Yo everyone, I'm back ;-)
Have been catching up with the news, and I see lots on HRP, Interlok and the usual police antics.
You know, if I were the Home Minister, I would NOT have permitted the police to jump on HRP as had happened. Instead I would have allowed HRP to protest, rally or rave and rant, do what it wants (short of perpetuating violence). Really, how much political impact could HRP make?
Likewise with other kacang putih protests such as candlelight vigils by small or fringe elements. Much as the participants might be sincere, the likelihood of such protests making political tsunamic waves were minimal. I know the average Malaysian. Most have already made up their minds so such politicking won't change their allegiance. The perceived brutality of the police towards such peaceful rallies would instead evoke sympathies for the poor anehs and tambis.
But then I’m not the Min of Home Affairs. Hishamuddin is.
Why he has allowed (or instructed) the police to come down heavy on those HRP rallies continues to puzzle me? He has played directly into Uthayakumar’s hands, the dumbo (Hisham that is, not Uthayakumar!)
Dear Uty, mandore master, craves attention more than ever, and dumbo Hisham has granted him his very wish.
Just ignore HRP for 6 months and I bet the party will turn out to be nothing more than a public nuisance, shunned by the average Malaysian. Just look at how the Penang government has ignored Uthayakumar’s attention-craving raves and rants. And how Pakatan has ignored his bullying blackmailing threats for 30 seats or HRP would split the Indian votes.
Thinking …
Now, if I were Home Minister, I would do a number of things quite differently.
For a start, I would place Hisham in Kem Kamunting wakakaka. But why? Being vindictive? No, no, no …
It’s actually to protect the good name and reputation of his illustrious dad and granddad. Hisham is an absolute disgrace to Tun Hussein and the magnificent Onn Jaafar. Usually the acorn doesn’t fall far from the oak tree but this particular acorn must have kicked itself wakakaka right across the field, into the cesspool.
Secondly … hmmm, maybe tomorrow ler ... ;-)
Monday, February 28, 2011
Monday, February 21, 2011
The yucky's
Dear readers, help kaytee on this.
I’m not sure whether I can continue to stand the yucky stuff on the media. I need to ‘boycott’ reading the muck. But my problem is there are so many yucky stuff, and for practical reasons I can’t afford to avoid all of them as I still need to read the news, yucky as some may be.
So if you can help me decide which is the yuckiest, I’ll avoid that one.
OK then, which of the following do you consider to be the pits:
(1) The sodomy case where each day we are cursed with yucky descriptions of peri-anal swabs, no-shit for 2 days, arse-holes, semen stains, genitals/rectal regions, oral bee-bop-a-lula, football team shagalag specimens, and other various shitty (pun not intended) stuff. Just f* spoil my appetite.
(2) The sleazy shameful sinful lies of Penang UMNO and its cohorts, those wishful wannabe (UMNO) wankers, against the current Penang Pakatan government. Most have been sheer fabrications. Don't they realize that Allah swt won't be pleased with their blatant lies for secular (political) purposes? One example has been the manufactured and instigated furore against a non-issue, a new exco portfolio to handle non-Islamic religious affairs, a portfolio exactly similar to the one the current Perak BN government had already set up.
Why don't those wishful wannabe (UMNO) wankers go over to Perak to make noise against their mate Zambry, and remain there! wakakaka.
(3) The pile of shit that’s called the PKFZ corruption scandal has been fermenting, rising and stinking to high heavens since the change of MCA Transport Minister, from Ong Tee Keat to CSL's buddy, Kong Chu Ha.
After Ong had the multi-billion dollar scandal investigated, he adopted the advice of external professional bodies and implemented several reform mechanisms, such as:
(a) an internal whistle-blower policy,
(b) requirement for contract bidders to sign an integrity pact, and
(c) most importantly, the appointment of three independent directors on the PKA board to ensure its integrity and competency. The independence of these directors can be assured if the minister stays clear of their appointment, but acts on the recommendation of the Board.
There are now deep concerna that these measures may be gradually dropped off particularly on the three independent directors.
Out of the original 3 independent directors, only one is left; one left for a new appointment while another, M Rajasingam, saw his term expired in November last year. When the Board recommended that Rajasingam be re-appointed, the new Transport Minsiter inexplicably refused.
Malaysiakini reported: Transparency International Malaysia president Paul Low, who chaired the PKA ad-hoc committee on governance, said Kong's decision has defeated the purpose of having independent director, averring:
"We (the committee) defined the independent director as someone recommended by the board without influence by the minister."
Shit all around!
I’m not sure whether I can continue to stand the yucky stuff on the media. I need to ‘boycott’ reading the muck. But my problem is there are so many yucky stuff, and for practical reasons I can’t afford to avoid all of them as I still need to read the news, yucky as some may be.
So if you can help me decide which is the yuckiest, I’ll avoid that one.
OK then, which of the following do you consider to be the pits:
(1) The sodomy case where each day we are cursed with yucky descriptions of peri-anal swabs, no-shit for 2 days, arse-holes, semen stains, genitals/rectal regions, oral bee-bop-a-lula, football team shagalag specimens, and other various shitty (pun not intended) stuff. Just f* spoil my appetite.
(2) The sleazy shameful sinful lies of Penang UMNO and its cohorts, those wishful wannabe (UMNO) wankers, against the current Penang Pakatan government. Most have been sheer fabrications. Don't they realize that Allah swt won't be pleased with their blatant lies for secular (political) purposes? One example has been the manufactured and instigated furore against a non-issue, a new exco portfolio to handle non-Islamic religious affairs, a portfolio exactly similar to the one the current Perak BN government had already set up.
Why don't those wishful wannabe (UMNO) wankers go over to Perak to make noise against their mate Zambry, and remain there! wakakaka.
(3) The pile of shit that’s called the PKFZ corruption scandal has been fermenting, rising and stinking to high heavens since the change of MCA Transport Minister, from Ong Tee Keat to CSL's buddy, Kong Chu Ha.
After Ong had the multi-billion dollar scandal investigated, he adopted the advice of external professional bodies and implemented several reform mechanisms, such as:
(a) an internal whistle-blower policy,
(b) requirement for contract bidders to sign an integrity pact, and
(c) most importantly, the appointment of three independent directors on the PKA board to ensure its integrity and competency. The independence of these directors can be assured if the minister stays clear of their appointment, but acts on the recommendation of the Board.
There are now deep concerna that these measures may be gradually dropped off particularly on the three independent directors.
Out of the original 3 independent directors, only one is left; one left for a new appointment while another, M Rajasingam, saw his term expired in November last year. When the Board recommended that Rajasingam be re-appointed, the new Transport Minsiter inexplicably refused.
Malaysiakini reported: Transparency International Malaysia president Paul Low, who chaired the PKA ad-hoc committee on governance, said Kong's decision has defeated the purpose of having independent director, averring:
"We (the committee) defined the independent director as someone recommended by the board without influence by the minister."
Shit all around!
RCI on Teoh's death - 9 inches could possibly be 11.5 inches?
In the RCI on Teoh Beng Hock’s mysterious death in the Selangor MACC building while the deceased was there (supposedly) as a witness in an alleged RM2,500 corruption case against his boss, a DAP ADUN, Selangor police forensic expert Chief Inspector Mazli Jusoh testified he found no evidence that Teoh had jumped to his death.
Golly be, this naturally shifted the spotlight on a cause of possible murder, manslaughter or, at the very least, an act of God.
But today, The Malaysian Insider reported:
Ultra-violet light showed a shoeprint on the window frame of the building where Teoh Beng Hock fell to his death, the royal commission of inquiry (RCI) heard today. DSP Sharul Othman Mansor who was part of the police forensic crime scene investigation team said he found a nine-inch shoeprint on the window frame on the 14th floor of Plaza Masalam Shah Alam.
Conducting officer Kwan Li Sa then pointed out that since the length of Teoh’s shoe was 11.5 inches (based on Sharul’s measurements of the court exhibit at the inquiry), that fact eliminated the shoeprint as belonging to Teoh.
But RCI chairman James Foong rejected that conclusion, chiding Kwan: “It is not your duty to prove one thing or another. It could be the shoe is slightly longer or concentrated part is shorter.”
A reader of The Malaysian Insider commented that Foong, in dismissing the conducting officer's point, sounded like he was cross examining the conducting officer.
But thank god in all his infinite wisdom that we are blessed with an observant still-serving judge as chairman of the RCI. Kaytee would have said the same thing as Kwan, that a 9 inch shoeprint obviously would not have belonged to a 11 inch size shoe. It does seem the logical conclusion to arrive at. But then, I’m not a judge so what the f* do I know!
Golly be, this naturally shifted the spotlight on a cause of possible murder, manslaughter or, at the very least, an act of God.
But today, The Malaysian Insider reported:
Ultra-violet light showed a shoeprint on the window frame of the building where Teoh Beng Hock fell to his death, the royal commission of inquiry (RCI) heard today. DSP Sharul Othman Mansor who was part of the police forensic crime scene investigation team said he found a nine-inch shoeprint on the window frame on the 14th floor of Plaza Masalam Shah Alam.
Conducting officer Kwan Li Sa then pointed out that since the length of Teoh’s shoe was 11.5 inches (based on Sharul’s measurements of the court exhibit at the inquiry), that fact eliminated the shoeprint as belonging to Teoh.
But RCI chairman James Foong rejected that conclusion, chiding Kwan: “It is not your duty to prove one thing or another. It could be the shoe is slightly longer or concentrated part is shorter.”
A reader of The Malaysian Insider commented that Foong, in dismissing the conducting officer's point, sounded like he was cross examining the conducting officer.
But thank god in all his infinite wisdom that we are blessed with an observant still-serving judge as chairman of the RCI. Kaytee would have said the same thing as Kwan, that a 9 inch shoeprint obviously would not have belonged to a 11 inch size shoe. It does seem the logical conclusion to arrive at. But then, I’m not a judge so what the f* do I know!
Wednesday, February 16, 2011
RCI = Regrettable Conflict of Interest?
The Malaysian Insider - Teoh’s family boycotts RCI.
What can I say for the prestige and various expected values of a RCI when the Teoh family, who had pushed so hard for its formation, now withdraws in protest at the decision of the Chairperson to allow officers from the AG’s Office to serve as conducting officers?
The AG has recently lodged an appeal against the coronial inquest's open verdict, asserting that Teoh Beng Hock's death was suicide. Yet the RCI has confounded us by accepting officers from the AG's Office, an interested party in the cause of Teoh's death, as conducting officers for the inquiry into Teoh's still unexplained death.
The conflict of interest is so bloody obvious that I am amazed (on second thoughts, maybe not) that regardless of the personal integrity of those officers from the AG's Office, surely James Foong, the Chair of the RCI, would have heard of that old adage “Justice must not only be done but be seen to be done”, but yet has not only persisted in using members of the AG's staff but also rejected the Teoh family's appeal on this very grave issue.
Alas, so in his inexplicable decision, justice now won't be seen to be done, as it ought to be. His decision to disregard the Teoh family’s concerns over the obvious, glaring and flagrant ‘conflict of interest’ flies in the face of convention, perceptions of fairness and raises deep concerns about the RCI itself.
This regrettably comes after the Teoh family’s unsuccessful appeal for the RCI to include 4 additional personalities of the highest caliber and integrity. No, they didn’t ask for Lim Kit Siang or kaytee. In an earlier post RCI for Teoh BH's death - Najib fighting against public perception I wrote:
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.
Most right thinking people would understand and support fully the decision of the Teoh family to withdraw from participating in the RCI.
Besides, as I also wrote in the same post, quoting The Malaysian Insider’s editorial 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 said exactly what has been on our minds.
Today The Malaysian Insider’s editorial Seeing justice done for Teoh Beng Hock ripostes succinctly to James Foong’s pompous statement to the Teoh family on Monday when he plain refused their appeal to change conducting officers: “Do not forget this is far bigger and wider in scope than just you and your family. The whole nation wants the truth. This inquiry is not just to appease you.”
The editorial stated: “True. This inquiry is not just to appease the family or to pay lip service to the pursuit of justice. It is more than that. It is about a country taking all the necessary steps to ensure no one ever goes in for questioning alive and leaves dead again.”
That's precisely what Ong Tee Keat (former MCA president) wrote in a letter to Malaysiakini, stating:
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.
And The Malaysian Insider concluded that: “The Teohs walked out today because they are not sure if justice will be served For Teoh Beng Hock and for Malaysia.”
Indeed and Amin to that.
What can I say for the prestige and various expected values of a RCI when the Teoh family, who had pushed so hard for its formation, now withdraws in protest at the decision of the Chairperson to allow officers from the AG’s Office to serve as conducting officers?
The AG has recently lodged an appeal against the coronial inquest's open verdict, asserting that Teoh Beng Hock's death was suicide. Yet the RCI has confounded us by accepting officers from the AG's Office, an interested party in the cause of Teoh's death, as conducting officers for the inquiry into Teoh's still unexplained death.
The conflict of interest is so bloody obvious that I am amazed (on second thoughts, maybe not) that regardless of the personal integrity of those officers from the AG's Office, surely James Foong, the Chair of the RCI, would have heard of that old adage “Justice must not only be done but be seen to be done”, but yet has not only persisted in using members of the AG's staff but also rejected the Teoh family's appeal on this very grave issue.
Alas, so in his inexplicable decision, justice now won't be seen to be done, as it ought to be. His decision to disregard the Teoh family’s concerns over the obvious, glaring and flagrant ‘conflict of interest’ flies in the face of convention, perceptions of fairness and raises deep concerns about the RCI itself.
This regrettably comes after the Teoh family’s unsuccessful appeal for the RCI to include 4 additional personalities of the highest caliber and integrity. No, they didn’t ask for Lim Kit Siang or kaytee. In an earlier post RCI for Teoh BH's death - Najib fighting against public perception I wrote:
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.
Most right thinking people would understand and support fully the decision of the Teoh family to withdraw from participating in the RCI.
Besides, as I also wrote in the same post, quoting The Malaysian Insider’s editorial 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 said exactly what has been on our minds.
Today The Malaysian Insider’s editorial Seeing justice done for Teoh Beng Hock ripostes succinctly to James Foong’s pompous statement to the Teoh family on Monday when he plain refused their appeal to change conducting officers: “Do not forget this is far bigger and wider in scope than just you and your family. The whole nation wants the truth. This inquiry is not just to appease you.”
The editorial stated: “True. This inquiry is not just to appease the family or to pay lip service to the pursuit of justice. It is more than that. It is about a country taking all the necessary steps to ensure no one ever goes in for questioning alive and leaves dead again.”
That's precisely what Ong Tee Keat (former MCA president) wrote in a letter to Malaysiakini, stating:
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.
And The Malaysian Insider concluded that: “The Teohs walked out today because they are not sure if justice will be served For Teoh Beng Hock and for Malaysia.”
Indeed and Amin to that.
Tuesday, February 15, 2011
Haris Ibrahim's MCLM candidates - a threat to Azmin Ali?
Why is MCLM offering its de-frog-itized candidates to only PKR but not DAP or PAS, or for that matter, the BN?
It’s not just a matter of minimising the froggie tendency of recent (and perhaps among existing) PKR politicians, but also of ensuring the credentials and competency of the PKR candidates for the next general election are up to speed.
Haris Ibrahim, conceptualizer and prime mover of MCLM’s current program to vet and offer PKR a list of 30 de-frog-itized and highly qualified candidates for PKR, has often voiced his utter amazement at PKR (in fact more Anwar Ibrahim’s personal) choice of candidates in the last election.
The prime example Haris had raised was Loh Gwo Burne, a person ‘renowned’ for his fame of “14 minutes from (video) photographer to parliamentarian” – for more of this ’14 minutes’ see my post Bahasa Mělayu - a letter to Yang Běrhormat wakakaka.
Anwar Ibrahim ‘invited’ him at the eleventh hour to stand in the Kelana Jaya federal seat. Haris challenged PKR to justify Loh’s nomination (though wakakaka, very successful election as the federal representative for Kelana Jaya) – see Haris’ PKR, why, why, why?
To be fair to Loh, he has remained faithful to PKR despite gibes and jeers that he would leapfrog over to BN. Loh also redeemed himself somewhat (though not to the anwaristas wakakaka) when he wrote a letter to Malaysiakini lambasting Azmin Ali during the party’s recent poll. Incidentally, Loh also was punched in the face by one of Anwar’s faithfuls during an argument on what I remember (vaguely) to be a squatter issue, so perhaps he might have shown some passion in his duties as a federal MP to earn the wrath (and fist) of his party colleague ;-).
We all know, and PKR members themselves do too, that the party is the weakest link in Pakatan Rakyat, with its problems mainly self-induced. A significant part of these problems has been due to its inability to sever itself completely from its UMNO past, practices and proclivities.
Haris obviously has an interest in seeing PKR develop into a party that is not a mere clone of UMNO, as it currently is (with a small appendix formerly called PRM, thanks to Dr Syed Husin’s misguided belief in Anwar Ibrahim’s reformasi).
This has been why, as reported by The Malaysian Insider in its Toe party line to get our seats, says PKR: “MCLM said that its candidates will decide on issues based on their conscience rather than the coalition’s consensus”.
However, I wonder why MCLM refers to the “coalition’s consensus” when it has been PKR it is worried about. Surely if the coalition, namely Pakatan, has reached a consensus, what then would be the issues which would so concern MCLM that its 30 candidates would vote on their conscience?
I can understand MCLM’s concerns with PKR, but what possible common grounds that DAP, PAS and PKR might have that could possibly worry MCLM? Can anyone help shed some light on Haris’s thoughts on this?
Meanwhile, Rafizi Ramli, PKR chief strategist, voiced his wariness of accepting MCLM-offered candidates because it wanted to avoid making the same “mistake” of 2008 where it had picked candidates who could not withstand the pressure and challenges of being a lawmaker".
But that’s precisely why MCLM is offering PKR 30 good and vetted candidates, because the reality is PKR is just incapable of selecting good candidates - a proven fact!
I’ve not an iota of doubt each and every MCLM-offered candidates will definitely be far superior in all respects to those erstwhile PKR MPs and members who defected to the BN, people like Zahrain. Tell me Rafizi, how far worse can MCLM’s candidate be compared to those your party had? When you’re at rock bottom, the only way has to be up! So, stop giving poor excuses.
Rafizi then went on to shoot his foot by stating: “While we are open to suggestions, the candidates must subscribe to our struggle. We are a political party with structure and rules. We have already gone through a painful experience with the ‘frogs’ where in the past we took people who were less experienced and they jumped at the first given opportunity. What was missing was the appreciation of the party struggle.”
This was precisely the reason some PKR leaders (those in the Anwar-Azmin camp) gave in supporting Azmin Ali as the preferred deputy presidential candidate over Zaid Ibrahim – essentially a ‘no’ to parachutist but 101% to those who ‘came though the reformasi struggle’.
But alas, not unlike our amazing judiciary, where on one day, white is right while on the next, black is correct, PKR has shown its double-standard cakap ta’serupa bikin in the Gobalakrishnan versus Surendran case. Nothing against innocent Surendran, but wouldn’t Gobalakrishnan be the one who had subscribed faithfully to the party struggle for the last 15 years? For more, see my posts The Poison within PKR - Part III and Gobalakrishnan leaves the poison behind.
So, Rafizi, what do you have to say? Your words have been totally inconsistent to the way your party has ill treated Gobalakrishnan.
But why is there this hypocritical UMNO-like bullsh*tting double-standard inconsistency?
Simple – because poor Gobala didn’t support Azmin Ali. He was in Zaid Ibrahim’s camp. And refusal to support Azmin Ali is not an acceptable status in PKR. Recall the furore over its party’s recent polling process, where there were 162 complaints about polling irregularities in the party race for the deputy president's position, but there was nary a twitch from the JPP PKR, the party body which is supposed to manage the party polls but which surrendered that management to ..... you can work that out!
Worse, and the absolute pits, there was the shameful silence of its President Dr Wan Azizah to Jonson Chong’s immaculate letter of appeal – see Dr Wan Azizah ignores Jonson Chong's plea?
Haris Ibrahim praised Jonson for his constructive approach but alas, not so Dr Wan as she ignored him completely - yes, we would like to know whether Dr Wan had even replied to Jonson?
Why did a party president ignore a constructive proposal from a sensible, fair and balanced gentleman like Jonson Chong which would have put to rest all complaints if the polls had been conducted fairly, unless of course she …..
Since that day, my once-respect for the lady plummeted to zilch. Yes, she may be a nice and kind lady but she is not fit to be the president of a political party.
So it’s hardly surprising Azmin Ali and Rafizi Ramli (no doubt supported by Anwar Ibrahim) have worriedly brought out ‘loyalty’ re the MCLM-offered candidates, meaning they don’t want them because they might not be (gasp gawd omigosh) loyal to Azmin Ali.
Speculative footnote: For Loh Gwo Burne who's no doubt in Azmin Ali's black book, I suspect his future candidacy for Kelana Jaya (or any other post – perhaps Pekan, wakakaka)) may well depend on the size of his dad’s contribution to PKR funds (which incidentally is NOT illegal). But in all likelihood, he will be what I said in my earlier post Loh Gwo Burne & Gobala - one-term MPs?
It’s not just a matter of minimising the froggie tendency of recent (and perhaps among existing) PKR politicians, but also of ensuring the credentials and competency of the PKR candidates for the next general election are up to speed.
Haris Ibrahim, conceptualizer and prime mover of MCLM’s current program to vet and offer PKR a list of 30 de-frog-itized and highly qualified candidates for PKR, has often voiced his utter amazement at PKR (in fact more Anwar Ibrahim’s personal) choice of candidates in the last election.
The prime example Haris had raised was Loh Gwo Burne, a person ‘renowned’ for his fame of “14 minutes from (video) photographer to parliamentarian” – for more of this ’14 minutes’ see my post Bahasa Mělayu - a letter to Yang Běrhormat wakakaka.
Anwar Ibrahim ‘invited’ him at the eleventh hour to stand in the Kelana Jaya federal seat. Haris challenged PKR to justify Loh’s nomination (though wakakaka, very successful election as the federal representative for Kelana Jaya) – see Haris’ PKR, why, why, why?
To be fair to Loh, he has remained faithful to PKR despite gibes and jeers that he would leapfrog over to BN. Loh also redeemed himself somewhat (though not to the anwaristas wakakaka) when he wrote a letter to Malaysiakini lambasting Azmin Ali during the party’s recent poll. Incidentally, Loh also was punched in the face by one of Anwar’s faithfuls during an argument on what I remember (vaguely) to be a squatter issue, so perhaps he might have shown some passion in his duties as a federal MP to earn the wrath (and fist) of his party colleague ;-).
We all know, and PKR members themselves do too, that the party is the weakest link in Pakatan Rakyat, with its problems mainly self-induced. A significant part of these problems has been due to its inability to sever itself completely from its UMNO past, practices and proclivities.
Haris obviously has an interest in seeing PKR develop into a party that is not a mere clone of UMNO, as it currently is (with a small appendix formerly called PRM, thanks to Dr Syed Husin’s misguided belief in Anwar Ibrahim’s reformasi).
This has been why, as reported by The Malaysian Insider in its Toe party line to get our seats, says PKR: “MCLM said that its candidates will decide on issues based on their conscience rather than the coalition’s consensus”.
However, I wonder why MCLM refers to the “coalition’s consensus” when it has been PKR it is worried about. Surely if the coalition, namely Pakatan, has reached a consensus, what then would be the issues which would so concern MCLM that its 30 candidates would vote on their conscience?
I can understand MCLM’s concerns with PKR, but what possible common grounds that DAP, PAS and PKR might have that could possibly worry MCLM? Can anyone help shed some light on Haris’s thoughts on this?
Meanwhile, Rafizi Ramli, PKR chief strategist, voiced his wariness of accepting MCLM-offered candidates because it wanted to avoid making the same “mistake” of 2008 where it had picked candidates who could not withstand the pressure and challenges of being a lawmaker".
But that’s precisely why MCLM is offering PKR 30 good and vetted candidates, because the reality is PKR is just incapable of selecting good candidates - a proven fact!
I’ve not an iota of doubt each and every MCLM-offered candidates will definitely be far superior in all respects to those erstwhile PKR MPs and members who defected to the BN, people like Zahrain. Tell me Rafizi, how far worse can MCLM’s candidate be compared to those your party had? When you’re at rock bottom, the only way has to be up! So, stop giving poor excuses.
Rafizi then went on to shoot his foot by stating: “While we are open to suggestions, the candidates must subscribe to our struggle. We are a political party with structure and rules. We have already gone through a painful experience with the ‘frogs’ where in the past we took people who were less experienced and they jumped at the first given opportunity. What was missing was the appreciation of the party struggle.”
This was precisely the reason some PKR leaders (those in the Anwar-Azmin camp) gave in supporting Azmin Ali as the preferred deputy presidential candidate over Zaid Ibrahim – essentially a ‘no’ to parachutist but 101% to those who ‘came though the reformasi struggle’.
But alas, not unlike our amazing judiciary, where on one day, white is right while on the next, black is correct, PKR has shown its double-standard cakap ta’serupa bikin in the Gobalakrishnan versus Surendran case. Nothing against innocent Surendran, but wouldn’t Gobalakrishnan be the one who had subscribed faithfully to the party struggle for the last 15 years? For more, see my posts The Poison within PKR - Part III and Gobalakrishnan leaves the poison behind.
So, Rafizi, what do you have to say? Your words have been totally inconsistent to the way your party has ill treated Gobalakrishnan.
But why is there this hypocritical UMNO-like bullsh*tting double-standard inconsistency?
Simple – because poor Gobala didn’t support Azmin Ali. He was in Zaid Ibrahim’s camp. And refusal to support Azmin Ali is not an acceptable status in PKR. Recall the furore over its party’s recent polling process, where there were 162 complaints about polling irregularities in the party race for the deputy president's position, but there was nary a twitch from the JPP PKR, the party body which is supposed to manage the party polls but which surrendered that management to ..... you can work that out!
Worse, and the absolute pits, there was the shameful silence of its President Dr Wan Azizah to Jonson Chong’s immaculate letter of appeal – see Dr Wan Azizah ignores Jonson Chong's plea?
Haris Ibrahim praised Jonson for his constructive approach but alas, not so Dr Wan as she ignored him completely - yes, we would like to know whether Dr Wan had even replied to Jonson?
Why did a party president ignore a constructive proposal from a sensible, fair and balanced gentleman like Jonson Chong which would have put to rest all complaints if the polls had been conducted fairly, unless of course she …..
Since that day, my once-respect for the lady plummeted to zilch. Yes, she may be a nice and kind lady but she is not fit to be the president of a political party.
So it’s hardly surprising Azmin Ali and Rafizi Ramli (no doubt supported by Anwar Ibrahim) have worriedly brought out ‘loyalty’ re the MCLM-offered candidates, meaning they don’t want them because they might not be (gasp gawd omigosh) loyal to Azmin Ali.
Speculative footnote: For Loh Gwo Burne who's no doubt in Azmin Ali's black book, I suspect his future candidacy for Kelana Jaya (or any other post – perhaps Pekan, wakakaka)) may well depend on the size of his dad’s contribution to PKR funds (which incidentally is NOT illegal). But in all likelihood, he will be what I said in my earlier post Loh Gwo Burne & Gobala - one-term MPs?
Friday, February 11, 2011
Visionary betrayed by himself
Malaysiakini - Private varsity 'squanders' RM100 mil gov't grant
If you read the above MIKINI article you will see that the wannabe-premier postgraduate technical university of Malaysia, named by the exciting inspiring acronym of MUST (Malaysian University of Science and Technology) was a concept conceived by Dr Mahathir when he visited the world famed Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT).
As I have written before, Dr Mahathir as PM was a visionary. Certainly MUST like the Multimedia Super Corridor, etc were worthy projects. But alas, a visionary or strategist’s concept could only be realized if he had the correct and competent people or staff to put flesh to his idea.
Many had been the times Dr Mahathir was let down by his blue-eyed boys. Remember MAS, Sime Darby, BIMB? Hey, in fact, once Anwar Ibrahim too was one of his blue-eyed boys wakakaka.
Let me share with you a couple of other stories that I heard recently from my elders during the Chinese New Year celebrations. I have no idea whether they’re true, but hear me out anyway ;-)
Once upon a time wakakaka, it was said that Dr Mahathir, when he became PM, was downright pissed off with the way the development and beautification of Kuala Lumpur was going. He saw so many f*ups that his blood pressure must have shot up with such force it would have easily escaped Earth’s gravitational pull.
I bet he must have been grinding his teeth at the thought of LKY down south nyah-nyah-nyah-ing him. Obviously in those days, when one talked about the ‘greening’ of a modern city, Singapore would have been a prime model. And there was nothing that pissed Dr M off more than for KL to be upstaged by that (to him) f*ing lil’ red dot down south wakakaka.
Things came to such a frustrating stage for him that it was said he hired a bus (aircon, of course wakakaka) and ordered the top KL civil servants including the Datuk Bandar into it. He then went around KL with himself in the role of (let’s put it in simple terms) a ‘tour guide’. As he passed each place or item of f*up in the greening/beautification program he would lecture his public service ‘generals’ on where they had gone wrong and how they should have done it correctly.
One related incident I still remember from the recent CNY gossip was Dr M’s admonition to the person in charge of greening the city. Words to the effect, he said that if one wanted to plant a tree or plant in a city, one should have the commonsense to choose a tree or plant which didn’t continuously shed its leaves off as that would have required more cleaning up.
When I was a kid I hated the star fruit (belimbing) tree in my garden. That arboreal monster shed and shed and shed its leaves everyday to my utter frustration, disgust and despair, because as the only kid left in my household I had the responsibility of sweeping the leaves each and every evening, finally escaping the Sisyphean ordeal only after I left home for KL when I completed my schooling.
Thus, if the story is true, Dr M was very correct in his admonition of the civil servant. Why add on unnecessarily to the cleaning cost and the untidy look of KL, when a little thought in selecting the correct plant could have help? But it’s a reflection of the lack of competency in his officers. The man had to turun padang himself to provide detailed directions. How many Dr M's would we need to spoon feed his underlings?
Another story gleaned from the gossip – again, I’m not sure whether it’s true but let’s treat it just like a story for the moment.
One day (or, once upon a time wakakaka) when Dr M went to America (which part is not important) he saw something he thought interesting and possibly useful for Malaysia. It was a Grumman Albatross (designation HU-16), a seaplane, taking off and landing on a lake.
The story went that Dr M thought such a plane could be used to land on, say, the Ringlet lake, and take off from there. He was always thinking of new ways to expand on the mode of transportation. So I presume he must have mentioned this to a staff.
So the staff went about his or her way (could it be a young 'no-crucifix' HK? wakakaka – well, a clone then) into getting ('ordering' was more like it) the TUDM to operate a couple of seaplanes. But this is the stupid part - it was not any modern seaplanes (say, like the Donier Seastar) but the Grumman Albatross, yes, that HU-16.
Just ponder on that moronic buy, or robotic mindlessness of the staff, because the Grumman Albatross was developed and produced in 1949, with its production ending in 1961. The last flight by the Americans was made in 1976.
Our southern neighbour Indonesia who had a few in its air force (or navy) had by then consigned theirs to the scrap yard long before the two HU-16’s were ordered by our Wonder for the TUDM sometime after mid-1980, a quarter of a century after production of the plane had ended.
Did those Yanks sell us some leftovers from their war museum, or more likely, a scrap yard? So, imagine how successfully(?) the TUDM operated those WWII relics? My Unc heard one nearly sank at sea but was fortuitously rescued by a RMN vessel which came upon the HU-16 wannabe-submarine and towed it back to land, wakakaka. I bet the Indonesian Air Force must have had a good laugh at Malaysian stupidity.
All these stories, if true, tell us that while Dr Mahathir had great vision and good ideas he was severely let down in the implementation by his so-called ‘generals’.
The MUST debacle is merely another example of poor implementation to a great idea by Dr M.
But in the final analysis, Dr M must bear the greater responsibility because he failed in the 3 necessary steps to ensure his ideas brought forth the correct fruit, namely:
(a) have the correct and competent people to implement his ideas or vision,
(b) ensure they conduct their business in accordance with good practice, governance and ethics, and
(c) most important of all, hold the implementers totally accountable.
Had he ever? Just think Tajudin, former CEO of MAS!
If you read the above MIKINI article you will see that the wannabe-premier postgraduate technical university of Malaysia, named by the exciting inspiring acronym of MUST (Malaysian University of Science and Technology) was a concept conceived by Dr Mahathir when he visited the world famed Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT).
As I have written before, Dr Mahathir as PM was a visionary. Certainly MUST like the Multimedia Super Corridor, etc were worthy projects. But alas, a visionary or strategist’s concept could only be realized if he had the correct and competent people or staff to put flesh to his idea.
Many had been the times Dr Mahathir was let down by his blue-eyed boys. Remember MAS, Sime Darby, BIMB? Hey, in fact, once Anwar Ibrahim too was one of his blue-eyed boys wakakaka.
Let me share with you a couple of other stories that I heard recently from my elders during the Chinese New Year celebrations. I have no idea whether they’re true, but hear me out anyway ;-)
Once upon a time wakakaka, it was said that Dr Mahathir, when he became PM, was downright pissed off with the way the development and beautification of Kuala Lumpur was going. He saw so many f*ups that his blood pressure must have shot up with such force it would have easily escaped Earth’s gravitational pull.
I bet he must have been grinding his teeth at the thought of LKY down south nyah-nyah-nyah-ing him. Obviously in those days, when one talked about the ‘greening’ of a modern city, Singapore would have been a prime model. And there was nothing that pissed Dr M off more than for KL to be upstaged by that (to him) f*ing lil’ red dot down south wakakaka.
Things came to such a frustrating stage for him that it was said he hired a bus (aircon, of course wakakaka) and ordered the top KL civil servants including the Datuk Bandar into it. He then went around KL with himself in the role of (let’s put it in simple terms) a ‘tour guide’. As he passed each place or item of f*up in the greening/beautification program he would lecture his public service ‘generals’ on where they had gone wrong and how they should have done it correctly.
One related incident I still remember from the recent CNY gossip was Dr M’s admonition to the person in charge of greening the city. Words to the effect, he said that if one wanted to plant a tree or plant in a city, one should have the commonsense to choose a tree or plant which didn’t continuously shed its leaves off as that would have required more cleaning up.
When I was a kid I hated the star fruit (belimbing) tree in my garden. That arboreal monster shed and shed and shed its leaves everyday to my utter frustration, disgust and despair, because as the only kid left in my household I had the responsibility of sweeping the leaves each and every evening, finally escaping the Sisyphean ordeal only after I left home for KL when I completed my schooling.
Thus, if the story is true, Dr M was very correct in his admonition of the civil servant. Why add on unnecessarily to the cleaning cost and the untidy look of KL, when a little thought in selecting the correct plant could have help? But it’s a reflection of the lack of competency in his officers. The man had to turun padang himself to provide detailed directions. How many Dr M's would we need to spoon feed his underlings?
Another story gleaned from the gossip – again, I’m not sure whether it’s true but let’s treat it just like a story for the moment.
One day (or, once upon a time wakakaka) when Dr M went to America (which part is not important) he saw something he thought interesting and possibly useful for Malaysia. It was a Grumman Albatross (designation HU-16), a seaplane, taking off and landing on a lake.
The story went that Dr M thought such a plane could be used to land on, say, the Ringlet lake, and take off from there. He was always thinking of new ways to expand on the mode of transportation. So I presume he must have mentioned this to a staff.
So the staff went about his or her way (could it be a young 'no-crucifix' HK? wakakaka – well, a clone then) into getting ('ordering' was more like it) the TUDM to operate a couple of seaplanes. But this is the stupid part - it was not any modern seaplanes (say, like the Donier Seastar) but the Grumman Albatross, yes, that HU-16.
Just ponder on that moronic buy, or robotic mindlessness of the staff, because the Grumman Albatross was developed and produced in 1949, with its production ending in 1961. The last flight by the Americans was made in 1976.
Our southern neighbour Indonesia who had a few in its air force (or navy) had by then consigned theirs to the scrap yard long before the two HU-16’s were ordered by our Wonder for the TUDM sometime after mid-1980, a quarter of a century after production of the plane had ended.
Did those Yanks sell us some leftovers from their war museum, or more likely, a scrap yard? So, imagine how successfully(?) the TUDM operated those WWII relics? My Unc heard one nearly sank at sea but was fortuitously rescued by a RMN vessel which came upon the HU-16 wannabe-submarine and towed it back to land, wakakaka. I bet the Indonesian Air Force must have had a good laugh at Malaysian stupidity.
All these stories, if true, tell us that while Dr Mahathir had great vision and good ideas he was severely let down in the implementation by his so-called ‘generals’.
The MUST debacle is merely another example of poor implementation to a great idea by Dr M.
But in the final analysis, Dr M must bear the greater responsibility because he failed in the 3 necessary steps to ensure his ideas brought forth the correct fruit, namely:
(a) have the correct and competent people to implement his ideas or vision,
(b) ensure they conduct their business in accordance with good practice, governance and ethics, and
(c) most important of all, hold the implementers totally accountable.
Had he ever? Just think Tajudin, former CEO of MAS!
Tuesday, February 08, 2011
Anwar's Indian bid - too little too late
The Malaysian Insider - Anwar in bid to win back Indian support.
Nallakaruppan, Jenapala, Gobalakrishnan, etc!
A stupid case of stopping the Indian temple bells from ringing (in PKR), as Anwar had threatened when he was DPM.
But I reckon his survival-driven bid, galvanized by the recent collapse of his Sabah house of cards, may be too little too late. Anwar’s dream of Putrajaya is becoming more of a nightmare.
As I had mentioned in my 3-part The Poison within PKR, that so long as Anwar Ibrahim blindly supports Azmin Ali to the extent of unfairly sweeping the latter’s competitors aside or stacking the odds up for Azmin’s supporters, this poisonous policy will eventually destroy his party.
The lamentable Sabah situation for his party is yet another case of this poison. Does anyone really believe Dr Wan Azizah has her heart in settling the Sabah issue, or the ability to do so? She’s nothing more than a puppet of either Anwar or Azmin, or both. The poison continues to prevail.
The Anwar-Azmin poison has affected more than just the Indians. Zaid Ibrahim has been the biggie, but soon we may see Jonson Chong, Chegubard and other good people leaving the ‘party-for-two’ in sheer frustration, as Zaid Ibrahim and Gobalakrishnan, the latter once his biggest supporter, had recently done.
And then Anwar doesn’t have to worry about stopping the Indian temple bells from ringing, because there won’t be any Indians (including a number of good non-Indians) in PKR anymore.
Nallakaruppan, Jenapala, Gobalakrishnan, etc!
A stupid case of stopping the Indian temple bells from ringing (in PKR), as Anwar had threatened when he was DPM.
But I reckon his survival-driven bid, galvanized by the recent collapse of his Sabah house of cards, may be too little too late. Anwar’s dream of Putrajaya is becoming more of a nightmare.
As I had mentioned in my 3-part The Poison within PKR, that so long as Anwar Ibrahim blindly supports Azmin Ali to the extent of unfairly sweeping the latter’s competitors aside or stacking the odds up for Azmin’s supporters, this poisonous policy will eventually destroy his party.
The lamentable Sabah situation for his party is yet another case of this poison. Does anyone really believe Dr Wan Azizah has her heart in settling the Sabah issue, or the ability to do so? She’s nothing more than a puppet of either Anwar or Azmin, or both. The poison continues to prevail.
The Anwar-Azmin poison has affected more than just the Indians. Zaid Ibrahim has been the biggie, but soon we may see Jonson Chong, Chegubard and other good people leaving the ‘party-for-two’ in sheer frustration, as Zaid Ibrahim and Gobalakrishnan, the latter once his biggest supporter, had recently done.
And then Anwar doesn’t have to worry about stopping the Indian temple bells from ringing, because there won’t be any Indians (including a number of good non-Indians) in PKR anymore.
The 'Extra-Milers'
In Malaysiakini’s Ex-US envoy launches broadside at M'sia's racism we read of former US Ambassador to Malaysia, John Malott, shooting down Najib’s 1Malaysia as a policy reeking with hypocrisy, when the PM failed to unreservedly repudiate the many racist-bigoted incidents/utterances conducted or perpetuated by his UMNO colleagues, media mouths or staff.
But the one which most shamed me, yes me!, was the instruction that no crucifix be displayed at the residence of the Catholic archbishop of Kuala Lumpur when Najib visited the cleric during a Christmas Day open house.
The person who issued that instruction was a top Najib aide, Hardev Kaur, though she claimed that she 'had made it clear that it was a request and not an instruction'.
But for f* sake, no crucifix in a Catholic archbishop's house? Where did she f* come from?
John Malott sneered at her excuse, questioning the ridiculous notion that any Malaysian would or could say no to a request from the prime minister's office.
Though I was ashamed by our ‘country woman’ for her totally needless & moronic 'extra mile', way way way beyond the 'call of duty', in reality I wasn’t surprised. It’s the non-Malay aides of Malay ministers who would be more likely to try to do such stupid things to either please or 'protect' the boss.
She reminds me of a certain DNA Denier who always write “Kita Melayu ...”. when the more appropriate (& far more dignified) declaration for him should have been 'Kita orang Muslim ...'.
Just bloody make the hair on my neck stand up, but alas, these 'nons' just love to go that 'extra mile'.
But the one which most shamed me, yes me!, was the instruction that no crucifix be displayed at the residence of the Catholic archbishop of Kuala Lumpur when Najib visited the cleric during a Christmas Day open house.
The person who issued that instruction was a top Najib aide, Hardev Kaur, though she claimed that she 'had made it clear that it was a request and not an instruction'.
But for f* sake, no crucifix in a Catholic archbishop's house? Where did she f* come from?
John Malott sneered at her excuse, questioning the ridiculous notion that any Malaysian would or could say no to a request from the prime minister's office.
Though I was ashamed by our ‘country woman’ for her totally needless & moronic 'extra mile', way way way beyond the 'call of duty', in reality I wasn’t surprised. It’s the non-Malay aides of Malay ministers who would be more likely to try to do such stupid things to either please or 'protect' the boss.
She reminds me of a certain DNA Denier who always write “Kita Melayu ...”. when the more appropriate (& far more dignified) declaration for him should have been 'Kita orang Muslim ...'.
Just bloody make the hair on my neck stand up, but alas, these 'nons' just love to go that 'extra mile'.
Wednesday, February 02, 2011
Bangsa Malaysia & bangsa malaysia
Tun Dr Mahathir was the Father of Bangsa Malaysia or 'Bapa Bangsa Malaysia'. We Malaysians like to confer our leaders with ‘Father’ of this and that. Tunku was ‘Bapa Merdeka’, Razak was ‘Bapa Pembangunan’, etc. Maybe Anwar Ibrahim hopes to be a ‘Bapa’ something too wakakaka.
But alas, when our Bapa Bangsa Malaysia talks about a national identity, where all Malaysians would be able to identify themselves with the country, speak Bahasa and accept the Constitution (presumable Article 153), he actually has many categories of Bangsa Malaysia in mind.
Initially, he wanted to create an inclusive national identity for all Malaysian citizens, full stop.
When the concept of Tun's Bangsa Malaysia was raised some years ago, the Johor MB, Ghani, was furiously against it, insisting that the Malays must continue to be the ‘pivotal’ race, whatever that word means, though of course we know Ghani’s concerns (and those of many others in UMNO) about Malays continuing to hold key positions in the Malaysian political leadership, such as PM, DPM, Finance Minister and various crucial ministries, and the most important part (his crucial concerns), that the gravy train steams jolly fully forward for selected UMNO members.
Well, after all, Dr Mahathir himself admitted that UMNO today is just a party of contracts.
Then last year Dr Mahathir qualified his call for a Bangsa Malaysia. As I recall, he said his concept of Bangsa Malaysia had been premised on the Malays doing well, when he then claimed they hadn’t. In other words or rather his words, Malaysia’s social-economic situation wasn’t ripe yet for the implementation of Bangsa Malaysia. Malays must continue to have special privileges and benefit from the official socio-economic engineering program.
It would seem then that he came to agree with MB Ghani about the latter's pivotal race.
But then, when will Malaysia's socio-economic situation be ripe for the acceptance and emergence of his wonderful Bangsa Malaysia?
No one knows, nor will there ever be an agreement on the achievement of that nirvana-like socio-economic state, because it all depends on the Malay share of the economic cake.
Unfortunately, the fact on Malay economic equity has been yo-yo-ing from a measly 19% to well over 45% and down again, depending on who made the assessments.
It’s no point arguing who had been right or who was bullsh*tting, because politics rather than statistics have dictated that Malay share of the economic kueh is still low, and therefore the NEP must continue.
Thus the less-than-happy socio-economic assessment, according to the gospel by Dr Mahathir, requires that the concept of Bangsa Malaysia be postponed further.
But wait, he has now changed his mind. The Malaysian Insider just reported in its Malaysia is Tanah Melayu, says Dr M that Dr Mahathir is revisiting that rather smelly ikan kembong called Bangsa Malaysia. Apprently he wants to have his cake and eat it as well.
Wondrously and wonderfully (well, initially) Dr Mahathir asserted that “… non-Malays must accept the concept of “Bangsa Malaysia” (Malaysian nation) to help strengthen national unity. … the communities must place country before race and identify themselves as Malaysians.”
Yay! High-5's!
But alas, he then spoiled it when he qualified the above noble aspiration. The Malaysian Insider quoted him as saying that Malaysians (presumably non-Malays) today must accept/admit that the country belongs to the Malays. He reminded us that Malaysia used to be called Tanah Melayu.
Hmmm, I wonder how Sabahans and Sarawakians would say? Besides, I thought Malaysia would belong to Malaysians, all Malaysians [sigh].
He urged non-Malays to accept the culture and language of the dominant community, which I personally believe that’s not only okay but already a given. I love wearing my sarong and eating nasi lemak, and certainly look forward to dating some sarong-kebaya-ed nyonyas (or nonas in Indonesian, which defines nyonyas as married women).
Then he launched into that old tired argument that the Malays gave the Chinese and Indians citizenship because they expected the communities to respect Malay sovereignty. Thank goodness he didn't use the 'grateful' word.
But what does he mean by ‘Malay sovereignty’?
The rulers? No problem, I sembah their HRH with utmost respect and loyalty.
But I suspect he wants the non-Malays to accept that the rights, privileges and whatever of Malays must take precedence over nons. Something like what is/was practised in Israel, White Zimbabwe and White South Africa? Okay, maybe not as bad, but certainly we can forget about equality.
In other words, there are Bangsa Malaysia and (in lower cases or uncapitalised) bangsa malaysia.
But he said: [the] Malays will feel less threatened if the country adopts the concept of Bangsa Malaysia. Former Philippine President Corazon Cory Aquino is Chinese but she identified herself as a Filipino. Former Thai Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra is Chinese but he speaks the Thai language and lives the Thai culture.
It is different in Malaysia. We still introduce ourselves according to our race. This is why the question of race will continue to haunt us.
I have to admit he’s right in the above second paragraph, but alas, Tun didn’t probe a bit deeper and ask why so?
Tun, I think the answer for you lies in fact in the above first paragraph, where ethnic Chinese like Corazon Cory Aquino and Thaksin Shinawatra could become the top political leaders of their respective countries.
Could that happen in Malaysia?
As Tun had alluded, there are Bangsa Malaysia and bangsa malaysia [sigh again].
The more cynical political observers have analysed his pitch to the non-Malays, particular the Chinese after the Tenang by-election showed that BN-UMNO, even in its (MCA) heartland have lost Chinese support. They suspected Tun has strategized, in an apparent willingness to accord a common national identity to the nons but one which would be spelt with lower cases - bangsa malaysia.
But alas, when our Bapa Bangsa Malaysia talks about a national identity, where all Malaysians would be able to identify themselves with the country, speak Bahasa and accept the Constitution (presumable Article 153), he actually has many categories of Bangsa Malaysia in mind.
Initially, he wanted to create an inclusive national identity for all Malaysian citizens, full stop.
When the concept of Tun's Bangsa Malaysia was raised some years ago, the Johor MB, Ghani, was furiously against it, insisting that the Malays must continue to be the ‘pivotal’ race, whatever that word means, though of course we know Ghani’s concerns (and those of many others in UMNO) about Malays continuing to hold key positions in the Malaysian political leadership, such as PM, DPM, Finance Minister and various crucial ministries, and the most important part (his crucial concerns), that the gravy train steams jolly fully forward for selected UMNO members.
Well, after all, Dr Mahathir himself admitted that UMNO today is just a party of contracts.
Then last year Dr Mahathir qualified his call for a Bangsa Malaysia. As I recall, he said his concept of Bangsa Malaysia had been premised on the Malays doing well, when he then claimed they hadn’t. In other words or rather his words, Malaysia’s social-economic situation wasn’t ripe yet for the implementation of Bangsa Malaysia. Malays must continue to have special privileges and benefit from the official socio-economic engineering program.
It would seem then that he came to agree with MB Ghani about the latter's pivotal race.
But then, when will Malaysia's socio-economic situation be ripe for the acceptance and emergence of his wonderful Bangsa Malaysia?
No one knows, nor will there ever be an agreement on the achievement of that nirvana-like socio-economic state, because it all depends on the Malay share of the economic cake.
Unfortunately, the fact on Malay economic equity has been yo-yo-ing from a measly 19% to well over 45% and down again, depending on who made the assessments.
It’s no point arguing who had been right or who was bullsh*tting, because politics rather than statistics have dictated that Malay share of the economic kueh is still low, and therefore the NEP must continue.
Thus the less-than-happy socio-economic assessment, according to the gospel by Dr Mahathir, requires that the concept of Bangsa Malaysia be postponed further.
But wait, he has now changed his mind. The Malaysian Insider just reported in its Malaysia is Tanah Melayu, says Dr M that Dr Mahathir is revisiting that rather smelly ikan kembong called Bangsa Malaysia. Apprently he wants to have his cake and eat it as well.
Wondrously and wonderfully (well, initially) Dr Mahathir asserted that “… non-Malays must accept the concept of “Bangsa Malaysia” (Malaysian nation) to help strengthen national unity. … the communities must place country before race and identify themselves as Malaysians.”
Yay! High-5's!
But alas, he then spoiled it when he qualified the above noble aspiration. The Malaysian Insider quoted him as saying that Malaysians (presumably non-Malays) today must accept/admit that the country belongs to the Malays. He reminded us that Malaysia used to be called Tanah Melayu.
Hmmm, I wonder how Sabahans and Sarawakians would say? Besides, I thought Malaysia would belong to Malaysians, all Malaysians [sigh].
He urged non-Malays to accept the culture and language of the dominant community, which I personally believe that’s not only okay but already a given. I love wearing my sarong and eating nasi lemak, and certainly look forward to dating some sarong-kebaya-ed nyonyas (or nonas in Indonesian, which defines nyonyas as married women).
Then he launched into that old tired argument that the Malays gave the Chinese and Indians citizenship because they expected the communities to respect Malay sovereignty. Thank goodness he didn't use the 'grateful' word.
But what does he mean by ‘Malay sovereignty’?
The rulers? No problem, I sembah their HRH with utmost respect and loyalty.
But I suspect he wants the non-Malays to accept that the rights, privileges and whatever of Malays must take precedence over nons. Something like what is/was practised in Israel, White Zimbabwe and White South Africa? Okay, maybe not as bad, but certainly we can forget about equality.
In other words, there are Bangsa Malaysia and (in lower cases or uncapitalised) bangsa malaysia.
But he said: [the] Malays will feel less threatened if the country adopts the concept of Bangsa Malaysia. Former Philippine President Corazon Cory Aquino is Chinese but she identified herself as a Filipino. Former Thai Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra is Chinese but he speaks the Thai language and lives the Thai culture.
It is different in Malaysia. We still introduce ourselves according to our race. This is why the question of race will continue to haunt us.
I have to admit he’s right in the above second paragraph, but alas, Tun didn’t probe a bit deeper and ask why so?
Tun, I think the answer for you lies in fact in the above first paragraph, where ethnic Chinese like Corazon Cory Aquino and Thaksin Shinawatra could become the top political leaders of their respective countries.
Could that happen in Malaysia?
As Tun had alluded, there are Bangsa Malaysia and bangsa malaysia [sigh again].
The more cynical political observers have analysed his pitch to the non-Malays, particular the Chinese after the Tenang by-election showed that BN-UMNO, even in its (MCA) heartland have lost Chinese support. They suspected Tun has strategized, in an apparent willingness to accord a common national identity to the nons but one which would be spelt with lower cases - bangsa malaysia.
Tuesday, February 01, 2011
PKR - a sinking ship?
Today I feel like having a bit of PKR bashing, mind you, not Anwar bashing but PKR bashing wakakaka! Apart from Anwar Ibrahim, PKR was noticeably conspicious by its absence in Tenang. This party is in deep disarray, and I don't have an iota of sympathy for it.
The Malaysian Insider - Azmin says Tenang a victory over MCA
Now, since when has he appointed himself as Pakatan spokesperson?
The Malaysian Insider - Pakatan wants local elections in KL
My dear Tian Chua, considering your party is in deep spin (downwards), shouldn't you be focussing on far more important things than to ask for the currently impossible? Incidentally, when were you appointed to speak on behalf of Pakatan?
Malaysiakini - PKR goes on a roadshow to repair dented image
So … attempting to close the stable doors after the horses (Zaid, Gobala, and soon a few more) have bolted! How about first answering the complaints about the party polling irregularities by Chegubard, Jonson Chong and Mustaffa Kamil, if not those by Gobala and Zaid? And what about the Jenapala scandal?
Malaysia-Today - The sour grapes syndrome
RPK wrote: Whenever anyone resigns from PKR or Pakatan Rakyat, the opposition supporters always say it is because these people are ex-Umno or ex-Barisan Nasional people; so what do you expect? These ex-Umno or Ex-BN people are not reliable or honest and eventually they betray the opposition cause and go back to their old party, is the argument we are given. Does this argument apply to all ex-Umno or ex-BN people in the opposition who are yet to leave the opposition to go back to the ruling party?
Wakakaka … see my related post Gobalakrishnan leaves the poison behind
The Malaysian Insider - Azmin says Tenang a victory over MCA
Now, since when has he appointed himself as Pakatan spokesperson?
The Malaysian Insider - Pakatan wants local elections in KL
My dear Tian Chua, considering your party is in deep spin (downwards), shouldn't you be focussing on far more important things than to ask for the currently impossible? Incidentally, when were you appointed to speak on behalf of Pakatan?
Malaysiakini - PKR goes on a roadshow to repair dented image
So … attempting to close the stable doors after the horses (Zaid, Gobala, and soon a few more) have bolted! How about first answering the complaints about the party polling irregularities by Chegubard, Jonson Chong and Mustaffa Kamil, if not those by Gobala and Zaid? And what about the Jenapala scandal?
Malaysia-Today - The sour grapes syndrome
RPK wrote: Whenever anyone resigns from PKR or Pakatan Rakyat, the opposition supporters always say it is because these people are ex-Umno or ex-Barisan Nasional people; so what do you expect? These ex-Umno or Ex-BN people are not reliable or honest and eventually they betray the opposition cause and go back to their old party, is the argument we are given. Does this argument apply to all ex-Umno or ex-BN people in the opposition who are yet to leave the opposition to go back to the ruling party?
Wakakaka … see my related post Gobalakrishnan leaves the poison behind
The truth behind the US' Egyptian nightmare
The US Administration had hoped Mubarak would continue to remain in power, which lead Hilary Clinton to foolishly say something she must now be regretting: "Our assessment is that the Egyptian government is stable and is looking for ways to respond to the legitimate needs and interests of the Egyptian people."
Stable? Yeah, as stable as a pyramid made of jelly!
Now those US authorities are weaving and weaseling their way around the Egyptian imbroglio. As the Chinese would say, those Yanks have each foot on a different papyrus sampan.
They still hope for Mubarak to come up tops but realizing that is a fast fading dream they are now ready to dump him for, best case scenario, another strong man to ensure US-Egyptian business runs as normal, and worst case scenario, to ingratiate themselves into the good books of the revolutionary forces as a beacon of freedom and democracy which had 'supported' them, yes, the type of 'freedom and democracy' they had allowed their strong man Mubarak to demonstrate in the last 30+ years.
Why all these farce? Why not truly support local democratic forces? Silly question, because the Americans had and will never care about freedom or democracy for the people of the Middle-East – for examples , consider Iran under their local strong man the late Shah, Iraq under their buddy Saddam Hussein, Afghanistan under their bosom friends the Talibans, Saudi Arabia and Jordan under their clients the respective rulers, and today their nominated and propped up local dictators in Iraq and Afghanistan.
On the other side of the coin, the Americans have demonized two true democratic forces there, Hamas and Hezbollah, both of which came to power genuinely through the ballot boxes. So much for the US hypocritical call for democracy.
The answer to the American hypocrisy can be summarized in one word, Israel.
They’re worried about the fall of Mubarak only because of Israel’s security.
For the last 30 odd years, since post Yom Kippur War of 1973, the Yanks have pumped at least 2 plus billion dollars per annum into Egypt (4 billions for Israel) to ensure the Egyptians remain in its pocket. That’s to ensure Israel could enjoy its ‘peace’ with Egypt.
Egypt is the only Arab nation which has the potential to cause grief to Israel. In 1973 in the Yom Kippur War it came close to defeating Israel. It was reported that Golda Meir was already contemplating suicide.
Alas, the Egyptian army then, under an innovative commander, while having an impressive start, failed in its finishing – typically of the Malaysian ‘style mahu, kalah ta’apa’.
There were many reasons analyzed for its poor finishing, but suffice to say, with a better trained Israeli army and massive infusion of American aid via its Operations Nickel Grass, using the formidable USAF Strategic Airlift Command, the USA poured weapons such as F4 fighter-bomber aircraft, tanks, advanced (then) weapons such as Maverick, Tow etc, into an embattled Israel. That turned the tide. Golda Meir personally awarded each pilot of the USAF Airlift Command an award.
Stable? Yeah, as stable as a pyramid made of jelly!
Now those US authorities are weaving and weaseling their way around the Egyptian imbroglio. As the Chinese would say, those Yanks have each foot on a different papyrus sampan.
They still hope for Mubarak to come up tops but realizing that is a fast fading dream they are now ready to dump him for, best case scenario, another strong man to ensure US-Egyptian business runs as normal, and worst case scenario, to ingratiate themselves into the good books of the revolutionary forces as a beacon of freedom and democracy which had 'supported' them, yes, the type of 'freedom and democracy' they had allowed their strong man Mubarak to demonstrate in the last 30+ years.
Why all these farce? Why not truly support local democratic forces? Silly question, because the Americans had and will never care about freedom or democracy for the people of the Middle-East – for examples , consider Iran under their local strong man the late Shah, Iraq under their buddy Saddam Hussein, Afghanistan under their bosom friends the Talibans, Saudi Arabia and Jordan under their clients the respective rulers, and today their nominated and propped up local dictators in Iraq and Afghanistan.
On the other side of the coin, the Americans have demonized two true democratic forces there, Hamas and Hezbollah, both of which came to power genuinely through the ballot boxes. So much for the US hypocritical call for democracy.
The answer to the American hypocrisy can be summarized in one word, Israel.
They’re worried about the fall of Mubarak only because of Israel’s security.
For the last 30 odd years, since post Yom Kippur War of 1973, the Yanks have pumped at least 2 plus billion dollars per annum into Egypt (4 billions for Israel) to ensure the Egyptians remain in its pocket. That’s to ensure Israel could enjoy its ‘peace’ with Egypt.
Egypt is the only Arab nation which has the potential to cause grief to Israel. In 1973 in the Yom Kippur War it came close to defeating Israel. It was reported that Golda Meir was already contemplating suicide.
Alas, the Egyptian army then, under an innovative commander, while having an impressive start, failed in its finishing – typically of the Malaysian ‘style mahu, kalah ta’apa’.
There were many reasons analyzed for its poor finishing, but suffice to say, with a better trained Israeli army and massive infusion of American aid via its Operations Nickel Grass, using the formidable USAF Strategic Airlift Command, the USA poured weapons such as F4 fighter-bomber aircraft, tanks, advanced (then) weapons such as Maverick, Tow etc, into an embattled Israel. That turned the tide. Golda Meir personally awarded each pilot of the USAF Airlift Command an award.
Ops Nickel Grass
The prioritization of Israel's needs over its own (American) interests in Vietnam, as demonstrated in Ops Nickel Grass, nearly brought about the near-resignation of then United States chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS) General George Brown.
Wikipedia said: Brown was reportedly livid that American weapons and munitions were being sent to a foreign country at the same time that the American command in Vietnam was protesting a lack of supplies in its theater of operations.
Maybe the US would not have suffered as many as 58,000 dead in Vietnam if those weapons had gone there instead?
That’s the lamentable story of the USA vis-à-vis Israel, such as witnessed in its recent sacrifice of over 4,000 young American lives and several thousands wounded to fight an Iraqi war (Gulf War II), ostentatiously against Saddam's non-existent WMD, then the hypocrisy about 'regime change', for oil as a second dupliticious mask (to fool its own American people), but in reality, deep in the heart of its agenda (as manipulated by the American neocon Zionists), purely for Israel’s regional interests.
It very nearly and foolishly did that again with Iran, until the American military advised against getting embroiled in Iran. But it's not off the hook yet on this one. The Israelis and their American supporters have a way of getting what they want from the US Administration, and they want Iran emasculated like Iraq, the two nations in the region (when Iraq was under Saddam) with the money, will, and hatred of Israel to cause Israel sleepless nights.
It’s all about Israel. That’s the millstone around each American Administration, perhaps forever. I had hoped President Obama would be different from previous US presidents but alas, he is in many respects worse than them.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)