Friday, December 12, 2014

A troubled Sultan of Selangor?

Malaysiakini - Sultan: I could have opted for PAS MB, but...

Selangor Sultan Sharafuddin Idris Shah said he "could have" opted to install a menteri besar from PAS to end the recent MB crisis in the state, but he chose PKR's Azmin Ali for the "long term".

In an interview with The Star, Sharafuddin said he was "shocked" when PKR objected to Azmin's proposed appointment, saying that PKR was "very, very selfish".

"He is from the same party but they rejected (Azmin) because of self interest," the sultan is reported as saying.

He stressed that he was not against a woman MB, following the Selangor palace's refusal to accept the nomination of PKR president Wan Azizah Wan Ismail as the new MB.

"I am not against any woman becoming MB but my benchmark is that she must be like the Bank Negara governor," he said. "They (the women) should be able to stand on their own without being under remote control."

I got him

and you too - thunderous applause please


Why has HRH come out to give the reason for his choice of MB to replace Khalid Ibrahim? By convention, he doesn't need to. Indeed, why did he do the unprecedented, in granting an interview with The Star for this purpose?

As I had posted on 28 September this year, in my post Only human and not a mere god-king:

HRH explained why he selected Azmin Ali as the new MB of Selangor, then he defended Khalid Ibrahim's record as the previous MB.

The former was in response to severe criticisms of his alleged breach of his constitutional role in ignoring the majority choice of Dr Wan as the new MB, while the latter was in response to him allowing Khalid Ibrahim to remain as MB for more than a month after Khalid Ibrahim was already expelled by PKR and rejected by the majority in the DUN, which in itself was also seen as a breach of his constitutional role.

In other words, his current explanation or justification for his decisions regarding the MB position or situation has NOT been his first, having been preceded by an earlier announcement in late September, almost two months ago.

Royalty doesn't simply provide news media with opportunities for interviews, so it would seem that for HRH to do so, again, he must have been deeply troubled by the unhappiness among his subjects, which would have reached his royal ears. And thus 'disturbed' and perturbed, he must have felt a compulsion to speak out again to explain his decision.

In September I had then written: But the point of this post is not to revisit all those arguments, but to mull over the fact that HRH saw fit to make public statements explaining his decisions over the recent MB issue, which many constitutional experts have criticized.

HRH needn't do so but his actions (in explaining his decisions), as I suspect, have shown him to be only human and not an aloof couldn't-be-bothered god-king figure.

Would we be correct in concluding he must have been troubled by the criticisms.

Yes, as humans we want to be liked.

What do you think? Will you be prepared to accept HRH's explanations as justified?

The majority of you must have said 'No', because from the interactive forums of news media I am afraid that even HRH's second explanation has not been well received by most commentators. And alas, we can't say HRH doesn't care two hoots because of the fact that he has seen fit to speak out twice, within two mere months.

Some comments from the news media interactive forums said the usual, that HRH lacks understanding of his constitutional role which, in the choice of a MB for the state, would be limited to only approving the nomination of the majority of the State Assembly, effectively the choice of the political party or coalition with the winning majority in the House.

By Westminster convention this seems to be the expected constitutional procedure.

However, there is an occasion when the constitutional ruler may object to a political choice, and that would be when he has reason to believe the candidate for the position of MB (or at federal level for the Agong, the PM) cannot in general fulfill the executive role.

For example, the candidate could be suffering from serious illness, or have a history of financial improprieties, or is a bankrupt, or is already notorious for or even suspected of associations with disreputable social elements, etc, basically, a candidate seen to be unable to fulfill the role of PM or MB properly.

Back to just post-2008 general/state elections, the Regent of Perak might have come to believe an ex postman was not a suitable candidate for MB. Maybe HRH was then a wee snobbish but we saw him select a PAS man who was an engineer. Fortuitously, it was a wonderful serendipitous choice for us because Nizar Jamaluddin turned out to be an excellent MB.

Now back to Selangor, whether the original Pakatan choice for MB, Dr Wan Azizah, fell within such an unaccepted area, it was clearly stated by HRH that he believes that Dr Wan would be a state MB who could NOT be able, in general, to fulfill the executive role.

HRH gave the reason that Dr Wan Azizah would be 'remotely controlled' by you-know-who, meaning she would have become a puppet MB.

Whether we agree with HRH, and many of the readers on the news media interactive forums don't, wakakaka, let's nonetheless examine some issues which might have given HRH those adverse perceptions.

Firstly, Dr Wan Azizah is known by almost everyone to be a reluctant politician. Could such a reluctant politician be an effective MB, or as HRH suspects, a mere front for 'someone'? Regrettably we would never know because the opportunity for her to perform as MB has already passed.

Secondly, Dr Wan Azizah is known (and termed by kaytee) as the 'super sub'. In my July post with that title The super sub, I had written:

But we have to acknowledge that Dr Wan Azizah is Pakatan's super sub, the term being well-known in soccer.

It refers to (Wikipedia): "Players who are noted for scoring important goals when coming off the bench or frequently making appearances as a substitute."

Dr Wan Azizah belongs to the later group, those frequently making appearances as a substitute rather than who are noted for scoring important goals when coming off the bench.

She substituted for her husband as (his ousted UMNO) faction leader after he was jailed following conviction for sodomy; she also took his position as MP for Permatang Pauh; and now she replaces him as candidate for the recent Kajang by-election, the central figure of the so-called 'Kajang Move', ...

... and let's not deny or pretend not to know that was nothing more than a political manoeuvre to mainly satisfy PKR's internal leadership struggle. Thus she is expected to sub for Anwar as the next Selangor MB. 

I had also written in that September post:

But back to Dr Wan Azizah, what next for this super sub? The next PM of Malaysia? Or, like the Kajang Move, an own goal?

But wait, maybe I'm going too far ahead. Instead, let's look at her likelihood of becoming MB Selangor, a position with so many obstacles before her like male chauvinistic PAS, HRH's acceptance and approval, and of course not forgetting the Dwarf, wakakaka!

Wakakaka, it's okay - no nid lah to praise me for my prescience, wakakaka again.

Yes, unfortunately Dr Wan has been known to be a yo-yo pollie, who was MP for Permatang Pauh, then abandoned her important role as the representative of that constituency for her hubby, and who took up the candidature for Kajang in the Rancid Satay 'road to Putrajaya' and to forestall the evil Mahathir-led 'army' from invading Selangor, again for her hubby, and who was nominated for the Selangor MB position, again in place of her hubby.

And scarily, she is known to have preposterously declared that her hubby is God's gift to the people.

Wakakaka, her ludicrous balderdash description of her hubby aside, could all the above, which seem to us (me anyway, wakakaka) as unnecessary political antics, influenced HRH's perceptions?

No doubt you have your opinions, wakakaka.


  1. What a syok-sendiri bull about yr prescience about Kak Wan’s ability!

    But let’s talk about yr interpretation of the sultan’s current 'disturbed' and perturbed’ mood.

    1st - What prompt the high & mighty to come out of their comfort to clarify their ‘personal’ decision?

    That – u have it right on the dot - bcoz, the feeler news from the ground is VERY disturbing about that high & mighty institution. The majority of the commoners is not buying the propagated story about the decision in selecting the MB. The back-slap - the erosion of respect to the royal household, is imminent, even among the die-hard royalists, as they see it. & the tide is building & galloping fast.

    Thus the necessity in coming out for explanation or justification, as by convention, he doesn't need to! Twice, too as u’d recounted.

    The sultan knows THAT decision is fraud NOW & yet he is still holding on to his ‘understanding’ about the state constitution giving him the SOLE authority to select the MB candidate. He just want to save face!!!!!

    Just for a minute, let leave aside the issue of the constitutionality. Let’s talk sense, modern sense, that’s.

    In this days & time, absolute authority no long exist in any democratic countries, save of N Korea & hell-bended Islamic theocracies.

    The governing authority/person has to be mindful of the people’s thinking & reaction. Paternalistic approach is definitely out of synch with the modern thinking.

    Like it or not, the masses play a BIG role in decision making – whether that decision is good or bad is no longer an issue.

    Queen Elisabeth II of England plays it right. Similarly, the current King of Thailand acts fully to that non-interference until the VERY last minute. Hence, both earn their highest respects from the people of their respective country.

    In the selection of the current Selangor MB, that vital ingredient has been missing.

    The sultan just ignored the majority (whether it changed later or not – that’s not the question) decision & took on his own sweet time to resolve the issue, while retaining a nobody (been sacked from the party) to be the ‘transitional’ MB!

    This is repugnant to the common public senses, as if we r still having an absolute monarchy – who’s paternalistic approach CANNOT be questioned.

    That approach treated all Selangoreans as children, who elected a bunch of ‘morons’ to govern them. Thus a high & mighty, who would stay forever(???) & does no mistake, has to intervene to correct the wrong(???).

    The people DON’T like it – whether their choice is right or wrong, they would have to face it for 5 years. & there is a chance that things might turn out a-OK!

    In the case of that ‘paternalistic approach’, the people feel that they have lost the choice that’s fundamental to the democratic principle they subscribed to.

    Now that choice is been made by someone alone, & due to his position has made a precedent that has repercussion long before he is gone, never mind the fact that the choice he authorized could turn out right.

    There’s NO guarantee for that by his successors in the future!

    That – I believe is the REAL issue here & now!!!!!!

    1. Wakakaka.....well said. Let's hear what uncle wakakaka got to say

    2. Why don't we ask that cibai kaytee? Supposingly that beta (Is that VHS?) were to choose Wan Azizah instead and she turned up to be the best MB? Would it be a wonderful serendipitous choice for the people of Selangor? Why applicable to Nizar and not Wan Azizah? Motherfucker bullshit.

      What did Nizar do before he becomes MB? As PAS member? Like Mat Sabu? Wakakakaka! Perhaps, that cibai kaytee got psychic. Wan Azizah is no good leader. Yeah, Tun Ismail also known as reluctant politicians.

      We must ask this cibai kaytee to discuss what the fuck happen to Whitlam sacking?

      Ring a bell, kaytee............By the way, at the end, Fraser has won the election...........This is a problem for every atheists.........They think themselves as immortals

    3. the reason for looes having such a vile mouth is that he normally comes here after sucking someone's dick wakakaka.

      what did Nizar do before he became MB? well, for a start he didn't yo-yo wakakaka! then, he didn't claim someone' "God's gift to the people" wakakaka.

    4. Name 5 good things Nizar has done before he becomes MB?

      Seriously nothing against Nizar, just can't stand the bullshit kaytee

    5. just name me ONE good thing Anwar or Wan Azizah did before they became identified with KeADILan or PKR?

      16 years as UMNO Minister and wife? wakakaka

    6. Actually, Anwar Ibrahim was not a bad Finance Minister.
      His tenure was the only period in the last 40 years that Malaysia has run a budget surplus.

      Anil took the trouble to plot out the data, but you might reject him as an Anwarista....wakakakaka...

  2. My good wife controls the remote control. It is probably the same with others, including Dr Anwar.

  3. This latest piece of news;

    is telling little with many voiceless undertones!

    Why did the the Selangor royal-family-and-court have to pledge their loyalty to the sultan now?

    It isnt a yearly affair!

    What has the sultan done to earn that pledge NOW?

    For the erosion of that feudalistic reputation under the recent events?

    It could be a very subtle way of telling the commoners that the sultan is still been supported by his courtesans for what he has done, rightly &/or wrongly.

    & why the need to tell?

    Bcoz the simmering anger of the commoners r coming to boil!

  4. Yr half-anmoh sifu is putting his leg into this royal cheering too.

    U cant blame him as he is a confirmed related crownish cur. If u cant help yr own then who could u help?

    What’s troubling though is the subtle undertone of threat that he uttered!

    ‘Hence the British, in their wisdom, gave the power of the gun to the Rulers so that the position of the Rulers and everything that the Rulers are supposed to protect can remain protected.’

    So, indeed there is a simmering unhappiness, among the Selangoreans about what the sultan has done. & the whole royalists know about it & getting emotive jitters.

    A potential case of “ Raja Adil Raja Disembah Raja Zalim Raja Disanggah“.????

    Thus, the warning about using the military as in ‘the British created the Royal Malay Regiment and appointed the Rulers as Colonels-in-Chief of the various branches of the Armed Forces and the Agong as the Commander-in-Chief of the entire Armed Forces.’

    But….but…as the chiefs no doubts about that…But, when the crunch is down, can these soldiers follow their orders when these soldiers r facing their own brothers, sisters & family kindred?

    Could they refusing/ignoring the order to crash any rebellion as in the case of the Arab Spring?

    This half-anmoh properly has been away for too long in white-boy land to know the reality in M’sia!

    BTW, the British colonial master created the Royal Malay Regiment and appointed the Rulers as Colonels-in-Chief of the various branches of the Armed Forces and the Agong as the Commander-in-Chief of the entire Armed Forces, simply bcoz they want their puppets to look nice & powerful.

    Never mind that those who actually command these forces r the colonial masters themselves.

    Ever heard of ceremonial head? It’s easier that way to control the feudalistic crowd of commoners in the bygone days. It worked in India & it worked in colonial Malaya. so what so special? It’s totally not the case of Mao’s ‘political power grows out of the barrel of a gun, as far as these ceremonial posts go.

    1. The half angmoh is nothing but a batu api

    2. Me refused to buy kaytee cockshit story especially when the entire UMNO cibais went against the former Sultan of Perak, Idris II. I got to admit Idris II was not as esteemed as Azlan Shah even though Azlan Shah.........better not to say bad things about the dead.........and Azlan's son...........Apa macam perak constitution allows father to pass to son when the title of sultan must be rotated among 3 esteemed families. Have you guys notice any remnants of Idris II descendants.........Spare me the bullshit la

      That cibai RPK forgotten to mention that Britain or England had become a republic with their king tried for treason and beheaded. Did that fucker ever mention that the Yingeland parliament got to seek for one King from Hannover to be their king. And the parliament has the power to restrict funding to the king

      Cibai kaytee..........Nah, one video clip for you

    3. looes is the greater cibai because he consistently fails to check his history but we must forgive him because he is a Sing residing in the UK as a result of his adoption by Mr Foot

      Following the demise of Sultan Azlan Shah, Sultan Nazrin Muizzuddin Shah was elected as the new Perak Sultan by a special meeting of the Dewan Negara Perak (Perak Council of Succession) which was chaired by Orang Kaya Bendahara Seri Maharaja, Gen. (Rtd) Tan Sri Mohd Zahidi Zainuddin

      The history book on Perak tells us Raja Dr Nazrin Shah was appointed as Raja Kecil Besar on Feb 16, 1984 following his father's appointment as the 34th Sultan of Perak.

      According to the Perak Sultanate's unique succession rotation system, the Raja Kecil Besar is third in line to the Perak throne after the Raja Di-Hilir (No 2) and Raja Muda (Crown Prince).

      In 1987, with the passing of the Perak Raja Muda, Raja Ahmad Saifuddin Almarhum Sultan Iskandar Shah, the then Raja Di-Hilir, Raja Ahmad Hisham Raja Abdul Malik, 80 (note 80 years old), made way for Raja Nazrin Shah to become Raja Muda due to age and health factors.

      Okay cibai, have you got it into your ch'ou cibai head? wakakaka

    4. Hahahahahaha! What the fuck la! One cibai penangite talking perak history

      How did Nazrin become Raja Kecil Besar? How really does Azlan Shah come into picture? Ask this guy

    5. better a penangite talking perak history than a cock sucking cibai Anglo-Sing, wakakaka

    6. Oh boy! hahaha .... the cibais are flying thick and fast thru the air as the pair of you indulge in a snowball-type cibai flinging contest! The rest of us have to duck lest we get hit with the foul stuff !! But, hahaha, keep it up - it brings life to the proceedings. Wonder if parliament can see the potential here? It can be a tourist magnet !!

  5. How about looking at the matter from another viewpoint?

    It's generally accepted that the Royalty's role in the choice of an MB is limited to only approving the nomination of the majority of the State Assembly.

    In other words the Royal's approval is the last act before the candidate assumes full duties as an MB. So, it can be said that the "buck stops here" (to quote President Truman's words) at the Royal's feet. That means he has a degree of responsibility too in the appointment of the MB.

    Let's imagine what if the State Assembly had nominated a monkey as their choice of an MB.

    Wouldn't the Royal be guilty of dereliction of duty if he had as a matter of course simply approved of such a choice despite knowing full well that the candidate will never be able to perform the duties expected of it?

    Wouldn't it also be a betrayal of his own judgment and conviction in approving someone/something whom he sincerely believes to be completely unsuitable for the job?

    1. When Margaret Thatcher was elected PM of UK, she would massively 're-invent' the govt subsidized industries & let them fight for survival in free market competition. BY doing so millions of workers lost their jobs.

      Did QEII objected, knowing very well that majority of the low income citizen would suffer? In fact she was never in good term with the wicked witch of UK!

      During many of the Thailand's military coups, all of them went against the norm of sensible govt practices. Many Thais were suffered during those incidents.

      When did the Thai King, Bhumibol Adulyadej, intervene? He did it until the very last minute with advices ONLY!

      Both did what they did bcoz, royalties must not ONLY seen to be above politics, they MUST also act above politics.

      After all it's the majority of the people that must make the ultimate decision, NOT the royalty!

      This is in tune with the modern sense of majority choice, NOT the paternalistic feudal thinking.

      If the State Assembly had nominated a monkey as their choice of an MB, then the people of Selangor has to suffered 5 years & change that mistake after that.

      Whereas, if the sultan authorized a donkey as his choice of an MB, then the people of Selangor would have no choice of recall, a key essence of democratic process, since the sultan can continue to do so by exercising his 'understanding' of the sole right as stated in the state constitution!

      That would be the ultimate betrayal of his own judgment and conviction in approving someone/something whom he sincerely believes to be completely suitable for the job & yet make a mess of it. & the irony of this tragedy is that that decision is paternalistic, in total disregard with a modern democratic setting!

      I suppose, yr point of argument is that the sultan has that sole right, so the buck stops there.

      Is he?

      BTW President Truman was popularly elected, whereas the sultan post is hereditary. The buck CAN only stop at the door step of someone who is majority elected in a democratic setting, OK?

    2. Well argued. It is this kind of discussion that will raise the quality of the comments section and help the democratic process as well as inform and educate readers.

    3. Quote: " ... if the sultan authorized a donkey as his choice of an MB, then the people of Selangor would have no choice of recall, a key essence of democratic process, since the sultan can continue to do so by exercising his 'understanding' of the sole right as stated in the state constitution!"

      A question regarding the above. If indeed a sultan had arbitrarily chosen an MB that the vast majority of the rakyat jelata are unhappy with, is there any recourse for the rakyat to challenge/overturn the sultan's decision?

      This is quite an interesting discussion. Hope you can provide enlightenment.

    4. ...President Truman was popularly elected, whereas the sultan post is hereditary. The buck CAN only stop at the door step of someone who is majority elected in a democratic setting.

      This is most likely true of the democratic system as practised in America. In other countries obviously there will be variations in their formats of democracy. It'll be good if you or any other expert can expound on this, in particular as practised in Malaysia.

    5. I strongly suggest to watch these clips. Come to think of it.......I really like the fictitious king of england

      Perhaps kaytee may think that Anwar Ibrahim is like Francis Uruqhart. Although the best F U is Madhater himself

    6. I strongly suggest to watch these clips. Come to think of it.......I really like the fictitious king of england

      Perhaps kaytee may think that Anwar Ibrahim is like Francis Uruqhart. Although the best F U is Madhater himself

    7. Anons @ 130 & 205,

      The simplest answer to both yr queries lies deep within the bygone wisdom of our ancestor, as expressed in the saying of:

      “Raja Adil Raja Disembah Raja Zalim Raja Disanggah“

      Absolute monarchy belongs to the feudalistic past. To be relevant, the royal institution has to evolve with chinging attitude & expectation of the people who support it.

      QEII & King Bhumibol Adulyadej have both perform their respective duties right to the dot, that's in tune with the democratic expectation of the masses.

      The M'sian royal households SHOULD take strong note of that.

      Spraying water when the fire has started to consume the house might do little good!!!

  6. For as long as you we have a Malay Constitutional Monarchy/Sultans, we have to follow and accept someone of HRH's choice to be the MB. The fact is this is Tanah Melayu not Tanah Orang Putih or Tanah Jawa or Tanah Bugis or Tanah Etc Etc Etc.... I personally think the appointment of AA tidak melanggar adat Melayu...

    1. So jadi tu;

      'Adakah destini bangsa Melayu menghambakan diri kepada golongan elit? Sejak Demang Lebar Daun berjanji janjian dengan Sri Teri Buana ketika menyerahkan anak perempuan nya, adakah destini bangsa Melayu ialah untuk menghamba-abdikan diri mereka kepada golongan bangsawan?'

      dan lagi,

      'Orang Melayu kan suka pemimpin mereka kaya raya sebab biarlah mereka kaya- mereka Melayu. Biarlah mereka masuk rumah kita, meniduri isteri dan anak perempuan kita- bukankah mereka itu Melayu? '

      Memang bagus.... bangsa feudalistic yg mandated sehinga zaman modern ?????

    2. Is that why umno baru can continue playing the AlifBaTa game, knowing deep down that the Malays have been crippled by years of indoctrination about depending on paternalistic tongkat supports & guildances - disguised as 'adat Melayu' baru?

      Mana keh perjanjian Demang Lebar Daun dengan Sri Teri Buana?

      Tu lah adat Melayu yg tulin!

    3. Fuck you la..........What the fuck Ghazali Jawi say to sultan idris II?

      What the cibai fuck you got to say about this? Stay away from my state

  7. Ingatlah pepatah Melayu "Biar mati anak, asalkan jangan mati adat." Sungguh dalam maknanya di dalam pepatah itu.

    1. Memang bagus, this is the question that I like to explore!

      Let’s go back to the perjanjian Demang Lebar Daun dengan Sri Teri Buana, which could be considered as the most important source of the adat Melayu.

      What's ‘adat’ BUT a set of man-made rules, kononnya been practiced by a group of people since masa nenek moyang.

      It's also within justification to say that these ‘adat’ changed/disappeared due to circumstances, again most likely man-made. Otherwise there would be many illogical & inconsequential ‘adat’ still been maintained now. Key examples would be the modified /removal of the old Hindus practices since the mass adaptation of Islam by the Malay masses.

      In the legend of the perjanjian Demang Lebar Daun dengan Sri Teri Buana, Demang Lebar Daun was brave & intelligent to challenge the old feudalistic norm of unquestioning obedience to Sri Teri Buana, who was then the alpha male of the tribe.

      He changed the unquestioning pledge of royalty to one of Quid pro quo – meaning in exchange for royalty, Sri Teri Buana must rule with justice & fairness to the populace.

      That’s was NEVER been done before – it’s against the old ‘adat’ to question & more so asking for something in return from the top elites!

      So, in that legend, our ancestors had shown their far-sightedness to go with the change of time & circumstances. They changed the old 'adat' with a more recent & fair one to reflect the needs of the circumstances!

      Thus, "Biar mati anak, asalkan jangan mati adat.", maksud apa????

      If Demang Lebar Daun held fast to that saying, then where was the need for the perjanjian. Don’t ask, don’t question - biarlah jadi hamba sh’ja!

      He didn’t, thus arise the often quoted saying of “Raja Adil Raja Disembah Raja Zalim Raja Disanggah“, which reflects the hidden gem of the bygone Malay intelligentsia.

      So, biar anak mati, even when that ‘adat’ has lost the shelf-life & essence in modern day living?

      Perhaps, u r not from the same tribe as Demang Lebar Daun & thus cant understand the need for adaptation with time & circumstances!!!!

      More likely, u r still living in the time zone before Demang Lebar Daun exits!!

  8. Perhaps you have known this : Hidup bersendikan adat, adat bersendikan hukum, hukum bersendikan kitab Allah dan sunnah Nabi Muhammad.

    So, jadi kalau anak berzina kenalah rejam anak itu sampai mati, kerana itulah adat resam dan hukumnya. Hence itulah sebab timbulnya pepatah itu which does not change irrespective of time and place by Allah.

    Sejak zaman dahulu hingga sekarang mana ada seorang perempuan menjadi Dato' Bendahara? Mungkin in your time zone kot. So, I am not wrong when I say that perlantikan AA adalah tidak melanggar adat!

    1. What a misogynistic view!!!

      Dalam dunia mu memang tak bolih ada perempuan jack Dato Bendahara. Sebab tu, u masih tinggal dalam zaman pri-Demang Lebar Daun.

      BTW, if u r talking about the 'adat' derives after the Malay Islamization, & they r hukum Allah & cant be changed.

      Then be very careful for what u implied. Hukum Allah dictates all image r of same status. There is no royalty. No elite class.

      Thus, r u proposing the abolishing of the blue-bloods??

      If u r sticking to yr ancient hamba adat to a royalty then ain't u going against the hukum Allah?

      U cant have it both ways - just be very clear about it.

    2. I strongly recommend that you read 'Thufat Al-Nafis' and another book 'Ahlul-Bait Rasulullah S.A.W & The Malay Sultanate'. I have read those books four times. You can warm up by reading 'Gurindam Dua Belas' first. I am crystal clear that I am not having it both ways.

  9. So u r saying among umat Islam, class & hierarchy r allowed???

    Any quotable surah from Quran & Quran only.

    What type of Islam is that?????

    1. You should ask the British why the British did not do to Tanah Melayu as to what the Dutch had did to Tanah Jawa?

    2. Simple - iff u r a historical freak & know yr takes!

      The Dutch was less ambitious bcoz their empire was falling & thus the colonial officers were looking for quick gains. A take-no-prison & zero tolerance approach was the quickest way to loot the colony of her wealth.

      Meanwhile, the British empire was blooming & their colonial officers were looking at ways & means to strengthen the political grip over the various colonies throughout the globe.

      Know yr Malaya history well?

      The British colonial office could very well ignore the objections of the setting up of the Malaya Union & continued with it.

      They didn't. Instead they played Machiavellian, just like in India, Middle East & S Africa, to garner their so called political 'gentlemanness'.

      Here lies all the ills that now spread throughout these countries, where that political-correctness turn monster after maturing.

      So, in hindsight, the Dutch were much kinder as their atrocity ONLY last a short time as compared with the ongoing lingering generational hatreds that the 'gentleman' British had sown.

    3. u forgot to mention that the dutch got rid of the monarchy/sultanate.

    4. The Dutch did NOT. Following the country’s independence in 1945, many sultanates in the country were abolished to conform with the republican nature of independent Indonesia.

      Some like Sultan Hamengkubuwono IX of Yogyakarta was wise enough to join Sukarno in their fight against the Dutch and eventually became a VP of the new republic, while some like the Sultan of Pontianak Syarif Hamid II Alqadrie, was jailed for 10 years in 1953 for siding with the Dutch against the Indonesian freedom fighters in the struggle for independence.

    5. the dutch did abolish the sultanate in piecemeal basis. for example, sultanate of sumatra in 1825, sultanate of batam in 1832, sultanate of banjarmasin 1860, sultanate of riau-lingga in 1911, and etc etc. but u r right that sultan hamengkubuwono declared his state as part of Indonesia when the indonesians fight for independence against the dutch.

  10. I hope that this cibai kaytee can read melayu.........This is another raja.......unlike RPK, he is indeed neutral

  11. what's going on over there in sydney? islamic militants causing pain to non muslim?