Malaysiakini - S'gor moots programme to replace BTN!
Khalid Ibrahim claims all PR-ruled states, starting with Selangor, plan to introduce its own nation-building courses to replace those conducted by the Biro Tata Negara (BTN), or National Civics Bureau.
The BTN federal programs have been reported to be nothing more than a series of racist indoctrination where Malays have been taught to develop a siege mentality, and as an example of its racist indoctrination, to view Chinese Malaysians suspiciously as the hated Jews.
BTN was conceived during Dr Mahathir’s time, supposedly to instill the sterling values of patriotism and a sense of civic consciousness, but in reality to also provide the Malays with a sense of self worth and confidence in themselves.
As PM Dr Mahathir was driven principally by two objectives, namely: (1) to raise Malaysia to 1st World status on par with other leading nations of the world, particularly that red dot just south of us, and (2) to endow the Malays with a sense of self worth, confidence in their own ability and pride in themselves and their work.
His promotion of Malaysia being the 'biggest', 'tallest', 'longest', 'highest' this and that, including adventure forays to the extremities of our planet has been part of this confidence building measures - needless to say, some exploited his promotion campiagn for their own benefits.
Perhaps he might have other national objectives but I believe these two were his main focus, perhaps even his obsessions, his life missions.
Apart from instilling patriotism and civic consciousness for all participants of its programs, BTN was supposed to help achieve the second.
As always, his good intentions were betrayed by his incompetent staff who went off at a tangent. They reduced the program down to their own gutter level and corrupt the second objective as one to badmouth non-Malays rather than elevate the confidence of Malays. In their own miserable minds they equate a program of racist propaganda as an act of promoting ethnic pride.
This indoctrination bull about patriotism has a way of being corrupted into sinister deviation, so I don’t support the PR state governments as well in developing any nation building course, because the PR people may well fall into the same mental trap, given the invincible hatred some have for anything and all things BN.
Why the hell do we need nation building courses? Are we saying that as Malaysians we don't love Malaysia? Remember, UMNO (or BN) is NOT Malaysia! We, the rakyat, are Malaysia! So ... why should we need nation building courses?
We’re better off promoting stuff such as ‘equity & diversity’ courses, namely, promote the concept of equality and diversity and stop discrimination, bullying and harassment.
It’s not just confine to ethnic diversity or anti-racial discrimination, though most Malaysians would probably think I’m proposing that. It’s far more than just ‘race’, a factor we Malaysians are already far too well acquainted with.
I’m talking as well on gender, age, religious and political beliefs, health (HIV-AID or pregnancy), physical and mental disadvantages, family backgrounds, and a whole lot of factors which lend themselves to discrimination, bias and prejudice.
That would be far superior to the bull on nation building. In promoting ‘equity & diversity’ I believe we will be on better footing to develop a more enlightened citizenry and thus a better nation.
I hope the governments of the PR-ruled states would consider my proposal.
Sunday, November 29, 2009
Saturday, November 28, 2009
New MB for Negeri Sembilan?
Malaysiakini - Bank Negara probes Negeri MB's RM10 mil fund transfer!
This means Mohd Isa Samad is on his way back to become MB again. Tough luck, Hasan old boy.
This means Mohd Isa Samad is on his way back to become MB again. Tough luck, Hasan old boy.
Thursday, November 26, 2009
Bala's SD - Americk Sidhu clears Anwar Ibrahim from involvement
In Malaysiakini’s PI's lawyer: 'Anwar not behind Bala tapes' lawyer Americk Singh asserted that “… Anwar had nothing to do with the release of the first SD except to deliver a speech prior to the press conference at the PKR headquarters last July. I have had no communication with Anwar at all, and neither has he or any PKR member tried to contact me.”
* above underlining and bold are mine
I am greatly comforted by Americk’s assertion.
But what puzzles me a tad is that despite having no communication with Anwar or any PKR member (except of course for an encounter with Sivarasa Rasiah at ‘The Backyard’ pub and Anwar Ibrahim at the press conference) Americk was able to further assert that “… Many people think Anwar Ibrahim is behind all this. That is absolutely untrue. Anwar has no idea about this whole episode except what he may have read in the blogs and on Malaysiakini.”
I am in a somewhat similar position as Americk, sharing with him a status where I too “…have had no communication with Anwar at all, and neither has he or any PKR member tried to contact me.”
Thus I too would definitely not accuse Anwar Ibrahim of being behind Balasubramaniam’s 1st SD ... Absolutely NOT!
But precisely for that very reason, that I am not in communication with Anwar, I wouldn’t be able to claim whether Anwar was involved or not involved.
In other words, I am not able nor entitle to speak on behalf of Anwar Ibrahim on this issue. Thus I would not be able to assert Anwar did or did not do this or that.
Anyway, don’t worry about Anwar Ibrahim as he can look after himself. Besides, "... Anwar has no idea about this whole episode [the SD] except what he may have read in the blogs and on Malaysiakini” though, coincidentally of course, presenting himself at the press conference to give a speech!
Another thing which puzzles me had been Americk’s statement that “…Let me assure you, no one is paying Bala to recant on his second SD.”
I thought it was a bloke by the name of Deepak?
Ooops … sorry, I didn’t read the Malaysiakini interviewer’s question, which was “Are you representing any party? Is that party paying Bala to recant?”
OK, in this context Americk’s assurance that “… no one is paying Bala to recant on his second SD” wasn’t referring to Deepak but a political party.
But yesterday in Malaysiakini’s report Lawyer: Najib 'linked' to Bala's disappearance Americk said:
"I received a call from a member of the press at about 9.30am on July 4, 2008 asking me why my client, Bala, had called a press conference for 11am that morning at the Prince hotel."
"I was a little surprised as I had no idea what this was about so I proceeded to call Bala, who did not answer his phone. I then proceeded to make further enquiries only to find out that Bala had purportedly been represented by another lawyer, one Arunampalam who had spoken to the press at that press conference on behalf of Bala and had said that Bala was retracting the contents of his first SD as he had been forced to sign it under duress."
"When I came to know of this press conference and what transpired thereat, I was absolutely flabbergasted. Bala and I had spent two months and many hours over the first SD to ensure it was absolutely correct and for him to deny the contents in the space of 24 hours did seem incredible to me."
Indeed it must be terribly confusing and no doubt a shock for Americk that Bala had recanted on his allegation against Najib.
But suppose for one instant ... what if Bala didn’t tell him the whole story, only engaging him for the 1st SD?
Given this possibility, it was hardly surprising that Americk "... was absolutely flabbergasted" by the 2nd SD.
But then, if he didn't know Bala was going to make a 2nd SD, how could he (Americk) then know, let alone assure us that “… no one is paying Bala to recant on his second SD”?
I'm quite confused by now.
Then, in yesterday’s news Americk stated “… Bala had anticipated that he would be arrested by the police after releasing the first statutory declaration and he told me so. This is why he had handed over his mobile phone to me for safe keeping before he left my office the evening before as he did not want the police to download information from it.”
“We were therefore preparing for his arrest and then to go to the police station he was being held at to represent him.”
But in today’s Malaysiakini news Americk stated “…Remember Bala left my office at 4.45pm on July 3 with ASP Suresh. They were supposed to go and see inspector Tonny Luggan at a restaurant near the Brickfields police station after he got off work at 6.30pm.”
“That was the arrangement made when Bala was in my office. I encouraged Bala to go and meet Tonny informally as I felt it would have been to Bala's benefit. And besides, he was with ASP Suresh, a police officer, who gave the impression he was looking after Bala's interests.”
This is very puzzling, because despite anticipating Bala's arrest after the (1st) SD, yet he didn’t accompany Bala to see Inspector Tonny Luggan?
But f*, what the hell do I know about such things - afterall I'm not a lawyer. I’m sure Americk Sidhu knew what he was doing and saying.
* above underlining and bold are mine
I am greatly comforted by Americk’s assertion.
But what puzzles me a tad is that despite having no communication with Anwar or any PKR member (except of course for an encounter with Sivarasa Rasiah at ‘The Backyard’ pub and Anwar Ibrahim at the press conference) Americk was able to further assert that “… Many people think Anwar Ibrahim is behind all this. That is absolutely untrue. Anwar has no idea about this whole episode except what he may have read in the blogs and on Malaysiakini.”
I am in a somewhat similar position as Americk, sharing with him a status where I too “…have had no communication with Anwar at all, and neither has he or any PKR member tried to contact me.”
Thus I too would definitely not accuse Anwar Ibrahim of being behind Balasubramaniam’s 1st SD ... Absolutely NOT!
But precisely for that very reason, that I am not in communication with Anwar, I wouldn’t be able to claim whether Anwar was involved or not involved.
In other words, I am not able nor entitle to speak on behalf of Anwar Ibrahim on this issue. Thus I would not be able to assert Anwar did or did not do this or that.
Anyway, don’t worry about Anwar Ibrahim as he can look after himself. Besides, "... Anwar has no idea about this whole episode [the SD] except what he may have read in the blogs and on Malaysiakini” though, coincidentally of course, presenting himself at the press conference to give a speech!
Another thing which puzzles me had been Americk’s statement that “…Let me assure you, no one is paying Bala to recant on his second SD.”
I thought it was a bloke by the name of Deepak?
Ooops … sorry, I didn’t read the Malaysiakini interviewer’s question, which was “Are you representing any party? Is that party paying Bala to recant?”
OK, in this context Americk’s assurance that “… no one is paying Bala to recant on his second SD” wasn’t referring to Deepak but a political party.
But yesterday in Malaysiakini’s report Lawyer: Najib 'linked' to Bala's disappearance Americk said:
"I received a call from a member of the press at about 9.30am on July 4, 2008 asking me why my client, Bala, had called a press conference for 11am that morning at the Prince hotel."
"I was a little surprised as I had no idea what this was about so I proceeded to call Bala, who did not answer his phone. I then proceeded to make further enquiries only to find out that Bala had purportedly been represented by another lawyer, one Arunampalam who had spoken to the press at that press conference on behalf of Bala and had said that Bala was retracting the contents of his first SD as he had been forced to sign it under duress."
"When I came to know of this press conference and what transpired thereat, I was absolutely flabbergasted. Bala and I had spent two months and many hours over the first SD to ensure it was absolutely correct and for him to deny the contents in the space of 24 hours did seem incredible to me."
Indeed it must be terribly confusing and no doubt a shock for Americk that Bala had recanted on his allegation against Najib.
But suppose for one instant ... what if Bala didn’t tell him the whole story, only engaging him for the 1st SD?
Given this possibility, it was hardly surprising that Americk "... was absolutely flabbergasted" by the 2nd SD.
But then, if he didn't know Bala was going to make a 2nd SD, how could he (Americk) then know, let alone assure us that “… no one is paying Bala to recant on his second SD”?
I'm quite confused by now.
Then, in yesterday’s news Americk stated “… Bala had anticipated that he would be arrested by the police after releasing the first statutory declaration and he told me so. This is why he had handed over his mobile phone to me for safe keeping before he left my office the evening before as he did not want the police to download information from it.”
“We were therefore preparing for his arrest and then to go to the police station he was being held at to represent him.”
But in today’s Malaysiakini news Americk stated “…Remember Bala left my office at 4.45pm on July 3 with ASP Suresh. They were supposed to go and see inspector Tonny Luggan at a restaurant near the Brickfields police station after he got off work at 6.30pm.”
“That was the arrangement made when Bala was in my office. I encouraged Bala to go and meet Tonny informally as I felt it would have been to Bala's benefit. And besides, he was with ASP Suresh, a police officer, who gave the impression he was looking after Bala's interests.”
This is very puzzling, because despite anticipating Bala's arrest after the (1st) SD, yet he didn’t accompany Bala to see Inspector Tonny Luggan?
But f*, what the hell do I know about such things - afterall I'm not a lawyer. I’m sure Americk Sidhu knew what he was doing and saying.
Wednesday, November 25, 2009
Balasubramaniam's lawyer linked Najib to Bala's disappearance
Finally …
... in Malaysiakini’s Lawyer: Najib 'linked' to Bala's disappearance we read of Americk Sidhu, the lawyer who helped PI Balasubramaniam Perumal make his first statutory declaration (SD) against Najib Razak (then DPM), emerging now into the open to make a statement himself that “… any reasonable person would draw the conclusion that Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak is somehow linked to the disappearance of P Balasubramaniam.”
He said: "The facts seem to point to the possibility that they wanted him out of the way and delegated this job to others close to them to execute."
Americk Singh has now ‘upgraded’ Balasubramaniam’s recent allegations to ‘facts’. Maybe counsellor American Sidhu can help clarify to us how Bala’s story can now be classified as ‘facts’ at this stage?
Just in case any reader can’t recall Bala’s original SD, he declared he was informed by Razak Baginda who in turn was informed by Najib Razak who in turn was informed by Altantuyaa Shariibuu who in turn confessed she liked ‘getting it’ in her behind, etc etc etc.
Then calamity! I believe most of us can recall that the day following the 1st SD, Bala made a 2nd SD denying what he declared in his 1st SD.
In a recent post Balasubramaniam story - brave broadcast or Ben-Hur-ish bullsh*t I did voice aloud my bemusement that:
… here’s a man who confessed he was so scared of the police lockup that he, under duress, signed a police statement on the Altantuyaa’s murder with no mention of Najib Razak at all (we must be sympathetic with his concerns as afterall he’s a dad with 3 kids to feed and look after), …
… BUT who subsequently decided to be another courageous RPK and make a SD of earth-shaking proportion against the man who was going to be (then) the next most powerful political leader of Malaysia …
… and here he was , in Rawang with ASP Suresh burning some copper wires … huh?
… and presumably as he would have us believed him, he was again under duress (AGAIN for fear of his family's safety, this time under mafioso threat) and thus withdrew his 1st SD by way of a 2nd SD […] before he went into financed exile.
Then recently he changed his mind about his fears or/and concern for his family YET AGAIN, and is now back, once again courageous after the earlier series of on-off-on-off of his courage switch, with a series of claims, made to and recorded by Americk Singh and 2 other lawyers.
Let’s leave Bala and his 'simple harmonic motion'-like courage and turn to Americk Singh.
According to Malaysiakini Americk stated that he, Bala, ASP Suresh (wow), Puravalen (a lawyer) were having a few drinks at 'The Backyard' pub in Sri Hartamas and discussing the Altantuyaa case when they were joined by PKR MP Sivarasa Rasiah.
Apparently after hearing what Bala had to offer regarding what he was informed by Razak Baginda who in turn was informed by Najib Razak who in turn was informed by Altantuyaa Shariibuu who in turn confessed she liked ‘getting it’ in her behind, Sivarasa suggested that Bala get ‘someone’ to record everything down.
Americk Sidhu was then nominated to help Bala make an SD about Razak Baginda's gossip about Najib and the Mongolian model. And according to Americk Sidhu, these recordings “… occurred about two or three times over a period of about two months and lasted a few hours each time.”
Wow, such dedication!
I have seen Americk Sidhu before in a video clip (at I think Malaysia-Today) where he asserted to the press that he has no political affiliation whatsoever.
In Malaysiakini’s article today he again asserted his political neutrality and his original unfamiliarity/non-interest in the Altantuyaa case, which in fact became the reason* for being nominated, presumably by the group at 'The Backyard' pub, to record Bala’s revelation.
* "Somehow I was chosen to do this as everyone felt I was the one lawyer who did not have an agenda in this matter as I was someone neutral."
I wonder if I may ask Americk Sidhu a few questions, as follows:
(1) Why was Anwar Ibrahim spearheading the press conference which exposed Balasubramaniam’s original SD?
(2) Why didn’t he (Americk) accompany Bala to the police station when Bala was summoned to one of Malaysia’s most dangerous places after informing the press about the first SD, especially more so when the SD was such a damning one against the then-DPM?
If I recall reading in Malaysiakini, he (Americk) had advised Bala to be a good lad or good citizen and to report to the police station* as required ... and all by himself unescorted by a lawyer
* of course now we've ‘learnt’ from Bala he went instead to Rawang with ASP Suresh to ‘burn some copper wires’ and to meet Deepak.
(3) Wasn’t he (Americk) aware of the danger to Bala reporting to the police unescorted by a lawyer, especially after Bala had made such a damning SD against the then-DPM?
(4) Was ASP Suresh part of the group at ‘The Backyard’ pub who encouraged Bala to record all he heard from Razak Baginda and to reveal all in a SD?
(5) Wasn’t he (Americk) aware that the involvement (persuasion) of PKR Sivarasa in Bala’s SD (and the high profile chairing of the press conference by Anwar Ibrahim to reveal Bala's 1st SD) would by default be a political involvement, removing any claims of ‘neutrality’ in such an affair?
Sigh, it's such a confusing affair.
... in Malaysiakini’s Lawyer: Najib 'linked' to Bala's disappearance we read of Americk Sidhu, the lawyer who helped PI Balasubramaniam Perumal make his first statutory declaration (SD) against Najib Razak (then DPM), emerging now into the open to make a statement himself that “… any reasonable person would draw the conclusion that Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak is somehow linked to the disappearance of P Balasubramaniam.”
He said: "The facts seem to point to the possibility that they wanted him out of the way and delegated this job to others close to them to execute."
Americk Singh has now ‘upgraded’ Balasubramaniam’s recent allegations to ‘facts’. Maybe counsellor American Sidhu can help clarify to us how Bala’s story can now be classified as ‘facts’ at this stage?
Just in case any reader can’t recall Bala’s original SD, he declared he was informed by Razak Baginda who in turn was informed by Najib Razak who in turn was informed by Altantuyaa Shariibuu who in turn confessed she liked ‘getting it’ in her behind, etc etc etc.
Then calamity! I believe most of us can recall that the day following the 1st SD, Bala made a 2nd SD denying what he declared in his 1st SD.
In a recent post Balasubramaniam story - brave broadcast or Ben-Hur-ish bullsh*t I did voice aloud my bemusement that:
… here’s a man who confessed he was so scared of the police lockup that he, under duress, signed a police statement on the Altantuyaa’s murder with no mention of Najib Razak at all (we must be sympathetic with his concerns as afterall he’s a dad with 3 kids to feed and look after), …
… BUT who subsequently decided to be another courageous RPK and make a SD of earth-shaking proportion against the man who was going to be (then) the next most powerful political leader of Malaysia …
… and here he was , in Rawang with ASP Suresh burning some copper wires … huh?
… and presumably as he would have us believed him, he was again under duress (AGAIN for fear of his family's safety, this time under mafioso threat) and thus withdrew his 1st SD by way of a 2nd SD […] before he went into financed exile.
Then recently he changed his mind about his fears or/and concern for his family YET AGAIN, and is now back, once again courageous after the earlier series of on-off-on-off of his courage switch, with a series of claims, made to and recorded by Americk Singh and 2 other lawyers.
Let’s leave Bala and his 'simple harmonic motion'-like courage and turn to Americk Singh.
According to Malaysiakini Americk stated that he, Bala, ASP Suresh (wow), Puravalen (a lawyer) were having a few drinks at 'The Backyard' pub in Sri Hartamas and discussing the Altantuyaa case when they were joined by PKR MP Sivarasa Rasiah.
Apparently after hearing what Bala had to offer regarding what he was informed by Razak Baginda who in turn was informed by Najib Razak who in turn was informed by Altantuyaa Shariibuu who in turn confessed she liked ‘getting it’ in her behind, Sivarasa suggested that Bala get ‘someone’ to record everything down.
Americk Sidhu was then nominated to help Bala make an SD about Razak Baginda's gossip about Najib and the Mongolian model. And according to Americk Sidhu, these recordings “… occurred about two or three times over a period of about two months and lasted a few hours each time.”
Wow, such dedication!
I have seen Americk Sidhu before in a video clip (at I think Malaysia-Today) where he asserted to the press that he has no political affiliation whatsoever.
In Malaysiakini’s article today he again asserted his political neutrality and his original unfamiliarity/non-interest in the Altantuyaa case, which in fact became the reason* for being nominated, presumably by the group at 'The Backyard' pub, to record Bala’s revelation.
* "Somehow I was chosen to do this as everyone felt I was the one lawyer who did not have an agenda in this matter as I was someone neutral."
I wonder if I may ask Americk Sidhu a few questions, as follows:
(1) Why was Anwar Ibrahim spearheading the press conference which exposed Balasubramaniam’s original SD?
(2) Why didn’t he (Americk) accompany Bala to the police station when Bala was summoned to one of Malaysia’s most dangerous places after informing the press about the first SD, especially more so when the SD was such a damning one against the then-DPM?
If I recall reading in Malaysiakini, he (Americk) had advised Bala to be a good lad or good citizen and to report to the police station* as required ... and all by himself unescorted by a lawyer
* of course now we've ‘learnt’ from Bala he went instead to Rawang with ASP Suresh to ‘burn some copper wires’ and to meet Deepak.
(3) Wasn’t he (Americk) aware of the danger to Bala reporting to the police unescorted by a lawyer, especially after Bala had made such a damning SD against the then-DPM?
(4) Was ASP Suresh part of the group at ‘The Backyard’ pub who encouraged Bala to record all he heard from Razak Baginda and to reveal all in a SD?
(5) Wasn’t he (Americk) aware that the involvement (persuasion) of PKR Sivarasa in Bala’s SD (and the high profile chairing of the press conference by Anwar Ibrahim to reveal Bala's 1st SD) would by default be a political involvement, removing any claims of ‘neutrality’ in such an affair?
Sigh, it's such a confusing affair.
Tuesday, November 24, 2009
The Good, the Bad & the Ugly!
The Good
Malaysiakini's Exco Liu: I shall attend Selcat hearing if hauled up!
Unofficial reports have it that Selangor ADUN Ronnie Liu may be called up before the Selangor Select Committee for Competency, Accountability and Transparency (Selcat).
Ronnie stated that he has no qualms about fronting up for a Selcat hearing if required to do so.
He acknowledged that the rumour mills and the event (should this occur) could damage his image regardless of his innocence but stated positively: “I shall try to make this into something that will come out positive for myself.”
The Bad
The Malaysian Insider's Karpal ridicules IGP’s ‘bizarre’ statement.
That so-called policeman has been at it again, showing his ignorance of Malaysian law. His KPI has dived down to 20,000 leagues beneath the sea, shocking even Captain Nemo down there! Ideally he should follow the fishy path of his KPI.
And Hishamuddin has a f* lot to answer for extending his contract.
The Ugly
The Malaysian Insider's Muhyiddin: No forgiving you Chin Peng.
WTF is there to forgive? Who needs forgiving?
If 'forgiving' is so vital to allowing someone into Malaysia, we shouldn't allow the Thais, whose forefathers sacked Langkawi and various other places in Malaya, the British whose colonial predecessors killed local hero Maharajalela and subjugated Malayans, and the Japanese whose ancestors raped the country, into our nation!
And don't forget mass murderer Noordin Top who brought immense shame for Malaysia by his evil wanton killings in a neighbouring country. How could we ever forgive this evil man?
And apart from Hishamuddin wanting to rehabilitate that evil man, he even permitted Noordin's corpse to be repatriated back to be buried on our sacred soil. So ... WTF!
F* forgiving.
But there is a necessity to honour the terms of the 02 December 1989 treaty, where Chin Peng and other former Malayan CTs were to be allowed to return home to live in peace if they want to.
Honour! I wonder whether our government even understands this word.
On this point of official agreement, even former IGP Rahim Noor and other former security officers were ready to testify on Chin Peng's behalf.
What Muhyiddin has just signalled by his cynical response is that the Malaysian government cannot be expected to honour its treaty.
Shame on Muhyiddin! And we shouldn't forgive him for bringing such shame to Malaysia.
Malaysiakini's Exco Liu: I shall attend Selcat hearing if hauled up!
Unofficial reports have it that Selangor ADUN Ronnie Liu may be called up before the Selangor Select Committee for Competency, Accountability and Transparency (Selcat).
Ronnie stated that he has no qualms about fronting up for a Selcat hearing if required to do so.
He acknowledged that the rumour mills and the event (should this occur) could damage his image regardless of his innocence but stated positively: “I shall try to make this into something that will come out positive for myself.”
The Bad
The Malaysian Insider's Karpal ridicules IGP’s ‘bizarre’ statement.
That so-called policeman has been at it again, showing his ignorance of Malaysian law. His KPI has dived down to 20,000 leagues beneath the sea, shocking even Captain Nemo down there! Ideally he should follow the fishy path of his KPI.
And Hishamuddin has a f* lot to answer for extending his contract.
The Ugly
The Malaysian Insider's Muhyiddin: No forgiving you Chin Peng.
WTF is there to forgive? Who needs forgiving?
If 'forgiving' is so vital to allowing someone into Malaysia, we shouldn't allow the Thais, whose forefathers sacked Langkawi and various other places in Malaya, the British whose colonial predecessors killed local hero Maharajalela and subjugated Malayans, and the Japanese whose ancestors raped the country, into our nation!
And don't forget mass murderer Noordin Top who brought immense shame for Malaysia by his evil wanton killings in a neighbouring country. How could we ever forgive this evil man?
And apart from Hishamuddin wanting to rehabilitate that evil man, he even permitted Noordin's corpse to be repatriated back to be buried on our sacred soil. So ... WTF!
F* forgiving.
But there is a necessity to honour the terms of the 02 December 1989 treaty, where Chin Peng and other former Malayan CTs were to be allowed to return home to live in peace if they want to.
Honour! I wonder whether our government even understands this word.
On this point of official agreement, even former IGP Rahim Noor and other former security officers were ready to testify on Chin Peng's behalf.
What Muhyiddin has just signalled by his cynical response is that the Malaysian government cannot be expected to honour its treaty.
Shame on Muhyiddin! And we shouldn't forgive him for bringing such shame to Malaysia.
Monday, November 23, 2009
Najib and Muhyiddin fighting for Liow Tiong Lai
According to Malaysiakini’s Muhyiddin reveals 7-day mission to fix MCA, DPM Muhyiddin, acting as the so-called but really unsolicited/unwanted mediator on the MCA leadership crisis, told reporters that PM Najib has suggested MCA holds a fresh election to resolve the conflict.
Naturally Muhyiddin said that he is working to the PM’s proposal [and fuck Ong Tee Keat and Chua Soi Lek - who are these 2 blokes anyway?].
So ... fresh MCA party election eh?
Coincidentally, mind you, just bloody coincidentally, Liow Tiong Lai has also been demanding for fresh party elections.
Wow, what a fantastic one in a zillion coincidence!
See Malaysiakini’s Fresh polls only way out: Liow says it again where Liow boasted that Najib agrees with him a fresh polls is the only way to resolve the current crisis in MCA.
And of course Najib has dismissed the Ong Tee Keat-Chua Soi Lek’s greater unity plan [hey, didn't I just say: fuck Ong Tee Keat and Chua Soi Lek - who are these 2 blokes anyway?].
Just note: apart from Murugiah, the deputy minister from no party which in itself has been an unusual BN policy under PM Najib (Dei Kayveas apadah?), Liow Tiong Lai has gotten around to describing Najib as ‘our beloved PM’.
‘Beloved PM’ – it’s been quite a long long while since the death of almarhum Tunku Abdul Rahman Putra al-Haj that I’ve heard a Chinese politician state such a phrase. Unfortunately, unlike the genuine adoration for almarhum Tunku Abdul Rahman Putra al-Haj, the current description of relatively young Najib by both Liow and that Senator Nobody sounded sycophantic, obsequious and grovelling - yuuuuuuck!
But well done Liow! And by the way Koh Tsu Koon, could you bloody move over please, thanks.
So it looks like what UMNO sayang boy Liow wants, UMNO will go out of its way to bring about.
If Muhyiddin ‘breaks’ a few arms to give Liow exactly what he wants in the 7 days the former has set himself, when he should bloody butt out because MCA is (theoretically anyway) not a subordinate party of, but a component party in BN, he will confirm in no uncertain terms that MCA is nothing more than a subservient subsidiary section of UMNO, ...
... and the MCA can kiss 2013 goodbye completely, right now!
Naturally Muhyiddin said that he is working to the PM’s proposal [and fuck Ong Tee Keat and Chua Soi Lek - who are these 2 blokes anyway?].
So ... fresh MCA party election eh?
Coincidentally, mind you, just bloody coincidentally, Liow Tiong Lai has also been demanding for fresh party elections.
Wow, what a fantastic one in a zillion coincidence!
See Malaysiakini’s Fresh polls only way out: Liow says it again where Liow boasted that Najib agrees with him a fresh polls is the only way to resolve the current crisis in MCA.
And of course Najib has dismissed the Ong Tee Keat-Chua Soi Lek’s greater unity plan [hey, didn't I just say: fuck Ong Tee Keat and Chua Soi Lek - who are these 2 blokes anyway?].
Just note: apart from Murugiah, the deputy minister from no party which in itself has been an unusual BN policy under PM Najib (Dei Kayveas apadah?), Liow Tiong Lai has gotten around to describing Najib as ‘our beloved PM’.
‘Beloved PM’ – it’s been quite a long long while since the death of almarhum Tunku Abdul Rahman Putra al-Haj that I’ve heard a Chinese politician state such a phrase. Unfortunately, unlike the genuine adoration for almarhum Tunku Abdul Rahman Putra al-Haj, the current description of relatively young Najib by both Liow and that Senator Nobody sounded sycophantic, obsequious and grovelling - yuuuuuuck!
But well done Liow! And by the way Koh Tsu Koon, could you bloody move over please, thanks.
So it looks like what UMNO sayang boy Liow wants, UMNO will go out of its way to bring about.
If Muhyiddin ‘breaks’ a few arms to give Liow exactly what he wants in the 7 days the former has set himself, when he should bloody butt out because MCA is (theoretically anyway) not a subordinate party of, but a component party in BN, he will confirm in no uncertain terms that MCA is nothing more than a subservient subsidiary section of UMNO, ...
... and the MCA can kiss 2013 goodbye completely, right now!
Now it's all up to Ong Tee Keat and Chua Soi Lek to hold on to their nerves, balls and backbones to show that MCA is a sovereign political party.
Saturday, November 21, 2009
Problems? No rush - think about it!
Sometimes when you're angry with someone, it helps to sit down and think about the problem!
Friday, November 20, 2009
Corruption
Very interesting!
I’m mulling over the Corruption Perception Index 2009 formulated by Transparency International. There are 10 levels, with the highest, 9.0 to the perfect 10.0, being the least corrupt, and the bottom rung, 0.0 to 0.9, being of course the most corrupt.
Let’s pick out a few relevant countries for us to consider.
At its abysmal depth are 5 countries, all of which are war-torn. But it’s worth noting that two, Afghanistan and Iraq, are American ‘neo-colonies’ or client-states or in actuality, American occupied territories.
In being American occupied territories, they are not unique in their corruption as America has the notoriety of spreading rampant corruption in most places it occupies or occupied, like (previously) Philippines, Thailand, Vietnam, Taiwan, etc.
It would seem the only American-occupied countries which could successfully resist the American disease are those with an established order which existed long before the Yanks run over the countries – notably Germany and Japan.
The Philippines has never gotten over its American legacy of corruption while Taiwan has successfully shrugged that off to rise up to an index of 5.6.
Just compare Taiwan’s rating with our own Malaysia’s 4.5. Isn’t it just galling?
But wait, there are more surprises - Hong Kong, once a most corrupt British territory, is now ranked at World's 12th least corrupt with an index of 8.7, while once-laughable near-lawless Macau is No 43 with an index of 5.3.
By shameful contrast Malaysia is together with Namibia and omigosh Samoa at No 56, one rung beneath quite corrupt South Africa.
Even more galling for Malaysia, the Island-Nation next door is ranked the World's 3rd least corrupt together with Sweden, with an index in the top bracket at 9.2.
Maybe this revelation is most galling for Dr Mahathir who can’t stand the red dot which is our southern neighbor where incidentally, its territory has recently expanded by an lighthouse-island wakakaka, thanks to AAB.
Anyway, contrary to western beliefs that corruption is inversely proportional to real democratic practice, the Sing case shows that Singapore is almost incorruptible even though it is in reality a very authoritarian state, carrying only a veneer of Westminster democracy.
Why is it then that our lil’ neighbor can be such when our state of corruption seem to be deteriorating, yes, to such an extent that the most distrusted and most feared man in the country is actually the nation’s top law enforcer, the IGP?
On the Singapore side, perhaps LKY saw that for Singapore to survive it needs to be, among many things, the most clean, not just environmentally – no spitting, flush your blooming toilet, no mini shrines or fortune telling shops sprouting all over, etc - but in its every day practice as well.
For example, if, say, a Kuwaiti tourist has been cheated at the airport shop with dodgy goods sent to the purchaser after sales, the Singapore authorities would fall on that cheat like a ton of bricks and ensure that the correct goods would be delivered safely to the purchaser. In short, Singapore wants to spell out to the foreigner its integrity, trustworthiness and reliability.
Compare this to our renown fruit sellers in Petaling Street, where by a sleigh of Malaysian hands your bag of luscious nashi pears would (between purchase and wrapping) transform into a bag of rotting mandarins, which of course you'd only realize when you reach home wakakaka.
But more importantly and sadly, what have our authorities done with such shameless swindling?
The above are very simple examples but if we take it to the extreme we now have perceptions of an IGP who is alleged to have links to the Triads (who apparently can control posting of police officers wakakaka).
We have the MACC being accused by an insider of having naughty liaison with a Selangor politician.
I bet when the Roman poet, Decimus Iunius Iuvenalis (better known in English as Juvenal), wrote his timeless phrase 'Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?' ('Who will guard the guardians?' or 'Who shall watch the watchers?') he must have had the 'future' Malaysian Police and ACA/MACC in mind.
We have Paradise Bali and the Port Klang Palace being obscenely flaunted in front of public eyes, and we have all sorts of multi-billion dollar projects handed over to cronies who despite being gifted with those lucrative contracts on a silver platter couldn’t even meet the terms of the contract.
Yet, in most cases, they have been allowed to get away scot-free.
I could go on and on, and so could other people, but suffice to say in conclusion that the Singaporean leaders consider the interests of their nation-state whilst ours consider their personal interests.
If the leaders in our nation are seen to be corrupt or living in unexplained and obscenely displayed wealth, can we the blame the ordinary mata mata for wanting to participate in the same short cut to prosperity?
I don't see any mitigating actions by the cabinet in the area of corruption. In fact I anticipate further worsening of this lamentable state of affairs.
I’m mulling over the Corruption Perception Index 2009 formulated by Transparency International. There are 10 levels, with the highest, 9.0 to the perfect 10.0, being the least corrupt, and the bottom rung, 0.0 to 0.9, being of course the most corrupt.
Let’s pick out a few relevant countries for us to consider.
At its abysmal depth are 5 countries, all of which are war-torn. But it’s worth noting that two, Afghanistan and Iraq, are American ‘neo-colonies’ or client-states or in actuality, American occupied territories.
In being American occupied territories, they are not unique in their corruption as America has the notoriety of spreading rampant corruption in most places it occupies or occupied, like (previously) Philippines, Thailand, Vietnam, Taiwan, etc.
It would seem the only American-occupied countries which could successfully resist the American disease are those with an established order which existed long before the Yanks run over the countries – notably Germany and Japan.
The Philippines has never gotten over its American legacy of corruption while Taiwan has successfully shrugged that off to rise up to an index of 5.6.
Just compare Taiwan’s rating with our own Malaysia’s 4.5. Isn’t it just galling?
But wait, there are more surprises - Hong Kong, once a most corrupt British territory, is now ranked at World's 12th least corrupt with an index of 8.7, while once-laughable near-lawless Macau is No 43 with an index of 5.3.
By shameful contrast Malaysia is together with Namibia and omigosh Samoa at No 56, one rung beneath quite corrupt South Africa.
Even more galling for Malaysia, the Island-Nation next door is ranked the World's 3rd least corrupt together with Sweden, with an index in the top bracket at 9.2.
Maybe this revelation is most galling for Dr Mahathir who can’t stand the red dot which is our southern neighbor where incidentally, its territory has recently expanded by an lighthouse-island wakakaka, thanks to AAB.
Anyway, contrary to western beliefs that corruption is inversely proportional to real democratic practice, the Sing case shows that Singapore is almost incorruptible even though it is in reality a very authoritarian state, carrying only a veneer of Westminster democracy.
Why is it then that our lil’ neighbor can be such when our state of corruption seem to be deteriorating, yes, to such an extent that the most distrusted and most feared man in the country is actually the nation’s top law enforcer, the IGP?
On the Singapore side, perhaps LKY saw that for Singapore to survive it needs to be, among many things, the most clean, not just environmentally – no spitting, flush your blooming toilet, no mini shrines or fortune telling shops sprouting all over, etc - but in its every day practice as well.
For example, if, say, a Kuwaiti tourist has been cheated at the airport shop with dodgy goods sent to the purchaser after sales, the Singapore authorities would fall on that cheat like a ton of bricks and ensure that the correct goods would be delivered safely to the purchaser. In short, Singapore wants to spell out to the foreigner its integrity, trustworthiness and reliability.
Compare this to our renown fruit sellers in Petaling Street, where by a sleigh of Malaysian hands your bag of luscious nashi pears would (between purchase and wrapping) transform into a bag of rotting mandarins, which of course you'd only realize when you reach home wakakaka.
But more importantly and sadly, what have our authorities done with such shameless swindling?
The above are very simple examples but if we take it to the extreme we now have perceptions of an IGP who is alleged to have links to the Triads (who apparently can control posting of police officers wakakaka).
We have the MACC being accused by an insider of having naughty liaison with a Selangor politician.
I bet when the Roman poet, Decimus Iunius Iuvenalis (better known in English as Juvenal), wrote his timeless phrase 'Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?' ('Who will guard the guardians?' or 'Who shall watch the watchers?') he must have had the 'future' Malaysian Police and ACA/MACC in mind.
We have Paradise Bali and the Port Klang Palace being obscenely flaunted in front of public eyes, and we have all sorts of multi-billion dollar projects handed over to cronies who despite being gifted with those lucrative contracts on a silver platter couldn’t even meet the terms of the contract.
Yet, in most cases, they have been allowed to get away scot-free.
I could go on and on, and so could other people, but suffice to say in conclusion that the Singaporean leaders consider the interests of their nation-state whilst ours consider their personal interests.
If the leaders in our nation are seen to be corrupt or living in unexplained and obscenely displayed wealth, can we the blame the ordinary mata mata for wanting to participate in the same short cut to prosperity?
I don't see any mitigating actions by the cabinet in the area of corruption. In fact I anticipate further worsening of this lamentable state of affairs.
Thursday, November 19, 2009
Liow Tiong Lai's godfather coming to save him?
There's no doubt UMNO wants Liow.
I say this because I have been observing DPM Muhyiddin's utterances on the MCA leadership issue for quite a while - Najib of course being Najib acted dunno to appear impartial.
In his utterances Muhyiddin has indirectly indicated he wanted (and still do, for) Ong Tee Keat to leave his position as president of the MCA - net result: Liow gets automatically promoted to President, with the grace of God (or UMNO) - hallelujah!
Even from Rome where he now is, Muhyiddin has indicated the possibility of UMNO intervening in MCA's on-going leadership crisis ... of course to save UMNO's boy Liow who is now in dire straits in MCA.
And don't think that the Sri Gading UMNO MP had the initiative or independent mind to insult Ong Tee Keat in Parliament, by telling the leader of the BN's 2nd biggest component party to bugger off.
'Twas unmistakably an UMNO imprimatur to Sri Gading to harass/embarrass Ong, basically a publicly announced crude hint that UMNO doesn't want him - and I believe Koh TK getting the blunt end of Sri Gading's insult as well was just a red herring, so as to show that UMNO wasn't particularly targetting Ong and thus taking sides in the MCA leadership tussle.
In this, Koh had served his usual role as UMNO's tool again, this time as a punching bag. I wonder whether YB Sri Gading subsequently went behind the scene to the PM-appointed senator to tell him: aiyah, Ah Koon sayang, sebenarnya ai bukan mahu hentam lu lah, jadi tenang ok, ma'i ai belanja kopi-aw. kira akaun DPM. wakakaka!
What more, according to Ti Lian Ker's blog, when Liow was MCA Deputy President, and Ong Tee Keat had refused to resign after he saw Liow and his fraction reneging on their presumably agreement to resign together with him should they lose the EGM's support, Liow boasted or attempted to intimidate the CC that he has the PM's support to be MCA President, implying to the members of the MCA CC that they should support him. Tarn kuku ler!
Politics make strange bedfellows wakakaka, where we now see Chua SL joining up with his erstwhile foe Ong TK to effectively neutralise young upstart and UMNO fave Liow and his cohorts.
This has naturally alarmed UMNO who now indicates it wants to step in, notwithstanding Najib's euphemistic remarks of 'calling for a meeting with MCA leaders', no doubt to save its boy.
Such gleeful joy for Liow as he reckons his UMNO Tai Koh now can save his position for him in MCA - in The Malaysian Insider's Liow ready to meet PM and explain fresh poll solution where he shamelessly declared "I thank the prime minister for his concern on the ongoing political turmoil in MCA. Whatever steps the prime minister takes cannot be seen as interference in our party but as advice."
Whatever steps the prime minister takes ...? Rather obsequiously shameless, isn't he? Why not make Najib President of MCA as well?
However, according to The Malaysian Insider's Outside interference akin to ‘political godfather’ culture, says Ti Ti Lian Ker emphatically stated … "there should be no 'political godfather' culture in the party where party leaders turn to other component parties for support."
"There should be no culture of this sort from within the party, where certain individuals continually subvert and undermine the party's agenda, purely because they have the comfort of crying to their political godfather outside the party."
"We appreciate the DPM's concern, but at the same time we would like to see to the party's internal affairs ourselves in order to stabilise the party.”
"When other BN component parties have internal problems, they don't let other parties step in to solve their problems. MCA, as of late, seems to be orchestrating a scenario to justify external interference."
I agree. One Koh TK is more than enough for the Chinese Malaysian community!
I say this because I have been observing DPM Muhyiddin's utterances on the MCA leadership issue for quite a while - Najib of course being Najib acted dunno to appear impartial.
In his utterances Muhyiddin has indirectly indicated he wanted (and still do, for) Ong Tee Keat to leave his position as president of the MCA - net result: Liow gets automatically promoted to President, with the grace of God (or UMNO) - hallelujah!
Even from Rome where he now is, Muhyiddin has indicated the possibility of UMNO intervening in MCA's on-going leadership crisis ... of course to save UMNO's boy Liow who is now in dire straits in MCA.
And don't think that the Sri Gading UMNO MP had the initiative or independent mind to insult Ong Tee Keat in Parliament, by telling the leader of the BN's 2nd biggest component party to bugger off.
'Twas unmistakably an UMNO imprimatur to Sri Gading to harass/embarrass Ong, basically a publicly announced crude hint that UMNO doesn't want him - and I believe Koh TK getting the blunt end of Sri Gading's insult as well was just a red herring, so as to show that UMNO wasn't particularly targetting Ong and thus taking sides in the MCA leadership tussle.
In this, Koh had served his usual role as UMNO's tool again, this time as a punching bag. I wonder whether YB Sri Gading subsequently went behind the scene to the PM-appointed senator to tell him: aiyah, Ah Koon sayang, sebenarnya ai bukan mahu hentam lu lah, jadi tenang ok, ma'i ai belanja kopi-aw. kira akaun DPM. wakakaka!
What more, according to Ti Lian Ker's blog, when Liow was MCA Deputy President, and Ong Tee Keat had refused to resign after he saw Liow and his fraction reneging on their presumably agreement to resign together with him should they lose the EGM's support, Liow boasted or attempted to intimidate the CC that he has the PM's support to be MCA President, implying to the members of the MCA CC that they should support him. Tarn kuku ler!
Politics make strange bedfellows wakakaka, where we now see Chua SL joining up with his erstwhile foe Ong TK to effectively neutralise young upstart and UMNO fave Liow and his cohorts.
This has naturally alarmed UMNO who now indicates it wants to step in, notwithstanding Najib's euphemistic remarks of 'calling for a meeting with MCA leaders', no doubt to save its boy.
Such gleeful joy for Liow as he reckons his UMNO Tai Koh now can save his position for him in MCA - in The Malaysian Insider's Liow ready to meet PM and explain fresh poll solution where he shamelessly declared "I thank the prime minister for his concern on the ongoing political turmoil in MCA. Whatever steps the prime minister takes cannot be seen as interference in our party but as advice."
Whatever steps the prime minister takes ...? Rather obsequiously shameless, isn't he? Why not make Najib President of MCA as well?
However, according to The Malaysian Insider's Outside interference akin to ‘political godfather’ culture, says Ti Ti Lian Ker emphatically stated … "there should be no 'political godfather' culture in the party where party leaders turn to other component parties for support."
"There should be no culture of this sort from within the party, where certain individuals continually subvert and undermine the party's agenda, purely because they have the comfort of crying to their political godfather outside the party."
"We appreciate the DPM's concern, but at the same time we would like to see to the party's internal affairs ourselves in order to stabilise the party.”
"When other BN component parties have internal problems, they don't let other parties step in to solve their problems. MCA, as of late, seems to be orchestrating a scenario to justify external interference."
I agree. One Koh TK is more than enough for the Chinese Malaysian community!
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
IGP - ‘Thou shalt not question me’
Once upon a time there was a man who proved that good genes could not guarantee the progeny of possessing basic intelligence and a sense of logic. Is this what is meant by the quote ‘Got into the gene pool while the lifeguard wasn't watching’?
Born into an illustrious family, he astounded the world with his boorish irrationality and stupidity.
Unfortunately the oligarchical nature of the country’s politics endowed him with extraordinary powers, where he then proceeded to amply demonstrate the inconsistency of his family’s otherwise noble strain.
He had previously blasted a colleague who exposed corrupt practice in his schooling system – yes, he shot the messenger but did nothing about the corrupt officials.
He pampered racial and religious bigots with a penchant for spitting and stomping on decapitated cow's head while arresting people who conducted peaceful candlelight vigils.
He lamented his lack of opportunity to ‘rehabilitate’ Asia’s most notorious mass murderer when the criminal terrorist was shot dead, but he kept his silence when his Sturmtroopers gunned down 5 people in a car in Klang, on the allegation that those killed were criminals.
Was the massacre an act of excessive force, by jack-booted Sturmabteilung already notorious for a multitude of unexplained deaths occurring under their custody?
Due to our misfortune we learnt from him that crime rates are directly proportional if not to the square of our criticism of the so-called crime stoppers - in other words, the more we criticise the so-called lawmen for their failures in reducing crime, the higher the crime rate becomes ...
... and according to his gospel, if crime increases, it's not because of his men's failures but our criticisms.
Such demented illogic must have motivated his chief lieutenant to now throw in his (the latter's) two sens of illogic by brazenly stating that to question police action is to support criminals.
In other words, his chief lieutenant argued those who questioned their action in shooting ‘suspects’ should consider whether they are really supporting the lawmen or the criminals.
He believes his men could shoot wantonly like American soldiers in downtown Baghdad and be similarly exempted from any need to account for their actions of dispensing death to 'suspects'. In Baghdad, coincidentally, those Iraqi civilians killed by Americans were all 'suspect' terrorists. We share the same explanation.
If there is no greater red light warning than his statement as to his Neanderthal mentality towards expending the powers he has been assigned, to protect the public but who now feel threatened by the so-called protector, then I like to know what would this be?
But I blame the chief lieutenant's unmitigated Caesar-like intimidation of ‘Thou shalt not question me’ on the man with supposedly good genes (which undoubtedly must have mutated since his birth). He was the one who employed a poor performing Ernst Röhm, despite allegations of the latter being involved with the triads.
Surely such idiocy has to be the weirdness of gene mutation.
“He who establishes his argument by noise and command shows that his reason is weak" - Michel de Montaigne
"All authority belongs to the people" - Thomas Jefferson
Born into an illustrious family, he astounded the world with his boorish irrationality and stupidity.
Unfortunately the oligarchical nature of the country’s politics endowed him with extraordinary powers, where he then proceeded to amply demonstrate the inconsistency of his family’s otherwise noble strain.
He had previously blasted a colleague who exposed corrupt practice in his schooling system – yes, he shot the messenger but did nothing about the corrupt officials.
He pampered racial and religious bigots with a penchant for spitting and stomping on decapitated cow's head while arresting people who conducted peaceful candlelight vigils.
He lamented his lack of opportunity to ‘rehabilitate’ Asia’s most notorious mass murderer when the criminal terrorist was shot dead, but he kept his silence when his Sturmtroopers gunned down 5 people in a car in Klang, on the allegation that those killed were criminals.
Was the massacre an act of excessive force, by jack-booted Sturmabteilung already notorious for a multitude of unexplained deaths occurring under their custody?
Due to our misfortune we learnt from him that crime rates are directly proportional if not to the square of our criticism of the so-called crime stoppers - in other words, the more we criticise the so-called lawmen for their failures in reducing crime, the higher the crime rate becomes ...
... and according to his gospel, if crime increases, it's not because of his men's failures but our criticisms.
Such demented illogic must have motivated his chief lieutenant to now throw in his (the latter's) two sens of illogic by brazenly stating that to question police action is to support criminals.
In other words, his chief lieutenant argued those who questioned their action in shooting ‘suspects’ should consider whether they are really supporting the lawmen or the criminals.
And our answer twould surely have to be: we need to know first, who are the lawmen and who are the criminals?
The chief lieutenant, a pathetic poor performer under whose watch the nation’s crime rate has soared as it has never soared before, like a solid fuelled rocketed turkey, is obviously and monumentally deficient in basic understanding of the concept of ‘accountability’.He believes his men could shoot wantonly like American soldiers in downtown Baghdad and be similarly exempted from any need to account for their actions of dispensing death to 'suspects'. In Baghdad, coincidentally, those Iraqi civilians killed by Americans were all 'suspect' terrorists. We share the same explanation.
If there is no greater red light warning than his statement as to his Neanderthal mentality towards expending the powers he has been assigned, to protect the public but who now feel threatened by the so-called protector, then I like to know what would this be?
But I blame the chief lieutenant's unmitigated Caesar-like intimidation of ‘Thou shalt not question me’ on the man with supposedly good genes (which undoubtedly must have mutated since his birth). He was the one who employed a poor performing Ernst Röhm, despite allegations of the latter being involved with the triads.
Surely such idiocy has to be the weirdness of gene mutation.
“He who establishes his argument by noise and command shows that his reason is weak" - Michel de Montaigne
"All authority belongs to the people" - Thomas Jefferson
Monday, November 16, 2009
Balasubramaniam story - brave broadcast or Ben-Hur-ish bullsh*t
The statutory declarations (SDs) of private investigator Balasubramaniam, when compared to other stories on Najib and Altantuyaa Shariibuu, carry too many contradictions, inconsistencies and implausibility.
Who introduced Altantuyaa Shariibuu to whom? Was it Razak Baginda to Najib Razak, or Najib Razak to Razak Baginda?
Who was Altantuyaa’s lover? Razak Baginda or Najib?
Never mind that there are currently two men sentenced to death for her murder (they won’t do because the principal target of Gerakan Anti Najib or G.A.N hasn’t been among those sentenced to death) who murdered Altantuyaa Shariibuu?
[Ignore those two found guilty and already sentenced to the gallows] Was it Najib or** Rosmah or Razak Baginda*?
* just a rhetorical question - in this, Razak Baginda is fortunate because the G.A.N target is Najib, thus Razak Baginda is just in the bloody way.
** well I wish the G.A.N people could bloody make up their mind whether it's Najib or Rosmah. Kaytee is utterly confused. But what is not confusing is either Najib or Rosmah as the guilty party will mean the sorry end of Najib's political position. This is known as the 'shotgun' effect - kalau ta'boleh hentam Najib, hentam Rosmah pun jadi wakakaka.
In my post The Paradox of Balasubramanian Perumal I wrote:
I recall that when Bala made that initial Stat Dec, he was challenged on why he had signed the police statement about the Altantuyaa murder but which did not contain details that implicated Najib, yet had since come out with such a earth-shaking revelation about the DPM (in the initial Stat Dec, albeit in hearsay fashion).
Bala confessed that he had signed the police statement under duress.
In the Malaysiakini report he said he had given information on Najib to the police when they took his statement but was surprised that all mention of Najib were removed from the police statement. He claimed that he reluctantly signed that statement under duress.
Balasubramaniam explained he was held in the police lock-up twice during the investigation into the murder - the first time for five days, the second, seven days.
He lamented: “If you have experience in the cell, you will definitely sign the statement. I wanted to go out, I have three children.”
Surely all of us can sympathize with that – I wouldn’t dare dream of boasting to be a brave hero, more so for a man like Bala who has responsibility towards a family comprising 3 children.
But then …
Indeed but then … he subsequently, strangely and bravely came up with that Stat Dec damning Najib.
Noticeable at the press conference in the prominent seat was of course Anwar Ibrahim, nemesis of Najib.
I find it utterly strange and inconsistent that for a family man who was scared of the police because of his responsibility towards his 3 children (and we can understand this), he suddenly became ‘brave’ enough to verbally slaughter the DPM of the nation (this change of his attitude we still cannot come to grips with).
So … what has caused Balasubramaniam to change his mind?
Was it his conscience?
Was it the inspiring redoubtable magnificent Anwar Ibrahim?
… for more, read my post The Paradox of Balasubramanian Perumal.
In another earlier post Saiful sodomized? Bala sodomized! I asked:
Then, high drama (we all know about it by now) Bala did a go-starn (reverse) as Malaysiakini reported in PI retracts stunning statutory declaration after he was last known to have reported to a police station on the advice of his lawyer Americk Singh, when the police wanted to query him on the Stat Dec.
So, unaccompanied as Anwar himself definitely would NOT have been if the ‘world's greatest’ were to report to a police station, what would this former police corporal, alone by himself, have encountered?
After Anwar’s triumphant press conference where he presided in majestic moralizing mood as Bala first announced to a stunned Malaysian media the alleged dirt on Anwar’s Nemesis, Najib, I find Anwar's complete apathy and tidak-apa (couldn't care less) attitude towards Bala’s post press conference protection amazing (or should I be?).
He was advised by his lawyer to report to the police station, as summoned, but unaccompanied by his own lawyer. Equally amazing!
Indeed, where was his lawyer? Why didn’t he accompany Bala to the police station? How could Bala, who looked like the type down and out financially, afford the service of a lawyer? Was it pro bono?
Now we read in RPK’s Malaysia-Today that contrary to the MKINI report PI retracts stunning statutory declaration Bala did not report to the police station but instead went to Rawang with one ASP Suresh to meet one Deepak where he was offered RM5 million by the latter to withdraw his 1st SD.
So here’s a man who confessed he was so scared of the police lockup that he, under duress, signed a police statement on the Altantuyaa’s murder with no mention of Najib Razak at all (we must be sympathetic with his concerns as afterall he’s a dad with 3 kids to feed and look after), …
… BUT who subsequently decided to be another courageous RPK and make a SD of earth-shaking proportion against the man who was going to be (then) the next most powerful political leader of Malaysia …
… and here he was , in Rawang with ASP Suresh burning some copper wires … huh?
… and presumably as he would have us believed him, he was again under duress (AGAIN for fear of his family's safety, this time under mafioso threat) and thus withdrew his 1st SD by way of a 2nd SD.
It’s just too full of contradictions (from being fearful to utterly courageous back to being fearful; going to police station without a lawyer as if he didn’t know what a police station in Malaysia for a man who just made a damning SD against the DPM means?).
Totally implausible.
What would be more plausible?
We need to ask ourselves three questions:
(1) Who would be damaged by the SD?
(2) Which SD (1st or 2nd) would be the far more damaging?
(3) What’s in it for Balasubramaniam – in other words what scenario would best benefit a father of 3 kids, fearful of the police lockup and for his family, to motivate him to make such a damning report against a powerful man?
Would it be a pre-planned package of 2 prepared SDs, the 2nd to be released after the inevitable visit to the police station but PLEASE without a lawyer (“No, Mr Americk Singh, I don’t need you, it’s OK, just a fish head curry with an old buddy”)?
And YES he did retract the 1st SD which meant he must have been paid … but by whom???
Quite frankly, despite MKINI reporting that Balasubramaniam rang them up to claim he had been back in Malaysia a few times to sort out family matters, I doubt that he made those calls within Malaysia.
The YouTube clip that RPL put up on his blog claimed he, a man who confessed he was so scared of the police lockup, made his latest ‘revelation’ in front of 3 prominent but unnamed Malaysian lawyers? And only after he had withdrew the first SD and made his far-more damaging 2nd SD.
To much man man lai lah.
Who introduced Altantuyaa Shariibuu to whom? Was it Razak Baginda to Najib Razak, or Najib Razak to Razak Baginda?
Who was Altantuyaa’s lover? Razak Baginda or Najib?
Never mind that there are currently two men sentenced to death for her murder (they won’t do because the principal target of Gerakan Anti Najib or G.A.N hasn’t been among those sentenced to death) who murdered Altantuyaa Shariibuu?
[Ignore those two found guilty and already sentenced to the gallows] Was it Najib or** Rosmah or Razak Baginda*?
* just a rhetorical question - in this, Razak Baginda is fortunate because the G.A.N target is Najib, thus Razak Baginda is just in the bloody way.
** well I wish the G.A.N people could bloody make up their mind whether it's Najib or Rosmah. Kaytee is utterly confused. But what is not confusing is either Najib or Rosmah as the guilty party will mean the sorry end of Najib's political position. This is known as the 'shotgun' effect - kalau ta'boleh hentam Najib, hentam Rosmah pun jadi wakakaka.
In my post The Paradox of Balasubramanian Perumal I wrote:
I recall that when Bala made that initial Stat Dec, he was challenged on why he had signed the police statement about the Altantuyaa murder but which did not contain details that implicated Najib, yet had since come out with such a earth-shaking revelation about the DPM (in the initial Stat Dec, albeit in hearsay fashion).
Bala confessed that he had signed the police statement under duress.
In the Malaysiakini report he said he had given information on Najib to the police when they took his statement but was surprised that all mention of Najib were removed from the police statement. He claimed that he reluctantly signed that statement under duress.
Balasubramaniam explained he was held in the police lock-up twice during the investigation into the murder - the first time for five days, the second, seven days.
He lamented: “If you have experience in the cell, you will definitely sign the statement. I wanted to go out, I have three children.”
Surely all of us can sympathize with that – I wouldn’t dare dream of boasting to be a brave hero, more so for a man like Bala who has responsibility towards a family comprising 3 children.
But then …
Indeed but then … he subsequently, strangely and bravely came up with that Stat Dec damning Najib.
Noticeable at the press conference in the prominent seat was of course Anwar Ibrahim, nemesis of Najib.
I find it utterly strange and inconsistent that for a family man who was scared of the police because of his responsibility towards his 3 children (and we can understand this), he suddenly became ‘brave’ enough to verbally slaughter the DPM of the nation (this change of his attitude we still cannot come to grips with).
So … what has caused Balasubramaniam to change his mind?
Was it his conscience?
Was it the inspiring redoubtable magnificent Anwar Ibrahim?
… for more, read my post The Paradox of Balasubramanian Perumal.
In another earlier post Saiful sodomized? Bala sodomized! I asked:
Then, high drama (we all know about it by now) Bala did a go-starn (reverse) as Malaysiakini reported in PI retracts stunning statutory declaration after he was last known to have reported to a police station on the advice of his lawyer Americk Singh, when the police wanted to query him on the Stat Dec.
So, unaccompanied as Anwar himself definitely would NOT have been if the ‘world's greatest’ were to report to a police station, what would this former police corporal, alone by himself, have encountered?
After Anwar’s triumphant press conference where he presided in majestic moralizing mood as Bala first announced to a stunned Malaysian media the alleged dirt on Anwar’s Nemesis, Najib, I find Anwar's complete apathy and tidak-apa (couldn't care less) attitude towards Bala’s post press conference protection amazing (or should I be?).
He was advised by his lawyer to report to the police station, as summoned, but unaccompanied by his own lawyer. Equally amazing!
Indeed, where was his lawyer? Why didn’t he accompany Bala to the police station? How could Bala, who looked like the type down and out financially, afford the service of a lawyer? Was it pro bono?
Now we read in RPK’s Malaysia-Today that contrary to the MKINI report PI retracts stunning statutory declaration Bala did not report to the police station but instead went to Rawang with one ASP Suresh to meet one Deepak where he was offered RM5 million by the latter to withdraw his 1st SD.
So here’s a man who confessed he was so scared of the police lockup that he, under duress, signed a police statement on the Altantuyaa’s murder with no mention of Najib Razak at all (we must be sympathetic with his concerns as afterall he’s a dad with 3 kids to feed and look after), …
… BUT who subsequently decided to be another courageous RPK and make a SD of earth-shaking proportion against the man who was going to be (then) the next most powerful political leader of Malaysia …
… and here he was , in Rawang with ASP Suresh burning some copper wires … huh?
… and presumably as he would have us believed him, he was again under duress (AGAIN for fear of his family's safety, this time under mafioso threat) and thus withdrew his 1st SD by way of a 2nd SD.
It’s just too full of contradictions (from being fearful to utterly courageous back to being fearful; going to police station without a lawyer as if he didn’t know what a police station in Malaysia for a man who just made a damning SD against the DPM means?).
Totally implausible.
What would be more plausible?
We need to ask ourselves three questions:
(1) Who would be damaged by the SD?
(2) Which SD (1st or 2nd) would be the far more damaging?
(3) What’s in it for Balasubramaniam – in other words what scenario would best benefit a father of 3 kids, fearful of the police lockup and for his family, to motivate him to make such a damning report against a powerful man?
Would it be a pre-planned package of 2 prepared SDs, the 2nd to be released after the inevitable visit to the police station but PLEASE without a lawyer (“No, Mr Americk Singh, I don’t need you, it’s OK, just a fish head curry with an old buddy”)?
And YES he did retract the 1st SD which meant he must have been paid … but by whom???
Quite frankly, despite MKINI reporting that Balasubramaniam rang them up to claim he had been back in Malaysia a few times to sort out family matters, I doubt that he made those calls within Malaysia.
The YouTube clip that RPL put up on his blog claimed he, a man who confessed he was so scared of the police lockup, made his latest ‘revelation’ in front of 3 prominent but unnamed Malaysian lawyers? And only after he had withdrew the first SD and made his far-more damaging 2nd SD.
To much man man lai lah.
Sunday, November 15, 2009
Ghettos - from Warsaw to Gaza
From Ha’aretz:
UN human rights official: Gaza evokes memories of Warsaw Ghetto
By Haaretz Service and Reuters
There is evidence that Israel committed war crimes during its 22-day campaign in the Gaza Strip and there should be an independent inquiry, UN investigator Richard Falk said Thursday.
The mental anguish of the civilians who suffered the assault is so great that the entire population of Gaza could be seen as casualties, said Falk, UN special rapporteur on human rights in the occupied West Bank and Gaza Strip.
Falk, speaking by phone from his home in California, said compelling evidence that Israel's actions in Gaza violated international humanitarian law required an independent investigation into whether they amounted to war crimes.
"I believe that there is the prima facie case for reaching that conclusion," he told a Geneva news conference.
Falk said Israel had made no effort to allow civilians to escape the fighting.
"To lock people into a war zone is something that evokes the worst kind of international memories of the Warsaw Ghetto, and sieges that occur unintentionally during a period of wartime," Falk, who is Jewish, said, referring to the starvation and murder of Warsaw's Jews by Nazi Germany in World War II.
"There could have been temporary provision at least made for children, disabled, sick civilians to leave, even if where they left to was southern Israel," the U.S. professor said.
Falk said the entire Gaza population, which had been trapped in a war zone with no possibility to leave as refugees, may have been mentally scarred for life. If so, the definition of casualty could be extended to the entire civilian population.
Falk, who was denied entry to Israel two weeks before the assault started on Dec. 27, dismissed Israel's argument that the assault was for self-defense in the light of rocket attacks aimed at Israel from the Hamas-ruled Gaza strip.
"In my view the UN charter, and international law, does not give Israel the legal foundation for claiming self-defense," he said.
Israel had not restricted fighting to areas where the rockets came from and had refused to negotiate with Hamas, preventing a diplomatic solution, Falk said.
A Foreign Ministry official rejected Falk's accusations.
"There's no need to lose one's temper. Falk is a well-known Israel hater," he told Army Radio.
About 1,300 Palestinians, many of them civilians, were killed and 5,000 wounded in the assault. Ten Israeli soldiers and three civilians, hit by cross-border rocket fire, were killed.
Related articles:
· Staunch Israel critic at UN reports receiving death threats
Related post here at KTemoc Konsiders:
How do you like your shin shot?
UN human rights official: Gaza evokes memories of Warsaw Ghetto
By Haaretz Service and Reuters
There is evidence that Israel committed war crimes during its 22-day campaign in the Gaza Strip and there should be an independent inquiry, UN investigator Richard Falk said Thursday.
The mental anguish of the civilians who suffered the assault is so great that the entire population of Gaza could be seen as casualties, said Falk, UN special rapporteur on human rights in the occupied West Bank and Gaza Strip.
Falk, speaking by phone from his home in California, said compelling evidence that Israel's actions in Gaza violated international humanitarian law required an independent investigation into whether they amounted to war crimes.
"I believe that there is the prima facie case for reaching that conclusion," he told a Geneva news conference.
Falk said Israel had made no effort to allow civilians to escape the fighting.
"To lock people into a war zone is something that evokes the worst kind of international memories of the Warsaw Ghetto, and sieges that occur unintentionally during a period of wartime," Falk, who is Jewish, said, referring to the starvation and murder of Warsaw's Jews by Nazi Germany in World War II.
"There could have been temporary provision at least made for children, disabled, sick civilians to leave, even if where they left to was southern Israel," the U.S. professor said.
Falk said the entire Gaza population, which had been trapped in a war zone with no possibility to leave as refugees, may have been mentally scarred for life. If so, the definition of casualty could be extended to the entire civilian population.
Falk, who was denied entry to Israel two weeks before the assault started on Dec. 27, dismissed Israel's argument that the assault was for self-defense in the light of rocket attacks aimed at Israel from the Hamas-ruled Gaza strip.
"In my view the UN charter, and international law, does not give Israel the legal foundation for claiming self-defense," he said.
Israel had not restricted fighting to areas where the rockets came from and had refused to negotiate with Hamas, preventing a diplomatic solution, Falk said.
A Foreign Ministry official rejected Falk's accusations.
"There's no need to lose one's temper. Falk is a well-known Israel hater," he told Army Radio.
About 1,300 Palestinians, many of them civilians, were killed and 5,000 wounded in the assault. Ten Israeli soldiers and three civilians, hit by cross-border rocket fire, were killed.
Related articles:
· Staunch Israel critic at UN reports receiving death threats
Related post here at KTemoc Konsiders:
How do you like your shin shot?
Saturday, November 14, 2009
Zaid Ibrahim's 'Malay unity'?
Malaysiakini Pakatan en route to victory or disaster?
Zaid Ibrahim in identifying Pakatan Rakyat’s several weaknesses and problems proposed Pakatan work together with Ku Li (Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah).
Zaid said Ku Li is reform-driven.
Malaysiakini reported: But in order for this to happen, he said, Pakatan's larger-than-life leader Anwar Ibrahim would have to 'sacrifice'.
Sacrifice? But how, what, when …….. etc?
Using a soccer analogy, Zaid added: "Pakatan needs a few more strikers than what it already has to strengthen the team. Ku Li (Razaleigh) is an old timer, but he has integrity and a contemporary political outlook."
He said Razaleigh does not have to switch parties to do this but could work together in terms of holding political rallies and campaigns.
"I am aware that he still harbours the dream of rehabilitating Umno, to revive the original Umno which is dead (and now a tool for party cronies with problems of corruption and money politics).
"For me, there is nothing wrong in cooperating as we both want to initiate changes towards establishing a clean, efficient and corrupt-free system of governance," he added.
Using Ku Li from UMNO as a 'striker' for Pakatan?
Is this another ‘Malay unity’ proposal, this time by stealth?
Zaid Ibrahim in identifying Pakatan Rakyat’s several weaknesses and problems proposed Pakatan work together with Ku Li (Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah).
Zaid said Ku Li is reform-driven.
Malaysiakini reported: But in order for this to happen, he said, Pakatan's larger-than-life leader Anwar Ibrahim would have to 'sacrifice'.
Sacrifice? But how, what, when …….. etc?
Using a soccer analogy, Zaid added: "Pakatan needs a few more strikers than what it already has to strengthen the team. Ku Li (Razaleigh) is an old timer, but he has integrity and a contemporary political outlook."
He said Razaleigh does not have to switch parties to do this but could work together in terms of holding political rallies and campaigns.
"I am aware that he still harbours the dream of rehabilitating Umno, to revive the original Umno which is dead (and now a tool for party cronies with problems of corruption and money politics).
"For me, there is nothing wrong in cooperating as we both want to initiate changes towards establishing a clean, efficient and corrupt-free system of governance," he added.
Using Ku Li from UMNO as a 'striker' for Pakatan?
Is this another ‘Malay unity’ proposal, this time by stealth?
Lord's 6th Commandment only applicable to non-Jews
From the Ha’aretz
Just weeks after the arrest of alleged Jewish terrorist, Yaakov Teitel, a West Bank rabbi on Monday released a book giving Jews permission to kill Gentiles who threaten Israel.
Rabbi Yitzhak Shapiro, who heads the Od Yosef Chai Yeshiva in the Yitzhar settlement, wrote in his book "The King's Torah" that even babies and children can be killed if they pose a threat to the nation.
Shapiro based the majority of his teachings on passages quoted from the Bible, to which he adds his opinions and beliefs.
"It is permissible to kill the Righteous among Nations even if they are not responsible for the threatening situation," he wrote, adding: "If we kill a Gentile who has sinned or has violated one of the seven commandments - because we care about the commandments - there is nothing wrong with the murder ."
Babies posing a threat to Israel?
Just weeks after the arrest of alleged Jewish terrorist, Yaakov Teitel, a West Bank rabbi on Monday released a book giving Jews permission to kill Gentiles who threaten Israel.
Rabbi Yitzhak Shapiro, who heads the Od Yosef Chai Yeshiva in the Yitzhar settlement, wrote in his book "The King's Torah" that even babies and children can be killed if they pose a threat to the nation.
Shapiro based the majority of his teachings on passages quoted from the Bible, to which he adds his opinions and beliefs.
"It is permissible to kill the Righteous among Nations even if they are not responsible for the threatening situation," he wrote, adding: "If we kill a Gentile who has sinned or has violated one of the seven commandments - because we care about the commandments - there is nothing wrong with the murder ."
Several prominent rabbis, including Rabbi Yithak Ginzburg and Rabbi Yaakov Yosef, have recommended the book to their students and followers.
Babies posing a threat to Israel?
I suppose so, because above two photos are of babies killed by the very very brave 'world's most moralistic' Israeli Armed Forces in Gaza. Bravo, the Israelis have certainly surpassed the Nazis.
…because we care about the commandments … like God's 6th Commandment, 'Thou shalt not kill', to the rabbi must mean the ‘Thou’ only applies to goyim (kaffirs or gentiles or non-Jews), whereas Israelis can keep on killing non-Jews, even babies, especially Palestinian babies.
Friday, November 13, 2009
Millionaire Bala
Hey hey, good to be back after a few weeks and posting again.
And I just read this rather interesting Malaysian Insider's headline PI Bala claims offered RM5m to retract statement
Wow, and if my recollection is correct, Bala did retract his initial declaration.
Does this mean he collected 5 million ringgit?
And I just read this rather interesting Malaysian Insider's headline PI Bala claims offered RM5m to retract statement
Wow, and if my recollection is correct, Bala did retract his initial declaration.
Does this mean he collected 5 million ringgit?
Tuesday, November 03, 2009
MACC diverting attention from Teoh Beng Hock's murder?
MACC has gone on a so-called anti corruption blitz but I am not convinced of the sincerity of its crusade. Who believes in the MACC anyway?
Until the murder of Teoh Beng Hock has been brought to account and his murderer faces due justice, it’s all a bloody sandiwara, a diversion of attention from its iniquity and shameful political involvement (while still targetting Selangor DAP people).
Indeed, I might also include ...
... until the King of Bali is dealt with for his unaccountable life style and assets ...
... until the notorious Disney World foray has been investigated ...
... until the act of former Selangor BN ADUNs going into frenzied spending of RM500,000 in a mere two months has been looked into ...
... until the alleged corruption against MCA’s now you see it now you don’t deputy president Liow has been fully investigated ...
... until Sarawak ...
... the police … [see GANG WAR? - but within Police Force]
... etc etc etc
And not forgetting the MACC is perceived as a corrupt organization! Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Until the murder of Teoh Beng Hock has been brought to account and his murderer faces due justice, it’s all a bloody sandiwara, a diversion of attention from its iniquity and shameful political involvement (while still targetting Selangor DAP people).
Indeed, I might also include ...
... until the King of Bali is dealt with for his unaccountable life style and assets ...
... until the notorious Disney World foray has been investigated ...
... until the act of former Selangor BN ADUNs going into frenzied spending of RM500,000 in a mere two months has been looked into ...
... until the alleged corruption against MCA’s now you see it now you don’t deputy president Liow has been fully investigated ...
... until Sarawak ...
... the police … [see GANG WAR? - but within Police Force]
... etc etc etc
And not forgetting the MACC is perceived as a corrupt organization! Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Monday, November 02, 2009
Anwar Ibrahim & PKR - sprinter not a distance runner
The reason why PKR is in strife today is its lack of endurance. What do I mean by that?
PKR like its principal predecessor KeADILan has been built as a sprinter, a one-issue party, to get to the finishing line of a political 100 metres as swiftly as possible. And the ‘finishing line’ (at the end of that political 100 metres) is the restoration, the return, the resurrection of Anwar Ibrahim in UMNO.
Of course many well meaning members in PKR, especially those coopted from PRM, have no idea of the covet objective of PKR’s inner/core leadership.
Remember, there was G.A.N or Gerakan Anti Najib, a parallel organization working against Najib (but not/never AAB) while KeADILan/PKR promoted Anwar Ibrahim … to an UMNO audience – basically a classic military pincer attacking movement, to (a) remove Najib from Anwar’s path back to UMNO’s NO 2, while (b) preparing UMNO to re-admit Anwar, hopefully as No 2 again. After that, getting rid of AAB should be (theoretically) a cinch.
Recall, the crooked bridge issue and how Anwar Ibrahim made cooing sounds to AAB? I stated in my post A Bridge Too Far - Anwar Ibrahim 3.5 years ago that Anwar eagerly offered (unsolicited) assistance to AAB on the crooked bridge business. I wrote:
Anwar has offered assistance to the government, saying he could draw from his experience in the government, including as finance minister between 1993 and 1998. That’s a fantastic CV, man.
Anwar continued: “I would not discount any possible meeting with Abdullah if he were to ask my views on the issues ... like the negotiations with Singapore on the bridge and even information on the negotiations with Indonesia on border issues.” […]
Mind you, Anwar assured us his offer does not imply a wish to rejoin UMNO - of course not! Everyone knows the UMNO-led government always gets ‘outsiders’ to negotiate with foreign governments on its behalf.
Alas for him, AAB snubbed him.
Recall, his court case challenging his dismissal from his No 2 position in UMNO. What for, if not to explore such a possibility.
Then there was his eagerness to be seen with AAB – read Anwar Ibrahim - AAB: Encounter of the thirsty kind.
Alas, I couldn't but help notice his very obvious and painstaking efforts to stand at arms’ length from PKR itself, the very party that has fought so valiantly for him ..... I suppose, so that he may remain ‘untainted’ as a true blue UMNO man ...
... until of course Sodomy II forced him (apart from running off to the Turkish Embassy and wearing flak jacket) to quickly seek parliamentary sanctuary by becoming a federal MP, where his long suffering but faithful wife had to vacate her Permatang Pauh seat for him.
Anwar hadn’t expected the March 08 general election to put him so close to his obsession, the PM position. He was no doubt as shocked as AAB or Najib with that amazing tsunamic result.
With such an amazing result, can you blame him for suddenly going ape-crazy with his 916 - all his long pent-up frustration at missing the PM job at the 11th hour in 1998 had then (finally) boiled over.
In reality Anwar had more modest expectations from that general election, namely, to get just enough federal seats (held by his inner core group) in order to pose that bloc as a strong bargaining chip in his wheeling and dealing with UMNO.
Even if Pakatan had won that election and he become PM (after Wan Azizah had vacated her seat to allow him to become MP in order to assume the PM position), I suspect he wouldn’t have been as comfy as he would as an UMNO PM ..... because PAS and DAP won't be as compliant and subservient as MCA, MIC or Gerakan, etc; indeed PAS and DAP could prove to be too difficult for him as PM.
Shadow cabinet? Sure it’s a hard task, divvying up the ministerial positions among PKR, PAS and DAP (not forgetting PSM), but it’s do-able. That's the job of a strong leader. But Anwar has studiously avoided that … because I suspect it’s not important enough to him as he really wants to be PM when in UMNO, not outside.
Besides he probably doesn't have any visions of Pakatan becoming government even in the long run. Yes, in my opinion, to Anwar, Pakatan serves him, not him Pakatan.
Apart from his charisma and his gift of the gab, which probably is the main (though not all) ingredient holding Pakatan together, he hasn’t done much for the loose alliance in terms of nurturing it into a viable and credible alternative government, despite his experience in government.
As I said, his inner support group has been built as a sprinter, not a distance runner like PAS or the DAP.
He may yet reap from what has been his gross neglect of PKR let alone Pakatan. Already he has lost significant grounds in Sabah and Sarawak, Najib’s so-called ‘fixed deposit’. It’s becoming all unstuck for Anwar.
Pakatan (TGNA, Lim KS and the non-UMNO people in PKR) must now consider a future minus Anwar. While Pakatan winning state governments again in 2013 is not impossible, I believe the prospect of winning federal rule is fading fast. It must re-shape the alliance as an Anwar-less distance runner, for victory in 2018 if not 2013.
PKR like its principal predecessor KeADILan has been built as a sprinter, a one-issue party, to get to the finishing line of a political 100 metres as swiftly as possible. And the ‘finishing line’ (at the end of that political 100 metres) is the restoration, the return, the resurrection of Anwar Ibrahim in UMNO.
Of course many well meaning members in PKR, especially those coopted from PRM, have no idea of the covet objective of PKR’s inner/core leadership.
Remember, there was G.A.N or Gerakan Anti Najib, a parallel organization working against Najib (but not/never AAB) while KeADILan/PKR promoted Anwar Ibrahim … to an UMNO audience – basically a classic military pincer attacking movement, to (a) remove Najib from Anwar’s path back to UMNO’s NO 2, while (b) preparing UMNO to re-admit Anwar, hopefully as No 2 again. After that, getting rid of AAB should be (theoretically) a cinch.
Recall, the crooked bridge issue and how Anwar Ibrahim made cooing sounds to AAB? I stated in my post A Bridge Too Far - Anwar Ibrahim 3.5 years ago that Anwar eagerly offered (unsolicited) assistance to AAB on the crooked bridge business. I wrote:
Anwar has offered assistance to the government, saying he could draw from his experience in the government, including as finance minister between 1993 and 1998. That’s a fantastic CV, man.
Anwar continued: “I would not discount any possible meeting with Abdullah if he were to ask my views on the issues ... like the negotiations with Singapore on the bridge and even information on the negotiations with Indonesia on border issues.” […]
Mind you, Anwar assured us his offer does not imply a wish to rejoin UMNO - of course not! Everyone knows the UMNO-led government always gets ‘outsiders’ to negotiate with foreign governments on its behalf.
Alas for him, AAB snubbed him.
Recall, his court case challenging his dismissal from his No 2 position in UMNO. What for, if not to explore such a possibility.
Then there was his eagerness to be seen with AAB – read Anwar Ibrahim - AAB: Encounter of the thirsty kind.
Alas, I couldn't but help notice his very obvious and painstaking efforts to stand at arms’ length from PKR itself, the very party that has fought so valiantly for him ..... I suppose, so that he may remain ‘untainted’ as a true blue UMNO man ...
... until of course Sodomy II forced him (apart from running off to the Turkish Embassy and wearing flak jacket) to quickly seek parliamentary sanctuary by becoming a federal MP, where his long suffering but faithful wife had to vacate her Permatang Pauh seat for him.
Anwar hadn’t expected the March 08 general election to put him so close to his obsession, the PM position. He was no doubt as shocked as AAB or Najib with that amazing tsunamic result.
With such an amazing result, can you blame him for suddenly going ape-crazy with his 916 - all his long pent-up frustration at missing the PM job at the 11th hour in 1998 had then (finally) boiled over.
In reality Anwar had more modest expectations from that general election, namely, to get just enough federal seats (held by his inner core group) in order to pose that bloc as a strong bargaining chip in his wheeling and dealing with UMNO.
Even if Pakatan had won that election and he become PM (after Wan Azizah had vacated her seat to allow him to become MP in order to assume the PM position), I suspect he wouldn’t have been as comfy as he would as an UMNO PM ..... because PAS and DAP won't be as compliant and subservient as MCA, MIC or Gerakan, etc; indeed PAS and DAP could prove to be too difficult for him as PM.
Shadow cabinet? Sure it’s a hard task, divvying up the ministerial positions among PKR, PAS and DAP (not forgetting PSM), but it’s do-able. That's the job of a strong leader. But Anwar has studiously avoided that … because I suspect it’s not important enough to him as he really wants to be PM when in UMNO, not outside.
Besides he probably doesn't have any visions of Pakatan becoming government even in the long run. Yes, in my opinion, to Anwar, Pakatan serves him, not him Pakatan.
Apart from his charisma and his gift of the gab, which probably is the main (though not all) ingredient holding Pakatan together, he hasn’t done much for the loose alliance in terms of nurturing it into a viable and credible alternative government, despite his experience in government.
As I said, his inner support group has been built as a sprinter, not a distance runner like PAS or the DAP.
He may yet reap from what has been his gross neglect of PKR let alone Pakatan. Already he has lost significant grounds in Sabah and Sarawak, Najib’s so-called ‘fixed deposit’. It’s becoming all unstuck for Anwar.
Pakatan (TGNA, Lim KS and the non-UMNO people in PKR) must now consider a future minus Anwar. While Pakatan winning state governments again in 2013 is not impossible, I believe the prospect of winning federal rule is fading fast. It must re-shape the alliance as an Anwar-less distance runner, for victory in 2018 if not 2013.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)