The Malaysian Insider - DAP leadership to cede office if hudud law part of Pakatan agenda.
Well, Lim Guan Eng has laid the DAP cards openly on the table ...
But I wonder where are those mindless & mute Myrmidons of the man-man-lai Master?
They’re usually virulently vicious & vociferous, those (non-Muslim) anwaristas! Suddenly they have become mute and meek or mindless (or more likely, spineless).
Monday, September 26, 2011
Saturday, September 24, 2011
Dr Jekyll & Mr Zaid
Malaysiakini - Kita roadshow for Najib's 'save democracy' reforms
“sent shock waves ...”
Apt description on Zaid Ibrahim’s declaration to organize “... a roadshow to garner support for Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak's efforts to ‘save democracy’ by way of reforms of a number of laws”, to wit, the dismantling of the hated and dreaded ISA.
As a blogger who has a soft spot for Zaid, because I see in him a man who wants to practise civilised Westminster politics (antipodal to the feral ‘either you’re with us or against us’ Bush-ism politics of many UMNO and PKR people) I've to admit I too was surprised by his proposal.
Now, after that initial surprise, there are more than one way to react to his rather bizarre plan for KITA, where one of course is to straightaway condemn him outright as an UMNO mole or stooge or stalking horse.
The extreme form of this hostile acrimonious feral approach based on hate or political opposition can be seen on many blogs – let me give you a few examples:
Say, for example, you’re a virulently anti-DAP person, where you would go to any extent, even fabricated ones wakakaka, to condemn Lim Guan Eng or any of the DAP politicians like Teresa Kok, Teo Nie Ching, or Hannah Yeo, you could:
• Condemn Lim GE for his administrative inclusiveness by portraying him as a Chinese traitor for favouring Muslims, and at the same time placed a photo of him conducting a sembileh (Muslim ritualistic slaughter of an animal for consumption) at a mosque.
The photo is of course a fraud but you used a technical word for it (photoshop) which most readers wouldn’t know - & you hope for that. Even if they know what ‘photoshop’ means (very unlikely), the effect would still be what scientists call ‘sublimal’ effect, basically influencing (Chinese) readers (without their being aware) to regard Lim GE as a CM who has ‘gone over’ to the Muslims
• In the aftermath of the ADUNs defection to BN in Perak, the Perak DAP had a poster of the 3 defectors placed on the entrance to a DAP party function for its members to walk over, as an act of disgust against those 3 defectors, a silly one as I had blogged in Mean-spirited Malaysians.
But it was widely reported in the news (e.g. Malaysiakini) that Lim Guan Eng, the civilised gentleman he is, took very careful step to avoid doing just that, by stretching his stride over the poster so as to avoid stepping on any of the 3 defectors’ face.
But you have no hesitation labelling that photo as “Hee Yit Foong diletakkan gambarnya di atas lantai untuk dipijak-pijak/Lim Guan Eng sedang berjoget”, thus slyly, sickeningly and sinisterly insinuating that Lim GE had not only stepped on the faces in the poster but danced on them as well.
It’s a disgusting political fabrication no different from the faked photo of Lim GE performing a sembileh ceremony at a mosque, to incite hatred and dislike for Lim.
• You could condemn Teresa Kok, Teo Nie Ching and Hannah Yeo for wearing a selendang (to cover their heads) when entering a mosque as evidence of DAP’s abject submission to Muslims/Malays, thus a betrayal of the Chinese, but when you were hauled in by the police for an alleged seditious piece of writing, you proclaimed loudly and with obscene haste to the world you love Malays because you frequently wear baju kurung wakakaka.
• Because some DAP leaders are Christians, you launched an attack against DAP for having a Christian agenda in Malaysian politics (probably on instructions from UMNO), and regardless of inconvenient facts, label everyone you dislike/hate (or secretly lusted after) as Christian fanatics.
You then go on to assert that foreign-based Malaysian bloggers (e.g. RPK, kaytee wakakaka) have no right to comment on Malaysian affairs, while you a chauvinistic Chinese, who's always posting on the superiority of Chinese culture and Chinese events in mainland China, would in the same breath write to condemn DAP MPs and ADUNs, RPK, Haris Ibrahim, MCLM, analyse that TBH's final note showed he probably committed suicide, and praise MCA.
OK, the above are very extreme shameless, unconscionable, disgraceful lies of hatred, deceit - probably sponsored by you-know-who - and hypocrisy and double standards. But they serve to demonstrate what extent unconscionable double standard hypocrisy based on hate or political interests could go, and what could even be twisted to be perceived as ‘truth’, and what would basically be the alternative view (as in lies from truth).
Now, having said all that, what then can we provide on Zaid’s bizarre proposal to run roadshows to garner support for Najib’s reforms such as the repel of the ISA?
As mentioned, we can of course condemn him.
Or, we could wait and see whether Zaid’s move could be one of the following:
• A subtle way to prod Najib from NATO (no action all talk only) into genuine reforms and to the ultimate dismantling of the draconian ISA.
• A bipartisan endeavour to hasten acceptance of Najib’s declaration and expedite its implementation – yes yes I know the word ‘bipartisan’ is a rare bird in Malaysian politics.
Wakakaka – the above will no doubt infuriate my dear mateys Looes74 and Cruzeiro, the latter calling me ‘braindead’ for being supportive of Zaid ;-)
“sent shock waves ...”
Apt description on Zaid Ibrahim’s declaration to organize “... a roadshow to garner support for Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak's efforts to ‘save democracy’ by way of reforms of a number of laws”, to wit, the dismantling of the hated and dreaded ISA.
As a blogger who has a soft spot for Zaid, because I see in him a man who wants to practise civilised Westminster politics (antipodal to the feral ‘either you’re with us or against us’ Bush-ism politics of many UMNO and PKR people) I've to admit I too was surprised by his proposal.
Now, after that initial surprise, there are more than one way to react to his rather bizarre plan for KITA, where one of course is to straightaway condemn him outright as an UMNO mole or stooge or stalking horse.
The extreme form of this hostile acrimonious feral approach based on hate or political opposition can be seen on many blogs – let me give you a few examples:
Say, for example, you’re a virulently anti-DAP person, where you would go to any extent, even fabricated ones wakakaka, to condemn Lim Guan Eng or any of the DAP politicians like Teresa Kok, Teo Nie Ching, or Hannah Yeo, you could:
• Condemn Lim GE for his administrative inclusiveness by portraying him as a Chinese traitor for favouring Muslims, and at the same time placed a photo of him conducting a sembileh (Muslim ritualistic slaughter of an animal for consumption) at a mosque.
The photo is of course a fraud but you used a technical word for it (photoshop) which most readers wouldn’t know - & you hope for that. Even if they know what ‘photoshop’ means (very unlikely), the effect would still be what scientists call ‘sublimal’ effect, basically influencing (Chinese) readers (without their being aware) to regard Lim GE as a CM who has ‘gone over’ to the Muslims
• In the aftermath of the ADUNs defection to BN in Perak, the Perak DAP had a poster of the 3 defectors placed on the entrance to a DAP party function for its members to walk over, as an act of disgust against those 3 defectors, a silly one as I had blogged in Mean-spirited Malaysians.
But it was widely reported in the news (e.g. Malaysiakini) that Lim Guan Eng, the civilised gentleman he is, took very careful step to avoid doing just that, by stretching his stride over the poster so as to avoid stepping on any of the 3 defectors’ face.
But you have no hesitation labelling that photo as “Hee Yit Foong diletakkan gambarnya di atas lantai untuk dipijak-pijak/Lim Guan Eng sedang berjoget”, thus slyly, sickeningly and sinisterly insinuating that Lim GE had not only stepped on the faces in the poster but danced on them as well.
It’s a disgusting political fabrication no different from the faked photo of Lim GE performing a sembileh ceremony at a mosque, to incite hatred and dislike for Lim.
• You could condemn Teresa Kok, Teo Nie Ching and Hannah Yeo for wearing a selendang (to cover their heads) when entering a mosque as evidence of DAP’s abject submission to Muslims/Malays, thus a betrayal of the Chinese, but when you were hauled in by the police for an alleged seditious piece of writing, you proclaimed loudly and with obscene haste to the world you love Malays because you frequently wear baju kurung wakakaka.
• Because some DAP leaders are Christians, you launched an attack against DAP for having a Christian agenda in Malaysian politics (probably on instructions from UMNO), and regardless of inconvenient facts, label everyone you dislike/hate (or secretly lusted after) as Christian fanatics.
You then go on to assert that foreign-based Malaysian bloggers (e.g. RPK, kaytee wakakaka) have no right to comment on Malaysian affairs, while you a chauvinistic Chinese, who's always posting on the superiority of Chinese culture and Chinese events in mainland China, would in the same breath write to condemn DAP MPs and ADUNs, RPK, Haris Ibrahim, MCLM, analyse that TBH's final note showed he probably committed suicide, and praise MCA.
OK, the above are very extreme shameless, unconscionable, disgraceful lies of hatred, deceit - probably sponsored by you-know-who - and hypocrisy and double standards. But they serve to demonstrate what extent unconscionable double standard hypocrisy based on hate or political interests could go, and what could even be twisted to be perceived as ‘truth’, and what would basically be the alternative view (as in lies from truth).
Now, having said all that, what then can we provide on Zaid’s bizarre proposal to run roadshows to garner support for Najib’s reforms such as the repel of the ISA?
As mentioned, we can of course condemn him.
Or, we could wait and see whether Zaid’s move could be one of the following:
• A subtle way to prod Najib from NATO (no action all talk only) into genuine reforms and to the ultimate dismantling of the draconian ISA.
• A bipartisan endeavour to hasten acceptance of Najib’s declaration and expedite its implementation – yes yes I know the word ‘bipartisan’ is a rare bird in Malaysian politics.
Wakakaka – the above will no doubt infuriate my dear mateys Looes74 and Cruzeiro, the latter calling me ‘braindead’ for being supportive of Zaid ;-)
Flagging DAP's political cringe
The Malaysian Insider - DAP unfurls six-month ban on Manoharan.
While I admire the editor of TMI for his clever headlines, playing on the word ‘unfurl’ to go together with the topic item, that of M Manoharan’s call for the Malaysian national flag to be redesigned, I don’t the DAP party disciplinary board’s decision to whack Manoharan with a 6 month suspension for what has been Manoharan's very legitimate opinion (expressed on his Facebook page).
Manoharan wanted the Jalur Gemilang redesigned because it shows too much of a resemblance to the national flag of the USA - incidentally an undeniable and, to many, embarrassing fact - an association that today is a not only a stigma, but a dangerous stigma, given the hatred for the USA throughout a large portion of our globe.
Now, on what grounds did the DAP disciplinary board find Manoharan’s comments ‘serious’? That DAP MPs, ADUNs and members must not express their own and legitimate opinions? Sheeesh!
The truth, I believe, is that the DAP has demonstrated it suffers from political cringe, afraid of UMNO’s racist attacks on Manoharan’s alleged unpatriotic call.
I reckon DAP must have felt that in the wake of Mat Sabu’s opinion on a piece of Malaya’s colonial history, it may be too much against the party’s endeavour to win Malay confidence in the party’s Malaysian-ness.
So, Manoharan has to be sembileh (sacrificed as an offering) to the Trimurti (gods) of racism, bigotry and intolerance.
I am truly disappointed, but I want Manoharan to know there are DAP supporters and members who believe he has been perfectly within his rights as a Malaysian citizen to propose a redesign of Jalur Gemilang, which by the way, belongs to every Malaysian and not just UMNO members.
Read also: Jalur Gemilang approved by King George VI
While I admire the editor of TMI for his clever headlines, playing on the word ‘unfurl’ to go together with the topic item, that of M Manoharan’s call for the Malaysian national flag to be redesigned, I don’t the DAP party disciplinary board’s decision to whack Manoharan with a 6 month suspension for what has been Manoharan's very legitimate opinion (expressed on his Facebook page).
Manoharan wanted the Jalur Gemilang redesigned because it shows too much of a resemblance to the national flag of the USA - incidentally an undeniable and, to many, embarrassing fact - an association that today is a not only a stigma, but a dangerous stigma, given the hatred for the USA throughout a large portion of our globe.
Now, on what grounds did the DAP disciplinary board find Manoharan’s comments ‘serious’? That DAP MPs, ADUNs and members must not express their own and legitimate opinions? Sheeesh!
The truth, I believe, is that the DAP has demonstrated it suffers from political cringe, afraid of UMNO’s racist attacks on Manoharan’s alleged unpatriotic call.
I reckon DAP must have felt that in the wake of Mat Sabu’s opinion on a piece of Malaya’s colonial history, it may be too much against the party’s endeavour to win Malay confidence in the party’s Malaysian-ness.
So, Manoharan has to be sembileh (sacrificed as an offering) to the Trimurti (gods) of racism, bigotry and intolerance.
I am truly disappointed, but I want Manoharan to know there are DAP supporters and members who believe he has been perfectly within his rights as a Malaysian citizen to propose a redesign of Jalur Gemilang, which by the way, belongs to every Malaysian and not just UMNO members.
Read also: Jalur Gemilang approved by King George VI
Thursday, September 22, 2011
Anwar & Zaid Ibrahim's - chalk & cheese
Should I write about Anwar Ibrahim supporting PAS’ plan to implement hudud laws? Ought I to question his so-called (and quite frankly, very undeserved) title of Asia’s Renaissance Man? Or, perhaps I could write about his complete loss of commonsense when he claimed that rights of non-Muslims (hey, what about Muslims?) will not be affected under a system of law where hands could be irreversible chopped off or people whipped and stoned, especially when we know all too well the quality of our judges?
Asia’s Renaissance Man supporting hudud? Wakakaka!
Or, maybe I should ask whether the DAP is now squirming with such an ally and touted leader of Pakatan? No, am not asking Tian Chua or Eli Wong because those PKR people are utterly hopeless without any spine or independent thoughts, much as I love Eli ;-)
To answer my own questions, alas, no, I won’t because Anwar being Anwar is always tap-dancing around any tulips which would make him personally smell sweet – note his classic evasive weaving 4-face Brahma-nic snake oil salesman talk, with a back door open for escape, where he … stressed … that PR had not discussed the matter and this was only a “personal opinion”.
What I do know is that dearest invincibly anti-DAP Helen Ang would be dancing too, but in rapt delight at DAP’s undoubted discomfort at the ‘out from the left field’ declaration by its unreliable undermining unconscionable Asia’s Renaissance ally wakakaka.
Sorry, Uncle Lim and Lim GE, can’t help you guys – go see Karpal Singh who will surely have a word or two to say about Anwar’s treacherous pulling of the rug right from under the DAP’s feet.
Rather, I prefer to write about Zaid Ibrahim.
But as a refresher, some words first about Zaid that I had written in Pakatan must not avoid the unavoidable as follows:
Zaid committed 3 sins in the eyes of PKR anwaristas:
(1) He didn’t show reverence for Anwar Ibrahim, calling a spade a spade. Anwar has attained such a cult status that to criticize him is not unlike committing blasphemy. There’s no reasoning with his devotees as they are no longer logical or rational, and cannot see anything wrong with him, whether it’s Anwar’s anti-reformasi shame of 916 or the greater humiliating shame of chasing potential tadpoles all the way to Taiwan.
Even my dear Eli Wong was complicit in going to Taiwan on that froggy hunt – shame on her! But such has been the demigod status of Anwar Ibrahim that his followers would even believe the corrupt doctrine of frogs being compatible with political reforms.
That same fanatical blind adoration would place only his family members, Dr Wan Azizah or Nurul Izzah, as acceptable substitutes to the Greatest Man on Earth since Moses, who would deliver them out of the BN-created wilderness, regardless of whether Dr Wan or Nurul, sweet as mother and daughter are, are really qualified. Isn't this BN-type nepotism?
(2) Zaid dared to challenge Anwar's Anointed One, first by attempting to get Nurul, then Khalid Ibrahim to stand against AI’s blue-eyed boy, and finally putting himself on the firing line, only to be frustrated in like fashion as was Chegubard, Jenapala, Gobala, etc, which in turn raised outraged voices of people like Haris Ibrahim and Jonson Chong in disgust at the PKR party polling process (but alas, to a deaf Dr Wan Azizah and an equally deaf what’s-the-name-of that-deer-caught-in-a car-headlights?)
(3) Zaid dared to leave the Greatest Party in the World, and then to strip layer by layer of mythological camouflage off the Greatest Man on Earth since Moses, and worse, in a mature, logical and evidential manner.
Thus, in the Pakatan camp (mainly PKR), Zaid is reviled as … horrors of horror … an anti Anwar traitor. And an anti-Anwar person must be (whether by logic or lack of) an UMNO mole, and f* the facts.
Look, they would say, there’s 'proof', didn't Zaid apologise to Najib when the latter declared he’d repeal the ISA? Look, even his own KITA party members have frowned upon and criticised his apology. It’s absolute proof of his UMNO leanings, if not his display of obsequiousness to Najib.
Really, it’s sad and pitiful to hear/read the recent series of unwarranted and ill-informed criticisms and worse, feral abuses at Zaid. I put it to a clash of culture where some (including his own KITA members) do not understand the meaning of his sportsman-like gesture to Najib.
In our Malaysian culture, imbued with an overdose of Rambo-ish hormones of jaguh-ness on steroids, where the brute is prized over the refine, an apology implies asking for ‘forgiveness’, and if in politics, subordinate servility or a hopeless cringe by a loser. There can be no other explanation.
For those low brow people, there’s no understanding of an apology made in sportsmanlike fairness, like “Hey matey, I read you wrong after all, sh*t man but sorry,. Now, what about a nasi lemak (or in the West, beer)!”
… not unlike losing a non-hostile bet!
But alas, there's no point explaining such to PKR or some KITA people – the culture or etiquette would be beyond their limited intellect.
Read also:
KITA - the example of Zaid Ibrahim
Asia’s Renaissance Man supporting hudud? Wakakaka!
Or, maybe I should ask whether the DAP is now squirming with such an ally and touted leader of Pakatan? No, am not asking Tian Chua or Eli Wong because those PKR people are utterly hopeless without any spine or independent thoughts, much as I love Eli ;-)
To answer my own questions, alas, no, I won’t because Anwar being Anwar is always tap-dancing around any tulips which would make him personally smell sweet – note his classic evasive weaving 4-face Brahma-nic snake oil salesman talk, with a back door open for escape, where he … stressed … that PR had not discussed the matter and this was only a “personal opinion”.
What I do know is that dearest invincibly anti-DAP Helen Ang would be dancing too, but in rapt delight at DAP’s undoubted discomfort at the ‘out from the left field’ declaration by its unreliable undermining unconscionable Asia’s Renaissance ally wakakaka.
Sorry, Uncle Lim and Lim GE, can’t help you guys – go see Karpal Singh who will surely have a word or two to say about Anwar’s treacherous pulling of the rug right from under the DAP’s feet.
Rather, I prefer to write about Zaid Ibrahim.
But as a refresher, some words first about Zaid that I had written in Pakatan must not avoid the unavoidable as follows:
Zaid committed 3 sins in the eyes of PKR anwaristas:
(1) He didn’t show reverence for Anwar Ibrahim, calling a spade a spade. Anwar has attained such a cult status that to criticize him is not unlike committing blasphemy. There’s no reasoning with his devotees as they are no longer logical or rational, and cannot see anything wrong with him, whether it’s Anwar’s anti-reformasi shame of 916 or the greater humiliating shame of chasing potential tadpoles all the way to Taiwan.
Even my dear Eli Wong was complicit in going to Taiwan on that froggy hunt – shame on her! But such has been the demigod status of Anwar Ibrahim that his followers would even believe the corrupt doctrine of frogs being compatible with political reforms.
That same fanatical blind adoration would place only his family members, Dr Wan Azizah or Nurul Izzah, as acceptable substitutes to the Greatest Man on Earth since Moses, who would deliver them out of the BN-created wilderness, regardless of whether Dr Wan or Nurul, sweet as mother and daughter are, are really qualified. Isn't this BN-type nepotism?
(2) Zaid dared to challenge Anwar's Anointed One, first by attempting to get Nurul, then Khalid Ibrahim to stand against AI’s blue-eyed boy, and finally putting himself on the firing line, only to be frustrated in like fashion as was Chegubard, Jenapala, Gobala, etc, which in turn raised outraged voices of people like Haris Ibrahim and Jonson Chong in disgust at the PKR party polling process (but alas, to a deaf Dr Wan Azizah and an equally deaf what’s-the-name-of that-deer-caught-in-a car-headlights?)
(3) Zaid dared to leave the Greatest Party in the World, and then to strip layer by layer of mythological camouflage off the Greatest Man on Earth since Moses, and worse, in a mature, logical and evidential manner.
Thus, in the Pakatan camp (mainly PKR), Zaid is reviled as … horrors of horror … an anti Anwar traitor. And an anti-Anwar person must be (whether by logic or lack of) an UMNO mole, and f* the facts.
Look, they would say, there’s 'proof', didn't Zaid apologise to Najib when the latter declared he’d repeal the ISA? Look, even his own KITA party members have frowned upon and criticised his apology. It’s absolute proof of his UMNO leanings, if not his display of obsequiousness to Najib.
Really, it’s sad and pitiful to hear/read the recent series of unwarranted and ill-informed criticisms and worse, feral abuses at Zaid. I put it to a clash of culture where some (including his own KITA members) do not understand the meaning of his sportsman-like gesture to Najib.
In our Malaysian culture, imbued with an overdose of Rambo-ish hormones of jaguh-ness on steroids, where the brute is prized over the refine, an apology implies asking for ‘forgiveness’, and if in politics, subordinate servility or a hopeless cringe by a loser. There can be no other explanation.
For those low brow people, there’s no understanding of an apology made in sportsmanlike fairness, like “Hey matey, I read you wrong after all, sh*t man but sorry,. Now, what about a nasi lemak (or in the West, beer)!”
… not unlike losing a non-hostile bet!
But alas, there's no point explaining such to PKR or some KITA people – the culture or etiquette would be beyond their limited intellect.
Read also:
KITA - the example of Zaid Ibrahim
Tuesday, September 20, 2011
The demon in us
One of my fave writers, AB Sulaiman, has done it again, with another of his usually penetrating observations in Malaysiakini’s Deficiency in intellectual honesty.
It’s a very well written article, typical of him, and I've picked on one of his points to blog.
He relates to us Utusan’s instigating fabrication in its anti-communist (and anti-Chinese) propaganda through the cartoons of illustrator Hamzah Mohd Amin.
AB Sulaiman tells us that: Among the most controversial of his [Hamzah Mohd Amin] artwork is a depiction of slant-eyed men in tan-coloured uniforms, waving weapons and forcing a group of Malay-looking (therefore Muslim) people to eat pork.
Sulaiman quotes Hamzah Mohd Amin stating: "Today's generation does not know the hardships of life during the communist era. I worked to create the drawings a few weeks ago, so that they will be able to picture the cruelty of the communist and why we hate them. Through the drawings, I hope that they will realise the cruelty of the communists and learn from it.”
AB Sulaiman interprets for us the sinister intention of the illustrated fabrications:
The message in turn was clear enough: The standard stereotype that the communists were inflicting untold cruelty on gentle and pious (Malay-Muslim) citizens. The communists were taken as wholly Chinese: so hate the Chinese! Hate the communists! Also, wake up Malays and defend your agama, bangsa dan negara against the marauding Chinese and communists!
Though AB Sulaiman tells us the Utusan’s (and thus presumably UMNO’s) propaganda was “… all hogwash of course,” he added that “…until the recent past such sentiments were in vogue.”
By “the recent past” AB Sulaiman implies the advent/availability of the worldwide web and its online media, websites and bloggers, etc, and other information exchanging facilities such as Twitter and Facebook, to provide us with alternative views.
Thus “easily available information” is the enemy of liars, propagandists and agitators, and that’s why UMNO and its cronies want to control information.
They were successful in the past by use of various means, including the threat implicit in the PPPA, but today they feel somewhat lost with the new almost-uncontrollable online media - maybe only temporarily until they too emulate and master the West’s wicked media manipulating machinations, where, for example, an Arab assassinating a Westerner or Jew is an evil terrorist Islamic militant while an Israeli assassinating an Arab or even an European or Americans (e.g. Rachel Corrie, Furkan Dogan, Tom Hurndall, Tristan Anderson, Caoimhe Butterly) would be a steely-eyed brave, resolute and brave defender of freedom and democracy or at worst, wasn’t aware of the presence or identity of the person killed.
But I want to add something else, another sad ingredient that facilitates the acceptance of such UMNO-type of hogwash. AB Sulaiman alludes to it subtly but kaytee will specify it bluntly – namely, our innate ethnic prejudice, racial bias or/and bigoted stereotyping.
We want to believe the bad in ‘others’, the worst in ‘them’. It’s not just Malays being biased towards Chinese/Indians but also Chinese thinking the Malays/Indians are the pits, and likewise the Indians vis-à-vis Malays/Chinese.
With some exceptions, we have become so because (a) we were brought up like so in our remarkable Malaysian environment, (b) we have become captive to our own tribal prejudices, and (c) we have been brainwashed by unscrupulous politicians, teachers, etc.
Just one example - I have written on this one before - picture this movie scene where Pakcik Daud, a silver-hair dignified looking, well groomed, handsomely moustached patrician, immaculate in his evening dress (complete with brown polka-dot cravat), comfortably seated on his magnificent armchair in a beautiful bungalow lounge room (or airy colonial styled veranda), puffing contentedly and contemplatively away on his briar pipe – the patrician thinks carefully before he removes his pipe, waves it in a gentle arc to signal he is about to make a pronouncement, then in his cool soft-spoken and soothing articulation, advises on how to resolve a village issue which has plagued the village multi-ethnic residents. His statement is succinct, considerate, fair, balanced, and compassionate.
Cut away to another scene and you get Ah Chong, the local fat flabby flatulent-ridden grocer, sweating away like a you-know-what, in dirty singlet and shorts and with a dodgy dacing, quarrelsome in his loud raucous argumentative voice, gesturing vigorously and rudely, and hawking once or twice in total arrogant biadap-ish disregard for his customers ...
... and there is Arumugam, the village clown squatting in his dhoti, skinny, unshaven, smelly, sly, sneaky, servile, smarmy, sleazy, picking his nose and speaking in inelegant loud rapid-fire Tamil while expectorating globs of red lime coloured sputum all over ...
Guess in which language movie we would likely see the above scenes?
Don’t worry, there are Chinese and Indian equivalents as well.
The point is: Can we arrest our own prejudice, bias, bigotry and stereotyping?
AB Sulaiman has shown us how he as a Malaysian has dealt with Utusan’s evil fabrications.
So what would you Malaysians do when you read an email circular that indulges in the worst possible lies and biased generalisations to badmouth, for example, Malays/Muslims?
The worst racist demon lies quietly within each of us.
It’s a very well written article, typical of him, and I've picked on one of his points to blog.
He relates to us Utusan’s instigating fabrication in its anti-communist (and anti-Chinese) propaganda through the cartoons of illustrator Hamzah Mohd Amin.
AB Sulaiman tells us that: Among the most controversial of his [Hamzah Mohd Amin] artwork is a depiction of slant-eyed men in tan-coloured uniforms, waving weapons and forcing a group of Malay-looking (therefore Muslim) people to eat pork.
Sulaiman quotes Hamzah Mohd Amin stating: "Today's generation does not know the hardships of life during the communist era. I worked to create the drawings a few weeks ago, so that they will be able to picture the cruelty of the communist and why we hate them. Through the drawings, I hope that they will realise the cruelty of the communists and learn from it.”
AB Sulaiman interprets for us the sinister intention of the illustrated fabrications:
The message in turn was clear enough: The standard stereotype that the communists were inflicting untold cruelty on gentle and pious (Malay-Muslim) citizens. The communists were taken as wholly Chinese: so hate the Chinese! Hate the communists! Also, wake up Malays and defend your agama, bangsa dan negara against the marauding Chinese and communists!
Though AB Sulaiman tells us the Utusan’s (and thus presumably UMNO’s) propaganda was “… all hogwash of course,” he added that “…until the recent past such sentiments were in vogue.”
By “the recent past” AB Sulaiman implies the advent/availability of the worldwide web and its online media, websites and bloggers, etc, and other information exchanging facilities such as Twitter and Facebook, to provide us with alternative views.
Thus “easily available information” is the enemy of liars, propagandists and agitators, and that’s why UMNO and its cronies want to control information.
They were successful in the past by use of various means, including the threat implicit in the PPPA, but today they feel somewhat lost with the new almost-uncontrollable online media - maybe only temporarily until they too emulate and master the West’s wicked media manipulating machinations, where, for example, an Arab assassinating a Westerner or Jew is an evil terrorist Islamic militant while an Israeli assassinating an Arab or even an European or Americans (e.g. Rachel Corrie, Furkan Dogan, Tom Hurndall, Tristan Anderson, Caoimhe Butterly) would be a steely-eyed brave, resolute and brave defender of freedom and democracy or at worst, wasn’t aware of the presence or identity of the person killed.
But I want to add something else, another sad ingredient that facilitates the acceptance of such UMNO-type of hogwash. AB Sulaiman alludes to it subtly but kaytee will specify it bluntly – namely, our innate ethnic prejudice, racial bias or/and bigoted stereotyping.
We want to believe the bad in ‘others’, the worst in ‘them’. It’s not just Malays being biased towards Chinese/Indians but also Chinese thinking the Malays/Indians are the pits, and likewise the Indians vis-à-vis Malays/Chinese.
With some exceptions, we have become so because (a) we were brought up like so in our remarkable Malaysian environment, (b) we have become captive to our own tribal prejudices, and (c) we have been brainwashed by unscrupulous politicians, teachers, etc.
Just one example - I have written on this one before - picture this movie scene where Pakcik Daud, a silver-hair dignified looking, well groomed, handsomely moustached patrician, immaculate in his evening dress (complete with brown polka-dot cravat), comfortably seated on his magnificent armchair in a beautiful bungalow lounge room (or airy colonial styled veranda), puffing contentedly and contemplatively away on his briar pipe – the patrician thinks carefully before he removes his pipe, waves it in a gentle arc to signal he is about to make a pronouncement, then in his cool soft-spoken and soothing articulation, advises on how to resolve a village issue which has plagued the village multi-ethnic residents. His statement is succinct, considerate, fair, balanced, and compassionate.
Cut away to another scene and you get Ah Chong, the local fat flabby flatulent-ridden grocer, sweating away like a you-know-what, in dirty singlet and shorts and with a dodgy dacing, quarrelsome in his loud raucous argumentative voice, gesturing vigorously and rudely, and hawking once or twice in total arrogant biadap-ish disregard for his customers ...
... and there is Arumugam, the village clown squatting in his dhoti, skinny, unshaven, smelly, sly, sneaky, servile, smarmy, sleazy, picking his nose and speaking in inelegant loud rapid-fire Tamil while expectorating globs of red lime coloured sputum all over ...
Guess in which language movie we would likely see the above scenes?
Don’t worry, there are Chinese and Indian equivalents as well.
The point is: Can we arrest our own prejudice, bias, bigotry and stereotyping?
AB Sulaiman has shown us how he as a Malaysian has dealt with Utusan’s evil fabrications.
So what would you Malaysians do when you read an email circular that indulges in the worst possible lies and biased generalisations to badmouth, for example, Malays/Muslims?
The worst racist demon lies quietly within each of us.
Monday, September 19, 2011
Jalur Gemilang approved by King George VI
Low brow ethnic pseudo-warrior Muhyiddin Yassin has condemned a DAP Selangor ADUN, M Manoharan, for showing disrespect to (what Muhyiddin termed) as ‘national heritage’ when the ADUN called for a redesign of the Malaysian flag.
National heritage?
Really, any commonsense understanding would tell us that a national flag, while a symbol of national identity, pride and belonging, is not exempt from changes, as shown by a number of countries.
For example, Canada has made one of the most improved changes to national flags to enhance its Canadian identity – see below and understand how the maple leaf design stands out remarkably and uniquely as Canadian, making the Canadian flag renowned as one of the best flag designs – a design which came about through deliberate change.
And like Canada, it’s only a matter of time before Australia and New Zealand will change theirs as well.
Spain on the other hand has switched from and back to its original royal flag, abandoning its Republican motif.
Estonia is now preparing to change its flag, which I suspect is a political move to be more identified (politically, economically, socially??) with its neighbouring Scandinavian countries.
Incidentally, the Jalur Gemilang (leaving out its several minor modifications following the merger of Malaya with Sarawak, Sabah and Singapore, and the subsequent expulsion of Singapore) was – NOW GET THIS – approved by King George VI on 19 May 1950.
And you can bet George VI certainly wasn't the Sultan of Bolehland.
For those who still don’t believe Malaya was a British colony (de facto or otherwise), eat that fact.
The Malayan/Malaysian flag was designed by Mohamad Hamzah who was said to have borrowed and then modified the design from the flag of the British East India Company, a rapacious trading organization.
Even the name Jalur Gemilang came only into being in 1997 when then-PM Dr Mahathir picked it from a list of proposed names for the flag. Wasn't that naming a change in itself?
Manoharan has been absolutely correct in calling for the redesign of our national flag. Let’s follow the Canadian example, but most of all let’s get rid of any association with the British colonial empire, King George VI and the terrible British East India Company.
As for the low brow ethnic pseudo-warrior, who accused Manoharan’s proposal as likely to lead to changes to the Constitution, let me remind that beetle the Constitution has been changed a couple of hundred times already, by his UMNO.
National heritage?
Really, any commonsense understanding would tell us that a national flag, while a symbol of national identity, pride and belonging, is not exempt from changes, as shown by a number of countries.
For example, Canada has made one of the most improved changes to national flags to enhance its Canadian identity – see below and understand how the maple leaf design stands out remarkably and uniquely as Canadian, making the Canadian flag renowned as one of the best flag designs – a design which came about through deliberate change.
And like Canada, it’s only a matter of time before Australia and New Zealand will change theirs as well.
Spain on the other hand has switched from and back to its original royal flag, abandoning its Republican motif.
Estonia is now preparing to change its flag, which I suspect is a political move to be more identified (politically, economically, socially??) with its neighbouring Scandinavian countries.
Incidentally, the Jalur Gemilang (leaving out its several minor modifications following the merger of Malaya with Sarawak, Sabah and Singapore, and the subsequent expulsion of Singapore) was – NOW GET THIS – approved by King George VI on 19 May 1950.
And you can bet George VI certainly wasn't the Sultan of Bolehland.
For those who still don’t believe Malaya was a British colony (de facto or otherwise), eat that fact.
The Malayan/Malaysian flag was designed by Mohamad Hamzah who was said to have borrowed and then modified the design from the flag of the British East India Company, a rapacious trading organization.
Even the name Jalur Gemilang came only into being in 1997 when then-PM Dr Mahathir picked it from a list of proposed names for the flag. Wasn't that naming a change in itself?
Manoharan has been absolutely correct in calling for the redesign of our national flag. Let’s follow the Canadian example, but most of all let’s get rid of any association with the British colonial empire, King George VI and the terrible British East India Company.
As for the low brow ethnic pseudo-warrior, who accused Manoharan’s proposal as likely to lead to changes to the Constitution, let me remind that beetle the Constitution has been changed a couple of hundred times already, by his UMNO.
Sunday, September 18, 2011
Historical revisionism
I’ve been away for two weeks and what have I been catching up with when I come back to blogging?
Historical revisionism!
Historical revisionism may sometimes be okay but when it’s about distorting the truth to hide crimes, like what rightwing Japanese have been trying to do for years, then that would be termed Negationism.
Rightwing Japanese (politicians, members of conservative clubs, etc) have been busy rewriting history to show its brutal invasion and occupation of Asia (from Korea to Burma and downwards to Papua New Guinea) had been mere ‘advances’ at the invitation of the natives to help them from oppression, or that there were no such war crimes as Korean/Chinese/SE Asian ‘comfort women’ for its occupying troops, or that very few Chinese (mostly soldiers) were killed at Nanjing.
Another example of negationism is the Old Testament which was written mainly by Davidic supporters to suppress the real side of King David who was a ruthless murderer and assassin, adulterer, corrupt mercenary, etc, basically a scumbag.
Gary Greenberg, the President of the Biblical Archaeology Society of New York wrote a book titled ‘The Sins of King David’ to show how but for the grace of the existence of biblical records from different groups of priesthood we would be no wiser to the evils of David.
The New Testament is also another contrived writing, to serve the Roman Emperor Constantine better administer his empire, through his version of the Christian religion. One of its victims was Judah, Jesus most trusted and favourite disciple, who through revisionism became the most hated man in Christianity.
So, now in Malaysia, we have questions on whether Malaya (forget about Malaysia) was a British colony?
My question is: does that matter when there are so much issues demanding our attention, issues like rampant corruption, abuse of the law and other public institutions and the unmitigated unceasing unabated pilfering of the national coffers?
So don’t fall into the trap of becoming involved in arguing over useless topics which in fact were deliberately instigated to divert our attention from far greater ongoing crimes.
Post-note: Some years ago there was a move by certain quarters to revise history to show Kuala Lumpur was not developed through the efforts of Yap Ah Loy.
Historical revisionism!
Historical revisionism may sometimes be okay but when it’s about distorting the truth to hide crimes, like what rightwing Japanese have been trying to do for years, then that would be termed Negationism.
Rightwing Japanese (politicians, members of conservative clubs, etc) have been busy rewriting history to show its brutal invasion and occupation of Asia (from Korea to Burma and downwards to Papua New Guinea) had been mere ‘advances’ at the invitation of the natives to help them from oppression, or that there were no such war crimes as Korean/Chinese/SE Asian ‘comfort women’ for its occupying troops, or that very few Chinese (mostly soldiers) were killed at Nanjing.
Another example of negationism is the Old Testament which was written mainly by Davidic supporters to suppress the real side of King David who was a ruthless murderer and assassin, adulterer, corrupt mercenary, etc, basically a scumbag.
Gary Greenberg, the President of the Biblical Archaeology Society of New York wrote a book titled ‘The Sins of King David’ to show how but for the grace of the existence of biblical records from different groups of priesthood we would be no wiser to the evils of David.
The New Testament is also another contrived writing, to serve the Roman Emperor Constantine better administer his empire, through his version of the Christian religion. One of its victims was Judah, Jesus most trusted and favourite disciple, who through revisionism became the most hated man in Christianity.
So, now in Malaysia, we have questions on whether Malaya (forget about Malaysia) was a British colony?
My question is: does that matter when there are so much issues demanding our attention, issues like rampant corruption, abuse of the law and other public institutions and the unmitigated unceasing unabated pilfering of the national coffers?
So don’t fall into the trap of becoming involved in arguing over useless topics which in fact were deliberately instigated to divert our attention from far greater ongoing crimes.
Post-note: Some years ago there was a move by certain quarters to revise history to show Kuala Lumpur was not developed through the efforts of Yap Ah Loy.
Sunday, September 04, 2011
GE 13 - Multi-ethnic crossroad for DAP
Come an election, seat allocation or distribution among component parties of a political alliance in Malaysia becomes a difficult, sensitive, and frequently, acrimonious exercise.
This applies to both BN and Pakatan, except the former finds it easier than the latter, for the simple reason UMNO can just bulldoze its views into unilateral decisions.
The only sector which UMNO had and will encounter most difficulties on this issue would/will be internal, from its own members, as witnessed in the last Hulu Selangor federal by-election and the pre-2008 Ijok state by-election, when much to the chagrin of its (local) UMNO members, it adamantly placed a MIC man each time in the federal and state constituencies as its preferred candidates.
Much as I dislike UMNO for its racist, arrogant and corrupt behaviour, I admire its decisions to place MIC (rather than UMNO) candidates in those Hulu Selangor and Ijok by-elections. That has been its strength, but the downside had been its bulldozing ways which made nonsense of the term ‘alliance’ because UMNO just rode roughshod over its so-called allies, MCA, Gerakan, MIC etc.
An example of this was ironically in the Hulu Selangor by-election where it ignored/dismissed the choice of the MIC President and directly selected the MIC candidate of its own (UMNO) preference.
The most humiliating reality of the so-called (pretend) alliance is that MCA, Gerakan and MIC couldn't even (still can't) nominate any of its party members as the candidate for the allocated seats without the UMNO president okaying those selections - witnessed that Hulu Selangor by-election humiliation for MIC. In other words, MCA, Gerakan and MIC (forget about the other parasite kutu parties) have been rendered into (ethnic) sub-branches of UMNO, not unlike the non-Muslim supporters of PAS wakakaka.
In its greater difficulty in seat sharing/distribution, Pakatan is at least one level more dignified than MCA, Gerakan or MIC had been allowed to enjoy.
In their at-times acrimonious squabble for seats – as witnessed in PKR’s avaricious grab of the Sarawak state seats and its arrogant dismissal of SNAP – Pakatan showed that no party was subordinated to another. That has been its strength, but then its weakness would be in tearing at each other in public eyes, often leading to concerns from its supporters that the alliance is about to disintegrate, and delight for its BN foes that it will.
A month or so ago, PKR again pre-empted its allies in declaring it will be contesting some 80+ seats in the next GE, while just a few days back PAS staked its claim to almost 70. That leaves roughly around 70 for DAP and PSM, and if they join Pakatan, SNAP, SAPP etc.
In terms of gross figures, despite PKR as usual grabbing the lion's share ('tis the nature of the beast wakakaka), it looks on the borderline of ‘okay-ness’, but as they say, the devil would be in the details.
Recently, DAP’s Zulkifli Mohd Noor caused an uproar when he gave PKR a taste of its own (greedy, selfish and power-crazy) medicine. Zul demanded that PKR surrender one Parliamentary and 5 State seats in Penang to DAP’s Malay candidates wakakaka.
One of his detractors, no doubt a PKR person, shouted that the DAP should give Zul one of its won (Chinese majority) seat to Zul to contest, and for Zul to keep off the PKR turf.
Actually Zul did contest in one of those Penang Chinese-majority seats in 2004 but alas for some unknown reasons, not in 2008. I recall my matey Sunline (Poli 101) responded to my query in Facebook that Zul wasn’t feeling well enough for the 2008 GE. Zul could have been the first DAP Malay MP had he re-contested in the Bukit Bendera federal constituency in March 2008.
4 years ago, on 07 May 2007, I posted DAP & PKR - blood brothers? which discussed Zul’s candidature in Bukit Bendera. I updated the discussion one year later after the March 2008 GE, where I wrote:
What ever happened to Zulkifli Mohd Noor who stood as DAP’s candidate in Bukit Bendera in 2004 and won a credible 18,000 votes out of 47,000?
As I had blogged previously, the DAP may have partial claim to their avowed multi-ethnic credentials – for example, they have put up many Indian candidates who have been voted successfully into both federal Parliament and State Assemblies.
Unfortunately none of its Malay candidates were ever successful, especially if and when they stood in Malay majority constituencies.
It was in a Chinese majority Bukit Bendera (Penang) that Zulkifli Mohd Noor made a decent mark, by winning nearly 18000 of the 47000 votes, and that’s no mean feat if we look at the ethnic breakdown. The Chinese majority federal seat had 13.82% Malays, 73.97% Chinese and 11.07% Indians plus a sprinkling of 1.14% Thais, Eurasian, etc.
Even if all 14% Malays in that constituency had turned up to cast their ballots for Zulkifli (which was absolutely unlikely), he wouldn’t get more than 5000 votes. This meant that there was a whole lot of Chinese votes (13,000 plus) for Zul.
I wrote on the possible reasons why Zul didn’t make it in 2004. That could have been due to three factors:
If you want to know more, please read my 2008 post Gerakan & DAP - the missing songkok factor!
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.
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 even for its Indian and Malay candidates such as Kula, Karpal, Zul, etc.
A very recent example of this ‘drooling’ over a blue chip seat has been being Dr Jeya’s ambit claim for Jelapang. According to an informed source, the principles of seat distribution are:
(1) Incumbent seats to be contested by the incumbent party!
My question on Jelapang, where the 'remarkable' Hee defected from the DAP is: Could DAP reasonably argue that notwithstanding that defection, Jelapang had voted for DAP and not Hee the person, thus DAP is the moral ‘incumbent’. If so then DAP would have both the political and moral rights in contest again in that state seat.
On the other hand, if one can argue successfully that with Hee's defection, DAP cannot be the moral ‘incumbent’ because, for example, voters had voted for the candidate rather than the party (a not completely impossible through rarely/unlikely case in Malaysian elections), then DAP loses the political and moral right to re-contest in that seat.
However, there is great danger in such a 'Hee'-ish argument for PKR (the notorious tadpole nursery) because of the defections or resignations, as the case may be, of its erstwhile MPs, namely ‘golf-course’ Zahrain, ‘Kulim Wonder’ Zul, ‘Gerakan-Daddy’ Tan Tee Beng, ‘Always-Absent’ Badrul Hisham, 'Love-Anwar-then-hate-Anwar-now' Gobala, poly-political-party Wee, etc etc etc.
Should Pakatan support Dr Jeya’s claim for Jelapang (and PKR’s claim for more of DAP’s seat in urban areas in both Peninsula Malaysia and Sarawak), then I have no doubt that DAP’s Zul and other DAP Malay members will be morally right in staking claims for the federal seats of Bayan Baru, Kulim, Nibong Tebal, Port Klang, Wangsa Maju etc, and all the associated state seats within those federal constituencies. Frightening for PKR, ain’t it, wakakaka.
(2) Seats contested by a particular party in the past, gets to contest again in the same seat unless there are exceptional circumstances warranting a change!
Now, what would constitute ‘exceptional circumstances’? Would losing (not making headway) with the voters be one of them, like PKR’s unfortunate lot in Sarawak or nearer at home, Hulu Selangor?
I leave you with these thoughts.
Now, on to the once-impregnable MCA fortress in Johor! Poor MCA is now quaking in itspantsUMNO-provided sarong at the very thought of GE-13. But more interesting for us, who in Pakatan should be allowed to challenge the BN-MCA (or Gerakan) candidates? DAP, PKR, PAS, or PSM? Your thoughts ;-)
Note of Appeal: I hope my brother Haris Ibrahim would forego his MCLM's pledge not to contest in GE-13 and go for the Bentong federal seat against Liow Tiong LIE wakakaka. Dear Haris had once expressed his wish that, should he offer himself as a political representative, he like to stand against LIE.
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. 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.
Note: I don’t give two hoots for what PKR or PAS will do with such dual representations by one person. As for PSM, it is still a small party which incidentally has very strict qualifications for its members to become MP or ADUN, so I won’t include it in this call.
Let’s start with sweetie Teresa. Though we need someone capable like Teresa in the Selangor exco, alas, the 'powers that be' plus so-called ally PAS in the person of one pro-Malay unity person didn’t feel comfy with her as the deputy MB of Selangor, all because Teresa suffered from triple 'C' handicaps, being Chinese, Christian & ‘Charbor’ (female).
Given the above, 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.
If so, he must surrender his federal role as an MP and thus his constituency of Bagan to Zulkifli Mohd Noor. I am sure Zul will become one of the several DAP MPs after the next GE election.
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.
This applies to both BN and Pakatan, except the former finds it easier than the latter, for the simple reason UMNO can just bulldoze its views into unilateral decisions.
The only sector which UMNO had and will encounter most difficulties on this issue would/will be internal, from its own members, as witnessed in the last Hulu Selangor federal by-election and the pre-2008 Ijok state by-election, when much to the chagrin of its (local) UMNO members, it adamantly placed a MIC man each time in the federal and state constituencies as its preferred candidates.
Much as I dislike UMNO for its racist, arrogant and corrupt behaviour, I admire its decisions to place MIC (rather than UMNO) candidates in those Hulu Selangor and Ijok by-elections. That has been its strength, but the downside had been its bulldozing ways which made nonsense of the term ‘alliance’ because UMNO just rode roughshod over its so-called allies, MCA, Gerakan, MIC etc.
An example of this was ironically in the Hulu Selangor by-election where it ignored/dismissed the choice of the MIC President and directly selected the MIC candidate of its own (UMNO) preference.
The most humiliating reality of the so-called (pretend) alliance is that MCA, Gerakan and MIC couldn't even (still can't) nominate any of its party members as the candidate for the allocated seats without the UMNO president okaying those selections - witnessed that Hulu Selangor by-election humiliation for MIC. In other words, MCA, Gerakan and MIC (forget about the other parasite kutu parties) have been rendered into (ethnic) sub-branches of UMNO, not unlike the non-Muslim supporters of PAS wakakaka.
In its greater difficulty in seat sharing/distribution, Pakatan is at least one level more dignified than MCA, Gerakan or MIC had been allowed to enjoy.
In their at-times acrimonious squabble for seats – as witnessed in PKR’s avaricious grab of the Sarawak state seats and its arrogant dismissal of SNAP – Pakatan showed that no party was subordinated to another. That has been its strength, but then its weakness would be in tearing at each other in public eyes, often leading to concerns from its supporters that the alliance is about to disintegrate, and delight for its BN foes that it will.
A month or so ago, PKR again pre-empted its allies in declaring it will be contesting some 80+ seats in the next GE, while just a few days back PAS staked its claim to almost 70. That leaves roughly around 70 for DAP and PSM, and if they join Pakatan, SNAP, SAPP etc.
In terms of gross figures, despite PKR as usual grabbing the lion's share ('tis the nature of the beast wakakaka), it looks on the borderline of ‘okay-ness’, but as they say, the devil would be in the details.
Recently, DAP’s Zulkifli Mohd Noor caused an uproar when he gave PKR a taste of its own (greedy, selfish and power-crazy) medicine. Zul demanded that PKR surrender one Parliamentary and 5 State seats in Penang to DAP’s Malay candidates wakakaka.
One of his detractors, no doubt a PKR person, shouted that the DAP should give Zul one of its won (Chinese majority) seat to Zul to contest, and for Zul to keep off the PKR turf.
Actually Zul did contest in one of those Penang Chinese-majority seats in 2004 but alas for some unknown reasons, not in 2008. I recall my matey Sunline (Poli 101) responded to my query in Facebook that Zul wasn’t feeling well enough for the 2008 GE. Zul could have been the first DAP Malay MP had he re-contested in the Bukit Bendera federal constituency in March 2008.
4 years ago, on 07 May 2007, I posted DAP & PKR - blood brothers? which discussed Zul’s candidature in Bukit Bendera. I updated the discussion one year later after the March 2008 GE, where I wrote:
What ever happened to Zulkifli Mohd Noor who stood as DAP’s candidate in Bukit Bendera in 2004 and won a credible 18,000 votes out of 47,000?
As I had blogged previously, the DAP may have partial claim to their avowed multi-ethnic credentials – for example, they have put up many Indian candidates who have been voted successfully into both federal Parliament and State Assemblies.
Unfortunately none of its Malay candidates were ever successful, especially if and when they stood in Malay majority constituencies.
It was in a Chinese majority Bukit Bendera (Penang) that Zulkifli Mohd Noor made a decent mark, by winning nearly 18000 of the 47000 votes, and that’s no mean feat if we look at the ethnic breakdown. The Chinese majority federal seat had 13.82% Malays, 73.97% Chinese and 11.07% Indians plus a sprinkling of 1.14% Thais, Eurasian, etc.
Even if all 14% Malays in that constituency had turned up to cast their ballots for Zulkifli (which was absolutely unlikely), he wouldn’t get more than 5000 votes. This meant that there was a whole lot of Chinese votes (13,000 plus) for Zul.
I wrote on the possible reasons why Zul didn’t make it in 2004. That could have been due to three factors:
If you want to know more, please read my 2008 post Gerakan & DAP - the missing songkok factor!
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.
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 even for its Indian and Malay candidates such as Kula, Karpal, Zul, etc.
A very recent example of this ‘drooling’ over a blue chip seat has been being Dr Jeya’s ambit claim for Jelapang. According to an informed source, the principles of seat distribution are:
(1) Incumbent seats to be contested by the incumbent party!
My question on Jelapang, where the 'remarkable' Hee defected from the DAP is: Could DAP reasonably argue that notwithstanding that defection, Jelapang had voted for DAP and not Hee the person, thus DAP is the moral ‘incumbent’. If so then DAP would have both the political and moral rights in contest again in that state seat.
On the other hand, if one can argue successfully that with Hee's defection, DAP cannot be the moral ‘incumbent’ because, for example, voters had voted for the candidate rather than the party (a not completely impossible through rarely/unlikely case in Malaysian elections), then DAP loses the political and moral right to re-contest in that seat.
However, there is great danger in such a 'Hee'-ish argument for PKR (the notorious tadpole nursery) because of the defections or resignations, as the case may be, of its erstwhile MPs, namely ‘golf-course’ Zahrain, ‘Kulim Wonder’ Zul, ‘Gerakan-Daddy’ Tan Tee Beng, ‘Always-Absent’ Badrul Hisham, 'Love-Anwar-then-hate-Anwar-now' Gobala, poly-political-party Wee, etc etc etc.
Should Pakatan support Dr Jeya’s claim for Jelapang (and PKR’s claim for more of DAP’s seat in urban areas in both Peninsula Malaysia and Sarawak), then I have no doubt that DAP’s Zul and other DAP Malay members will be morally right in staking claims for the federal seats of Bayan Baru, Kulim, Nibong Tebal, Port Klang, Wangsa Maju etc, and all the associated state seats within those federal constituencies. Frightening for PKR, ain’t it, wakakaka.
(2) Seats contested by a particular party in the past, gets to contest again in the same seat unless there are exceptional circumstances warranting a change!
Now, what would constitute ‘exceptional circumstances’? Would losing (not making headway) with the voters be one of them, like PKR’s unfortunate lot in Sarawak or nearer at home, Hulu Selangor?
I leave you with these thoughts.
Now, on to the once-impregnable MCA fortress in Johor! Poor MCA is now quaking in its
Note of Appeal: I hope my brother Haris Ibrahim would forego his MCLM's pledge not to contest in GE-13 and go for the Bentong federal seat against Liow Tiong LIE wakakaka. Dear Haris had once expressed his wish that, should he offer himself as a political representative, he like to stand against LIE.
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. 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.
Note: I don’t give two hoots for what PKR or PAS will do with such dual representations by one person. As for PSM, it is still a small party which incidentally has very strict qualifications for its members to become MP or ADUN, so I won’t include it in this call.
Let’s start with sweetie Teresa. Though we need someone capable like Teresa in the Selangor exco, alas, the 'powers that be' plus so-called ally PAS in the person of one pro-Malay unity person didn’t feel comfy with her as the deputy MB of Selangor, all because Teresa suffered from triple 'C' handicaps, being Chinese, Christian & ‘Charbor’ (female).
Given the above, 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.
If so, he must surrender his federal role as an MP and thus his constituency of Bagan to Zulkifli Mohd Noor. I am sure Zul will become one of the several DAP MPs after the next GE election.
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.
Friday, August 26, 2011
Tadpoles on trial
Darling, are the kids asleep?
Yes, Sayang.
OK, let me turn on the aquarium light then.
Wow, Sayang, I didn’t know you have switched from guppies to tadpoles. Hmmm, very small tadpoles too.
[Silent]
Oh, I haven’t seen translucent tadpoles before. Are they expensive?
Nowadays, everyday, you get a load of them for free, whether you like it or not.
They look very active.
In ‘pristine’ condition, but they won’t look pretty in a couple more days.
Why?
[Silent]
Oh Sayang, look, that one is dark brown instead of translucent.
Er? Shouldn’t be. I thought his … er … canal was clean? Shit!
Don’t swear Sayang. What canal? Whose canal? Did you scoop them from the canal?
[Silent]
3 days later …
Oh Sayang you said they won’t look pretty after a couple of days, but they still look very active.
So no degradation. Impossible .. but then ....
Huh?
Maybe they were fed minyak Tongkat Ali. Yeah, I would say that's possible in this country.
I don’t understand, Sayang.
Can you believe that bloke fucked himself!
Who, Sayang?
Hmmm, the Tiuniaseng Tadpole Tattler [smile], or the F* Fairy Froggie hehehe.
Sayang, your language, thank goodness the kids are asleep. Anyway, who are you referring to? What do you mean he … er, never mind … himself?
His own … er … tadpoles were in his own canal.
[Confused]
Yes, Sayang.
OK, let me turn on the aquarium light then.
Wow, Sayang, I didn’t know you have switched from guppies to tadpoles. Hmmm, very small tadpoles too.
[Silent]
Oh, I haven’t seen translucent tadpoles before. Are they expensive?
Nowadays, everyday, you get a load of them for free, whether you like it or not.
They look very active.
In ‘pristine’ condition, but they won’t look pretty in a couple more days.
Why?
[Silent]
Oh Sayang, look, that one is dark brown instead of translucent.
Er? Shouldn’t be. I thought his … er … canal was clean? Shit!
Don’t swear Sayang. What canal? Whose canal? Did you scoop them from the canal?
[Silent]
3 days later …
Oh Sayang you said they won’t look pretty after a couple of days, but they still look very active.
So no degradation. Impossible .. but then ....
Huh?
Maybe they were fed minyak Tongkat Ali. Yeah, I would say that's possible in this country.
I don’t understand, Sayang.
Can you believe that bloke fucked himself!
Who, Sayang?
Hmmm, the Tiuniaseng Tadpole Tattler [smile], or the F* Fairy Froggie hehehe.
Sayang, your language, thank goodness the kids are asleep. Anyway, who are you referring to? What do you mean he … er, never mind … himself?
His own … er … tadpoles were in his own canal.
[Confused]
Thursday, August 25, 2011
The Last 'Raja' of Penang
TMI’s Tsu Koon hits out at Utusan over Penang BN row
The above article by The Malaysian Insider tells us that Koh TK, former CM of Penang and current party president of the once-mighty but now-castrated Gerakan, lambasted Utusan for sneering at Gerakan and demanding that UMNO takes over the CM seat if BN wins the next State election.
Utusan has not been wrong insofar as the BN side of the story goes. Indeed both Gerakan and MCA have become extinct political species in Penang since March 2008, though lately, like most chooks about to be once-and-for-all-times decapitated, have been making noisy squawks.
Most voters know Penang's current political status quo won’t change much after the next state election. Thus Utusan has been correct in demanding the CM position for UMNO, should the BN (meaning UMNO and a slim likelihood of MIC but definitely minus Gerakan and MCA) emerges as the party with the majority of ADUNs.
Perhaps UMNO has already targeted some frogs to enhance such an eventuality.
Perhaps UMNO is, as some say, preparing to get into bed with the DAP to form a new ruling coalition in Penang, by removing the embarrassing (and jealous) Gerakan and DAP.
Perhaps UMNO is fantasizing.
One – DAP must never trust UMNO. Just look at poor Gerakan.
Once a mighty party, then touted (after the 1969 GE) as the ‘next’ ruling federal party, Gerakan made the mistake of joining BN (effectively UMNO).
While the circumstance (political, social and most important of all, economic) at that time convinced Dr Lim Chong Eu to join BN or see Penang wither like a dried-up rambutan on the limb that a hostile BN government would likely have left it ... fair enough, the party unfortunately failed to assert its 1969-acquired political dominance in Penang, surrendering meekly to UMNO as the latter deviously and gradually sliced off its constituencies as allocations for a then-extinct MCA.
Side-note: Yes, MCA became an extinct species in Penang twice, in 1969 and 2008, but was resurrected in Penang, principally to weaken Gerakan.
The outcome of UMNO’s manipulation post 1972 was a divided Chinese political base in Penang, when a Gerakan minus MCA or even a combined Gerakan-MCA numbers would have overwhelmed UMNO in numbers, but as individual and mutually antagonistic parties (and UMNO ensured that by its British-taught ‘divide & rule’ strategy), Gerakan and MCA made UMNO by default the biggest component in the Penang BN.
All I can say to Koh TK is ‘padan muka’ though Lim KY and even Dr Lim Chong Eu must share the blame for Gerakan's castration by UMNO a la the death of a thousand cuts.
Mind, many Penangites (including people like my family) should also be criticized for supporting a loser in Gerakan. For years, under Koh TK, the UMNO DCM was the de facto CM, so the Utusan comment merely brought matters into clearer perspective. The only reason UMNO dared not insist on the CM's position outright was its fear of driving Gerakan and MCA into each others' arms, a situation UMNO didn't and still doesn't want - remember: 'divide & rule'.
The mitigating factor in the Penangites' favour is that they woke up on 08 March 2008 as they did on 10 May 1969.
Two – having said that, not trusting or getting into bed with UMNO doesn’t mean that DAP can’t work with the UMNO on a practical basis, either at state or federal level, though this cooperation is unlikely with a weak UMNO President-PM. But whatever, whichever, whenever, however, the DAP must never ever allow UMNO to persuade it to join BN.
But, I’m not sure what or how we can advise Koh TK to do. And should we, considering he went into Parliament via the back door which he swore he wouldn’t do prior to the 2008 GE? I used to call him disparagingly as 'Raja B....', but after he handed over the reins of Penang to Lim GE in a gentlemanly manner, I promised not to call him that again.
The above article by The Malaysian Insider tells us that Koh TK, former CM of Penang and current party president of the once-mighty but now-castrated Gerakan, lambasted Utusan for sneering at Gerakan and demanding that UMNO takes over the CM seat if BN wins the next State election.
Utusan has not been wrong insofar as the BN side of the story goes. Indeed both Gerakan and MCA have become extinct political species in Penang since March 2008, though lately, like most chooks about to be once-and-for-all-times decapitated, have been making noisy squawks.
Most voters know Penang's current political status quo won’t change much after the next state election. Thus Utusan has been correct in demanding the CM position for UMNO, should the BN (meaning UMNO and a slim likelihood of MIC but definitely minus Gerakan and MCA) emerges as the party with the majority of ADUNs.
Perhaps UMNO has already targeted some frogs to enhance such an eventuality.
Perhaps UMNO is, as some say, preparing to get into bed with the DAP to form a new ruling coalition in Penang, by removing the embarrassing (and jealous) Gerakan and DAP.
Perhaps UMNO is fantasizing.
One – DAP must never trust UMNO. Just look at poor Gerakan.
Once a mighty party, then touted (after the 1969 GE) as the ‘next’ ruling federal party, Gerakan made the mistake of joining BN (effectively UMNO).
While the circumstance (political, social and most important of all, economic) at that time convinced Dr Lim Chong Eu to join BN or see Penang wither like a dried-up rambutan on the limb that a hostile BN government would likely have left it ... fair enough, the party unfortunately failed to assert its 1969-acquired political dominance in Penang, surrendering meekly to UMNO as the latter deviously and gradually sliced off its constituencies as allocations for a then-extinct MCA.
Side-note: Yes, MCA became an extinct species in Penang twice, in 1969 and 2008, but was resurrected in Penang, principally to weaken Gerakan.
The outcome of UMNO’s manipulation post 1972 was a divided Chinese political base in Penang, when a Gerakan minus MCA or even a combined Gerakan-MCA numbers would have overwhelmed UMNO in numbers, but as individual and mutually antagonistic parties (and UMNO ensured that by its British-taught ‘divide & rule’ strategy), Gerakan and MCA made UMNO by default the biggest component in the Penang BN.
All I can say to Koh TK is ‘padan muka’ though Lim KY and even Dr Lim Chong Eu must share the blame for Gerakan's castration by UMNO a la the death of a thousand cuts.
Mind, many Penangites (including people like my family) should also be criticized for supporting a loser in Gerakan. For years, under Koh TK, the UMNO DCM was the de facto CM, so the Utusan comment merely brought matters into clearer perspective. The only reason UMNO dared not insist on the CM's position outright was its fear of driving Gerakan and MCA into each others' arms, a situation UMNO didn't and still doesn't want - remember: 'divide & rule'.
The mitigating factor in the Penangites' favour is that they woke up on 08 March 2008 as they did on 10 May 1969.
Two – having said that, not trusting or getting into bed with UMNO doesn’t mean that DAP can’t work with the UMNO on a practical basis, either at state or federal level, though this cooperation is unlikely with a weak UMNO President-PM. But whatever, whichever, whenever, however, the DAP must never ever allow UMNO to persuade it to join BN.
But, I’m not sure what or how we can advise Koh TK to do. And should we, considering he went into Parliament via the back door which he swore he wouldn’t do prior to the 2008 GE? I used to call him disparagingly as 'Raja B....', but after he handed over the reins of Penang to Lim GE in a gentlemanly manner, I promised not to call him that again.
Last Emperor Puyi (or KTK?)
But as 'Raja', he’s like one of those medieval Chinese emperors at the end of his dynastic line, as The Last Emperor, not unlike Puyi, the last Chinese Emperor, who was a puppet under the Japanese, just as Koh as Penang CM had been one under UMNO.
As a Penangite I shed a tear or two for the once-mighty Gerakan which somewhere between 1969 and 2008 lost its soul, forgetting its 'satu hati' promise to the rakyat.
Sunday, August 21, 2011
PM Muhyiddin? DPM Mukhriz?
Yo, have been away on bread & butter missions, so haven’t blog for a while – in fact still trying to catch up with what’s happening in Malaysia. So has to be just a quickie for this post.
I see Muhyiddin still at his fave pastime, disrespectfully undermining Najib. Imagine for an instant that he eventually succeeds, and say BN wins GE-13 (with help of EC etc), maybe narrowly but still ruling as government. Then we’ll have:
PM – Muyiddin Yassin (freaky f* frightening thought)
DPM – wakakaka – many believe there’s a quid pro quo, done deal, with Dr M to promote his son Mukhriz from deputy minister to DPM for Dr M’s considerable ‘support’.
But is this likely?
Mukhriz is a nice kid but really, kaytee assesses he doesn’t have his dad’s standing to lead UMNO (f* the rest of BN).
Secondly, I doubt UMNO will accept a deputy minister being catapulted into the nation’s No 2 political position, even if the man is the son of the very influential Dr M. Bloke couldn’t even get the Youth Boss position, what more the DPM’s post. C’mon, be realistic.
Thirdly, blokes like Ali Rustam, Zahid, Hishamuddin are hardly likely to sit still just twiddling their thumbs or wanking off in silent frustration and, Dr M or no Dr M, allow this to happen. It’ll be every man ‘avaricious’ jack for himself. I dread to think of the internal bloodbath which unfortunately will have the inevitable 'collateral damage' as each jaguh demonstrates his ultra-ethnic credentials to claim leadership.
If Mukhriz’s elevation is conditional for Dr M’s support for Muhyiddin, I doubt the Old Man would accept a Muhyiddin's ‘promise’ that Mukhriz will be DPM in 5 years time, because Dr M isn’t exactly a spring chicken.
Sure, Muhyiddin is undermining Najib, and sure, Dr M is supporting Muhyiddin … but what’s the quid pro quo, because there’s no free meal.
I see Muhyiddin still at his fave pastime, disrespectfully undermining Najib. Imagine for an instant that he eventually succeeds, and say BN wins GE-13 (with help of EC etc), maybe narrowly but still ruling as government. Then we’ll have:
PM – Muyiddin Yassin (freaky f* frightening thought)
DPM – wakakaka – many believe there’s a quid pro quo, done deal, with Dr M to promote his son Mukhriz from deputy minister to DPM for Dr M’s considerable ‘support’.
But is this likely?
Mukhriz is a nice kid but really, kaytee assesses he doesn’t have his dad’s standing to lead UMNO (f* the rest of BN).
Secondly, I doubt UMNO will accept a deputy minister being catapulted into the nation’s No 2 political position, even if the man is the son of the very influential Dr M. Bloke couldn’t even get the Youth Boss position, what more the DPM’s post. C’mon, be realistic.
Thirdly, blokes like Ali Rustam, Zahid, Hishamuddin are hardly likely to sit still just twiddling their thumbs or wanking off in silent frustration and, Dr M or no Dr M, allow this to happen. It’ll be every man ‘avaricious’ jack for himself. I dread to think of the internal bloodbath which unfortunately will have the inevitable 'collateral damage' as each jaguh demonstrates his ultra-ethnic credentials to claim leadership.
If Mukhriz’s elevation is conditional for Dr M’s support for Muhyiddin, I doubt the Old Man would accept a Muhyiddin's ‘promise’ that Mukhriz will be DPM in 5 years time, because Dr M isn’t exactly a spring chicken.
Sure, Muhyiddin is undermining Najib, and sure, Dr M is supporting Muhyiddin … but what’s the quid pro quo, because there’s no free meal.
Thursday, August 11, 2011
UMNO to reclaim Selangor?
Selangor is Malaysia's premier state ... so say the Selangoreans, and some government officials and federal pollies.
Sarawakians would strongly disagree, and probably Sabahans too. And I have no doubt that Kelantanese would scoff disdainfully at that pretentious claim.
As a Penangite, I know my fellow state-citizens would be like me, just smiling at that silly boast, some perhaps more sneeringly while most condescendingly so wakakaka.
Another Malaysian state better than Penang? C'mon lah, what sheer gall, what nonsense, what unrealistic hopefulness.
Be that as it may, what has made me raised this subject about Selangor being the prized Malaysian province?
Najib!
Najib has previously voiced his insistence that BN (or more truthfully, UMNO) wants Selangor back under its rule. And it seems that some supporters are certainly going about fulfilling his desires with more zeal than an army of ants scrambling to partake of a particularly sceptic glob of spit.
Daily we read of discoveries of dodgy electoral rolls, the unaccountable & suddenly mute NRD in the issue of blue-card IC to aliens, the process taking only a matter of 4 hours, pandai-buat-ta tahu (act dunno) EC who recited pathetic explanations like episodes from a Scheherazade-wannabe "One Thousand & One Lies", multiple registrations on one name and various other nefarious activities and occurrences to ensure the defeat in the State of the more popular Pakatan Rakyat.
The more junior of the conspiring conniving collaborationist public servants probably aren't even aware of their traitorous treason in turning aliens into citizens by the recently-revealed questionable process (just to increase the voters base for a political party).
All the above, in conjunction with our world renowned Judiciary and our equally world renowned Police, have led me to believe very strongly that UMNO is likely to reclaim Selangor in the next state election (not in GE-13 because Pakatan has said it will not hop to the UMNO tune of an early/snap general election).
My belief is of course not based on any perceived swing in voters' support for UMNO (au contraire), but rather on the very shameless and arrogant dodgy-ness of ourpublicpoliticized institutions. Whatever it takes (and even PAS's Dr Hasan Ali has helped), Najib will have his desire fulfilled for UMNO to regain rule in Selangor.
Sarawakians would strongly disagree, and probably Sabahans too. And I have no doubt that Kelantanese would scoff disdainfully at that pretentious claim.
As a Penangite, I know my fellow state-citizens would be like me, just smiling at that silly boast, some perhaps more sneeringly while most condescendingly so wakakaka.
Another Malaysian state better than Penang? C'mon lah, what sheer gall, what nonsense, what unrealistic hopefulness.
Be that as it may, what has made me raised this subject about Selangor being the prized Malaysian province?
Najib!
Najib has previously voiced his insistence that BN (or more truthfully, UMNO) wants Selangor back under its rule. And it seems that some supporters are certainly going about fulfilling his desires with more zeal than an army of ants scrambling to partake of a particularly sceptic glob of spit.
Daily we read of discoveries of dodgy electoral rolls, the unaccountable & suddenly mute NRD in the issue of blue-card IC to aliens, the process taking only a matter of 4 hours, pandai-buat-ta tahu (act dunno) EC who recited pathetic explanations like episodes from a Scheherazade-wannabe "One Thousand & One Lies", multiple registrations on one name and various other nefarious activities and occurrences to ensure the defeat in the State of the more popular Pakatan Rakyat.
The more junior of the conspiring conniving collaborationist public servants probably aren't even aware of their traitorous treason in turning aliens into citizens by the recently-revealed questionable process (just to increase the voters base for a political party).
All the above, in conjunction with our world renowned Judiciary and our equally world renowned Police, have led me to believe very strongly that UMNO is likely to reclaim Selangor in the next state election (not in GE-13 because Pakatan has said it will not hop to the UMNO tune of an early/snap general election).
My belief is of course not based on any perceived swing in voters' support for UMNO (au contraire), but rather on the very shameless and arrogant dodgy-ness of our
Mlaaysian student hurt & robbed in London riots
Read today’s Sydney Morning Herald’s news about Ashraf Haziq, a Malaysian student who was injured and robbed during the recent London riots – see Student tells of backpack attack that shocked the world.
Sunday, August 07, 2011
Not so fast Hasan Ali, accountability first before expulsion!
Don’t for a moment believe that Dr Hasan Ali's assertion that he is willing to be sacked for defending the JAIS shameful arrogant raid on a non-Muslim dinner function just on the basis of hearing the words ‘Quran’ and ‘prayer' being supposedly aired, signals his correctness.
He must have realized his PAS party's investigation will require such inconvenient items like (surprise surprise) evidence and (gosh) burden of proof. Alamak, old fashioned Middle-East type unsubstantiated free-range accusations won't hold water in these modern days. Has he then been attempting to come out as a Muslim jaguh, to blindside his lack of evidence?
And Bishop Paul Tan is absolutely spot on when he told Dr Hasan Ali 'Dei kawan, not so fast', and to hold on and not preempt the PAS party investigation by making a childish defiant stand.
In other words, Dr Hasan, don’t think you can just run away from accounting for your accusation with your theatrics. Not so fast jaguh!
He must have realized his PAS party's investigation will require such inconvenient items like (surprise surprise) evidence and (gosh) burden of proof. Alamak, old fashioned Middle-East type unsubstantiated free-range accusations won't hold water in these modern days. Has he then been attempting to come out as a Muslim jaguh, to blindside his lack of evidence?
And Bishop Paul Tan is absolutely spot on when he told Dr Hasan Ali 'Dei kawan, not so fast', and to hold on and not preempt the PAS party investigation by making a childish defiant stand.
In other words, Dr Hasan, don’t think you can just run away from accounting for your accusation with your theatrics. Not so fast jaguh!
Ads on TV67
Hi everyone, I’m Dodgy Dimsum. On this happy Sunday I wish to launch two of my latest products, a deodorant and an antidote for headaches on ‘mornings after’.
First, the deodorant.
**********************
Oi, you have sweaty armpits. Spare a thought for men, especially those poor Pa Chik’s who are fasting. Do you have to offend them with your BO when you expose your armpits?
Use Bersih, the new refreshing deororant.
It normally comes in three fragrances: jasmine, cempaka and pandan!
And for this special month, we offer a new scent, kemenyen. Yes, kemenyen to particularly educate insensitive sleazy inter-lork*
* ‘lork is a Penang Hokkien word for sluts, especially those who were sold into prostitution by their mums
Brought to you by a Dodgy Dimsum Bersih-ing Production.
**********************
Now, the analgesic.
**********************
Being proactive is the key – use Auntie Dipootee pills to avoid that painful depressing ‘mornings after’.
Auntie Dipootee neutralises the Dipootee virus and prevents not only pain but regrets over the Dipootee treacherous attacks.
So don’t wait until you have to react – it’ll be too late by then.
Listen to what the experts have to say:
“After being exposed to adverse elements in 1969, I should have been more careful and taken Auntie Dipootee pills to prevent a Dipootee viral attack. I awoke on morning of 22 September the following year to realize the extent of the attack from which I never ever did recover. Not only did my head suffer but my heart was broken.”
- Abdul Rahman (Penang)
“I suppose one of the principal symptoms warning me of a pending Dipootee viral attack was my constant drowsiness. But confident of my good medical report of 2004, I ignored those symptoms, now every much to my regret. The Dipootee virus made me hallucinate as well, where on one occasion I saw a bridge as crooked. Finally on 02 April 2009, I acknowledged the infliction was far too serious for me to continue with my job.”
- Dollah bin Ai Knoon (Penang)
“Hehehe. I used Auntie Dipootee regularly, and avoided been affected by that virus, not just once but on several occasions hehehe. No constipation too hehehe.”
- Mah Har Der (address not provided)
“I want to use Auntie Dipootee, very urgently lor.”
- Na Jee Ip a.k.a Ip-man (Pahang)
Brought to you by a Dodgy Dimsum Bersih-ing Production, the people who brought you Big Mamak, Big Mama and soon Big MooMoo.
First, the deodorant.
**********************
Oi, you have sweaty armpits. Spare a thought for men, especially those poor Pa Chik’s who are fasting. Do you have to offend them with your BO when you expose your armpits?
Use Bersih, the new refreshing deororant.
It normally comes in three fragrances: jasmine, cempaka and pandan!
And for this special month, we offer a new scent, kemenyen. Yes, kemenyen to particularly educate insensitive sleazy inter-lork*
* ‘lork is a Penang Hokkien word for sluts, especially those who were sold into prostitution by their mums
Brought to you by a Dodgy Dimsum Bersih-ing Production.
**********************
Now, the analgesic.
**********************
Being proactive is the key – use Auntie Dipootee pills to avoid that painful depressing ‘mornings after’.
Auntie Dipootee neutralises the Dipootee virus and prevents not only pain but regrets over the Dipootee treacherous attacks.
So don’t wait until you have to react – it’ll be too late by then.
Listen to what the experts have to say:
“After being exposed to adverse elements in 1969, I should have been more careful and taken Auntie Dipootee pills to prevent a Dipootee viral attack. I awoke on morning of 22 September the following year to realize the extent of the attack from which I never ever did recover. Not only did my head suffer but my heart was broken.”
- Abdul Rahman (Penang)
“I suppose one of the principal symptoms warning me of a pending Dipootee viral attack was my constant drowsiness. But confident of my good medical report of 2004, I ignored those symptoms, now every much to my regret. The Dipootee virus made me hallucinate as well, where on one occasion I saw a bridge as crooked. Finally on 02 April 2009, I acknowledged the infliction was far too serious for me to continue with my job.”
- Dollah bin Ai Knoon (Penang)
“Hehehe. I used Auntie Dipootee regularly, and avoided been affected by that virus, not just once but on several occasions hehehe. No constipation too hehehe.”
- Mah Har Der (address not provided)
“I want to use Auntie Dipootee, very urgently lor.”
- Na Jee Ip a.k.a Ip-man (Pahang)
Brought to you by a Dodgy Dimsum Bersih-ing Production, the people who brought you Big Mamak, Big Mama and soon Big MooMoo.
Saturday, August 06, 2011
Overheard
..... ring ring ring ring ring .....
X: Hello hello?
Y: Yes, who’s that on my private line?
X: Oh my dear PM, it’s just me Bernie.
Y: Your Holiness! How nice of you to call me.
X: Just call me Bernie, frankly my friend, that ‘Your Holiness’ business is getting a bit on me. It reminds me of another ‘Holiness’, you know, that one in yello ... ooops I mean ... saffron robes.
Y: Hahaha, that incredibly idolised insurgent whom the Chinese government loves to hate or hates to love.
X: Yes yes hehehe, very clever play of words hahaha.
Y: [loud glum sigh] Bernie, I’m afraid I am not that well appreciated at home.
X: Don’t despair my dear friend, as they say, a prophet is never well received at home. Look at Prophet Mohamed peace be upon his name and his flight from his hometown of Mecca.
Y: Yes, you right, also look at Nabi Isa peace be upon his name and his persecution at the hands of his own people in Jerusalem.
X [slightly taut voice]: May I correct you my dear friend, Jesus was not a mere prophet but the son of God.
Y: Well, at least, not the son of Allah swt.
X: Hahaha, very droll very droll. Anyway, I rang because of some recent controversy at a church organized dinner. Should my fellow Catholics there be concerned?
Y: Not at this stage Bernie, it’s the other church which had been involved, hahaha. But if the Chinese authority thinks your Buddhist counterpart is a traitorous insurgent, they should see what I have here in my own party.
X: Be brave my friend, for was not Jesus himself betrayed for 30 pieces of silver?
Y: My versions of Judas demand more than 30 pieces, more like 30 billion. That illegal and arrogant raid has been one in a series of sabotaging acts to embarrass me and undermine my leadership. I expect more to come.
X: Oh dear, will our recent breaking bread together at my enclave in the Eternal City be used against you?
Y: That possibility, nay, make that ‘probability’ instead, certainly exists. By the by, is there any villa located in a secluded suburb in your area available for long term lease?
X: My dear friend, is the Pope a Catholic?
Y: Hahaha, thank you thank you, you’re a cool dude ... er ... I mean ... dad ... er father ... er ... papa, you know what I mean.
X: Bless you my friend, in nomine Patris et Filii et Spiritus Sancti, go in peace.
Y [thinks]: Go in peace? That’s what that bloody teacherous Moodeen Judas wants.
X: Hello hello?
Y: Yes, who’s that on my private line?
X: Oh my dear PM, it’s just me Bernie.
Y: Your Holiness! How nice of you to call me.
X: Just call me Bernie, frankly my friend, that ‘Your Holiness’ business is getting a bit on me. It reminds me of another ‘Holiness’, you know, that one in yello ... ooops I mean ... saffron robes.
Y: Hahaha, that incredibly idolised insurgent whom the Chinese government loves to hate or hates to love.
X: Yes yes hehehe, very clever play of words hahaha.
Y: [loud glum sigh] Bernie, I’m afraid I am not that well appreciated at home.
X: Don’t despair my dear friend, as they say, a prophet is never well received at home. Look at Prophet Mohamed peace be upon his name and his flight from his hometown of Mecca.
Y: Yes, you right, also look at Nabi Isa peace be upon his name and his persecution at the hands of his own people in Jerusalem.
X [slightly taut voice]: May I correct you my dear friend, Jesus was not a mere prophet but the son of God.
Y: Well, at least, not the son of Allah swt.
X: Hahaha, very droll very droll. Anyway, I rang because of some recent controversy at a church organized dinner. Should my fellow Catholics there be concerned?
Y: Not at this stage Bernie, it’s the other church which had been involved, hahaha. But if the Chinese authority thinks your Buddhist counterpart is a traitorous insurgent, they should see what I have here in my own party.
X: Be brave my friend, for was not Jesus himself betrayed for 30 pieces of silver?
Y: My versions of Judas demand more than 30 pieces, more like 30 billion. That illegal and arrogant raid has been one in a series of sabotaging acts to embarrass me and undermine my leadership. I expect more to come.
X: Oh dear, will our recent breaking bread together at my enclave in the Eternal City be used against you?
Y: That possibility, nay, make that ‘probability’ instead, certainly exists. By the by, is there any villa located in a secluded suburb in your area available for long term lease?
X: My dear friend, is the Pope a Catholic?
Y: Hahaha, thank you thank you, you’re a cool dude ... er ... I mean ... dad ... er father ... er ... papa, you know what I mean.
X: Bless you my friend, in nomine Patris et Filii et Spiritus Sancti, go in peace.
Y [thinks]: Go in peace? That’s what that bloody teacherous Moodeen Judas wants.
Sunday, July 31, 2011
Royal remarks on rally
Today my post is on two of the Johor Sultanah’s comments, in her role as Chancellor of UTM, during the 5th Annual Malaysian Student Leaders Summit at the Kuala Lumpur Hilton yesterday - see Malaysiakini's Johor sultanah: Bersih 2.0 was hijacked.
First comment was on Bersih where she, to summarise, said the movement calling for free and fair elections had been hijacked.
As one of my personal political principles/beliefs, I don’t support constitutional royalty making comments on politics. This has been my position way way before the 2008 GE, and most certainly way before a series of unwelcomed royal intervention in the politics of Perlis, Terengganu (against AAB & UMNO then) and Perak (against Pakatan) - I posted on all these events.
I have always said that royalty should only make political comments if they are politicians like Tunku or Ku Li, but never (especially) when they are constitutional Heads of States.
If a Head of State, de jure or acting, makes political comments or acts politically in like fashion as a politician, then he/she must be mindful that in a democracy any political statement or act can be challenged, commented on and criticized. Thus he/she must not/cannot take umbrage nor could his/her supporters claim lèse majesté had been committed. The Perak case springs immediately into mind.
The only way such a Head of State acting politically can get away unquestioned or unchallenged would be when he/she is an absolute monarch (e.g in Brunei, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Jordan) as one local (late) royal member thought he was. The Malaccan Sultanh ordering the execution of Hang Tuah on the basis of a mere rumour would be another example.
However, having carefully read the news article in Malaysiakini, I have to say HRH has quite carefully navigated her way around the ambush of a student's difficult question on Bersih. I find it hard to criticise her reasonable response.
She was even handed in stating (as reported) "Of course, you can see from the mainstream media that perhaps Bersih is founded by wrong people and the bad guys, and other groups are the good guys.”
"It maybe or may not be, there is no right or wrong answer, but it may indicate that the country is heading for some kind of maturity."
But what did she mean by Bersih being ‘hijacked’? Well, Tian Chua flashed across my mental vision wakakaka. That wannabe martyr has been at his usual self – I won’t comment any further on this PKR Drama King wakakaka again. Then there was Anwar Ibrahim's pathetic attempt to (take over and) make unauthorised proposal to cancel the Bersih, but which was shot down in flames, thanks to cool sweetie Ambiga.
However, I believe HRH’s opinion on vernacular schooling, to abolish it, though fair and logical as it might be (because I once shared it wakakaka), is unfortunately way too late, as a large segment of Malaysian society no longer trusts the dodgy standards and at-times racist governance of national type schooling.
In these lamentable impressions (of not trusting national types but only vernacular schooling) we only have a series of UMNO Educational Ministers to thank, for their treatment of education as a political/nationalistic football, to kick their rotten way up the ranks of UMNO and thus to greater access to the Boleh Land gravy train.
The notorious BTN has played an equally nefarious part in confusing, corroding and corrupting the values of some school heads, who should no longer be fit to 'educate' young Malaysian minds.
Many parents now cling on to vernacular schooling as the only educational salvation for their children’s future.
First comment was on Bersih where she, to summarise, said the movement calling for free and fair elections had been hijacked.
As one of my personal political principles/beliefs, I don’t support constitutional royalty making comments on politics. This has been my position way way before the 2008 GE, and most certainly way before a series of unwelcomed royal intervention in the politics of Perlis, Terengganu (against AAB & UMNO then) and Perak (against Pakatan) - I posted on all these events.
I have always said that royalty should only make political comments if they are politicians like Tunku or Ku Li, but never (especially) when they are constitutional Heads of States.
If a Head of State, de jure or acting, makes political comments or acts politically in like fashion as a politician, then he/she must be mindful that in a democracy any political statement or act can be challenged, commented on and criticized. Thus he/she must not/cannot take umbrage nor could his/her supporters claim lèse majesté had been committed. The Perak case springs immediately into mind.
The only way such a Head of State acting politically can get away unquestioned or unchallenged would be when he/she is an absolute monarch (e.g in Brunei, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Jordan) as one local (late) royal member thought he was. The Malaccan Sultanh ordering the execution of Hang Tuah on the basis of a mere rumour would be another example.
However, having carefully read the news article in Malaysiakini, I have to say HRH has quite carefully navigated her way around the ambush of a student's difficult question on Bersih. I find it hard to criticise her reasonable response.
She was even handed in stating (as reported) "Of course, you can see from the mainstream media that perhaps Bersih is founded by wrong people and the bad guys, and other groups are the good guys.”
"It maybe or may not be, there is no right or wrong answer, but it may indicate that the country is heading for some kind of maturity."
But what did she mean by Bersih being ‘hijacked’? Well, Tian Chua flashed across my mental vision wakakaka. That wannabe martyr has been at his usual self – I won’t comment any further on this PKR Drama King wakakaka again. Then there was Anwar Ibrahim's pathetic attempt to (take over and) make unauthorised proposal to cancel the Bersih, but which was shot down in flames, thanks to cool sweetie Ambiga.
However, I believe HRH’s opinion on vernacular schooling, to abolish it, though fair and logical as it might be (because I once shared it wakakaka), is unfortunately way too late, as a large segment of Malaysian society no longer trusts the dodgy standards and at-times racist governance of national type schooling.
In these lamentable impressions (of not trusting national types but only vernacular schooling) we only have a series of UMNO Educational Ministers to thank, for their treatment of education as a political/nationalistic football, to kick their rotten way up the ranks of UMNO and thus to greater access to the Boleh Land gravy train.
The notorious BTN has played an equally nefarious part in confusing, corroding and corrupting the values of some school heads, who should no longer be fit to 'educate' young Malaysian minds.
Many parents now cling on to vernacular schooling as the only educational salvation for their children’s future.
Monday, July 25, 2011
Teoh Beng Hock - Murdered?
Read The Malaysian Insider’s A sham that deceived Malaysia — by Marcus van Geyzel, taken from the Loyarburuk website, and compare it with my post yesterday titled RCI report on Teoh Beng Hock - the Dark Interregnum.
Marcus wrote the following (concluding extract):
*****************************
The purpose of the TBH RCI was to reveal the truth. Looking at the chronology of events and the findings of fact made along the way and the sudden and inexplicable conclusion it is obvious that it has failed to reveal the truth behind the death of Teoh Beng Hock.
I am in shock. The five Commissioners are respected experts in their fields and are held in high regard. There seems to be no reason to doubt their integrity. The way the report was written points to only one logical conclusion - murder or at the very least culpable homicide not amounting to murder due to an accident during the interrogation process.
But suddenly without any basis without any evidence and in fact with evidence pointing to the contrary, the TBH RCI turns all its key findings on its head with one fanciful speculative fantastical and fictional paragraph*.
* the paragraph Marcus was referring to was the RCI's finding that Teoh was driven by the interrogations to commit suicide. That paragraph stated "Tormented by this predicament TBH experienced a change in his state of mind. And in a matter of hours this change transformed him from being in the low-risk group for suicide into the high-risk group. The doubts extreme emotional conflict and the immense feeling of guilt were all intolerable. Finally precipitating the irreversible crisis that happened to him ... etc etc ..."
No reasonable person of the calibre of those five Commissioners could possibly have come up with that. It beggars belief.
In the spirit of the TBH RCI report perhaps I should try my hand at a fanciful conclusion. Here we go.
Maybe there was a political intervention - or at least some heavy influence.
Maybe the Government would not have been able to cope with the backlash that would have resulted from a finding of murder.
Perhaps having been pre-informed that the TBH RCI was going to conclude that Teoh was murdered, someone somewhere forced the TBH RCI to invent this “middle ground” - this cop out solution which has cheated Malaysia of the truth.
** above highlighting are kaytee's
Do you find this theory unbelievable?
Well it is no more unbelievable than the ridiculous finding of “driven suicide” that was contained in that report.
Malaysia is going through some interesting times. Our Judiciary is failing us. Our Government is failing us. Our politicians and leaders are failing us. Our police force are failing us. So many of our institutions are failing us.
With their finding of “driven suicide”, the TBH RCI has most certainly failed us.
It was supposed to reveal the truth but instead has thrown up even more deception and doubt.
Marcus wrote the following (concluding extract):
*****************************
The purpose of the TBH RCI was to reveal the truth. Looking at the chronology of events and the findings of fact made along the way and the sudden and inexplicable conclusion it is obvious that it has failed to reveal the truth behind the death of Teoh Beng Hock.
I am in shock. The five Commissioners are respected experts in their fields and are held in high regard. There seems to be no reason to doubt their integrity. The way the report was written points to only one logical conclusion - murder or at the very least culpable homicide not amounting to murder due to an accident during the interrogation process.
But suddenly without any basis without any evidence and in fact with evidence pointing to the contrary, the TBH RCI turns all its key findings on its head with one fanciful speculative fantastical and fictional paragraph*.
* the paragraph Marcus was referring to was the RCI's finding that Teoh was driven by the interrogations to commit suicide. That paragraph stated "Tormented by this predicament TBH experienced a change in his state of mind. And in a matter of hours this change transformed him from being in the low-risk group for suicide into the high-risk group. The doubts extreme emotional conflict and the immense feeling of guilt were all intolerable. Finally precipitating the irreversible crisis that happened to him ... etc etc ..."
No reasonable person of the calibre of those five Commissioners could possibly have come up with that. It beggars belief.
In the spirit of the TBH RCI report perhaps I should try my hand at a fanciful conclusion. Here we go.
Maybe there was a political intervention - or at least some heavy influence.
Maybe the Government would not have been able to cope with the backlash that would have resulted from a finding of murder.
Perhaps having been pre-informed that the TBH RCI was going to conclude that Teoh was murdered, someone somewhere forced the TBH RCI to invent this “middle ground” - this cop out solution which has cheated Malaysia of the truth.
** above highlighting are kaytee's
Do you find this theory unbelievable?
Well it is no more unbelievable than the ridiculous finding of “driven suicide” that was contained in that report.
Malaysia is going through some interesting times. Our Judiciary is failing us. Our Government is failing us. Our politicians and leaders are failing us. Our police force are failing us. So many of our institutions are failing us.
With their finding of “driven suicide”, the TBH RCI has most certainly failed us.
It was supposed to reveal the truth but instead has thrown up even more deception and doubt.
Sunday, July 24, 2011
RCI report on Teoh Beng Hock - the Dark Interregnum
Every violation of truth is not only a sort of suicide in the liar, but is a stab at the health of human society - Ralph Waldo Emerson
Lies, lies, and damn lies ... which have been why I posted in The missing public trust that no one in Malaysia (other than the most hard core & faithful UMNO supporters) would trust in and rely on the objectivity of public institutions or ministers.
We see more of this in The Malaysian Insider’s Bar Council says MACC responsible for Teoh’s death.
Far more important, and totally damning for Minister Nazri and the cabinet, has been the Bar Council President, Lim Chee Wee’s repudiations of Minister Nazri’s untrue assertions. TMI reported:
Lim also rejected the notion that Teoh’s “weak character” had led him to suicide, as described by Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Datuk Seri Mohamed Nazri Aziz when he announced the release of the RCI report.
He pointed out that forensic psychiatrist Professor Paul Mullen had not testified that Teoh had a “weak character” and had not concluded that Teoh had committed suicide.
It’s just unbelievable that Minister Nazri had the brazen nerve in believing he could get away with putting words in Professor Paul Mullen’s mouth. Obviously Nazri, knowing there is no credible source on the authority’s side, had hoped to hitch a stowaway ride on a credible source.
But then, how do we explain the following extract of TMI’s report?
On the other findings in the RCI report, Lim said the council had concurred with the royal panel that Teoh had been subjected to “aggressive relentless oppressive and unscrupulous interrogation” and that most of the MACC officers involved in the case were not credible as they “had the inevitable habit of lying”
Lim said the council also agreed that the massive operation launched by the Selangor MACC at the time had been based on a mere belief without proper ground work or verification. The then-Selangor MACC deputy director Hishammuddin Hashim, he said, had been accurately described in the RCI report as “arrogant, given to falsehoods, untruthful and uncompromising” and “just too stubborn to retreat from his mistake in mounting such a massive operation”.
We know the answer would be found somewhere in the period between the RCI's submission of its report to the Agong (and thus, effectively the cabinet) and its public release, nearly 3 weeks of unaccountable 'blackout', not unlike a crucial moment at one of the polling station in interior Sarawak in the State's last election, when the creativity of dark forces would be at its zenith wakakaka.
The Bar Council’s disagreement has been strictly with Minister Nazri’s spin (his attempt to put words in the mouth of credible expert like Prof Mullen). Notwithstanding the implausible finding of 'suicide', now totally demolished by the Bar Council's repudiation of Nazri's pathetic and shameful attempt to 'justify' the finding, there is enough in the RCI's report to show some genuine investigation. But ...
... BUT there is now an increasing* suspicion that in the silent interregnum, there has been some disingenuous ‘creativity’.
* 'increasing' means the suspicion was already there way before the public release of the RCI report, but since then, has escalated to humongous dimensions
If so, then it supports the rakyat's perception that in Boleh Land court cases, coronial inquests, police reports, pathological reports and hospital medical checks etc must always support the side of the UMNO-led government and its pro-UMNO public institutions. How it would or could be achieved is irrelevant. It could be a voluntarily case of what Sasterawan Negara (National Laureate) Samad Said termed 'charma' (cari makan), or it could be involuntary.
We also know why, as reported in TMI, that the Teoh family boycotted RCI when, aside from the RCI chairperson being (unusually) a sitting Federal Court judge, the RCI insisted on continuing the inquiry despite a proposed judicial review over the appointment of deputy public prosecutors DPPs (from the AG's Office) as conducting officers.
And the ultimate insult to the Teoh family’s wish for at least some (whom they see as) impartial and outstanding citizens sitting as RCI members was when Najib and his cabinet rejected what was a fair and reasonable request.
I wrote on that in one of my earlier (February) posts RCI = Regrettable Conflict of Interest?:
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 in refusing such a request for outstanding citizens, including even UMNO's Musa Hitam to sit on the RCI, Najib and his cabinet had actually revealed their true colours, their intention and what they had already decided on the outcome, thus the Teoh family's correct boycotting of the RCI at least didn't confer on the inquiry its most desired and most important vestige of credibility.
As Sir Humphrey Appleby advised: 'Minister, two basic rules of government: Never look into anything you don’t have to. And never set up an enquiry unless you know in advance what its findings will be.' And so it was.
Lies, lies, and damn lies ... which have been why I posted in The missing public trust that no one in Malaysia (other than the most hard core & faithful UMNO supporters) would trust in and rely on the objectivity of public institutions or ministers.
We see more of this in The Malaysian Insider’s Bar Council says MACC responsible for Teoh’s death.
Far more important, and totally damning for Minister Nazri and the cabinet, has been the Bar Council President, Lim Chee Wee’s repudiations of Minister Nazri’s untrue assertions. TMI reported:
Lim also rejected the notion that Teoh’s “weak character” had led him to suicide, as described by Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Datuk Seri Mohamed Nazri Aziz when he announced the release of the RCI report.
He pointed out that forensic psychiatrist Professor Paul Mullen had not testified that Teoh had a “weak character” and had not concluded that Teoh had committed suicide.
It’s just unbelievable that Minister Nazri had the brazen nerve in believing he could get away with putting words in Professor Paul Mullen’s mouth. Obviously Nazri, knowing there is no credible source on the authority’s side, had hoped to hitch a stowaway ride on a credible source.
But then, how do we explain the following extract of TMI’s report?
On the other findings in the RCI report, Lim said the council had concurred with the royal panel that Teoh had been subjected to “aggressive relentless oppressive and unscrupulous interrogation” and that most of the MACC officers involved in the case were not credible as they “had the inevitable habit of lying”
Lim said the council also agreed that the massive operation launched by the Selangor MACC at the time had been based on a mere belief without proper ground work or verification. The then-Selangor MACC deputy director Hishammuddin Hashim, he said, had been accurately described in the RCI report as “arrogant, given to falsehoods, untruthful and uncompromising” and “just too stubborn to retreat from his mistake in mounting such a massive operation”.
We know the answer would be found somewhere in the period between the RCI's submission of its report to the Agong (and thus, effectively the cabinet) and its public release, nearly 3 weeks of unaccountable 'blackout', not unlike a crucial moment at one of the polling station in interior Sarawak in the State's last election, when the creativity of dark forces would be at its zenith wakakaka.
The Bar Council’s disagreement has been strictly with Minister Nazri’s spin (his attempt to put words in the mouth of credible expert like Prof Mullen). Notwithstanding the implausible finding of 'suicide', now totally demolished by the Bar Council's repudiation of Nazri's pathetic and shameful attempt to 'justify' the finding, there is enough in the RCI's report to show some genuine investigation. But ...
... BUT there is now an increasing* suspicion that in the silent interregnum, there has been some disingenuous ‘creativity’.
* 'increasing' means the suspicion was already there way before the public release of the RCI report, but since then, has escalated to humongous dimensions
If so, then it supports the rakyat's perception that in Boleh Land court cases, coronial inquests, police reports, pathological reports and hospital medical checks etc must always support the side of the UMNO-led government and its pro-UMNO public institutions. How it would or could be achieved is irrelevant. It could be a voluntarily case of what Sasterawan Negara (National Laureate) Samad Said termed 'charma' (cari makan), or it could be involuntary.
We also know why, as reported in TMI, that the Teoh family boycotted RCI when, aside from the RCI chairperson being (unusually) a sitting Federal Court judge, the RCI insisted on continuing the inquiry despite a proposed judicial review over the appointment of deputy public prosecutors DPPs (from the AG's Office) as conducting officers.
And the ultimate insult to the Teoh family’s wish for at least some (whom they see as) impartial and outstanding citizens sitting as RCI members was when Najib and his cabinet rejected what was a fair and reasonable request.
I wrote on that in one of my earlier (February) posts RCI = Regrettable Conflict of Interest?:
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 in refusing such a request for outstanding citizens, including even UMNO's Musa Hitam to sit on the RCI, Najib and his cabinet had actually revealed their true colours, their intention and what they had already decided on the outcome, thus the Teoh family's correct boycotting of the RCI at least didn't confer on the inquiry its most desired and most important vestige of credibility.
As Sir Humphrey Appleby advised: 'Minister, two basic rules of government: Never look into anything you don’t have to. And never set up an enquiry unless you know in advance what its findings will be.' And so it was.
Thursday, July 21, 2011
Lateral thinking by Mat de Brootal
Story No 1
Once upon a time a man named Edward de Bono explained his theory of ‘lateral thinking’ with the following story (in kaytee’s own words wakakaka):
A bastard of an old loan shark lusted after a sweetie whose father was pathetically poor thus vulnerable to borrowing money from the Ah Long. As the story went, Dad was in deep deep deep, very deep financial shit with the Ah Long when the assh*le decided to pounce and satisfy his evil lust.
He told the sweetie to bet on a 50-50 chance game, for her to pick either a white or black pebble from a bag. Picking up a white pebble would mean she wins, with her father’s debt completely cleared, while picking up a black would require her to marry the prick. It was an 'all or nothing' gamble, an offer which Don Vito Corleone would have said that sweetie couldn't refuse.
Coincidentally where Ah Long and the sweetie were standing, the ground was covered with white and black pebbles.
Of course Ah Long intended to win by cheating so he placed two black stones in the bag. Sweetie saw the bastard doing that but knew she was in a fix. If she made noise, Ah Long would make her father’s life hell.
So we were told that she employed ‘lateral thinking’
She picked a pebble (obviously black) from the bag but ... ooops a daisy ... she dropped it on the ground. She bersandiwara and apologised to Ah Long, but asserted that all was not lost as whatever colour pebble was left in the bag would mean the one she dropped, accidentally of course, would be of the opposite colour (in other words, a winning white).
That’s Edward de Bono’s explanation of what ‘lateral thinking’ is, where sweetie won without being confrontational with Ah Long. To kaytee it’s just another term for ‘creative thinking’.
Story No 2
Once upon a time a man namedMacc Mat de Brootal of the Brootal Clan explained his theory of ‘lateral thinking’ with the following story (in kaytee’s own words wakakaka):
A bastard of a sadistic oppressor lusted after a confession from a young man for nefarious purposes. In the interrogation he killed the victim, perhaps accidentally, but nonetheless a crime that would have been classified at least as ‘manslaughter’, one requiring imprisonment of the Mossad-like assh*le.
To cut the story short, he and backers attempted to pass the death off as suicide but the public did not accept that implausible bullsh*t because facts and logic stood in the bloody way of what he thought would be a convenient escape.
His backers had to think of a way out, one that won’t implicate the draconian Shabak-like (Shin Bet like) clone with a crime (this one mana boleh lah), but provide that extra something beyond just a mere statement of ‘suicide’, though mind you, not too much, just a wee sweetener for the public to punish the prick with a slap or maybe even two on his f* wrist, which was covered with the victim's blood.
So, they thought ‘creative thinking’ was in order, with a new inquiry. The aim was to win without complete denial of some (light) form of punishment to satisfy the angry crowd.
Coincidentally, the finding came out that death was indeed by suicide due to the weak character of the victim, but, here’s what they thought would be the wee sweetener (probably arrived at weeks after the inquiry report was submitted), the cause of the suicide was contributed by incorrect interrogation techniques, deemed as aggressive, inappropriate and therefore in violation of the regulations.
The Aman (Agaf HaModi'in)-like assh*le would then be dealt with by an administrative tribunal for his harsh interrogation techniques since it was just a case of poor judgement and not a ‘crime’ - perhaps with a small pay deduction or more probably, a promotion sideways. An administrative slap-on-the-wrist was the maximum punishment acceptable for 'The Chosen Ones' who would/must never be ever responsible for any crimes - don't believe me, hey man, ask the Palestinians.
Kow tim.
Recall, I posted yesterday in The missing public trust where I asked “Does anyone (other than UMNO and cronies) trust … [any Malaysian public institution]?”
But praise The Lord, and thank goodness for atheists like me, Story No 2 did not happen in Malaysia, but elsewhere … in B****Land.
Once upon a time a man named Edward de Bono explained his theory of ‘lateral thinking’ with the following story (in kaytee’s own words wakakaka):
A bastard of an old loan shark lusted after a sweetie whose father was pathetically poor thus vulnerable to borrowing money from the Ah Long. As the story went, Dad was in deep deep deep, very deep financial shit with the Ah Long when the assh*le decided to pounce and satisfy his evil lust.
He told the sweetie to bet on a 50-50 chance game, for her to pick either a white or black pebble from a bag. Picking up a white pebble would mean she wins, with her father’s debt completely cleared, while picking up a black would require her to marry the prick. It was an 'all or nothing' gamble, an offer which Don Vito Corleone would have said that sweetie couldn't refuse.
Coincidentally where Ah Long and the sweetie were standing, the ground was covered with white and black pebbles.
Of course Ah Long intended to win by cheating so he placed two black stones in the bag. Sweetie saw the bastard doing that but knew she was in a fix. If she made noise, Ah Long would make her father’s life hell.
So we were told that she employed ‘lateral thinking’
She picked a pebble (obviously black) from the bag but ... ooops a daisy ... she dropped it on the ground. She bersandiwara and apologised to Ah Long, but asserted that all was not lost as whatever colour pebble was left in the bag would mean the one she dropped, accidentally of course, would be of the opposite colour (in other words, a winning white).
That’s Edward de Bono’s explanation of what ‘lateral thinking’ is, where sweetie won without being confrontational with Ah Long. To kaytee it’s just another term for ‘creative thinking’.
Story No 2
Once upon a time a man named
A bastard of a sadistic oppressor lusted after a confession from a young man for nefarious purposes. In the interrogation he killed the victim, perhaps accidentally, but nonetheless a crime that would have been classified at least as ‘manslaughter’, one requiring imprisonment of the Mossad-like assh*le.
To cut the story short, he and backers attempted to pass the death off as suicide but the public did not accept that implausible bullsh*t because facts and logic stood in the bloody way of what he thought would be a convenient escape.
His backers had to think of a way out, one that won’t implicate the draconian Shabak-like (Shin Bet like) clone with a crime (this one mana boleh lah), but provide that extra something beyond just a mere statement of ‘suicide’, though mind you, not too much, just a wee sweetener for the public to punish the prick with a slap or maybe even two on his f* wrist, which was covered with the victim's blood.
So, they thought ‘creative thinking’ was in order, with a new inquiry. The aim was to win without complete denial of some (light) form of punishment to satisfy the angry crowd.
Coincidentally, the finding came out that death was indeed by suicide due to the weak character of the victim, but, here’s what they thought would be the wee sweetener (probably arrived at weeks after the inquiry report was submitted), the cause of the suicide was contributed by incorrect interrogation techniques, deemed as aggressive, inappropriate and therefore in violation of the regulations.
The Aman (Agaf HaModi'in)-like assh*le would then be dealt with by an administrative tribunal for his harsh interrogation techniques since it was just a case of poor judgement and not a ‘crime’ - perhaps with a small pay deduction or more probably, a promotion sideways. An administrative slap-on-the-wrist was the maximum punishment acceptable for 'The Chosen Ones' who would/must never be ever responsible for any crimes - don't believe me, hey man, ask the Palestinians.
Kow tim.
Recall, I posted yesterday in The missing public trust where I asked “Does anyone (other than UMNO and cronies) trust … [any Malaysian public institution]?”
But praise The Lord, and thank goodness for atheists like me, Story No 2 did not happen in Malaysia, but elsewhere … in B****Land.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)