Yesterday TMI told usAbout 90% of the Malaysian workforce can't cope with the additional expenses incurred following the implementation of the goods and services tax (GST), according to a recent survey by career resources site Jobstreet.com.
too much?
If you spent RM 20 a day, then with GST at 6% you'd be paying RM21.60.
If your personal monthly expenditure was RM1000 a month, you will now require RM1060.
Does it make sense that "90% of the Malaysian workforce can't cope with the additional expenses"? 90% of Malaysians?
GEORGE TOWN: There is ample supply of chicken for this Hari Raya, said Agriculture and Agro-based Minister Datuk Seri Ismail Sabri Yaakob.
The problem was poultry prices and he believed that some traders were taking advantage of the coming festive season to raise prices.
“It is possible that some traders are holding back supply because of the high demand,” he said.
Ismail added that it was without question that the cost of chicken feed, which is mostly imported maize, had increased due to the depreciation of the ringgit against the US dollar.
“We have to import because we cannot grow maize in Malaysia. Even the soybeans mixed in the feed are also imported.
Every f* pre-festival we hear the same message and accompanying excuses, in their various forms, as:
assurance of plentiful supply
unscrupulous traders taking advantage
threats of punitive actions against unscrupulous traders
yadda yadda yadda
... whether the feared shortage was on chicken, beef, mutton, eggs, flour, minyak, etc, and in this case, even santan.
For a minister to give assurances and excuses each and EVERY year, there has to be sheer bad management or something naughty and hanky panky going on on the supply side. And don't just blame those small traders but look more at the conglomerates. It's beginning to sound like Indians and Russians of yesteryears booking for their own car 10 years ahead.
I could tell you a story on how several years ago one wannabe-get-rich-instantaneously with "connections" had attempted by approved monopoly to corner the mandarin-orange market in the pre Chinese New Year market. One of the most effective boycott of goods then took place and the bloke was sent scurrying away with his tail between his hind quarters to his tuan's arms. But I won't now, wakakaka.
So will the minister/authority stop the blame & excuse game. The free market is about supply & demand, and the traders are more than happy to make profits in increased sales - that's the very essence of business.
Also anticipate festival requirements and ensure the shelves on the supermarkets, wet markets and kedai2 kampung are well stocked. Don't wait until a shortage crisis occur before importing.
Caliph Ali ibn Abi Talib, bravest of Prophet Mohammad's generals
Above scene shows him leading the Prophet's army to victory at the Battle of Badr
A cousin and son-in-law of the Prophet he was said to Prophet Mohammad's rightful heir, and that the Prophet had anointed him as successor
He lost the caliphate to Abu Bakr in a swift bloodless coup d'etat while he was busy washing the Prophet's body for burial
He eventually and reluctantly accepted the appointment of 4th Caliph, but 5 years later was assassinated with a poison-coated sword while he was prostrating in a Fajr (dawn) prayer in the Great Mosque of Kufa.
His descendants and followers became Shia Muslims
I wonder whether the Mail's headlines could be wrong; perhaps it should have read:
PAS Syura Council to decide on DAP ties after the Battle of Badr.
I had previously written against our monarchs or their immediate heirs taking part in politics, especially in polemical politics, because their royal statements or opinions would confer or deprive unfair advantage to/from a side of politics in the eyes of the public especially the rakyat of the Heartland who have for centuries menjunjung tinggi our sultans.
A ruler by staying above politics assumes the role with which HRH has been assigned by our Constitution, that of being our respected and loved head of state (in the respective sultanate, or in the case of the Agong, our nation). He assumes the important, nay, vital role of an important father-figure for all of us to focus on as a pillar of stability, continuity and centre of gravity of our undivided loyalty. Without such a central figure, our nation will be internally ripped asunder.
Just recently, HRH Sultan of Selangor has with just a few kind and encouraging words to our redoubtable gymnast Farah Ann Abdul Hadi would undoubtedly have effectively shut up the vulgar obscene clams of those kay-poe-chnee kerang kotor who preferred to zoom in on the gymnast's physical profile rather than the gymnast's perfect performance during the recent ASEAN games.
HRH has just demonstrated the perfect role of a constitutional monarch by being a pillar of stability, continuity and centre of gravity of our undivided loyalty amidst worrying Taliban-Saudi-like mafulat-ish misogynistic misdemeanours.
So, our young prince of Johor, HRH Tunku Idris Sultan Ibrahim has left his earlier threat of Johorean secession aside to also join HRH Sultan Selangor in putting his royal imprimatur on exceptional gymnastic performance, with a very telling advice by a well-known Mufti to not judge a person superficially or more correctly to not usurp the prerogative of Allah swt by pre-judging a person by his or her external appearance.
Now, I have been one who have not been happy with, in fact against royal intrusion into the political arena, only for fear of two issues, namely, (1) as mentioned above, it provides one side of politics with unfair and undue advantage, but more importantly (2) it exposes the royal figure to political 'whacking' (wakakaka) because by the royal person choosing to enter the grubby grotty grim of the political arena, he has voluntarily and automatically invited counter-political comments which can be in very harsh adversarial forms.
Such are the rules of democratic adversarial politics a la Newton's 3rd Law. One can't have his cake and eat it also, in wrongly believing the royal person can make political commentaries but would be exempt from counter-challenges or criticisms. You may also wish to read my postThe ultimate cake wakakaka.
By playing a firm, stern but fair father figure in deciding on non-political issues, such as whether social attacks on a leading sports personality who had participated exceptionally in a sports on behalf of our nation have been fair or worthy, the royal person ensures the stability of our society and continuity of our state as a safe, stable and secure nation.
But was the young prince seeking social rehabilitation after his bizarre threat of Johor seceding from Malaysia?
Who knows and who cares as this time he has done a damn good and to-be-highly-commended non-political job of 'protecting' Farah Ann Abdul Hadi from the sleazy scums and slugs.
Perhaps in today's more politically-conscious society it may indicate the growing power of the people, to whom even the royals want to be on their good side?
To quote Otto Von Bismarck, a king reigns but never governs. Daulat Tuanku!
why shouldn't I flaunt it when I have it - I'm just damn good
For Khalid, a man who's despised by both DAP and to a lesser extent, PKR, to make such a daring proposal must mean he has as-yet-unidentified support.
Don't be so eager as to dismiss his wet yet not so wet dreams as a case of nasi dah jadi bubur, because a businessman, which Khalid is, doesn't make such a seemingly preposterous proposal unless he has done his sums.
To reiterate, obviously he has 'support' for him to believe he can return as the 'comeback kid'.
Let's follow his example and do some maths ourselves.
Numbers-wise, he is, I believe, assured of 12 UMNO ADUN and of course himself, which gives him 13, counting towards 29 in a DUN of 56.
The Mail reported that 'Khalid, who was sacked from PKR last year in a leadership putsch that cost him the mentri besar post, said, however, that he would only consider making a comeback if he wins a vote of confidence in the state assembly with a simple majority.'
And a simple majority is one, meaning he has the backing of 29 in the Selangor DUN of 56.
Based on the last MB selection turmoil, initiated by the rancid Kajang Satay Bull and coagulated by PAS merajuk-ish recalcitrancy, he is probably assured of 13 out of the 15 PAS ADUN, which adds up to a nice 26 in his quest to resume his Royal MB-ship.
I suspect Khalid may still have around 3 pro-Khalid ADUN in PKR itself who still support or will support him when they see the encouraging numbers. So that will give him what he needs, a simple majority of one in his 29, which will nicely kow-tim the MB situation for him.
Yes, Azmin Ali may be in dire danger!
Okay, it's unlikely he'll receive any DAP backing but WTF does he care if/when he has 29, the simple majority that he needs, as he has stated and must have already calculated.
And why won't DAP back him? See my 2013 post Selangor saga shows PKR's ketuanan mentality on how he had treated the DAP with a disrespect that was only possible by copious dosages of name dropping and a wee dram of ketuanan Melayu-ness.
Besides, if UMNO is involved, it'll be the death knell for DAP to be involved.
As for the palace, he has been a fave of HRH, and it's likely he won't meet any objection from the palace.
But we voters need to be aware Khalid Ibrahim is more of a businessman rather than a people's representative in the true sense of the latter, as had been evidenced by his early handling of the Grand Saga Toll Fiasco in 2008 when he was far more interested in the profits for the Toll Company than justice and service for the Cheras folks.
After all, didn't PSM describe him as an 'unfriendly Guthrie towkay' when Anwar Ibrahim parachuted him into the Ijok by-election. So it was a bit silly of me to expect him to act sympathetically towards the people of Cheras in the Grand Saga road toll debacle, when I should know by then a bourgeois like him would of course be more concerned about the road toll towkays, with him as a MB stating rather bizarrely that the state government must also take into consideration that the toll would be the source of revenue for the company. Hmmm, what about those people of Selangor who had supported Pakatan? That's what he was, has been, is and will be, a pure businessman, one who had been an 'unfriendly Guthrie towkay' who is good at making money for his company (Guthrie or the state of Selangor) and who deems himself answerable to ONLY his sponsor-major stakeholder (be this Dr M, Anwar Ibrahim or as he was last seen to have believed, HRH).
During the sad turbulent days immediately after the 2013 GE when the appointment of Selangor's MB for a fresh new term was in progress and criticisms of Khalid Ibrahim was flying high and low, wakakaka, one criticism was about him not listening to the Pakatan ADUNs on state issues.
He had then pompously replied via what was seen as a pathetic pretentious pseudo-presidential proclamation, that he"listened to criticisms from the people more than from party leaders and politicians".
That nonsense so riled DAP's Gobind Singh Deo who immediately 'urged' (a polite euphemism for 'f**king demand', wakakaka) the Selangor MB to bloody well clarify that statement.
Gobind went as far as to say Khalid had made a "very serious statement, which may have serious consequences", meaning Khalid either knew f**k all about democratic parliamentary process or had deliberately ignored that!
Gobind said: "Khalid must not take things for granted. I ask him to respond and clarify matters."
In fact I suspect Khalid might not be even conscious of the fact that he was nominated to be MB by Pakatan (not just the mere elected ADUNs) but by the parties' top leadership. Thus, in his (I suspect) lack of understanding of the party process or democratic process, he doesn't see his obligation to step down when told by his party to do so.
When DAP leaders went bonkers and tore off what little patches of hair they had left because of this politically bizarre and obdurate man, and condemned him as dishonourable in insisting on staying as MB despite losing the confidence of his party and the majority of the Pakatan pact, they were just pissing in the wind.
Yes, they were because Khalid Ibrahim did not see himself as a politician who had to abide by the rules of democratic political process. He didn't understand all that because, as we had suspected, he didn't see himself being nominated by Pakatan to be MB of Selangor. His conviction of his right to continue in his CEO (MB) position was most unfortunately further strengthened by PAS' Pak Haji Hadi Awang's naughty support of him.
As I've joked about it before, without support from his own political party or as a renegade to his own political party, by insisting on remaining on as MB in a Pakatan ruled state, he effectively became a rare avis, not unlike a unicorn or a chimera.
It's in his DNA so in general don't be too harsh on him, other than his wish to be MB again. Being MB is being a people's representative which as discussed, he appeared not cut out to be.
Hey, maybe we can recommend him to be CEO 1MDB?
Thus, I have serious concerns about his ability to serve the people of Selangor as MB who's really a people's representative - again, don't mistake or be confused about his excellent business sense and competency for his political responsibility of truly serving the people (rather than just the state as a business company) - ask the people of Cheras.
In the final analysis, for Khalid to realize his wet yet not so wet dreams, to revert bubur back into nasi (and I don't want to hear that term nasi k***k***, wakakaka), it will all depend on PAS or to be more specific, Pak Haji Hadi Awang.
Will Pak Haji be willing to join in a new state coalition to back Khalid Ibrahim as MB, in which the coalition may include UMNO's participation? Icing on top for Pak Haji, DAP is unlikely to be in, wakakaka.
Throughout history we have been blessed by idioms, such as:
(a) on the horns of a dilemma,
(b) between Scylla and Charybdis,
(c) between the devil and the deep blue sea, and
(d) between a rock and a hard place,
... with each of course being most suitable for its particular time in history. For example, the version 'between Scylla and Charybdis' would make sense mainly to those schooled in the classics, whereas today the last of above idioms would strike a cord with the now-generation.
All more or less means having to choose between two evils, though some may argue there are subtle differences among them.
Today I read the Malay Mail Online's As PKR fails to pick sides, stalemate possible which reported (extracts): KUALA LUMPUR, June 25 ― With PKR struggling to choose an alliance in the fallout between DAP and PAS, leaders keen on starting a new opposition coalition without the Islamist party now fear their plans may not materialise.
Conflicting remarks issued by PKR leaders since the crisis started earlier this month clearly show the party is now caught between a rock and a hard place ― severing ties with PAS could see PKR lose its rule in Selangor but staying friendly with the Islamist party would not bode well with its DAP allies.
“PKR's inability to decide on choosing between DAP and PAS is making any efforts to move on difficult.
“From their remarks, it seems like they can't make the hard choice of cutting ties with PAS, and this has upset plans to form a new party to replace PAS,” a PR source told Malay Mail Online.
I thought I was allowed polygamy
Note that our reporter uses 'between a rock and a hard place'.
But given our Malaysian interests in the salacious, for example, staring at a gymnast's physical profile rather than the gymnast's perfect performance, I wonder whether it's now time for another rising idiom, all of it 100% Malaysian Boleh-make, wakakaka. Okay, boys & girls & ulama, shut your eyes and close your ears, wakakaka.
Given that the weakest link PKR could not choose between the stronger PAS and DAP, the party members might appreciate the new idiom 'between pr*ck and *unt'.
And what is that last word? If you want to know, the answer is in my post at KTemoc Kachinates titled Papal crossword.
On 11 March 2002 in Saudi Arabia, 15 schoolgirls in Mecca were barred by the Mutaween, Saudi religious police, from leaving a burning building because they had not worn the correct Islamic dress required of Muslims. All 15 died.
Witnesses reported that the Mutaween didn't want the girls to come into physical contact with the civil defense forces for fear of sexual enticement, and that the girls were locked in by the police, or forced back into the building.
Sexual enticement in an uncontrolled blazing situation? Well, f**k my camel!
Back here in Malaysia, specifically in Kelantan, the Islamic officials have not been so cruel. In their Operasi Gempur Aurat, Muslim caught not wearing apparel to cover up their aurat would be fined RM500, heaps more kind than to be locked up in a blazing building for fear of being sexually enticing or sexually enticed.
But lately the Islamic-influenced codes on dressing have been seen not to be only confined to Muslims. Recently we have witnessed an increasing imposition of such religiously-driven codes of dressing on non-Muslims as well, at places like the Road Transport Department (RTD), the Selangor state secretariat and the Sg Buloh public hospital.
The intrusions into non-Muslims' rights have thus put paid to the assurance by PAS that the far more frightening hudud, the Islamic penal code for punishments, will not affect non-Muslims.
In those cases where non-Muslims were forced to wear sarongs and towels, the respective departmental heads had commendably come out to say those impositions had been the individual actions of lil' Napoleons, it nonetheless sends us the signal, as reported by the Malay Mail Online"... that religious conservatism could supplant Malaysia’s secular administration and drive the country towards theocratic rule as seen in Iran and Saudi Arabia."
But far more disturbing, the Mail warned us that while "... media coverage of incidents have elicited criticism of the agencies by the English-speaking audience, the reverse is true in Malay."
"On social media, Malay-speaking users have instead targeted the women barred from entry over their attire, which include knee-length skirts, dresses and, in one instance, shorts."
What it ominously means for non-Muslims is that Malay Muslims objecting to such impositions on non-Muslims are only the English-educated Muslims, a minority, while the majority of Muslims are in support of syariah laws, or at least its codes for dressing, being applied to non-Muslims as well.
This is hardly surprising when you consider that as far back as in 2001, Malaysiakini had reported (of course bearing in mind the news report was in 2001):
Terengganu Mentri Besar and PAS national deputy president Abdul Hadi Awang was quoted as saying that once an Islamic state is established, non-Muslims will be subjected to Islamic laws involving public interests although there will be exceptions for certain areas.
Gulp gasp omigosh, so there you have it, our dear Pak Haji Hadi and his belief that 'non-Muslims will be subjected to Islamic laws involving public interests'.
Datuk Noor Farida Ariffin, a former session court judge, told Malay Mail Online yesterday: “My view is that if these unhealthy developments are not checked by the government, our secular state and our secular Federal Constitution are at risk. If we don’t take action now to arrest this trend, we may end up like ... [Saudi Arabia and Iran].”
I have always been against religion getting involved in politics, regardless of the religious denomination, be this the Buddhist, Christian, Islamic, Hindu (etc) organizations.
It's dangerous and unchallengeable when clerics use (or more likely misuse) the name of Divinity to influence their political standing, policies and rulings.
The 'church' (I use 'church' here in a generic sense, implying the establishments of any religion) is already in power in Saudi Arabia and Iran, while it exerts very influential but unhealthy pressure in the USA, Israel, Pakistan, even some states in India*, and ... you-work-out-the-rest.
* In February this year, the state of Maharashtra in India which has banned cow slaughter has extended that ban to include buffalo, which make up the majority of the beef consumed in and exported from India. It's reported by ABC that anyone in Maharashtra caught selling or in possession of beef faces a five-year jail term and a $200 fine.
Additionally, the state government of Haryana had reportedly been considering making the crime of killing a cow akin to murder, which would attract a life sentence.
Meanwhile in New Delhi, PM Narendra Modi's Hindu Nationalist (federal) government of India is considering a national prohibition of cow slaughter.
So don't think only Muslims are fanatics. Hindus are as well as Christians while we learn, to our shock, that a Buddhist monk in Myanmar had advocated killing the Rohingyas. He should be immediately defrocked and jailed. But it teaches us that religions must not be allowed to play a part in politics.
Take for example what was reported by Free Malaysia Today in August 2012 in its article GE 13: What would Jesus do?
In that piece of news, there was a public forum in PJ, Section 8, at the Dignity International, A-2-7 Pusat Perdagangan, on the upcoming general election from a Christian perspective.
And the topic of discussion: What will Jesus be doing in Malaysia today?
You wonder, wouldn't you, about Jesus coming to Malaysia to interfere with a Malaysian general elections? But then, that's the Christian Church dropping name again.
The speakers were Rev Dr Hermen Shastri and Paul Sinnappan.
FMT reported: A media statement on the forum explained that the cowardly fence-sitters are the sole obstacle in preventing political change in Malaysia.
“As the winds of change blow in this most exciting times of political change in Malaysia, the only obstacle that is preventing the change from actually taking place is the Malaysian ‘fence-sitters’ who for the last 54 years have been afraid to make that choice for change.
“Many among this also reside in our Churches and sit glued to benches and pews during Sunday service without fail, listening fervently to what Jesus may be saying to them,” it read.
The statement added that there is a growing awakening among all Malaysians on the need for real change – a reform of the political landscape for Malaysians.
“Yet there seems to be a disjoint of the faith growth within the Churches and the growth without among all Malaysians. This seemingly two worlds of faith and politics are a challenge to all Christians. Are there two lives or only one life, [which] we live according to the will of God?,” it said.
The speakers, read the statement, will take the audience through the Bible to study the political implications and experiences of being a Christian.
“This is to help us enter into present-day reality of the Malaysian political context, and answer the perennial thought: what would Jesus do in Malaysia Today?” it added.
Just as Islam in Malaysia has been highly politicized, so it seemed too with the Christian church, at least in 2012 prior to GE-13.
As a most lovable adorable atheist, I wasn't impressed at all by what those clerics were attempting to hint to their congregation, especially more so when Yehoshua ben Yosef ('Jesus' if you're into Greek names) told us in Matthew 22:21, to wit:
Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's.
And that's what Yehoshua ben Yosef would have done and said if he was here at the Church organized public forum at the Dignity International, A-2-7 Pusat Perdagangan in August 2012. In other words, the state is the ruler's (or government's) domain, and the church should bloody damn well keep out of state affairs.
Isn't it troubling enough that we already have so many Islamic clerics politicizing their religion for political gains? We certainly don't need any more clerics of other religious denomination interfering in politics. We urgently need a clear separation between State and Church.
State secularism does NOT mean the prohibition of religious worship, but only that the State (and thus the government and all its institutions and agencies) does NOT bloody well get itself involved with religious matters, especially on issues that can impact on the individual's democratic and human rights. Religion under a secular state is a private matter for the individual. Likewise, the 'church' should stay out of politics!
Under our Constitution, (Malaya had been, and subsequently) Malaysia is a secular state but which uniquely recognizes Islam as the official religion. What does this mean will be explained further on in this post by none other than former Lord President Salleh Abas (in a ruling he made 15 years ago) and again earlier this year by a three-judge panel of Malaysia’s second-highest court led by Justice Datuk Mohd Hishamudin Yunus.
But despite former Lord President Salleh Abas' ruling, this constitutional fact was thrown into confusion and ambiguity for 15 long years, and became a fertile ground for ambitious clerics to plant their unConstitutional seeds of intended domination, when former PM Dr Mahathir made his declaration on 29 September 2001 that Malaysia was an Islamic State, and as if that wasn't enough for his UMNO political agenda to out-flank PAS in the Heartland, made a further declaration the following year, on 17 June 2002, that Malaysia was not just an Islamic State but a fundamentalist Islamic State.
The two questionable and very ominous declarations came to be respectively (note, not 'respected') known as the 929 and 617 Declarations, both of which were adoringly supported (no, not by PAS but) by Dr Mahathir's kutus, MCA and Gerakan. MCA even creatively came up with a new disingenuous incredulous preposterous term, namely, 'secular Islamic state' to ameliorate the party's blind support for Dr Mahathir's unilateral declarations.
But alas, those declarations gave free reins to the UMNO Islamists to drive our multi-racial and multireligious nation in a caravan direction different to what what our founding fathers, Onn Jaffar, Tunku Abdul Rahman, Tun Razak and Tun Hussein Onn had determined and written into our Constitution.
Former Lord President Salleh Abas pointed out that the highest law in the country is the Federal Constitution, with Syariah law (Islamic law) being only a branch within the constitution.
Malaysiakini (12 Nov 2001) reported: Salleh said that his stand on Article 3 was clearly stated in a 1988 judgment which ruled that the term 'Islam' in Article 3 referred only to acts relating to "rituals and ceremonies".
He stressed that Malaysia can only be converted into an Islamic state when the word 'Islam' in Article 3 is amended so that Syariah could be applied fully to at least all Muslims.
Early this year we read again the same Salleh judicial ruling in the recent Court of Appeal decision reaffirming the limits of Shariah law to only familial matters.
Note the word 're-affirming' means the limited powers of the syariah courts were long since affirmed, as per what former Lord President Salleh Abas had ruled.
The three-judge panel of Malaysia’s second-highest court led by Justice Datuk Mohd Hishamudin Yunus cited former Lord President Tun Salleh Abas, who had ruled that the framers of the Federal Constitution had confined the word “Islam” in Article 3 — which says that Islam is the religion of the Federation — to the areas of marriage, divorce and inheritance law, based on the history of Islamic legislation in Malaya during British colonial times.
“In short, the Supreme Court takes the position that it was the intention of the framers of our Federal Constitution that the word ‘Islam’ in Art. 3(1) be given a restrictive meaning,” Hishamudin said in the appellate court’s full judgment released on January 2 in the case of three Muslim transwomen fighting a cross-dressing ban under Negri Sembilan Shariah law.
The news also said former de facto law minister Datuk Zaid Ibrahim lauded the “clear thinking” judges for the decision and said that it took “lots of courage from Muslim judges to pronounce the appropriate place of Islamic law under the Constitution.”
He noted however, such decision has already been made decades ago but today’s ruling is an affirmation to that. He said:
“If our judges had been willing to make the correct pronouncement of the law, the country would have been spared the uncertainty and confusion which 20 years of ambivalence has generated.”
Now get this, and believe me or not wakakaka, the second Malaysian leader to dispute Dr M's Declarations that Malaysia was an Islamic State was none other the late spiritual leader of PAS and Menteri Besar of Kelantan, Allahyarham Pak Haji Nik Aziz who had then said:
“You can talk all you want. You can declare a piece of wood to be gold, or a wheelbarrow as a Mercedez, but in reality, nothing has changed.
For us, an Islamic country is one which is governed according to the tenets of the Quran and Hadith (sayings of Prophet Muhammed). Malaysia is a secular State. If the present Malaysia is already an Islamic state, then what do you call the state ruled by Prophet Muhammed and his friends?”
But thanks to Dr Mahathir and his too-clever-by-half politicking, and the opportunistic zealots, we are now seriously affected by the mess he left behind where lil' Napoleons have exploited his Islamic (but in reality UMNO-interests-driven political) declarations, making life difficult for ordinary non Muslims. We dread the days of the Big Napoleons coming in with more religiously-driven intrusions into non-Muslim lives.
I was discussing the NEP (via comments) with some visitors at RPK's Malaysia-Today.
Chinese Malaysians
But let's leave the NEP aside for another day. In this post I just want to comment on an oft-repeated MYTH about Chinese not wanting to join the Malaysian Civil Services or Police Force or Armed Forces. And mind you, I am not referring to appointments for ranking commissioned officers in the 3 services but positions for ordinary admin clerk, our village mata-mata and non-commissioned soldiers. This long tall tale of Chinese avoiding the civil and armed services because of poor pay (in the non-officer sections) is the BIGGEST myth or bullshit in Malaysia, perpetuated for obvious reasons. Another long tall tale would be that the Chinese are not patriotic enough to join the military, as claimed by Ahmad Zahid when he was Defence Minister and asked in parliament on why there were too few non-Malays in his defence force. When our policemen were killed by Filipino bandits in Sabah, Pak Kadir Jasin, an UMNO uber mediaman alluded in his quite erudite old world style of polite English but rather slyly (and not subtly) that the Chinese should join the police force, saying: As has always been the case, when we send our policemen and soldiers into battle and are killed or injured, the chances are they are Melayus and Bumiputeras.
Perhaps there is wisdom in getting more Chinese and Indians to join the armed forces so that they too can die for one Malaysia.
That was in 2013. Sadly, it seems Pak Kadir had forgotten my reply to his article published by the Centre for Policy Initiatives (CPI) titled I wish to remain a M’sian – KTemoc replies Kadir Jasin just 3 years previously, in March 2010. Then I mentioned about non-Malays, specifically my uncles and their Chinese and Indian friends, serving in the Malaysian Armed Forces fighting against the communist insurgents during the Emergency.
Nonetheless I posted another article titled Chinese policemen to show (a) firstly, Pak Kadir Jasin that he was so very wrong in his sly insult to Chinese on their purported 'reluctance' to join the Malaysian police and military to serve the nation, and (b) secondly, the blatant but perennial lie of this ethnic-driven myth. In that post I listed several Chinese policemen who gave their lives in the course of their service to our nation. Please read my post to know how many Seri Pahlawan Gagah Perkasa (SP), the nation's highest award for valour, and Pingat Gagah Berani (PGB) were bestowed by the Agong to Chinese service personnel.
I also modified my blog post into a letter to Malaysiakini for wider readership because it's damn bloody important to debunk the naughty but cheap racial and untrue insinuations. On the Civil Service, as mentioned above, there has been a deliberate contrived myth, yes a MYTH, that the Chinese shun the Civil Service because they prefer the lucrativeness of private business rather than the staid salary of the public service, and that the Civil Service is an alien concept of employment to Chinese culture.
The latter, the Civil Service being an alien concept to Chinese culture, is 101% pure grade bullshit because the Chinese have in their several thousands of years of civilisation enjoyed (or suffered) from the Chinese Civil Service. In fact the Chinese invented the Civil Service.
sitting Imperial Exams to enter Imperial Civil Service - Sui Dynasty
This is what Wikipedia has to say:
The origin of the modern meritocratic civil service can be traced back to Imperial examinations founded in Imperial China. The Imperial exam based on merit was designed to select the best administrative officials for the state's bureaucracy. This system had a huge influence on both society and culture in Imperial China and was directly responsible for the creation of a class of scholar-bureacrats irrespective of their family pedigree.
Note the mention of 'meritocratic civil service' and the selection of 'the best administrative officials for the state's bureaucracy'!
Emperor Wu of Han started an early form of the imperial examinations, transitioning from inheritance and patronage to merit, in which local officials would select candidates to take part in an examination of the Confucian classics. The system reached its apogee during the Song dynasty. The Chinese civil-service system gave the Chinese empire stability for more than 2,000 years and provided one of the major outlets for social mobility in Chinese society.
The modern examination system for selecting civil service staff also indirectly evolved from the imperial one. This system was admired and then borrowed by European countries from the 16th century onward, and is now the model for most countries around the world.
So the myth about Chinese viewing the Civil Service as alien to their culture or career path is what it is, a myth that has been repetitively used by some people to explain why there are too few Chinese Malaysians in the Malaysian Civil Service, when of course the real reason is they were obstructed from joining or just not welcomed.
Condemned for not joining - Constrained from joining! If we were to look at our historical records of the 50, 60 and 70's we will find many Chinese in the Civil Service, police and military. My own family has several members in the police force and armed forces (army and air force). One of my granduncles, who was in the SB, was assassinated by communist terrorists during the Emergency. Two of my uncle's close (Chinese) friends were also killed by the CTs. But due to the political poisoning of Malay minds for several decades, Chinese Malaysians are still viewed by quite a few Malays with suspicion today. In the old days, the Malays saw them as potential or closeted communists - one day my uncle who was in the military was off duty (in civilian clothing) and in a bus in Alor Setar when he was accused by a very loud old Malay man of being a Chinese communist, wakakaka. The orang tua was playing 'hero' to the bus passengers who except for my uncle, his Indian aneh and the equally old bus driver, were all Malays. Today they are Chinese chauvinist pigs - alas, Chinese Christians are still too few to be considered as representative of the Chinese community, so Chinese chauvinist pigs will have to do for the time being, wakakaka. Chinese are variously anti-monarch (thus biadap to Malay royalty) or pro-monarch (accused of supporting the Johor Crown Prince against Najib) or neutral-towards-monarch (tidakapathy towards Malay culture). They just f* can't win, wakakaka.
Malaysians have never grown up, politically. When they disagree they sometimes take extreme measures even to the extent of killing, as happened in May 1969. Throwing molotov cocktails seem to be popular in recent years. This latest bout of vandalism is really shameful.
Intra-party wise, when words fail in a discussion or policy debate, or worse in a party polls which conduct dissatisfied some members wakakaka, we can expect and indeed have witnessed flying chairs and tables of aerodynamicists-pilots-bolehnauts wannabes, as to be expected of low brow Neanderthals absurdly participating in Socratic democracy.
PKR polls at Nibong Tebal aerodynamics of furniture, wakakaka then there was MIC, now there is PKR
Who did what to whom is not important, but the fact that Malaysians are capable of such low class acts of disgusting immaturity is an indictment on the poverty of our socio-cultural and religious values.
KUALA LUMPUR, June 20 — Lim Kit Siang refused today to continue debating with PAS over the death or survival of Pakatan Rakyat (PR), saying it was baffling that the Islamist party’s president Datuk Seri Abdul Hadi Awang still considers the pact intact when he had been the allege cause of its split.
Lim noted that since PAS decided in its recent muktamar to end ties with the DAP, its leaders have been at loggerheads over whether this meant that PR was no longer a functioning coalition.
For example, the DAP veteran pointed out that Hadi’s claim yesterday that PR was still alive contradicted Dewan Ulama chief president Datuk Dr Mahfodz Mohamed’s statement earlier in the day that he did not regret the muktamar decision although it led to the pact’s dissolution.
Divorced, dead, pengsan (fainted), in a comatose, and HOPEFULLY soon resurrection!
Actually PAS and DAP had divorced each other before, years ago during the debacle of the failed Barisan Alternatif, so the current divorce would be the second one.
Indeed, the supposed life cycle of Pakatan Rakyat had been and can be far far more exciting that that of a butterfly or perhaps mosquito, wakakaka.
In reality, none of the 3 parties wanted a divorce nor for the coalition to be killed off as each by itself does NOT have the intrinsic strength to take on BN or effectively even UMNO alone. Each of them knows it too!
Pak Haji Hadi Awang must have realized what he had done in a moment of hubris and gotten the sh*ts when he heard Mat Sabu say PAS will never get back non-Muslim support.
Pak Haji might have also copped a bit of flak from some of his confidantes in his party for wasting the vast pool of non-Muslim goodwill and support that PAS had won over the last 6 years or so, thanks in no small part for the perception that it had been a good matey of DAP. Oh oh 'Tok, kenapa tak tunggu sehingga kita duduk selamat di Putrajaya?
I suspect Pak Haji might have been unduly influenced by one particular PAS pro Malay-Unity person close to him, and of course close to Najib as well. BTW, have you been to Gaza? Wakakaka!
Sadly, Pak Haji fell for the oldest UMNO trick in the world and with his crossing of Sungai Rubicon, dah habislah semuanya - persahabatan Pakatan, muhibbah PAS & pengundi2 Cina-Hindu, cerita syiok rocket sampai he bulan, dlsb-nya. And his regrets may be why he's now still insisting Pakatan is very much alive.
Of course Pak Haji isn't the only having regrets. The one who's cursing PAS and DAP most is definitely PKR in both the persons of Anwar Ibrahim and Azmin Ali as each respectively sees his dream of becoming PM fades away. Now, even the mere post of MB Selangor isn't all that stable for Azmin as some ambitious PAS in Selangor may start having dreams of his own too, wakakaka.
And so it goes too for the dreams of Lim KS and Lim GE!
Though not having the temerity of aspiring to be a Chinese alternative PM in this very race-conscious country, in their wish to remove a corrupt-ridden BN from the country's administration, they know that wish will have to remain still a dream. They might be acting tough but they're hurting real bad deep inside.
Pride keeps PAS and DAP apart ...
... with PKR jumping up and down like a kera kena belacan (jumping up and down at least mentally, wakakaka).
Commonsense tells them the voters won't take sh*t anymore where the Muslim-Malay voters in the Heartland won't accept PKR let alone DAP, and vice versa for PAS with regards to non-Muslim support.
But ambition and aspiration urge them not to give up.
Besides, this is politics and politics has been known to be the art of the possible.
We need the resurrection of Pakatan, even if by another name ... for doesn't a rose by any other name smell just as sweet! For a wee digression, see my Kongsamkok postWhat's in a name!
But is resurrection really possible?
Okay, let's leave political resurrection for a while and instead examine religious/spiritual resurrection, just to have a feel of such an impossible task before we return to the political model.
Christians definitely believe in resurrection though it has to be said Yehoshua Ben Yosef had a bit of outside or out-worldly help in moving a huge stone door aside.
Muslims believe in Qiyāmah, Hindus and Buddhists in reincarnation which while not resurrection per se is nonetheless a new identity of life after death.
Mind, Confucianists are a difficult lot and though they believe in the Great God of Heaven. they don't hold much store for an afterlife in a heaven or hell. They believe the spirits of the departed would be hanging around familiar abodes like their homes (or perhaps kopitiams, wakakaka).
It can thus be said Confucianists do not believe in resurrection or reincarnation but more on living and upholding an ethical way of life in the now!
In fact, the Sage himself advised them to revere but keep the gods at a distance, which means they don't see the god or gods as all that omnipotent or even reliable - yeah, where were those god or gods on Boxing Day 2004 or recently in Sabah? Why did god or gods allow innocent people on board MH370 and MH17 to perish?
As for the Taoists (Daoists) they're rather reserved but appear to prefer talking to the trees and to Mt Kinabalu, and alas, we can't get anything out of them other than the Tao (or Dao). They're the most mystical religious minority in Malaysia.
Perhaps resurrection (and reincarnation) for some religions seems to be far easier than the political resurrection of Pakatan Rakyat! Hmmm, we might just need those twin coconuts of Raja Bomoh!
To conclude I leave you with the consoling words of the Judean prophet Isaiah who informed us in Isaiah 26:19:
Thy dead men shall live, together with my dead body shall they arise. Awake and sing, ye that dwell in dust: for thy dew is as the dew of herbs, and the earth shall cast out the dead.
