I know I’ll be banging my head against a steel-reinforced wall when I say I agree with Dr Mahathir’s statement wakakaka, as reported in The Malaysian Insider:
Malaysia was a more democratic country than Singapore, and argued that the island republic’s “disciplined” image was at the expense of the freedom of its citizens.
Dr Mahathir had said the reason why Malaysians were not as disciplined as Singaporeans was because Malaysia did not resort to extreme measures in governing the country.
Now, don’t confuse the non-corruptibility of the Singapore government with greater democracy. There’s no denying that on a scale of 1 to 10 for non-corruptibility (with 10 being excellent), Singapore as one of the 3 top national authorities in the world to be 'cleanest', the Island State certainly merits a 10.
Alas, I am far too embarrassed to rate Malaysia at all. The corruption of the government and its agencies is just pathetic, and worse, with the lil’ Napoleons (officials) not ashamed of or even arrogant in their malfeasance.
But when it comes to democratic practices, Malaysia, warts and all, is by far superior. Mind you, it's just relative.
The reason for this seeming incongruity is that a long long time ago, LKY and his cabinet decided for a Singapore without any resources other than its people, and which aspires to survive by becoming a financial centre, not just of the region but one of the tops in the world, and a shipping, trading, commercial etc centre, it has to be absolutely squeaky clean, a bastion of law and order and super efficient in every which way to assure, motivate and encourage foreign investments and the use of the island as their regional base.
LKY being LKY, intellectually arrogant as a father-who-knows-best for his Sing children went about ruthlessly achieving that status. Any namby pamby opposition would be crushed if they stand in his way towards achieving this planned status. And just as an example of its assurance to western investors that law & order would be its hallmark, many years ago it even allowed western lawyers to practise in Singapore. Another step in its wish to be a serious global competitor was its non-nationalistic policy of (deliberately) having foreign (orang putih) pilots in SIA, because this would provide assurance to the much needed orang putih passengers.
Malaysia was at its economic peak when we had Dr Mahathir as the PM. Now, did he go about ensuring a Malaysia that was squeaky clean, a bastion of law and order and super efficient in every which way?
I think in some ways, the abundance of our non-human resources has lulled him and his government into neglect in the above fields. Why bother whether foreign investors want to come or not? They can f*-off if they didn’t like our style of government. Result? A typical example in stark contrast to the Sing's practice was our very own amazing Adorna shame, where the judiciary and the ruling it passed disgracefully supported fraud and wholesale cheating.
Of course it cannot be denied that the Malaysian government always have a far more difficult job to do than the Sing’s. There’s social engineering to consider, as in the various reincarnations of the NEP and its various permutations in the implementation. Also, there are far too many political warlords to appease.
Additionally, Dr Mahathir was personally driven by an obsessed fear, that the Malays won’t be masters in their own land. I have a lot of sympathy for his fear but I think his tactics to address this fear (his strategy) were flawed. Yes, his strategy was noble but his tactics weren't.
One of his tactics was to choose a bunch of Malay entrepreneurs to fast track achievement of his strategy, but those wonders let him down, humongously. He compounded the flaw by not getting rid of them. Instead he molly coddled them, and they responded by going into greater disasters. He allowed his fear to blind him into not seeing his chosen ones were far from qualified for the roles he assigned to, or provided for them. His generals let him down badly in the field.
Coming to democracy, because of a ‘relat lah’ attitude, unlike LKY’s uptight don’t-f*-around-with-father-knows-best mentality, I dare say that was what made Malaysia far more democratic in many ways than Singapore.
But as I said, don’t confuse Singapore’s super-duper efficiency and non-corruptibility with greater democracy.
Monday, January 31, 2011
Saturday, January 29, 2011
Gobalakrishnan leaves the poison behind
So the virtually impossible has happened - Gobalakrishnan, once PKR’s chief bodek-er of Anwar, has resigned from PKR in disgust. Who would have ever predicted this prior to the recent party polls - a poll which had led many party stalwarts as well as notable and neutral socio-political observers to question the integrity of its process.
Silence from the party leaders, or their caught-with-pants-down inability to reply the challenges by the complainants have invited the inevitable destructive implosion.
And instead of pressuring the party leaders to be fully accountable, predictably, the moronic PKR fanatics lambasted Gobala as a snake, frog, UMNO-MIC mole, running dog and with various animal appellations. Will they do likewise to other complainants like Chegubard, Jonson Chong, Mustaffa Kamil as they did to Zaid Ibrahim, Gobala, Nallakaruppan, etc?
As I mentioned in my previous post The Poison within PKR - Part III:
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.
and also
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 vs 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.
Just double-standard fanatics, blind to their own follies, without the ability to think independently.
I believe it has been Anwar’s blind devotion for and non-negotiable support of Azmin Ali that have fermented the poison within PKR which will eventually kill the party off like Roundup does for lallangs.
Yes, perhaps Gobala may not be an intellectual, as some snobs in PKR suggested and thus better out of the party, but how many intellectuals does PKR have? Is Azmin Ali an intellectual? wakakaka! In reality he is nothing more than a pretty boy, a relative lightweight in the intellect department. His only strength in PKR is that Anwar Ibrahim backs him up 101% - nothing else.
Gobala was a loyal PKR member and an erstwhile staunch supporter of Anwar Ibrahim. The reason for him leaving PKR with such anger is no different to that of Nallakaruppan, where Anwar and the party had done him grave injustices. For Gobala, they were a mix, namely, the questionable party polling process and the refusal or inability of the party leaders to answer the challenges of the complainants, the deliberate snubbing of him in favour of Surendran (showing PKR's double standard where Surendran is okay as a parachutist but not so for Zaid Ibrahim), the outrageous 45-page show-cause letter with a demand to respond within an unreasonable 7 days, etc. Any reasonable man would have been driven off by such rot.
Gobala wasn’t the first to exit PKR with animosity; he won’t be the last. So, will you anwaristas again blame those who leave, or will you open your eyes wide and recognize the Anwar-Azmin poison? It's time PKR members wake up from their mesmerized hypnotized hallucinations, and stop imagining your icon and his blue-eye boy are infallible.
Silence from the party leaders, or their caught-with-pants-down inability to reply the challenges by the complainants have invited the inevitable destructive implosion.
And instead of pressuring the party leaders to be fully accountable, predictably, the moronic PKR fanatics lambasted Gobala as a snake, frog, UMNO-MIC mole, running dog and with various animal appellations. Will they do likewise to other complainants like Chegubard, Jonson Chong, Mustaffa Kamil as they did to Zaid Ibrahim, Gobala, Nallakaruppan, etc?
As I mentioned in my previous post The Poison within PKR - Part III:
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.
and also
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 vs 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.
Just double-standard fanatics, blind to their own follies, without the ability to think independently.
I believe it has been Anwar’s blind devotion for and non-negotiable support of Azmin Ali that have fermented the poison within PKR which will eventually kill the party off like Roundup does for lallangs.
Yes, perhaps Gobala may not be an intellectual, as some snobs in PKR suggested and thus better out of the party, but how many intellectuals does PKR have? Is Azmin Ali an intellectual? wakakaka! In reality he is nothing more than a pretty boy, a relative lightweight in the intellect department. His only strength in PKR is that Anwar Ibrahim backs him up 101% - nothing else.
Gobala was a loyal PKR member and an erstwhile staunch supporter of Anwar Ibrahim. The reason for him leaving PKR with such anger is no different to that of Nallakaruppan, where Anwar and the party had done him grave injustices. For Gobala, they were a mix, namely, the questionable party polling process and the refusal or inability of the party leaders to answer the challenges of the complainants, the deliberate snubbing of him in favour of Surendran (showing PKR's double standard where Surendran is okay as a parachutist but not so for Zaid Ibrahim), the outrageous 45-page show-cause letter with a demand to respond within an unreasonable 7 days, etc. Any reasonable man would have been driven off by such rot.
Gobala wasn’t the first to exit PKR with animosity; he won’t be the last. So, will you anwaristas again blame those who leave, or will you open your eyes wide and recognize the Anwar-Azmin poison? It's time PKR members wake up from their mesmerized hypnotized hallucinations, and stop imagining your icon and his blue-eye boy are infallible.
Friday, January 28, 2011
Anwar Ibrahim's terrorist links?
Malaysiakini - Hisham: Cops probing Anwar's 'terror links'
Anwar Ibrahim's terrorist links? Talk of town?
You know something - kaytee believes that in Malaysia, where we haven't suffered any terrorist bombing (praise be to Allah swt, Jehovah, Siva, Vishnu and the Jade Emperor), the allusion (not yet an accusation) to Anwar Ibrahim having some form of links to Islamist terrorists, whether true or otherwise, won't do him any harm in the heartland. It may yet earn him some sympathies or even admiration.
And he doesn't have to worry about the non-BN Chinese, because they don't believe it anyway.
kaytee reckons it's a non-issue, with even a plus point for Anwar in the heartland.
And the westerners don't vote here anywhere, wakakaka!
Anwar Ibrahim's terrorist links? Talk of town?
You know something - kaytee believes that in Malaysia, where we haven't suffered any terrorist bombing (praise be to Allah swt, Jehovah, Siva, Vishnu and the Jade Emperor), the allusion (not yet an accusation) to Anwar Ibrahim having some form of links to Islamist terrorists, whether true or otherwise, won't do him any harm in the heartland. It may yet earn him some sympathies or even admiration.
And he doesn't have to worry about the non-BN Chinese, because they don't believe it anyway.
kaytee reckons it's a non-issue, with even a plus point for Anwar in the heartland.
And the westerners don't vote here anywhere, wakakaka!
Thursday, January 27, 2011
RCI for Teoh BH's death - Najib fighting against public perception
Obviously PM Najib Razak must have sensed the political dangers of allowing the Teoh Beng Hock’s unsolved death to become a weighty millstone around his neck …
… which has been why he subsequently changed the terms of reference of the Royal Commission of Inquiry (RCI) to include the examining of the cause of Teoh's death, a term of reference which was neon-light conspicious by its very absence in the original terms of reference, alluding to the government deliberate avoidance of it ...
... but which becomes absolutely necessary when the inquest issued an unbelievable open verdict of ‘dunno’. As former MCA president Ong Tee Keat had written in a letter to Malaysiakini (extracts):
The loss of life, especially while in the custody of government enforcement officials, is always a serious matter of public concern.
There cannot be no answers for this particular case.
It's simply not acceptable that one can die in the MACC's custody without knowing what had happened.
Teoh voluntarily stepped into the Selangor Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC)'s office to give a statement as a witness. He failed to come out alive, while under MACC's custody.
Regardless of the facts, the public believes, especially in the light of the tap dancing verdict by the coronial inquest, the harassment of the Thai pathologist Dr Pornthirp, and the initial & limited terms of reference for the RCI, the government is hiding something, protecting someone and avoiding the truth.
The revised and expanded terms of reference has ameliorated this suspicion somewhat, but only slightly.
What is denying the Teoh family full satisfaction has been the composition of the RCI. As The Malaysian Insider pointed out in its editorial today Ensuring justice for Teoh Beng Hock:
All those named to the panel headed by Federal Court judge Tan Sri James Foong are people who are still serving in the government service. None are from outside the service as has been done in previous royal panels. Justice must be seen to be done. So it is hard to understand why no representative from the Bar Council or respected individuals are on the panel.
In other words, people who could (and the public suspicion is, they would) be beholden to the government, as the magistrate of the inquest, the government pathologists and the police have been suspected by the public to be, rightly or wrongly. And the street axiom about “never hold an inquiry unless you already know the finding” is already running wild among the public. Such is the public distrust of the BN government
The Malaysian Insider’s editorial continues:
Perhaps it’s too early to judge the panel but the collection of judges, former judges and civil servants will have to show that they are interested in giving justice for Teoh Beng Hock, his family, the MACC and the country.
The thing is in the US, Australia and the United Kingdom, the presence of judges or former judges guarantees independence and impartiality. Unfortunately the judiciary in Malaysia has been under a dark cloud since 1988. Thus there is a danger that justice might not be served. This is something for the Najib administration to consider.
The editorial says succinctly what has on our minds.
The Teoh family after consulting 126 NGOs had earlier proposed (a) former national police chief Tun Hanif Omar, (b) former Bar Council president Datuk Ambiga Sreenevasan, (c) former Court of Appeal judge NH Chan, and (d) former Deputy Prime Minister Tun Musa Hitam. But Najib has failed to appoint even one of them to the RCI. Why?
Surely these four are Malaysian luminaries with impeccable credentials and reputations of integrity, with even an UMNO man in Musa Hitam. The only person, also of exceptional integrity and courage, former Justice NH Chan, may perhaps be seen by the Najib administration as being anti-government. If that is the case, kaytee suggests he be replaced by former Justice Gopal Sri Ram, who is also retired.
But the other three are highly respected people and should be included in the RCI. Teoh Lee Lan, the late Beng Hock’s intrepid sister, has called upon Najib to expand the RCI into a commission of nine by including the four outstanding citizens.
If Najib doesn’t, then there is going to be suspicions on the RCI findings, unfair as this may be to the five current appointees. Nosirree, Najib, the millstone isn’t going to go away unless you satisfy the Teoh family’s very reasonable request.
… which has been why he subsequently changed the terms of reference of the Royal Commission of Inquiry (RCI) to include the examining of the cause of Teoh's death, a term of reference which was neon-light conspicious by its very absence in the original terms of reference, alluding to the government deliberate avoidance of it ...
... but which becomes absolutely necessary when the inquest issued an unbelievable open verdict of ‘dunno’. As former MCA president Ong Tee Keat had written in a letter to Malaysiakini (extracts):
The loss of life, especially while in the custody of government enforcement officials, is always a serious matter of public concern.
There cannot be no answers for this particular case.
It's simply not acceptable that one can die in the MACC's custody without knowing what had happened.
Teoh voluntarily stepped into the Selangor Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC)'s office to give a statement as a witness. He failed to come out alive, while under MACC's custody.
Regardless of the facts, the public believes, especially in the light of the tap dancing verdict by the coronial inquest, the harassment of the Thai pathologist Dr Pornthirp, and the initial & limited terms of reference for the RCI, the government is hiding something, protecting someone and avoiding the truth.
The revised and expanded terms of reference has ameliorated this suspicion somewhat, but only slightly.
What is denying the Teoh family full satisfaction has been the composition of the RCI. As The Malaysian Insider pointed out in its editorial today Ensuring justice for Teoh Beng Hock:
All those named to the panel headed by Federal Court judge Tan Sri James Foong are people who are still serving in the government service. None are from outside the service as has been done in previous royal panels. Justice must be seen to be done. So it is hard to understand why no representative from the Bar Council or respected individuals are on the panel.
In other words, people who could (and the public suspicion is, they would) be beholden to the government, as the magistrate of the inquest, the government pathologists and the police have been suspected by the public to be, rightly or wrongly. And the street axiom about “never hold an inquiry unless you already know the finding” is already running wild among the public. Such is the public distrust of the BN government
The Malaysian Insider’s editorial continues:
Perhaps it’s too early to judge the panel but the collection of judges, former judges and civil servants will have to show that they are interested in giving justice for Teoh Beng Hock, his family, the MACC and the country.
The thing is in the US, Australia and the United Kingdom, the presence of judges or former judges guarantees independence and impartiality. Unfortunately the judiciary in Malaysia has been under a dark cloud since 1988. Thus there is a danger that justice might not be served. This is something for the Najib administration to consider.
The editorial says succinctly what has on our minds.
The Teoh family after consulting 126 NGOs had earlier proposed (a) former national police chief Tun Hanif Omar, (b) former Bar Council president Datuk Ambiga Sreenevasan, (c) former Court of Appeal judge NH Chan, and (d) former Deputy Prime Minister Tun Musa Hitam. But Najib has failed to appoint even one of them to the RCI. Why?
Surely these four are Malaysian luminaries with impeccable credentials and reputations of integrity, with even an UMNO man in Musa Hitam. The only person, also of exceptional integrity and courage, former Justice NH Chan, may perhaps be seen by the Najib administration as being anti-government. If that is the case, kaytee suggests he be replaced by former Justice Gopal Sri Ram, who is also retired.
But the other three are highly respected people and should be included in the RCI. Teoh Lee Lan, the late Beng Hock’s intrepid sister, has called upon Najib to expand the RCI into a commission of nine by including the four outstanding citizens.
If Najib doesn’t, then there is going to be suspicions on the RCI findings, unfair as this may be to the five current appointees. Nosirree, Najib, the millstone isn’t going to go away unless you satisfy the Teoh family’s very reasonable request.
Wednesday, January 26, 2011
Obama the Israeli whore
Thanks to his hypocrisy and cowardly cringe to Israel, President Barack Obama has betrayed the Palestinian authority (Fatah), who has once again been marginalized by the US to be made subservient to the Israeli overlord. In turn Fatah has betrayed the Palestinian people to serve its own party political interests, in acts reminiscent of quislings, collaborators and running dogs.
Read the Palestinian Papers which tell us all about the useless US-sponsored pseudo-negotiations between an Israel, backed blindly by the US, and the Palestinians (Fatah) forced to the negotiating table (knowing they won’t get anything from the Israelis) just for Obama’s photo-op self aggrandizing glory. Fatah had to obey or else. Learn of Fatah's sad selfish treachery to its own Palestinian people.
In particular, read Deep frustration with Obama, where the US President showed he has been worse than the Bush Administration, refusing to honour even one of the previous Administration’s key promises to the Palestinians, that of the 1967 cease-fire line as the basic starting point for negotiations.
The Obama Administration forced the Palestinian Authority to negotiate from the current situation where Israel has already illegally gobbled up vast tracts of the West Bank to turn into Jewish settlements, as well as manipulated through purchases and illegal actions, to grab the majority of the areas around Jerusalem.
It has been precisely this sort of sickening US bias (for Israel and against the Palestinians) that there can be no any useful Israeli-Palestinian negotiations, or will there ever be one. Also, the USA cannot be considered as an impartial broker, ever!
Because of this invincible US bias, Robert Grenier, a former CIA operative drafted a notional letter for President Obama to send to the Israeli people, to inform them that the USA will henceforth withdraw from ever mediating in any negotiations between them and the Palestinians.
As an example of Grenier's succinct points in the notional letter on why the US is not (and can never be) an impartial broker of peace between the Israelis and Palestinians, he mentioned (just extracts):
It pains me to make this admission. But the clear and sustained record of the last 63 years, greatly amplified in the last 20, tells us that the passionate attachment to Israel of many of my fellow citizens, however noble and well-intentioned, has blinded us, and has made us incapable of defending either our interests or yours.
He also chided Israel for its brutal arrogance (extracts):
In fact, the peace process, as currently understood, has already ended. A two-state solution in the Holy Land is no longer possible. The policy of creating settlements throughout the West Bank, illegal under international law, has had its intended effect. […]
Moreover, I must tell you, again as a friend, that there lurks in these formulations, in the linking of citizenship and race, and in the insistence of some on gaining recognition of Israel as a “Jewish state,” a grave danger – not a physical one, but a moral one. The strength of Israel and its legitimacy in the community of nations rests not on its military might, but on the humane and democratic values which it has always espoused – even if, where some are concerned, those values are observed in the breach.
Now, recent revelations tell us that the head of your largest political party, and a long term participant in negotiations with the Palestinians, has made clear that a redrawing of the 1967 borders would perhaps not be a simple matter of trading land for occupied territory annexed by Israel, but instead a sinister effort to rid Israel of a significant number of its Arab citizens, by transferring the territory they inhabit, without their consent, to a newly-created country. This is unworthy of you, and leaders who promote such ideas betray your values. Indeed, they pose a dire threat to the moral legitimacy of the state.
The Israelis are just like Nazis.
Read his proposed notional letter for the US president in full here - A letter to the Israeli people.
According to Wikipedia, Robert Grenier is a longtime CIA officer who served as the CIA's top counter-terrorism official for about a year, was fired from that position on 6 February 2006 by CIA director Porter Goss, because (as reported by the London Sunday Times he opposed detaining Al-Qaeda suspects in secret prisons abroad, sending them to other countries for interrogation and using forms of torture such as 'water boarding'.
Read the Palestinian Papers which tell us all about the useless US-sponsored pseudo-negotiations between an Israel, backed blindly by the US, and the Palestinians (Fatah) forced to the negotiating table (knowing they won’t get anything from the Israelis) just for Obama’s photo-op self aggrandizing glory. Fatah had to obey or else. Learn of Fatah's sad selfish treachery to its own Palestinian people.
In particular, read Deep frustration with Obama, where the US President showed he has been worse than the Bush Administration, refusing to honour even one of the previous Administration’s key promises to the Palestinians, that of the 1967 cease-fire line as the basic starting point for negotiations.
The Obama Administration forced the Palestinian Authority to negotiate from the current situation where Israel has already illegally gobbled up vast tracts of the West Bank to turn into Jewish settlements, as well as manipulated through purchases and illegal actions, to grab the majority of the areas around Jerusalem.
It has been precisely this sort of sickening US bias (for Israel and against the Palestinians) that there can be no any useful Israeli-Palestinian negotiations, or will there ever be one. Also, the USA cannot be considered as an impartial broker, ever!
Because of this invincible US bias, Robert Grenier, a former CIA operative drafted a notional letter for President Obama to send to the Israeli people, to inform them that the USA will henceforth withdraw from ever mediating in any negotiations between them and the Palestinians.
As an example of Grenier's succinct points in the notional letter on why the US is not (and can never be) an impartial broker of peace between the Israelis and Palestinians, he mentioned (just extracts):
It pains me to make this admission. But the clear and sustained record of the last 63 years, greatly amplified in the last 20, tells us that the passionate attachment to Israel of many of my fellow citizens, however noble and well-intentioned, has blinded us, and has made us incapable of defending either our interests or yours.
He also chided Israel for its brutal arrogance (extracts):
In fact, the peace process, as currently understood, has already ended. A two-state solution in the Holy Land is no longer possible. The policy of creating settlements throughout the West Bank, illegal under international law, has had its intended effect. […]
Moreover, I must tell you, again as a friend, that there lurks in these formulations, in the linking of citizenship and race, and in the insistence of some on gaining recognition of Israel as a “Jewish state,” a grave danger – not a physical one, but a moral one. The strength of Israel and its legitimacy in the community of nations rests not on its military might, but on the humane and democratic values which it has always espoused – even if, where some are concerned, those values are observed in the breach.
Now, recent revelations tell us that the head of your largest political party, and a long term participant in negotiations with the Palestinians, has made clear that a redrawing of the 1967 borders would perhaps not be a simple matter of trading land for occupied territory annexed by Israel, but instead a sinister effort to rid Israel of a significant number of its Arab citizens, by transferring the territory they inhabit, without their consent, to a newly-created country. This is unworthy of you, and leaders who promote such ideas betray your values. Indeed, they pose a dire threat to the moral legitimacy of the state.
The Israelis are just like Nazis.
Read his proposed notional letter for the US president in full here - A letter to the Israeli people.
According to Wikipedia, Robert Grenier is a longtime CIA officer who served as the CIA's top counter-terrorism official for about a year, was fired from that position on 6 February 2006 by CIA director Porter Goss, because (as reported by the London Sunday Times he opposed detaining Al-Qaeda suspects in secret prisons abroad, sending them to other countries for interrogation and using forms of torture such as 'water boarding'.
UMNO's mercenary disease
If you’re from UMNO, I’ll understand if you feel deeply depressed after reading Sakmongkol AK47’s article in A potential rude awakening, published in The Malaysian Insider.
Apart from Sakmongkol's complaint of the dearth of talent in UMNO, the frustration of its grassroot troops by the parachuting in of people like its current candidate for Tenang, and the likelihood of such frustrated locals sabotaging the support for the parachutist-candidate(s), Sakmongkol also wrote on what we have long been aware of:
I am apprehensive of the trends regarding Umno. And here are my reasons for being nervous. How does the public feel about Umno and BN? To be more specific how does the Malay public feel about Umno.
Some days ago Umno Setiawangsa convened a meeting. It is preparing a list of election speakers to campaign for the next parliamentary candidate. They are speculating that Zulhasnan will be replaced by the anak mami from Penang but now residing mostly in KL.
Shahrizat’s name is being mentioned as a possible replacement for Zulhasnan because she stands no chance at all in Lembah Pantai.
How was the response to that meeting? It was lacklustre said my source. I think I know the reasons, I said. Was there any mention of money? Allocations? None, said my source.
There you are! Umno people in general respond as though in a Maslow experiment. They respond favourably when there are financial incentives. Of course that kind of response isn’t a crime or inherently wrong. But it shows one thing - Umno can lose because it depends mainly on mercenary-like behaviour. Rome fell because it entrusted its defences to paid mercenaries. Mercenaries fight with dedication as long as they get paid.
There exists the notorious money politics in UMNO for the precise reason UMNO politics enable its leaders to put their snouts into the trough. It’s not just ministers or parliamentary secretaries; division, branch and whatout party leaders have been (and no doubt will be) given untendered/uncontested contracts, a virtual guarantee to profits in the millions of ringgit. And don’t worry about business ability, let alone acumen, because the party will ensure failures will be bailed out.
That’s the disease in UMNO, so what Sakmongkol tells us about UMNO now relying mainly on mercenaries is not in the least revealing. What is revealing has been an UMNO man like him brave enough to tell it as it is!
As I've said before, UMNO should have been the preferred Malay party and having the Malay leaders for non-Malays because of its now-lost moderate politics. But somewhere in the last couple of decades, the Tunku-like moderate Malay nationalists (no denying the old UMNO consisted of Malay nationalists but at least they were moderates) like Khir Johari, Gaafar Baba, Hussein Onn, etc gave way to avaricious successors who only wanted to make money.
Mind you, not just money but humongous piles and piles of millions. As the years of such unfettered god-sent privileges were enjoyed, their avarice realized no bounds, upgrading their expectations from mere millions into the billions. And they want all these very quickly too. Everyone wants to have his/her own palace, Porsche, and overseas holiday homes, etc. And why not, since that bloke down the street is already enjoying them, in obscene ostentatious style too!
UMNO politics enable that, provided one is a leader. The way to rough-shoulder one's way up the ranks is to be seen as a super-ultra (the tautology is apt here) Malay nationalist, meaning an ethnic hero, in the vanguard of the ketuanan brigade. The more extreme one is, the better the prospects of moving up.
Soon ethocentric ultraisms (pretend or otherwise) became prerequisite qualifications to be an UMNO leader, and from such a political culture, invariably the unhappy fallout on the ‘nons’, leading to immense dissatisfaction, would usually be UMNO leaders' hurtful, arrogantly insensitive and bigoted statements, policies and behaviour, and/or their refusal to take correct action on their supporters who demonstrated similar racist conduct.
These have not only alarmed but deeply offended the non-Malays to an extent that they are now prepared to offer their political support to PAS, an unthinkable possibility prior to 2008.
Once the reserves of tolerance have been depleted, it's no longer a case of 'better the devil you know', but rather 'let's kick those arrogant, racist, corrupt bastards out'.
Money politics also abet the deterioration of UMNO political culture, which we see or hear in the way top UMNO politicians have been ‘investing’ big bundles buying up party support, in the expectation of course that these investments will be recovered plus plus when they are in a position to put their snouts into the trough.
So the UMNO body politics suffer from a vicious circle, propelled principally by the personal greed of its leaders - political mercenaries, as Sakmongkol has succinctly pointed out.
Can Najib tame the beast? Can he be the Iskandar to cut the UMNO Gordian knot?
But alas, there doesn't seem to be any sign he has succeeded, or even tried!
However, Pakatan needs to watch out they do not succumb to the same disease. No party, regardless of how many saints they currently have, can be immune from the UMNO type of personal greed!
Apart from Sakmongkol's complaint of the dearth of talent in UMNO, the frustration of its grassroot troops by the parachuting in of people like its current candidate for Tenang, and the likelihood of such frustrated locals sabotaging the support for the parachutist-candidate(s), Sakmongkol also wrote on what we have long been aware of:
I am apprehensive of the trends regarding Umno. And here are my reasons for being nervous. How does the public feel about Umno and BN? To be more specific how does the Malay public feel about Umno.
Some days ago Umno Setiawangsa convened a meeting. It is preparing a list of election speakers to campaign for the next parliamentary candidate. They are speculating that Zulhasnan will be replaced by the anak mami from Penang but now residing mostly in KL.
Shahrizat’s name is being mentioned as a possible replacement for Zulhasnan because she stands no chance at all in Lembah Pantai.
How was the response to that meeting? It was lacklustre said my source. I think I know the reasons, I said. Was there any mention of money? Allocations? None, said my source.
There you are! Umno people in general respond as though in a Maslow experiment. They respond favourably when there are financial incentives. Of course that kind of response isn’t a crime or inherently wrong. But it shows one thing - Umno can lose because it depends mainly on mercenary-like behaviour. Rome fell because it entrusted its defences to paid mercenaries. Mercenaries fight with dedication as long as they get paid.
There exists the notorious money politics in UMNO for the precise reason UMNO politics enable its leaders to put their snouts into the trough. It’s not just ministers or parliamentary secretaries; division, branch and whatout party leaders have been (and no doubt will be) given untendered/uncontested contracts, a virtual guarantee to profits in the millions of ringgit. And don’t worry about business ability, let alone acumen, because the party will ensure failures will be bailed out.
That’s the disease in UMNO, so what Sakmongkol tells us about UMNO now relying mainly on mercenaries is not in the least revealing. What is revealing has been an UMNO man like him brave enough to tell it as it is!
As I've said before, UMNO should have been the preferred Malay party and having the Malay leaders for non-Malays because of its now-lost moderate politics. But somewhere in the last couple of decades, the Tunku-like moderate Malay nationalists (no denying the old UMNO consisted of Malay nationalists but at least they were moderates) like Khir Johari, Gaafar Baba, Hussein Onn, etc gave way to avaricious successors who only wanted to make money.
Mind you, not just money but humongous piles and piles of millions. As the years of such unfettered god-sent privileges were enjoyed, their avarice realized no bounds, upgrading their expectations from mere millions into the billions. And they want all these very quickly too. Everyone wants to have his/her own palace, Porsche, and overseas holiday homes, etc. And why not, since that bloke down the street is already enjoying them, in obscene ostentatious style too!
UMNO politics enable that, provided one is a leader. The way to rough-shoulder one's way up the ranks is to be seen as a super-ultra (the tautology is apt here) Malay nationalist, meaning an ethnic hero, in the vanguard of the ketuanan brigade. The more extreme one is, the better the prospects of moving up.
Soon ethocentric ultraisms (pretend or otherwise) became prerequisite qualifications to be an UMNO leader, and from such a political culture, invariably the unhappy fallout on the ‘nons’, leading to immense dissatisfaction, would usually be UMNO leaders' hurtful, arrogantly insensitive and bigoted statements, policies and behaviour, and/or their refusal to take correct action on their supporters who demonstrated similar racist conduct.
These have not only alarmed but deeply offended the non-Malays to an extent that they are now prepared to offer their political support to PAS, an unthinkable possibility prior to 2008.
Once the reserves of tolerance have been depleted, it's no longer a case of 'better the devil you know', but rather 'let's kick those arrogant, racist, corrupt bastards out'.
Money politics also abet the deterioration of UMNO political culture, which we see or hear in the way top UMNO politicians have been ‘investing’ big bundles buying up party support, in the expectation of course that these investments will be recovered plus plus when they are in a position to put their snouts into the trough.
So the UMNO body politics suffer from a vicious circle, propelled principally by the personal greed of its leaders - political mercenaries, as Sakmongkol has succinctly pointed out.
Can Najib tame the beast? Can he be the Iskandar to cut the UMNO Gordian knot?
But alas, there doesn't seem to be any sign he has succeeded, or even tried!
However, Pakatan needs to watch out they do not succumb to the same disease. No party, regardless of how many saints they currently have, can be immune from the UMNO type of personal greed!
Tuesday, January 25, 2011
The Poison within PKR - Part III
Concluding my final part to The Poison within PKR and The Poison within PKR – Part II:
Read The Malaysian Insider’s PKR hits Mustaffa Kamil with show-cause letter.
Mustaffa was one of the disgruntled deputy presidential candidate in the recent party polls, where together with Zaid Ibrahim, he complained against irregularities in the party polling process. Zaid Ibrahim has since left the party to form his own, KITA.
Several others, like erstwhile Anwar-bodek-er but now Anwar-disparager, Gobala has similarly complained about what they perceived as gross dodgy-ness in the party polls. They included popular Badrul Hisham Shaharin, better known as Chegubard. Even leng chai Jonson Chong, a party moderate, exposed the alleged party polling nonsense openly in his inimitable polite style.
The list of party dissenters is fairly long, stretching all the way to Sabah. Anwar's last-minute candidate for the federal seat of Kelana Jaya, Loh Gwo Burne, he of the videoclip fame wakakaka, also was among those dissatisfied and wrote a letter to Malaysiakini criticising Azmin Ali - see my previous post Loh Gwo Burne & Gobala - one-term MPs?
Additionally, well-known political activist Haris Ibrahim has on several occasions presented evidence of the alleged party polling irregularities in his blog The People’s Parliament. So did RPK.
The most laughable part about Mustaffa’s show cause letter must go to PKR secretary-general Saifuddin Nasution, who when asked by the press, said he … could not “remember” if the party leadership had issued the letter on Mustaffa.
His excuse? The Malaysian Insider reported that … "He however indicated that the party could have issued show-cause letters to more than one dissident leader” and that he signed over a hundred of these show-cause letters, thus he couldn’t remember if Mustaffa Kamil was one of them.
Bull! Mustaffa is not one of the party’s hoi polloi. He was one of only three deputy presidential candidates, and post-election the party even offered him a position in the party hierarchy, presumably to mollify him. So, how could Saifuddin claimed he can’t remember whether his secretariat had issued a show cause letter to a top party personality like Mustaffa Kamil. Looks to me like a sad case of payback time!
Remember, Saifuddin Nasution was the person who claimed P Jenapala was already sacked and thus a non-member when the latter raised complaints about his denied candidature for the party’s deputy presidential posts. Jenapala had followed due process and written 162 complaints to the party but none was entertained.
Associated with Saifuddin's claim of Jenapala's alleged non-membership was the by-now ‘notorious’ letter supposedly testifying to Jenapal's sacking - a claim which sent the normally moderate Jonson Chong ballistic. Jonson wrote in a long public letter of why that was just sheer bull (my words, Jonson is far too refined and polite).
The disgraceful scandal of the so-claimed sacking of Jenapala was so notorious (in its alleged fabricated letter of dismissal) that former PKR sec-gen Salehuddin Hashim emerged to sign an affidavit in court on 23 Nov 2010 that he, supposedly the one who signed that letter of Jenapala's dismissal, had no knowledge of the letter dated 2 Feb 2009. Salehuddin stated in his affidavit that the letter of dismissal was ‘not authentic’ as (quoting him) ‘the language, format and style of the letter is not mine’.
Additionally, Salehuddin asserted that the party sec-gen did not have the power under the party constitution to sack a member, where such power is exclusively vested with the party's supreme council. In other words, how could he (Salehuddin) have signed it?
So, when Saifuddin Nasution claimed he wasn’t sure whether a show cause letter had been issued to Mustaffa, I merely yawned. It seems Saifuddin doesn't know much about letters wakakaka.
Recently, Gobala was also issued a show cause letter, numbering a War & Peace-sized 45 pages. He was given only an unrealistic 7 days to respond. When he ignored that, claiming he wasn’t provided enough reasonable time to read and reply, he was given another 7 days (or so). Understandably, Gobala ignored it again.
When a show cause letter resembles a tome, the least the party people responsible for its issue should have given Gobala a month if not 6 weeks. That would in fact be what is meant by 'due process'.
Can you all recall how, in contrast, Anwar Ibrahim and the party leadership tap-danced around for agonizing months instead of issuing Zul Noordin such a show cause letter when the Kulim Wonder was running amok against party policies and undermining the party’s stand? Yet they provided poor Gobala only 7 days to answer to a 45-page show cause letter!
Maybe there’s some truth in Indians in PKR being discriminated – Nallakaruppan, Jenapala, Gobala - but let’s leave them for a while and move on to Zaid Ibrahim.
In spite of my hero Karpal Singh condemning Zaid, I have written in support of the latter – see my previous post Zaid Ibrahim - suffers no fool gladly.
When he was in PKR at the time leading to the party polls (before he tossed his hat into the election ring) Zaid Ibrahim was criticised for being erratic because one moment he said he would not challenge the deputy presidential post IF (initially) Nurul Izaah took up the challenge*, then IF (subsequently) Khalid Ibrahim did so, and the next (when both didn’t) he took up the challenge.
* Azmin Ali went into a panicky tizzy when Nurul causally mentioned her interests, and ‘advised’ Nurul against it because people would talk. Bet you Anwar had a few private words with Nurul
The standard anwaristas' cries against Zaid Ibrahim were his inconsistencies (in supporting Nurul, then Khalid, before standing as a candidate himself), and their accusations unimaginatively attacked Zaid for his lust for power.
But I didn’t see any inconsistency in Zaid’s manoeuvrings. In fact there was a very consistent objective in his support for firstly, Nurul, and subsequently for Khalid Ibrahim, before he personally challenged Azmin Ali in the party election. That objective was to prevent Azmin Ali from coasting home on an Anwar-provided free ticket into the deputy president post. He wanted Azmin Ali stopped!
Yes, Zaid was invincibly against Azmin Ali, the man for whom Anwar Ibrahim instructed Nallakaruppan to stand aside in a party VP contest some years back, and which drove Nalla out of the party in angry frustration. Nalla would have easily won that VP position because of the strength of his Indian supporters in PKR.
Count Ezam in as well among those frustrated by the Anwar’s blind support of Azmin Ali.
But no dount the anwaristas would say of Ezam and Nalla (and perhaps even Chandra Muzzafar) as they said of Gobala when the last criticised Anwar. Let us revisit the Gobala’s example which I wrote in The Poison within PKR – Part II:
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.
and also
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 vs 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.
Just double-standard fanatics, blind to their own follies.
Sure, the unfortunate outcome of Nalla and Ezam's unhappy encounters with the Anwar-only-for-Azmin stand has been their joining BN. But like the saying goes, 'Hell hath no fury like (someone) scorned' and Nalla and Ezam, both loyal to Anwar before the breakup, having suffered at the hands of BN because of him, were scorned by their former idol, in both cases because of Azmin Ali. They sought to vent their fury at him, and where better than from positions in BN.
There’s no doubt an issue of pesonal judgement in them deciding to join BN, but be that as it might be, let’s not forget or dismiss the underlying motivation (the cause), namely anger at Anwar Ibrahim, perhaps even hatred of their former leader who was seen to be disloyal to them. Loyalty has to flow both ways, or it won’t flow at all. But in Anwar’s case, it didn’t because of his non-negotiable support for Azmin Ali. He was seen to be only loyal to Azmin!
So Zaid tried his best to stop Azmin from becoming party deputy president, a post which is a mere heartbeat away from party president, which he would be when Anwar either retires, goes voluntarily into exile or is sent to jail. He challenged Azmin for the post. But Zaid withdrew midway when he saw he was going to fail, not because of lack of support but because of questionable polling process, a process queried not just by him but by several neutral notables like Jonson Chong, Haris Ibrahim etc.
This is the poison within PKR. So long as Anwar Ibrahim exerts an overpowering authority in the party, or even by remote control from, say, within jail, and continues to ‘clear the way’ for his Azmin to ascend to the top of PKR or have his way within the party, the poison in the party will continue to exist.
As I often said that change in UMNO must come from within, so I now say, change in PKR must likewise come from within. It’s up to the PKR people to deal with this plague of theirs.
Related:
(1) PKR without Anwar Ibrahim & Azmin Ali
(2) PKR party election - the horror stories continue
Read The Malaysian Insider’s PKR hits Mustaffa Kamil with show-cause letter.
Mustaffa was one of the disgruntled deputy presidential candidate in the recent party polls, where together with Zaid Ibrahim, he complained against irregularities in the party polling process. Zaid Ibrahim has since left the party to form his own, KITA.
Several others, like erstwhile Anwar-bodek-er but now Anwar-disparager, Gobala has similarly complained about what they perceived as gross dodgy-ness in the party polls. They included popular Badrul Hisham Shaharin, better known as Chegubard. Even leng chai Jonson Chong, a party moderate, exposed the alleged party polling nonsense openly in his inimitable polite style.
The list of party dissenters is fairly long, stretching all the way to Sabah. Anwar's last-minute candidate for the federal seat of Kelana Jaya, Loh Gwo Burne, he of the videoclip fame wakakaka, also was among those dissatisfied and wrote a letter to Malaysiakini criticising Azmin Ali - see my previous post Loh Gwo Burne & Gobala - one-term MPs?
Additionally, well-known political activist Haris Ibrahim has on several occasions presented evidence of the alleged party polling irregularities in his blog The People’s Parliament. So did RPK.
The most laughable part about Mustaffa’s show cause letter must go to PKR secretary-general Saifuddin Nasution, who when asked by the press, said he … could not “remember” if the party leadership had issued the letter on Mustaffa.
His excuse? The Malaysian Insider reported that … "He however indicated that the party could have issued show-cause letters to more than one dissident leader” and that he signed over a hundred of these show-cause letters, thus he couldn’t remember if Mustaffa Kamil was one of them.
Bull! Mustaffa is not one of the party’s hoi polloi. He was one of only three deputy presidential candidates, and post-election the party even offered him a position in the party hierarchy, presumably to mollify him. So, how could Saifuddin claimed he can’t remember whether his secretariat had issued a show cause letter to a top party personality like Mustaffa Kamil. Looks to me like a sad case of payback time!
Remember, Saifuddin Nasution was the person who claimed P Jenapala was already sacked and thus a non-member when the latter raised complaints about his denied candidature for the party’s deputy presidential posts. Jenapala had followed due process and written 162 complaints to the party but none was entertained.
Associated with Saifuddin's claim of Jenapala's alleged non-membership was the by-now ‘notorious’ letter supposedly testifying to Jenapal's sacking - a claim which sent the normally moderate Jonson Chong ballistic. Jonson wrote in a long public letter of why that was just sheer bull (my words, Jonson is far too refined and polite).
The disgraceful scandal of the so-claimed sacking of Jenapala was so notorious (in its alleged fabricated letter of dismissal) that former PKR sec-gen Salehuddin Hashim emerged to sign an affidavit in court on 23 Nov 2010 that he, supposedly the one who signed that letter of Jenapala's dismissal, had no knowledge of the letter dated 2 Feb 2009. Salehuddin stated in his affidavit that the letter of dismissal was ‘not authentic’ as (quoting him) ‘the language, format and style of the letter is not mine’.
Additionally, Salehuddin asserted that the party sec-gen did not have the power under the party constitution to sack a member, where such power is exclusively vested with the party's supreme council. In other words, how could he (Salehuddin) have signed it?
So, when Saifuddin Nasution claimed he wasn’t sure whether a show cause letter had been issued to Mustaffa, I merely yawned. It seems Saifuddin doesn't know much about letters wakakaka.
Recently, Gobala was also issued a show cause letter, numbering a War & Peace-sized 45 pages. He was given only an unrealistic 7 days to respond. When he ignored that, claiming he wasn’t provided enough reasonable time to read and reply, he was given another 7 days (or so). Understandably, Gobala ignored it again.
When a show cause letter resembles a tome, the least the party people responsible for its issue should have given Gobala a month if not 6 weeks. That would in fact be what is meant by 'due process'.
Can you all recall how, in contrast, Anwar Ibrahim and the party leadership tap-danced around for agonizing months instead of issuing Zul Noordin such a show cause letter when the Kulim Wonder was running amok against party policies and undermining the party’s stand? Yet they provided poor Gobala only 7 days to answer to a 45-page show cause letter!
Maybe there’s some truth in Indians in PKR being discriminated – Nallakaruppan, Jenapala, Gobala - but let’s leave them for a while and move on to Zaid Ibrahim.
In spite of my hero Karpal Singh condemning Zaid, I have written in support of the latter – see my previous post Zaid Ibrahim - suffers no fool gladly.
When he was in PKR at the time leading to the party polls (before he tossed his hat into the election ring) Zaid Ibrahim was criticised for being erratic because one moment he said he would not challenge the deputy presidential post IF (initially) Nurul Izaah took up the challenge*, then IF (subsequently) Khalid Ibrahim did so, and the next (when both didn’t) he took up the challenge.
* Azmin Ali went into a panicky tizzy when Nurul causally mentioned her interests, and ‘advised’ Nurul against it because people would talk. Bet you Anwar had a few private words with Nurul
The standard anwaristas' cries against Zaid Ibrahim were his inconsistencies (in supporting Nurul, then Khalid, before standing as a candidate himself), and their accusations unimaginatively attacked Zaid for his lust for power.
But I didn’t see any inconsistency in Zaid’s manoeuvrings. In fact there was a very consistent objective in his support for firstly, Nurul, and subsequently for Khalid Ibrahim, before he personally challenged Azmin Ali in the party election. That objective was to prevent Azmin Ali from coasting home on an Anwar-provided free ticket into the deputy president post. He wanted Azmin Ali stopped!
Yes, Zaid was invincibly against Azmin Ali, the man for whom Anwar Ibrahim instructed Nallakaruppan to stand aside in a party VP contest some years back, and which drove Nalla out of the party in angry frustration. Nalla would have easily won that VP position because of the strength of his Indian supporters in PKR.
Count Ezam in as well among those frustrated by the Anwar’s blind support of Azmin Ali.
But no dount the anwaristas would say of Ezam and Nalla (and perhaps even Chandra Muzzafar) as they said of Gobala when the last criticised Anwar. Let us revisit the Gobala’s example which I wrote in The Poison within PKR – Part II:
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.
and also
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 vs 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.
Just double-standard fanatics, blind to their own follies.
Sure, the unfortunate outcome of Nalla and Ezam's unhappy encounters with the Anwar-only-for-Azmin stand has been their joining BN. But like the saying goes, 'Hell hath no fury like (someone) scorned' and Nalla and Ezam, both loyal to Anwar before the breakup, having suffered at the hands of BN because of him, were scorned by their former idol, in both cases because of Azmin Ali. They sought to vent their fury at him, and where better than from positions in BN.
There’s no doubt an issue of pesonal judgement in them deciding to join BN, but be that as it might be, let’s not forget or dismiss the underlying motivation (the cause), namely anger at Anwar Ibrahim, perhaps even hatred of their former leader who was seen to be disloyal to them. Loyalty has to flow both ways, or it won’t flow at all. But in Anwar’s case, it didn’t because of his non-negotiable support for Azmin Ali. He was seen to be only loyal to Azmin!
So Zaid tried his best to stop Azmin from becoming party deputy president, a post which is a mere heartbeat away from party president, which he would be when Anwar either retires, goes voluntarily into exile or is sent to jail. He challenged Azmin for the post. But Zaid withdrew midway when he saw he was going to fail, not because of lack of support but because of questionable polling process, a process queried not just by him but by several neutral notables like Jonson Chong, Haris Ibrahim etc.
This is the poison within PKR. So long as Anwar Ibrahim exerts an overpowering authority in the party, or even by remote control from, say, within jail, and continues to ‘clear the way’ for his Azmin to ascend to the top of PKR or have his way within the party, the poison in the party will continue to exist.
As I often said that change in UMNO must come from within, so I now say, change in PKR must likewise come from within. It’s up to the PKR people to deal with this plague of theirs.
Related:
(1) PKR without Anwar Ibrahim & Azmin Ali
(2) PKR party election - the horror stories continue
Monday, January 24, 2011
Dream No 2 – the God spoke, very precisely!
Just posted Dream No 2 – the God spoke, very precisely! over at my other blog KTemoc Kongsamkok.
It’s my second instalment on dreams of gods. ;-)
It’s my second instalment on dreams of gods. ;-)
Sunday, January 23, 2011
Not tenang in Tenang
In Malaysiakini’s Hadi shrugs off MCA's Islamic state bogey, Pak Haji Hadi Awang has been very modest, only claiming a possible 50% chance for PAS to win the Tenang by-election, but he has been openly gleeful as victory is more than just possible; it’s very very probable …
… which has been why MCA has gone into overdrive in its scare campaign about a future Islamic State with full implementation of the hudud if the Chinese in the Tenang state constituency, comprising 39% of the registered voters, were to vote for the PAS candidate - see Malaysiakini's MCA unleashes race-religion leaflet campaign.
As if matters couldn’t be made worse for UMNO, DPM Muhyiddin has incurred the unmitigated wrath of the Indian community on his ‘statement’ about the use of the Interlok book. Malaysiakini reported in Muhyiddin lied, say Indian groups that The Federation of Indian NGO Associations has called Muhyiddin a liar and a traitor for suggesting that the ministry has reached consensus with the Indian community on the use of the Malay literature textbook 'Interlok'.
I am not sure about the label of 'traitor' (may be a bit overboard), but certainly calling the DPM a liar, just as for the DPM to be called a liar, are both very serious matters which cannot be left unchallenged, one way or other. The DPM must now either sue the the Federation of Indian NGO Associations or ... live forever as a liar.
With kaytee's self-awarded licence to fiddle around with a well-known idiom, we can now describe the federation's information chief AP Raja Retinam's call to Tenang Indian voters to give their backing to PAS, as adding potential injury to insult. What a double-barrelled shot at poor Muhyiddin.
Wait, there's more (as they say, 'when it rains it sure as hell pours') - even the normally compliant MIC has shown great anger at Muhyiddin’s attempt to sweep the Interlok affair under the carpet - see Malaysiakini's Endorse 'withdraw Interlok' demand, MIC told.
Sorry Muhyiddin, the Interlok’s story won't just go away ….. unless you do the right thing and remove that book from use in the Form 5 curriculum …
… which has been why Pak Haji has been beaming away. The Chinese and Indians in Tenang together constitute 51.15% of the registered voters. And of course UMNO alone cannot claim all of the 47.54% of Malay voters.
Sorry if my comments have been on the racial equation of the Tenang by-election – but don’t blame kaytee for raising them. Apart from UMNO having already done the damage, it has together with its mouth pieces like Utusan, Perkasa and various nationalist NGOs kept reminding us even until today of our ethnic ‘differences’ and ketuanan Melayu.
Strangely enough, UMNO (the UMNO of Tunku Abdul Rahman) would have been the natural Malay party for Chinese and Indians to back in a vote of preferred political party or political leadership, but in the last couple of decades it has lost its strongest point, its moderate bearings.
Worse, even more than its betrayal of the secular Malaysia we had when it proclaimed Malaysia as an Islamic State, its crude corrupt conduct has repulsed many Malaysians …
… to such an extent that PAS, though never ever wavering from its political Islamic ideology and its intent to implement the hudud in Malaysia's legal system, has now become the superior Malay party for many Chinese.
(I’ve to admit I’m not sure about the Indians, what with people like the Great Glorious Uthayakumar confusing the support base by attacking DAP instead of UMNO and MIC).
It's obvious Chinese Malaysians ta'boleh tahan lagi (cannot tolerate any further) UMNO's arrogance, abuse of powers and gross corruption. They are now prepared to take a chance with an Islamic party. At this stage, I cannot yet comment on whether the Chinese 180-degree political turnaround is wise.
ON UMNO's conduct, it’s noteworthy that currently there has been a coordinated attack on Singapore by Dr Mahathir, Dr DNA Denier and Doctor-ed Ethnic Warrior. I see this campaign as connected to UMNO's political strategy.
My take - UMNO is worried about its polling chances if it keeps on annoying or/and attacking the Chinese voters in Malaysia or frightening them by demonstrating its ultra-ness. But it has to do so to ensure its so-called relevance to the Malays and thus to retain their continuing support. Since Singapore is Chinese, it’s convenient to show to the heartland the ‘evils’ of the Chinese ruled neighbouring country and how it supposedly suppresses the Malays there.
Therefore attack Singapore leadership. Singapore leadership is bad, Singapore leadership is Chinese, thus Chinese leadership is bad!
Though Singapore may on the surface appear as a completely different/foreign target, in the reality of our historical-cultural-social context it serves as an surrogate-attack on the local (non-BN) Chinese leadership and their alleged 'iniquity', and a reminder to the heartland not to vote for DAP or any coalition that has DAP as a member, namely Pakatan and thus PAS and PKR.
As UMNO blogger Sakmongkol AK 47 noted sadly, the current UMNO leaders don’t seem to be able to cope with Malaysia’s modern political landscape. They still believe in the supremacy of force and the employment of mischievous tactics like the undemocratic and shameful Khusrin affair.
A week ago he wrote: UMNO hasn't shed off its arrogance and bully tactics. It's showing it is incapable of dealing with dissenting views and does not have the credentials to deal with the future. How has UMNO approached dissenting views and opposition? By making endless police reports. The police should not be used as an oppressive tool by UMNO.
Much earlier he penned: Just recently, the appointment of the Selangor SS was also seen as being made possible by the intervention and involvement of the king of Selangor. The two events [earlier he mentioned a similar situation in Perak] resulted in a loosening of people's inhibitions. People are becoming emboldened to question the proper role of the constitutional monarchy. Let us be clear to what is happening here. People are pointing out to the fact that ours is a constitutional monarchy. It's not a call for the overthrow of the institution or a call for rebellion. It is suggestive of a larger desire by an increasing number of the population, to see that the proper rule of law and the sovereignty of the rule of law need to and should be observed. Pointing that out is not intended to derhaka to the monarchy. [...]
UMNO doesn't seem to have what it takes to manage the loosening of the social and cultural milieu. Nor does it seem to have the presence of mind, the verve so to speak, to manage the change.
When UMNO sponsored or indirectly supported those wild eyed young men and women to shout violent outbursts and threatening verbal abuses against the so called traitors of certain Malay institutions, it only points out to one fact- that UMNO has lost its grip on the loosening and uninhibited future culture.
Since it doesn't understand and lacked the tools to manage the new social milieu, it can lose in the next GE.
Alas, his advice to UMNO seems to have fallen on deaf ears, though I see a slight change in tactics by some notable UMNO personalities shifting the attack over to the surrogate Chinese target, Singapore, as a so-called iniquitous and oppressive Chinese-ruled country with a Malay minority, obviously a tactic to drive home the fear of Chinese political leadership into the minds of Malays, as MCA is attempting to do to the Chinese Malaysians on PAS leadership.
I fear that the short and long term fallout from the UMNO-MCA style of political campaign for the Tenang by-election will be far from being tenang (calm). They can only concretize, if not exacerbate our already existing and very lamentable communal schism.
… which has been why MCA has gone into overdrive in its scare campaign about a future Islamic State with full implementation of the hudud if the Chinese in the Tenang state constituency, comprising 39% of the registered voters, were to vote for the PAS candidate - see Malaysiakini's MCA unleashes race-religion leaflet campaign.
As if matters couldn’t be made worse for UMNO, DPM Muhyiddin has incurred the unmitigated wrath of the Indian community on his ‘statement’ about the use of the Interlok book. Malaysiakini reported in Muhyiddin lied, say Indian groups that The Federation of Indian NGO Associations has called Muhyiddin a liar and a traitor for suggesting that the ministry has reached consensus with the Indian community on the use of the Malay literature textbook 'Interlok'.
I am not sure about the label of 'traitor' (may be a bit overboard), but certainly calling the DPM a liar, just as for the DPM to be called a liar, are both very serious matters which cannot be left unchallenged, one way or other. The DPM must now either sue the the Federation of Indian NGO Associations or ... live forever as a liar.
With kaytee's self-awarded licence to fiddle around with a well-known idiom, we can now describe the federation's information chief AP Raja Retinam's call to Tenang Indian voters to give their backing to PAS, as adding potential injury to insult. What a double-barrelled shot at poor Muhyiddin.
Wait, there's more (as they say, 'when it rains it sure as hell pours') - even the normally compliant MIC has shown great anger at Muhyiddin’s attempt to sweep the Interlok affair under the carpet - see Malaysiakini's Endorse 'withdraw Interlok' demand, MIC told.
Sorry Muhyiddin, the Interlok’s story won't just go away ….. unless you do the right thing and remove that book from use in the Form 5 curriculum …
… which has been why Pak Haji has been beaming away. The Chinese and Indians in Tenang together constitute 51.15% of the registered voters. And of course UMNO alone cannot claim all of the 47.54% of Malay voters.
Sorry if my comments have been on the racial equation of the Tenang by-election – but don’t blame kaytee for raising them. Apart from UMNO having already done the damage, it has together with its mouth pieces like Utusan, Perkasa and various nationalist NGOs kept reminding us even until today of our ethnic ‘differences’ and ketuanan Melayu.
Strangely enough, UMNO (the UMNO of Tunku Abdul Rahman) would have been the natural Malay party for Chinese and Indians to back in a vote of preferred political party or political leadership, but in the last couple of decades it has lost its strongest point, its moderate bearings.
Worse, even more than its betrayal of the secular Malaysia we had when it proclaimed Malaysia as an Islamic State, its crude corrupt conduct has repulsed many Malaysians …
… to such an extent that PAS, though never ever wavering from its political Islamic ideology and its intent to implement the hudud in Malaysia's legal system, has now become the superior Malay party for many Chinese.
(I’ve to admit I’m not sure about the Indians, what with people like the Great Glorious Uthayakumar confusing the support base by attacking DAP instead of UMNO and MIC).
It's obvious Chinese Malaysians ta'boleh tahan lagi (cannot tolerate any further) UMNO's arrogance, abuse of powers and gross corruption. They are now prepared to take a chance with an Islamic party. At this stage, I cannot yet comment on whether the Chinese 180-degree political turnaround is wise.
ON UMNO's conduct, it’s noteworthy that currently there has been a coordinated attack on Singapore by Dr Mahathir, Dr DNA Denier and Doctor-ed Ethnic Warrior. I see this campaign as connected to UMNO's political strategy.
My take - UMNO is worried about its polling chances if it keeps on annoying or/and attacking the Chinese voters in Malaysia or frightening them by demonstrating its ultra-ness. But it has to do so to ensure its so-called relevance to the Malays and thus to retain their continuing support. Since Singapore is Chinese, it’s convenient to show to the heartland the ‘evils’ of the Chinese ruled neighbouring country and how it supposedly suppresses the Malays there.
Therefore attack Singapore leadership. Singapore leadership is bad, Singapore leadership is Chinese, thus Chinese leadership is bad!
Though Singapore may on the surface appear as a completely different/foreign target, in the reality of our historical-cultural-social context it serves as an surrogate-attack on the local (non-BN) Chinese leadership and their alleged 'iniquity', and a reminder to the heartland not to vote for DAP or any coalition that has DAP as a member, namely Pakatan and thus PAS and PKR.
As UMNO blogger Sakmongkol AK 47 noted sadly, the current UMNO leaders don’t seem to be able to cope with Malaysia’s modern political landscape. They still believe in the supremacy of force and the employment of mischievous tactics like the undemocratic and shameful Khusrin affair.
A week ago he wrote: UMNO hasn't shed off its arrogance and bully tactics. It's showing it is incapable of dealing with dissenting views and does not have the credentials to deal with the future. How has UMNO approached dissenting views and opposition? By making endless police reports. The police should not be used as an oppressive tool by UMNO.
Much earlier he penned: Just recently, the appointment of the Selangor SS was also seen as being made possible by the intervention and involvement of the king of Selangor. The two events [earlier he mentioned a similar situation in Perak] resulted in a loosening of people's inhibitions. People are becoming emboldened to question the proper role of the constitutional monarchy. Let us be clear to what is happening here. People are pointing out to the fact that ours is a constitutional monarchy. It's not a call for the overthrow of the institution or a call for rebellion. It is suggestive of a larger desire by an increasing number of the population, to see that the proper rule of law and the sovereignty of the rule of law need to and should be observed. Pointing that out is not intended to derhaka to the monarchy. [...]
UMNO doesn't seem to have what it takes to manage the loosening of the social and cultural milieu. Nor does it seem to have the presence of mind, the verve so to speak, to manage the change.
When UMNO sponsored or indirectly supported those wild eyed young men and women to shout violent outbursts and threatening verbal abuses against the so called traitors of certain Malay institutions, it only points out to one fact- that UMNO has lost its grip on the loosening and uninhibited future culture.
Since it doesn't understand and lacked the tools to manage the new social milieu, it can lose in the next GE.
Alas, his advice to UMNO seems to have fallen on deaf ears, though I see a slight change in tactics by some notable UMNO personalities shifting the attack over to the surrogate Chinese target, Singapore, as a so-called iniquitous and oppressive Chinese-ruled country with a Malay minority, obviously a tactic to drive home the fear of Chinese political leadership into the minds of Malays, as MCA is attempting to do to the Chinese Malaysians on PAS leadership.
I fear that the short and long term fallout from the UMNO-MCA style of political campaign for the Tenang by-election will be far from being tenang (calm). They can only concretize, if not exacerbate our already existing and very lamentable communal schism.
Wednesday, January 19, 2011
Najib avoiding the real question of Teoh Beng Hock's death
Reading between the lines in PM Najib’s Razak terms of reference for the proposed Royal Commission of Inquiry (RCI) into the Teoh Beng Hock tragedy, we can see very clearly that the RCI will be steered clear of the cause of Teoh’s death, or his pre-fall injury which has been established by the inquest's ordered post mortem.
What then would be the f* point of having a RCI if not to establish the cause of his death, so carefully avoided by the government inquest, or who had been responsible for his pre-fall injuries. It's obvious Najib is just trying to buy time for his pending general election.
Instead the terms of reference for the RCI is limited to a minor issue, the MACC investigative procedures. Now, who the f* is interested in the MACC procedures because when a witness walked into its building alive but emerged out of it via a window at the 14th floor, already having pre-fall injuries, to his death, those procedures are undeniably all f*ing rotten.
The crucial issue for Teoh’s family and every citizen in this country is the true cause of his death, or to be more blunt, his manslaughter or even possibly murder.
His sister, the intrepid Teoh Lee Lan, bemoans in an open letter to PM Najib of his broken promise, where after 500 days of an inquest, the outcome was still an open verdict. And Najib has the cheek to tell us to look at the bigger picture as if the unexplained death of an innocent citizen (a mere witness, not even a police or MACC suspect) in a MACC building is unimportant. Teoh Lee Lan wrote (extracts):
After one and a half years, we still have no idea how he died. What is stopping the authorities from finding out the truth?
When we complained about the biased inquest, you ignored us; when we demanded for a royal commission of inquiry (RCI) to probe Beng Hock's cause of death, you did not respond to us.
We still remember what you said to us when we met you last year. You said that the government would conduct a thorough investigation to ensure that no stone would be left unturned.
Yes, we want a thorough investigation. The final verdict of the inquest confirmed that Beng Hock sustained pre-fall injury to his neck. Our family wants to know who caused the injury, how it was sustained and who should be responsible for it.
It has been two weeks since the coroner delivered his verdict which did not rule out the possibility of homicide in a convincing manner. Why didn't the government continue to investigate the pre-fall injury on Beng Hock's neck?
It’s obvious from both the inquest and the terms of reference for the proposed RCI that the authorities are protecting someone in MACC, weaving and dodging around the f* obvious question: Who or what caused Teoh to fall out of that 14th window?
No one less than former MCA President, Ong Tee Keat, had this to say in a letter to Malaysiakini (extracts):
I am shocked by the coroner's open verdict yesterday which rules out both suicide and homicide in the death of Teoh Beng Hock. […]
The loss of life, especially while in the custody of government enforcement officials, is always a serious matter of public concern.
There cannot be no answers for this particular case. It's simply not acceptable that one can die in the MACC's custody without knowing what had happened.
Teoh voluntarily stepped into the Selangor Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC)'s office to give a statement as a witness.
He failed to come out alive, while under MACC's custody. His body was found sprawled on a service corridor in Plaza Masalam's Level 5 on July 16, 2009.
No matter from which point of view or political divide you see the death, it is just unbelievable, unacceptable and illogical that no one knows what happened to Teoh in a place where security is relatively tight.
Well and truly said, Ong Tee Keat. At least you have the bloody balls to call it as it is, instead of a mealy mouthed attempt by your MCA colleagues to tell the public "not to politicize the Teoh Beng Hock tragedy".
What then would be the f* point of having a RCI if not to establish the cause of his death, so carefully avoided by the government inquest, or who had been responsible for his pre-fall injuries. It's obvious Najib is just trying to buy time for his pending general election.
Instead the terms of reference for the RCI is limited to a minor issue, the MACC investigative procedures. Now, who the f* is interested in the MACC procedures because when a witness walked into its building alive but emerged out of it via a window at the 14th floor, already having pre-fall injuries, to his death, those procedures are undeniably all f*ing rotten.
The crucial issue for Teoh’s family and every citizen in this country is the true cause of his death, or to be more blunt, his manslaughter or even possibly murder.
His sister, the intrepid Teoh Lee Lan, bemoans in an open letter to PM Najib of his broken promise, where after 500 days of an inquest, the outcome was still an open verdict. And Najib has the cheek to tell us to look at the bigger picture as if the unexplained death of an innocent citizen (a mere witness, not even a police or MACC suspect) in a MACC building is unimportant. Teoh Lee Lan wrote (extracts):
After one and a half years, we still have no idea how he died. What is stopping the authorities from finding out the truth?
When we complained about the biased inquest, you ignored us; when we demanded for a royal commission of inquiry (RCI) to probe Beng Hock's cause of death, you did not respond to us.
We still remember what you said to us when we met you last year. You said that the government would conduct a thorough investigation to ensure that no stone would be left unturned.
Yes, we want a thorough investigation. The final verdict of the inquest confirmed that Beng Hock sustained pre-fall injury to his neck. Our family wants to know who caused the injury, how it was sustained and who should be responsible for it.
It has been two weeks since the coroner delivered his verdict which did not rule out the possibility of homicide in a convincing manner. Why didn't the government continue to investigate the pre-fall injury on Beng Hock's neck?
It’s obvious from both the inquest and the terms of reference for the proposed RCI that the authorities are protecting someone in MACC, weaving and dodging around the f* obvious question: Who or what caused Teoh to fall out of that 14th window?
No one less than former MCA President, Ong Tee Keat, had this to say in a letter to Malaysiakini (extracts):
I am shocked by the coroner's open verdict yesterday which rules out both suicide and homicide in the death of Teoh Beng Hock. […]
The loss of life, especially while in the custody of government enforcement officials, is always a serious matter of public concern.
There cannot be no answers for this particular case. It's simply not acceptable that one can die in the MACC's custody without knowing what had happened.
Teoh voluntarily stepped into the Selangor Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC)'s office to give a statement as a witness.
He failed to come out alive, while under MACC's custody. His body was found sprawled on a service corridor in Plaza Masalam's Level 5 on July 16, 2009.
No matter from which point of view or political divide you see the death, it is just unbelievable, unacceptable and illogical that no one knows what happened to Teoh in a place where security is relatively tight.
Well and truly said, Ong Tee Keat. At least you have the bloody balls to call it as it is, instead of a mealy mouthed attempt by your MCA colleagues to tell the public "not to politicize the Teoh Beng Hock tragedy".
A dead chook and many frightened monkeys
There is a Chinese saying which states “Kill the chicken to frighten the monkeys”. But it seems in the current and deplorable Malaysian political situation, the chicken has now been killed by frightened monkeys.
Malaysiakini’s Dead chicken in threat against Serdang MP tells us:
Serdang MP Teo Nie Ching received a death threat this morning, reinforced by a dead chicken hung on the grill door of the DAP Sungai Chua branch office. […]
… the carcass was still hanging where it had been hung. Its throat had been slashed and blood was still dripping …
A poster was stuck to the signboard, with the warning: "Ingat! Ini satu Peringatan Teo Nie Ching, Tentera Jihad" (Take note! This is a reminder Teo Nie Ching, the Jihad Army).
Let's read between the lines, to dive into, discover & discern the real reason for the lamentable Malaysian Mafiaso action [remember that severed horse head in the the film 'Godfather'?].
To kaytee, Teo Nie Ching is one hell of a MP. She is hardworking, dedicated, colour blind and has reached out to every sector of her constituency, very effectively, very successfully. Her Malay constituency has been very responsively warm to her, even inviting her to their aerobics sessions.
Her popularity with her Malay constituency has so worried UMNO that she has been specifically targeted by the UMNO-BN cyber army (and I am not talking about this puerile buggeration of monkeys killing the poor chook).
It’s not unlike the recent and unprecedented Utusan barrage of attacks against DAP party in general and Lim Guan Eng in particular. Until recently Utusan and UMNO didn't bother with the DAP. To them, the DAP was a sarp sarp suoi (minor irrelevant) distraction, mainly a MCA's problem - but not so now.
Teo Nie Ching forms the 3rd of the feared DAP trio. They have done what was hitherto considered by UMNO as impossible. They have penetrated effectively into the Malay constituencies, admittedly only in the urban areas. Perhaps the next giant step for DAP may well be taken into the very 'heartland' - now, won't that truly shake UMNO up.
That has been why they have been relentlessly attacked, week after week. The slaughtered chook is a sign of utter desperation, an indication of the bankruptcy of her opponents. The frightened monkeys are certainly chattering away.
Malaysiakini’s Dead chicken in threat against Serdang MP tells us:
Serdang MP Teo Nie Ching received a death threat this morning, reinforced by a dead chicken hung on the grill door of the DAP Sungai Chua branch office. […]
… the carcass was still hanging where it had been hung. Its throat had been slashed and blood was still dripping …
A poster was stuck to the signboard, with the warning: "Ingat! Ini satu Peringatan Teo Nie Ching, Tentera Jihad" (Take note! This is a reminder Teo Nie Ching, the Jihad Army).
Let's read between the lines, to dive into, discover & discern the real reason for the lamentable Malaysian Mafiaso action [remember that severed horse head in the the film 'Godfather'?].
To kaytee, Teo Nie Ching is one hell of a MP. She is hardworking, dedicated, colour blind and has reached out to every sector of her constituency, very effectively, very successfully. Her Malay constituency has been very responsively warm to her, even inviting her to their aerobics sessions.
Her popularity with her Malay constituency has so worried UMNO that she has been specifically targeted by the UMNO-BN cyber army (and I am not talking about this puerile buggeration of monkeys killing the poor chook).
It’s not unlike the recent and unprecedented Utusan barrage of attacks against DAP party in general and Lim Guan Eng in particular. Until recently Utusan and UMNO didn't bother with the DAP. To them, the DAP was a sarp sarp suoi (minor irrelevant) distraction, mainly a MCA's problem - but not so now.
Teo Nie Ching forms the 3rd of the feared DAP trio. They have done what was hitherto considered by UMNO as impossible. They have penetrated effectively into the Malay constituencies, admittedly only in the urban areas. Perhaps the next giant step for DAP may well be taken into the very 'heartland' - now, won't that truly shake UMNO up.
That has been why they have been relentlessly attacked, week after week. The slaughtered chook is a sign of utter desperation, an indication of the bankruptcy of her opponents. The frightened monkeys are certainly chattering away.
Tuesday, January 18, 2011
Siapa yang depan boleh, belakang pun boleh?
One thing you can depend on Chinese Malaysians is their amazing ability to stage a jolly good show, bring about a festive mood so to speak, at either a religious celebration or a political event, especially during a general or by-election campaign. And their ability in this regard is not just limited to the two mentioned events ;-)
Remember the recent Penang ‘koe-tai’ during the 7th Moon (Ghost) Religious Rites, where scantily dressed sweeties pranced on a village stage, crooning songs in Mandarin, Cantonese and god-knows what other languages. The celebratory atmosphere was so jolly enjoyable that the God of Hades had great difficulties marshalling those lost souls back into Hell after the month was up wakakaka.
Now the MCA (well, they’re Chinese Malaysians, aren’t they?) have done it again – see Malaysiakini’s Anwar targeted as sexy dancers jazz up pro-BN bash which reported:
Over 1,000 Tenang constituents were treated to a sumptuous dinner last night with free beer, sexy dance performance and a lucky draw, featuring a 100cc motorcycle as the grand prize.
Where’s Kimmia when you really needed them wakakaka!
Okay, it’s good for the villagers to have a bit of fun, and the pending by-election in Tenang provides the opportunity for such an occasion. But I wonder about the campaign speech by former Umno vice-president Mohd Isa Abdul Samad, where he stated:
“Anwar depan boleh, belakang pun boleh.”
Given that Anwar Ibrahim is currently being prosecuted for alleged sodomy in a court trial, thus the matter being sub judice, hasn’t Isa Samad’s speech been in contempt of court proceedings?
Isa Samad will in all likelihood get away with such a blatant contempt of court proceedings, so it's teflon-ised BN leaders like him who's sebenarnya yang depan boleh, belakang pun boleh, reaming right royally the dignity of the courts.
Remember the recent Penang ‘koe-tai’ during the 7th Moon (Ghost) Religious Rites, where scantily dressed sweeties pranced on a village stage, crooning songs in Mandarin, Cantonese and god-knows what other languages. The celebratory atmosphere was so jolly enjoyable that the God of Hades had great difficulties marshalling those lost souls back into Hell after the month was up wakakaka.
Now the MCA (well, they’re Chinese Malaysians, aren’t they?) have done it again – see Malaysiakini’s Anwar targeted as sexy dancers jazz up pro-BN bash which reported:
Over 1,000 Tenang constituents were treated to a sumptuous dinner last night with free beer, sexy dance performance and a lucky draw, featuring a 100cc motorcycle as the grand prize.
Where’s Kimmia when you really needed them wakakaka!
Okay, it’s good for the villagers to have a bit of fun, and the pending by-election in Tenang provides the opportunity for such an occasion. But I wonder about the campaign speech by former Umno vice-president Mohd Isa Abdul Samad, where he stated:
“Anwar depan boleh, belakang pun boleh.”
Given that Anwar Ibrahim is currently being prosecuted for alleged sodomy in a court trial, thus the matter being sub judice, hasn’t Isa Samad’s speech been in contempt of court proceedings?
Isa Samad will in all likelihood get away with such a blatant contempt of court proceedings, so it's teflon-ised BN leaders like him who's sebenarnya yang depan boleh, belakang pun boleh, reaming right royally the dignity of the courts.
Monday, January 17, 2011
EC double standards
Abdul Aziz Mohd Yusof, the head of the Election Commission (EC), is an unmitigated hypocrite in his reason for the proposal to introduce proxy voting. He claimed the proposed system is aimed at empowering individuals to cast ballots on behalf of registered voters unable to do so themselves at designated voting stations.
Well, why doesn't he lift the restriction on voting for many overseas Malaysians - Malaysian citizens who are eligible to vote but deliberately marginalised from voting by a 2002 amendment to the election Act because they presumably "aren't seen to be pro BN" (i.e. those who aren't public servants, students on government scholarship, armed forces personnel, most of whom are non-Malays).
On one hand the EC deliberately disenfranchises many overseas Malaysians from voting, while now it proposes a system to enable registered voters to use surrogates to cast their votes for them. It's basically talking cock.
The proposal stinks to high heaven. How will this Abdul Aziz answer to his Maker for another EC nonsense?
Well, why doesn't he lift the restriction on voting for many overseas Malaysians - Malaysian citizens who are eligible to vote but deliberately marginalised from voting by a 2002 amendment to the election Act because they presumably "aren't seen to be pro BN" (i.e. those who aren't public servants, students on government scholarship, armed forces personnel, most of whom are non-Malays).
On one hand the EC deliberately disenfranchises many overseas Malaysians from voting, while now it proposes a system to enable registered voters to use surrogates to cast their votes for them. It's basically talking cock.
The proposal stinks to high heaven. How will this Abdul Aziz answer to his Maker for another EC nonsense?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)