Wednesday, December 29, 2010

The Poison Within PKR - Part II

[… continuing from The Poison Within PKR]

Gobala might have hailed from MIC, supposedly a stigma that anwaristas have been hurling at him since he spoke out against Anwar Ibrahim. That’s the infantile stupidity of anwaristas. They seem to have forgotten that their very own icon and his blue-eye boy hailed from UMNO, and as another example, Chua Jui Meng was from MCA, etc.

Dismissing Anwar’s critics by pointing to their original political affiliations (Gobala from MIC, Zaid Ibrahim from UMNO, etc) while ignoring those of Anwar and Azmin (and Chua JM) is childish, double-standard, not objective, self deceiving, and can even eventually lead/escalate to accusing-stereotyping people like Gobala of being a “typical Indian”. Bet you that label has already been voiced within some groups in PKR.

Then, there is also a tendency to conflate or confuse Gobala’s frustration or anger at being left out of the top echelon by Anwar in favour of Surendran, a new comer (member or otherwise), with the current BN black campaign against Pakatan. Thus, Gobala is being unjustly blamed as a BN mole/frog/tool whatever, out to discredit PKR.

This moronic approach is no different to the PKR self deceiving syiok sendiri (masturbatory) accusation that Zaid Ibrahim was an UMNO plant* to destroy PKR from within when he raised issues on the lack of integrity of the party polling process. While Zaid was no doubt ambitious (anything wrong with that?) and had behaved erratically, the issues he raised were legitimate, but till today has yet to be addressed and will probably never be addressed. It’s such (continuous) sweeping of the dodgy-ness under the carpet that Jonson Chong has warned “the party’s days may be numbered with or without a new line-up.”

* note I disagree with my hero Karpal Singh on Zaid Ibrahim; I was disappointed with Karpal for saying that Zaid doesn't have a trustworthy face; that's a stupid and unworthy statement to have come from Karpal - also see my post Zaid Ibrahim - suffers no fool gladly

The truth of why Zaid or Gobala has shown such anger at PKR leadership is far more closer to home, within PKR itself, rather than from UMNO or MIC. The dodgy PKR party polling has not only frustrated Zaid and Gobala, but also several other members like Jonson Chong, Badrul Hisham Shaharin (Chegubard) and perhaps Christine Liew, and outsiders like Haris Ibrahim and RPK. Yes, even Haris had sneered at the conduct of the polls and questioned the integrity of its process.

There is a coterie headed by the trio of Anwar-Azmin-Saifuddin (both Dr's Wan Azizah and Syed Husin are just puppets) who treat other PKR leaders not within their camp or control as dangerous rivals, to suppress or keep in check. Azmin fears Zaid as a far more charismatic and capable leader, therefore the party polling took on a “life of its own” wakakaka.

Alas for Gobala, he and Loh Gwo Burne wakakaka had not only voiced their preference for Zaid but also their disdain for Azmin Ali during the recent party polls – see my previous post
Loh Gwo Burne & Gobala - one-term MPs?

While Gobala and Loh voiced their lack of support for Azmin, they were very careful to show their continuing loyalty to Anwar Ibrahim, but those two should have known better, especially Gobala who has been in PKR for 12 years. He should have realized by now that Azmin is so intimately close to Anwar that they’re virtually inseparable twins – in simpler terms, Azmin is Anwar and Anwar is Azmin. So Gobala and Loh’s hair splitting on their loyalty had been in vain, because the moment they showed their non-support for Azmin, in Anwar’s eyes they are as useless (and dangerous) as Zaid Ibrahim.

Thus it was hardly surprising that Gobala was sidelined in the party selection of the 3 appointed (not elected) VPs. Surendran was a choice in place of Gobala to appease the PKR Indian members.

As I mentioned in my previous post, this is not about Surendran nor indeed had Surendran played any active, direct or conscious role in the churning of the poison within PKR – he’s just an innocent newcomer, a convenient Nallakarupan-ish tool for the Anwar-Azmin-Saifuddin coterie.

But we would be deceitful to ourselves to ignore the fact that among PKR members, Gobala is by far more senior than Surendran, has been far more active in party events thus made far more sacrifices, and probably has more internal party support.

And haven’t party seniority and living the party's ‘trials & tribulations’ been the Azmin Ali camp’s arguments on why Azmin was far more deserving than Zaid Ibrahim of the post of party deputy president?

The blind double-standard hypocrites they are, their argument of ‘no to parachutist’ in the Azmin versus Zaid Ibrahim election tussle obviously doesn’t apply to the Gobala or Surendran case.

Such double standard hypocrisy and Machiavellian manipulation to marginalize those members posing a threat to Azmin Ali have been the deadly ingredients which brew the poison with PKR. Recall, Nallakarupan* left the party totally pissed because he was told by Anwar Ibrahim not to contest the VP position so as to make way for Azmin Ali. Such was the poison fomented in the party then, such is the poison now!

* Nalla has aligned himself to BN because as a political animal, where could he go, after his traumatic severance of ties with Anwar Ibrahim? The DAP has a rule of not accepting anyone from its ally PKR. Thus I blame Anwar for driving him into the arms of BN.

It’s ironical that Gobala, once Anwar's chief-bodek-er, who personally turun padang with his two sons and some supporters during the Permatang Pauh by-election to do the hard yards for Anwar Ibrahim, even unto embarrassing themselves with the PKR core group’s habit of stopping buses, allegedly full of phantom voters wakakaka - see my post
Buses of phantom voters with water bottles - is now so full of hatred for his erstwhile hero.

I recall reading about a PKR assembly prior to the 2008 general election, where Gobala was the only member who called for three cheers for Anwar Ibrahim wakakaka, such was his fervour for his once-respected leader. I guess now it’s three jeers.

Paraphrasing, hell hath no fury like an acolyte scorned, and Gobala has been venting his hellish fury at his once-adored leader Anwar Ibrahim.

What Gobala has been doing lately is certainly out of spite, anger and from a frustration he knows is unlikely to be ever acquitted by the PKR leadership. After all, it's the very top leadership which has brought about the monumental grievances and deep-rooted sense of frustration for Gobala and many others, thus those leaders are hardly the people to address the great wrong felt by those outraged by the questionable party election process - see also my post PKR party election - the horror stories continue and what Chegubard said about Anwar and Azmin.

Now, what Gobala has been doing is not right of course. But as I have advised, anwaristas (there's no hope for the anwaristas so I'm addressing my advice to reasonable thinking people in PKR) PKR members should pause and consider why this once die-hard supporter of Anwar Ibrahim, almost of kamikaze-like dedication for the so-called Great Reformer, is now attacking him, rather than continue to deceive themselves by stupidly dismissing Gobala as an ex-MIC mole planted to destroy PKR from within.

What Gobala is doing is not right, but what Anwar-Azmin-Saifuddin have done is far worse than just not right.

[to be continued …]

Tuesday, December 28, 2010

The Poison Within PKR

In The Malaysian Insider’s PKR confirms Surendran’s membership we read of a PKR member’s dissent, dissatisfaction and disgust. I’m talking about N Gobalakrishnan’s accusation that the appointment of N Surendran as one of three newly appointed PKR VPs is illegal because Surendran is not a registered member of the party.

My post is not about the issue of Surendran's membership, but rather the story of an anwarista scorned wakakaka. As the saying goes (paraphrased) ‘Hell hath no fury like an acolyte scorned’.

And the story is not just about poor Gobala, once chief bodek-er of Anwar Ibrahim, but about the nature of Anwar’s leadership (or lack of) in PKR and the paradox of his role in the Pakatan Rakyat coalition.

First, let’s get the ‘minor’ wakakaka issues out of the way.

Party secretary-general Saifuddin Nasution said he had directed his staff to check with the party’s membership listing and discovered that Surendran is a registered member with the Lembah Pantai division.

He said: Gobalakrishnan’s accusation is not true. Surendran is a party member.

Now, that may well be so, but alas, Saifuddin Nasution had said a lot of things, which I am tempted to ask: Have those promised to Chegubard, Zaid Ibrahim and a few others (including outsider Haris Ibrahim) come to fruition or been fulfilled meaningfully?

Take for example, the recent case of Badrul Hisham Shaharin, better known as Chegubard, who had complained about irregularities in PKR party polling process. According to Chegubard, Saifuddin promised in November that investigation into Chegubard’s complaint had been initiated and the finding would be revealed in a couple of weeks’ time. Now it’s already the end of the year, well over a month since Saifuddin’s deadline promise, and Chegubard is still asking about the finding of that so-called investigation.

The party leadership had appointed Chegubard to the position of party deputy secretary-general, perhaps believing that should mollify and quieten him down over his earlier complaints about the irregularities in the party polling process, but unlike that 3rd candidate for the deputy presidential post, Chegubard refused the appointment, insisting on first knowing what the finding of the so-called investigation is.

As Penangites would comment, with some people, yes, you can cheet haw ch’ooi (keep the tiger’s mouth closed by filling it with goodies), but with others you just can’t!

Chegubard is not the only person in the party to complain. Leaving aside people like Zaid Ibrahim, Gobala, even Anwar’s personally (last-minute) nominated candidate for Kelana Jaya Loh Gwo Burne wakakaka, Jonson Chong had written a personal letter to the party president Dr Wan Azizah about the questionable party polling process – see my earlier post
Dr Wan Azizah ignores Jonson Chong's plea?

Renowned activist Haris Ibrahim praised Jonson for his constructive approach but alas, not so Dr Wan as she ignored him completely. Why did a party president ignore a constructive proposal from a sensible, fair and balanced gentleman like Jonson Chong which would have put to rest all complaints if the polls had been conducted fairly, unless of course she knew it was far too embarassing to her hubby and blue-eye boy, Azmin to take up Jonson's proposal?

Anyway, Jonson has been so disappointed with the arrogance of the Anwar-Azmin-Saifuddin coterie in its refusal to truly investigate into party members’ complaints about the dodgy party polls that I believe he will leave PKR (not that Anwar-Azmin care two hoots) or remain a passive-inactive member until the Anwar-Azmin-Saifuddin coterie has been removed. No doubt anwaristas will describe Jonson as a frog – it’s their usual puerile self-delusional escapism from the ugly reality of their icon cum inner core associates.

Read also Haris Ibrahim’s
Khalid and Azmin, please respond immediately. Time for another Penang saying: Tarn koo koo

Back to the main issue – Saifuddin Nasution said Gobala should have consulted him first before going public with his allegations. He stated: He could have referred to me and I can check for him. It is just a matter of a click on the mouse and we can trace back the membership list. But making a public statement as if he knows the truth that is inappropriate.

Technically and theoretically, Saifuddin is correct. But if one has been following the history of Saifuddin’s proclivity to brush aside any party members' criticisms and the quantum of substantialness in his promises to people such as Chegubard (still no revelation of the finding of an investigation into PKR party polling irregularities) and Zaid Ibrahim’s agent (gross irregularities in the Kubang Pasu branch polling still unanswered), one would understand, or at least sympathize with why Gobala has done what he did.

Then there was the case of Haris Ibrahim's pointed query as to how party ballot papers were floating around freely, which till today has not been answered to Haris' satisfaction. The worst has been Saifuddin’s claim that the previous party secretary-general had sacked party member Jenapala – see Jonson Chong’s revelation in my post
De facto, my foot! What about de facts! where Jonson wrote (extracts only):

Now I share my true feelings not because I want to embarrass the party but because I sense the presence of foolish arrogance in the voice of the party’s secretary-general. And I simply cannot remain silent in the face of bold-faced lies because I know it will eventually bring the party to its knees. Yes I am talking about his statements vis-à-vis the sacking of Jenapala. […]

For me, just the stupidity of how this Jenapala issue was handled is enough to tell me that the judgement of the people who are purportedly in charge of the party are seriously impaired. […]

But what really sickens me to the core of my being is that I know for a fact that someone in the party HQ knows that the letter is a forgery. […]

Then before I knew it I saw a letter with the previous sec-gen’s signature which was purportedly sent to Jenapala to sack him way back in February 2009. I was speechless.

I was speechless because there is no doubt in my mind that the letter is a forgery, and I am dumbfounded that they could resort to such a thing to cover up an honest mistake, for which they could have just humbly informed the media and move on.

Now, in light of the police report lodged by the previous sec-gen, this matter cannot be swept under the carpet anymore, especially not the way the current sec-gen attempted to do it. I’m amazed that he doesn't see the gravity of the situation.

I know, in politics perception is everything. But I also know, in a court of law evidence is everything. And when the judiciary is not on your side, it doesn’t even matter if they don’t have the evidence. All they need is a good reason to put you away.

If the president still does not take some serious action to remedy this situation, then I’m afraid the party’s days may be numbered with or without a new line-up. And let me unequivocally state that I am not addressing the de facto leader on this matter because I no longer recognise the validity of that position.

And has the PKR party president taken any action to remedy the issue of forgery? I leave that for you to answer.

As Jonson said: ... perception is everything ... thus to Gobala, whether Saifuddin has the true answer doesn't matter anymore. He just doesn't want to rely on Saifuddin anymore.

Should we then, in all fairness, expect Gobala to follow strict protocol and seek Saifuddin for the details of Surendran's membership?

[to be continued …]

Monday, December 27, 2010

Malaysian buses & ferries

Three years ago I posted Maritime tradition fell overboard from Tioman ferry following a Malaysiakini report that an unlicensed Malaysian ferry sailing from Pulau Tioman to Mersing suffered a fire breaking out on board the vessel yesterday. The incident left four dead and four injured. The terrified passengers said it was a horrendous scene as the ageing vessel filled with smoke, forcing them to hurl their children into the sea.

Yes, you read it correct, that ferry was unlicensed. A Marine Department official revealed the ferry's permit to transport passengers had expired a year before and which was not renewed. One blooming year of unlicensed sailing!

And the f*ing worst thing of all, our brave crew, the inheritors of Hang Tuah’s maritime prowess, abandoned the vessel even before the passengers. The f*ing cowards, which was why I titled that posting 'Maritime tradition fell overboard from Tioman ferry'.

In conjunction with that tragedy I also posted
Tioman ferry disaster - Ministerial criminal negligence, capturing a letter by Alice Au which was published by Malaysiakini.

She wrote about overloaded boat and illegal transfer of passengers from ferry to an already overloaded ferry in mid sea without any mandatory police supervision. Alice said: This operator shows a blatant disregard for passenger safety, their arrogance and the high-handed manner they deal with their clients has to be experienced to be believed.

The crews might have been cowards but they were arrogant cowards. F*ing typical of cowards.

It seems the responsible ministry that I accused of being criminally negligent in not clamping down on such dodgy operations have allowed another boat accident in the same region to occur again.

The Star Online reported that
three Singaporeans died and two more are missing after a boat carrying 29 people capsized while on its way back from a fishing trip near Sibu Island here.

DSP Mohd Nor said strong winds and choppy waves could have resulted in the boatman not being able to control the vessel. He added that the boat which was carrying 19 Singaporeans, nine Malaysians and one China national was overloaded.

“Initial investigations revealed that the boat could carry about 12 passengers but there were 29 people on board. All the victims were not wearing life jackets.”

Actually 4 Singaporeans have been confirmed dead, as I heard from
Channel News Asia. Unlike the Star Online and New Straits Times, the Channel News Asia report also explained why all the victims were not wearing life jackets …

because there were f*ing none on board!

Why didn't the Star and NST report this? Woi, Hartalmsm, lu olang tidur kah?

Bus & ferry disasters– the usual f*ing Malaysian ministerial negligence. Corruption is right at the root of all these.

Thursday, December 23, 2010

P Uthayakumar - Hero or Zero?

Sigh, sometimes I feel I shouldn’t blame Uthayakumar for being pompous because a few people love to lionize him. Maybe that's why he is so big-headed, wakakaka.

Read this letter in Malaysiakini titled
Uthaya not keen on a united Malaysia. It was written by FT (Toffee) Rozario, as follows:


P Uthayakumar has to wake up to the reasons for Tamil marginalisation and then see if he is really a champion of the marginalised or is he trying to be the champion of Indian marginalisers, attempting to outdo S Samy Vellu and the BN.

Uthaya is no better than Samy Vellu. In the first place he is not in Pakatan so how can he make demands? He is threatening to play spoiler with his racial party, the very kind of politics that Pakatan is trying to get rid off.

I think parties in the HRP mould should be discarded; let them go to BN, or go on their own and let them face the brunt of their own folly.

The problems of the Indian community lie within the community itself, every Samy, S Subramaniam, and Uthaya can claim to represent the community, and they come out with numbers of 'supporters', and each of them espouses to champion the "Indian cause."

The funny thing is many of Samy's supporters are Subramaniam's supporters and also Uthaya's supporters too, and to understand this better you have to take a close look at what happened in Kampung Buah Pala. These so-called politicians thrive on the ignorance of the Tamils.

Uthaya demands that the Indians be given the same kind of rights that were accorded to the Malays by the NEP, I say Malay and not bumiputera because if one takes a close look at the native population of this country, the natives (Orang Asli) seem to be in worse shape than the Malaysian Indians.

It is not only the Indians who are marginalised, the Senoi, the Jakun, the Negrito, the Dayak, the Iban, the Kadazan and all the other real natives of this country are far more marginalised than the Indians so what is this marginalisation that these champions of the Indian cause are talking about?

I am not saying that there is no marginalisation amongst the Indians, there is, but are they the only ones marginalised?

In the first place will Uthaya show me one constituency where the Indians make a majority? There is none, and knowing this the Tamils should be the last people wanting to play the racial card. This man is plain stupid.

Never before in the history of this country has so many Indians turned up as state assemblymen and parliamentarians than after the last election as members of Pakatan-based parties.

They were chosen on merit not on their race, and they won, and instead of seeing the light here Uthaya decides he will be Samy Vellu's successor in screwing up the Tamils.

I keep saying Tamil, because he cannot expect to represent anyone else other than the Tamils. I have talked about this before, the reasons for Tamil marginalisation, and it is so clear it is the type of Uthaya/Samy politics that is the cause of this.

Uthaya is not keen on a united Malaysia; he can't get one with these kinds of demands. He is only bent on demanding and disturbing, I think he needs the MIC and the BN and that is where he should be.

Go suck up to them again, let them whip the hell out of his community, because he knows that that is what will happen if he decides to go it alone. To him it looks like a "never mind as long as I land up with the goodies it is okay," that seems to be his mentality.

If the Tamils can't read the game, blame yourselves and only yourselves.

Wednesday, December 22, 2010

Lim GE, Utusan Malaysia & Hartalmsm

When a non-BN leader becomes the subject of UMNO’s repetitive and concerted vilifications and a victim of its campaign of demonization, you can guess he is getting too popular for UMNO’s liking.

When that non-BN leader is a Chinese, you can bet he is getting too popular with the Malay electorate.

When that non-BN leader is a DAP man, hell’s bells, UMNO shits bricks because that just won’t do … no no no … it’ll be a disaster … for UMNO of course.

Not that the DAP leader’s breakthrough into hitherto UMNO (or PAS, PKR) territory is advance, but hey hey hey, better to nip the Cina Apek’s appeal in the bud.

DAP leaps into 'pseudo-M'sian' battle reported:

DAP publicity secretary Tony Pua was equally disdainful of the daily.

“Never before in history has the DAP, a party that Utusan Malaysia has previously regarded as irrelevant, become the object of obsession to an Umno-owned newspaper.”

“ It is most laughable when Utusan had to appeal to its readers not to boycott the paper due to 'political sentiments' and to blame Pakatan (when its) business (was affected). It appears that Utusan is attempting to rationalise its loss of readership (by blaming) external factors instead of looking inwards at their incessant racial posturing, outright lies and inflammatory headlines such as Bangkitlah Melayu as being the main causes.”

“The relentless attacks on the DAP only serve to prove that DAP and Pakatan are making major inroads in proving to the people that we are not only competent in governance, but that - despite having a DAP chief minister in Penang - Malays and Muslims enjoy greater rights and benefits than under a BN administration.”

Thus, Utusan Malaysia pours on Lim Guan Eng cauldron after cauldron of vile poison.

And what has Hartalmsm, the so-called mainstream media monitor, been doing? It turns itself into an anti-DAP and anti-Pakatan blog, ignoring Utusan's lies, disinformation and misinformation while attacking Lim Guan Eng.

Mainstream media monitor? As Balram Halwai, the hero in Aravind Adiga's Man Booker prize-winning book, The White Tiger, would say: "What a fucking joke". wakakaka

Malaysiakini's Newsmaker of 2010

Congratulations to Ibrahim Ali for being named as Malaysiakini’s Newsmaker of 2010.

Incidentally many may not know that Adolf Hitler was named Time magazine’s Man of the Year for 1938.


Tuesday, December 21, 2010

The 'mandore' threat in Sungei Siput

Big-headed pompous hubristic Uthayakumar has demanded that Pakatan gives way to his HRP in 15 parliamentary and 38 state seats in the coming general election.

If he had only demanded seats held by PKR or his bête noire DAP (and those currently occupied by BN), one could even argue on his behalf that his threat has been directed at parties which he dislikes and accuses, debatable as this may be, of not doing enough for Indians.

Associated with his regular attacks on particularly the DAP, he in bully boy petulance has regularly described Indian members in DAP as ‘mandores’, demonstrating his bad manners and uncouth behavior.

But when he included the Sungei Siput parliamentary seat as part of his outrageous threat to Pakatan, he suddenly revealed his true agenda, something that’s not pretty to look at.

The Sungei Siput parliamentary seat is currently held by Dr D Jeyakumar of the PSM – note please, not of the DAP nor of PKR but PSM, a sovereign party beholden to no one but the rakyat of its constituencies.

For years Dr Jeya had invested blood, toil, tears and sweat in Sungei Siput for the betterment of the downtrodden Indians, in a constituency held for eons by Samy Vellu. The former MIC president was virtually the maharaja (with lower case ‘m’) of that parliamentary constituency, and like maharajas, cared not for the peasants.

Despite being on the outer for years, Dr Jeya plodded on, not for self aggrandizing nor promotion of his personal political ambition. Dr Jeya has been a true socialist, striving for years for the poor, downtrodden and marginalized.

Down came a rotten stinking wannabe parachutist who wasn’t seen in Sungei Siput when Dr Jeya was putting in the hard yards, and who now wants Dr Jeya to give up his seat for his HRP.

Now, the words to spring to mind at such a demand would be ‘outrageous’, ‘impertinent’, ‘f* extortion’ and ‘highway robbery’.

So why has the big-headed pompous, hubristic and now biadap Uthayakumar demanded Dr Jeya’s seat?

We must ask, in a 3-corner fight in Sungei Siput who would benefit?

Is this what Uthayakumar want? I’m afraid the ugly answer seems to be a disappointing ‘yes’.

I would not be surprised if Samy Vellu were to tell Palanivel “Dei tambi, I’ll be contesting in my old seat. This time I have plans to wrest the seat from that socialist.”

Then a worried Palanivel would riposte “But aneh, you’re now an ambassador. Why want to contest in an election?”

SV “Dei, that ambassador in Washington, he’s also an MP what. Don’t worry lah, you’re still the party president. I only want to regain my maruah and toupee which I lost in Sungei Siput on 08 March 2008. And I’m confident with a 3-corner flight" - nudge nudge wink wink!

Palanivel thinks silently [Well, I’m not so confident, and I’m not talking about winning the SS seat. Pundih]

Yes, Uthayakumar's demand for the seat of Sungei Siput is very telling of his 'agenda'. By splitting the votes in Sungei Siput, he will become the 'mandore' that he accuses others of being.

It is now encumbent on Pakatan supporters to provide 100% support for Dr Jeyakumar, to enable him to fend off the MIC and HRP plans to de-seat him.

Related: Say no to Uthayakumar's threat

Monday, December 20, 2010

Say no to Uthayakumar's threat

Malaysiakini’s HRP to Pakatan: Give us 15 parliamentary seats reported that HRP has issued an ultimatum to Pakatan Rakyat to back out and allow the Indian-based party to take on BN in straight fights in 15 parliamentary seats and 38 state seats in the next general election ...

... or else the opposition coalition will find itself in three-corner fights in the constituencies.

Parliamentary seats that HRP demands are:
1. Padang Serai (Incumbent: PKR - N Gobalakrishnan)
2. Batu Kawan (DAP - Ramasamy)
3. Sungei Siput (PSM - Dr D Jeyakumar)
4. Ipoh Barat (DAP - N Kulasegaran)
5. Bagan Datoh (BN - Ahmad Zahid Hamidi)
6. Cameron Highlands (BN - SK Devamany)
7. Hulu Selangor (BN - P Kamalanathan)
8. Kuala Selangor (PAS - Dzulkefy Ahmad)
9. Klang (DAP - Charles Santiago)
10. Kota Raja (PAS - Siti Mariah Mahmud)
11. Rasah (DAP - Anthony Loke)
12. Teluk Kemang (PKR - Kamarul Baharin Abbas)
13. Alor Gajah (BN - Fong Chan Onn)
14. Tebrau (BN - Teng Boon Soon)
15. Lembah Pantai (PKR - Nurul Izzah Anwar)

It's a wonder Uthayakumar didn't ask for the Pakatan leaders to kiss his feet as well.

To give my take on his atrociously avaricious demand let me first provide a brief discussion of what happened in the Australian state of Victoria recently.

In Australia there are two major parties, Labour and the Liberal-National Coalition, the latter known as just the Coalition. In recent times the Greens have emerged as a powerful 3rd Force. There are also a sprinkling of Independents, most being former Coalition members. The major parties realize that the minor or so-called 3rd Force parties (Greens and Independents) have been using their minority strength to extract disproportionate gains.

Senior civil servants have now emerged to complain that because of the Greens and some Independents (who have joined Labour to prevent a ‘hung parliament’), they (the civil servants) have far greater workloads than before. It's due to the minor parties insisting on being briefed separately on almost everything. Such briefings have doubled or tripled the workload of the civil servants, distracting them from the important tasks.

So, in the recent state election in Victoria, the Coalition has decided to bite the bullet and avoid ‘preferential-ing’ the Greens, risking even defeat. The Australian voting system has the ‘preferential votes’ system where parties can do deals and ‘preference’ the votes they received (when they are no longer in the running as a potential winner) to another party. Traditionally Labour and the Coalition preference each other last, meaning they won’t ever benefit from each other’s preferential votes, for obvious reason. So what the Coalition did was unprecedented, preparing to even lose in order to eliminate the Greens. They preferenced Greens last, meaning they were willing to have their main rival, Labour, benefit from their preferential votes. But the Coalition won.

While we don’t have a preferential voting system, the time has come for Pakatan to be brave (like the Victorian Coalition Party) and destroy HRP once and for all, even at the loss of a few seats. My reasons are as follows:

(1) Never give in to a threat, or you’ll forever be a slave to it. It’s better to lose in those threatened 3-corner fights than to have a blackmailing demon riding on your shoulders in each and every election.

(2) Don’t trust Uthayakumar as he is likely to jump over to the BN. This man is pompous, hubristic, self centred, and cannot be reasonably dealt with. Pakatan can’t and mustn’t do business with him.

(3) Giving in to his threat is far worse than fighting in out in 3-corner fights. Surrendering to Uthayakumar means losing those seats even before the election begins.

(4) Thus why cringe and provide Uthayakumar an easy ride.

(5) Most importantly, while HRP may do some damage, it’s not as significant as Uthayakumar has pompously presented. In reality the '27 Nov 2007' Hindraf has already disintegrated. For example, Thanethiran has taken his Makkal Sakthi and a host of Indian supporters over to the BN, while Ganabatirau and colleagues stay true with the DAP. Furthermore it’s known that most Indians have returned to the BN fold. So, what’s really there left of the old Hindraf or HRP, and thus of the real effect of Uthayakumar’s threat of 3-corner fights.

Ignore Uthayakumar and HRP. Don’t allow him to dictate to Pakatan even if some seats may be lost. Destroy this potential ‘Old Man of the Sea’.

Sunday, December 19, 2010

Why 1Malaysia = 1Israel

Anwar Ibrahim’s sneer at Najib’s 1Malaysia being based on 1Israel (both conceived by the same consultant APCO) must have hurt badly. But was such a political jibe sufficient reason to bar Anwar from Parliament for an absurd 6 months?

The harsh treatment was nothing more than vindictive punishment. And as if that was not enough harsh bullying, 3 other Pakatan MPs were similarly barred for trivial reasons for the same duration. The Parliamentary Speaker has a lot to answer for his abuse of powers.

Israel has always been a hated entity for Muslim Malaysians, because Muslim Malaysians feel an obligatory if not sympathetic requirement to do so, to stand in solidarity with their Muslim brothers and sisters in Palestine. In recent years I have come to share this dislike of Israel though my reasons are more specific than being obligatory or just sympathetic. I have been utterly appalled by Israel’s blatant, unmitigated and feral racism.

Yesterday I posted an article from the
Sydney Morning Herald which I titled Neo-Nazis' 1935 'Nuremberg Laws' in Israel to highlight the Israelis’ neo-Nazism. Isn't it just ironical that the so-called children of the Holocaust behave towards the Palestiniaans in exactly the same manner as the Nazi oppressors of their European forefathers! (You'll be reading this word 'ironical' one more time in this post, for a good reason)

But don’t be surprised by the Israeli* savage and racist barbarism being similar to those demonstrated by the Nazis or white Afrikaans. One only has to open the Old Testament to read about the proclivity of their Israeli-Hebraic forefathers to murder, massacre and commit genocide against non-Hebrew tribes, to seize the latter’s land and property and take their wives and daughters as slaves. The Hebrews-Israelites-Judeans-Israelis all shared/share the national characteristic of evil barbarism.

* note that not all Israelis or Jews are racist

Naturally the Judean (Israelis) authors creatively put all those acts of atrocity as approved by God, in the same way as our Biro Tatanegara indoctrinators have creatively written to justify ketuanan Melayu, and the other races as lesser beings, undesirable and unclean for Malaysia – thus we get the mata sepets and kaki botols, and sons of Chinese prostitutes and Indians leashed by their wrist like animals.

Ironically, for a government which tells the Muslim Malays that Israel is to be condemned for its persecutions and oppressions of Palestinians, it behaves in an almost similar manner to the Israelis – I've underlined the word ‘almost’ because to be fair, Malaysia is not yet as bad as the evil Israeli rightwing government. But we worry for the future.

Nonetheless it’s racist and plays on racist issues, to divide the people and conquer their support.

Maybe that’s why Anwar’s accusations of Najib’s 1Malaysia have struck at the very core of Najib’s (and UMNO's) heart, because it raises embarrassing questions about the parallel parochial policies of both 1Malaysia and 1Israel.

Saturday, December 18, 2010

Neo-Nazis' 1935 'Nuremberg Laws' in Israel

And it came to pass, when Israel had made an end of slaying all the inhabitants of Ai in the field, in the wilderness wherein they chased them, and when they were all fallen on the edge of the sword, until they were consumed, that all the Israelites returned unto Ai, and smote it with the edge of the sword – Joshua 8:24-25 (KJV)

Nazism is well and truly alive … in Israel.

From the Sydney Morning Herald:

Psychology student Osama Ghanaim was woken early one night last month by a mob of 60 ultra-Orthodox Jews chanting ''Kill the Arabs'' outside his flat.

'Then they stoned my house,'' Ghanaim said this week. ''Rocks broke through my front windows.''

After the crowd dispersed, Ganaim, who is one of 1400 Arab Israeli students enrolled at Safed Academic College, in northern Israel, found a poster on his front door warning him to move out.

''The poster said they would set fire to the house, so I called the police,'' Ghanaim said. ''The police took four hours to come to my house, and they did nothing. I have not heard a thing from them since.''

One of Judaism's four holy cities, Safed has been the centre of roiling ethnic tensions in recent weeks after the city's state-sponsored
chief rabbi, Shmuel Eliyahu, issued a ruling forbidding Jews to rent flats or sell property to non-Jews because it ''causes evil and makes the public commit the sin of intermarriage''.

Only 70 Arab students live in private accommodation in Safed, a city of 32,000 Jews, one third of whom are ultra-Orthodox. Another 120 Arab students live in dormitories provided by the college, while the remaining 1200 commute from nearby Arab villages.

''Here at the college, we Arabs get on very well with the Jewish students,'' Ghanaim said. ''Many of us have Jewish girlfriends, and I think this really is the problem. The Jewish people who live in Safed don't like to see Jewish women with Arab men.''

Ghanaim moved out of his flat, and was able to find alternative accommodation without further harassment.

But a fellow student, Mustafa Ali, has not been so lucky.

Last Friday, two months after Ali's flat was damaged during a riot against Arab students living in Safed, he woke to discover that his car had been vandalised.

''All the windows were smashed, some of the tyres had been cut, and the words 'Arabs out' were spray-painted on the front of the car,'' he said. ''What is next? Are we made to wear a green crescent on our coats so everyone knows we are Arab Muslims? Why are these people not being stopped?''

Ali and Ghanaim took the Herald on a short tour of their campus, identifying sites where anti-Arab graffiti had been painted over by college administrators. ''Mostly things like 'Death to Arabs' and 'Arabs go home','' said Ghanaim.

Pointing to several benches in the park next to the college, Ghanaim said they had been smeared with the words 'Seating for Jews Only'.

Despite Rabbi Eliyahu's edict sending shockwaves through Israel's secular political establishment - with many commentators likening it to Nazi Germany's anti-Semitic Nuremberg Laws of 1935 - it received the immediate backing of 75 rabbis across Israel.

At last count more than 300 rabbis - most of them in positions funded by the state - have added their names to the edict.

''A short perusal of any history book, and of course Wikipedia, will immediately lead to the parallel laws and regulations enacted by the Nazis against the Jews,'' the columnist Ruth Sinai wrote this week in the mass selling newspaper Maariv.

Israeli Jews offended by the actions of the state rabbis have been further angered by their apparent immunity from the law.

''The silence of the law-enforcement agencies towards displays of racism is not a sign of liberalism or tolerance; it is a sign of weakness,'' said the Israeli commentator Boaz Okon.

Yet, after two months in which a host of discriminatory laws were passed by the Israeli parliament, including a loyalty oath demanded of all new immigrants to Israel, a ban on Arab tour guides in the city of Jerusalem, and a ban on all organisations that question the Jewish character of the state of Israel, others argue that it is a natural extension of the current status quo. ''Fascism has raised its head in Israeli society,'' said the Arab Israeli MP Ahmed Tibi.

Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass – 1 Samuel 15:3 (KJV)

The original Taliban - religiously racist!
Brothers of the Talibans

Thursday, December 16, 2010

DAP's inclusiveness - requirements & reasons

At a recent DAP party assembly, a guest, a PAS commissioner was invited to offer doa (prayers) to start off the event. No doubt the DAP party’s gesture of inclusiveness will be seized on by the non-Muslim component parties of BN, namely MCA, Gerakan and MIC to frighten non-Muslim voters of DAP’s so-called ‘infatuation’ with PAS. And most certainly MCA cybertroopers ensure that the DAP gesture balloons into something sinister, as part of their traditional scare tactics.

Yes, non-Muslims can be easily scared because they are already wary of Islamic laws (and its punishments). This attitude has been nurtured by a combination of harsh examples from other Islamic countries and our local and highly politicized happenings such as body snatching, caning of women, (most of all) rude and arrogant behaviour by some officers from the religious departments, and the constant UMNO aggressive policitization of Islam, etc.

In October this year (happier days then), at CPI, I too voiced my unease in my small article
Ride the Islamic tiger, risk becoming cat food, where I said:

Since March 2008, some DAP leaders have been courting Malay voters in order to dispel the Barisan Nasional stigmatization of the DAP as a Chinese-based political party. Obviously this is necessary as more than 60% of Malaysian voters are Malays, and the DAP realizes that it can never aspire to be a significant political force without their support.

Ironically, like Lim Chin Siong, Lim Guan Eng is an incorruptible dedicated leader who too lives a personal austere Spartan lifestyle, and has shown his care for the poor and elders of Penang. These and his going to jail some years ago in seeking justice for an underage Malay girl are already redoubtable models to showcase the DAP as a worthy multi-racial party to the Malay voters.

Yet DAP has gone one step further, choosing to project itself as a pro-Islamic organization.

Guan Eng has often referred to the Caliphate of Umar Ibn Abdul Aziz as his model for a scrupulously clean and thrifty government which cares for the ordinary people, while another DAP leader Nga Kor Ming is known for spouting quotations from the Quran.

Apart from the obvious need to expand its Malay-Muslim base, there have been other compelling reasons for DAP to expedite its wooing of the Malays via the Islamic avenue. The party has been concerned about the future of Anwar Ibrahim as well as the politics of PKR.

Anwar has served a vital role as the bridge and glue for the new coalition, Pakatan Rakyat which has PAS and DAP with antipodal ideologies. If Anwar is forcefully removed from the Malaysian political landscape, it is unlikely that PKR will be able to provide a substitute of equal stature and charisma. Thus DAP has decided on the worst case scenario where it will be required to work directly with PAS. What better time than to start now, and perhaps sneak a ride on the Islamic tiger.

I ended that article with a cautionary note for DAP: Let me advice those DAP leaders who want to ride the Islamic tiger that you are unlikely to succeed!

It's consequence would not only be the riders becoming meals for a big cat but in a reiteration of my earlier remark, in a religious state, when power hungry men can overturn the tables into 'God proposes, man disposes', the potential for gross injustice cannot be understated or overestimated.

Our only protection is the current constitution and the secular civil courts, warts and all.

Of course there is another angle to DAP’s demonstration of ‘inclusiveness’. As mentioned, the majority of Malaysians are Muslim Malays, thus DAP cannot be a major political force by stupidly ignoring them. As the saying goes, if the mountain won’t come to you, then you must go to the mountain.

Facts to consider:

(a) majority of Malaysians are Muslim-Malays [including the non-Malay Muslims among the Indians, Sarawakians and Sabahans]

(b) DAP is a political party

(c) votes are absolutely essential, not only for a political party’s survival but also for its development/progression into a major political power in Malaysia

(d) while the DAP is an ally of both PKR and PAS, it cannot hinge its future solely on the goodwill and cooperation of its partners. As was seen recently, PKR nearly went into disintegration mode.

Conclusion: The DAP must, while hoping for continuous and harmonious Pakatan strength and viability, prepare for a future where it may be forced to be on its own.

For its political survival, the DAP must therefore cultivate Malay goodwill and support, while at the same time dispelling both UMNO and MCA double-barrelled black propaganda, namely, UMNO's accusations that 'DAP is an anti Malay & anti Islam party' and MCA's scare tactics that 'DAP is a pro Malay & pro Islam party'.

Rubbing cosy shoulders with PAS may be a start to its inclusiveness campaign, and should not be seen as endorsing PAS’ aim to introduce hudud laws into Malaysia’s legal system. The DAP has already and firmly stated its opposition to substituting the civil laws of this country for a religious set of laws.

But it's important that DAP leaders should also exercise sensitivity when handling issues where Malay beliefs, customs, cultural preferences, feelings and indeed fears are prevalent.

We know that Malays have very strong feelings for their rulers, religion (Islam) and traditional customs (adat), so DAP members (not just leaders) should show respect for these.

Some examples of respect would be:

(a) wearing a songkok at an official event where a ruler is present – this would be a mark of respect to both the ruler and Malay customs; similarly, female DAP members should be advised to adopt Malay custom of wearing a Malay selendang (but not an Arab headdress) when in the presence of a ruler or visiting religious venues (no difference from wearing a shawl when entering a Catholic church)

(b) while I am personally against titles, principally because the BN has cheapened the royal award system by its nonsense of recommending every towkay and who-else for a datukship, nonetheless, accepting an award from a ruler indicates respect to the sovereign ruler, more so when the award has been conferred personally by HRH.

DAP’s inclusiveness campaign should be focussed on Malays rather than Islam, though of course it’s not possible to separate the two especially in today’s climate where UMNO has heightened the politicization of Islam to such an evil extent that Juanda Jaya, the
Perlis mufti had to defend Nik Aziz over the pluralism controversy. The propaganda was so un-Islamic that Mufti Juanda was driven to decry the UMNO attackers as extremists.

Nonetheless the accent of DAP’s campaign should be on Malay customs, traditions and sensitivities.

At the end of the day, may I remind DAP members that as Malaysians we live in a country where the majority of the population are Malays. Speaking Bahasa is a given. But it’s only right that we show some respect for them and their feelings, and where it does not militate against out core values, adopt some or many of their customs and lifestyles. For example, kaytee loves to wear a sarong because it’s the world’s cheapest and most portable comfy air-conditioning wakakaka. And don't start me off on nasi lemak and the kuehs, or yummiest of all, those Penang sweeties in their sarong kebaya. ;-)

Wednesday, December 15, 2010

Conspiracy theory - LKY against Anwar Ibrahim

The swell of anger against former Singapore PM LKY for his comments, revealed through Wikileaks, that Anwar Ibrahim walked knowingly into a trap to commit sodomy has ballooned into a tsunami of conspiracy theories.

Malaysia's acrimonious relationship with Singapore, fuelled in many ways by a combination of our jealousy at their economic prowess and Singaporeans’ arrogance and selfishness, has given this topic much fertile grounds for conspiracy theories against our closest yet most despised neighbour.

Even sweetie Mariam Mokhtar, a columnist in Malaysiakini, was driven to write
Is S'pore's future in Anwar's hands? where the conclusion, or if you like, the essence of her piece was:

Just as Umno can only triumph if the 'rakyat' is kept weak, poor, corrupt and bickering over race, religion, schools and ketuanan Melayu, Singapore can only triumph if Malaysia is kept weak, poor, corrupt and bickering over race, religion, schools and ketuanan Melayu.

Both have a common goal: To keep Anwar down.

This perception of Singapore's duplicity and kaypohchnee-ness in Malaysian affairs, specifically the Anwar Ibrahim's sodomy trial, is fairly commongrounds for most Malaysians right now, but kaytee must counsel caution in making such a leap of conclusion. Let’s examine the case with more clinical and dispassionate eyes instead of outraged emotions. Admittedly this is a lot easier for me because unlike many Pakatan supporters I don’t idolize Anwar Ibrahim wakakaka.

Mind you, having said that, I did defend Anwar against those LKY’s comments in my post
Anwar Ibrahim’s Wikileaks. I am also known to be NOT an admirer to LKY as a person, though (OK) I acknowledge his brilliance as (former) Singapore PM.

Now, the circumstances (LKY stating this and that about Anwar Ibrahim) would have been indisputable grounds that Singapore’s LKY indeed has directly meddled in Malaysia’s political affairs and leadership issues, by deliberately blackening Anwar Ibrahim’s name to support Najib ….. EXCEPT for one fact and one logical deduction.

The fact is that it was a renegade Wikileaks which revealed the conversation between LKY and the Australian ONA (Office of National Assessment), not Singapore or Australia or USA or for that matter, Malaysia.

The logical deduction, from the above fact that it was Wikileaks which revealed LKY as having passed comment (and judgement) on Anwar, is that surely no one in Malaysia, Singapore, Australia, or the USA could have anticipated and thus prepared for, or 'situated' (exploited) Wikileaks’ revelation of that salacious conversation about Anwar Ibrahim.

That’s right, it’s not as if LKY had anticipated the exact (future) specifics of Wikileaks exposures, namely, that it would reveal his take on Anwar walking knowingly into a honey trap, which then led LKY to prepare for the smearing of Anwar’s name so as to enhance Najib’s position.

This would be drawing a mighty long bow. OK, but then why did LKY do it? Let me speculate.

There is much common grounds between the leaders of Singapore and Australia vis-à-vis their respective relationship with the USA. Both are small fart nations wanting to be accepted by the USA as equals, as global giants so to speak, if not in size, then in knowledge, strategies and regional intelligence, sound and reliable friends for the Yanks to consult.

Australian PMs like Bob Hawke, John Howard and Kevin Rudd (but not Paul Keating) fancied themselves as confidantes of American presidents.

As an example, examine Wikileaks’ revelation of what Kevin Rudd told Hilary Clinton (US Secretary of State), as reported by Sydney Morning Herald:

… described himself as 'a brutal realist on China' and said Australian intelligence agencies closely watched its military expansion.

… the goal must be to integrate China into the international community, 'while also preparing to deploy force if everything goes wrong’.

… characterised Chinese leaders as 'sub-rational and deeply emotional' about Taiwan.

… aid the planned build-up of Australia's navy was 'a response to China's growing ability to project force'.

Imagine Australia responding to China's growing ability to project force or preparing to deploy force if everything goes wrong wakakaka.

Of course Rudd was playing lil’ Napoleon, way above his international 'pay grade', but secretly egging the USA to do the nasty bully boy bit. But it’s a reflection of Rudd’s wannabe global leader mania. And it’s not a characteristic unique to Rudd. Some leaders of small countries closely allied to the USA have a secret wish to be seen as on par with the American president or his secretary of state.

I believe LKY was such when he ‘showed off’ his so-called intimate knowledge of Anwar Ibrahim’s sexual activities and the trap set for him, presumably by the BN. Basically I put it down as nothing more than an attempt to impress the Australians and indirectly the Americans.

Now tell me this, did this happen, the Singaporeans’ advice to the Yanks in 2008 that racial conflict was likely to break out in Malaysia, with consequential floods of Chinese Malaysian refugees swamping into Singapore?

No? Well, doesn’t that tell you the worth of those Singapore briefing to their American friends?

Trust Wikileaks to screw all of them up kau kau wakakaka.

Tuesday, December 14, 2010

Monday quickies

... :( but alas, posted only on Tuesday - wakakaka (problems with my Internet)

(1) Muhyiddin: MPs need to up quality of debates.

OK, but debates (let alone quality ones) will only possible if the BN-appointed Speaker allows them to speak, or in Perak, doesn't switch off the Pakatan ADUNs' mikes

Azmin promises 'full autonomy' for Sarawak.

Autonomy aside, did he believe he's the PM designate?

WikiLeaks: Anwar walked into sex trap, says Kuan Yew.

I just wonder who Dr M will side - LKY who said Anwar did it, or Anwar Ibrahim who said he didn't? wakakaka

Update (with news on Monday night): Surprise surprise, Dr M believes LKY but corrected the latter by saying it was not a horny honey trap

CJ: Plea bargaining on the cards.

In the USA, plea bargaining has sometimes resulted in an innocent person going to jail for a few years so as to avoid the threat of life imprisonment or death sentence, so why import a terrible American system? Just to meet KPIs?

Ibrahim Ali: I'm back, alive and kicking.

Huh? Did you go away? How can we miss you if you don’t!

Sunday, December 12, 2010

Anwar Ibrahim's Wikileaks

I read the news yesterday, and it’s an aspect of Anwar Ibrahim I have never really been interested in, well, for a couple of reasons. One, so long as it was consensual between adults then it bothers me not; two, it’s news that came about from a series of “I was told by …, who was told by …, who heard it from …, “ so it’s technically not factual, hearsay evidence so to speak. So what’s the big deal?

But undoubtedly it’s humongous news in Malaysia, depressingly so for the PKR camp and maybe a joyful revelation for BN.

But let’s examine in more details where or who the source was. The Yanks heard it from the Aussies; the Aussies heard it from the Sings, in particular LKY; the Sings claimed they extracted it from ‘technical’ intelligence, meaning electronic interception or even land line eavesdropping.

[don’t think the Sings are above that; my Uncs told me that in earlier days, Malaysian military people on holidays in Sing had their briefcases, suitcases and bags covertly opened if these were left unattended in hotel rooms. How did they know? Some played James Bond wakakaka].

As Anwar himself said, the source could well be Special Branch (SB). Disinformation by the SB means they deliberately issued a transmission, knowing it would be intercepted (and wanting it to be intercepted), that carried the so-called 'intelligence'.

So that disinformation could have been one of the following:

(a) S: “Datuk, he shacked me liao” on a cell phone, or
(b) MH: “Dapat dia. Dia dah hentam S sehingga sai (sh*t) pun ta’ada lagi”
(c) etc.

But if that’s the case, and the act was penetrated perpetuated, then why have the court and government medical examiner been playing silly buggers in refusing to provide Anwar’s lawyers with access to the medical records, etc. Their unfair actions have lent the public the impression they don’t have a leg in their case to stand on.

Thus I am inclined to believe that more need to be investigated, that is, assuming you’re interested in that sort of stuff.

Mind you, the above arguments doesn't mean I support Anwar Ibrahim wakakaka. I just want to be fair.

Saturday, December 11, 2010

Is defence spending justified?

Malaysiakini - No parliamentary oversight on runaway defence spending.
In the above news article, Kua Kia Soong, the Suaram director and academician who wrote 'Questioning Arms Spending in Malaysia', described the arms race in the region as both wasteful and futile.

According to him, many Asean countries, but particularly Malaysia, has been on an arms race since the end of Cold War.

“Since the early 1990s, the Asean countries have been the only region in the world where defence spending has increased by more than 10 percent since the end of Cold War,” he said at a forum entitled 'Towards an Alternative Defence Policy and a Culture of Peace' which was held in conjunction with the book launch.

Kua also said: RM1 billion worth of arms is equivalent to building at least 100 hospitals or 1,000 new schools or 10,000 new houses.

Do you know that since Independence in 1957 – after more than 50 years - there has not been a single new Chinese or Tamil primary school built? In fact we had more Chinese and Tamil primary schools then (1,350 and 880 respectively) compared to the present (1,285 and 550 schools respectively). And the population at Independence was only half what it is today.

But in one weekend alone in April 2010, the government could justify spending RM10 billion on arms at the Kuala Lumpur Defence Fair. With that money, we could have built 1,000 hospitals or 10,000 schools or 100,000 houses!

I find it very difficult to assess his article as a whole because there are several separate issues mixed up together, for example, Kua talked about:

(1) RM1 billion worth of arms is equivalent to building at least 100 hospitals or 1,000 new schools or 10,000 new houses. Chinese and Tamil schools have reduced in numbers while the population has doubled.

In this, I totally agree with him on both, what RM1 billion can do, and the marginalization of vernacular schools. But let’s not mix defence spending up with civil infrastructure or the BN government's neglect of vernacular education, though I appreciate of course Kua was trying to higlight the 'waste' of the former. It should be a separate subject. In an ideal world our billions we allocate for defence should be used instead for building schools and hospitals. But unfortunately we live in a violent, selfish and greedy world.

(2) Corruption involved in defence spending – see separate MKINI article Defence Ministry goes on a spending spree. There have been and will be various forms of corruption, from:

(a) humongous ‘commission’ (for no or little work done, a la the Selangor hospital project),

(b) large sums for substandard products - manufacturer merely passes on ‘commission’ sums {see paragraph (a) above} by either substracting same from the cost for the products which means it gives us a cheaper and thus inferior product to what we pay for, or adding same to the cost of the product which means we pay a far higher price than we should for the product - eg. RM700 million extra for the submarines.

(c) directorship of military-industrial complexes for retired generals and senior civil servants or retired politicians who kowtim (okay-ed) the choice and purchases, to

(d) ownership of agencies supplying spares for purchased aircraft or ships or vehicles - one of the most guaranteed and lucrative contracts, etc.

Again, I totally agree with Dr Kua. This explains why our defence budget is way too bloody high and why at the same time we usually received substandard products for it.

Thus I support the musing of Subang MP R Sivarasa who lamented the absence of a parliamentary standing committee to oversight the considerable military spending.

He said: “Among the many dysfunctional institutions in Malaysia, one of them is the Parliament. Yes, we are supposed to debate the defence expenditure, but the government can always bulldoze it through.”
(3) However, I believe Kua has been incorrect to describe Malaysia’s armed purchases as a futile arms race by comparing it to the gargantuan defence expenditures of China, S Korea, Japan and India. He stated that each of their respective aircraft procurement budgets would dwarf that of all of Southeast Asia combined.

He cried: “Given the disparity in defence budgets, Asean countries cannot be said to engage in an arms race against regional powers like India or China. It would not be a race.”

No, Asean countries aren’t competing with the biggies. Kua has been wrong in this respect, to imagine Malaysia is competing with, for example, China or India. Those are major if not super powers, giant sharks like the USA.

In fact they are less dangerous than the USA. The USA has eleven nuclear-powered aircraft carriers with several complementary amphibious fleets and a capacity to wage wars at the international level in two separate theatres, and thus the only major power in the world to have an invasive force, by amphibious or air or combined operations, backed by a monstrous worldwide logistic capability.

We aren’t worried about the biggies. If the unthinkable happens, and say, the USA invades us, we retreat to the jungles and hills and copycat the Vietnamese. The Yanks won’t like that. The Chinese or Indians don’t have a US-like invasion capability nor secure logistic lines to sustain any invasion of Malaysia, assuming they would even try that in the first place.

Malaysia is a mere ikan bilis military power, but an ikan bilis has its natural predators.

Who then are our threats. For a start, let’s leave out Singapore as a potential enemy which seems to unduly worry many Malaysians, especially Malays. Singapore would be nuts to invade Malaysia, because it’ll at the same time destroy all it has built up for itself, as a First World economy and international financial and shipping centre. It is as dependent on Malaysia as we're on it.

Singapore merely postures its military might as a deterrent, telling its neighbours not to threaten it as it has a heavy bite. Naturally vis-a-vis Malaysia, it doesn’t want its water supply curtailed, nor will it tolerate its vital sea lanes being threatened. In the latter, it has allied itself with the USA to ensure (okay, let’s be blunt and call a spade a spade) Indonesia behaves itself.

We can also dismiss Thailand or Vietnam as potential and immediate threats. The communication and logistic lines are far too daunting for any ambitious Thai or Viet Napoleon. Besides Thailand has its own humongous internal problems to address, and I cannot see a war weary Vietnam trying to rebuild its country and economy back to normal out for mischievous and expensive adventure.

Now, I am not sure whether Kua is plain naïve or just from the looney far left who only wants to build schools, universities, hospitals and aged homes, when he stated: ... although the last war against the Indonesian 'Confrontation' was over more than 40 years ago, the government has continued to make available ample funds for the defence minister to purchase state-of-the-art defence equipment.

Defence planning is always about the future. Malaysia cannot wait until a new Konfrontasi occurs before we rush off to buy weapons. If we do that, then we certainly will need all the hospitals Kua wants the defence budget to go to. Lots of war cemeteries will be necessary too.

Malaysia is a littoral state with one of the longest coastline in the world, around the Peninsula and that in the east, from Tanjung Datu in the extreme west of Sarawak running all the way to Tawau in Sabah. We also have the most porous borders with Indonesia and Philippines.

In recent times, we have significantly serious disagreements with Indonesia over some islands and their potential for fossil fuel deposits. Illegal migrants slipping through the Sarawak/Sabah borders with Philippines and especially Indonesia can only get worse, if the illegal migrants were not economic migrants but instead trained and armed troops in mufti.

We badly need more patrol boats for both the Straits of Malacca and the north and eastern parts of Sabah, and surveillance along the Sarawak/Sabah borders with both Indonesia and Philippines. Essentially, we require helicopters, patrol boats, surveillance aircraft (both manned and drones), troops trained for jungle warfare, first class communication, logistics and good intelligence.

Alas, we cannot do without fighter aircraft for protection of our ground and sea operations. Land and sea forces will be highly vulnerable without air superiority. So we are talking about an arms race between ourselves and Indonesia or Philippines.

I think Philippines would have lots of problems in trying to better us (financial problems and its own preoccupation with the southern Muslim insurgencies) so our main threat, much as the government may not wish to publicly acknowledge, is Indonesia.

As long as Indonesia is well off and prospering, it won’t bother us. But once it has internal problems it will need an external enemy to divert its people’s attention, as the recent Bentera hooligans and once Soekarno had attempted.

No Dr Kua, we certainly require arms. Besides, old war horses like the Nuris and MIG 29s need to be replaced. Perhaps the MIG 29s can be refurbished to last for another decade. Look, I won’t go into the nitty gritty but suffice to say, we don’t live in an ideal world.

And yes I agree with you, we dread and anticipate the corruption that will underlie or is already underlying our military spending. We are trapped between the Scylla of not (or under) preparing for the defence of our national interests and the Charybdis of unmitigated corruption in our defence spending.

US hypocrisy in freedom of expression

From Sydney Morning Herald Mike Carlton dripped with sarcasm at the hypocrisy of the US government in the following:


Lost in the global uproar over Julian Assange and the WikiLeaks horror, there was some good news from Washington. The US will host World Press Freedom Day in May, an exciting event with the catchy slogan "New Frontiers, New Barriers''.

Tuesday's announcement from the State Department's chief huckster, one P.J. Crowley, scaled the heights of irony. It deserves quoting. "The United States places technology and innovation at the forefront of its diplomatic and development efforts," he said.

"New media has [sic] empowered citizens around the world to report on their circumstances, express opinions on world events and exchange information in environments sometimes hostile to such exercises of individuals' right to freedom of expression.

"At the same time, we are concerned about the determination of some governments to censor and silence individuals and to restrict the free flow of information. We mark events such as World Press Freedom Day in the context of our enduring commitment to support and expand press freedom and the free flow of information in this digital age."

Fabulous. Empowered citizens! The free flow of information! The trumpeting of these lofty ideals must come as a huge relief to Our Julian and his legions of supporters who fear - with reason - that the US wants him dead for those very sins.


Friday, December 10, 2010

Zahid Hamidi slept with an Indian

One month ago I posted Patriotism - a useful UMNO word where I wrote: Defence Minister Zahid Hamidi stated in response to a question in Parliament that the low number of Chinese and Indian recruits in the military could be due to the Chinese and Indians [being] 'not patriotic enough'.

Zahid Hamidi, once a very close ally of Anwar Ibrahim and the man who accused Dr Mahathir of corruption and cronyism in an apparent impatient move by the Anwar faction in UMNO to nudge then-PM Dr M out for Anwar’s final ascendancy to the PM’s post, but who has since abandoned his allegiance to Anwar to be allied to Najib, is hardly an appropriate person to talk about patriotism or loyalty. But Zahid is certainly the very model of treachery in UMNO or, if one really wants to be kind to him, a mercenary unprincipled opportunist.

DAP’s Kulasegaran was the man who called Zahid a patriot coward wakakaka when he scooted out of the Dewan Rakyat to evade opposition questions after delivering his 'non-Malays lack spirit of patriotism' controversy.

Since then, Zahid has made some half-hearted back-down, trying to spin his way out of his self created bigoted mess in much the same way as he had spun his way back into mainstream UMNO after deserting the Anwar Ibrahim camp.

Clever bloke and a potential general in the art of tactical redeployment wakakaka.

Yesterday in Parliament, Kulasegaran latched on to him and fired several barrage of HE (high explosive) artillery shells, passing a motion to deduct a symbolic but very indicting RM10 from Zahid’s pay. That forced Zahid to come out in girlish defence of his 1Malaysia credentials. Why ‘girlish’? I’ll come to that shortly.

After reversing his earlier comment on non-Malays lacking spirit of patriotism, and in a shameless 180 degrees direction, praising the contribution of non-Malays in the armed forces during the emergency period and the Indonesian confrontation (he failed to mention their contributions on overseas missions) who had “given their limbs and lives for this beloved country”, Zahid claimed the
following as proof that he wasn’t racist:

"I have many Indian and Chinese friends and voters in my area who are non-Malays. Did you ever have friend in university who are not of your race?

"I used to share a room in the dorm with an Indian, in my final year in University Malaya. I shared a room with an Indian."

The roar of wakakaka’s from the opposition bench shook the foundations of the already unstable Parliament building. Kula sneeringly commented: "What does that have to do with anything? That does not explain the statement you made as a minister."

I too have been overwhelmed by a bout of heavy wakakaka-ing at Zahid’s resort to a very girlish reply.

Two years ago, as I posted in
Racist Malaysians, a sweetie blogger by the name of (ironically) Sammy wakakaka (no relation to that Samy), made a very hurtful racist comment against Indians. I wrote:

Blogger Sammy, alas a sweetie, of Life is a Drama is certainly living up to her motto of ‘A life without a dash of conflict and colour will not be a complete one’, except she chose the theme of colour a wee too literally, and consequentially is now reaping the ugly conflict.

According to Malaysiakini, Sammy went ballistic when two alleged Indian youths snatched her mobile phone left on a table while she was having lunch. She did the silly thing by resorting to cynical stereotyping of Indians in the worst ways, and then made things worse for herself by posting the entire racist raving rant on her blog. […]

After she had ‘woken’ up from her rage she realized the enormity of what she had done and apologized, but when I read her blog this afternoon I thought she could have closed the whole issue (or at least most of it) by making an unreserved apology, instead of qualifying it by stating she apologized to ‘educated’ Indians, whatever that meant.

Much later in another post she admitted being told that her apology had been ‘grudging’. She posted:

I realised this is getting way out of hand. I was also dubbed as 'grudgingly apologised' in my later post. Since text has no tone and emotions, I don't know how to make it sound sincere but I do hope to get this out as sincere as I can. Again, I will apologise and say sorry to those I've offended, Indian or no Indian. I hope this official apology does not sound 'grudgy' again.

I was not racist and was acting out of my anger the last few days. If i've to face the police, then yes i will to explain the whole situation. If i were to hate indians, I would not wear saree on my Indian friend's birthday party because that would be ridiculous.

Sammy’s proof of her non-racist attitude towards Indians was that she wore a saree, not unlike Zahid’s sharing a room with an Indian. That’s why I said Zahid was ‘girlish’. Pity Zahid didn’t claim he wore a dhoti wakakaka.

But at least Sammy unlike Zahid made a full apology the second time.

But it’s amazing that these people dare expect us to accept their claims of mere superficialities as proof that they aren’t bigots. It certainly reflected on the superficial nature of their characters.