Motive?

The word (noun) 'motive' is defined in the dictionary as:

(a) something that causes a person to act in a certain way, do a certain thing, etc.; incentive,

and also:

(b) the goal or object of a person's actions, as in 'Her motive was revenge'.

Let us take a local example - eight years ago, on 02 March 2006, Malaysiakini reported in its news article Judge: Daims statement contemptuous! which incidentally featured Daim Zainuddin and Muhammad Shafee Abdullah, wakakaka, the following (note how the word 'motive' was used):

Court of Appeal judge Gopal Sri Ram today said that Daim Zainuddin could be hauled for contempt of court for his statement to the press in which the former finance minister questioned the court's motives in dragging his name into the Metramac scandal. 

"Daim told the press: 'I do not know what the court's motives are'. Our motives here is to do justice without fear and favour. And let me say this: This (Daim's) statement is contemptuous!

"We fear no one, however wealthy or however powerful they are. This institution does not fear anybody! We are the people who have sworn to uphold the constitution and interpret the acts of Parliament. 

"Are we to keep quiet when we see there is something wrong? Is it better to shut up and look like fools rather than to open our mouths and cast doubts?" 

The judge made the hard-hitting remarks while hearing arguments from DP Vijandran, the counsel acting on behalf of Metramac Corporation Sdn Bhd's lawyer Muhammad Shafee Abdullah, who is facing possible contempt proceeding for sending a letter of complaint against the judge.

Okay?

No? What about another example, say, the Grasshopper of Shaolin which I posted yesterday displaying Sakmongkol AK47's piercing piece about 'motive', wakakaka.

Then, what about what Malaysiakini had published on 02 April 2009, in its article Prayers for Altantuya.

In that 2009 article it reported that PKR politicians (wakakaka), specifically Perak PKR state representatives Tai Sing Ng (Kuala Sepetang) and Chang Lih Kang (Teja), held a mini Chinese 'Cheng Beng' ritual to commemorate Altantuyaa's departed soul.

Very touching but what about Malaysians Preeshena Varshiny and Nurin Jazlin Jazimin? By the by, I hope, dear readers, as Malaysians you would still remember who Preeshena Varshiny and Nurin Jazlin Jazimin were!

Yes, as we can witnessed from the above two photos, poor Mongolian Altantuyaa was not even allowed to rest in peace - see my post Murdering Altantuyaa Shaariibuu Again in which I penned the thoughts of Altantuyaa's soul (extracts only):

But the loudest noises are they calling for ‘justice’
Though, I smile cynically, ‘twas not meant for me
Their shrill proclamations & belated outrage (sigh)
Startled even great Gujir Tngri and the 77 siqar

Grandstanding acrobatics, their excuse to dispense
With all norms, purportedly all for me (wry smile)
I must confess I view with scepticism and distaste
As I would professional chest-pounding mourners

Gnashing Colgate mint-flavoured peroxide-d teeth
Wretchedly wringing manicured Ulan oiled hands
Shedding date-expired plastic bags of lo-salt tears
Proclaiming to be 11th hour paragons of ‘justice’

Even Ataya Tngri rolled his ancient eyes upwards
While Emegelji Eji cackled with caustic laughter
The ancient pair could see abacus shaped hearts
Clicking furiously and shaming Casio calculators

By sheer speed of their computation of advantage
What to extract, exploit, extricate from my name
Squeezing the very last speck of desiccated blood
From my hyper cold shattered fragments of bones

Don't mind me if I ask, so what was the PKR politicians' motive in only mourning a slain Mongolian but not two wee Malaysian sweethearts?

Yes, what was their 'Motive'?

Anyway, with the 'mournful' help of PKR how-laam (mourners) we have arrived at the subject of Shaariibuu Altantuyaa. In Malaysia-Today RPK posted an article from the Malay Mail Online (which I couldn't find) titled PAS MAN SAYS WANTS TO MEET SIRUL TO DISCUSS ALTANTUYA MURDER MOTIVE.

In that post we are informed that Mahfuz Omar, PAS party information chief, wants to meet Sirul Azhar Umar, who was recently sentenced to hang for his crime of killing the slain Mongolian model. Mahfuz claimed Sirul's dear mummy "... had admitted that her son had merely been following orders when he killed Altantuya."

Mahfuz stated, “I do not challenge the court’s decision but I heard the mother said her son admitted to following orders to kill Altantuya. But what are the motives in killing Altantuya? Why did the court not reveal it?”

Mahfuz has a point there. The court should have revealed the motive.

The Malay Mail online report said that 'Mahfuz added that he did not see how Sirul or Azilah Hadri, his convicted accomplice, would have any personal reason to kill the Mongolian translator.'

We're back to motive again.

At that time I did have a suspicion on what might have been their motive but which of course would be only a possibility, but one that is unlikely to satisfy Pakatan and its supporters even if proven correct, wakakaka.

Okay, let me re-publish an old 2012 post of mine Motive for murder - seeking Confucius' help (with some minor editorial improvements on grammar, sentence flow, missing words, etc including an additional couple of sentences at its end, wakakaka) in which I alluded to that 'motive'.

At its end I would like to pose a question on 'motive' to Mahfuz Omar, and I hope he'll help me by answering it.

********

In my post The motives of love, lust, lucre and loathing I quoted famous crime author, P.D. James, who had served for thirty years in various departments of the British Civil Service, including the Police and Criminal Law Department of Great Britain's Home Office, as well as been a magistrate, that “All the motives for murder are covered by four Ls: Love, Lust, Lucre and Loathing.”

Everyone who has been following the Altantuyaa case including the most learned judge knows that Altantuyaa was blackmailing her ex lover Razak Baginda with such aggression that he became terrified enough to ask for special protection, so most would say there was initially love and lust in their relationship, and then when the passion and ardor turned cool and relationship soured, the blackmailing for money (lucre) kicked in, with the final outcome of loathing, probably of a mutual nature.

To some people it was an astonishing pronouncement by his Lordship that notwithstanding Razak Baginda’s possessing all the likely motives (which of course don't necessarily translate into criminal action), those motives couldn't be the basis to suspect him.

Thus it’s hardly surprising and perhaps also politically convenient (also a motive, wakakaka) that most Malaysians would cast their eyes on siapa godfather-nya?

Of course his close friendship with Najib plus alleged corrupt armed purchases have deepened the suspicions that there had been kow-tim-ness.

Those suspicions are all natural, logical and thus unavoidable, and coupled with the (lack of) reputation of our aleged kow-tim-able judiciary, have led to accusations that our Malaysian Don Corleone might had intervened. I'd go along with such suspicions.

Be that as it may, while it’s one thing to suspect Najib helping his buddy, it’s quite another to accuse Najib of being the killer or the man who gave the order to pull the trigger.

But that is the sentiment currently prevailing among PKR people who wants Najib implicated, not just as an accessory to the crime but as the prime suspect, the man who ordered the murder of Altantuyaa Shariibuu.

* and that's why when Siril and Azilah Hadri were found guilty and sentenced to death, many Pakatan supporters voiced their continuing dissatisfaction with that verdict. Look, they will never ever be satisfied until Ah Jib Gor is pronounced as guilty of Shaariibuu Altantuyaa's murder, regardless of evidence, facts or the truth, wakakaka.

And if they can't get him directly, they'll want to get him through his Big Mama, wakakaka.

All these started ages ago when the G.A.N (Gerakan Anti Najib) campaign was launched.

In my readings of the various available articles and news reports, I could not find a single shred of evidence of Altantuyaa harassing Najib, or waiting outside his (DPM) house to pounce on him. All I gleaned from those was Altantuyaa going after Razak Baginda, her former lover (or even alleged hubby).

Of course there was that alleged mysterious photograph of a threesome French dinner which PKR's Tian Chu loved to have (I suspect he still does even though he already has one which he quite cleverly 'developed' himself, wakakaka) and ...

... of course there's the late Balasubramaniam’s double SD’s (or was it triple - I have lost count). His words - allegedly told to him by Razak Baginda who in turn was allegedly told to him by Najib who in turn was allegedly told to him by Altantuyaa - were like treasure to those who want to finish off Najib, wakakaka.

Quite frankly, after reading the readers' comments in Malaysiakini on the judge’s dismissal of charges against Razak Baginda, such as “The 2 policemen had no motive to murder Altantuyaa” ... and ...

... as someone commented in my last post in Exploiting the murder of Altantuyaa Shariibuu that “The UTK goons who were convicted were just the idiots who shouted 'Aye Aye Sir' and carried out the orders. Who gave the order to drop the bomb?”, ...

... I came to the conclusion that even if the judge had called Razak Baginda to give his defence and he was subsequently found guilty, those baying out for blood would still not be satisfied.

No sirree, as mentioned above, not with Razak Baginda or even those already ‘found guilty’, namely Azilah Hadri and Sirul Azhar.

Just a reminder, the two policemen were the ones who were the last people with a still-alive Altantuyaa when they whisked her off from Razak Baginda’s house to her sad fate.

Those Malaysiakini readers want Najib’s head. They want him not just as an accessory to the murder (in helping Razak Baginda) but as the murderer.

Why? I suppose we could ask: what's their motive? Wakakaka.

To end this post, I am seeking the help of an ancient Chinese to help me conclude my piece about a possible motive. Kǒng Zǐ or Confucius said that “A picture is worth a thousand words”, so please have a look at the following pictures (or photographs).

Altantuyaa Shariibuu was undoubtedly a very beautiful woman. 

[please note that in my original 2012 post I had mistakenly posted above photographs as those of Altantuyaa, when actually they were of South Korean model U Nee, but nonetheless I continue to use them here as we have been often told that Altantuyaa was no less beautiful, and thus to make a point with Confucius help]

Okay a quick revision, P.D. James said “All the motives for murder are covered by four Ls: Love, Lust, Lucre and Loathing.”

But I don’t suppose any of above photographs can answer the comment in Malaysiakini: “The 2 policemen had no motive to murder Altantuyaa” even with P.D James' advice?

Okay then, in that case I might recall for readers the sad murder of another equally beautiful woman, namely, Canny Ong, whose murder can be read here, here and here.

So having arrived at the end of my rather long-ish post, as promised I would now like to ask Mahfuz Omar what was the motive in the rape and murder of Canny Ong?

Datuk, please ignore your colleague's reason of 'divine wrath' and choose from P.D James' four Ls: Love, Lust, Lucre and Loathing”.

Grasshopper of Shaolin

I'll relax today and instead post an article from The Malaysian Insider, one written by DAP Ariff Sabri, better known as blogger Sakmongkol AK47.

wa tolong lu, lu tolong wa, okay?

Sak's article titled The story of Androcles and the lion (citing the title of a fable by Aesop) is a full blown version of my more pithy Wa tolong lu, lu tolong wa?

Here is it:

I am writing this on a personal basis. As one who writes on politics long before I joined DAP and later became its candidate for Raub, Pahang. And Raub, Pahang, is a Malay majority constituency, yea.

I am puzzled by the strategy taken by the leader of PR, Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim. Maybe I have not read a hidden political manual from the Shaolin temple. My political kung fu is not fully developed yet.

He has offered to provide evidence on the corruption that former information minister Tun Daim Zainduin did. He has stories about embezzlements, commissions, award of contracts, licences, monopolies and even sexual trysts? Now, as readers may know, I came to know a bit about Tun Daim. Most of all I know, he is not the PM who is now controlling Malaysia.

So here is why I am puzzled. Why attack Daim when the focus of our efforts ought to be centred on kicking Najib out of Putrajaya? We should be giving as much space for the Umno people to kill off each other.

I would have thought, an enemy of our real enemy is our friend. We should allow Daim and his people (writers, bloggers, ex-ministers) to whack Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak. Let us not stop Zam for example to reveal those juicy stories about Najib so that all Malaysia will know Najib for what his truly is. An overrated blue blood who has not much grey material between his ears who is actually a menace to our country. Come on Pak Zam, kasi keluaq habis.

Let us also encourage people like veteran newsman Datuk A. Kadir Jasin to write negatively about Najib.

The objective is to save Malaysia from the insouciant Najib. Look at our debt. It’s really more than the meaningless ceiling of 55% of GDP thing. I can’t remember what it is already- maybe RM560 billion. The amount of contingent liabilities alone is RM160 billion. This amount is cleverly not shown in the Malaysian Budget.

Most of us don’t know. These are loans undertaken by specially created vehicles, such as GLC or some SPVs which are guaranteed by the government. If they go bust or default on their loans, the government steps in and pay. Where will the government get the money? From the treasury of course which is our money.

Look at what is happening to race relations. Umno wants us to be at war with one another. Umno wants nothing better than waging a war against the Chinese, the majority of whom have become supporters of DAP. But its own senior minister is helping out a law breaker now investigated in America. And he is a Chinese.

The narrative by Umno about the Chinese? They will take away the special privileges of the Malays, will attack the Malay religion and will dethrone the poor and hapless Malay rulers. I say hapless because Malay rulers depend on people like Perkasa to defend them. That’s implying, the Malay rulers are not that bright to the extent that they must depend on Perkasa.

It means that The Constitution is useless. The Malay demography is useless.

Look at the government’s acting as bystander to the “vetocracy” unleashed by unelected Islamists now inhabiting many of the religious departments. I don’t want to appear mean-hearted when I say, what does Najib understand about the Islamic religion to expect him to do anything about it?

So why lend a hand to Najib? Indeed TV3 as the main spin master of the PM is giving Anwar a large space to denounce Daim Zainudin. This is suspicious and it’s not because that Saifool bloke is complaining about it. TV3 or other communications medium owned and controlled by Media Prima will not move or do anything, unless cleared by Najib’s people.

I don’t think people like Johan Jaafar, Ashraf Abdullah or Manja Ismail got the balls to give space to Anwar.

To me it appears that Anwar’s priority is no longer PR. So what is it? Even though he has told me he doesn’t care about it- I think his priority now is his personal freedom.

So is there a deal between Najib and Anwar? Anwar lends a hand to Najib to whack Daim who is actually fronting for Dr Mahathir and by doing so, if Anwar succeeds, remove the thorn in the lion’s paw. Is Anwar playing the role of Androcles removing the thorn from Najib’s paw? The lion then becomes tame and shares game with Androcles Anwar?

Or maybe the hidden manual in the Shaolin temple contains a coded message that says - Grasshopper – isolate Najib first and then goes [sic] for the kill?

"Master please don't call me Grasshopper"

"Okay then, what about King of hoppers?"

********

* Sakmongkol AK47 is the nom de guerre of Raub MP Datuk Ariff Sabri Abdul Aziz.

* This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of The Malaysian Insider.

Wa tolong lu, lu tolong wa?

(NST) – Opposition leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim says he has evidence against former finance minister Tun Daim Zainuddin on the latter’s alleged abuse of position to amass wealth.

"Therefore I say that it is a narrow policy to suppose that this country or that is to be marked out as the eternal ally or the perpetual enemy of England. We have no eternal allies, and we have no perpetual enemies. Our interests are eternal and perpetual, and those interests it is our duty to follow."

- Lord Palmerston (Henry John Temple)

Anwar told reporters today that he was even willing to assist the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) into investigations on Daim, if need be.

“I have the evidence… from those years sometime ago which has been filed (shelved).

“MACC should also carry out its duties professionally in this matter. It has been going on for quite sometime, so they (MACC) shouldn’t be afraid to do their job.”

Daim three days ago had said that he welcomed investigations by MACC.

NST publishing this means the Empire Strikes Back campaign is in full force.

But why does Anwar Ibrahim only come out now to say he has the 'goods' on Daim? Why not during the last 16 years?

Is it a "Wa tolong lu, lu tolong wa" message to Najib?

The Countrywoman behind Najib

We have been told that doctors make the worst patients, and this saying became more apparent when the UMNO N-faction gave their colleagues in M-faction a taste of, yes, M's medicine, which the latter didn't like, no not at all. wakakaka.

That's why currently the M-faction has been whinging, whining and whimpering like a kera kena belacan.

In my post yesterday Empire strikes back? I mentioned Daim Zainuddin complaining about those in N-faction who has or have unleashed the UMNO-controlled media mouthpieces onto his business empire, thus galvanizing Malaysia's anti-graft officials to investigate his banking business abroad.

Daim expressed his surprise that the UMNO-controlled Media Prima Bhd would provide coverage for opposition party PKR, which indirectly tells us that the mainstream media in Malaysia, which he termed as government-friendly media, wakakaka, normally “... would not give 2 minutes of air time to Pakatan, has aired the PKR press conference no less than 3 times. The NST and Utusan have also carried this news."

His annoyance had already been preceded by wanings from his UMNO (M-faction) matey Zainuddin Maidin (Zam) who even threatened to reveal 'presumably naughty' stories about Ah Jib Gor. Yum, I love the occasional salacious tale especially about our politicians, wakakaka.

Now, it seems the man behind the N-faction's current campaign a la Empire Strikes Back is not a man but rather a 'countrywoman'.

First, what do I mean by the term 'countrywoman' apart from the first understanding it must be a Malaysian sweetie.

'Countrywoman' is the feminine equivalent of 'countryman' - hope you as a Malaysian knows who is a 'countryman'? wakakaka.

If you don't, tsk tsk, then read my post over at my other blog KTemoc Kongsamkok titled Correspondence with a Sardarji in which I mentioned 'countrymen' (in the plural) several times, examples as follows:

Anyway, what the f**k is this blogging bullsh*t on the long & short of 'tambis', where you questioned the countrymen’s size. The moment I landed in Penang, my brother (with a bloody grin) told me to read Kaytee’s posting.

That writeup has been an insult to your blood brother, moi.

... and ... 

But I don’t want to hear anymore bullsh*t about the countrymen’s size. As my family (save dad) and I have always treated you as an honorary countryman, I feel I can share with you the most inner secret of the Sikhs.

Wakakaka.

she looks like my childhood 'crush', Saroj, Lakhbir's sis

wakakaka

Today RPK posted DAIM FINGERS MYSTERY MAN BEHIND ‘ATTACKS’ where he wrote:

Kadir Jasin is grumbling about what he calls the well-planned and well-coordinated attacks on Tun Dr Mahathir Mohammad and Tun Daim Zainuddin. He even identified the mystery man heading the operation, a person he called H…R…

It seems the mystery man, who is actually a woman, is Hardev KauR. Kadir also accuses her of ordering TV3 to give PKR’s Shamsul Iskandar airtime to attack Daim.

What Kadir did not mention is that he, together with Dr Mahathir and Daim, started attacking Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak first. But now that they are being hit back they find the heat too much to bear.

And that's what I meant by ... doctors make the worst patients, and this saying became more apparent when the UMNO N-faction gave their colleagues in M-faction a taste of, yes, M's medicine, which the latter didn't like, no not at all.

I also mentioned that Ah Jib Gor is known for his amazing survival instinct, and which might have convinced him that a fightback is now more necessary, nay, vital than ever if he wants to remain as head of UMNO and PM of Malaysia.

But to be fair to him, I also wrote: sometimes Bodek-ites run away with the game without the principals even knowing what's going on, wakakaka.

Indeed, back in December 2010, there were initial allegations that Najib, who was paying a Christmas courtesy visit to a Church, naughtily demanded that the church remove crosses or crucifixes from the church or the vicinity of the function, and that Christmas carols not be sung.

The argument was that Najib was scared of suffering a Ku Li experience which caused him (Ku Li) the UMNO presidency and the PM-ship - for more of Ku Li's faux pas, read my 2013 post Tengku Razaleigh & The NeverEnding Story.

In the end, we found out an overzealous aide had been involved, though she claimed she was misunderstood - here's her apology-explanation which incidentally was supported by the church officials.

The Najib aide involved in the allegations about crosses, crucifixes and carols was Hardev Kaur, which I presume would be the same 'countrywoman' in the Gerakan Anti Mahathir (faction), a GAM to PKR's GAN (Gerakan Anti Najib).

Or should we rename GAM to GNAM GNAM (Gerakan Najib Against Mahathir)? Wakakaka.

Our 'countrywoman' has quite an impressive CV. TMI once published the following about her:

Datuk Hardev Kaur was born and educated in Malaysia. She obtained her first degree in Economics (Honours) from University Malaya and her Masters in Public Administration from Harvard University in the US. 

She started her career in journalism with Radio Television Malaysia (RTM), moved to Malaysia Business and then to Business Times.

In 1998, she was made Editor-at-Large for the New Straits Times Group and in January 2002 appointed Assistant Group Editor. 

She was made the Group Editor on May 1, the first female to hold the post in the 160 year history of the paper. In March 2002 she was appointed Consultant, Editorial Marketing for the NSTP Group. 

Datuk Hardev has been bestowed a number of awards for regional economic coverage including the Asia Editor of the year by the Asia Press Foundation. She was the first female in the region to be given this award.

It seems that there are two very powerful and well-qualified women behind Ah Jib Gor, wakakaka, lucky bloke!

And I wonder about that old saying (don't I just love old sayings, wakakaka), 'Set a thief to catch a thief' which in our case under discussions, could well be paraphrased into 'Set an Indian to catch an Indian', wakakaka.

Empire strikes back?

TMI - Daim: I know those behind media spotlight on me

still sure, Tun?

Tun Daim Zainuddin has revealed he knows those behind a sudden spotlight on his business empire as Malaysia's anti-graft officials investigate the former finance minister's banking business abroad.

Daim, in a statement today, said he was surprised that Umno-controlled Media Prima Bhd would provide coverage for opposition party PKR.

“While I understand the motivation of these PKR politicians as they know not much other than politics and making baseless allegations, I am quite surprised with the attention given to them by the government-friendly media.

“TV3 which would not give 2 minutes of air time to Pakatan, has aired the PKR press conference no less than 3 times. The NST and Utusan have also carried this news."

Daim's half 'revelation' had been preceded by a Zam warning to the people in Najib's camp, a veiled threat that such UMNO guerrilla warfare will also hurt Najib. Zam nastily hinted at scandalous tales on the PM.

51 dalil ...?

It seems the Mahathir versus Najib, or to be more diplomatic, the Mahathir faction versus Najib faction internecine war is definitely on. As we know in our politics, sometimes Bodek-ites run away with the game without the principals even knowing what's going on, wakakaka, though I doubt this would be the case in the former camp, wakakaka.

Seperti orang tua ajar, bila gajah sama gajah berlawan, pelanduk mati ditengah-tengah.

where's that bloody pelandok non?

seems the croc got him first, bloody overgrown lizard

wakakaka 

OTOH, there is a more optimistic version that tells us, bila gajah sama gajah berlawan, pelanduk ditengah-tengah yang untung, wakakaka.

we pelandoks will inherit the world, well, according to Yehoshua anyway

We can only hope ... ah ... for one to win convincingly and completely so that there'll be ... er ... stability, wakakaka - I'm speaking from the viewpoint of one of the potential pelanduk mati ditengah-tengah otherwise known as 'collateral damage', wakakaka.

been a while since you said something Ridhuan my boy
time to don your spots and return to your 'duties'


wakakaka

Anyway, guess the Empire has decided to strike back at the Mahathir camp's for the latter's constant sniping at Najib and undermining of his policies (has the IGP seeming discrediting of Home Minister Zahid Hamidi, a Najib sidekick, been part of the Mahathir camp's campaign? No worries, all kow-tim liao under OSA, wakakaka).

However, I'm not sure whether the man himself has given the green light for the current 'Empire strikes back' campaign. But Ah Jib Gor is known for his amazing survival instinct, and which might have convinced him that a fightback is now more necessary, nay, vital than ever if he wants to remain as head of UMNO and PM of Malaysia.

Aiyoyo, who will win lah?

hmmm, who could he be?

Taai-Ee-Saang or Ah Jib Gor?

wakakaka

‘KD Freedom of Expression’ scuttled?

My response to Commander (Retd) S Thayaparan's take on my article 'Charlie Hebdo - an onion that needs to be peeled' has been published in Malaysiakini as a letter (thanks mateys):

p/s for those who subscribes to Malaysiakini, Commander Thayaparan's article 'chewing' me up, wakakaka is accessible via a link in this post (or letter to Malaysiakini), but with kind indulgence from Malaysiakini editors, I have produced in full at end of this post for those of you who don't have a subscription - advice: get a subscription - you don't know just what you're missing ;-)


3:51PM Jan 15, 20

‘KD Freedom of Expression’ scuttled?

 0  0

0

Firstly, I wish to thank Commander (Rtd) S Thayaparan for his eruditely written take on my earlier piece ‘Charlie Hebdo - an onion that needs to be peeled’ though sadly it has a number of incorrect allegations against me, and secondly, to apprise him of why I disagree with some of his accusations against me.

The worst accusation he hurled against me has been “K Temoc does the usual linking of the carnage of American neo-colonialism to the Charlie Hebdo slaughter. It is an old tactic used in liberal rhetoric that is meant to overshadow the slaughter itself (in guise of nuance) thus establishing identity politics.”

Pray tell me, my dear Commander Thayaparan, where was it in my article that had me “... linking of the carnage of American neo-colonialism to the Charlie Hebdo slaughter.” Yes, please re-read my article to see if you can discover that supposed ‘linking’ in the murky waters of your angry response. If you can find it I’ll call you uncle and buy you two beers (grin).

The Commander has been very very naughty in suggesting that non-existent ‘linking' which I had supposedly done. I know naval officers especially those who are submarine-qualified are trained to torpedo enemy vessel from below the sea surface (assuming in the first place they succeed in submerging their submarines) but it’s altogether another thing to torpedo a debating foe way below his belt.

Again, he did just that when he wrote: “The writer starts off the piece confusingly with “I have to call what happened in Paris on Jan 7, 2015 as an ‘incident’ (and not yet a terrible tragedy), at least until we can separate the two issues and examine each carefully and objectively...” and ends “finding the hypocrisy of Charlie Hebdoas offensive as the slaughter of their cartoonists”.

and

“In other words, to someone like the writer, the slaughter atCharlie Hebdo ends up an ‘incident’ and not a tragedy because they were hypocrites when it comes to the ideal of freedom of expression.”

Very naughty, Commander. You’re putting words in my mouth or writing, that the senseless killings were on par with Charlie Hebdo’s hypocrisy on the issue of freedom of expression.

Both your paragraphs basically accused me of what I had attempted to forestall in my opening paragraphs of my article, namely, the emotional conflation of two separate issues, namely, (1) the wanton evil killings in Paris by Islamist terrorists and (2) the claimed ‘freedom of expression’ when in reality the latter didn’t exist in Charlie Hebdo, and what I had feared, that in the aftermath of the chaos the sympathy for the former would blind people to the reality of the latter.

Separating two kettles of fish

And that has been why I refused to term the Paris events as a tragedy (only the killings were tragic) UNTIL I could separate the two distinctly different kettles of fish, notwithstanding the general superficial observations they were interconnected, the myth thatCharlie Hebdo suffered the assault because they were paragons of freedom of expression.

I provided events to support my belief that ‘freedom of expression’ had not been practiced by Charlie Hebdo and to a certain extent by European authorities and their media.

In fact, on the senseless killings I asserted unequivocally that “There must be no ‘ifs’ or ‘buts’ when it comes to the absolute necessity for humanity to resoundingly condemn acts of evil, as had been the case at the Charlie Hebdo office in Paris, and indeed also in the case of the horrendous slaughter of Mohammed Deif’s family in Gaza on Aug 19 last year.”

And in my concluding paragraphs I stated the same, drawing distinction between the two separate issues. Lamentably, Commander Thayaparan in his wrong accusations has inflicted the most unkindest and unfair cut on me.

I’m also sad that he has accused me of singling out Jewish oppression, but doesn’t the word ‘oppression’ means exactly what it is, and thus, does it matter which race or religion oppressed who? I would like to remind him I did also include US oppression, not just Jewish ones.

Anyway, accusing me of singling out Jewish oppression (instead of looking at the oppression per se) is like being accused of being anti-Malay or anti-Islam in Malaysia, where the more one attempts to defend himself against such accusations, the worse it becomes for the accused.

I could if he wishes include Saudi oppression of Shiite Muslims, Chinese oppression of Tibetan people, Hindu extremists’ burning an Australian Christian missionary and his children alive in a car, and their oppression of Indian Muslims, and vice versa in Pakistan, etc.

Fortunately as a thick-skinned blogger I’m quite used to false accusations against me where I have been accused of being variously a DAPster and MCA-Umno paid cybertrooper though sadly never a MIC or PKR cybertrooper. I’m still waiting for the alluded numerous cheques from DAP and MCA head offices and Purajaya. I dream on!

Talking about bloggers, a well-known Malaysian blogger (we know who he is, don’t we) had once informed his readers that most Malaysians lack reading skills. While I don’t wish nor dare to accuse Commander Thayaparan of this, I sense that sometimes when people are angry they read their opposition’s writing in the way they had already pre-judged them.

Commander Thayaparan must have been annoyed by what he saw as my less than favourable reference to him and had come sailing out on KD Marah with all guns blazing, but alas, before he could launch more torpedoes after the one that got me just below my navel (smile) he inadvertently scuttled his own vessel a la Graf Spee.

Sadly, in accusing my views as being riddled with assumptions and condescension, he himself has been grossly guilty of them. And frankly I am too old to be his ‘son’ (smile) but I am prepared to respectfully differ to his seniority, status and superior writing skills (though not his arguments), and address him as Aneh.

Plight of those in other parts of the world

Aneh also stated: “Does the ‘Je suis Charlie’ mean that the people who adopt it are ignorant of the plight of those in other parts of the world? Does the adoption of this moniker mean that people are ignorant of the hypocritical stance of their governments, as the writer seems to imply? Does the adoption of this moniker mean that people are ignorant of the hypocrisy of freedom of expression?”

Now, hasn’t Aneh been guilty of making assumptions in his above assertions, a ‘sin’ he has accused me of? I invite him to peruse the comments in various Malaysian media interactive forums to see whether his faith in his naive belief above would continue to hold?

He then wrote: “Put it another way, do people who proudly chant ABU (Anything But Umno), really think that the alternative is perfect? In the case of the French, perhaps they are choosing to claim allegiance to an ideal (freedom of expression) something that Islam has a problem with and commiserating with their fellow citizens. Could this be it?”

Again another of his assumptions and good faith in the French people, many of whom are by now decidedly fed-up with the Muslims in their country (as is the case today in Australia), mind you, not that I blame them. But the point I had been making in my previous letter is that for me, Je ne suis pas Charlie if the Paris march had been about eulogising Charlie Hebdo as a paragon of expression of freedom.

That would be like me saluting Benjamin Netanyahu for being awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. A very nauseating thought.

As for our own ABU, much as I respect, admire and indeed adore Haris Ibrahim, I disagree with his ABU right from Day 1 (exercising my freedom of expression - grin) because one horrendous outcome of ABU had been the replacement of a good man like Saifuddin Abdullah, yes from Umno and so what, with a less-than-admirable person who believed that babies abandoned by single mothers through illicit births had been the result of Valentine’s Day and New Year’s Day celebrations and whose colleagues have been either recent Deucalion-wannabe or one who informed our supposedly august Parliament that “If we see women who don’t have husbands and are divorced not because their husbands are dead, (it must be because) they are ‘gatal sikit’.”

Well, Aneh, you have to ask those people who proudly chanted ABU especially those who voted in Temerloh in the last election, whether they had really thought carefully before they voted out Saifuddin Abdullah? That's the problem with an angry mob having a catchy chant, or an equally emotional one in Paris!

Then Aneh said of his Tambee (moi, smile): “I do not dispute anything the writer wrote about the hypocrisy of Charlie Hebdo, even though they have a history of insulting every state and religious sacred cow on the planet.”

Europe’s most sacred cow

Not so Aneh, as I have narrated in the case of Maurice Sinet who was sacked by Charlie Hebdo in 2008 because he had the offensive temerity to touch on Europe’s most sacred cow.

I could go on and on refuting Aneh's words against me but I have to apologise to Aneh for not doing him proper honour with just this short response today because I somehow missed his article until one of my blog visitors informed me early this morning, thus I am pressed to finish it before the Friday* cut-off time for letters to Malaysiakini.

* should be Thursday - my bad ;-)

However, I am very happy to note that Aneh has since his statement about “those very ideals that Charlie Hebdo fought to maintain in its own sometimes crude way,” has now revised it to the “various degrees of freedom of expression”.

Based on that, we could draw a rating of 0 to 10 where 10 represents absolute freedom of expression. I, arbitrarily of course, would gauge Austria at 6 for jailing David Irving, Britain at 7.5 for its silly treatment of Prince Harry and a 6.5 for undemocratically suspending Ken Livingstone, while Charlie Hebdo would be found in the nasty netherworld of a negative 5 or further back, for both its ill treatment of Maurice Sinet and its misuse of the freedom of expression to abuse, vilify and provoke people’s scared beliefs, be it Islam, Christianity, Judaism, etc. What Charlie Hebdo has done has been beyond journalistic satire.

Mind, there is a temptation for Tambee (moi) to shout triumphantly ‘Land Ahoy’ and dismiss Aneh’s revised statement on freedom of expression as a grudging euphemism of the reality I had presented, but I believe he has made quite a compelling case for his “various degrees of freedom of expression” which I will consider as a moderation of my harsh criticism on European hypocrisy on topic. Nandri Aneh (grin).

********

Commander Thayaparan's article follows:

9:28AM Jan 14, 2015

By S Thayaparan

The Charlie Hebdo debate on freedom of expression

 31  2

7

“A learning experience is one of those things that says, 'You know that thing you just did? Don't do that.” - Douglas Adams


COMMENT In a piece riddled with assumptions and condescension, blogger K Temoc attempts to navigate the treacherous terrain of religion, politics and media and ends in agreement with Umno Youth chief Khairy Jamaluddin.
                                                                 
The writer starts off the piece confusingly with “I have to call what happened in Paris on Jan 7, 2015 as an ‘incident’ (and not yet a terrible tragedy), at least until we can separate the two issues and examine each carefully and objectively...” and ends finding the hypocrisy of Charlie Hebdo as offensive as the slaughter of their cartoonists.
                    
In other words, to someone like the writer, the slaughter at Charlie Hebdo ends up an “incident” and not a tragedy because they were hypocrites when it comes to the ideal of freedom of expression.

The writer says I (like many others) “chose to highlight what had stood out uniquely, that of the Islamist terrorists killing a Muslim police officer” and goes on about “this identification of a victim’s religious affiliation or even ethnic grouping as regrettable”.

Well, if something stood out “uniquely,” then why should it not be highlighted, not that I did this as a matter of course - an opening point of the absurdity of Islamic extremism is old ground for me and was not the thrust of the piece. The fact that the perpetrators targeted the cartoonists because of what they deemed offensive to their religion has no part to play or no need of mention, according to the writer’s point of view.

However, since the writer chose to ignore what my piece was about and chose instead to argue on assumptions he makes, I will respond to his points merely because it exposes a kind of thinking that has eroded the very values many in Malaysia wish they had more of.

K Temoc does the usual linking of the carnage of American neo-colonialism to the Charlie Hebdo slaughter. It is an old tactic used in liberal rhetoric that is meant to overshadow the slaughter itself (in guise of nuance) thus establishing identity politics.

The reality is that the people of France have always been sympathetic to the Palestinian cause to the extent that Israel has accused successive French governments, not to mention French citizens, of being anti-Semitic.

Indeed what was unusual about the march last Sunday was Israeli participation in a capital where much anti-war/anti-American, pro-Palestinian literature is disseminated.

Does the ‘Je suis Charlie’ mean that the people who adopt it are ignorant of the plight of those in other parts of the world? Does the adoption of this moniker mean that people are ignorant of the hypocritical stance of their governments, as the writer seems to imply? Does the adoption of this moniker mean that people are ignorant of the hypocrisy of freedom of expression?

Put it another way, do people who proudly chant ABU (Anything But Umno), really think that the alternative is perfect? In the case of the French, perhaps they are choosing to claim allegiance to an ideal (freedom of expression) something that Islam has a problem with and commiserating with their fellow citizens. Could this be it?

Acts of barbarity

Here is an excerpt from an email from a dear old French friend who generously allowed me to publish his private message:

“Well, Thaya, we (he and his wife) walked again today, as we have done numerous times. My son cried and messaged me “...that you walk for everyone, free Palestine, free Iraq, rage against the Americans. If you and your little group were gunned down, these Muslims would have lost 40 old people who always defend them. This world is too complex for simple men like us, my dear old comrade.”

Therefore, I know that when many French citizens saw Israeli premier Benjamin Netanyahu at the solidarity march, they were extremely aware of the absurdity of it all.

However, we must condemn all acts of barbarity. For whatever cynical reasons, K Temoc chose to single out Jewish oppression. Have you noticed that in these condemnations of Jewish aggression, there is never any talk of Muslim oppression on their own kind or better yet have you noticed that the discourse of this reality is discouraged or even shouted down? However, when it comes to Muslims aggression, every excuse and justification is tendered? Think about it.

And then, we come to the writer’s analysis (sic) of freedom of expression:

“Well, let me disabuse our dear retired naval commander of both notions: firstly, freedom of expression in Europe has been a fable, a myth rich with double standards hypocrisy, and I will come to this shortly. Secondly, freedom of expression is an ideal, but only if truly practised, without double standards or cherry picking. Thus, to claim that Charlie Hebdo has fought to maintain these ideals would be to wear horse blinkers, either out of ignorance or refusal to see the truth.”

Son, I am way ahead of you. This is what I wrote some time ago in a piece titled, ‘The press gangs of Malaysia’.

“I never bought into that cliché of ‘free press’ believing that such a state is heavily reliant on context and generally those who advocated this ideal rarely practiced it themselves.

“This does not mean I don’t subscribe to the concept of a ‘market place of ideas’ which is dependent on freedom of expression which has always been constrained here in Malaysia, the press being the prime example.”

I do not dispute anything the writer wrote about the hypocrisy ofCharlie Hebdo, even though they have a history of insulting every state and religious sacred cow on the planet. I do think that K Temoc is disingenuous when he implies that freedom of expression is an all or nothing proposition or at the very least implies that ‘Western’ proponents of such, makes such claims.

However his long spiel on “happened years and years ago, though admittedly not to vile, villainous and vicious abuses against Islam” is utter horse manure and any right-thinking person should call him out on it.

K Temoc’s contention is that because there is no absolute freedom of expression anywhere in the world and that double standards are present, the ideal of freedom of expression as promoted by the West or (France in this case) is only deserving of a “podah”.

Well, he is wrong. The various degrees of freedom of expression do matter, have mattered and most definitely will determine how a society evolves. Any serious examination of the discourse will reveal that there has never been any proposition of ‘absolute freedom’, except as advocated by certain groups.

Holocaust denial is a crime in Germany and Austria, that is understandable considering their histories but other than that, freedom of expression is far more beneficial to the average citizen in both countries. Compare this with Holocaust denying in some Muslim countries where to argue otherwise would be to invite a possible death sentence.

Never mind that Muslims flock to France and Europe because they have been prosecuted in their own countries, mostly engaging in behaviour deemed ‘seditious’ which often involves freedom of expression.  Never mind the fact that Muslim extremists have targeted French Muslims in a pogrom to stifle independent thought in Islam.

In America, nearly anything goes, including Holocaust denial Sunni Muslims from Iraq who have taken to broadcasting their hate speech against Shias (in Iraq) from California (because they are banned in Iraq) where because of the degree of freedom of expression there, they exist side by side with other hate groups.

The degree of freedom of expression in Qatar for example is different from those of most Islamic Middle Eastern states, thus allowing a form of journalism rarely practiced in that region, not to mention allowing Western audiences a different perspective. The fact that extremists from their own region target Al Jazeera should tell you why degrees of freedom of expression are anathema to a certain kind of cretin.

Our limited freedom
        
Here in Malaysia, freedom of expression is much more evident online, so you and I, because of our limited freedom of expression, can argue on the pages of Malaysiakini, whereas we may not even get a chance in the mainstream media. Of course, depending on your political affiliation calling someone or some group “extremist” would warrant different sanctions.

For every point K Temoc raises on Western hypocrisy of freedom of expression, there is a more powerful counter point, which has proven far more beneficial to Western societies, and which Islamic societies desperately need. They need this far more than the Muslim apologia some writers choose to indulge in.

Appeals to emotions of the transgression of the Jewish state or Western hypocrisy pales in comparison, to what Muslims have done to their own and continue to do to their own. Most times, when a tragedy like this occurs, some writers feel the need to proffer excuses, justifications and intellectual sleight of hand, instead of reminders of what Muslims could achieve with the right tools, however flawed those tools may be.

Yes, we could cherry pick and offer examples of how Charlie Hebdo has not lived up to its ideals but really, which groups of individuals have? Over the years, DAP has proclaimed many fine ideals but as history demonstrates, they have not be able to live up to them. The same goes for PAS, and most recently PKR.

If they are not perfect, should we abandon them? Should we abandon their ideals even if they cheery pick and practice double standards?

Because of this latest aggression some Western intellectuals (much to the delight of their Asian counterparts) are considering limiting the degree of freedom of expression and rethinking questions of censorship.

No doubt, there would be much resistance to this, but thankfully, because of the degree of freedoms of expression enjoyed in those countries, people disagreeing will not be gunned down on the streets or publically executed in the market place.

To dismiss these degrees of freedom of expression either out of ignorance, deviousness or plain obliviousness merely to score rhetorical points is far more damaging than the hypocrisy of Western nations when it comes to freedom of expression.

In conclusion, I am glad K Temoc finds common ground with the honourable gentleman from Rembau on this issue on the Paris rally of freedom of expression.

From K Temoc’s blog writing, I know that he would never limit the freedom of expression (or degree of freedom of expression) of Khairy, but as indicated by historical precedent, the same cannot be said of Khairy (or the political party he represents) extending the same courtesy to K Temoc.

---

S THAYAPARAN is Commander (rtd) of the Royal Malaysian Navy.