Really, what is there to write about the current state of affairs in Malaysia?
We all know where we're actually at, where Malaysia has openly reached the total completion of being a policed state.
I'm just waiting for UMNO to throw in the anti-Bersih kitchen sink as well, that is, if they haven't already!
PM Najib is a coward, staying quietly out of sight in the midst of this tinder dry powder keg called Malaysia as his heavy handed clumsy-mouth low-brow cousin does his hatchet job with his henchmen, where even the sanctity of Parliament was violated and thus raped by the so-called guardians of the law. Even cartoons and T-shirts represent frightening spectres to the UMNO goons. Boo, watch out for that shadow.
Ironically, Najib had a good start as a new PM, in fact succeeding somewhat in gradually turning the BN boat around with his inclusive actions and sweet talk (but those are political allowances so why begrudge him that), but alas, he was never allowed by his own party power brokers to accomplish his aim of restoring the rakyat's faith in the leadership of the BN.
Betrayed, sabotaged and derailed by power-hungry factions in his own party, padan muka, Mr Zig Zag deserves his current predicament of being in the unusual position of a recently appointed PM but one that is a lame duck. No one in his party gives two figs about his grand strategy, with vested interests constantly manouevring and manipulating racial-religious sensitivities to stampede his economic thrust towards old corrupt goals.
That we see evil in such figures as known rapists (at least two) playing main roles on the political stage reflects on our dark times. How low have these evil forces descended to, when they saw fit to coopt or shelter rapists?
Wednesday, June 29, 2011
Sunday, June 26, 2011
Resurrection of Communism, by UMNO?
UMNO’s clarion call used to be ‘agama, bangsa dan Negara’. It has used this to arouse patriotic rallying to its banner.
Then at some stage, it decided to add ‘raja’ and kicked ‘Negara’ out.
‘Raja’ to Malays is a far more emotional word than ‘Negara’, inspiring fealty and readiness to defend their liege lord a la Hang Tuah against the Hang Jebats, which today are mainly party members of PAS, and their Chinese-Indian allies in DAP.
It’s also easier to accuse the nons, especially Chinese, of being biadap to the rulers.
Never mind that on 10 December 1992, Dr Affifuddin Omar, an UMNO man from Padang Terap, no doubt given the imprimatur by his party leaders, asked in Parliament:
"How can we continue to uphold rulers who are known to be robbers, adulterers, drunkards and kaki pukul (thugs)?" [...]
"They (the rulers) must be made to realize that they do not own this country. They are not Superman but placed on their thrones by the people. "The real power did not lie with them, but with us - the representatives of the people."
Which ‘non’ could have said that and got away? None! Only UMNO and UMNO alone could have gotten away with its abuse of the raja whom they claim to defend today.
Francis Bacon once said: “The zeal which begins with hypocrisy must conclude in treachery; at first it deceives, at last it betrays”, but obviously Boleh-UMNO has innovatively done it the other way around.
For more, see my post UMNO abusing raja, agama dan bangsa
Likewise with ‘agama dan bangsa’ against the nons, but [sigh] blast PAS, if only those anti-Malay-unity people [bloody Jebats] weren’t around to ruin the stirring ring of ‘agama, bangsa danNegara raja’ [f* Negara anyway]
But, in spite of spoilsports PAS, the clarion call has been updated to ‘agama, bangsa dan raja’.
Agama – bloody DAP and their agenda to install a Christian PM and make Malaysia a Christian nation. Islam is under threat from those DAP crusaders.
Bangsa – bloody greedy arrogant Chinese who will take over the country.
Raja – bloody DAP, so biadap to the Agong in having elections of mosque committee members without getting HM’s permission
But but but … all above three are not true; besides, the DAP is not even involved in the last.
Doesn’t matter and we (UMNO, Utusan etc) don't give a fig – it’s the perception of the Heartland that matters, and we UMNO intends to colour this perception kau kau.
But what about the UMNO denigration of the rulers in calling them robbers, adulterers, drunkards and kaki pukul (thugs)? Ta apa lah, besides Melayu muda lupa.
What! You ask: How can they lie when they’re sprouting ‘agama’ at the same time?
Aiyoh, lying is just one of the lesser crimes they have committed, which has been why kaytee believes almost every leader in UMNO is virtually an atheist wakakaka.
But the clarion is still considered not good enough.
So what now?
From The Malaysian Insider - Bersih supporters nabbed for waging war against King, we get this news:
The police said today they are probing an alleged attempt by some Bersih activists to revive communism and are investigating 30 Parti Sosialis Malaysia PSM members including Sungai Siput MP Dr Michael Jayakumar for ‘waging war against the Yang DiPertuan Agong’.
Deputy Penang police chief Datuk Abdul Rahim Jaafar was quoted by Astro Awani as saying today that remand orders would be applied for to detain the 30 activists under Section 122 of the Penal Code. The law was used to prosecute militant terrorist group Al Ma’unah who were involved in an audacious arms heist at an army camp in 2000 and a tense stand-off in the jungles of Perak in 2000.
Under Section 122 of the Penal Code ‘Whoever collects or attempts to collect men arms or ammunition or otherwise prepares to wage war with the intention of either waging or being prepared to wage war against the Yang di-Pertuan Agong or any of the Rulers or the Yang di-Pertua Negeri or abets the waging or the preparation of such war shall be punished with imprisonment for life or imprisonment for a term not exceeding twenty years and shall also be liable to fine’.
It is understood that the 30 activists were detained at the Sungai Dua toll plaza near Kepala Batas in Penang while on their way to attend a gathering in support of the Bersih rally planned for July 9.
Abdul Rahim said in Penang today that it was believed that the group was also trying to revive the communist ideology.
So they (not PSM but UMNO and its tool, the Police) have revived the old communist bogeyman.
Preposterous? Of course. Look, you, I, UMNO, Hisham, the Police, all know that it’s sheer utter bullsh*t.
But it’s for the consumption of the Heartland, not yours. A threat of communist revival will enhance the clarion call of ‘agama, bangsa dan raja’, to rally the Heartland to support UMNO.
[From UMNO to Heartland: Oh, by the way, can you all make that into a vote please, just leave the actual fighting to us; each of your vote for UMNO will be like a bullet for our army].
Then at some stage, it decided to add ‘raja’ and kicked ‘Negara’ out.
‘Raja’ to Malays is a far more emotional word than ‘Negara’, inspiring fealty and readiness to defend their liege lord a la Hang Tuah against the Hang Jebats, which today are mainly party members of PAS, and their Chinese-Indian allies in DAP.
It’s also easier to accuse the nons, especially Chinese, of being biadap to the rulers.
Never mind that on 10 December 1992, Dr Affifuddin Omar, an UMNO man from Padang Terap, no doubt given the imprimatur by his party leaders, asked in Parliament:
"How can we continue to uphold rulers who are known to be robbers, adulterers, drunkards and kaki pukul (thugs)?" [...]
"They (the rulers) must be made to realize that they do not own this country. They are not Superman but placed on their thrones by the people. "The real power did not lie with them, but with us - the representatives of the people."
Which ‘non’ could have said that and got away? None! Only UMNO and UMNO alone could have gotten away with its abuse of the raja whom they claim to defend today.
Francis Bacon once said: “The zeal which begins with hypocrisy must conclude in treachery; at first it deceives, at last it betrays”, but obviously Boleh-UMNO has innovatively done it the other way around.
For more, see my post UMNO abusing raja, agama dan bangsa
Likewise with ‘agama dan bangsa’ against the nons, but [sigh] blast PAS, if only those anti-Malay-unity people [bloody Jebats] weren’t around to ruin the stirring ring of ‘agama, bangsa dan
But, in spite of spoilsports PAS, the clarion call has been updated to ‘agama, bangsa dan raja’.
Agama – bloody DAP and their agenda to install a Christian PM and make Malaysia a Christian nation. Islam is under threat from those DAP crusaders.
Bangsa – bloody greedy arrogant Chinese who will take over the country.
Raja – bloody DAP, so biadap to the Agong in having elections of mosque committee members without getting HM’s permission
But but but … all above three are not true; besides, the DAP is not even involved in the last.
Doesn’t matter and we (UMNO, Utusan etc) don't give a fig – it’s the perception of the Heartland that matters, and we UMNO intends to colour this perception kau kau.
But what about the UMNO denigration of the rulers in calling them robbers, adulterers, drunkards and kaki pukul (thugs)? Ta apa lah, besides Melayu muda lupa.
What! You ask: How can they lie when they’re sprouting ‘agama’ at the same time?
Aiyoh, lying is just one of the lesser crimes they have committed, which has been why kaytee believes almost every leader in UMNO is virtually an atheist wakakaka.
But the clarion is still considered not good enough.
So what now?
From The Malaysian Insider - Bersih supporters nabbed for waging war against King, we get this news:
The police said today they are probing an alleged attempt by some Bersih activists to revive communism and are investigating 30 Parti Sosialis Malaysia PSM members including Sungai Siput MP Dr Michael Jayakumar for ‘waging war against the Yang DiPertuan Agong’.
Deputy Penang police chief Datuk Abdul Rahim Jaafar was quoted by Astro Awani as saying today that remand orders would be applied for to detain the 30 activists under Section 122 of the Penal Code. The law was used to prosecute militant terrorist group Al Ma’unah who were involved in an audacious arms heist at an army camp in 2000 and a tense stand-off in the jungles of Perak in 2000.
Under Section 122 of the Penal Code ‘Whoever collects or attempts to collect men arms or ammunition or otherwise prepares to wage war with the intention of either waging or being prepared to wage war against the Yang di-Pertuan Agong or any of the Rulers or the Yang di-Pertua Negeri or abets the waging or the preparation of such war shall be punished with imprisonment for life or imprisonment for a term not exceeding twenty years and shall also be liable to fine’.
It is understood that the 30 activists were detained at the Sungai Dua toll plaza near Kepala Batas in Penang while on their way to attend a gathering in support of the Bersih rally planned for July 9.
Abdul Rahim said in Penang today that it was believed that the group was also trying to revive the communist ideology.
So they (not PSM but UMNO and its tool, the Police) have revived the old communist bogeyman.
Preposterous? Of course. Look, you, I, UMNO, Hisham, the Police, all know that it’s sheer utter bullsh*t.
But it’s for the consumption of the Heartland, not yours. A threat of communist revival will enhance the clarion call of ‘agama, bangsa dan raja’, to rally the Heartland to support UMNO.
[From UMNO to Heartland: Oh, by the way, can you all make that into a vote please, just leave the actual fighting to us; each of your vote for UMNO will be like a bullet for our army].
Saturday, June 25, 2011
Truth about Bersih
Do you know why the UMNO-led government (meaning UMNO itself) is sh*t scared of 'Bersih', so much so even the (supposedly neutral) Head of the EC had his butt kicked by towkay to do his bit to persuade the organizers from abandoning the rally march?
Do you know why Perkasa has been let loose from its leash to threaten the non-Malays from participating, in tones and contents that, in any other country with an ISA and anti-sedition laws, would have seen the proponent of those racist threats jailed for a lengthy time?
Do you know why both Perkasa and UMNO Youth were galvanised into organizing counter rallies against Bersih?
No, it's not Anwar Ibrahim - he's damaged goods, especially in a country obsessed by sex, and which hypocritically and unrealistically* expect its leaders to be the Mufti of Mecca!
* earlier typo where the prefix 'un' was unfortunately omitted, making the meaning exactly opposite to what I wanted to say wakakaka
Actually it’s just a 6-letter word!
Bersih!
And one with an e-tanda.
If the organizers has used the word ’reformasi’ wakakaka, the UMNO-led government wouldn’t have care two figs.
Why is ‘Bersih’ so unacceptable?
... well, it’s because the meaning of ‘Bersih’ means that whatever it opposes is ‘Kotor’.
Hence UMNO is just sh*t scared that the Heartland will catch the implied meaning of what the protest is all about, a kotor UMNO-government and that won’t do, can’t be permitted ...
.... which is why they (UMNO) are prepared to launch another May 13 or preferably (not to disturb FDI etc ) an Ops Lalang II.
Do you know why Perkasa has been let loose from its leash to threaten the non-Malays from participating, in tones and contents that, in any other country with an ISA and anti-sedition laws, would have seen the proponent of those racist threats jailed for a lengthy time?
Do you know why both Perkasa and UMNO Youth were galvanised into organizing counter rallies against Bersih?
No, it's not Anwar Ibrahim - he's damaged goods, especially in a country obsessed by sex, and which hypocritically and unrealistically* expect its leaders to be the Mufti of Mecca!
* earlier typo where the prefix 'un' was unfortunately omitted, making the meaning exactly opposite to what I wanted to say wakakaka
Actually it’s just a 6-letter word!
Bersih!
And one with an e-tanda.
If the organizers has used the word ’reformasi’ wakakaka, the UMNO-led government wouldn’t have care two figs.
Why is ‘Bersih’ so unacceptable?
... well, it’s because the meaning of ‘Bersih’ means that whatever it opposes is ‘Kotor’.
Hence UMNO is just sh*t scared that the Heartland will catch the implied meaning of what the protest is all about, a kotor UMNO-government and that won’t do, can’t be permitted ...
.... which is why they (UMNO) are prepared to launch another May 13 or preferably (not to disturb FDI etc ) an Ops Lalang II.
Thursday, June 23, 2011
Lalang déjà vu?
Déjà vu!
In 1987 the nation was facing rising political tension with racial issues embedded. The situation was tinder dry with clowns pouring paraffin onto piles of kindle.
The issue?
Protests against the government’s decision to send non-Mandarin qualified principals to Chinese vernacular schools.
Guess who was the (UMNO) Education Minister? Wakakaka!
There was bipartisan political support against the Education Ministry’s decision, but alas, this was where the racial element supposedly crept in - the bipartisan stand against the Education Ministry were from the Chinese-based party MCA and mainly Chinese-based Gerakan, both part of the ruling party BN, and the opposition DAP, a party demon-ized for years by UMNO and thus perceived as a Chinese party by Malays.
Gathering at a KL Chinese temple together with Dong Jiao Zong (Chinese educationists & parents association) they vociferously voiced their anger and disagreement with what they saw as the Education Minister’s ulterior motive to weaken the leadership and administration of the Chinese vernacular schools. They threatened to boycott the vernacular schools for 3 days, though this specific threat was subsequently withdrawn.
However, the choice of a Chinese temple as a venue for the protesting parties was most unfortunate because it provided justification for then-PM Dr Mahathir’s to conduct pre-emptive arrests. He subsequently alluded to the Chinese gathering at Thian Hou Temple in KL as a Shaolin-type rebellion against the central (Qing) government.
While he didn’t mention the word ‘Shaolin’ wakakaka, every Chinese Malaysian understood what he meant when he said (as I was told), words to the effect, the history of Chinese groups gathering at a Chinese temple to protest against the government, has shown this to be dangerous for the authority.
How did Dr Mahathir know about the history of Shaolin? Maybe he was informed by his Chinese (or SB Chinese specialist) advisors, or maybe he was a closeted Chinese kungfu movie fan wakakaka.
In typical Malaysian political jaguh (heroic) fashion, an intrinsic characteristic of our ethnocentric political culture, UMNO Youth responded with a planned mass counter-rally. Someone declared he wanted his keris to be dripping with Chinese blood.
The rest is history, which saw Ops Lalang launched.
Now, what did I say at the very beginning of this post?
Déjà vu!
Yup, the political situation today is not unlike that in September 1987, with the tinder dry escalating political tension, racism at its worst, a protest (Bersih) is planned, a counter protest by a favoured party (Good Lord, it’s the same one though with a devolved name), the keris is implied by someone telling the Chinese to stock up with emergency food, etc etc. Three names involved in 1987 are still with us today, namely Najib, Anwar and Dr Mahathir.
Ops Lalang II?
If that comes about, make a guess who’ll be eating nasi kamunting, some perhaps for a second time under a new Lalang sweep?
In 1987 the nation was facing rising political tension with racial issues embedded. The situation was tinder dry with clowns pouring paraffin onto piles of kindle.
The issue?
Protests against the government’s decision to send non-Mandarin qualified principals to Chinese vernacular schools.
Guess who was the (UMNO) Education Minister? Wakakaka!
There was bipartisan political support against the Education Ministry’s decision, but alas, this was where the racial element supposedly crept in - the bipartisan stand against the Education Ministry were from the Chinese-based party MCA and mainly Chinese-based Gerakan, both part of the ruling party BN, and the opposition DAP, a party demon-ized for years by UMNO and thus perceived as a Chinese party by Malays.
Gathering at a KL Chinese temple together with Dong Jiao Zong (Chinese educationists & parents association) they vociferously voiced their anger and disagreement with what they saw as the Education Minister’s ulterior motive to weaken the leadership and administration of the Chinese vernacular schools. They threatened to boycott the vernacular schools for 3 days, though this specific threat was subsequently withdrawn.
However, the choice of a Chinese temple as a venue for the protesting parties was most unfortunate because it provided justification for then-PM Dr Mahathir’s to conduct pre-emptive arrests. He subsequently alluded to the Chinese gathering at Thian Hou Temple in KL as a Shaolin-type rebellion against the central (Qing) government.
While he didn’t mention the word ‘Shaolin’ wakakaka, every Chinese Malaysian understood what he meant when he said (as I was told), words to the effect, the history of Chinese groups gathering at a Chinese temple to protest against the government, has shown this to be dangerous for the authority.
How did Dr Mahathir know about the history of Shaolin? Maybe he was informed by his Chinese (or SB Chinese specialist) advisors, or maybe he was a closeted Chinese kungfu movie fan wakakaka.
In typical Malaysian political jaguh (heroic) fashion, an intrinsic characteristic of our ethnocentric political culture, UMNO Youth responded with a planned mass counter-rally. Someone declared he wanted his keris to be dripping with Chinese blood.
The rest is history, which saw Ops Lalang launched.
Now, what did I say at the very beginning of this post?
Déjà vu!
Yup, the political situation today is not unlike that in September 1987, with the tinder dry escalating political tension, racism at its worst, a protest (Bersih) is planned, a counter protest by a favoured party (Good Lord, it’s the same one though with a devolved name), the keris is implied by someone telling the Chinese to stock up with emergency food, etc etc. Three names involved in 1987 are still with us today, namely Najib, Anwar and Dr Mahathir.
Ops Lalang II?
If that comes about, make a guess who’ll be eating nasi kamunting, some perhaps for a second time under a new Lalang sweep?
Sunday, June 19, 2011
Malaysians pay more than Sings do for imported rice
Two weeks ago I posted Cronyism, where I asked:
What is cronyism? […]
In the Malaysian case, cronyism is more about commercial awards with outrageous terms, usually at the expense of the rakyat […]
… for example, such as the disgraceful extent of the government’s refusal to make public the contractual terms the government had signed with the IPP, and outrageously declaring the contracts as classified.
What is the BN government hiding?*
* er ... just a rhetorical question, meaning we know the answer to it, wakakaka
Ask yourself whether today’s The Malaysian Insider’s Ku Li: Putrajaya should rethink economic policies as income gap widens suggests another act of cronyism?
In TMI news article, Tengku Razaleigh ... criticised Malaysia for being the only rice producing country that has privatised rice production and given it to politically-linked Tan Sri Syed Mokhtar Al-Bukhary’s company Padiberas Nasional Bhd (Bernas) a monopoly over the market.
He said: The reality today is Thailand and Indonesia are self sufficient in rice and we are 30 per cent dependent on imported rice. But because it is a monopoly, imported rice is cheaper in Singapore than Malaysia. Privatisation for the benefit of private individuals to profit from such an essential commodity is a clear abuse of power.
If only non-Malay Malaysians eat rice, I can at least understand (if not disagree with) a BN favoured individual being allowed to monopolize the provision of rice, an essential commodity.
But don’t Malays eat rice too? So, via this rice monopoly, hasn’t someone f* the Malays up kau kau, forcing them to buy rice at prices far more expensive than what a Singaporean, a citizen of a non-rice producing nation, needs to pay for imported rice?
I hope those über Ketuanan Melayu types like Ibrahim Ali and his Perkasa, Pembela, Utusan Malaysia and Awang Selamat, Big Dog, etc would say something about this.
Thus, may I just reiterate, that in the Malaysian case, cronyism is more about commercial awards with outrageous terms, usually at the expense of the rakyat …
… and the rakyat of this country, our nation, naturally includes the Malays.
What is cronyism? […]
In the Malaysian case, cronyism is more about commercial awards with outrageous terms, usually at the expense of the rakyat […]
… for example, such as the disgraceful extent of the government’s refusal to make public the contractual terms the government had signed with the IPP, and outrageously declaring the contracts as classified.
What is the BN government hiding?*
* er ... just a rhetorical question, meaning we know the answer to it, wakakaka
Ask yourself whether today’s The Malaysian Insider’s Ku Li: Putrajaya should rethink economic policies as income gap widens suggests another act of cronyism?
In TMI news article, Tengku Razaleigh ... criticised Malaysia for being the only rice producing country that has privatised rice production and given it to politically-linked Tan Sri Syed Mokhtar Al-Bukhary’s company Padiberas Nasional Bhd (Bernas) a monopoly over the market.
He said: The reality today is Thailand and Indonesia are self sufficient in rice and we are 30 per cent dependent on imported rice. But because it is a monopoly, imported rice is cheaper in Singapore than Malaysia. Privatisation for the benefit of private individuals to profit from such an essential commodity is a clear abuse of power.
If only non-Malay Malaysians eat rice, I can at least understand (if not disagree with) a BN favoured individual being allowed to monopolize the provision of rice, an essential commodity.
But don’t Malays eat rice too? So, via this rice monopoly, hasn’t someone f* the Malays up kau kau, forcing them to buy rice at prices far more expensive than what a Singaporean, a citizen of a non-rice producing nation, needs to pay for imported rice?
I hope those über Ketuanan Melayu types like Ibrahim Ali and his Perkasa, Pembela, Utusan Malaysia and Awang Selamat, Big Dog, etc would say something about this.
Thus, may I just reiterate, that in the Malaysian case, cronyism is more about commercial awards with outrageous terms, usually at the expense of the rakyat …
… and the rakyat of this country, our nation, naturally includes the Malays.
Saturday, June 18, 2011
Carthaginian DAP must be destroyed
Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam
(Furthermore I think Carthage must be destroyed)
(Furthermore I think Carthage must be destroyed)
- Cato
Malaysiakini’s Umno 'welcomed' to sue Penang on mosque polls reported that:
Penang state executive councillor for religious affairs Abdul Malik Abul Kassim has challenged groups protesting the elections to mosque committees in the state to sue the government ...
… because he knew the elections (outside of interference by political parties) (a) would be completely in accordance with Islamic belief and practice and (b) does not interfere with the Agong’s prerogative as the Islamic Head of Penang State because all the nominees will have to be endorsed (approved) by His Majesty.
Knowing UMNO and its sinister tactics, I wasn’t surprised to read sweetie Susan Loone's article in Malaysiakini that the Agong has ordered the Penang mosque panel polls to be put off.
No doubt HM must have felt uneasy enough to have a discussion with Penang’s Head of State Abdul Rahman Abbas and MAIPP head Ellias Zakaria (by the way, are the latter two UMNO nominated/appointed?).
According to Bernama HM wants the MAIPP to “set up an independent committee to find new procedures in appointing mosque committee members.”
I thought that was precisely what the MAIPP was supposed to do, but 'nuff said. Other than voicing my complete bemusement at the Agong's statement (as reported by Bernama), I’m going to keep my mouth shut and my further opinions to myself on HM's statement.
Needless to say, MKINI readers have a somewhat different attitude to me, where comments have been free flowing, unbridled, unrestrained and in a few cases, perhaps even uncouth.
Rather than them just commenting on alleged unwelcomed royal intrusion into politics, one should look at the bigger picture of what UMNO is striving to achieve politically, particularly in Penang State.
Even though HM's wish for MAIPP to “set up an independent committee to find new procedures in appointing mosque committee members” has been precisely what MAIPP had set out to do (indeed for the first time in Penang State), UMNO wants the Malay and Muslim communities to see the Agong’s royal command to put a halt to the election, as indicative of the political scenario it badly wants painted ...
... that the DAP government is un-Islamic, anti-Muslim, anti-Melayu, evil, sinister, seditious, rapacious and most important of all, wakakaka, not to be voted for in the next election.
You have to understand that UMNO is not doing it for MCA, MIC or wakakaka Gerakan.
Like Rome is of Carthage, UMNO is currently sh*t-scared of DAP.
Penang state executive councillor for religious affairs Abdul Malik Abul Kassim has challenged groups protesting the elections to mosque committees in the state to sue the government ...
… because he knew the elections (outside of interference by political parties) (a) would be completely in accordance with Islamic belief and practice and (b) does not interfere with the Agong’s prerogative as the Islamic Head of Penang State because all the nominees will have to be endorsed (approved) by His Majesty.
Knowing UMNO and its sinister tactics, I wasn’t surprised to read sweetie Susan Loone's article in Malaysiakini that the Agong has ordered the Penang mosque panel polls to be put off.
No doubt HM must have felt uneasy enough to have a discussion with Penang’s Head of State Abdul Rahman Abbas and MAIPP head Ellias Zakaria (by the way, are the latter two UMNO nominated/appointed?).
According to Bernama HM wants the MAIPP to “set up an independent committee to find new procedures in appointing mosque committee members.”
I thought that was precisely what the MAIPP was supposed to do, but 'nuff said. Other than voicing my complete bemusement at the Agong's statement (as reported by Bernama), I’m going to keep my mouth shut and my further opinions to myself on HM's statement.
Needless to say, MKINI readers have a somewhat different attitude to me, where comments have been free flowing, unbridled, unrestrained and in a few cases, perhaps even uncouth.
Rather than them just commenting on alleged unwelcomed royal intrusion into politics, one should look at the bigger picture of what UMNO is striving to achieve politically, particularly in Penang State.
Even though HM's wish for MAIPP to “set up an independent committee to find new procedures in appointing mosque committee members” has been precisely what MAIPP had set out to do (indeed for the first time in Penang State), UMNO wants the Malay and Muslim communities to see the Agong’s royal command to put a halt to the election, as indicative of the political scenario it badly wants painted ...
... that the DAP government is un-Islamic, anti-Muslim, anti-Melayu, evil, sinister, seditious, rapacious and most important of all, wakakaka, not to be voted for in the next election.
You have to understand that UMNO is not doing it for MCA, MIC or wakakaka Gerakan.
Like Rome is of Carthage, UMNO is currently sh*t-scared of DAP.
Sunday, June 12, 2011
Mat Sabu - a new Lee Lam Thye?
“I did not join PAS because of its Islamic platform or because I was anti-Umno. It was for want of a better democracy and it is a struggle which my colleagues and I continue until now.”
“Marx said that religion is the opium for the people … (In the past) priests supported cruel tsars, wages were neglected, Christian leaders supported oppressive monarchs, so if they wanted to bring social change (at the time), they have to reject religion."
“Religion is like opium too in Malaysia and in the Arab nations. This view is highly controversial … but I see religion being misused.”
- Mat Sabu in an interview with Malaysiakini
One of my fave Malaysiakini columnists, Sim Kwang Yang (a former DAP MP from Sarawak), wrote an interesting piece in response to Mat Sabu’s tongue-in-cheek suggestion that he would like to stand in the Chinese-majority constituency of Bukit Bintang (BB) – see MKINI Mat Sabu in BB – a mission not impossible?
Electorally, BB is virtually a Chinese fortress, where once Lee Lam Thye (DAP) reigned supreme. Lee L.T was so loved by the BB people that no one, not even Lim Kit Siang, would have dared to challenge him, let alone the silly MCA people. They including Lim KS would have been mercilessly massacred.
Those MCA candidates nominated by their party to stand against him were either unpopular with or unimportant to their party wakakaka. For a MCA bloke to be 'offered' as asacrificial goat candidate to stand in BB against the invincible Lee L.T was like being handed the poison chalice. They became dispensable cannon fodder.
I believe only once had MCA taken the seat, and then, long after Lee L.T. had retired and only with the 'help' of a court decision a la (at that time, still futuristic) the malodorous Perakian manure.
Sim posed several interesting questions on the election prospects of Mat Sabu in BB. However, I take exception to one of Sim’s statement which unwittingly smacks of UMNO-ism. Sim wrote:
It is a sad reality in Malaysia that in popular politic, voters will support only a candidate from the same race and not from other races.
While Sim and others may find some truth in that, I beg to differ by providing the following evidence:
... that there are numerous non-Chinese DAP MPs such as (in Penang) Karpal Singh, Professor Rama, (in Perak) Kula, Manogaran, (in Selangor) Charles Santiago, Gobind Deo, (in NS) John Fernandez, ...
... and non-Chinese DAP ADUNs (not including a Perak frog), like (in Penang) Professor Rama, Jagdeep Singh, Tanasekharan, R Sanisvara Rayer, (in Perak) A Sivaesan, V Sivakumar. A Sivasubramaniam, (in Selangor) M Manoharan, and (in NS) S Veerapan, K Arumugum, P Gunasekaren ...
... who are in the majority representatives of Chinese-majority constituencies and thus voted into office by them.
Then there was my post about the late D.R. Seenivasagam, better known in his days as the ‘King of Ipoh’, a Chinese-majority city – see Obituary for PPP. Most of his and his brother's supporters were Chinese - just compare or rather contrast the popular standing of the Seenivasagan brothers with that of the politically-pariah status of Kayveas and his current PPP Indian leaders wakakaka.
The above examples offer incontrovertible truth as to why I find exception to Sim's statement that [Chinese] voters will support only a [Chinese] candidate ... and not from other races. The evidence shows otherwise, that they have supported and continue to support political leaders (of any ethnicity including those from UMNO and PAS) who would be fair to their genuine concerns.
OK, now let’s move to my favourite federal constituency of Bukit Bendera in the 2004 general election. Like BB (Bukit Bintang), Bukit Bendera (coincidentally also BB) is a Chinese-majority federal constituency, currently represented by DAP’s Liew Chin Tong.
But the DAP candidate in Bukit Bendera in 2004 was Zulkifli Mohd Noor.
B. Bendera then had the following breakdown of registered voters: 13.82% Malays, 73.97% Chinese and 11.07% Indians, with 1.14% others (presumably Eurasians and Thais?).
Zul won nearly 18000 of the 47000 votes, just a mere 5500 short of becoming the first* DAP Malay MP. Regardless of his loss, his achievement was no mean feat if we look at the above ethnic breakdown.
* correction to my error about DAP's 1st Malay MP - Ahmad Nor was the first DAP MP, He won the federal constituency of Bayan Baru in Penang in the 1990 general election.
Apparently, since 1969, 6 DAP Malay politicians won in elections – of course there was Ahmad Nor in the federal constituency of Bayan Baru, and 5 ADUNs (i) Ibrahim Singgeh; (ii) Haji Hassan bin Haji Ahmad; (iii) Daing Ibrahim Othman; (iv) Mohd Salleh Nakhoda Itam & (v) Fadzlan Yahya.
Even if all 14% Malays in that constituency had turned up to cast their ballots for Zulkifli (which was as likely as war criminal George Bush or Tony Blair winning the Nobel Peace Prize), he wouldn’t get more than 5000 votes. So make a guess as to where the other 13,000 plus votes came from?
Kaytee suspects one of the two reasons why Zulkifli didn’t roam all the way home was that he was a johnny-come-lately in the constituency (rather than a non Chinese). The DAP had failed to prepare him for or introduce him to the voters well ahead.
But despite being parachuted into B. Bendera at the eleventh hour, Zul did remarkably well. It's a pity and to kaytee's immense regrets that he didn't stand again in the same constituency in 2008.
The second reason was that his Gerakan opponent was the once-formidable wakakaka Chia Kwang Chye. The Gerakan was the party favoured by Penang hawkers and small business, and B. Bendera was home to many of them.
Today the DAP brand has high probability of winnability (regardless of the ethnicity of its candidates) because voters have confidence that candidates from the DAP party will look after their interests [as once Gerakan had until it sold its 'soul' to UMNO].
This factor is what wins voters' support, as it once did for D.R Seenivasagam and Lee Lam Thye. And that’s the precise reason a non-Chinese like Karpal Singh has become an iconic institution in Gelugor, not unlike D.R Seenivasagam, the late 'King of Ipoh', and the once equally invincible Lee Lam Thye was in B.B.
Ironically, it was the voters’ perception in 1999 that the DAP had sold out to PAS and its frightening Islamic hudud laws that saw Karpal and Lim Kit Siang losing.
But if the Pakatan Rakyat wishes to venture on a no-ethnicity campaign such as standing Mat Sabu in BB, it has to prepare the voters for it, as should have been the case in Bukit Bendera in 2004.
On his part, Mat Sabu as the new exciting PAS personality, beside the incomparable Nizar Jamaluddin, must strike a balance between PAS' Islamic values and its multi-ethnic multi-cultural credentials.
I suggest that PAS marries the two into an Islamic anti-corruption, pro-justice and pro-welfare policy for all under the current Malaysian civil legislative arrangements, rather than become obsessed with implementing hudud laws per se.
There's no evidence whatsoever that hudud will reduce, let alone eliminate corruption and oppression - for proof, just look at the terrible state of affairs in hudud-governed Pakistan (which even condones 'revenge-rapes'), Bangladesh, Saudi Arabia, Iran and a host of other Islamic nations. Where then is the empirical evidence that hudud is the 'silver bullet' to rid Malaysia of corruption, oppression and injustice?
By contrast, examine and admire the non or minimal corruptibility of the secular governance practised by Scandinavian countries, New Zealand, Australia and our neighbour, Singapore.
Tell me, between having hudud in the midst of continuing injustice, corruption & oppression or a secular governance (but under genuine/sincere Islamic leadership) that doesn't tolerate corruption nor oppression and ensure justice for all, which will meaningfully glorify Allah swt?
“Marx said that religion is the opium for the people … (In the past) priests supported cruel tsars, wages were neglected, Christian leaders supported oppressive monarchs, so if they wanted to bring social change (at the time), they have to reject religion."
“Religion is like opium too in Malaysia and in the Arab nations. This view is highly controversial … but I see religion being misused.”
- Mat Sabu in an interview with Malaysiakini
One of my fave Malaysiakini columnists, Sim Kwang Yang (a former DAP MP from Sarawak), wrote an interesting piece in response to Mat Sabu’s tongue-in-cheek suggestion that he would like to stand in the Chinese-majority constituency of Bukit Bintang (BB) – see MKINI Mat Sabu in BB – a mission not impossible?
Electorally, BB is virtually a Chinese fortress, where once Lee Lam Thye (DAP) reigned supreme. Lee L.T was so loved by the BB people that no one, not even Lim Kit Siang, would have dared to challenge him, let alone the silly MCA people. They including Lim KS would have been mercilessly massacred.
Those MCA candidates nominated by their party to stand against him were either unpopular with or unimportant to their party wakakaka. For a MCA bloke to be 'offered' as a
I believe only once had MCA taken the seat, and then, long after Lee L.T. had retired and only with the 'help' of a court decision a la (at that time, still futuristic) the malodorous Perakian manure.
Sim posed several interesting questions on the election prospects of Mat Sabu in BB. However, I take exception to one of Sim’s statement which unwittingly smacks of UMNO-ism. Sim wrote:
It is a sad reality in Malaysia that in popular politic, voters will support only a candidate from the same race and not from other races.
While Sim and others may find some truth in that, I beg to differ by providing the following evidence:
... that there are numerous non-Chinese DAP MPs such as (in Penang) Karpal Singh, Professor Rama, (in Perak) Kula, Manogaran, (in Selangor) Charles Santiago, Gobind Deo, (in NS) John Fernandez, ...
... and non-Chinese DAP ADUNs (not including a Perak frog), like (in Penang) Professor Rama, Jagdeep Singh, Tanasekharan, R Sanisvara Rayer, (in Perak) A Sivaesan, V Sivakumar. A Sivasubramaniam, (in Selangor) M Manoharan, and (in NS) S Veerapan, K Arumugum, P Gunasekaren ...
... who are in the majority representatives of Chinese-majority constituencies and thus voted into office by them.
Then there was my post about the late D.R. Seenivasagam, better known in his days as the ‘King of Ipoh’, a Chinese-majority city – see Obituary for PPP. Most of his and his brother's supporters were Chinese - just compare or rather contrast the popular standing of the Seenivasagan brothers with that of the politically-pariah status of Kayveas and his current PPP Indian leaders wakakaka.
The above examples offer incontrovertible truth as to why I find exception to Sim's statement that [Chinese] voters will support only a [Chinese] candidate ... and not from other races. The evidence shows otherwise, that they have supported and continue to support political leaders (of any ethnicity including those from UMNO and PAS) who would be fair to their genuine concerns.
OK, now let’s move to my favourite federal constituency of Bukit Bendera in the 2004 general election. Like BB (Bukit Bintang), Bukit Bendera (coincidentally also BB) is a Chinese-majority federal constituency, currently represented by DAP’s Liew Chin Tong.
But the DAP candidate in Bukit Bendera in 2004 was Zulkifli Mohd Noor.
B. Bendera then had the following breakdown of registered voters: 13.82% Malays, 73.97% Chinese and 11.07% Indians, with 1.14% others (presumably Eurasians and Thais?).
Zul won nearly 18000 of the 47000 votes, just a mere 5500 short of becoming the first* DAP Malay MP. Regardless of his loss, his achievement was no mean feat if we look at the above ethnic breakdown.
* correction to my error about DAP's 1st Malay MP - Ahmad Nor was the first DAP MP, He won the federal constituency of Bayan Baru in Penang in the 1990 general election.
Apparently, since 1969, 6 DAP Malay politicians won in elections – of course there was Ahmad Nor in the federal constituency of Bayan Baru, and 5 ADUNs (i) Ibrahim Singgeh; (ii) Haji Hassan bin Haji Ahmad; (iii) Daing Ibrahim Othman; (iv) Mohd Salleh Nakhoda Itam & (v) Fadzlan Yahya.
Even if all 14% Malays in that constituency had turned up to cast their ballots for Zulkifli (which was as likely as war criminal George Bush or Tony Blair winning the Nobel Peace Prize), he wouldn’t get more than 5000 votes. So make a guess as to where the other 13,000 plus votes came from?
Kaytee suspects one of the two reasons why Zulkifli didn’t roam all the way home was that he was a johnny-come-lately in the constituency (rather than a non Chinese). The DAP had failed to prepare him for or introduce him to the voters well ahead.
But despite being parachuted into B. Bendera at the eleventh hour, Zul did remarkably well. It's a pity and to kaytee's immense regrets that he didn't stand again in the same constituency in 2008.
The second reason was that his Gerakan opponent was the once-formidable wakakaka Chia Kwang Chye. The Gerakan was the party favoured by Penang hawkers and small business, and B. Bendera was home to many of them.
Today the DAP brand has high probability of winnability (regardless of the ethnicity of its candidates) because voters have confidence that candidates from the DAP party will look after their interests [as once Gerakan had until it sold its 'soul' to UMNO].
This factor is what wins voters' support, as it once did for D.R Seenivasagam and Lee Lam Thye. And that’s the precise reason a non-Chinese like Karpal Singh has become an iconic institution in Gelugor, not unlike D.R Seenivasagam, the late 'King of Ipoh', and the once equally invincible Lee Lam Thye was in B.B.
Ironically, it was the voters’ perception in 1999 that the DAP had sold out to PAS and its frightening Islamic hudud laws that saw Karpal and Lim Kit Siang losing.
But if the Pakatan Rakyat wishes to venture on a no-ethnicity campaign such as standing Mat Sabu in BB, it has to prepare the voters for it, as should have been the case in Bukit Bendera in 2004.
On his part, Mat Sabu as the new exciting PAS personality, beside the incomparable Nizar Jamaluddin, must strike a balance between PAS' Islamic values and its multi-ethnic multi-cultural credentials.
I suggest that PAS marries the two into an Islamic anti-corruption, pro-justice and pro-welfare policy for all under the current Malaysian civil legislative arrangements, rather than become obsessed with implementing hudud laws per se.
There's no evidence whatsoever that hudud will reduce, let alone eliminate corruption and oppression - for proof, just look at the terrible state of affairs in hudud-governed Pakistan (which even condones 'revenge-rapes'), Bangladesh, Saudi Arabia, Iran and a host of other Islamic nations. Where then is the empirical evidence that hudud is the 'silver bullet' to rid Malaysia of corruption, oppression and injustice?
By contrast, examine and admire the non or minimal corruptibility of the secular governance practised by Scandinavian countries, New Zealand, Australia and our neighbour, Singapore.
Tell me, between having hudud in the midst of continuing injustice, corruption & oppression or a secular governance (but under genuine/sincere Islamic leadership) that doesn't tolerate corruption nor oppression and ensure justice for all, which will meaningfully glorify Allah swt?
Wednesday, June 08, 2011
Scholarships
The Malaysian Insider reported that DAP insists on overseas scholarships for all SPM aces so as to prevent loss of talent to overseas countries, like for example, predatory Singapore.
This argument is of course different from the case of the amazing Olivia Lum, the now-famous Kampar-born Hyflux chief who won the Ernst & Young World Entrepreneur Award for 2011. She beat 48 international finalists to emerge as the top entrepreneur.
Lum wasn’t a brilliant SPM achiever. In fact, as TMI reported, she was adopted at birth and never knew her parents, ... brought up in an illegally constructed tin shack with no utilities in Kampar Perak where floods were common and food scarce ... she moved to Singapore at the age of 15 and supported her schooling through tutoring and sales jobs eventually graduating with an Honours degree in chemistry from the National University of Singapore NUS in 1986. The rest is history, bringing her to her current brilliant achievement and praiseworthy status.
Truly, in Chinese eyes, a blooming lotus.
Oh? Why ‘lotus’?
As I wrote in a 2005 post The Lotus Will Not Bloom For One Man:
One of the cental pillars of Chinese culture has always been ‘education’. Every Chinese, especially those from the disadvantaged social strata, aspires for his or her children to make it good via an education, to become a mandarin, to ‘rise above the muddy waters and bloom like a lotus’. That’s why many Chinese named their daughters ‘Lotus’.
Chinese folklore has many glorious tales of a poor peasant's son becoming the Emperor’s mandarin, through the young man’s arduous and brilliant studies. Those historical tales have inspired Chinese society to educate their children well.
In Malaya, legends abound of prominent surgeons, engineers and other notables of society who were children of poor hawkers or coolies, so poor that they had to study by the street lamps or flickering candles during their school days. Those young lads, hardly in their teens, were also required to work for the family’s survival that it was a wonder how they managed to combine their studies with their apprenticeships as hawkers and labourers. Some even walked umpteen miles to reach school. But they eventually attained their exalted positions.
Obviously Olivia Lum has joined these exalted ranks. Bravo Olivia!
I also wrote: That is why education is a very sensitive issue with Chinese Malaysians. That has been why the Chinese in Malaysia have virtually abandoned the national education system which they consider to have dodgy standards.
Chinese parents there have been known to mortgage their houses and worldly possessions to send their children abroad for tertiary education in Australia, New Zealand, UK, Canada, USA, China, India etc. Many have left very comfortable positions and lives to migrate abroad for such educational reasons.
The reasons for seeking university education abroad even though the financial cost threatens their economic position are three-fold – the dodgy standards of local universities, difficulties of getting a scholarship (the subject of this post), but most significant of all, the very slim chance of even securing a place in a university study of their preference because the government’s affirmative action have marginalized many Chinese and Indians.
But back to the SPM people. Lim Guan Eng asserted that “... all SPM top scorers should get overseas Public Service Department PSD scholarships instead of 1Malaysia Development Bhd 1MDB grants if Malaysia wants to retain the country’s talent.”
I have some difficulty with Lim’s argument for “all”.
Firstly, we need to answer one question, why should the scholarship be for an overseas (presumably) university education when the achievement is only at SPM? Shouldn’t it be STPM (HSC)?
Obviously I won’t ask the question of 'why overseas’ per se, unlike my question above, because I’ve already written on it in the above extract of my 2005 post, namely, no one respects the dodgy standards of local universities. Thus I fully understand why Malaysians like Lim GE prefers an overseas university education for these young achievers rather than one locally.
So, perhaps the Education Minister, instead of making populist driven and divisive 'I'm a Malay first, then only a Malaysian' bull, should focus on rejuvenating the once respected status of our universities. Recruit a few international and national experts, where I deem internationally renowned Dr Wang Gungwu to be one of the latter. We certainly don’t need those 'half-past six' type, perhaps already worsened by BTN indoctrination bull and described by the US diplomats as ‘inept’.
Maybe when we have improved the standards of our local universities, people won’t be so obsessive with rushing overseas to study there.
Now back to 'scholarships', to my thinking, it should be awarded based on two principal factors, namely ‘need’ basis and ‘merits’.
The latter is straightforward, where students who obtain straight A’s meet the criterion.
But ‘needs’ basis is about the student’s financial ability to afford further education, whether this be at the tertiary level or a trade skill.
Consider Khairy (wakakaka), Mohandas and Kuok, who all are children of very rich or certainly comfortably-well-to-do families. Each has scored all A1’s in their SPM or STPM. Their scholarly achievements would be very praiseworthy but should they be awarded scholarships to the denial of three poor student less brilliant than them, when it’s obvious the cost of their tertiary education anywhere in the world would be sap-sap suoi (peanuts) to their respective parents?
Of course this is different from and does not do away with prestigious scholarships, where the award is more about recognition of amazing scholarly achievements rather than to finally assist the beneficiary of the award. But these are the rare prestigious awards, like, for example, the Rhodes scholarships.
But as I mentioned, I have some difficulty with Lim’s call for ALL top scorers to be so awarded. Scholarships at this level are not the prestigious types so I want to see the ‘needs’ basis considered. I’m not happy to see public money spent on funding a rich man’s son or daughter education (plus living and other expenses) overseas at a foreign university.
Only, and only when the high achievers who are needy have been awarded scholarships, may we then consider those not so needy for awards of such government scholarships.
This argument is of course different from the case of the amazing Olivia Lum, the now-famous Kampar-born Hyflux chief who won the Ernst & Young World Entrepreneur Award for 2011. She beat 48 international finalists to emerge as the top entrepreneur.
Lum wasn’t a brilliant SPM achiever. In fact, as TMI reported, she was adopted at birth and never knew her parents, ... brought up in an illegally constructed tin shack with no utilities in Kampar Perak where floods were common and food scarce ... she moved to Singapore at the age of 15 and supported her schooling through tutoring and sales jobs eventually graduating with an Honours degree in chemistry from the National University of Singapore NUS in 1986. The rest is history, bringing her to her current brilliant achievement and praiseworthy status.
Truly, in Chinese eyes, a blooming lotus.
Oh? Why ‘lotus’?
As I wrote in a 2005 post The Lotus Will Not Bloom For One Man:
One of the cental pillars of Chinese culture has always been ‘education’. Every Chinese, especially those from the disadvantaged social strata, aspires for his or her children to make it good via an education, to become a mandarin, to ‘rise above the muddy waters and bloom like a lotus’. That’s why many Chinese named their daughters ‘Lotus’.
Chinese folklore has many glorious tales of a poor peasant's son becoming the Emperor’s mandarin, through the young man’s arduous and brilliant studies. Those historical tales have inspired Chinese society to educate their children well.
In Malaya, legends abound of prominent surgeons, engineers and other notables of society who were children of poor hawkers or coolies, so poor that they had to study by the street lamps or flickering candles during their school days. Those young lads, hardly in their teens, were also required to work for the family’s survival that it was a wonder how they managed to combine their studies with their apprenticeships as hawkers and labourers. Some even walked umpteen miles to reach school. But they eventually attained their exalted positions.
Obviously Olivia Lum has joined these exalted ranks. Bravo Olivia!
I also wrote: That is why education is a very sensitive issue with Chinese Malaysians. That has been why the Chinese in Malaysia have virtually abandoned the national education system which they consider to have dodgy standards.
Chinese parents there have been known to mortgage their houses and worldly possessions to send their children abroad for tertiary education in Australia, New Zealand, UK, Canada, USA, China, India etc. Many have left very comfortable positions and lives to migrate abroad for such educational reasons.
The reasons for seeking university education abroad even though the financial cost threatens their economic position are three-fold – the dodgy standards of local universities, difficulties of getting a scholarship (the subject of this post), but most significant of all, the very slim chance of even securing a place in a university study of their preference because the government’s affirmative action have marginalized many Chinese and Indians.
But back to the SPM people. Lim Guan Eng asserted that “... all SPM top scorers should get overseas Public Service Department PSD scholarships instead of 1Malaysia Development Bhd 1MDB grants if Malaysia wants to retain the country’s talent.”
I have some difficulty with Lim’s argument for “all”.
Firstly, we need to answer one question, why should the scholarship be for an overseas (presumably) university education when the achievement is only at SPM? Shouldn’t it be STPM (HSC)?
Obviously I won’t ask the question of 'why overseas’ per se, unlike my question above, because I’ve already written on it in the above extract of my 2005 post, namely, no one respects the dodgy standards of local universities. Thus I fully understand why Malaysians like Lim GE prefers an overseas university education for these young achievers rather than one locally.
So, perhaps the Education Minister, instead of making populist driven and divisive 'I'm a Malay first, then only a Malaysian' bull, should focus on rejuvenating the once respected status of our universities. Recruit a few international and national experts, where I deem internationally renowned Dr Wang Gungwu to be one of the latter. We certainly don’t need those 'half-past six' type, perhaps already worsened by BTN indoctrination bull and described by the US diplomats as ‘inept’.
 |
Malaysian Dr Wang Gungwu academically renown internationally |
Maybe when we have improved the standards of our local universities, people won’t be so obsessive with rushing overseas to study there.
Now back to 'scholarships', to my thinking, it should be awarded based on two principal factors, namely ‘need’ basis and ‘merits’.
The latter is straightforward, where students who obtain straight A’s meet the criterion.
But ‘needs’ basis is about the student’s financial ability to afford further education, whether this be at the tertiary level or a trade skill.
Consider Khairy (wakakaka), Mohandas and Kuok, who all are children of very rich or certainly comfortably-well-to-do families. Each has scored all A1’s in their SPM or STPM. Their scholarly achievements would be very praiseworthy but should they be awarded scholarships to the denial of three poor student less brilliant than them, when it’s obvious the cost of their tertiary education anywhere in the world would be sap-sap suoi (peanuts) to their respective parents?
Of course this is different from and does not do away with prestigious scholarships, where the award is more about recognition of amazing scholarly achievements rather than to finally assist the beneficiary of the award. But these are the rare prestigious awards, like, for example, the Rhodes scholarships.
 |
Rhodes Scholar - late Bob Hawke, former PM Australia |
 |
Rhodes Scholar - guess who? wakakaka |
 |
Rhodes Scholar - Zhang Chunying journalist, LGBT activist and lawyer |
But as I mentioned, I have some difficulty with Lim’s call for ALL top scorers to be so awarded. Scholarships at this level are not the prestigious types so I want to see the ‘needs’ basis considered. I’m not happy to see public money spent on funding a rich man’s son or daughter education (plus living and other expenses) overseas at a foreign university.
Only, and only when the high achievers who are needy have been awarded scholarships, may we then consider those not so needy for awards of such government scholarships.
Tuesday, June 07, 2011
Inept, Insidious & Incurable
I must be feeling a bit energetic as this is my fourth post for today wakakaka.
Reading Malaysiakini’s Penang CPO to politicians: Don't divide the people which was penned by my matey, sweetie Susan Loone, I find it outrageous that Penang police chief Ayub Yaakob saw fit to comment on how politicians should treat their constituencies.
Bloke said pollies “must stop dividing the people in the delivery of community policing services, which should be open to all regardless of political affiliation.”
He also said “certain quarters were trying to undermine community policing by preventing members of political parties, other than their own, from joining the teams.”
While he was circumspect about the identity of the political party or politician, some readers have accused the Police of only daring to say so in a Pakatan governed state, while remaining diam when BN was in charge.
Now, as far as kaytee is concerned, it doesn't matter who or which political party the CPO is referring to, but he is f* way out of line, because as a police officer (essentially a civil servant), he has no right to make a political statement, which is exactly what it has been.
It is not within his police terms of reference to lecture politicians on how to represent their constituencies.
This is the problem of Malaysian civil servants today, who lack the propriety not to intrude into areas out of bounds for civil servants.
Recall that Penang SDO officer who attacked Lim GE at an UMNO forum, committing a double sin of a public servant criticising a people's representative and speaking (partisan politics) at a forum meant for members of a political party. He was unmitigatingly biadap.
Yet the Chief Secretary, instead of reprimanding the erring biadap bloke, himself behaved abysmally by defending the disgraceful SDO.
But then, as Wikileaks revealed, US diplomats had reported to the US State Department that the Malaysian Civil Service is inept and pro UMNO.
Inept! What an insulting word, and the MCS deserves every bit of it.
The Malaysian Insider reported that “According to the cable, former Economic Planning Unit EPU deputy director general Datuk K Govindan said the civil service has a 'narrow worldview' and believed that affirmative action reforms will erode the Malay community’s interests.”
Poor Tan Sri Ghazali Shafie, a giant in worldviews, yet his successors are impossibly inept.
“Govindan sees Malaysia’s huge and largely ethnic Malay civil service completely loyal to Umno but increasingly incompetent as PM Najib’s largest obstacle.”
“He commented that the civil service has a very narrow worldview and will oppose even refuse to implement reforms perceived as damaging ethnic Malay interests even if convinced of the long-run gains for Malaysia”.
But one hand doesn’t make a clap, because the ruling politicians have been equally responsible for the MCS ineptness, biadap-ness and insidious nature.
Recall the former IGP, the one before the last one. He was so mutinous that he threatened AAB’s (UMNO) government of withdrawing police support of BN during the elections if AAB went ahead with the IPCMC, and even provided a special briefing for PAS to reinforce his threat to UMNO.
Was this man sacked immediately?
No, AAB gave way on the IPCMC, and the pits, to make it worse, even honoured the mutinous bastard when he left.
So how will a civil servant ever respect a f* UMNO PM/politician who surrendered his prime ministerial authority to the threats of a uniformed thug, and then honoured the @r$eh*le.
Reading Malaysiakini’s Penang CPO to politicians: Don't divide the people which was penned by my matey, sweetie Susan Loone, I find it outrageous that Penang police chief Ayub Yaakob saw fit to comment on how politicians should treat their constituencies.
Bloke said pollies “must stop dividing the people in the delivery of community policing services, which should be open to all regardless of political affiliation.”
He also said “certain quarters were trying to undermine community policing by preventing members of political parties, other than their own, from joining the teams.”
While he was circumspect about the identity of the political party or politician, some readers have accused the Police of only daring to say so in a Pakatan governed state, while remaining diam when BN was in charge.
Now, as far as kaytee is concerned, it doesn't matter who or which political party the CPO is referring to, but he is f* way out of line, because as a police officer (essentially a civil servant), he has no right to make a political statement, which is exactly what it has been.
It is not within his police terms of reference to lecture politicians on how to represent their constituencies.
This is the problem of Malaysian civil servants today, who lack the propriety not to intrude into areas out of bounds for civil servants.
Recall that Penang SDO officer who attacked Lim GE at an UMNO forum, committing a double sin of a public servant criticising a people's representative and speaking (partisan politics) at a forum meant for members of a political party. He was unmitigatingly biadap.
Yet the Chief Secretary, instead of reprimanding the erring biadap bloke, himself behaved abysmally by defending the disgraceful SDO.
But then, as Wikileaks revealed, US diplomats had reported to the US State Department that the Malaysian Civil Service is inept and pro UMNO.
Inept! What an insulting word, and the MCS deserves every bit of it.
The Malaysian Insider reported that “According to the cable, former Economic Planning Unit EPU deputy director general Datuk K Govindan said the civil service has a 'narrow worldview' and believed that affirmative action reforms will erode the Malay community’s interests.”
Poor Tan Sri Ghazali Shafie, a giant in worldviews, yet his successors are impossibly inept.
“Govindan sees Malaysia’s huge and largely ethnic Malay civil service completely loyal to Umno but increasingly incompetent as PM Najib’s largest obstacle.”
“He commented that the civil service has a very narrow worldview and will oppose even refuse to implement reforms perceived as damaging ethnic Malay interests even if convinced of the long-run gains for Malaysia”.
But one hand doesn’t make a clap, because the ruling politicians have been equally responsible for the MCS ineptness, biadap-ness and insidious nature.
Recall the former IGP, the one before the last one. He was so mutinous that he threatened AAB’s (UMNO) government of withdrawing police support of BN during the elections if AAB went ahead with the IPCMC, and even provided a special briefing for PAS to reinforce his threat to UMNO.
Was this man sacked immediately?
No, AAB gave way on the IPCMC, and the pits, to make it worse, even honoured the mutinous bastard when he left.
So how will a civil servant ever respect a f* UMNO PM/politician who surrendered his prime ministerial authority to the threats of a uniformed thug, and then honoured the @r$eh*le.
Pakatan must not avoid the unavoidable
In my post If Pakatan wins 2013 to rule, who'll be PM? I wasn’t surprised to see/read comments lambasting Zaid Ibrahim.
Zaid committed 3 sins in the eyes of PKR anwaristas:
(1) He didn’t show reverence for Anwar Ibrahim, calling a spade a spade. Anwar has attained such a cult status that to criticize him is not unlike committing blasphemy. There’s no reasoning with his devotees as they are no longer logical or rational, and cannot see anything wrong with him, whether it’s Anwar’s anti-reformasi shame of 916 or the greater humiliating shame of chasing potential tadpoles all the way to Taiwan.
That same fanatical blind adoration would place only his family members, Dr Wan Azizah or Nurul Izzah, as acceptable substitutes to the Greatest Man on Earth since Moses, who would deliver them out of the BN-created wilderness, regardless of whether Dr Wan or Nurul, sweet as mother and daughter are, are really qualified. Isn't this BN-type nepotism?
(2) He dared to challenge Anwar's Anointed One, first by attempting to get Nurul, then Khalid Ibrahim to stand against AI’s blue-eyed boy, and finally putting himself on the firing line, only to be frustrated in like fashion as was Chegubard, Jenapala, Gobala, etc, which in turn raised outrage voices of people like Haris Ibrahim and Jonson Chong (but alas, to a deaf Dr Wan Azizah and an equally deaf what’s-the-name-of that-deer-caught-in-a car-headlights?).
(3) He dared to leave the Greatest Party in the World, and then to strip layer by layer of mythological camouflage off the Greatest Man on Earth since Moses, and worse, in a mature, logical and evidential manner.
But far more worrying or sad than the above has been comments like "PR should win the election first before deciding who should head its new government".
This is nonsense, and an evasion of responsible commitment. PR has to, must decide who’s to be leader should Anwar Ibrahim not be available. This is basic contingency planning, to prevent chaos in a worst case scenario. A political orgnaization without contingency leadership planning does not deserve to be elected.
Whether the PR leader is to be Pak Haji Hadi Awang, Mat Sabu, Karpal Singh, Lim Snr/Jnr, Azmin Ali wakakaka, sweetie Nurul, Dr Rama, or even (okay, bizarre as it may be) Ku Li of UMNO, the commitment/decision has to be made NOW!
Waiting for the election to be won before nominating a PR leader is just like avoiding the difficult but necessary establishment of the shadow cabinet, which will only foster the subsequent and inevitable disintegration of PR (when the election has been won and the appointments have to be made).
Worse, it's not only a gross evasion of responsible commitment but smacks of some having an ulterior agenda up his/her/their sleeves!
Related: Free Malaysia Today - Zaid wants to take the spin out of politics by Mariam Mokhtar
Zaid committed 3 sins in the eyes of PKR anwaristas:
(1) He didn’t show reverence for Anwar Ibrahim, calling a spade a spade. Anwar has attained such a cult status that to criticize him is not unlike committing blasphemy. There’s no reasoning with his devotees as they are no longer logical or rational, and cannot see anything wrong with him, whether it’s Anwar’s anti-reformasi shame of 916 or the greater humiliating shame of chasing potential tadpoles all the way to Taiwan.
That same fanatical blind adoration would place only his family members, Dr Wan Azizah or Nurul Izzah, as acceptable substitutes to the Greatest Man on Earth since Moses, who would deliver them out of the BN-created wilderness, regardless of whether Dr Wan or Nurul, sweet as mother and daughter are, are really qualified. Isn't this BN-type nepotism?
(2) He dared to challenge Anwar's Anointed One, first by attempting to get Nurul, then Khalid Ibrahim to stand against AI’s blue-eyed boy, and finally putting himself on the firing line, only to be frustrated in like fashion as was Chegubard, Jenapala, Gobala, etc, which in turn raised outrage voices of people like Haris Ibrahim and Jonson Chong (but alas, to a deaf Dr Wan Azizah and an equally deaf what’s-the-name-of that-deer-caught-in-a car-headlights?).
(3) He dared to leave the Greatest Party in the World, and then to strip layer by layer of mythological camouflage off the Greatest Man on Earth since Moses, and worse, in a mature, logical and evidential manner.
But far more worrying or sad than the above has been comments like "PR should win the election first before deciding who should head its new government".
This is nonsense, and an evasion of responsible commitment. PR has to, must decide who’s to be leader should Anwar Ibrahim not be available. This is basic contingency planning, to prevent chaos in a worst case scenario. A political orgnaization without contingency leadership planning does not deserve to be elected.
Whether the PR leader is to be Pak Haji Hadi Awang, Mat Sabu, Karpal Singh, Lim Snr/Jnr, Azmin Ali wakakaka, sweetie Nurul, Dr Rama, or even (okay, bizarre as it may be) Ku Li of UMNO, the commitment/decision has to be made NOW!
Waiting for the election to be won before nominating a PR leader is just like avoiding the difficult but necessary establishment of the shadow cabinet, which will only foster the subsequent and inevitable disintegration of PR (when the election has been won and the appointments have to be made).
Worse, it's not only a gross evasion of responsible commitment but smacks of some having an ulterior agenda up his/her/their sleeves!
Related: Free Malaysia Today - Zaid wants to take the spin out of politics by Mariam Mokhtar
Cronyism
My late mum had a lot of cronies, with whom she saw teochew operas, played mahjung or chee-key, and p'ah-kok (kongsamkok).
‘Crony’ means a close friend, chum, buddy, pal, and wakakaka, matey.
But alas, from ‘crony’ comes the more nefarious term ‘cronyism’.
What is cronyism?
According to the dictionary, it’s the practice of appointing friends to high-level posts regardless of their suitability.
In the Malaysian case, cronyism is more about commercial awards with outrageous terms, usually at the expense of the rakyat.
Look at legal gambling organizations, highway tolls, construction, software, arms, etc contracts in Malaysia.
The latest accusation of ‘cronyism’ has the rakyat railing and ranting against the increase in electricity tariffs and the inexplicable and unmitigated government’s protection of the IPP, even to the extent of hiding the contractual terms declaring these are classified.
Malaysiakini reported in Subsidy scandal: 'EPU blunders, rakyat suffers' that:
Energy, Green Technology and Water Minister Peter Chin said the government has no power to make the power purchase agreements public as these are contracts signed with private entities.
As well-known UMNO blogger Sakmongkol AK47 said (words to effect), if there is anyone who can declassify secrets, it’s the government.
Indeed so, let alone a mere commercial contract.
Needless to say, the rakyat wants to know who are these ruling party’s cronies, and in the case of the IPP, what is the gvernment attempting to hide?
But I think the first question, who are these ruling party’s cronies, may be the wrong question to ask. While it’s interesting to know who they are (and quite frankly, we already know many of them), the far more important questions to ask should be:
How did they become ‘cronies’, or what’s the quid pro quo to become a crony?
‘Crony’ means a close friend, chum, buddy, pal, and wakakaka, matey.
But alas, from ‘crony’ comes the more nefarious term ‘cronyism’.
What is cronyism?
According to the dictionary, it’s the practice of appointing friends to high-level posts regardless of their suitability.
In the Malaysian case, cronyism is more about commercial awards with outrageous terms, usually at the expense of the rakyat.
Look at legal gambling organizations, highway tolls, construction, software, arms, etc contracts in Malaysia.
The latest accusation of ‘cronyism’ has the rakyat railing and ranting against the increase in electricity tariffs and the inexplicable and unmitigated government’s protection of the IPP, even to the extent of hiding the contractual terms declaring these are classified.
Malaysiakini reported in Subsidy scandal: 'EPU blunders, rakyat suffers' that:
Energy, Green Technology and Water Minister Peter Chin said the government has no power to make the power purchase agreements public as these are contracts signed with private entities.
As well-known UMNO blogger Sakmongkol AK47 said (words to effect), if there is anyone who can declassify secrets, it’s the government.
Indeed so, let alone a mere commercial contract.
Needless to say, the rakyat wants to know who are these ruling party’s cronies, and in the case of the IPP, what is the gvernment attempting to hide?
But I think the first question, who are these ruling party’s cronies, may be the wrong question to ask. While it’s interesting to know who they are (and quite frankly, we already know many of them), the far more important questions to ask should be:
How did they become ‘cronies’, or what’s the quid pro quo to become a crony?
PKR's second stab in East Malaysia
The Malaysian Insider’s news headline PKR eyes Pakatan-SAPP alliance in Sabah carries the news that:
... Sabah Pakatan Rakyat PR is actively moving towards forging a formal alliance with local opposition party SAPP hoping to break Barisan Nasional’s BN stranglehold over the east Malaysian state.
This statement is slightly misleading because it’s not Pakatan (the coalition) which is now seeking to negotiate with SAPP but actually a PKR team led by Dr Wan Azizah. Every member of the team is from PKR.
Other than the above incorrect attribution, the question that has to be asked is, can PKR be trusted to negotiate a pact after its abysmal bull-in-a-china-shop failure with SNAP?
I think not, given the propensity of PKR’s federal leaders to want to control, dominate, manipulate and speak down to their people not only in East Malaysia but also in the Peninsula.
Worse, when I recall PKR making all sorts of noise because DAP had recently made a solo overture to SNAP after PKR had bombed the Sarawak negotiations, it now has the selfish double-standard gall to attempt to negotiate with SAPP without consulting DAP or PAS. Typical anwarista-ish cakap ta’serupa bikin.
But we know PKR has an unbridled obsession to dominate Pakatan, hence has now quickly attempted to stake an early claim in Sabah after its miserable failure in Sarawak.
The recent Sarawak election result has filled it with overwhelming dread as it realizes that, other than Anwar Ibrahim as an individual, it's hope-for but incorrect expectation of being the primus inter pares in Pakatan is slipping even farther away wakakaka.
... Sabah Pakatan Rakyat PR is actively moving towards forging a formal alliance with local opposition party SAPP hoping to break Barisan Nasional’s BN stranglehold over the east Malaysian state.
This statement is slightly misleading because it’s not Pakatan (the coalition) which is now seeking to negotiate with SAPP but actually a PKR team led by Dr Wan Azizah. Every member of the team is from PKR.
Other than the above incorrect attribution, the question that has to be asked is, can PKR be trusted to negotiate a pact after its abysmal bull-in-a-china-shop failure with SNAP?
I think not, given the propensity of PKR’s federal leaders to want to control, dominate, manipulate and speak down to their people not only in East Malaysia but also in the Peninsula.
Worse, when I recall PKR making all sorts of noise because DAP had recently made a solo overture to SNAP after PKR had bombed the Sarawak negotiations, it now has the selfish double-standard gall to attempt to negotiate with SAPP without consulting DAP or PAS. Typical anwarista-ish cakap ta’serupa bikin.
But we know PKR has an unbridled obsession to dominate Pakatan, hence has now quickly attempted to stake an early claim in Sabah after its miserable failure in Sarawak.
The recent Sarawak election result has filled it with overwhelming dread as it realizes that, other than Anwar Ibrahim as an individual, it's hope-for but incorrect expectation of being the primus inter pares in Pakatan is slipping even farther away wakakaka.
Sunday, June 05, 2011
If Pakatan wins 2013 to rule, who'll be PM?
Picture this 2013 (could be earlier) scenario:
Anwar Ibrahim is in jail after being found guilty of sodomy in 2011. Due to his conviction he lost his MP status and wasn’t allowed to stand again in Permatang Pauh in the 2013 general election. Following Anwar’s grief, Azmin Ali rose to be the President of PKR.
MCLM’s offer of 30 candidates were rejected by PKR but accepted by KITA – two on MCLM’s list were Haris Ibrahim and RPK wakakaka (kaytee's choice).
Kayveas applied to join DAP 3 months before the general election but was informed politely that due to pre-election preparation, his application could only be assessed after the election wakakaka.
Pakatan wins the general election with a clear majority.
Its 120 MPs are from PAS (35), DAP-SNAP (35), PKR (25), KITA (25).
All leaders and leading personalities from the three Pakatan component parties retain their seats, with new comers like Zaid, Haris and RPK winning new ones.
To name a few luminaries, there are the two Pak Hajis, Mat Sabu and Mohamad Nizar Jamaluddin etc from PAS, Karpal Singh, Tunku Aziz, Khir, Lim Snr and Jnr, etc from DAP, Azmin Ali, Nurul Izzah, Khalid Ibrahim etc from PKR, and Zaid Ibrahim, Haris Ibrahim and RPK, etc from KITA.
Who should be PM?
If Anwar was around, he would be a natural candidate of compromise, but alas he isn’t even a MP. Yes, there will be steps to review the judicial process that led to his imprisonment or even a royal pardon, but royal pardons will require the recommendation of a PM, so we are back to Square One, namely, who shall be PM (to make that recommendation)?
Anyway, all above regarding Anwar requires time – Pakatan has to nominate a PM pronto, so …who?
PAS
Pak Haji Hadi Awang? He loves to be PM, I bet … but I doubt he will be accepted by DAP, PKR or KITA.
Mat Sabu? Maybe, with about, say, 25 to 35% probability* of acceptance.
* all probability ratings in this post are abitrarily made by kaytee
Nizar? High probability of about 70% acceptance, but may not even be offered by PAS itself. Besides, PKR will no doubt object strenuously.
DAP-SNAP
Karpal, Lim Jnr, Lim Snr? Sorry, all no can do lah. Malaysia is not ready yet for a non-Malay PM, for the following reasons:
(a) more than 60% of the population are Malays, with many already poisoned by UMNO-Perkasa-Pembela Triad. It’s unlikely they’ll accept a non as a PM, full stop!
(b) the new Pakatan government cannot afford the disruption to running the nation that is likely to be caused by the Triad sabotage bullshit a la Christian PM, Christian nation, Christian conversion – the black sabo propaganda will be inevitable if Pakatan appoints a non as the PM, even assuming for a minute that PAS could be persuaded to accept it.
(c) the Agong and the Rulers' Council may not feel comfy with a non-Muslim PM, and may delay giving his royal consent to the appointment
Tunku Aziz (moved from being senator to standing successfully as a federal candidate) may be a faint possibility but at an odds of 20% acceptance by others. Khir? Too young.
Any good candidate from SNAP?
PKR
Azmin Ali? Puhleeeze lah – if I so much as smell this, Pakatan can forget my vote wakakaka. Besides, he hardly has the persona, knowledge and maturity to be PM. I can bet that both the DAP and PAS won’t accept him as a PM candidate – maybe he needs to first say sorry to SNAP and KITA wakakaka.
Nurul Izzah? C’mon, she’s sweet but in 2013? Like Khir she’s too bloody young. Sorry, being the daughter of Anwar is not an automatic free pass.
Dr Wan Azizah? She won’t be eligible to stand in 2013, and even if the election laws are changed by the new Pakatan government, it still requires time, something the new ruling party cannot afford to wait to appoint a PM.
What about the senatorial backdoor? Sorry, no can do, as in a Westminster democracy, the PM appointment requires a fully elected MP, not an unelected senator.
Khalid Ibrahim? Not bad, and with a likely odds of 60%. He'll PKR's best candidate - Azmin eat your heart out, wakakaka.
KITA
;-) That leaves us with Zaid Ibrahim, Haris Ibrahim and RPK.
I let you work it out whether one of these three, and which one, has prime ministerial bearings, know-how, skills and acceptability to the other Pakatan component parties.
I know who my choice is ;-)
Anwar Ibrahim is in jail after being found guilty of sodomy in 2011. Due to his conviction he lost his MP status and wasn’t allowed to stand again in Permatang Pauh in the 2013 general election. Following Anwar’s grief, Azmin Ali rose to be the President of PKR.
MCLM’s offer of 30 candidates were rejected by PKR but accepted by KITA – two on MCLM’s list were Haris Ibrahim and RPK wakakaka (kaytee's choice).
Kayveas applied to join DAP 3 months before the general election but was informed politely that due to pre-election preparation, his application could only be assessed after the election wakakaka.
Pakatan wins the general election with a clear majority.
Its 120 MPs are from PAS (35), DAP-SNAP (35), PKR (25), KITA (25).
All leaders and leading personalities from the three Pakatan component parties retain their seats, with new comers like Zaid, Haris and RPK winning new ones.
To name a few luminaries, there are the two Pak Hajis, Mat Sabu and Mohamad Nizar Jamaluddin etc from PAS, Karpal Singh, Tunku Aziz, Khir, Lim Snr and Jnr, etc from DAP, Azmin Ali, Nurul Izzah, Khalid Ibrahim etc from PKR, and Zaid Ibrahim, Haris Ibrahim and RPK, etc from KITA.
Who should be PM?
If Anwar was around, he would be a natural candidate of compromise, but alas he isn’t even a MP. Yes, there will be steps to review the judicial process that led to his imprisonment or even a royal pardon, but royal pardons will require the recommendation of a PM, so we are back to Square One, namely, who shall be PM (to make that recommendation)?
Anyway, all above regarding Anwar requires time – Pakatan has to nominate a PM pronto, so …who?
PAS
Pak Haji Hadi Awang? He loves to be PM, I bet … but I doubt he will be accepted by DAP, PKR or KITA.
Mat Sabu? Maybe, with about, say, 25 to 35% probability* of acceptance.
* all probability ratings in this post are abitrarily made by kaytee
Nizar? High probability of about 70% acceptance, but may not even be offered by PAS itself. Besides, PKR will no doubt object strenuously.
DAP-SNAP
Karpal, Lim Jnr, Lim Snr? Sorry, all no can do lah. Malaysia is not ready yet for a non-Malay PM, for the following reasons:
(a) more than 60% of the population are Malays, with many already poisoned by UMNO-Perkasa-Pembela Triad. It’s unlikely they’ll accept a non as a PM, full stop!
(b) the new Pakatan government cannot afford the disruption to running the nation that is likely to be caused by the Triad sabotage bullshit a la Christian PM, Christian nation, Christian conversion – the black sabo propaganda will be inevitable if Pakatan appoints a non as the PM, even assuming for a minute that PAS could be persuaded to accept it.
(c) the Agong and the Rulers' Council may not feel comfy with a non-Muslim PM, and may delay giving his royal consent to the appointment
Tunku Aziz (moved from being senator to standing successfully as a federal candidate) may be a faint possibility but at an odds of 20% acceptance by others. Khir? Too young.
Any good candidate from SNAP?
PKR
Azmin Ali? Puhleeeze lah – if I so much as smell this, Pakatan can forget my vote wakakaka. Besides, he hardly has the persona, knowledge and maturity to be PM. I can bet that both the DAP and PAS won’t accept him as a PM candidate – maybe he needs to first say sorry to SNAP and KITA wakakaka.
Nurul Izzah? C’mon, she’s sweet but in 2013? Like Khir she’s too bloody young. Sorry, being the daughter of Anwar is not an automatic free pass.
Dr Wan Azizah? She won’t be eligible to stand in 2013, and even if the election laws are changed by the new Pakatan government, it still requires time, something the new ruling party cannot afford to wait to appoint a PM.
What about the senatorial backdoor? Sorry, no can do, as in a Westminster democracy, the PM appointment requires a fully elected MP, not an unelected senator.
Khalid Ibrahim? Not bad, and with a likely odds of 60%. He'll PKR's best candidate - Azmin eat your heart out, wakakaka.
KITA
;-) That leaves us with Zaid Ibrahim, Haris Ibrahim and RPK.
I let you work it out whether one of these three, and which one, has prime ministerial bearings, know-how, skills and acceptability to the other Pakatan component parties.
I know who my choice is ;-)
Saturday, June 04, 2011
Obituary for PPP
My Uncle was so sad after reading a leaked WikiLeaks’s cable, where US diplomats in Malaysia submitted a report to Foggy Bottom on the Perak political situation. In the report Power struggles in Perak, he saw with great dismay:
Perak had been a bastion of the ruling BN coalition since Malaysia's independence in 1957 until the March 2008 general election, when the opposition PR coalition stunned the BN and took control of the state government by winning 31 of 59 state assembly seats.
Within the PR, the Democratic Action Party (DAP) won 18 seats; the People's Justice Party (PKR) won 7 seats; and the Islamic Party of Malaysia (PAS) won 5 seats. Although the DAP earned more seats than their coalition partners combined, the position of Chief Minister went to PAS assemblyman Mohd Nizar Jamaluddin, because the Perak state constitution stipulates that only a Muslim can hold the position of Chief Minister (CM).
On the BN side, the United Malays National Organization (UMNO) won 27 of their 28 seats while the Malaysian Chinese Association (MCA) took the remaining seat. Two other BN partners, the Malaysian Peoples Movement Party (Gerakan) and Malaysian Indian Congress (MIC), were all but rendered obsolete as neither won a single contested seat.
So, prior to the frog season, out of the 59 State seats, DAP won 18 seats, PKR 7, PAS actually 6 (not 5 as per the US report), UMNO 27, and MCA 1.
Forget about Gerakan and MIC wakakaka, but considering we are talking about Perak, who was missing?
PPP!
Yes, the People’s Progressive Party – none other than the Seenivasagam brothers’ PPP.
This is what Wikipedia has to say about the People’s Progressive Party:
In 1969, as a strong opposition party, PPP was nearly able to form the Perak State Government, but fell short of just 2 seats in combination with the opposition to form the state assembly when 2 of its members crossed over. The success of PPP was mainly due to the Chinese vote, though many of the top leaders then were Indians.
My Uncle was sad because he was an ardent admirer of DR Seenivasagam, a man he described as the political King of Ipoh. He lamented that after DR passed away, SP, the elder but less astute brother fell for Tun Razak’s invitation to be part of the Barisan Nasional. PPP joining the ruling coalition spelt its death knell.
Today the PPP is virtually non-existent, apart from a backdoor Senator-pretender (who frog-ied to MIC but, I believe, did not have his senatorial term extended). The 2008 general and state elections brought out that reality very clearly, and personally for my Uncle, poignantly.
Note the last line of the Wikipedia article, namely “The success of PPP was mainly due to the Chinese vote, though many of the top leaders then were Indians.”
Yes, DR & SP Seenivasagam ruled Ipoh principally on overwhelming Chinese support. Hinraf, eat your bloody hearts out wakakaka.
No MCA or DAP bloke could have touched the Seenivasagam’s, and that said something for the brother's popularity with Ipoh/Perak Chinese - it's not unlike Penang Chinese devotion for Karpal Singh.
The only reason DAP made some headway in Perak in 1969 was because of the loose pact between DAP, PPP and Gerakan, where obviously DAP was seen as an ally of PPP; even PAS agreed not to split the votes in an anti-Perikatan (Alliance) campaign in 1969.
And people say the Chinese are racists. But why did those Ipoh/Perak Chinese proved them wrong by supporting the PPP's Indian leaders in those days?
The secret lies in the Wikipedia article on PPP, where it states of the party then “It was hugely popular party upon inception, particularly due to the popularity of the brothers who spoke up for justice, equality and the common man.”
Read this again: “… the brothers ..... spoke up for justice, equality and the common man.”
That’s the f* secret.
Today the PPP is nothing more than an Indian-based party, with very little or even zero support from the Perak Chinese. Its power base in Perak has been taken over by the DAP, a party alleged by many in PKR wakakaka to be a sino-centric party.
But alas for those jealous detractors, DAP so happens to be a party which has the most number of Indian MPs and ADUNs, more than MIC and all Indian-based party combined could put together (if you wish, you can add PKR Indian members as well, including Gobala wakakaka).
Despite losing one Indian (Punjabi) ADUN some months ago due to the seasonal tadpole season, the DAP still has:
MPs
Karpal Singh, Professor Rama, Kula, Manogaran, Charles Santiago, Gobind Deo, John Fernandez, and
ADUNs
(in NS) S Veerapan, K Arumugum, P Gunasekaren, (in Penang) Professor Rama again, Jagdeep Singh, Tanasekharan, R Sanisvara Rayer, (in Perak) A Sivaesan, V Sivakumar. A Sivasubramaniam, (in Selangor) M Manoharan, and
Senator S Ramakrishnan - (DAP’s other senator being Senator Tunku Aziz).
But all the above haven't ameliorated my Uncle’s sadness at the lost glory of the Seenivasagam’s party.
How are the mighty fallen, and the weapons of war perished! – 2 Samuel 1:27 (KJV)
Related: PPP = Pathetic Pitiful Party
Perak had been a bastion of the ruling BN coalition since Malaysia's independence in 1957 until the March 2008 general election, when the opposition PR coalition stunned the BN and took control of the state government by winning 31 of 59 state assembly seats.
Within the PR, the Democratic Action Party (DAP) won 18 seats; the People's Justice Party (PKR) won 7 seats; and the Islamic Party of Malaysia (PAS) won 5 seats. Although the DAP earned more seats than their coalition partners combined, the position of Chief Minister went to PAS assemblyman Mohd Nizar Jamaluddin, because the Perak state constitution stipulates that only a Muslim can hold the position of Chief Minister (CM).
On the BN side, the United Malays National Organization (UMNO) won 27 of their 28 seats while the Malaysian Chinese Association (MCA) took the remaining seat. Two other BN partners, the Malaysian Peoples Movement Party (Gerakan) and Malaysian Indian Congress (MIC), were all but rendered obsolete as neither won a single contested seat.
So, prior to the frog season, out of the 59 State seats, DAP won 18 seats, PKR 7, PAS actually 6 (not 5 as per the US report), UMNO 27, and MCA 1.
Forget about Gerakan and MIC wakakaka, but considering we are talking about Perak, who was missing?
PPP!
Yes, the People’s Progressive Party – none other than the Seenivasagam brothers’ PPP.
This is what Wikipedia has to say about the People’s Progressive Party:
In 1969, as a strong opposition party, PPP was nearly able to form the Perak State Government, but fell short of just 2 seats in combination with the opposition to form the state assembly when 2 of its members crossed over. The success of PPP was mainly due to the Chinese vote, though many of the top leaders then were Indians.
My Uncle was sad because he was an ardent admirer of DR Seenivasagam, a man he described as the political King of Ipoh. He lamented that after DR passed away, SP, the elder but less astute brother fell for Tun Razak’s invitation to be part of the Barisan Nasional. PPP joining the ruling coalition spelt its death knell.
Today the PPP is virtually non-existent, apart from a backdoor Senator-pretender (who frog-ied to MIC but, I believe, did not have his senatorial term extended). The 2008 general and state elections brought out that reality very clearly, and personally for my Uncle, poignantly.
Note the last line of the Wikipedia article, namely “The success of PPP was mainly due to the Chinese vote, though many of the top leaders then were Indians.”
Yes, DR & SP Seenivasagam ruled Ipoh principally on overwhelming Chinese support. Hinraf, eat your bloody hearts out wakakaka.
No MCA or DAP bloke could have touched the Seenivasagam’s, and that said something for the brother's popularity with Ipoh/Perak Chinese - it's not unlike Penang Chinese devotion for Karpal Singh.
The only reason DAP made some headway in Perak in 1969 was because of the loose pact between DAP, PPP and Gerakan, where obviously DAP was seen as an ally of PPP; even PAS agreed not to split the votes in an anti-Perikatan (Alliance) campaign in 1969.
And people say the Chinese are racists. But why did those Ipoh/Perak Chinese proved them wrong by supporting the PPP's Indian leaders in those days?
The secret lies in the Wikipedia article on PPP, where it states of the party then “It was hugely popular party upon inception, particularly due to the popularity of the brothers who spoke up for justice, equality and the common man.”
Read this again: “… the brothers ..... spoke up for justice, equality and the common man.”
That’s the f* secret.
Today the PPP is nothing more than an Indian-based party, with very little or even zero support from the Perak Chinese. Its power base in Perak has been taken over by the DAP, a party alleged by many in PKR wakakaka to be a sino-centric party.
But alas for those jealous detractors, DAP so happens to be a party which has the most number of Indian MPs and ADUNs, more than MIC and all Indian-based party combined could put together (if you wish, you can add PKR Indian members as well, including Gobala wakakaka).
Despite losing one Indian (Punjabi) ADUN some months ago due to the seasonal tadpole season, the DAP still has:
MPs
Karpal Singh, Professor Rama, Kula, Manogaran, Charles Santiago, Gobind Deo, John Fernandez, and
ADUNs
(in NS) S Veerapan, K Arumugum, P Gunasekaren, (in Penang) Professor Rama again, Jagdeep Singh, Tanasekharan, R Sanisvara Rayer, (in Perak) A Sivaesan, V Sivakumar. A Sivasubramaniam, (in Selangor) M Manoharan, and
Senator S Ramakrishnan - (DAP’s other senator being Senator Tunku Aziz).
But all the above haven't ameliorated my Uncle’s sadness at the lost glory of the Seenivasagam’s party.
How are the mighty fallen, and the weapons of war perished! – 2 Samuel 1:27 (KJV)
Related: PPP = Pathetic Pitiful Party
Friday, June 03, 2011
KITA - the example of Zaid Ibrahim
Zaid Ibrahim is a much maligned man, both personally and as a politician.
When he stood as the PKR candidate in Hulu Selangor, UMNO groped into its bag of dirty tricks and found enough to portray him as a brandy swilling kuda kaki, so much so that PKR’s ally, PAS, was embarrassed in supporting him in the by-election campaign. The only label UMNO didn’t/couldn’t stick onto him was womanizing or buggery wakakaka.
Incidentally, while on Hulu Selangor, Zaid was reported recently in Free Malaysia Today for calling Anwar Ibrahim a liar. Zaid was riled by Anwar’s claim that he (Zaid) had pleaded with him (Anwar) for the opportunity to stand in the by-election for that federal constituency.
Zaid said in fact it was Anwar who selected him to contest. At that time Anwar Ibrahim was at his political nadir following the desertion of seven PKR MPs especially after the cataclysmic failure of his bullsh*t 916, the most shameful un-reformasi folly of Anwar in his power-crazy but failed attempt on 16 Sept 2008.
Zaid suspected that the so-called de facto boss of PKR nominated him because he desperately wanted to make use of Zaid’s high profile personality (my words, not Zaid’s) to regain lost momentum through winning Hulu Selangor for PKR.
Zaid told Free Malaysia Today: “Anwar is a liar and this is how he makes his living in politics. He thought I could pull it off. He did not spend a single sen on me [in the by-election]. I paid the deposit with my money. The party did not do anything to help me. His remarks are a joke. It’s not true.”
Zaid isn’t the only person to say thus of Anwar – in Malaysia-Today there is an article written by Christopher Badeaux which accused Anwar of being two-face, with one message for Muslim audience but a completely different one for western audience. Badeaux condemned Anwar as follows: “... he has played the nasty demagogue at home, then played the good democrat in the West ...”
There’s no doubt that Badeaux doesn’t like Anwar as he took pains to explain to his western readers that Anwar is on trial for forced sodomy and not, as mistakenly described by some more sympathetic western reporters, consensual sodomy.
Though the distinction makes no difference to Anwar’s case insofar as Malaysian laws are concerned, it does to western readers as consensual sex between adults of the same gender is not a crime, and in fact, in the general case, accepted by society. Obviously Badeaux has plunged the knife into Anwar’s heart or, rather, image in the West, by alluding to Sodomy II as a trial for rape.
Back to Zaid - To demonstrate that he had not pleaded to stand in Hulu Selangor, when in the first instance he was already doubtful of his chances in that UMNO stronghold (the 2008 GE result for HS being more of a fluke), Zaid referred to DAP’s Lim Kit Siang and PAS’ Mustapha Ali as his witnesses, that he had asked the two Pakatan leaders for advice.
According to Zaid, Lim and Mustapha told him that “it would not be good for me, as a party member, to decline the offer, because it would seem that I did not want to help the party," presumably even in the face of his mentioning he wanted to decline because the election odds in HS were against him.
Thus he accepted the candidacy because he had believed Anwar’s offer was made in good faith. He tossed another couple of names as his referees, namely Dr Mahathir and AAB, as to his characteristics/style of never pleading for any opportunities.
I am not surprised by Zaid readily referring to personalities from both sides of Malaysian politics - Dr Mahathir and AAB from UMNO, and Lim KS and Mustapha Ali from Pakatan - as his character referees or witnesses to what he alleged as Anwar’s blatant lie of him (Zaid) pleading to stand in Hulu Selangor.
And that’s because Zaid has been consistently mature in his political stance, unlike the feral examples introduced by the UMNO faction of Anwar Ibrahim, a vicious herd mentality that now prevails mainly among the PKR anwaristas and some UMNO people.
While in Pakatan, Zaid has repetitively and more importantly, OPENLY, demonstrated his willingness to talk with BN or even be interviewed by UMNO’s mainstream media mouths, such as Utusan and Berita Harian, etc. He had also not hesitated in praising good policies by BN.
I stress on the word OPENLY because there’s a certain someone who talked to UMNO secretly; I have often accused him of wanting to return to that cesspool in which he had once thrived. ‘Tis only the sheer greed of UMNO’s current crop of leaders who saw no room for him in the party that they have spurned his overtures.
Of course it is this very OPEN-minded mentality, befitting that of a mature politician (like Ku Li wishing Lim KS a happy 70th birthday, and the DAP leader in turn wishing an UMNO leader who was hospitalised a speedy recovery) that saw Zaid Ibrahim being vilified by anwaristas.
Their extreme dictate has always been “Thou shall not breathe the same air as the enemy .....” with of course the exception of you-know-who wakakaka.
But they remained dumb, mute and blind when Zaid became the alleged victim of a PKR polling process which has been questioned by several people, including courageous Jonson Chong and neutral but fair-minded Haris Ibrahim.
Other alleged victims of that party poll have been Chegubard, Jenapala (who was mysteriously struck by a phantom 'resignation'), Gobala and in the past, Nallakaruppan (told to stand aside for Anwar's blue-eyed boy), etc. Those rabid dogs* suddenly became diam saja when even the tikus2 were more vocal.
* note it’s not only UMNO dogs that are rabid
Now, if Lim KS or Mustapha Ali were to dare come out and confirm Zaid’s reference of them as witness to Anwar’s lies, I bet you those anwaristas will be calling them all sorts of names as they did to RPK, Haris Ibrahim, etc.
Personality cultism, black & white no-quarters-given politics, ‘either you’re with or against us’ primitive Bush-ism! That’s the politics of anwaristas. And it has spread across to UMNO (from where it originated).
2-party politics? How man, with such immature mentality?
Yup, the sort of mentality that rejoiced in petty pathetic puerile lil’ insignificant things like ousting Rosmah Mansor from her post as Chancellor of Unisel.
I wrote despairingly of Azmin Ali’s pathetic twitter of his paltry ‘victory’ in my February 2010 post (long before RPK clarified his statements in his Stat Dec about allegation of Rosmah being at the scene of Altantuyaa’s demise) Mean-spirited Malaysians:
This is really pathetic, shamelessly partisan and totally mean-spirited.
She was invited by the previous Selangor government so why not let her term as Chancellor finish off without re-inviting her?
Why make such a spiteful announcement? It’s pathetic, pitiful, petty and utterly childish. Don’t Azmin Ali and other PKR leaders have more important things to do, like running Selangor State, than to dabble around with such masturbatory indulgences?
The argument that she should go because she is surrounded by controversies is not only too partisan but unsubstantiated.
We only have RPK’s word that she was allegedly at the scene of Altantuyaa Shariibuu’s last moments to personally ‘supervise’ the demolition of the late model’s corpse – which without any shred of evidence other than RPK's 'I have been reliably informed ...' has been, in my opinion, an incredulous preposterous allegation.
There was also an argument that her Masters degree wasn’t good enough – really, this is such a pathetic shabby argument.
OK, I know PKR is deliberately being vocal about Rosmah as part of their tactic to mitigate the Sodomy II fallout, by ratcheting up the anti-Najib campaign, but PKR should have remained on high moral grounds rather than ….. sorry, I keep forgetting they and UMNO are from the same stock … where spiteful pettiness and mean-spiritedness are their stock-in-trade.
I hope DAP will never descend to such petty bickering.
I also lamented that in the face of such rabid fanatical mindless mean-spirited mentality:
(a) we aren’t quite ready for a two-party political system,
(b) some politicians don’t consider all citizens of this country (including their own supporters and political opponents) as fellow Malaysians, and
(c) political attacks are often ad hominem rather than directed at the policies, governance and conduct of the other side.
Thank goodness Zaid Ibrahim, Lim Kit Siang and Haris Ibrahim are showing the way to mature Malaysian politics.
When he stood as the PKR candidate in Hulu Selangor, UMNO groped into its bag of dirty tricks and found enough to portray him as a brandy swilling kuda kaki, so much so that PKR’s ally, PAS, was embarrassed in supporting him in the by-election campaign. The only label UMNO didn’t/couldn’t stick onto him was womanizing or buggery wakakaka.
Incidentally, while on Hulu Selangor, Zaid was reported recently in Free Malaysia Today for calling Anwar Ibrahim a liar. Zaid was riled by Anwar’s claim that he (Zaid) had pleaded with him (Anwar) for the opportunity to stand in the by-election for that federal constituency.
Zaid said in fact it was Anwar who selected him to contest. At that time Anwar Ibrahim was at his political nadir following the desertion of seven PKR MPs especially after the cataclysmic failure of his bullsh*t 916, the most shameful un-reformasi folly of Anwar in his power-crazy but failed attempt on 16 Sept 2008.
Zaid suspected that the so-called de facto boss of PKR nominated him because he desperately wanted to make use of Zaid’s high profile personality (my words, not Zaid’s) to regain lost momentum through winning Hulu Selangor for PKR.
Zaid told Free Malaysia Today: “Anwar is a liar and this is how he makes his living in politics. He thought I could pull it off. He did not spend a single sen on me [in the by-election]. I paid the deposit with my money. The party did not do anything to help me. His remarks are a joke. It’s not true.”
Zaid isn’t the only person to say thus of Anwar – in Malaysia-Today there is an article written by Christopher Badeaux which accused Anwar of being two-face, with one message for Muslim audience but a completely different one for western audience. Badeaux condemned Anwar as follows: “... he has played the nasty demagogue at home, then played the good democrat in the West ...”
There’s no doubt that Badeaux doesn’t like Anwar as he took pains to explain to his western readers that Anwar is on trial for forced sodomy and not, as mistakenly described by some more sympathetic western reporters, consensual sodomy.
Though the distinction makes no difference to Anwar’s case insofar as Malaysian laws are concerned, it does to western readers as consensual sex between adults of the same gender is not a crime, and in fact, in the general case, accepted by society. Obviously Badeaux has plunged the knife into Anwar’s heart or, rather, image in the West, by alluding to Sodomy II as a trial for rape.
Back to Zaid - To demonstrate that he had not pleaded to stand in Hulu Selangor, when in the first instance he was already doubtful of his chances in that UMNO stronghold (the 2008 GE result for HS being more of a fluke), Zaid referred to DAP’s Lim Kit Siang and PAS’ Mustapha Ali as his witnesses, that he had asked the two Pakatan leaders for advice.
According to Zaid, Lim and Mustapha told him that “it would not be good for me, as a party member, to decline the offer, because it would seem that I did not want to help the party," presumably even in the face of his mentioning he wanted to decline because the election odds in HS were against him.
Thus he accepted the candidacy because he had believed Anwar’s offer was made in good faith. He tossed another couple of names as his referees, namely Dr Mahathir and AAB, as to his characteristics/style of never pleading for any opportunities.
I am not surprised by Zaid readily referring to personalities from both sides of Malaysian politics - Dr Mahathir and AAB from UMNO, and Lim KS and Mustapha Ali from Pakatan - as his character referees or witnesses to what he alleged as Anwar’s blatant lie of him (Zaid) pleading to stand in Hulu Selangor.
And that’s because Zaid has been consistently mature in his political stance, unlike the feral examples introduced by the UMNO faction of Anwar Ibrahim, a vicious herd mentality that now prevails mainly among the PKR anwaristas and some UMNO people.
While in Pakatan, Zaid has repetitively and more importantly, OPENLY, demonstrated his willingness to talk with BN or even be interviewed by UMNO’s mainstream media mouths, such as Utusan and Berita Harian, etc. He had also not hesitated in praising good policies by BN.
I stress on the word OPENLY because there’s a certain someone who talked to UMNO secretly; I have often accused him of wanting to return to that cesspool in which he had once thrived. ‘Tis only the sheer greed of UMNO’s current crop of leaders who saw no room for him in the party that they have spurned his overtures.
Of course it is this very OPEN-minded mentality, befitting that of a mature politician (like Ku Li wishing Lim KS a happy 70th birthday, and the DAP leader in turn wishing an UMNO leader who was hospitalised a speedy recovery) that saw Zaid Ibrahim being vilified by anwaristas.
Their extreme dictate has always been “Thou shall not breathe the same air as the enemy .....” with of course the exception of you-know-who wakakaka.
But they remained dumb, mute and blind when Zaid became the alleged victim of a PKR polling process which has been questioned by several people, including courageous Jonson Chong and neutral but fair-minded Haris Ibrahim.
Other alleged victims of that party poll have been Chegubard, Jenapala (who was mysteriously struck by a phantom 'resignation'), Gobala and in the past, Nallakaruppan (told to stand aside for Anwar's blue-eyed boy), etc. Those rabid dogs* suddenly became diam saja when even the tikus2 were more vocal.
* note it’s not only UMNO dogs that are rabid
Now, if Lim KS or Mustapha Ali were to dare come out and confirm Zaid’s reference of them as witness to Anwar’s lies, I bet you those anwaristas will be calling them all sorts of names as they did to RPK, Haris Ibrahim, etc.
Personality cultism, black & white no-quarters-given politics, ‘either you’re with or against us’ primitive Bush-ism! That’s the politics of anwaristas. And it has spread across to UMNO (from where it originated).
2-party politics? How man, with such immature mentality?
Yup, the sort of mentality that rejoiced in petty pathetic puerile lil’ insignificant things like ousting Rosmah Mansor from her post as Chancellor of Unisel.
I wrote despairingly of Azmin Ali’s pathetic twitter of his paltry ‘victory’ in my February 2010 post (long before RPK clarified his statements in his Stat Dec about allegation of Rosmah being at the scene of Altantuyaa’s demise) Mean-spirited Malaysians:
This is really pathetic, shamelessly partisan and totally mean-spirited.
She was invited by the previous Selangor government so why not let her term as Chancellor finish off without re-inviting her?
Why make such a spiteful announcement? It’s pathetic, pitiful, petty and utterly childish. Don’t Azmin Ali and other PKR leaders have more important things to do, like running Selangor State, than to dabble around with such masturbatory indulgences?
The argument that she should go because she is surrounded by controversies is not only too partisan but unsubstantiated.
We only have RPK’s word that she was allegedly at the scene of Altantuyaa Shariibuu’s last moments to personally ‘supervise’ the demolition of the late model’s corpse – which without any shred of evidence other than RPK's 'I have been reliably informed ...' has been, in my opinion, an incredulous preposterous allegation.
There was also an argument that her Masters degree wasn’t good enough – really, this is such a pathetic shabby argument.
OK, I know PKR is deliberately being vocal about Rosmah as part of their tactic to mitigate the Sodomy II fallout, by ratcheting up the anti-Najib campaign, but PKR should have remained on high moral grounds rather than ….. sorry, I keep forgetting they and UMNO are from the same stock … where spiteful pettiness and mean-spiritedness are their stock-in-trade.
I hope DAP will never descend to such petty bickering.
I also lamented that in the face of such rabid fanatical mindless mean-spirited mentality:
(a) we aren’t quite ready for a two-party political system,
(b) some politicians don’t consider all citizens of this country (including their own supporters and political opponents) as fellow Malaysians, and
(c) political attacks are often ad hominem rather than directed at the policies, governance and conduct of the other side.
Thank goodness Zaid Ibrahim, Lim Kit Siang and Haris Ibrahim are showing the way to mature Malaysian politics.