PAS government underhanded?

Why is the Kelantan government so uncaring about Aborigines?

Star Online tells us an NGO has condemned Kelantan PAS government's underhand tactics on orang asli - underhanded? by an Islamic government?

The Star Online report stated:

A non-governmental organisation has told the Kelantan government not to use underhand tactics against the orang asli who are trying to protect their land and homes.

Center to Combat Corruption & Cronyism (C4) founder Cynthia Gabriel said it "is deeply alarmed and disturbed at the arrests of about 40 orang asli leaders in attempting to defend the blockades in their native customary lands of Simpang Petei near Pos Gob, Betau Cawas near Pos Bihai and Kelawong di Pos Pasik."

"Is this the type of government who prefers to use underhand tactics and what happened to the promise by the Kelantan deputy mentri besar to meet the orang asli and see the devastation of their forest. It never happened," Cynthia said in a press statement.

Then Zaid Ibrahim tells us in FMT that PAS Kelantan doesn't care about Orang Asli. Zaid said:

“You have to care a little bit. But this is the problem with PAS. Everything they do, they add an Islamic label to it, but in the end the content is zero.”

And Shah Alam MP Khalid Samad, who was a former PAS member, was reported by FMT as surprised and very disappointed to hear about the way PAS Kelantan government is treating the Aborigines so shabbily. He said:

“I’m sure that if the late Nik Aziz were around, he would not allow this kind of thing to happen.”

May I humbly disagree ...

Malaysiakini tells us that The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) surveyed 76 countries and concluded that Singaporeans are among the smartest in the world due to prioritising math and science.

I respectfully dispute that, and in turn claim Malaysian students are in fact the smartest in the world as they are being taught by JAKIM on how to turn dogs into sausages (to the envy of Koreans), to bite policeman (wakakaka) and to be aware that floods are caused by god to punish those who support unnecessary amendments to Act 355.

But admittedly some Malaysians don't even know their nation's history.

Wakakaka.

Malaysian political parties for Chinese (2)

Continuing from Malaysian political parties for Chinese (1) 
..

But in recent times (past 30 plus years or so), a younger more educated generation of Chinese Malaysians grew up, wakakaka, to be eligible voters. They no longer consider themselves as children of migrants but rather true blue umpteen-generation Malaysians with all the rights of true blue citizens.

They frown on 'recent' migrants from around the region, perhaps even as far as beyond the Kashmir Valley or even the Great Rift Valley, many of whom have far more rights and privileges than they do.

They make mucho noises, upset the more conservative Malays and even the elder Chinese with their vociferous behaviour. And annoyingly they have been right in their assertions of their citizens' rights.

Praetorian Guards were sent out with the usual messages of 'Don't test our patience' as if those Praetorian Guards have any patience themselves. 

Ironically, most of the 'newly aware' Malaysian generations flock to the most vociferous and least corrupt opposition party, namely, the Democratic Action Party (DAP), thus labelling themselves in the eyes of Malays, even those who arrived recently, as 'Chinese', not Malaysians.

They earn descriptions of being DAPigs, with their accusers not being aware that Chinese love pigs, even to the extent of being named after those creatures (eg. Ah Too, Too Knia, Aw Too, etc) or to eat them, wakakaka, as in char siew, siew yoke, bah-kut-teh, tau eu bah, etc. 

Thus their wannabe tormentors were casting poisonous pearls before bah-kut-teh lovers, wakakaka.

Some of these 'newly aware' Malaysians join PKR, wishing to distance themselves from what has been perceived as the Cinapek Party (DAP) instead found themselves wading in a familiar cesspool. The PKR, as mentioned in the previous post, was nothing more than a single-issue party, that of initially rescuing Anwar Ibrahim and now promoting him or his family. The 'familiar ground' is that the PKR is a melange of UMNO, MCA and MIC, wakakaka, basically old wine rebranded under a new label.

the 'quiet' MCA of PKR 

To be continued ...

Koreans, eat your 'sausages' out!

MM Online - Auntie Anne’s confirms ‘pretzel dog’ now ‘pretzel sausage’ to satisfy halal cert

KUALA LUMPUR, Nov 28 ― The local chapter of US pretzel chain Auntie Anne's confirmed today that it has changed the name of its “pretzel dog” to “pretzel sausage”, after it was reported that they would be denied halal certification if they refused to do so.

The company's executive Farhatul Kamilah Mohamed Sazali said the name was changed to meet the requirements set by the country's halal authorities.

“We changed already to ‘pretzel sausage’ to comply with Malaysia's halal certification requirements,” she told Malay Mail Online when contacted today 

[...]

Jakim previously denied that it had rejected Auntie Anne's application for halal status due to the presence of the word “dog” in its menu, and had blamed media for the public furore.

Its halal division director Dr Sirajuddin Suhaimee said the chain’s application for halal certification had failed due to reasons such as incomplete paperwork.

Previously, Sirajuddin had told the media that “In Islam, dogs are considered unclean and the name cannot be related to halal certification” but later insisted his remark was in general and not specific to the Auntie Anne’s chain.

Media outlets reported Sirajuddin’s remarks about the unsuitability of the term “dogs” this week, along with the department’s guidelines against halal food items being similar in name to haram products such as beer, bacon and ham, among others.

The issue surfaced after an executive with US pretzel chain Auntie Anne’s revealed that their application for halal certification had failed due to, among others, concerns over the “pretzel dogs” in their menu.

Muslim lawmakers from both sides of the political divide have also expressed their disagreement with Jakim’s decision.

On the heels of the Auntie Anne’s controversy, non-halal pork burger chain Ninja Joe was probed by state religious authorities for allegedly confusing Muslims with its “P. Ramly” homage burger.

Bravo, we have done it. Malaysia is not for nothing, in the words of Mahathir in 2002, a fundamentalist Islamic nation.

The Koreans must be envious about Malaysian can-do for once. Yes, we may not be able to manufacture mobile phones, tanker ships and aeroplanes, nor do we have K-pop sweeties or popular K-dramas, but we can convert dogs into sausages.

As can be read from above MM Online extracts above, Jakim's Sirajuddin Suhaimee said that and now says this, wakakaka, as a Jakim man would do.

If he has told the truth, then no sweat here or hereafter, but if he has lied (as above news report seems to indicate), then he will have to face the wrath of Allah swt, and may His Almighty use the mightiest hottest painful thunderbolt, amin.

As for Ninja Joe's Ramly pork burger, it my take a while as Jakim has no authority whatsoever over a non-Muslim joint. Thus Mahathir's job is at this stage only half done.

100 lashes

Dr Khairuddin Aman Razali, a PAS MP, must be obviously thrilled that with the passing of Pak Haji's private member's Bill to amend Act 355, the measly 6 strokes of the rotan as allowed for the subordinate syariah courts to award to naughty Muslims can then be increased to 100 lashes of flogging.

Remember Kartika Sari Dewi Shukarno?

The part time nurse in Singapore and mother of two was caught drinking a beer, only her second time in her 32 years of life, in a hotel lounge in Kuantan, Pahang. Even though she was said to be a Sing citizen (her father is/was(?) Malaysian from Perak), she was sentenced to caning, and she herself insisted that the caning be conducted preferably in public.

There was much show by the authorities on how the caning would be gently conducted.

Firstly, the warden carrying out the caning would be a woman who was only allowed to raise her cane-holding arm to a certain limit which prevented the likelihood of severe strokes.

Then then there was this and there was that, etc, all to show the compassion of Islam and the meaning of Islamic caning which was only to inflict not pain but rightful remorse, etc etc etc.

Now ask yourself, if Islamic caning was said to be only to invoke remorse, why has PAS ask for the syariah courts to have its quota of hudud punishment increased to 100 (one hundred) strokes?

I believe the increased flogging is to instil severe pain and fear into Muslims' hearts so that they will obey the ulamas' every dictates.

Any wise cracks at the ulama or wise guys questioning the ulama (eg. Kassim Ahmad) will be hauled off for public flogging.

Precedents in Saudi Arabia, Iran, the Gulf countries, Pakistan, Afghanistan, etc, have been ample examples of gross injustice by narrow minded ulama who misused the glorious name of Allah swt to inflict severe painful punishments and deaths to innocents especially women for their own earthly power.

Ladies like Nik Raina was only saved because of the secular superior courts of Malaysia. In the end, Kartika Sari Dewi Shukarno was pardoned by HRH Pahang, only because our rulers and authorities practised secular compassion. If we had left it to those ulama with ingrown toe-nails, woe betided the sweeties.

And when hudud is finally fully implemented, the non Muslims will also be subjected to hudud punishments. Don't ever trust PAS or any ulama who swear that syariah punishments including hudud will not apply to non Muslims.

That's why we non Muslims must persevere in our current efforts to object to Pak Haji's private member's Bill which seeks not only to increase punishments such as from 6 to 100 strokes of the whip, but by stealth, to elevate the syariah courts to be on par with civil courts.

Of course, the only people in Malaysia who wont be subjected to syariah-hudud punishment will be the ulama and those they need to bodek.

Malaysian political parties for Chinese

Of the 3 main Chinese or Chinese-based political parties in Malaysia (in particular Peninsula Malaysia), namely MCA, DAP, Gerakan, the two main antagonists are MCA and DAP.

Gerakan is but a mere clone of MCA though admittedly it did start life by itself, having being a merger of Dr Lim Chong Eu's UDP, Dr Tan Chee Koon's Labour Party and various other personalities, unions etc. Just a side-note, Dr Lim Chong Eu himself was a former MCA President but why he left MCA to form the United Democratic Party (UDP) in Penang has to be another story.

But in 1973, after the then conservative pro-UMNO MCA President Tun Tan Siew Sin expelled Dr Lim Keng Yaik from MCA for the latter's  (then) radical Young Turk policy proposals, Keng Yaik brought his young MCA Turks from MCA into Gerakan, and in the subsequent process basically changed Gerakan's characteristics into being a clone of the MCA, becoming more and more Chinese based. 

There are three (3) reasons why the MCA is shit scared of DAP. these being:

(a) most of the Chinese Malaysians are currently right behind the DAP which means the MCA will end up in an election embarrassingly holding ducks' eggs, more so for a Chinese-based party which was once the mightiest Chinese political party in Malaya and then Malaysia.

Voters' support have to be built up over a large number of years, say 20 to 5 years, after a minimum of four to five general elections. and I would say the DAP, after being a fringe opposition party for years, has done just that.

Alas, for the PKR, Chinese Malaysians have never quite caught on to it for three reasons, principally because of its far-too Malayness, it being a splinter clone of UMNO, secondly, it failed at playing being a truly multiracial party though it claims to be so, presumably because of preceding reason one and the following reason three, and lastly but not least, because it is seen as a very personal vehicle of Anwar Ibrahim, which his wife Dr Wan created to free him when he was incarcerated for Sodomy I.

On the last reason, many Chinese saw it as a single-issue political party which would serve Anwar's cause until he returns to UMNO (and which many still believe he would if given the slightest opportunity), thus there is a finite life span on PKR.

Years ago, indeed many many years ago, I was invited to join PKR by a kindly Chinese towkay who was impressed by my style of blogging and my political thoughts which I discussed with him over tea and much ogling at his very charming daughter, wakakaka (much as some of you might strongly disagree, wakakaka).

He said he would sponsored me into the upper echelons of the party but I graciously declined, saying (a) I was a DAP supporter and (b) I could not participate actively and directly in frontline politics in Malaysia as I was working in Oz.

I recalled his response, which was that the DAP was far too Chinese and that I should consider coming home to 'rescue' the nation, wakakaka. I have to say he was/is a true Malaysian as he did not want to be seen as being too Chinese and felt the PKR would be a better bet than the DAP - last I met him he showed his great disappointment with the PKR, wakakaka.

At that time I did not want to disappoint him by revealing my dislike and distrust of Anwar Ibrahim and that, in my and many Chinese Malaysians' opinion, PKR was (and still is) a single-issue political party, where its cause had been and still is all about Anwar Ibrahim. Mind, I did not say I dislike PKR when I saw him last, wakakaka.

What about the MCA?

In the past, during our Malayan political beginning, the Chinese supported MCA which then had towering personalities like Tan Cheng Lock (later his son Tan Siew Sin), Henry HS Lee, and Lim Chong Eu, etc. Most MCA leaders came from or had links with the Chinese anti-communist KMT, an association which might have given UMNO leaders at that time some assurance of the MCA being anti-communist. 

As opposed to businessmen, traders and the English-educated who supported the MCA, the Chinese workers and new villagers flocked to the goo-t'au tong, the Labour Party, but that party foolishly committed political suicide by boycotting the general election of 1969 - a lesson to us that it's damn stupid to boycott general elections unless one is a nobody-no-hoper party like PPP and a host of kutu Indian and Indian Muslim party or wakakaka, Parti Cinta Malaysia, which has no hope of ever winning any seat at all, thus boycotting an election would be another face-saving act to avoid total humiliation at the polls.

Maybe the MCA should consider boycotting the coming general election, wakakaka.

To be continued ...

MCA chow-kow

MM Online on how MCA backtracking on its anti-PAS hudud bill:

MCA president Datuk Seri Liow Tiong Lai today said that the party did not oppose the PAS’ private bill seeking to empower the Syariah courts.

He said there had been a misunderstanding on MCA’s stand on the matter.

“I think there have been a lot of misunderstandings, saying that we oppose the bill. We just want it to be implemented according to the constitution.


Liow Tiong Lie, typical of the MCA. Have you been under orders from UMNO?

We will remember this on election day.

What is PKR Selangor up to now?

FMT on The Thinking of Manmanlai:

First, the thoughts of Chairman Mao Mahathir 

SHAH ALAM: The Selangor Islamic Religious Council (Mais) has instructed the Selangor Islamic Religious Department (Jais) to rescind its order to religious teachers in the state to attend the Pemikiran Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim (The Thinking of Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim) seminar scheduled to be held here on Monday.

Mais chairman Mohamad Adzib Mohd Isa in a statement here today said the Jais officer who issued the order did so on his own accord without referring to higher ups.

He also reminded the state government and Selangor PKR leaders not to involve Jais in political matters.

One day earlier, Malaysiakini reported:

The Selangor government has instructed the state Islamic Religious Affairs Department (Jais) to invite teachers to a seminar on 'The Thoughts of Anwar Ibrahim' next Monday.

"Jais received instructions to extend the invitation to teachers under Jais' purview, but it is not compulsory to attend," Jais director Haris Kasim said in a statement.

Haris said this after an invitation letter from Jais to Islamic schools in the districts of Petaling and Klang was circulated on social media. [...]

Haris stressed that the seminar is not a Jais event but is hosted by the state under the purview of Selangor executive councillor in charge of education Nik Nazmi Nik Ahmad.

Nik Nazmi is PKR Youth Chief and Adun for Selangor state seat of Seri Setia and the exco member for Education, Human Capital Development, Science, Technology and Innovation.

Three issues have been demonstrated:

(a) PKR has executive control over JAIS so we know who to see when JAIS exceeds its authority again,

(b) PKR has via Nik Nazmi uses JAIS, a religious agency, as its party vehicle, and

(c) PKR (or a section of it) is still promoting (officially promoting) the thoughts of a convicted sodomite through JAIS.

MAIS is the policy making authority for JAIS, and under the direct control of HRH Sultan Selangor.

In the past, the state government under PKR had sought to review JAIS' SOP because the religious agency was intruding into non-Islamic domains, but MAIS fended off that attempt by the state government.

So, with the misuse of JAIS by a PKR exco member, and dissent by MAIS, two questions arise, namely:

(1) Who is charge of what? and 

(2) Is there two factions in PKR, with one preposterously promoting the thinking of a convicted sodomite, no doubt one now approved by Anwar's erstwhile archfoe, former PM Mahathir and current chairman of Pribumi?

we're together again

 but this time who is the boss, you or me?

manmanlai lah, we'll decide after we've won the GE

Innocents living in fear under Hadi Awang's bill

MM Online - Creating hell for the promise of heaven

by Erna Mahyuni

NOVEMBER 23 — 2016 has become the year for opening Pandora's Box, it seems. From Brexit to Trump, people are disrupting the status quo seeking change for the sake of it... even if it is to their own detriment.

It is quaint to believe that humanity can make decisions based on the greater good. In reality, however, we are motivated by our basest urges with fear winning the battle over rational thought.

Another person who seems hell-bent on building his own private kingdom of heaven on Earth is Datuk Seri Abdul Hadi Awang with his tabling of his purported amendments to the Syariah Courts (Criminal Jurisdiction) Act 1965.

I find it alarming, this sick obsession with barbaric punishments as apparently God-prescribed. Too many Malaysians think that God wants his people to chop off limbs, stone and whip criminals to both prevent crime and earn God's blessing.

Theology is not worth debating here; my perspective is simply from a stance of common sense and simple mercy. Punitive measures do not work to stop crime; Saudi Arabia for all its supposed adherence to God's law has not stopped crime. It has just ensured the weakest and most vulnerable suffer even more.

Rape victims are not given justice in Saudi; instead they are persecuted and their aggressors often let off without so much as a slap on the wrist. Women are treated as nothing more than property ― with no right to independence and freedom of movement.

I do not wish to comment on the debate of supposed Arabisation in the country, but what is clear is that people like Hadi are making themselves out to be the envoys of God.

For non-Muslims to say that any change to the Shariah code will not affect them is an act of self-delusion.

It is no secret that Hadi's dearest wish is for Shariah law to apply not just to Muslims but to non-Muslims as well. He sees it as the perfect alternative to the civil laws of our land, thinking them more just and of course, blessed.

For all his pontificating, it is rather easy to disprove his notion that Shariah for all would usher in a safer, more moral society. All you need to do is look over at Saudi, Iran and now, Acheh to see that none of it is true. Instead, purportedly Islamic countries are not at all prosperous or crime-free.

Look at Saudi and its flailing economy, now that oil is no longer black gold. The heady days of high petroleum prices are over and they are never coming back. What has punitive laws that include disfigurement and inhumane treatment brought Saudi? Nothing good, nothing good at all.

I am no enemy of religion; but I will oppose torture disguised as justice and sick fascination with pain masked as piety.

Whatever flaws the current legal system has, at least at its core it tries to protect the innocent but Hadi's vision will see even the innocent living in fear.

Secular Malaysia - Are Christians helping?

Malaysiakini - While churches fume, Gerakan's Yong apologises (extracts):

Gerakan Youth deputy chief Andy Yong has been accused of singling out Christians in his recent statement on why religion and Bersih should not mix.

Yong, however, claims his views were misconstrued by the media and said he was sorry if any churches were offended. [...]

Yesterday, Yong said that some churches held masses and services before the rallies in Kuala Lumpur on Nov 19 and had their believers conspicuously supporting one side.

He added that a bishop who joined the rally encouraged his followers to do the same.

Yong said "to use the sacraments to encourage support or affiliation to certain political agendas is not appropriate".

"He should consider whether he risk fuelling the anger towards (from those of) different faith and political support. He must consider the consequences of his actions.

"I am not advocating that persons who are religious should be excluded from government affairs or influencing others to do the same but its sensitivity. We cannot use religious tenets as a justification for our support in government or politics," said Yong.

He argued that religion and politics should not mix because it would lead to violence.

Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, Taoists, Bahais, Sikhs, Atheists (wakakaka) and Christians as individuals (and not as a religious mob) should always be allowed to participate in politics, rallies and whatnot, provided those are NOT illegal activities.

But what is objectionable and should NEVER ever be allowed is those participants using the name of their religion, organizations (mosques, temples, gurdwaras, churches, etc) or the credentials of their priests (or monks or elders) or the priests (or monks or elders) themselves to marshal, galvanise and influence their adherents into partisan politics.

Hence my post day before yesterday on Matthew 22:21 had been in support of Andy Yong's reminder, backed by the two-thousand year old words of Yehoshua ben Yosef.

Earlier Bishop Bernard Paul of the Malacca and Johor Catholic Diocese had the brazen nerve to poke his church into Malaysian secular politics by urging his people to join Bersih 5.0.

The Church stands for this and that BERSIH.

The Catholic Church or its priests may not have any influence over me but what about hundreds of thousands of Malaysian Catholics?

Was not above instructions by a Catholic priest gross involvement in Malaysian political activity? 

Obviously the Bishop has forgotten Yehoshua ben Yosef's advice as contained in Mathew 22:21. 

These church people - when it suits them they quote the bible, but when it doesn't they ignore it.

Thus Andy Yong was correct that religious organizations or their priests must NOT be allowed to influence politics. Thei adherents can participate as individuals but the churches and their priest cannot and must not use the mantle of their religions as political motivators.

Religious-propelled motivations and influences are far too dangerous in secular politics as they suggest the almighty would be involved on one side of politics - that's why the USA, with 95 million voters who are Evangelistic Christians, has blindly supported Israel.

When a supernatural force like one's god is brought into politics, or more specifically one side of politics, the user of that supernatural force (eg, a priest, monk or ulama) is imbued with unfair and indeed very unscrupulous powers of influence.

And when I mention 'religious-propelled motivations and influences' I mean of all religions, which currently in Malaysia seem to be mainly of Islam, Christianity and Hinduism (Hindraf). Pity there is no practice (open practice) of Judaism here or I would have called it the Abrahamic religions, wakakaka.

Mind, once there were Ayah Pin's Sky Kingdom and his Teapot Affair (wakakaka) and on a more serious note, the Al Arqam cult.

Incidentally, Waythamoorty of the Hindu Hindraf has a fond propensity for involving or involvement of foreign nations, firstly (last year), wanting to sue Britain and now calling on the UN to intervene in freeing Maria Chin Abdullah.

The former, that of suing Britain, is a Waythamoorty nonsense with no practical result ever in sight. while on the latter, Waythamoorty might as well called on the OIC who would probably have more influence on the Malaysian government than the UN, wakakaka.

And now a word from the National Secular Society of (I'm a bit like Waytha, wakakaka) Britain, which I want Bishop Bernard Paul to read:

What is Secularism?

Secularism is a principle that involves two basic propositions. The first is the strict separation of the state from religious institutions. The second is that people of different religions and beliefs are equal before the law.

Separation of religion from state

The separation of religion and state is the foundation of secularism. It ensures that religious groups don't interfere in affairs of state, and makes sure the state doesn't interfere in religious affairs.

In the United Kingdom there are officially two state recognised Christian denominations – the Church of England and the Presbyterian Church of Scotland. The Queen is both head of state and Supreme Governor of the Church of England. There is no established church in Northern Ireland or Wales but the 26 unelected bishops of the Church of England who sit in the House of Lords influence laws that affect the whole of the UK.

Christianity is one major influence among many that shape our current ways of life; we are a nation of many denominations and religions and large sectors of the population do not hold, or practise, religious beliefs.

If Britain were truly a secular democracy, political structures would reflect the reality of changing times by separating religion from the state.

Secularism protects both believers and non-believers

Secularism seeks to ensure and protect freedom of religious belief and practice for all citizens. Secularism is not about curtailing religious freedoms; it is about ensuring that the freedoms of thought and conscience apply equally to all believers and non-believers alike.
Religious Freedom

Secularism seeks to defend the absolute freedom of religious and other belief, and protect the right to manifest religious belief insofar as it does not impinge disproportionately on the rights and freedoms of others. 

Secularism ensures that the right of individuals to freedom of religion is always balanced by the right to be free from religion.

Secularism is about democracy and fairness

In a secular democracy all citizens are equal before the law and parliament. No religious or political affiliation gives advantages or disadvantages and religious believers are citizens with the same rights and obligations as anyone else.

Secularism champions human rights above discriminatory religious demands. It upholds equality laws that protect women, LGBT people and minorities. These equality laws ensure that non-believers have the same rights as those who identify with a religious or philosophical belief.

Equal access to public services

We all share hospitals, schools, the police and the services of local authorities. It is essential that these public services are secular at the point of use so that no-one is disadvantaged or denied access on grounds of religious belief (or non-belief.) 

All state-funded schools should be non-religious in character, with children being educated together regardless of their parents' religion.

When a public body grants a contract for the provision of services to an organisation affiliated to a particular religion or belief, such services must be delivered in a neutral manner, with no attempt to promote the ideas of that faith group.

Secularism is not atheism

Atheism is a lack of belief in gods. Secularism simply provides a framework for a democratic society. Atheists have an obvious interest in supporting secularism, but secularism itself does not seek to challenge the tenets of any particular religion or belief, neither does it seek to impose atheism on anyone.

Secularism is simply a framework for ensuring equality throughout society – in politics, education, the law and elsewhere, for believers and non-believers alike.

Secularism protects free speech and expression

Religious people have the right to express their beliefs publicly but so do those who oppose or question those beliefs. Religious beliefs, ideas and organisations must not enjoy privileged protection from the right to freedom of expression. 

In a democracy, all ideas and beliefs must be open to discussion. Individuals have rights, ideas do not.

Secularism is the best chance we have to create a society in which people of all religions or none can live together fairly and peacefully.

Amen! And glory be to Amen-Ra.

Amen-Ra 

2 white men

FMT on "likeness" diplomacy:

Britain on Tuesday dismissed U.S. President-elect Donald Trump’s unprecedented expression of support for Brexit campaigner Nigel Farage to be made British ambassador to Washington, saying pointedly that there is no vacancy for the job.

Trump, who after his election victory met Farage before any EU leaders, said on Twitter that “many people” would like to see the former metals trader turned politician as Britain’s ambassador.

“Many people would like to see @Nigel_Farage represent Great Britain as their Ambassador to the United States. He would do a great job!” Trump said on Twitter.

Prime Minister Theresa May, who congratulated Trump on his victory, was swift to reject such an undiplomatic proposal.

“There is no vacancy,” a Downing Street spokesman said when asked about Trump’s remark on Tuesday. “We already have an excellent ambassador to the US.”

It is highly unusual in the modern era for leaders to publicly suggest to foreign nations whom they would like to see as ambassador, though during strained relations they sometimes reject or expel envoys.

Obviously Trump and Farage "like" each other, sharing similar views.

Deny Deny Deny

Malaysiakini on cosmonaut versus astronaut:

Former prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad said he was ashamed to call Perkasa chief Ibrahim Ali his friend.

"I am ashamed. He is my friend but he doesn't want to join Parti Pribumi Bersatu Malaysia because we are friends with DAP," Mahathir said during a press conference at Putrajaya.

While Ibrahim had claimed that DAP was "jahat (evil)", he should compare DAP with MCA to truly see who was more evil, said Mahathir.

Mahathir said DAP has publicly declared that they respect the constitution, the position of the Malay rulers, Islam as the nation's official religion, among others.

He questioned if MCA and MIC had done the same.

On Perkasa's plan to field independent candidates during the next general election, Mahathir said this meant Ibrahim was working for Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak.

"He (Ibrahim) works for Najib because he knows that if there's more than one-to-one contest, Najib will win, so he's making it so that Najib will win.

"He pretends to fight for Malays. He cannot work with DAP but he is willing to work with Najib, he is willing to work with someone who steals money," Mahathir said.

He also denied that he was ever a Perkasa patron.

What a shameless man. The Malays call it Melayu mudah lupa while the Americans have a saying to describe a person like him, something about selling something down the river.

And now he praises his erstwhile Satan-ish DAP - man, what an 180 degrees volte-face.

But didn't I mention Ibrahim Ali is an astronaut? Wakakaka.

And since Maddy inspired the Malaysian cosmonaut program as part of the deal with Russia when Malaysia signed up for the RMAF a bunch of 18 Russian Sukhoi Su-30MKM fighter jets, we saw Sheikh Muszaphar Shukora a Malay cosmonaut become our first man in space.

Sheikh Muszaphar Shukora  

Thus Maddy must be so honoured as Bapak Cosmo-nought (nought = kosong, wakakaka).

So he and Ibrahim Ali in a stoush would be akin to a cosmo-nought versus astronaut.

Maddy can have the roti canai and Ibrahim Ali the teh tarik, wakakaka 

Capons in parliament

From MM Online about UMNO roosters:

capons were cocks whose cocks have been sliced off

Deputy Agriculture and Agro-Based Industries Minister Tajuddin Abdul Rahman knows lots about capons 

KUALA LUMPUR, Nov 22 ― Deputy Agriculture and Agro-Based Industries Minister Datuk Seri Tajuddin Abdul Rahman will not be referred to the rights and privileges committee for describing another MP as a “woman with a Kok,” the Speaker said today.

Tan Sri Pandikar Amin Mulia concurred with his deputy, Datuk Ronald Kiandee, who surmised that Tajuddin was simply referring to Seputeh MP Theresa Kok's surname, and upheld the latter's decision to consider the matter resolved.

“Everyone saw what happened. (The) rights and privileges committee is only for incidences where we need to call witnesses to determine the issue.

“But everyone saw what happened and it has been settled,” Pandikar said in Dewan Rakyat today.

He was responding to a request by Kasthuri Patto (DAP-Batu Kawan) for him to make a ruling against Tajuddin for calling Kok “the only woman with a Kok” during Question Time in Parliament yesterday.

Related: Low class

low class cock 

I wonder why it's so difficult to say sorry or to admit one's mistake or the mistakes of one's staff or department, the last a common stupidity in Malaysia.

To continue to argue in defence of a low class village thug speaks lowly of the Speaker himself.

Those UMNO blokes are low class lah! Or shitty c**ts.

Mudah lupa?

From Malaysiakini on one of Mahathir's last PM acts:

Former prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad has denied he approved a RM507.77 million contract for Malaysian Maritime and Dredging Corporation Sdn Bhd (MMDC) without the cabinet's approval, as revealed by Auditor-General Report 2015 (Series 2).

"No, that's invention," Mahathir told reporters when met at Dataran Merdeka last night.

"They should show proof," he said curtly before leaving.

Mahathir was attending a vigil in solidarity with Bersih chairperson Maria Chin Abdullah who has been detained under the Special Offences (Security Measures) Act 2012.

According to the audit report which was tabled at Parliament yesterday, Mahathir, the then finance minister, decided that MMDC be granted the contract for dredging works at river mouths across the country, with a 15-year concession period.

This was despite 15 bids having been made for the contract to undertake dredging works at the ports in 2011.

MMDC was established in June 2002.

"Checks also revealed that on Aug 10, 2002 the finance ministry decided that all prior dredging tenders were to be cancelled and awarded to MMDC."

"However, checks by the audit department did not find any documents pertaining to discussions, valuations or studies regarding the decision at the transport ministry level," reads the audit report.

Mahathir denies the audit report. He has also denied a number of other issues, like Project IC in Sabah, he was in KL when Memali occurred, etc.