical indoctrination have shown that Azly Rahman has been correct, in that Malays in general (& not excluding many other Malaysians) have inherited such a slave mentality or, in its modern and extreme form, slavish adoration of political leaders.

Substitute the word ‘UMNO’ with ‘PKR’ and we have the same stuff, that to PKR members, Anwar Ibrahim must not be challenged, because (to paraphrase Azly’s finding) “the idea of a good PKR member is one who surrenders total obedience to the Great One”.

Thus, except for many of those former members who left in utter disgust or were expelled for bucking the ‘inner coterie’, PKR members never ever question Anwar on, for example:

· The most un-reformasi promotion of frogs in Perak (prior to the drastic ricochet wakakaka)

· The most un-reformasi 916. When asked whether 916, had it been successful, would have been a total disrespect to the people’s democratic choice, many idol worshippers argued PKR couldn’t afford to wait until 2013 to replace UMNO, and thus the end (Anwar as PM) justified the means (including shameful frog-ological cheating of the voters, which of course they criticized most vehemently when Najib/UMNO was the proponent).

· The utter shameful frog-hunting expedition to Taiwan. Tian Chua fitted in but shame on Eli Wong for being party to it, though I didn't heistate to defend her on my blog during the period of her most trying times.

Let me pause here for a while and ask, do you PKR people still believe n reformasi?

OK, I bet your answer would be as above, that PKR can’t afford to wait until post-GE 13 to replace UMNO, and thus the end (to enthrone Anwar as PM soonest) justifies the means whatever these may be, even living in a world of self deception (about reformasi), by burying their heads in the sand like the proverbial ostrich and ignoring the most un-reformasi practices of their idol.

· His out-of-the-blue support of the implementation of PAS’ hudud. Of course I don’t expect the PKR Muslim members to question him on this but why were the non-Muslim members struck dumb during that time? Eli? Tian Chua? Sivarasa?

· His last minute and very personal selection of Loh Gwo Burne (who?) as PKR candidate for the federal parliamentary seat of Kelana Jaya. Loh’s perceived unsuitability as a federal MP led Haris Ibrahim to demand an explanation from Anwar Ibrahim for his (Anwar's) choice, which as with all such challenging queries to PKR, remained unanswered. Bloody great refomasi process.

· The questionable governance of PKR’s last party polls. Hell of a lot had already been written by Haris Ibrahim, (OK, let’s exclude RPK) and PKR’s own members (some still members like Chegubard and Mustaffa Kamil, while others had left) without the need for me to elaborate.

Instead ask Gobala, once chief bodeker of Anwar, Zaid Ibrahim wakakaka, Jenapala (who was marginalized like another Nallakaruppan), Jonson Chong, Chegubard (still in PKR and unlike Mustaffa Kamil, had refused a consolation prize of some party position, but recently backstabbed by PKR insiders), and earlier on, Johari Jasin, Abdul Rahman (membership No 3 and now in PAS).

But I’m sure, in accordance with PKR beliefs, each and every one of them was wrong, evil and a frog like RPK, unlike the precious pristine pure Great One.

I don’t intend to join RPK in commenting on the Haadyai video clip nor on the Sodomy II case, which incidentally brings me to RPK.

Now, while I sometimes don’t agree with RPK, I do with his recent criticisms (minus the Haadyai & Sodomy II incidents) of Anwar and Azmin Ali.

In fact RPK has been far more generous than I have been, in persuading Nurul Izzah to take over the reins (not 'helm', wakakaka) of PKR.

As RPK (and a sweetie once) said, one can be anti Anwar without being anti Pakatan or anti PKR. And I include myself in this group.

But alas, as Azly Rahman wrote, (as modified/modernized by kaytee) “the idea of a good PKR member is one who surrenders total obedience to the Great One” where total obedience also means defending him regardless.

Thus, leaving aside RPK's unauthorized comments on MCLM, I wasn’t surprised to read numerous and very venomous vilifications of him for his opinons on Anwar, while not one comment or query had been raised on Anwar’s credentials as a reformer and his performance in that respect, let alone his suitability as a future PM.

Very few bother to read what RPK said, about the danger of focusing on the personality cult of Anwar instead of policies of Pakatan as a future government (eg. where’s the bloody shadow cabinet? but day in day out, it's all about Anwar vs Najib & Najib vs Anwar - cukup lah!), ...

... leading to such moronic declarations, that if Anwar is jailed, PKR members will storm the barricades at Putrajaya to place Anwar there (of course made by a bloke whose political existence is dependent on Anwar Ibrahim's continuing political influence)

Look, let's consider RPK playing the role of deconstructing (wakakaka, Azly Rahman’s word) the Great Anwar Ibrahim a la what Kassim Ahmad did in his doctoral thesis 'Perwatakan Hikayat Hang Tuah'.

Hang Tuah was the very epitome of Malay heroic loyalty until Kassim Ahmad raised doubts on his iconic status in (circa) 1950.

Dr Bakri Musa commented on Kassim’s thesis as follows:

In it he challenged the traditional interpretation and made the hitherto hero Hang Tuah as nothing more than a palace hack, and elevated the anti-hero Hang Jebat as the true hero, willing to kill even the sultan in defence of honor and principles. Surely Jebat was the reformer wakakaka.

Similarly in studies on the Hindu saga, Ramayana, some modern scholars have questioned the true nature of the epic’s typified heroic Rama and his arch foe, the demonic Ravana. The scholars have considered reversing the roles and status of the two principal antagonists, something that would have been previously considered as an unimaginable proposition, namely, that Rama was a cad in many ways while Ravana was a chivalrous hero of sorts.

Some conservative Hindus may even take that proposition as blasphemous, not unlike conservative Malays on the role reversal of Kassim Ahmad’s Tuah and Jebat.

The studies have focused on what has puzzled Ramayana scholars throughout the centuries, namely, the inexplicable nature of the relationship between Rama and his wife Sita, specifically Rama's deplorable behaviour towards her.

Like Tuah, Rama was the hero of the saga, an avatar of Vishnu born on earth to save the world and the heavens from Ravana. Sita was his loyal wife. Together, with Rama's brother, Laksamana, the three left Ayodha on a pre-destined mission.

They went through trials and tribulation. In the course of their mission until their eventual triumphant return to Ayodha, Rama accused Sita twice of infidelity, even though she was innocent. Each time Sita was forced to prove her purity by ordeal.

But in spite of her repetitive demonstration of virtue, she was considered a tainted partner. Sita was never accepted by Rama as a loyal and full member of the Ayodha family.

Why did such a so-called righteous hero like Rama, ironically termed the ‘Perfect Man’, treat his partner Sita with such distrust, lack of respect and injustice, not once but on two separate occasions? By contrast, Ravana treated his hostage Sita with great respect and chivalry.

So, who's actually the hero and who's the villain in Ramayana?

Rama's caddish treatment of Sita was not his only 'crime'. His treacherous murder of King Vali by stealth from behind a tree while the latter was fighting his brother Sugriva) was disgraceful and most unchivalrous for the 'Perfect Man' Rama was supposed to be.

The dying Vali was so shocked by Rama's treachery that he said (from Wikipedia) "if you are searching your wife you should have come to me for help and friendship. Whoever took Sita even if it is Ravana I have defeated them and would have taken them at your feet and at your mercy".

Then he asked Rama with his dying breath:

• What was my crime?
• Even if I committed a crime (with my brother), what is your right to kill me?
• The third statement shows Vali's disapproval of the way Rama killed him. He says, "I was fighting with some other person and was not careful enough when you shot me."

Rama showed his unrepentant arrogance in a most disgraceful reply to Vali's third question, as disgraceful as was his equally arrogant reply to Vali's second question.

He said that Vali, King of Kishkinda (a monkey kingdom) was just a monkey, therefore he as a king on the hunt couldn't be bothered whether the prey being hunted was careful or not, dismissing Vali as being in the same category as a deer being hunted.

Such was Rama's unmitigated sin of killing by treacherous stealth the King of Kishkinda, yet whose army he sought for help (through Sugriva) to rescue Sita from Ravana. Can you respect Rama's arrogant and totally unrepentant argument?

Anyway, do consider Azly Rahman's postulation about 'neo-feudalism hypermodern inner construct of believers'.

While I wouldn’t be surprised to learn that PKR people consider Anwar as the ‘Perfect Man’ wakakaka, why vilify RPK for his deconstruction of the Great One and his (Anwar's) alleged disrespect for reformasi, when the former had sacrificed so much (including the safety and welfare of his family) for the latter?

Even if RPK had gone over to bat for UMNO, so what! Assuming for a moment that's true, I believe no one more than RPK has earned that independent right to do so, after so many personal sacrifices for Anwar, without attracting such infantile venom.

After all, Anwar is no greater than Hang Tuah or Rama, though of course I could be wrong here wakakaka.

The RPK-Haris Ibrahim saga

RPK & Haris Ibrahim - a great partnership in the newly formed MCLM but which future now holds a big question mark!

The Malaysian Insider (TMI) article MCLM president quits, says undermined by RPK reported that Haris Ibrahim tendered his resignation as president of the MCLM, after citing as reasons for his decision two of RPK’s recent and very damning interviews – see my previous post RPK amputates 'gangrenous' Anwar Ibrahim from Pakatan?


Brother Haris resigned as MCLM’s president because he has been terribly upset by RPK’s:

(1) unilateral assertion (meaning minus prior consultation & agreement with Haris & other MCLM office holders) that The Rights group (MCLM) is not a 3rd force and therefore would not contest the next general election, and

(2) remarks that ‘the Egypt-style people’s revolution was not an answer for Malaysia due to the delicate racial balance’ because according to RPK, “they (Chinese voters) don’t want Tahrir Square type of change”, saddening Haris because according to him “... my friend (Raja Petra) should continue to see us as Malays, Chinese, Indians, dll (others).”

The overall effect, according to Haris, has basically put a spanner in his (Haris’) ABU campaign.


I lament the end of a great RPK-Haris Ibrahim partnership in MCLM, a movement to promote good parliamentarians and parliamentary practice of first class Westminster-type democracy.

But is there any hope of salvaging the relationship and the impetus of MCLM?

Before I comment on that, let me provide my personal take on the two protagonists.

Let me start with RPK.

I came to know of (rather than ‘know’ per se) RPK in 2005 when I, influenced very much by Jeff Ooi's blogging, started blogging under the mentorship of my erstwhile partner, Mr X, at the BolehTalk blog.

Then, after I posted a piece critical of Anwar Ibrahim, much to the consternation of my partner and friends wakakaka, RPK contacted me by email with a brief message which I replied with courtesy and kept its contents confidential for the last 7 years. Thereafter we have had no further person-to-person contact.

Out of respect for confidentiality, as should be observed in any private correspondence, I have no intention of ever revealing that message.

As I had written before, cynical kaytee hasn’t been and isn’t exactly a bloke known to be particularly fond of RPK personally (I treat him with clinical neutrality), though of course I do admire, respect and am a wee envious of his creativity and ability to influence many politically.

But I do not always agree with his arguments, for example, those relating to his inflammatory Stat Dec and his take on Ombudsman. I’ve written several posts to disagree with the former – see my post RPK a willing captive in his statutory declaration and ...

... shot him down on the latter when sometime immediately after the March 2008 GE, he wrote about instituting an ombudsman (or committee) for the then 5 States under the DAP-PKR-PAS governments. But what took my breath away was his over-the-top proposal when he stated (for some obscure reasons):

“The Ombudsman must be above the Chief Minister and Menteri Besar. It must have the power and authority to summon even the highest man in the state to come before the committee for questioning on anything at all that may be perceived as wrongdoing, transgressions, deviations, etc. And the Ombudsman must have the power and authority to recommend the removal of any public servant or politician who may have committed a breach of discipline, even if he is the Chief Minister/Menteri Besar.”

I was totally flabbergasted by his remarks of "... above the Chief Minister and Menteri Besar ..." and the accompanying power-this and power-that for the proposed ombudsman.

I then wrote: This is going too far, putting an unelected person above the elected representatives of the people!

Mind, this seems to be a common problem suffered occasionally by very learned people, both in BN and Pakatan, where I'm more critical of the latter who promoted and supported frog-ology, yes, even a DAP sweetie like Hannah Yeo who broke my heart when she wrote in defence of Mr man man lai’s 916 attempted but failed coup d’état.

I wrote that having an Ombudsman establishment a la RPK’s proposal would not be unlike instituting the structure of the Iranian government, where the unelected clerical Supreme Leader and the Assembly of Elders in Iran can overrule decisions and policies of the elected President and the Majles (Parliament).

In my post I left a message for RPK to ‘keep my ombudsman steak medium rare please’ so as not to overcook the new (Ombudsman) meal by making him/her into a pseudo-Ayatollah with supra-constitutional powers over the people's democratically elected representatives – for more read my post Post election snippets (1).

Now you know why Karpal Singh is my spiritual leader in politics.

To summarize on RPK, I respect and admire him, but would accept his arguments only after I have personally analyzed their merits, unlike those who gushingly called him ‘The Great RPK’ or even fawningly ‘yang sangat mulia’ wakakaka when he sang songs they loved to hear, but alas, denigrated him as a ‘turncoat, traitor, UMNO paid bum, etc’ when he didn't.

As for Brother Haris Ibrahim, what can I say about this wonderful man, other than he is a sincere socio-political activist who’s brave, dedicated, self-sacrificing and straight talking – so straight that people could use his character to calibrate rulers.

Do you realize that I once disliked him wakakaka, much to the distress of my blogging matey, Lucia Lai of Mental Jog blog. Then one day, Haris wrote a piece titled Jambuism, and in that process, indirectly revealed to me his intrinsic character, as epitomised by his perception of God.

As I wrote in my response Omnia Vincit Jambuism:

Strangely (or should it be) for an atheist I find God’s judgement as presented by Haris very touching. If there is a God ;-), surely Haris’ version has to be the true one - One who is kind, just, loving, compassionate, humorous, and definitely One confidently above silly (human projected) petty nonsensical jealousy.

I am reminded of a quote by one of the Hindu Trinity, Krishna who said “Whoever you pray to, it is I who will answer”.

But the story of Jambuism also tells me a little about the author, and I now look at him differently. Yes, I now like him ;-)

Okay, now you know how my dice (for those two) would fall, but having said all these, my opinion on Brother Haris' complaints against RPK turns out to be a 50:50 split, as follows:

I support Haris in that RPK should not have arbitrarily decided on MCLM’s behalf (that it won’t contest in the coming GE) without prior consultation with Haris and other MCLM office bearers. In this, RPK has been arrogant and insensitive in ignoring that the president of MCLM possesses the right and courtesy to be consulted prior to such important public announcement.

However, on the second point vis-à-vis RPK’s remarks that ‘the Egypt-style people’s revolution was not an answer for Malaysia due to the delicate racial balance’ and that “... (Chinese voters) don’t want Tahrir Square type of change”, I support RPK.

Much as Brother Haris may be striving for the idealistic non-ethnic approach. and I truly admire him for this, I reckon RPK has been realistic in stating an important truth, that (reading beyond his straightforward statement of our ‘delicate racial balance’) the Malays, and not just UMNO Malays, are unlikely to accept any Tahrir Square type of revolutionary protests, regardless of the worthiness of the cause or even if PAS or Anwar Ibrahim organizes them, if they believe or are made to believe the Chinese are behind the revolt against the BN government.

And we know UMNO will present it as a violent Chinese (throw in the communist for good measure) coup d’état to overthrow and remove the Malays' sacred cow (removed a la NFC's management? wakakaka), namely their agama, raja dan bangsa.

Haven’t various UMNO people (including big names) already and repetitively primed the heartland on this 'threat', of the Chinese potential and aim to take over the country (and instal a Christian PM), preposterous as its likelihood may be?

Recalling my question: But is there any hope to salvage the RPK-Haris Ibrahim relationship?

The ball lies in RPK’s court, to apologize to Haris for not consulting him on saying MCLM will not field a candidate in GE-13.

RPK amputates 'gangrenous' Anwar Ibrahim from Pakatan?

Ho ho ho ho ho.

Hello there, would that be Santa (Father Christmas), late by more than a week? Maybe his tardy arrival were due to some of his reindeers being made to disappear by a woman who had abracadabra-ishly changed them into condominiums? wakakaka.

No, it’s RPK with his political and personal dis-endorsements of the Great One, Anwar Ibrahim, much to the distress, disappointments and dismay of the PKR camp – see following at Malaysia-Today:

(1) Anwar morally unfit to become PM, says RPK
(2) ’Rights group not a third force’ - RPK
(3) RPK: There’s life after Anwar
(4) RPK: “Anwar may become irrelevant”
(5) RPK says confident Anwar man in sex video

Oh, how those anwaristas would love to mutilate, mangle and mafoolaat RPK wakakaka. Already the predictable, childish and zombie-like "RPK has been bought by UMNO" comments can be seen in a number of intercative online news media and blogs. Instead, I would advise those losers to wear sack cloth, powder themselves with ashes and wail for seven days and seven nights as per Esther 4:1 (KJV), with apologies to the author of the solar-powered King James version of the Bible for substituting Mordecai with ‘PKR’ wakakaka:

When PKR perceived all that was done, PKR rent his clothes, and put on sackcloth with ashes, and went out into the midst of the city, and cried with a loud and a bitter cry.

But other than the year being new, there’s nothing new in RPK’s views about Anwar. On 14 April last year (that is/was 2011), RPK stated more or less the same in The Malaysian Insider’s article RPK says Pakatan disunited, Anwar incapable to lead.

Then, RPK condemned Anwar for exactly the same things, broken promises, the disgraceful 916 undemocratic bullsh*t and most important of all, a lack of political and economic leadership, especially in a number of incidents in Selangor.

I blogged immediately after The Malaysian Insider’s article in a post titled RPK and the necessary destruction of Anwar Ibrahim? where I wrote:

We know that Anwar Ibrahim is NOT, repeat, NOT the reformasi champion he claims to be.

Recall, this has been the man (then DPM and director of BN elections in Sabah in 1994) responsible for the Great LEAP Forward in that State that year, when Pairin, leader of the party with the majority of seats from the election, went to the residence of the YDP Negeri to claim the CM post, and found that not only were the gates of the YDP Negeri's residence locked and closed to him, but that he had by then become the Opposition Leader, thanks to Anwar Ibrahim, Master of frog-ology.

Remember, this has been the man who wanted to be PM on 16 September 2008 with 82 federal parliamentary seats against AAB’s 140, and attempted to bully his mathematically-muddled claim through by nothing more than his hope for an encore of his dubious Sabah achievement, which, thankfully for democracy and the supremacy of the ballot box, proved to be a fantasy as surreal as some scenes in James Cameron's 'Avatar'.

And surely the most humiliating outcome for him (and embarrassing for Pakatan) from that shameful incident had been the rejection of his vainglorious and failed coup d’etat by none other than His Snooziness, the Sultan of Somnambulation. Even AAB could see through his cheap trick.

Reminder, this has also been the man who sent a team of frog hunters to Taiwan. Reformasi? Surely my good sir/lady, thou but jest! […]

….. Haris Ibrahim and Peter have formed the MCLM, with its first high profile task being to offer de-frog-itized candidates to PKR (but not DAP or PAS) for the next general election.

Why? Because they believe Anwar Ibrahim could no longer be trusted to lead the charge against BN nor to select good candidates to offer to the rakyat as their parliamentary representatives.

The way I’ve read it, Peter and Haris are both fed up with the political incompetency, insincerity and lack of will of Anwar Ibrahim, Azmin Ali and their innermost coterie to truly reform their party and run it as a model of democratic, just and transparent process, thus as the natural primus inter pares of Pakatan.

Instead, we've learnt those PKR leaders have been accused of stacking the odds in their personal interests, to shore up their own political positions, their fiefdoms, instead of nurturing true democratic conduct, and eliminating and removing genuine and legitimate dissenters within PKR. Yes, they’re light years from being political reformers where the only evidence of that so-called ideology or democratic process lies only with and in 9 alphabetical letters, r-e-f-o-r-m-a-s-i, that’s all.

Anwar Ibrahim, Azmin Ali and their innermost coterie belong better in UMNO, though some UMNO members might take umbrage at this suggestion.

Anwar Ibrahim is more than just ‘damaged goods’. As he’s a biological creature, let’s use the term that I believe Peter sees him as being. Anwar Ibrahim is now ‘gangrenous’ to Pakatan, and thus, must be amputated off before his presence poisons the entire body and life of the coalition.

Thus I do not see Peter, master of strategy extraordinaire, as having defected to the other side or being bought over by UMNO. I believe Peter sees the (political) destruction and removal of Anwar Ibrahim (and his like-minded coterie) as a necessary step to the continuing life of Pakatan and in its fight against BN.

Like Cato and his declaration of "Carthago delenda est" (Carthage must be destroyed), RPK believes in the necessary and total destruction of Anwar Ibrahim and inner coterie for Pakatan (Rome) to survive as a viable political alternative to the BN.

Malaysian of 2011

Traditionally, around end of December each year, news media like to ‘roundup’ the year’s important headline-making news, while Time Magazine likes to nominate who it considers as the most significant news-making person or institution of the Year; and of course Playboy announces the Playmate of the Year wakakaka.

I prefer the latter, yes, I’ve to confess to having a wish to view Playmate of the Year wakakaka, but in this post I’ll forgo the girlie pictures and write on whom I believe to be the socio-political Malaysian of the Year 2011.

I reckon it’ll be boring to continue nominating RPK or Haris Ibrahim as they would have been nominated years before. Neither would I name Ibrahim Ali or Utusan Malaysia as newsworthy anymore as their strident shrill and sickening bigoted comments have become flat like an overexposed piece of keropok because of over airing wakakaka.

How about sweeties Ambiga Sreenevasan or Auntie Bersih? Both are wonderful sweethearts but I want someone more intriguing and who’s likely (has the potential) to make an impact on the political scene.

What about Dr Mahathir who in recent times has disappointedly been propounding the Chinese threat to Malays? I suppose he really meant the threats to UMNO-Malays rather than general Malays. No, not him!

Hmmm, I wonder whether Dr M has read a delightful summary of the year’s threats to Malays, in The Malaysian Insider’s piece MILF-PRON Special Report for 2011: Malays under threat, delightfully written by Yusseri Yusoff. Following are extracts of his article:

While Mahathir continued his series of warnings to the Malays by warning that the Malays could end up like the Palestinians who sold their own country out to the Jews, a new threat to the Malays reared its ugly head — Kentucky Fried Chicken could possibly be out of Malay hands.

Based on an unconfirmed rumour it was said that the majority owner of KFC in Malaysia Kulim Bhd could be sold off to a non-Malay company and therefore this would constitute a major threat to the ability of Malays to consume chicken fried in 11 secret herbs and spices.

The owners of Kulim Bhd Johor Corp denied the rumours. When asked whether they were the ones responsible for spreading the rumour the owners of the Radix Fried Chicken chain refused to comment They did however say that Radix Fried Chicken contained more that 11 herbs and spices as well as Tongkat Ali and quite possibly ginseng, for a stiffer fried chicken experience presumably.

Wakakaka, good one Yusseri, but sorry, no, you’re not my Malaysian of 2011 …

... and likewise nyet for Lim KS, Lim GE, Karpal Singh & his once-machai Dr Rama wakakaka, the Pak Hajis from PAS, or even the woman who made kerbau disappear by turning them into kondos, wakakaka.

Most certainly nyet also for Mr man man lai and his blue eyed boy and princess.

Neither would I consider blokes who used corrupt money/gifts to fly to Mecca to perform their Haj’s, or him who pompously claimed to be a solar-powered Malay saviour or his buddy who cowardly blamed a woman for his seditious sms-ed lies.

The man I have in mind is probably the most intriguing politician in Malaysia, a man (sorry ladies) who sits on the side of Coalition A, yet has been considered by/offered to Coalition B - in other words, he is seen as also ‘acceptable’ to side B.

Many have been the scenarios offered as to why he is the best UMNO candidate to head (not ‘helm’ for god’s sake, wakakaka), bizarre as it may sound, Pakatan Rakyat.

His principal proposer has been Dato' Mohd Ariff Sabri bin Hj Abdul Aziz who’s better known in the blogging world as Sakmongkol AK47, a blogger who’s generally unhappy with the way UMNO has gone songsang and grossly corrupt since its earlier nationalistic days. Incidentally, I read DAP has purportedly been headhunting Dato' Mohd Ariff Sabri.

By now, I’m sure you are aware I’m talking about Tengku Razaleigh, affectionately known as Ku Li, a once-powerful politician destined by his karma, kismet and mea-lee to sit by the sideline of power politics for the last 25 years, and make many Malaysians wonder whether, by a mere but treacherous change of tide of around 40-ish UMNO party votes, he was the best Malaysian PM we never had?

Now, intriguingly, the question is: could Ku Li be the best PM we will have?

I don’t propose to go into why Anwar won’t be PM (lots have already been written on it), while the proposed replacements for him are mere moronic fantasies of some diehard anwarista cultists. Nor will DAP accept a PAS PM and naturally, vice versa. Thus Ku Li’s potential as a unifying figure to head Pakatan (post a '2nd-time incarcerated' Anwar) grows more significant.

I believe DAP will accept him and PAS perhaps grudgingly so, after some hard considerations of realpolitiks and their wish to be in a cohesive Pakatan government. PKR may come to the party after much budak-type rolling on the floor cum heels thumping merajuk-ing by someone wakakaka.

But, like Empat Ekor, much as we know the probability of winning runs into odds of one in several million, you can never win unless you play (buy the ticket).

So, all the arguments for Ku Li by Sakmongkol or any of his staunch proposers will be bloody useless unless Ku Li actually joins Pakatan. He must make up his mind now or it'll be too late.

Nonetheless, his intriguing (3rd time I've used this adjective to describe him) middle-of-the road potential to head and present a strongly unified Pakatan in GE-13 stares at us in the face.

Ku Li has to be my (socio-political) Malaysian of 2011.