Thursday, November 30, 2006
Following that the villagers put up obstructions in the form of makeshift shelters to protect the surau.
But this morning, MPAJ arrived with four bulldozers to finish off the job. They did meet again with stiff resistance from approx 60 villagers and activists who tried to stand steadfast against the demolition. The protestors also parked their vehicles in a cordon around the surau to stop the bulldozers.
However their resistance was met with brute force as the enforcement agencies resorted to aggressive tactics and physical violence to remove the human barrier set up by the villagers.
Alas, there was no stopping ‘city hall’ as the MPAJ enforcers backed by FRU troops tore down the only remaining structure in Kampung Berembang, the surau. Reporters said the 30-year-old village looked like a devastated battle ground.
Isn't there some respect for a house of God?
But what was typical was the brutal suppression of the villagers by the MPAJ enforcers. It seems that in Vision 20/20 Malaysia, the mentality of authority enforcers are still of Vision minus 20/minus 20.
There is always a callousness, disregard and brutality in their treatment of citizens.
Firstly I blame the authority for permitting physical oppression of citizens.
Secondly I blame the citizens for voting in the usual thugs.
Thirdly I blame …….. I don’t know (not so much who I can blame but) who not to blame … that’s our quandary, in our Bolehland.
I thought I won’t say it but I will – F88K!
Wednesday, November 29, 2006
I prepared the original draft 2 weeks ago but with the UMNO general assembly going feral, didn't have a chance to squeeze it in, so had abandoned it.
But today the World Bank has responded to a minister claim of its (World Bank) involvement in providing advice on the government's dodgy methodology. Therefore I have resurrected the posting with updates to illustrate a classic example of the shameless duplicity of ministerial pronouncements within the (so-called) hallowed halls of Parliament.
Let's start from where I had left off ...
The Economic Planning Unit (EPU) in the PM’s Department had worked out the 9MP on the basis of bumi equity at 18.9%, but was challenged by two studies, one by Asli, an independent multi-ethnic think-tank whose president is one of Dr Mahathir’s son, while the other was a Universiti Malaysia (UM) 4-year old research study by Dr Fazilah. Both studies showed that the target 30% bumi equity had long been reached.
Then Dr Awang Adek (PhD in economic), deputy minister in the Finance Ministry agreed it was 36.6% but 6 days later, Effendi Norwawi, Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department responsible for the EPU claimed that bumi equity in Bursa Malaysia was 21.8% in 2005, but with various factorisations, he brought it down to a convenient 18.9%.
Effendi Norwawi claimed the EPU’s methodology of measuring the corporate equity ownership was given the seal of approval by a number of international financial agencies.
He declared: “The methodology used is recognised by international financial bodies, such as the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund and the Asian Development Bank.”
In a previous posting Bumi equity - explosion of government's lies I wrote and asked, as follows:
When the press queried him [Dr Awang Adek] on the government’s methodology in the Parliament lobby later, Awang Adek again defended it, saying this had been prepared with advice from World Bank leaders and international scholars. Then why not reveal it? Was the advice related to the true outcome of that methodology, or was the 18.9% massaged?
When asked when the government would reveal its methodology as promised, he had the f**king nerve to aver that his (unrevealing) reply in the House was ‘a way of revealing the government’s methodology’.
But Dr Lim Teck Ghee. former director of Asli has also questioned Effendi’s claim of the World Bank endorsing the methodology used by Malaysia in computing the corporate equity held by various ethnic groups.
Lim told Malaysiakini that the confusion over the different sets of figures on bumi equity indicated that the government ministries are at odds over the methodology used.
But more revealing, Dr Lim who is a former World Bank top economist and served as its senior social scientist for six years, said it was not the official practice of the bank and other international development agencies to endorse any national methodology.
“The claim of the EPU that its methodology of calculating equity ownership is ‘best practice’ is totally unfounded; as also the claim that the methodology is recognised by international financial bodies.”
He said: “If the EPU wants to make the claim of international endorsement, it should cite the full details. Otherwise, no one will believe it and its claim of so-called best practice.”
Dr Lim is too diplomatic to say “Bullsh*t!”
Does this mean that Opposition Leader Lim Kit Siang can once again call for the Parliamentary Privilege Committee to investigate and discipline Effendi Norwawi for misleading Parliament. Oh, do you guys know what 'misleading' means in parliamentary language?
The following response from the World Bank with regards to Effendi Norwawi's claim has been published by Malaysiakini today:
The World Bank has denied any involvement in the Malaysian government’s decision to use par value to calculate race-based equity ownership, a subject that has been hotly debated for months.
“The methodology for computing the country’s equity ownership using par value calculation was initiated by the Malaysian government,” a World Bank spokesperson told Malaysiakini by email in response to a query.
The bank said it has to recognise the data provided by the Malaysian government, even with use of par value calculation, as these figures are deemed to be official data.
The spokesperson declined to respond to another question as to whether the par value calculation is suitable methodology in computing equity ownership.
Now, who has been the naughty boy 'misleading parliament'? In Western democracy, 'misleading parliament' demands either the resignation or the sacking of the minister as he has no place in parliament.
There’s no stronger accusation and insult to the No 2 man in the State government. And, not that I am a MCP (male chauvinist pig), I want Abdul Rashid to note that Chong Eng is a woman. A woman has insulted his official credentials and integrity.
OK, so I am a sh*t stirrer but I reckon Abdul Rashid deserves all sorts of insults, if Chong Eng's allegation is true that he had slyly brought about the demolition of the Taoist temple, despite the State Exco’s ‘stay’ order.
Now, why did Chong Eng call Abdul Rashid a liar?
Well, The Star quoted Abdul Rashid as saying that he did not call for the temple’s demolition but had merely contacted Seberang Prai Municipal Council (MPSP) president Md Aris Ariffin to act on complaints from residents in the area.
He said: "I did not give instructions (to demolish the temple). It's none of my business, I just referred the matter to the relevant authorities.”
None of his business? Well, Chong’s about to prove otherwise.
Chong said: “The letter (dated Aug 18) stated very clearly that he supported and endorsed the demolition. He even said it should be done before any untoward incidents occur. He is lying about this (not sending orders for demolition).”
Deputy CM demolition letter - malaysiakini
But Abdul Rashid said he does not remember the contents or the date of the letter addressed to MPSP. Of course.
Kinda remind you of the “I was misinterpreted” case.
However, Chong gave him an out by suggesting that, if Abdul Rashid denies the letter was sent on his instruction, he should take action against his private secretary Zulkafli Kamaruddin who signed the letter. It was written on official letterhead paper of the DCM office’s.
Then Chong, obviously not quite finished yet, said the demolished temple stood on its own land, abutting the proposed property development.
She pointed out that Abdul Rashid was the VIP who had launched that particular development project.
She said: “He said he acted on complaints of residents in the area. The only neighbour that the temple had were the developers.”
“So technically he acted in the developers’ interests in ordering the demolition. That’s clearly a conflict of interest.”
And just to prove I am not an MCP, I would commend Chong Eng as the only politician in Penang State with balls.
Maybe we should make her the new Chief Minister since the current one only wants to play karn lork (you know, the thing that spins) as he has no ball. I suppose we could say his deputy may also be missing a couple because he dared not acknowledge he gave the go-ahead for the despatch of the demolition letter.
Malaysiakini reader Sulaiman Rejab wrote:
What is so special about Abdul Razak that he can be freed on a bond?
Perhaps not many Malaysians know that there is a difference between being released on bond and being freed on bail. Those who make bail will have to deposit a sum of money as stipulated by the court. However, in the case of a bond, the accused does not have to cough up the money. The person who places the bond just needs to promise the court that the specified sum of money will be paid if the accused does not show up in court.
In the case of Abdul Razak, it is RM1 million. You don't even to have to raise any money to put up a bond. My question is: Why the discrimination? Abdul Razak may be sick, but he can be taken to the hospital under the watchful eyes of the policemen or personnel from the prison authorities.
Was the High Court being fair or was it just practising double standards when it released Abdul Razak? Is it because Abdul Razak belongs to a think-tank linked to the deputy prime minister?
Well, he wasn't the only one who wrote in to query the Malaysian court's decision. Dr Munawar A Anees, who spent years in jail on accusation (since dismissed) that he and Anwar were engaged in sodomy wrote in from Los Angeles to say:
The news of Abdul Razak Baginda's court bond of RM1 million - without security - must have come as a rude shock to many who expected the unfolding of a murder trial that would have seen to be fair. That expectation was justified after Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi's assurance that the culprits in this heinous crime would be brought to justice.
Bronchitis’ and ‘asthma’ were said to be the basis for the bond. These are not the type of ailments for which a Malaysian prison or a common hospital cannot provide adequate treatment. These are not the type of ailments that necessitate a person's evacuation from prison.
Legal precedents for allowing bond for someone charged with murder abetment and similar non-bailable offences have been cited in the media as much as the role of judicial prerogatives in such cases.
However, the legal treatment meted out to Anwar Ibrahim for the alleged offences of corruption and sodomy fails to substantiate these pious statements. He was brutally beaten by the then inspector-general of police resulting in severe spinal injuries. Photographs of his heavily bruised and bleeding face are among the permanent exhibits on the Internet. The offences for which he was charged were bailable. Yet, Anwar Ibrahim failed to receive a bail much less a bond! Does the judicial discretion in Malaysia override the legal provision too?
The judicial quarter and the media in Malaysia are facing a challenge of integrity in Altantuya's murder and Razak's bond for ‘bronchitis’. They must dispel the notion that preferential justice prevails in Malaysia. Moreover, the reputation of Malaysian hospitals seems to be at stake for not being able to treat common ailments.
I am NOT interested in cases like this alleged murder which has been why I haven't blogged on the case. But this posting is about our judiciary. Are they still subject to political pressure?
Tuesday, November 28, 2006
Probably after he picked himself off the floor from laughing, Dr Syed Husin said the very opposite would be true because it had been clearly evident AAB would react badly and aggressively against those who crticised him (AAB).
Dr Syed pointed out to the treatment of the father and son pair of Dr Mahathir and Mukhriz as examples of AAB’s BS double talk.
Dr Syed said: “The way Mahathir was attacked by Abdullah and Rafidah Aziz and how Mukhriz was attacked en massé shows that UMNO leaders are not open to criticisms.”
Nope, not especially when the criticisms had hit home true.
Poor Mukhriz had commented on the UMNO presidential address, saying precisely what expert analysts had been saying – he remarked that AAB should have taken concrete action to curb corruption and not dish out mere rhetoric.
Later, post assembly, AAB had the hypocrisy to lament that the delegates disappointed him by not airing issues of corruption, while in the same breath he ticked off Mukhriz for criticising his opening address.
On top of that, the UMNO hounds were set on Mukhriz, forcing him into an apologise for his rightful comments. There were implicit threats of his virtual expulsion or suspension from the gravy train. Imagine, those sycophantic sokong brigade once were kissing his behind because of who his father was.
So much for UMNO's sense of loyalty. Wasn't it Dr Mahathir who said "Melayu mudah lupa"?
While no doubt the tribal participants enjoyed their ‘cakes’ (and of course ate them as well) there was no racist threat or bigoted strutting around. No weapon was drawn nor displayed.
We are advised that ensuring the participants are ‘looked after’ is good for our ... er ... karma. I am all for it.
The consequences were horrendous. It was the real Umno ‘unplugged’. It was a ‘no-holds-barred’ kind of outrageous display of unbridled arrogance.
Brandishing the unsheathed keris again by the Umno Youth leader, was offensive enough, but the readiness ‘to die in a blood-bath’ was atrocious and entirely unsolicited.
A Perlis’ delegate remarks of ‘when the keris will be used’, after it has been unsheathed, waved and kissed by the youth leader, not only angered an opposition leader but ruffled feathers with the entire nation. Umno has turned back the clock of nation-building by decades.
As if the actions of the Youth leaders of Umno were insufficient to incite hurt and animosity, a veteran Umno leader saw fit to remind everyone that Malays (read: Umnoputras) are very capable of exhibiting the ‘amok’, when challenged.
Reminders of the May 13 incident were conveniently cited and oft-repeated.
Then Dzulkifli came to what was missing (or deliberately masked by the above racist polemics).
Overwhelmed by the immediate interest of their ‘entitlements’ and ‘sacred’ rights that now seemed challenged, this assembly of the Malay political party has willfully deluded themselves from addressing malignant problem that will indeed obliterate them forever viz; the scourge of corruption.
No delegates dared touch the subject with any vigour nor rigour, as were exhibited in discussing their ‘Malay Agenda’. None spoke of the Corruption Perception Index of the Transparency International that has further relegated the country performance to 44th position i.e. slipping further from 39th. Any guess of who the greatest perpetrators were?
If corruption wasn’t the focus, so [neither] was the discussion on the competitiveness of the Malay race, much less of the nation’s competitiveness in facing the ever-increasing global business challenge.
Most disgustingly, we are cruelly reminded that this [UMNO] is the backbone, if not, the government of the day. This is the annual assembly of the party of policy-makers and the political masters that determine the destiny of this nation.
Any serious attempt at addressing the issue of the flagging inflow of FDI, is naively rationalized as caused by our own lack of interest in merger and acquisition (M&A), hence the failures to entice foreign capitals.
When has FDI been hinged on M&A of critical and strategic assets of the nation? Are we in denial of losing out to even our immediate neighbours?
Are we facing a perception problem here? I’m afraid it is more than just perception. It is real. It’s the sum total of two basic malaise of our nation viz lacking competitiveness and integrity. What has happened to the grand launching of the National Integrity Plan of April 2004 by the president-cum-PM?
We know the blood curdling threats and racist statements were meant to divert Malay attention from:
(1) the embarrassing question of why ‘wealth’ and ‘prosperity’ haven’t flowed on downwards to the Malay masses when the bumi equity percentage target has long been reached and indeed surpassed but accrued in the hands of the elite few;
(2) the rampant corruption, a glimpse of which has been arrogantly displayed by the inexplicable lifestyles of UMNO leaders (too many to name here) and their defiance and contempt of the law (by MPs like Cyclops, etc);
(3) the Mahathir factor, or more precisely, his anger with AAB and his SIL and cohorts on certain specific issues.
KTemoc recalls what Abraham Lincoln once said: “You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time.”
I believe UMNO has, though its 50 years of perpetuating government mismanagement, reached the third component of Lincoln’s saying, which may explain why Dzulkifli described the UMNO assembly succinctly as:
"... going by the events in the recently concluded Umno general assembly, calling it as the most bizarre is still an understatement. It is the worst ever. Anything beyond, borders on and tantamount to a declaration of ‘war’ - Umnoputeras versus the rest of the nation."
above underlining is mine
Monday, November 27, 2006
Even though there’s not much to split between bodek-spinning and bodek-ing per se, the master of bodek-spinning is normally also the master of bodek-ing, and would be accorded the title of Raja Bodek.
Once held for years by a master from Penang, it was recently wrestled away from him by another slimy unctuous character during the UMNO general assembly where, the dubious talents of tok ampus (brown nosers) were discovered in droves.
But never one to lie down with a mere common bodek-ing status, the former Raja is making a fight-back for the lowest possible spot in the pit of revolting sycophancy. Here is an example of his bodek-spinning.
OK first, the scenario: a Taoist temple, despite being on its own land for more than 20 years, was scheduled for demolition - because its building was without the proper approved building plans.
You know, there was no promise of cancelling the demolition. The temporary suspension of the demolition was perhaps to enable more detailed discussion, maybe on a proposed scheduled removal of some items such as the sacred icons, possibly even motivational or mitigatory compensation, or an offer to review any belated submission of building plans, in the same way UMNO Port Klang councillor Zakaria Deros was provided with a 3-months extension to submit a proper planning permit for his illegally constructed palatial mansion.
We would never know, because two days before the State exco could get together to review the case, the deputy Chief Minister of the State, egged on by an UMNO Youth leader, borrowed a leaf out of the Israeli Air Force book and ordered a pre-emptive demolition of the temple in total defiance and insubordination of the State exco's 'stay' order.
There was much trauma caused to temple devotees, and not unlike the demolishing of a Hindu temple in KL where DBKL enforcement unit viciously and maliciously smashed sacred icons of the temple, the demolition of said Taoist temple was conducted in a similar vicious, brutal and malicious fashion, without due regards for inter-religious respect or community sensitivities.
The sneak demolition in total insubordination of the State exco’s 'stay' order is of course not touched upon by the state’s Chief Minister, because that act of insubordination was by his ‘boss’.
Ah hah, stop there – I know what you’re about to ask – please don’t be confused by the 'Deputy' Chief Minister being described as the boss of the 'Chief' Minister because in this country (no, it’s not in the southern hemisphere), particular situations could render a certain ‘Chief‘ Minister subordinate and subservient to his ‘Deputy’.
Stop there again, and don’t challenge the oxymoronic ‘Chief Subordinate Minister’ or 'subservient Chief Minister'.
The DAP demand for an independent inquiry was of course ignored, but a … er … I suppose we should call it … er ... ‘dependent’ inquiry, conducted by the Chief Subordinate Minister’s office cleared the equally insubordinate Seberang Prai Municipal Council (MPSP) of any wrong doing.
To save you readers from vomiting at the foul odour of the Chief Subordinate Minister’s cartload of bovine ordure, the said office came out with a statement to the effect that the demolition of the Taoist temple had been a planning issue, mind you, a 20-years old one, relating to structures constructed without approval and ... of course ... probably the more relevant reason, the conflict between a developer and the temple.
Oh BTW, just keep your eye on the term ‘developer’ for as I mentioned in my previous posting a certain politician was the VIP who launched the same development project next to the temple, and thus in the public eyes suffered from a ‘conflict of interest’, not that the universal concept of governing propriety mattered - well for a start, the term carries six daunting whole syllables.
I suppose we may assume then that the temple structures became a planning issue coincidentally with the development of the project, which I’ll be more than pleased to be told my assumptions have been in error.
The released statements by the C(Subordinate)M office said the findings by you-know-who had been based on reports received from said malicious destructive MPSP, the gun-firing police (whose sergeant was reported as saying he couldn’t care two stuff if any of the protesters defending the temple died) and two State Executive Councillors - all totally independent sources of course!
The statement said “although the state government, through its Special Committee for the Coordination of Non-Muslim Places of Worship and the MPSP in 2000 had imposed a condition on the developer to provide a site within their land to relocate the temple, the developer did not respond and comply.”
Dear readers, the above report was from Star Online, but please note with care what it said – that the government in 2000 had imposed a condition on the developer, yes, on the developer, not the temple authorities - to provide a site within their land to relocate the temple, the developer did not respond and comply.
So, if the developer didn’t respond or comply with a State government’s condition, what action would you Penangite voters expect from your government?
You guess wrong – the Star Online news revealed that the C(Subordinate)M’s office as saying “This had resulted in the planning application being cancelled by MPSP in 2002.”
Please tell me if I have read it wrongly, or I am as confused as I had confused you readers earlier about a ‘Deputy’ being superior to his ‘Chief’ and therefore can be insubordinate because then a superior is never insubordinate, whilst a ‘Chief’ is subordinate to his ‘Deputy’ and therefore …….. OK, you work out the Bukit Mertajam logic (and I’m not insulting people from Bukit Mertajam because hey, I’m a Teochew nang too!)
OK, back to where we left off to momentarily pontificate on the BM logic, an exercise that would have astounded the ancient Hellenistic schools of logic. So, when the developer reneged on a State government’s imposed condition to provide a site within their land to relocate the temple, the temple gets punished.
Eat your heart out President Bush, you thought you had creamed this BM logic by invading Iraq to punish Iraqis for an al Qaeda (Saudi/Egyptian) attack on New York’s Twin Towers. Well, we Malaysians don’t have a national motto of Malaysia Boleh for nothing!
Then the issued statement by the office of the former Raja Bodek concluded by saying what we all already know, that after receiving many complaints over the last three years (in fact, some allegedly from Chinese too), the MPSP finally decided to demolish the structures. Oh, they just happened to forget the ‘stay’ order from the State exco - not that the former Raja Bodek dared raise this inconvenient embarrassing issue up.
Not one word about the insubordination or snubbing of the State exco’s orders; not one word about the over the top extremely mean (and certainly malicious) refusal by MPSP people to allow temple authorities to recover the sacred icons from within the temple prior to the demolition; not one word about the dictatorial lawlessness of the unelected unrepresentative MPSP president; not one word about the superior ‘Deputy’ failing a conflict of interest test.
No, not one teensy weensy squeek!
For the former Raja Bodek, 'twas a case of:
Eight bells and all is well
Accountability's truly dead
The temple can go to hell
So long I get a pat on my head
I say, restore his royal (un)right title – he deserves it more than any tok ampus.
[1st stats trivia - I deleted 12 F-words from the above posting - mate said I was too emotional. Me? C'mon!]
[2nd stats trivia - Like Langkawi, Penang has been cursed for 7 generations (counting from 1969 plus 7 x 5 per GE = 2004 which was last GE). Does this mean we could be free of our Mahsuri-ish curse, brought about by a certain Raja?]
That sums up the perpetual predicament of non-UMNO component parties in Peninsula Malaysia, particularly the MCA and to a lesser extent, Gerakan, when dealing with UMNO’s racist policies and utterances.
When a party like the MCA beds down with an aggressive partner, or more correctly a selfish taikoh (big brother), it frequently gets buggered, in every sense of that word. And it's no point calling on the cleric because UMNO buggering its partner(s) is to be expected.
Years ago, after the disastrous general election in 1969 for the BN’s predecessor Perikatan (or Alliance), the late Dr Tun Ismail was so pissed off with the MCA’s performance (it was decimated by a combination of the DAP, Gerakan, PPP, with supporting help from PAS) that he described the MCA as (words to this effect) “… hidup segan, mati ta’mahu”
I'll be kind by providing the polite translation of 'neither dead nor alive'.
The sad tale for the MCA, apart from the party’s sometimes corrupt policies and some leaders, was the regular undermining of its status among the Chinese community by (no, not DAP but) UMNO.
Yes, UMNO has always been MCA’s real political enemy because every time UMNO wants to shore up its own position with its Malay electorate, it invariably f**ks up MCA in the process – more significantly, it doesn’t give two hoots for MCA’s interests (or for that matter, Gerakan’s or the MIC’s).
… or where do you think the DAP gets its ammo from? In this regard, UMNO is in fact the DAP's best friend.
The recent UMNO general assembly, where a president under-siege, a Youth chief unsure of his position, an over educated deputy Youth underhanded in his grubby ethnic politics and several delegates underachieving in their party positions, wanted to show they are over nationalistic, over loyal and over the top in their Hang Tuah-ish credentials in one way or another, by acting in ways destructive, dogmatic, domineering, doctrinaire, ‘dunno’, dumbo or plain dictatorial.
As malaysiakini journalist Kuek Ser Kuang Keng puts it “The racist flames ignited at the UMNO general assembly last week seems to have burnt the ruling party’s non-Malay partners in the Barisan Nasional coalition with MCA being the first casualty.”
And as Hishamuddin Tun Hussein, UMNO Youth chief told Star Online Joceline Tan rather bluntly and insensitively when she questioned UMNO's infliction of severe damage on its non-Malay partners in the Barisan Nasional, namely MCA and Gerakan by its racist remarks:
“We have to get our priorities right. It’s not just about winning elections but building a society and a very complex one that requires strong leadership. We are in it together. Even if UMNO wins a lot of seats and the component parties do not win, it is not going to make us happy. We have to deliver as we build up to the elections.”
In that statement, Hishamuddin summed up UMNO’s disdain for its partners’ political interests to the effect of dismissing MCA and Gerakan’s inevitable losing of votes as far less important than UMNO demonstrating ‘strong leadership’ in a ‘complex society’, which in truth has been made complex and highly divided by none other than UMNO’s racist policies and pronouncements. And that's what he meant.
So a collaterally damaged MCA is in damage control. Unlike the DAP it can’t lash out in equal dosage back at UMNO because that will effectively take it out of the BN into the opposition camp, making ethnic politics even more divided and indeed dangerous for ordinary Malaysians (and its own interests). But it has been forced to deal with an uncaring, selfish and arrogant taikoh.
Instead of remaining like mutes stung by hornets, or spinning bull like the former Raja Bodek, MCA top leaders, including four ministers, will be meeting with the party’s grassroots leaders by way of a nationwide road show to explain the party's stand on several current issues, especially the racist remarks made by UMNO delegates.
The official explanation is that the MCA road show aims to alleviate and ameliorate discontent among party members pissed off with racist statements made during the UMNO assembly, but the reality will be a mixture of spin and an appeal for tolerance in the face of its taikoh’s usual selfish and arrogant behaviour.
For a start, they will seize on AAB’s closing speech as the true indication of UMNO’s stand. But many MCA grassroots members will point out that AAB is the FIL of the famous SIL who made disparaging remarks about the Chinese some months ago and who hasn’t yet been called to order by anyone – so WTF with AAB’s closest ‘act dunno’ speech?
Second, MCA president Ong Ka Ting will say that the party leadership had conveyed the Chinese community's demands to the government and that they will not compromise the rights of the Chinese community.
In reality, MCA doesn’t make demands to UMNO – but the road shows will be behind closed doors, so talk about ‘MCA making 'demands’ to UMNO is cheap.
However, at a practical level, I have to concede that the MCA talking behind closed doors to top UMNO leaders may still be the best bet for the nation, because UMNO leaders don’t like being publicly put down or talked back at, least of all by Chinese leaders – t'is merely an UMNO Malay problem of ‘face’ and ‘siapa raja’ (who’s the boss!)
But MCA Federal Territory youth vice-chief Yee Poh Ping told malayiskini yesterday "No matter how strongly you criticise in the closed-door briefing, people do not hear you."
.. meaning those inconvenient Chinese voters!
The MCA (and Gerakan) leadership had been criticised as weak vis-à-vis UMNO's policies, and having surrendered to the hegemony of UMNO.
But look, it’s all bull complaining about UMNO’s hegemony as if that party wasn’t exercising it in the first place, eons ago.
UMNO has always been the domineering partner, the primus inter pares (first among equals), except in the BN or its Perikatan predecessor, there’s no such concept as ‘pares’ (equals). Only UMNO makes policies, only UMNO’s interests matter, the rest are mere supporting cast, unless in rare cases like 1999 when the Chinese were elevated to some useful ‘equal brotherly’ status.
But Tang Ah Chai, chief executive of Kuala Lumpur and Selangor Chinese Assembly Hall, thought that MCA leadership should train their members to carry out open and rational discussions on national issues, instead of solving problems solely through the BN leadership.
... like Asli's report?
He said the 'kapitan’ system of leadership which surrenders all decisions to respective leaders cannot be implemented in a modern democratic society.
"We cannot simply sweep all the controversial issues under the carpet every time. This actually delays the progress of democracy and transparency of the country. The same problem will rise again soon, because we did not solve it seriously and openly."
Do you readers think our society is ready for open democracy, because that’s what Tang Ah Chai is advocating? I can tell you UMNO isn't!
Sunday, November 26, 2006
Q. But do you have to keep brandishing the keris?
A. What is it about the keris that makes people so uncomfortable? The keris is on the Umno flag. There are two keris on the Umno logo. It is the symbol of Malay culture. It’s not Umno. It’s not Pemuda. You give keris as gifts to non-Malays and non-Malays give them to me at functions. (Chief Minister Tan Sri Dr Koh) Tsu Koon showed me a huge keris during our Penang convention.
Firstly, the waving of the keris (which incidentally KTemoc assessed in Hishamuddin’s case, has more to do with his wanting to out-do Khairy than to threaten the Chinese) must be seen in its context – the context was a whole load of belligerent assertions of Malay rights and nationalism, and to f**ks with 'others', which means the keris waving was perceived as bellicose. Besides his cousin, DPM Najib had set a nasty precedence.
In my previous posting Lie hides violence - Violence maintains lie! I wrote “let’s not forget that the keris is also a weapon, where Hang Tuah, Malay most famous hero, used one to kill his best friend, blood brother and the man who valiantly defended him (Tuah) against the oppressive ungrateful Sultan."
"Thus in Malay legend the keris was a weapon to kill, and in the final conflict between Hang Tuah – Hang Jebat it was one, not of honour, but of treachery and betrayal, of the triumph of sycophancy over friendship.”
Secondly, Koh TK’s action could not be counted as representative of non-Malays for obvious reason, because …..… hey Hisham, are you restoring his ‘royal’ title?
Q. Will you carry it again next year?
A. Yes, I will carry it again next year. The keris is here to stay. I told Liow (MCA Youth chief Datuk Liow Tiong Lai), give me your kungfu sword and I will carry it. I am doing it on a question of principle, until people realise the keris is not there to threaten non-Malays but to motivate the Malays. These are all symbols to get Malays to move.
… and of course to out-Hang Tuah your impatient ambitious deputy. But Chinese don’t brandish kungfu swords for the reasons those would be considered as acts of aggression. In fact, all brandishing of weapons are acts of aggression.
We will do whatever it takes to bring them to a point where they don’t feel they are alienated in their own country. We’ve tried everything and if it can help Malays be more focused on what they can do, then my conscience is clear. I did it for the future. I want non-Malays to understand that our doing this is not to take anything away from anybody. That is also enshrined. Allowing the release will help the stability of the country. It won’t drive off investments.
Until “…they don’t feel they are alienated in their own country”? And if the Malays do feel alienated, guess who’s to be blamed, after leading the nation for close to half a century. And if the non-Malays do feel alienated, guess why!
Q. Is the keris not also symbolic of Malay supremacy?
A. Far from it. Unless I keep going on, every day, every year, people will not get out of thinking about the keris this way. If I can’t do it, I don’t think anybody else can.
If I can’t do it when I’m leading Umno Youth, with Pak Lah (Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi) as the PM and Najib (Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak) as the DPM, when our economy is going strong, and we are rolling out the Ninth Malaysia Plan (9MP), then when? Wait till our rubber and palm oil prices go down before voicing our fears about apostasy and the IFC? By then people will be hungry; they don’t want to talk anymore.
As I said, UMNO had half a century of governing this rich, very very rich country, and has created lots of Malay billionaires and millionaires, especially young 31-year old ones. So why bull about Malay people ‘not wanting to talk anymore’.
Q. MCA and Gerakan may lose votes at the expense of Umno releasing tension.
A. We have to get our priorities right. It’s not just about winning elections but building a society and a very complex one that requires strong leadership. We are in it together. Even if Umno wins a lot of seats and the component parties do not win, it is not going to make us happy. We have to deliver as we build up to the elections.
The priority is UMNO must get what it wants, and f**k those non-UMNO parties. And indeed Hishamuddin is acknowledging the truth (when he stated “Even if Umno wins a lot of seats and the component parties do not win …”) that the non-UMNO parties, particularly MCA and Gerakan will lose heavily.
Q. What does all this say about race relations after almost 50 years as a nation?
A. If you were talking to me when I was (Youth and Sports Minister), I’d say we could do it in our lifetime. But now I am more realistic because you get pulled in so many directions. You have to look at things from so many angles. It is very difficult being in a society that is very complex, but there is strength in diversity. If we galvanise that, we have something to offer the world.
In other words, the rort will continue - f**k those % targets anyway, and as for “…get pulled in so many directions”? Hishamuddin, are you saying that greed in UMNO today is far more prevalent and deep-rooted?
Q. There was so much about Malay issues and too little on meritocracy, competitiveness or the push against corruption.
A. It’s all relative. If Dr Mahathir (former prime minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad) had been there, you probably won’t be talking about the keris, or the New Economic Policy. But people expect too much of a three-day gathering. How much more (do) you want to say about fighting corruption? Pak Lah is moving in that direction.
Bullsh*t, what happened to Cyclops, or Zakaria Deros’ nonsense with his place, or a young 31-year old man receiving a multi-million ringgit loan without any visible collateral?
Why are giant contracts still being handed out without an open tender process. Who will benefit from the PORR project?
As for meritocracy, Johor Umno has said that we are worried about Malays in the rural areas who cannot get the same level of opportunities in education. Reducing the gap between rural and urban areas is the right way.
Well, WTF has UMNO been doing for the last 50 years?
Q. Your deputy Khairy Jamaluddin had a controversial run-up to the assembly. How do you think he fared?
A. He did very well. I told him, now that people outside have heard the real grassroots speak in Umno, they are probably thinking that Khairy is not so bad. Yes, he is Oxford material and people expect more of him. But he’s back in Malaysian society and he has to address the concerns of the constituents. An Oxford degree is not going to help if your country is in shambles.
Was that part of the strategy, to fling racist sh*t around to hide the bigoted poo? But Hisham, you're wrong - we think when an UMNO bloke attempted to use the demi agama dan bangsa excuse to hide the excesses of his own interests, he's still as bad as ever.
But he will need to prove himself, and if he learns, he’ll get wiser. Sometimes people come back and feel they want to change things. Then you realise it is not so simple and you really sit down and learn. He has learnt a lot but he’s still got a lot more to learn. He’s so lucky he has Pak Lah as his father-in-law.
The only gem from the interview - indeed, a PM as a father-in-law helps, doesn’t it!
During the interview Hisham averred, as had his deputy who's the world’s most famous SIL, on why it became necessary to allow the UMNO grassroots to release their fears and uneasiness in the controlled environment of the assembly rather than let it get out of hand elsewhere.
Now, what fears or unease were truly had the UMNO leadership not agitate those UMNO members in the first place? Remember the bloke who warned of unscrupulous Chinese exploitation of Malay divisiveness – a division caused by 9,200,000 million factors outside the control of the Chinese community!
Joceline posed the following questions (KTemoc’s queries follow in different highlights)
Q. This general assembly saw the Malay Agenda come out stronger than in previous years.
A. Two questions I get everywhere I go – why more so this year, and why I did what I did. Any leader in a complex society like Malaysia has to feel the pulse of the constituency. It’s like what one of the delegates said about the duck swimming in calm waters but paddling like mad to stay afloat. It’s the same with ensuring stability – it requires a lot of work that is not seen, there’s all this furious paddling beneath the water surface.
What happened this year was because issues raised in the past year or so have created resentment, frustration. I could feel the Malays were very restless over issues like the Lina Joy and apostasy case, the IFC (Inter-Faith Commission), the status of Islam.
SMSes going back and forth about Christian conversions and the Azhar Mansor thing. Geo-politically, there are the issues of Palestine, Iran, Israel. Then there were vocal criticisms from Asli (Asian Strategy and Leadership Institute) and Lee Kuan Yew.
Now, may KTemoc ask – who has been the bloody culprit sending out SMS’es regarding the lie about Christian mass-converting Muslims? Were they Chinese? Indians? Christians?
Why didn’t the authority figure, who was the first person told of the lie, check the facts of the situation instead of inflaming the issue by further spreading the lies to the Muslim NGOs? Why hasn’t this irresponsible agitator been punished? Why had the police gone after a nobody like Raja Sherina instead of the most authoritative figure involved in the spreading of lies?
There is also the process of more transparency and freedom of the press. All these played on the Malay psyche. If they had not been allowed to release their feelings in a controlled channel, it could have been even worse. We are in control of the situation.
Hishamuddin, my dear sir, son of your most respectable and illustrious father and granddad, why didn’t you or your deputy or UMNO other leaders, including AAB, inform/educate your members of the true situation/story? Why did you leaders worsen the situation by deliberately piling pressure on people like your partners in the MCA, Gerakan and MIC? Don't 'act dunno' because we are all too familiar with UMNO's tactics!
Why did you pick on Koh KT, to insinuate he didn’t do enough for the Penang Malays when in fact official statistics show that the Penang Malays are better off than Malays in any other Malaysian States.
If you look at what happened, there was the opening speech, then the delegates spoke, then I pulled them back on track with my closing speech. It’s not about starting a fire and letting it go out of control. I told them Umno Youth has never been as strong as today and that it has to be translated into strength in the Barisan.
Hishamuddin sir, haven’t you heard of the saying “Prevention is better than cure”? Please don’t give us buttered bullsh*t about how remedial you had been.
Q. The target seemed to be non-Malays rather than Umno’s political opposition.
A. If you read my speech in detail, you will realise the targets are those who were wrong in their assumptions and arguments such as Asli and Lee Kuan Yew. People tend to look at things from what one, two, three delegates said. You have to also look at the leadership.
How dare you said the Asli report was wrong without even refuting it in a professional manner? All you UMNO people did was just, as per your modus operandi, threatened Asli? Then what about Dr Fazilah’s research paper?
And f**k that Singaporean. Hey man, he and his lot are 'intimate' buddies of your famous deputy, so perhaps you should go after your deputy, or better still, watch your vulnerable back - just a friendly tip!
I am the leader of Umno Youth. Do I look like somebody out to target the non-Malays? And would I do that intentionally? For what purpose? Pemuda Umno (Umno Youth) is at its strongest. I don’t need that kind of record. We have built up Pemuda to the extent that it is respected. My relationship with the BN Youth is so good. Why would I want to jeopardise it?
I tell you why, because 50% of the time you have been so sh*t scared of your deputy stabbing you in the back (or telling 'daddy') if you don’t backed him up (most of your anti non-Malay tirades had originated from that bloke’s nonsense), and the other 50% of the time you had to show your UMNO Youth members you are more Malay than Khairy is.
We have not been surprise at your keris waving. In fact, I would even concede your waving of the keris had been more to do with keeping your dangerous deputy at bay more than threatening the compliant Chinese.
to be continued ...
Saturday, November 25, 2006
Honey Tan said what I had said earlier, that instead of Najib or AAB just commenting on the remarks being extreme, or future UMNO forums won’t be televised, or ‘caring for other races’, they would have been more effective if they had spoken up more strongly against the use of violent and threatening language.
As an example, she highlighted UMNO Youth deputy head Khairy Jamaluddin’s statement that the delegates were merely airing grassroots issues.
She said such was an example of people like Khairy attempting to justify those warlike speeches.
Well, we remember Khairy’s “I was misinterpreted” (don’t we) when he himself delivered one of those racist speeches about Chinese exploiting Malay division. Khairy always has plenty of excuses, like 9.2 million of them.
We all know it’s the UMNO leadership that has encouraged those bellicose utterances.
(1) To hide UMNO’s failure to spread their ill gotten wealth amongst the Malay constituency. The loot has remained at the top.
(2) To perpetuate the 'open cheque' called NEP, or if you like the way AAB put it recently, that the NEP is no more BUT, a big BUT, its objectives will continue, which means the 'cheque book' is still open.
(3) To hide the going-on's and the doing's of UMNO leaders, which Dr Mahathir has provided a glimpse of.
(4) …….. (you fill in the blanks)
(5) …….. (I’m sure there are more than just 5)
5-B's? Belligerent bellicose brains-baffling bullsh*t!
Friday, November 24, 2006
Imagine a political alliance by the terrible triplets of Dr Mahathir, Anwar Ibrahim and Tengku Razeleigh (Ku Li).
The 3-R's - rebel, reformer and royalty!
Recently author and political commentator Syed Hussein Alattas published a political book titled “Macam-macam ada”, claiming the existence of an alliance by the trio to form an opposition coalition to challenge the ruling Barisan Nasional government.
Ku Li pooh-poohed away the story. He said he does not even have the former premier’s phone number, let alone maintain constant contact with Mahathir, as the book alleged. Ku Li visited Mahathir while the latter was recuperating for his heart attack on Nov 8.
What Ku Li did say was there isn’t any hope for reconciliation between Dr Mahathir AAB if things continued in its current course.
What ‘present course’ was he referring ti?
He said that AAB doesn't give a 'fig' about what has been raised by Dr Mahathir.
Well, KTemoc has to disagree with his assessment. It’s not that AAB doesn’t give a 'fig'. It’s more like he couldn’t/can’t care because ……… well, it’s obvious why he CAN’T! A 'fig' by him would turn out to be a 'f**k' for him.
Ku Li said: “Everyone’s opinions must be heard. Whether correct or otherwise is another matter. But as a former UMNO president, when he (Mahathir) questions something, we have to pay attention to what he raises.”
“Whether it was correct or not depends on the government.”
“Now today, people don’t allow Mahathir his right to air his views. They were all his protégés when he led the country. There is no reason why attention shouldn’t be given to Mahathir.”
Aiyah, Tengku, AAB tak boleh lah, susah sangat!
Oh, by the way, sale of the “Macam-macam ada” book was banned at the recent UMNO general assembly.
I am very disturbed by the remarks made by Michael Backman in his article in in the Melbourne's The Age by calling Malaysia ‘bodoh’. I am even more distressed by International Trade and Industry Minister Rafidah Aziz’s refusal to comment or refute the statement of Backman.
To call Malaysia ‘bodoh’ is an international insult not only to all Malaysians but also to the Umno-led government.
Umno Youth leader Hishammuddin Hussein Onn had drawn his keris and waved it at the recent Umno general assembly. The battle cry to defend the Malays, their religion, their culture is made amply clear. How then can Backman insult us?
Umno Youth, are you not going to lead a protest to the Australian High Commission and ask for an unreserved apology from the Australian government for this national insult on us. Tell us when the protest will be and we will rally behind you. Oh yes!
Hishammuddin, don’t forget to bring your keris as we want to show the ‘Mat Salleh’ that we are not afraid to defend our culture. Hidup Pemuda Umno!
I like the last part “Hishammuddin, don’t forget to bring your keris …”.
Truly Malaysian, truly sweet & sour ;-)
Well written, JTB.
Thai military-appointed PM Surayud Chulanont had earlier (on Tuesday) claimed on that a network of Tom Yam Kung restaurants in Malaysia was the funding source for the southern militants.
Tom Yam Kung (or sometimes spelt ‘Tom Yum Goong’) is a hot (fiery) sour Thai soup which is a favourite of mine. Apart from chillie paste in the soup, it has fresh chilli padi (cabai burung or Mexican chillies) floating in it as well. Lemon grass and kaffir lime leaves (daun lima purut) are must's.
The ‘Kung’ or ‘Goong’ stands for prawns. One could have ‘Kai’ or chicken in it too.
The Thai PM’s accusation that our Tom Yum Goong restaurants are fund raisers for Thai insurgents nearly became a diplomatic row between our two countries, but Surayud Chulanont called AAB to calm the situation down.
Surayud told reporters here Thursday that AAB agreed with him that the issue would not affect the relationship between neighbours. And they weren’t going to discuss the issue through the press, undoubtedly much to the chagrin of reporters.
Surayud asked the press for cooperation and not to ask about the issue, which is akin to him striking 1st prize in the Malaysian 4-D draw.
Meanwhile, in damage control, an association representing Thai restaurant owners in Malaysia had said that the Pattani United Liberation Organisation (Pulo) used to extort money from its members to fund their separatist activities in southern Thai but had stopped it now.
Pulo is of course the insurgent group composed of ethnic Malays in the southernmost provinces of Yala, Pattani and Narathiwat seeking independence from Thailand.
Just imagine, you could be supporting Pulo’s armed insurgency in southern Thailand whenever you slurped a bowl of Tom Yum Goong (or Kai)! And if you do it too earnestly (slurping) you could land yourself into hot soup.
Viva la prik kinu (chilli padi)!
Other Soupy Stuff:
(1) Scary Soups!
(2) Secret Soup!
(3) Secret Soup! (2)
Thursday, November 23, 2006
The person who korek (dug) out this fact was DAP Wanita chief and Bukit Mertajam MP Chong Eng. She said there are letters to prove that Abdul Rashid and Bukit Mertajam UMNO Youth chief Ramlan Ishak had called for the demolition.
She also pointed out that Abdul Rashid was the VIP who had launched a development project next to the temple.
Conflict of interest implies the Deputy CM, having an interest in the project, could well be happy to see a Taoist temple next to the project go. Conflict of interest has to do not only with facts but with perception – you know, that old saying about ‘justice must not only be done, but be seen to be done.’
The concept of avoiding conflict of interest is meant to achieve that same visibly fair approach, which obviously in this case was obscenely absent.
… apart from the perception that, in the midst of the recent UMNO general assembly, many questioned whether the timing was encouraging for such a demolition.
I wonder whether the value of the deputy CM's supported project would go up with the disappearance of the temple – mind you, the land still belongs to the temple. Maybe we ought to raise funds to build another but bigger one.
Three issues have arisen from the sneak demolition of the Taoist temple, despite Penang state exco Toh Kim Woon and Berapit state assemblyperson Lau Chiek Tuan having secured an agreement from authorities to delay the demolition until yesterday’s state exco meeting.
One – no warning whatsoever to the temple authorities, Toh or Lau. A planned 'Israeli-style 6-Day War attack' - very Israeli-like!
Two – the MPSP demolition staff and police refused to allow the temple authorities retrieve the sacred objects, and the police even fired warning shots to keep them at bay - Gaza style? Again very Israeli-like!
The two incidents together showed the ‘determined’ malice to destroy not only the temple but Taoist sacred icons in the temple a la the recent demolition of Lebanon by the Israelis- very Israeli-like!
Not unlike Lebanon, the temple was built on its OWN LAND! as way back as 1985, more than 20 years ago.
Three – former Raja Bodek has been deafening by his conspicuous silence. Parliamentary Opposition Leader Lim Kit Siang said: hey, Koh had said he would investigate who was behind the demolition.
“It is very clear from the documents (the letters) that the person behind the demolition is the deputy chief minister. It appears Koh has been kept in the dark even so long after the demolition.”
Lim said this was a clear case of insubordination by the Deputy Chief Minister Abdul Rashid Abdullah.
Personally I am very very very surprised that Koh was completely in the dark.
A country in chaos, a terrorised population under siege in neighbourhoods polarised on sectarian lines or on the move in their hundreds of thousands to escape worsening violence. That was the picture of Iraq depicted in a new U.N. human rights report on Wednesday.
The report said the number of Iraqi deaths spiked in October in surging sectarian violence that has its epicentre in Baghdad, while more than 100,000 people are leaving Iraq every month and some 2 million have fled their homes since the 2003 invasion.
The report raised questions about the sectarian loyalties and effectiveness of Iraq's 300,000-strong U.S.-trained security forces ahead of next week's meeting between U.S. President George W. Bush and Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki to discuss speeding up the handover of security control to Iraq.
"There are increasing reports of militias and death squads operating from within the police ranks or in collusion with them," it said. "Its forces are increasingly accused of ... kidnapping, torture, murder, bribery ... extortion and theft."
Its findings cast doubt on Maliki's recent assertion that Iraqi forces would be able to reduce violence within six months if they had control, saying in Kirkuk alone, half of the 5,000 police force and 13,000 soldiers were not reporting for duty.
Thank you, President Bush. Do take a bow in the above manifestation of your avowed ‘bringing of democracy’ to the Middle East.
The racist comments, the promised violence, threats of Kuala Lumpur as a battle zone for a new May 13, blood. the drawing of the keris by the chief of its most virulent wing, UMNO Youth - what were these?
Just as a reminder Malacca delegate Hasnoor Hussein said: “Umno is willing to risk lives and bathe in blood to defend the race and religion. Don’t play with fire. If they mess with our rights, we will mess with theirs.”
The Perlis delegate called on UMNO Youth chief not to just draw, wave or kiss his keris, but to use it!
If those aren’t acts and threats of violence, then what were they?
An UMNO bloke tried to mask the significance of the keris, alluding to the King carrying two ceremonial keris as evident that the Malay weapon was only symbols of power, and even honour.
I response to that by asking for the context within which the keris was used.
So, let’s not forget that the keris is also a weapon, where Hang Tuah, Malay most famous hero, used one to kill his best friend, blood brother and the man who valiantly defended him (Tuah) against the oppressive ungrateful Sultan.
Thus in Malay legend the keris was a weapon to kill, and in the final conflict between Hang Tuah – Hang Jebat it was one, not of honour, but of treachery and betrayal, of the triumph of sycophancy over friendship.
OK, we have the violence, in fact lots of them, so where's the lie?
Stanley Koh commented:
“The most damaging aspect that has tarnished Umnoputeras and the integrity of Umno overall was the double standards its ruling leaders adopted. Umnoputera leaders in government banned the inter-faith dialogues under the pretext of preventing racial problems but at its own assembly allowing certain Umno delegates from getting away with strongly worded remarks viewed by many as seditious.”
He said: “… in truth, the assembly was more concerned with executing its foremost strategic priority to shore up maximum political support for its party president Abdullah Ahmad Badawi.”
“Secondly, the leadership turned a blind eye to delegates deliberately playing to the gallery or the racial card for a better preference to consolidate the mindset of the Malay voting masses on the Malay agenda through live telecast in view for the coming general elections. All other orchestrated logistic activities seemed to deem periphery to the main objectives.
“Seasoned political observers generally believed that the “thinking cap” was very much in place in executing the logistic and strategy of the huge event. Careful selection of speaking delegates and even the pre-planned agenda or content of speeches were subjected to finer tuning to ensure maximum exploitation of the political mileage. Vindictive criticisms were deliberately put in place to raise the mood and tone by selected political actors.”
“Without the hidden approval from some influential leaders, delegates would not have dared to forward such provocative remarks in the first place. It was an assembly trapped in history.”
Thus, UMNO had put on its greatest show on earth for its constituency, to remind them that come 2008, “fear not”, UMNO with its post-Mahathir era president (and his henchmen) are firmly in place to ensure ketuanan Melayu.
That only the UMNO elite enjoys the fruits of Malay supremacy is the real lie!
Wednesday, November 22, 2006
AAB smiled silently at the bodek-ing idiot! He understood why 'one' would be needed at every court.
Lim Kit Siang railed at the seditious utterances, knowing in his heart he had to go through the process as the police won't take any action.
AAB smiled silently at the idealistic dreamer! He understood why 'one' would be needed at every 'democracy'.
Gerakan leader Lim Keng Yaik voiced his concerns at the language used during the UMNO general assembly.
AAB smiled silently at the retiring BN component leader! He understood why 'one' should be allowed to grumble as such - which enhances the 'threats'.
Anwar emerged to tell UMNO to stop playing its racist card.
AAB smiled silently at the hopeful wannabe! He understood why 'one' would be needed to heal the 'heartland' by his (AAB) show of tolerance for Malay dissent, provided the dissent is not within UMNO - take f**king note, Mukhriz.
Najib said the NEP has benefitted everyone, including the non-Malays.
AAB smiled silently at UMNO's 'soft' man! He understood why 'one' would be needed in a 'hard man', 'soft man, 'silent man' combination to pyschologically unsettle the opposition.
He (AAB) himself announced that the NEP is no more, having ended long ago, but its objectives remain to be pursued.
AAB smiled silently at himself! He understood why someone must be eating his HEART out by his (AAB) clever sleigh of the hands - NEP no more? Hehehehehe! Don't you wish you had though of the brilliant annoucement?
The sad and inevitable ending for the once-mighty PPP has been due to a combination of the loss (death) of its fantastic dynamic Dr Seenivasegam and the antics of his present day successor, the walking joker called M Kayveas.
Firstly, the PPP has proven that (what I wrote) "in each pre-election, the PPP stood out like a sore thumb for Badawi and previously, Mahathir, when it came to the difficult task of distributing the seats among the major players. They must have found that trying to factor in the PPP was an annoying nuisance. The last election saw Kayveas throwing a tantrum when he was thrown an iffy constituency."
Secondly, Kayveas has offended virtually every non-UMNO BN leader in Peninsula Malaysia In my posting King Sabo I did warn (Kayveas) that “he’s a bit unwise asking for them [including Gerakan's president] to be sacked [from the cabinet] because his Taiping seat is very much dependent on Gerakan’s goodwill and support."
I also commented that “… the PPP not adding any value to the BN, with Kayveas unwanted on both sides of the political fence. So I suppose AAB no longer has much use for him or the PPP. I wouldn't be surprised if AAB cuts him loose or ignores him in the next pre-selection, and WTF can the PPP do? The once-powerful PPP is not even a pale shadow of its old self; nowadays it’s just a sore pimple on the BN’s backside.”
Then Kayveas made the silly mistake of declaring he would stand as an independent if the Gerakan demands back the Taiping seat. I wrote on that, saying “if Kayveas so much as carries out his threat to stand as an independent in Taiping, he’s toast. But then, the poor bloke is virtually dead meat anyway.”
Well, poor Kayveas has seen the writing on the wall and yesterday proposed that the PPP merge with Gerakan so that the two multiracial parties can speak out in one voice for all Malaysians.
He made the surprise (and desperate) announcement during his speech at the opening of the state PPP convention in, significantly, Penang, and not Ipoh where the heart of the PPP is supposed to be.
He even invited Penang Chief Minister Gerakan Koh Tsu Koon to open the PPP convention.
He made a (plaintive?) appeal to Koh (because Lim Keng Yaik has no time for the clown): “I’m open to this idea and we can start talking about it after April next year.” (when Dr Koh takes over as party president from Datuk Seri Dr Lim Keng Yaik).
Then he dropped his true motive for the proposed merger with a loud clanging noise.
“But, don’t kacau (disturb) my parliamentary seat in Taiping.”
Dr Koh, who is a master of sweet words and nifty dribbling (among other 'qualifications'), did some tap dancing (to evade Kayveas' appeal), saying he took the suggestion well and added the two parties should co-operate more closely first.
He meandered away from a ‘yes’ or ‘no’ response by stating the obvious: “There will be of course problems like who will be the president of the merged identity.”
And he didn’t give poor Kayveas any relief by adding ominously: “As for the Taiping parliamentary seat, the two parties can share it.”
With those words from the president-designate of a bigger party like Gerakan, the PPP can ta ta its Taiping seat. Kayveas has made a fool of himself and his party by springing that surprise on Koh and his own members, with no dignified gain. A clown to the end!
After the opening ceremony, Kayveas ate lots of humble pie and said rather pitifully he was not eyeing any posts if the two parties merged: “I can hold the position of deputy president or vice-president or even take charge of Perak."
“…deputy president or vice-president or even take charge of Perak.”
Isn't it pathetic that the PRESIDENT of a BN component party had to beg to be just the head of a state branch of his proposed Gerakan-PPP merger?
But still, all I can say to Kayveas is 'dream on', because Perak is Lim Keng Yaik’s (Gerakan’s) backyard. The reality is Gerakan, like AAB, sees no use for the PPP. If the PPP members want to transfer across to become Gerakan members, that’s OK, but as I said in September the PPP is finished.
Kayveas knows that and is only fighting for nothing more than his own self.
But Gerakan Wanita chief Tan Lian Hoe, Bukit Gantang MP, obviously less ‘diplomatic’ than Koh TK, said Kayveas should watch his words, as his idea may not be well received by members of both parties.
Indeed, I bet PPP members must have been squirming when they were caught with surprise by Kayveas proposed merger and the subsequent flickoff by Gerakan.
Tan said Kayveas had been making a number of statements lately which were not favourable to the spirit of Barisan. She told him “Please stop talking and instead focus on your work as the MP for Taiping.”
She has basically told Kayveas to PPP (P*ssoff, Pordah, Pund …).
But leaving the clown aside, it’s kind of sad that the party of the late Dr Seenivasegam, a man once crowned as King of Ipoh, is coming to the end of its road.
Tuesday, November 21, 2006
He said many people (who?) felt that the telecast was inappropriate because it gave a distorted view of UMNO proceedings.
Distorted? Each and every year we get the same ugly stuff - the only difference has been that each year it gets uglier.
Najib conceded that some speeches during the just concluded assembly were extreme. And bloody how!!!
But he explained why: “We have gone through this before but because of the direct telecast, they should not use that to pass judgment on UMNO. Sometimes inexperienced speakers tend to get carried away by the occasion and they play to the gallery.”
"They should realise that when they speak, there are others outside the party who are also listening to their speeches.”
So he reckons racist comments were due to inexperience? So he reckons the UMNO leadership had played no part in the assembly's permissiveness in allowing UMNO delegates exhibit unfettered racism, including one urging Hishamuddin to 'use his keris'?
So he reckons racist utterances would be alright so long as they are kept among only UMNO members?
Not one bloody word from him that the UMNO supreme council will prohibit such divisive racist remarks by any delegate, with a ‘cease & desist’ policy.
No, not one reprimand or promise to eliminate such ultra-pronouncements, threats and frothing ravings against ‘other’ Malaysians.
Instead, the bigotry and hatred will be managed under wraps from the public – as if we don’t or won’t know.
We knew he was then in deep sh*t. We heard the Sultan of Perak had snubbed him. He was persona non grata for the SMS scandal which saw angry Muslims duped into believing a Malaysian church had the temerity to mass-convert hundreds of Muslims.
But he denied he was responsible for the SMS wildfire, having only heard about the alleged mass conversion from a woman who sent him an SMS message on Oct 21, providing him with the time and place of the alleged provocative baptism.
Then he admitted that he asked her to meet him at his house, and after receiving from her the documents etc he handed all the information to the police and the Special Branch for their investigation like a good citizen!
But he also admitted he raised his concerns over the allegations with representatives of Muslim non-governmental organisations at the state mosque here on Nov 2.
He reminded me of one of my neighbours whom my village called ‘Big Mouth’. You want anything to be ‘circulated’ or ‘broadcast’, tell it to Auntie Big Mouth. Maybe today we would be calling her Auntie Internet?
So the Mufti dobbed the woman as the culprit, who had told him the alleged mass baptism – see Perak Mufti blamed woman; SIS condemns him!.
But Sisters-in-Islam (SIS) said bullsh*t to that. The Muslim NGO slammed the Mufti for spreading wild malicious rumours which could have resulted in an ugly religious clash.
SIS criticised him for failing to “learn from past experiences the danger of disseminating unverified information especially regarding contentious issues such as apostasy”.
SIS programme manager Norhayati Kaprawi said: “This is not the first time the mufti has made careless statements and allegations.”
She cited a number of previous statements made by the mufti, including in February where he claimed that between 100,000 and 250,000 Muslims had renounced Islam.
She added: “To date, he has not been able to substantiate these claims, except to merely state that these were obtained from ‘reliable sources’.”
In other words, he bullshits.
So instead of dealing with the Mufti, who has been notorious for spreading malicious unsubstantiated rumours, Perak police are looking instead for the ‘SMS woman’, identified as Raja Sherina – lovely name but she’s currently not walking around proudly to enjoy KTemoc’s admiration of her sweet moniker.
Raja Sherina - Star photo
I like to meet her, yes I do, I want to help her!
But I think the Mufti has been let off the hook too easily – pity but entirely predictable!