Nizar right about absolute monarchy?

The Malaysian Insider reported that Doctors advise rest after Johor MB complains of discomfort.

I wonder whether it has anything to do with what I read in the Star Online, a news article titled Sultan Johor: Shape up or ship out? wakakaka!

HRH warned the pollies: "They must buck up and if they cannot, then they must get out. I am fair to everyone (Opposition or ruling government). Even to the present government, I tell them to buck up and shape up."

Thanks to the Federal Court's questionable ruling on the Perak saga, a constitutional ruler is now able to dismiss an elected MB of a State or, at the federal level, the elected PM of our nation.

Mohd Nizar Jamaluddin, considered by most Perakians as the legitimate MB of the State, in commenting on the bizarre ruling, had been absolutely right in stating that we can expect absolute monarchy now - see also my post Court's ruling on Perak - second Pandora Box opened!

Thou setter up and plucker down of kings - Shakespeare, King Henry VI, Act II, Scene III

MCA - nest of vipers

I am neither a member nor a diehard supporter of the DAP but the reason why I have preferred this party over, say, the MCA can be explained by what I have written below.

The MCA is now in turmoil. I guess Ong Tee Keat was in deep trouble when Najib refused to attend the MCA AGM as the traditionally principal guest of honour (in his capacity as Head of the BN coalition) to open the meeting for its ally – see Malaysiakini’s Najib will not attend disputed MCA AGM.

Najib’s decision is unprecedented and unequivocally, blatantly anti Ong Tee Keat as the president of MCA, as had been his attending the opening of Makkal Sakthi an anti MIC snub.

One way or another, UMNO has and is showing it can control MCA, MIC, especially Gerakan, etc. While there has been bad blood between Ong and Chua as well as Liow, the lamentable observation is there are MCA leaders who are prepared to play to UMNO’s tune, to remove Ong Tee Keat.

Why do I say this, because for quite some time now, DPM Muhyiddin has indicated in many ways his displeasure with Ong through his (Muhyiddin's) attempt to galvanise MCA into another/early party election.

It was then obvious that UMNO preferred Liow, who had lovingly described Najib as 'our beloved PM' wakakaka what a Raja Bodek! – see my post Najib and Muhyiddin fighting for Liow Tiong Lai.

Ong has been fairly dexterous in forestalling Muhyiddin’s attempted manipulation by coopting Chua SL over to his side against Liow (and surprising everyone). But it’s obvious Ong and Chua have a falling out again. One can only wonder whether the long arm of UMNO has been in play since.

Those in MCA who have rejoiced at Ong’s current predicament and loss of support are, have been and will be the very people who love bodek-ing UMNO, of course for their own interests.

Ong has been unpopular with UMNO since his deputy ministerial days when he ran foul of Hishamuddin. Ong then had exposed corrupt officials in the Education department which sent Hishamuddin ballistic.

Then DPM, Najib had argued in support of his cousin that the fact of corruption (embezzlement) was beside the matter, and that Ong had not followed proper channels to raise the issue.

Najib had then stated: "I don’t want to talk about facts, that’s another issue".

The DPM of the nation didn't want to talk about the facts of embezzlement? Dei man, that's stealing, a crime, an act of sheer corruption and you don't want to talk about it?

And he gave the excuse that form (of cross-ministerial procedure) should have taken precedence over substance (a crime of embezzlement of public money).

What a f* joke of a government!

I had then written in a 2009’s post UMNO prefers Ong Tee Keat out?:

Bull! It's everyone's duty to expose corruption, not just Ong's. And in fact, Ong did not air that alleged embezzlement as a racist issue. He merely highlighted corruption. There was no mention of race. That the schools were vernacular in character was never the issue - the missing 90% of the maintenance funds was.

It was Hishamuddin who turned it into an anti-Ong issue because he obviously didn’t like the idea of an MCA bloke highlighting alleged corruption in his ministry. His act of political intimidation against Ong could be seen as an act against the exposure of corruption.

Of course we know that had Ong raised the issue through ‘proper channels’ the issue (of corruption in that embezzlement) won’t see daylight ever again wakakaka!

Don't believe me? Then read my Int Sec Ministry gagged Chinese press on alleged embezzlements where I wrote about the Chinese press unearthing similar cases of alleged misuse of the special funds in two other schools - SRJK Mah Hua in Kepala Batas, Penang and SRJK Sin Bin in Klang, Selangor. I had then stated:

... the Internal Security Ministry has instructed the media to stop reporting on the alleged misappropriation of funds earmarked for the repair and maintenance of Chinese primary schools nationwide. The ministry wrote to the editors last Thursday demanding “immediate cooperation” from the media to not highlight the controversy - especially if those contain FACTS.

The expression "Immediate cooperation" can be undertood to carry an unwritten/unstated "Or else"!

Fate and a wee episode on DVD enabled Ong TK to become, oh calamity for UMNO, the President of MCA, and by tradition, the Minister of Transport.

As yet unforgiven by UMNO, loose cannon Ong TK went immediately on the rampage by exposing the PKFZ scandal wakakaka ... no, not to the amusement of some of his MCA colleagues nor Taikoh UMNO.

It was obvious he has to go, and no worries as there would be MCA members to support this.

Even if Ong loses his position as party president and thus his ministership, and surely it will come to it that (maybe to humiliate him, Najib may make him KPI Minister wakakaka), the MCA will not be out of the woods yet, because Chua and Liow have more than a few things to sort out between themselves and their supporters. It may yet be the Hundred Years War for MCA.

Just like MIC and all the mosquito Indian political parties, including Makkal Sakthi and Human Rights Party, have been betraying the Indian Malaysian community, the MCA has shown once again it will continue to betray the Chinese Malaysian community by getting rid of its party president who has the backbone, since Lim Chong Eu, to stand up to UMNO.

Related:
(1) UMNO prefers Ong Tee Keat out?
(2) Najib and Muhyiddin fighting for Liow Tiong Lai
(3) Najib's facts, principles, goose & gander
(4) Corruption 'Fact' for DPM Najib & Hishamuddin
(5) What the cabinet reprimanded Ong Tee Keat for!
(6) Najib riled with Ong Tee Keat's last laugh!
(7) Int Sec Ministry gagged Chinese press on alleged embezzlements
(8) MCA at a crossroad

Who are the real 'mandores'?

I have always suspected the leaders of the so-called Human Rights Party (HRP - fomerly Hindraf) of being stalking horses for UMNO.

Last year, in my post Deliberate racial tones in Kg Buah Pala polemics? I mentioned how Uthayakumar threatened CM Lim Guan Eng -see Malaysiakini's Lim given one-week ultimatum to save village.

I then asked: Who is Uthayakumar to use such threatening language? And with such crude aggression, acrimony and arrogance, do you believe this man really wants the best deal for the villagers, or one who wants to stir up a conflict?

In another post Uthayakumar - correct person to represent Tamils? I questioned Uthayakumar’s motive in attacking Lim Guan Eng and Dr Ramasamy but not even criticising the biggest culprit of all, Koh Tsu Koon.

I was flabbergasted by his vilification of Dr Ramasamy as a ‘mandore’ – for this inexcusable outrageous rudeness, Penangites would describe Uthayakumar as ‘peh-boe boe kah see’ (meaning 'he wasn’t taught manners by his parents' – the second most humiliating insult to/criticism of his parents).

And dear Uthayakumar remained mute when Najib washed federal hands of Buah Pala case – yes, despite Indian Malaysians suffering 52 years of marginalization at the hands of BN and a useless MIC, including a BN former CM of Penang, Koh TK ‘selling’ the Indians of Kampung Buah Pala off, Uthayakumar remained totally (or obsequiously) silent on Najib’s brushoff of the Indian problem at High Chaparral.

Instead he attacked an innocent party Lim Guan Eng. I ask, what motive did Uthayakumar and his brother have?

In another post Indians - 50 more years of marginalisation? I quoted Hindraf activist V Ganabatirau who asked why:

Waythamoorthy did not condemn RS Thanenthirran for using the title Makkal Sakthi as the name of his new political party, when that title was coined by Ganabatirau and K Vasanthakumar for the Hindraf movement.

Ganabatirau reminded us that Thanenthirran in forming the Makkal Sakthi Party had immediately made overtures to the BN government which then led to the possibility of Waythamoorthy's return to Malaysia.

And Ganabatirau further questioned Waythamoorthy's motives in blaming Pakatan Rakyat for the Kampung Buah Pala fiasco. Oh yes, while we are on this issue, don't forget his brother Uthayakumar as well - yes, we did wonder about these two brothers attacking the DAP which had supported them when they were in strife.

Ganabatirau sneered: "Who does he [Waynamoorthy] want to please to ensure his safe return?"

In MIC virus affecting all Indian-based parties? I lamented on the pathetic leadership for the Indian Malaysian community – just as an example, can you all recall a recent statement by Murugiah that if the court doesn’t rule in his favour what RoS had ruled for Kayveas regarding the presidency of PPP, he (Murugiah) would take his ‘200,000’ followers out of PPP, ..... presumably to form another party where he can be president – tell me, how would that serve the Indian community?

Anyway, in the above post, I wrote:

But the saddest revelation of all has to be the intention of HRP, led by the two brothers, Waynamoorthy and Uthayakumar.

The party is turning out to be a ‘spoiler’ (against Pakatan) which obviously can only benefit BN – this was amply demonstrated in the recent state by-election in NS. If we recall, Uthayakumar campaigned for Indians to boycott the ballot box, and who would have benefited from the boycott, and who had won?

Earlier Uthayakumar and his supporters had railed against Lim GE, demanding the State government do the impossible, but hardly touching/mentioning the party responsible in the first place for the Kampung Buah Pala saga, the Gerakan Party.

Why was there the double standard? Why were the grievances lodged only against the DAP? Why not against the responsible party, Gerakan-BN?

Today we read again the sad story of Uthayakumar’s rant against DAP-Pakatan in The Malaysian Insider’s Hindraf set to cut ties with Pakatan in Sunday protest, which reported:

P. Uthayakumar, the founder of the Makkal Sakti movement who has been critical of PR for months now, has decided to break all ties with the federal opposition coalition.

His game plan now is to eventually field Human Rights Party (HRP) candidates in about one dozen parliamentary and state constituencies with a significant Indian electorate in the next general elections.

The move will likely split PR support and benefit the Barisan Nasional (BN) coalition.

What ‘ties’ are we talking about when we had witnessed unparallel attacks against Lim GE and Dr Ramasamy but hardly a word against the BN by this man who claims to represent Indians?

This is a man who’s going all out to split the Pakatan votes in order to benefit the BN in the next general election.

PKR’s Suresh Kumar told reporters: … the PR states had done more for the Indian community than the BN in the past five decades.

“These people who criticise Pakatan are playing into the hands of the Barisan,” he said.

“Why don’t Uthayakumar and gang demonstrate against the MIC or Samy Vellu, who is accused of trying to hijack MIED and Telecoms shares?,” he said.

“Why don’t they demonstrate against the Barisan Nasional, which neglected Tamil schools and demolished temples,” he said.

“These people are the real mandores ... by their foolish act they are lending themselves to be the mandores to Barisan.”

Half-past-six half-assed legal system

When I read Art Harun’s article Of sodomy, caning and potato chips in The Malaysian Insider, my blood pressure went ballistic because of the arrogant nonchalance of our Appeal Court judges in casually dismissing an issue of great constitutional importance.

Art wrote:

Some months ago, my learned friends Fahri Azzat and Amer Hamzah appeared in the Court of Appeal to argue an appeal. They were representing a man who was found guilty of sodomising a boy. He was sentenced to 60 years’ jail and 22 strokes of the rotan although he maintained that the sodomy acts were consensual.

During the appeal, the two lawyers brought up constitutional issues which have never ever been brought up before. As these issues were never brought up before, it follows that there has never been any judicial pronouncement on those constitutional issues. Those issues are:

• the law provision which makes the act of sodomy is unconstitutional as it transgresses the right to privacy, which is a part of our fundamental liberties;

• the act of criminalising and penalising the act of sodomy, when it is consensual, amounts to an act of discrimination and inequality, especially against men with homosexual tendency. As discrimination on the basis of, among others, gender, is prohibited by the Constitution, it follows that the criminalisation of consensual sodomy is unconstitutional;

• the caning sentence is also discriminatory in nature as under the law women cannot be caned.

Now, I am not going to touch on whether the arguments were correct or not. But these arguments were taken up for the very first time in our legal history. Furthermore, they were taken up in the second highest court of the land, namely, the Court of Appeal.

It goes without saying that the Court of Appeal should have seen it fit to hear the arguments in totality. Then it should consider the arguments in depth. Then it should decide on the arguments. After that, it should write proper and well-reasoned grounds for its judgment so that the people know what it was thinking and how it came to such thinking.

That decision would have been one of the most important decisions in our constitutional law. It will serve as a precedent and as a guideline to all of us Malaysians, to the police, the A-G Chambers, to legal practitioners, law lecturers and law students alike.

Guess what happened? Fahri was cut short in the middle of his constitutional issues/points. The learned judge asked him to stop arguing midway through his arguments. He was asked to go to the next point. After hearing the both of them, the Court of Appeal dismissed their case there and then.

Quite obviously, the Court of Appeal did not think much of the various constitutional issues — which touched on people’s constitutional rights — which were raised for the first time.

It was reported that one of the learned judges said, “Are you saying that (homosexuality) among consenting adults is legal? In other words, what happens in the bedroom is none of the government’s business?” during the hearing.

Needless to say, no written judgment was given until the time I am writing this (March 5).

Art then went on to show how, by Grand Canyon-ish contrast, the Court of Appeal in the UK sat to hear a question on whether the snack product Pringles is similar to a crisp and made from the potato and therefore subject to standard-rate VAT.

After long and laborious arguments, the UK Court of Appeal considered what was branded as an “Aristotelian question” and came up with a judicial pronouncement which is not only well reasoned but also a delight to read.

As Lamar S Smith said: Judicial abuse occurs when judges substitute their own political views for the law.

Most of our judges are political appointees. While that in itself is not a major problem as we also see that in other countries and we would expect the judges to rise above gutter politics, unfortunately our Malaysian version have been and continue to be notoriously partisan or beholden to the ruling party.

On top of their lack of moral courage to act independently without fear and favour, many lack the intellect (don't expect them to be competent on finer points of the law - remember the Adorna Property case?) and lazy (we've read of how some judgements, even those cases which had sentenced the accused to the gallows, have yet to be written - so how could the defence be able to appeal?)

Besides most of our civil servants, judges, MACC and police officers, keep an eye on which way the political wind blows, as exemplified in the current Sodomy II case - hardly a conducive time for the Appeals Court to pontificate on constitutional laws which may (gasp) benefit Anwar Ibrahim.

What should you expect when afterall the nation’s leading lawman, the AG, has been resoundingly condemned by the editorial of The Malaysian Insider in The AG is ‘not in the interest of justice’ — The Malaysian Insider which wrote:

Is it any wonder why Attorney-General Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail can’t walk the talk about justice in the country? He put his foot in the mouth again last night when justifying that charging the Al-Islam magazine editors and reporters who offended Catholics in an article would have been “not in the interest of justice”.

His statement was outrageous at the very least as he was offering protection to a group of people who have not had the decency to apologise for their actions. And Gani was condoning vigilantism as the reporters had participated in a Catholic rite while investigating an allegation that Muslims were being converted. […]

Simply put, this man by his statement has shown himself to be incapable of protecting the interest of Christians and non-Muslims in the country.

One has to look no further than across the Causeway where bloggers who insulted Islam were sanctioned and a Christian pastor who ridiculed Buddhism and Taoism was warned by Singapore’s Internal Security Dept and forced to apologise.

In Malaysia, the AG has the cheek to turn the other cheek and let people who insult a religion get away with it because in his mind, it is “not in the interest of justice”. One can only wonder what justice is for the AG, for his actions in the Al-Islam case show he is “not in the interest of justice” in any time or situation.

Read also Malaysiakini’s Kit Siang: AG should be censured over Al-Islam decision and Insider’s AG’s acumen for asinine answers – Martin Jalleh.

The judges’ arrogant nonchalance (tidakapathy) in brusquely & blatantly brushing aside an important constitutional issue no doubt stems from their knowledge that the government (ruling party) will not allow them to lose their jobs so long as they, the so-called constitutional umpires, always blow the whistle against the other side.

"A judge must bear in mind that when he tries a case he is himself on trial" - Philo, Special Laws, 1st century

Kulim Wonder gave bird to PKR disciplinary board

Malaysiakini reported that Zul walks out of PKR disciplinary board in protest of the presence of non-Muslims on the panel.

The Kulim Wonder insisted on a PKR disciplinary panel comprising only Muslims. He refused to recognise the authority of the party’s disciplinary panel made up of one Muslim, two Christians and one Hindu (what, no Buddhist, Confucianist or Taoist wakakaka).

Maybe he wants a panel made up of Ridhuan Tee, Ibrahim Ali, Dr Hassan Ali, Mufti Harussani Zakaria and Nasir Safra? wakakaka

Or maybe bloke still thinks he is in PAS.

WAIT! He is in PAS.

I read somewhere that he is still a PAS member, and claimed to have stood under a PKR banner only because Anwar Ibrahim personally invited him to do so (but neglected to inform us that PAS didn’t nominate him wakakaka).

Anwar has been great to invite his personal mates like the Kulim Wonder (a PAS member) and Loh Gwo Burne to stand as PKR’s candidates in federal constituencies.

Well, the recalcitrance, revolt and rejection of PKR’s disciplinary panel by the bloke can be said to be a making of Anwar Ibrahim. So … what is Anwar going to do about this defiantly insubordinate Kulim Wonder?

The Marina Mahathir's article which The Star refused to publish!

Marina Mahathir wrote an exceptional article for her regular column in the Star but alas, the newspaper refused to publish it.

Fortunately for us, The Malaysian Insider has published it as: The column that wasn’t, obviously a jab at The Star for denying the publishing of Marina's latest article in her Star column.

I won’t say much about it here so you need to read it yourself. However I venture to post here some selected extracts of her writing:

… most people are ignorant about their religion and tend to leave these matters to those they believe know best. Thus if the State Mufti or religious adviser says it’s a good law, they are unlikely to challenge him. Thus are religious laws passed unscrutinised.

Until, that is, something happens, such as when someone gets convicted of a syariah crime and punishment is meted out. Who knew that people could get caned for drinking, or for having a baby out of wedlock until the recent cases of Kartika and the three women?

Not only are these laws not debated when they are being made, they can’t be debated afterwards either, unlike civil laws. To do so, according to some people, is akin to arguing with God …

If one believes that syariah laws are superior to civil laws, should they not be held to higher standards? Should they not be subjected to more rigorous debate than civil laws out of fear that they may be unjust? If syariah courts are deemed superior to civil courts, should not their processes be more transparent and efficient? How is it that there are innumerable women having to undergo tremendous suffering because syariah court orders to their divorced husbands to pay child maintenance cannot be enforced?

How is it also that we suddenly hear about women being caned without any information about the processes they went through? Did they have the benefit of legal representation and heard in an open court? If they did, who were their lawyers and what defence did they mount?

Surely the best court of law is one that strives for justice, which shows it is fair to all parties. In this case, on whose behalf was justice served?

I have no problems with syariah laws if their foundation is justice, equality and non-discrimination for all, even non-Muslims. But when their intent, processes and enforcement are unfair, they only give the impression that Islam is unjust and discriminatory. Surely to give such an image of Islam is a sin.

As I mentioned, I won’t comment on the questions she poses. I merely want to put the above extracts in juxtaposition with another article (below), also by The Malaysian Insider titled: Government woos conservative base with canings - extracts follow:

The caning of three women under Islamic law is the latest move by the government to woo conservative Muslims, a risky tactic that could cause a backlash by ethnic minorities and damage economic reforms.

The first ever canings of women in traditionally moderate Malaysia were carried out in February after syariah court sentencing for adultery. Another woman faces caning for drinking beer.

The canings came hot on the heels of a row over the use of the word ‘Allah’ by Malay-speaking Christians that triggered attacks on churches and mosques and ahead of another court case this week over Christians’ right to use the word.

PAS officials say Umno’s approach on the canings was a political ploy to win over the 15 per cent of Malays who remain undecided as well as to split PAS from its ethnic Chinese allies.

“The caning issue is just political bait,” said Dr Dzulkifli Ahmad, a senior PAS official.

In closing, I beg Marina Mahathir’s permission to quote once again her final sentence in her article, namely: Surely to give such an image of Islam is a sin.

Regardless of PKR's numbers, Lim Kit Siang wants Anwar Ibrahim as PM

The Malaysian Insider’s news article Kit Siang backs Anwar to remain Opposition Leader reported that:

Lim Kit Siang has pledged support for Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim to remain as Parliamentary Opposition Leader and Pakatan Rakyat’s (PR) choice for prime minister even if the number of PKR representatives falls below that of the DAP.

This watershed stand by the DAP should be significantly reassuring to PKR at a time when the latter party is experiencing strife within its ranks.

There has been a strong perception in Malaysian political circles that PKR had been reluctant to bring its errant boys back into line or expel them for indiscipline because the party fears that by losing any of its 31 MPs (or rather just 30 because Dr Jeya of PSM won the last general election on a PKR ticket) it may lose its majority position in Pakatan (to DAP’s 28 MPs), and thus the position of opposition leader and that of the alternative PM of Malaysia.

It would not be incorrect to say that Lim also realizes that Malaysia and its heartland is not quite ready to accept a non-Malaysian* PM. His declaration will also neutralize the likelihood of a fear campaign by UMNO on the issue of a Chinese (DAP) PM or that Anwar Ibrahim supports one [hey, why not Indian as the DAP has so many outstanding Indian Malaysian MPs?].

* thanks for pointing out my error, PeterP and great quote

But of course it’s not all merely strategic thinking, because prior to the March 2008 general election, when Anwar Ibrahim was only adored within his own party, Lim Kit Siang had been the man who frequently went out of his way to bring Anwar into the DAP’s strategic planning circle. Many were the DAP party talks that Anwar attended as a close confidante and accepted ally of Lim.

Lim Kit Siang has resoundingly and consistently demonstrated his statesmanship.

Truly a Malaysian of impeccable political calibre.

Analysing Tan Tee Beng's resignation from PKR

Malaysiakini’s news headlines Tee Beng quits PKR reported:

Nibong Tebal MP Tan Tee Beng today formally announced his resignation from PKR and is now an Independent.

However, he refused to confirm if he will be an ally to Barisan Nasional.

But he appealed to the federal government to release federal development allocations for his constituency, so that he can do his job in serving the people.

Asked how he would respond if BN expects his support in Parliament in return for the federal allocations, Tan said "these are two very different things which should not be linked".

I draw out two items from the above report:

Firstly, by appealing to the federal government to release federal development allocations for his constituency, he has finally admitted that allocations to MPs (as different from Penang ADUNs) should be from the Federal government and not the Penang State government.

In other words, he has by default also admitted that his accusatory attacks against Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng for allegedly refusing to provide financial allocations for his Nibong Tebal federal constituency had been a mongrel misdirected malicious attack all along, that was, attacking Lim Guan Eng for no other reason than he wanted to attack Lim Guan Eng.

It probably was because Lim is DAP.

Secondly, note he hasn’t rejected the idea of joining BN or becoming a so-called ‘BN-friendly’ MP, like Hee is in the Perak State Assembly. But this post is not about Tan becoming a frog. If he does that, it won’t surprise me. After all, his family roots are in Gerakan-BN. His father Tan Ghim Hwa was the former Gerakan State Chairman, and known as the sworn enemy of the DAP.

Lim Kit Siang had in 1991 described Tan Ghim Hwa as a political vulture in a matter where phone threats were made against Lim, allegedly by some Gerakan Party members.

This post is more about Tan Junior's attack against CM Lim GE in particular and the DAP in general.

We can of course speculate that his background could have been a possible factor in his latent hostility towards the DAP and the son of Lim Kit Siang, and eventually brought to the boil after some disagreement with CM Lim. But let us not forget that he came from the Chinese section of PKR, led by (its de facto section leader wakakaka) Tian Chua.

In the lead up to March 2008, Tian Chua had realised that while the Malay (ex UMNO) bloc of PKR would electorally contest against UMNO, his Chinese section would have difficulty staking out ‘green pastures’ as the DAP had already been grazing on those plots for eons.

So it wasn’t strange that Tian Chua targeted the DAP rather than the MCA (or Gerakan) in the earlier days when Anwar Ibrahim and Lim Kit Siang were talking about PKR and DAP (and PAS) forming a loose pact to defeat the BN. Then PKR’s idea of so-called ‘negotiations’ with DAP had been to make press releases without DAP even knowing about (or agreeing to) the negotiations. Azmin Ali had been a notorious culprit in such media pre-emptive strikes against the DAP.

Given these two factors, I suppose one shouldn’t blame Tan Tee Beng for possessing such an invincible bias against the DAP and the Lim family. But one wonders at his political moral values for leaping out of PKR just after two years as an MP elected under the party's banner.

My uncle knows his father quite well. In the days when Dr Lim Chong Eu was wandering (like Moses) in the political wilderness, between the time of his resignation as MCA President to his co-founding of Gerakan Party with people like Professor Syed Hussein Alatas, Veerapan, Dr Wang and Tan Sri Dr Tan Chee Khoon, he formed his pre-Gerakan party called UDP (United Democratic Party) in Penang.

Then Tan Ghim Hwa joined him as a young UDP politician. Tan Senior's political baptism of fire was in a state by-election in my village Ayer Itam but he was defeated by MCA's Lim Kean Siew (formerly of Labour Party).

Tan Ghim Hwa was then a greenhorn pollie, and known as Mr Clean. My uncle was shocked when 25 to 30 years later Lim Kit Siang brought out the issue of alleged phone threats to his (Lim’s) safety, and Lim’s description of Tan Ghim Hwa as a ‘political vulture’.

Remember Tan Ghim Hwa's political allegiance metamorphosed as a member of a Gerakan Party against BN's predecessor (Perikatan or Alliance) to being a member of a Gerakan Party within BN.

Is this going to be a sad case of ‘like father, like son’?

But more importantly, the lessons from the actions of PKR people like Tan, Zahrain, Firaus, etc suggest that both federal and state seats in Penang should go to a party whose candidates will be least likely to jump the Pakatan ship.

Truth behind acts of overcompensation

In her article Condoms, Chinese and the constitution at Malaysiakini, sweetie Helen Ang revealed to us the attempts by Mohd Ridhuan Tee Abdullah, to intrude, interfere and impose his rigid sexual morality on non-Muslim Malaysians.

Sweetie told us the bloke wrote in an Utusan article titled 'Isu timbul kerana kejahilan beragama', that: “… liquor has now become a part of the Chinese culture/way of life, just like sex outside marriage”.

He also said that the non-Malays “can go to Kuala Lumpur, drink arak and visit the nightclubs until they pass out because maybe their religions allow them to do so.”

Let me answer that.

Firstly, liquor has always been a part of Chinese culture since time immemorial – it didn’t start here in Malaysia. China’s most famous poet Li Po was said to have fallen into a vat of wine while drunk, and drowned – what a … hic … way to go wakakaka!

As for sex outside marriage, I don’t believe Chinese have the monopoly on such acts – just look around the world … well I won’t say much here but I have Arab friends and I know how they behave when they see and are around women. There there is of course the domestic scene ... but 'nuff said ;-)

As for his assertion that “… non-Malays can go to Kuala Lumpur, drink arak and visit the nightclubs until they pass out because maybe their religions allow them to do so …”, while I won’t dispute the first part, that of pissing, puking and passing out which I had occasionally done (though I pride myself I don't puke nor pass out that easily wakakaka), I wonder how Ridhuan came to the offensive conclusion that our religions allow us to do so?

For your information, Ridhuan, some religions like Buddhism neither allow nor disallow - it's between our gods/beliefs and us, and not for some modern wannabe prophets to dictate to or threaten us, so kindly F* off.

Apart from intruding into our religious beliefs, Ridhuan seemed to be obsessed with the sexual activities of non-Muslims.

There are some like Ridhuan - Chinese Muslims or Muslim with a Chinese father and Malay mum, or with a Malay dad and a Chinese mum - who always feel a desperate need to prove to their Malay-Muslim counterparts that they are also Muslim tulin or Malay wannabe yang tulin.

Once my ‘best friend’ was one of them – he was always f* feral and ferocious in his Muslim-Malay-ness but only when there were Malays around, but would be the nicest and most secular-minded liberal when they weren’t.

I regret not asking him why he had to so ‘prove’ his Muslim-Malay-ness because the poor bloke died in an unfortunate accident – I’ll never ever know.

In some ways I feel sorry for this Ridhuan bloke who has obviously found himself or felt that he is in a social twilight zone, where he believes he is neither accepted here nor there, but wants to be, so has to keep trying.

Ridhuan should perhaps look at those people working in departments starting with the acronym of 'JAI-' because I recall one case where such an officer who caught a woman in a nightclub (or somewhere) offered to ‘let her go’ if she did a blowjob for him. I assure Ridhuan he isn’t Chinese, and I doubt he offered to wear a condom for the blowjob.

Then there was that Zuok nightclub case where some 'JAI-' officers (obviously not Chinese) forced women to urinate in front of their hot hungry eyes. Rather pathetic to be so desperate - I have some old copies of 'Playboy' and 'Penthouse' I could donate to their office for their wanking pleasures.

Dr Ridhuan, kindly look into these incidents or you are the greatest hypocrite in moralising to non-Muslims.

Now I would like to refer again to my matey Dean John’s article Umno boys protest too much which states words to the effect that when a bloke comes on mucho too macho, he could possibly be a monoclinous MSM.

Dean and I suspect that when someone overdoes something, or overcompensates, could it be that he wishes to hide another something, not unlike the above case of someone not quite Malay trying to over-prove his Malay-Muslim-ness?

Tongue-in-cheek, Dean pointed out that those UMNO Youth wannabe Hang Tuahs outside the Australian High Commission, with their wira-style headbands, looked more like Village People contingent in a gay-pride march than serious political protestors wakakaka!

Dean pointed out statistics have shown that as many as 10% of adult humans are either bi or gay, though a great many either deny or pretend they're not, especially in countries like Malaysia where it's against the law wakakaka.

Dean being Dean of course ended up by remarking that, “… as hopelessly heterosexual as I am, I've often wished I was at least bisexual so I could, as Woody Allen once famously remarked, have twice the chance of a date on Saturday nights”.

I am more moderate - I think I'll settle for sweetie Helen Ang wakakaka (just a joke Helen) ;-)

Politically Partisan Police Pariah, Pathetic & Pukish

Yesterday in my post Police targetting Lim Guan Eng I stated that The pathetic RMP are at it again, playing politics, this time by harassing Lim GE.

Today the police decided to harass both PKR and DAP MPs – see Malaysiakini’s Sivarasa, Salahuddin, 7 others in police sights.

Salahuddin stated the investigations on Pakatan MPs for sedition was playing out like a ‘script’ …

… written by …?

He said: "It looks like whoever who talks about the sodomy trial during a ceramah will definitely be charged under the Sedition Act."

If the police had demonstrated equal vigilance against Utusan Melayu and other mainstream mouthpieces of UMNO for their worse acts of sedition (via their racially inflammatory articles) and the likes of opportunisic-bigot Ibrahim Ali, we might have given them the benefit of the doubt, but alas, they’re so pathetically and pariah-ishly predictable.

As my good matey, Dean Johns said about the UMNO Youth rally at the Aussie Hi-Comm in his latest column piece Umno boys protest too much:

… the rally outside the Australian High Commission in Kuala Lumpur, was just one more demonstration of the deceit and double-dealing behind ridiculous slogans like '1Malaysia' and 'Umno Juara Rakyat'.

While this regime denies most Malaysian citizens their constitutional right to peaceful public assembly, Umno/BN positively supports and sponsors protests against its opponents.

No threats of arrest under the ISA as for the rest of the rakyat, not a water cannon in sight, and the police and FRU on hand not to disrupt the performance but to see that it all goes smoothly.

And this bias is absolutely blatant, as when, following last year's outrageous 'cow's head' protest against a Hindu temple, Minister Hishammuddin Hussein defended the culprits with “in this day and age, protests should be accepted in this world as people want their voices to be heard. If we don't give them room to voice their opinions, they have no choice but to protest”.

But then within hours he gave the lie to this self-serving liberal sentiment by condoning the arrest of a handful of people holding a peaceful candle-light vigil in protest against the government. And in a similarly disgraceful display of the same double standard, he initially downplayed a rash of attacks on churches by firebrands opposed to the use of the word 'Allah' by Christians, by suggesting that the culprits were just a bunch of naughty boys.

Naughty boys, juvenile delinquents, mat rempit, whatever, it's patently and painfully evident that protest is only permissible as long as they're Umno/BN boys, as in the recent rally against us nosey Australians.

F* the Minister but we can see just how pathetically political and partisan the Police had been, are and will be … and they have the f* brazen nerve to claim a motto of Tegas, Adil Dan Berhemah (Firm, Fair And Prudent).

How pukish!

Police targetting Lim Guan Eng

Malaysiakini - Cops zoom in on Guan Eng

The pathetic RMP are at it again, playing politics, this time by harassing Lim GE.

Those men in blue claimed they are acting on reports lodged in Penang - in Sungai Nibong, Kg Baru, Kubang Semang, Seberang Jaya, Sungai Pinang and Kepala Batas. They said the alleged offences comprise four counts of participating in an illegal assembly, one of violating the Sedition Act 1948 and three counts of criminal defamation.

WHAT, no sodomy!

And what about Lim being a chauvinistic, communist-minded dictator?

But other than a hint that he is being investigated on 6 counts, Lim has not been told when those alleged incidents happened nor any details necessary for Lim to defend himself.

Of course the identities of the complainants are still unknown, and undoubtedly classified TOP SECRET – NATIONAL SECURITY!

His lawyer, Jagdeet Singh, said: "If chief minister is to defend himself, he has to know what he is being accused of".

… and ‘when’ those incidents occurred would also be helpful!

Jagdeet also said: “Many reports have been lodged against others - the prime minister, menteris besar and cabinet members. I want to know whether the police are investigating those allegations.”

Hmmmm, better not hold your breath.

Charming Caning Conference

malaysiakini photo

Shahrizat Abdul Jalil, our minister for Women, Family and Community Development, tells us that an Arab country, Oman, does not have any legislative provisions for caning sentence either under syariah or civil law.

That’s right, under BOTH syariah and civil laws.

Nah nah nah, you Arabs, we Malaysians Boleh!

Being minister for women, she now wants her Ministry to organise global meet on caning.

This amazing and brilliant idea follows the recent caning of three women who had illicit sex. I wonder what their sex partners received?

Obviously our dear Shahrizat, like Najib and Hishamuddin, is neither here nor there – too afraid to stand up for women, too embarrassed to keep her mouth shut, she now digs a bigger hole for herself, to hide or to bury herself?

But hey, don't blame her just because she's behaving like a cacing kena abu. It does show in a certain way she has some troubled conscience ... but not enough!

She said: "We can share ideas and practices and gain in-depth knowledge on how each country views the caning sentence."

Share practices?

Gawd, gasp, omigosh, another world first!

Name of 'Pakatan Rakyat Malaysia' smells!

Equo ne credite, Teucri
Quidquid id est,
timeo Danaos et dona ferentis

Do not trust the Horse, Trojans
Whatever it is,
I fear the Greeks even when they bring gifts

- Virgil (Aeneid)

The Malaysian Insider’s RoS prefers ‘Pakatan Rakyat Malaysia’ tells us that the Registrar of Societies (RoS) wants the word ‘Malaysia’ added to the registration of Pakatan Rakyat, to reflect the national identity.

This is the same RoS who had thwarted the registration of PSM for years and years, but in contrasting action, registered the Makkal Sakthi party in less time than you can spell ‘hijacked name’.

This is also the same RoS who is being sued for allegedly allowing someone in Makkal Sakthi to amend the party’s constitution to endow the president with extra powers to sack party leaders.

Now it seems RoS wants Pakatan Rakyat to add the word ‘Malaysia’ in the coalition’s name.

According to Saifuddin Nasution, the secretary-general of PKR, “The Ros wants the word ‘Malaysia’ added to instil the national image onto Pakatan Rakyat.”

Wait a ding dong minute, it is not RoS’ job to suggest names, unless of course if some other organisation or party already has the name, or the to-be-registered name is forbidden like, for example, ‘The Allah’s Party’.

If Pakatan Rakyat is registered as Pakatan Rakyat Malaysia, RoS may then require the coalition to carry the abbreviation ‘PRM’ where/if abbreviation is to be used, perhaps on ballot papers or election campaign posters!

PRM also stands for Parti Rakyat Malaysia, or as most Malaysians know it, the socialist party.

Alas, ‘socialism’ is a dirty word in the Malay heartland because it also means ‘communism’, regardless of whether that perception is warranted or not.

Chinese Malaysians call Parti Rakyat Malaysia ‘goo t’au tong’, meaning the party with the head of a water buffalo as its party symbol. The symbol of 'goo t'au tong' carries the same political association as the one the Malay heartland holds for anything ‘socialist’, namely ‘communist’!


You can bet your bottom RMB, rouble or even rupiah that the BN will exploit this to its hilt – by alleging that Pakatan Rakyat Malaysia (PRM) are closeted communists.

Politically, it's an abbreviation that I trust the Pakatan leaders will studiously avoid.

Penang DAP - learn from Gerakan's Indian mistake

Hey, I posted this at my other blog BolehTalk on 14 January 2008, 2 months before the last general election - thought it might be good for another read wakakaka!

********

Raja Bodek's promise to Indians - all hot air

Malaysiakini today published what many people already know, that Raja Bodek has done diddly squat for the Penang Indians. Its headlines asked Is Koh 'sincere and honest' about helping Indians?

;-) well, you judge from the following extracts (in italised gold highlights):

In 50 years of independence, this is the first time a chief minister has held a dialogue session with Indian NGOs and temple committees.

Let’s be fair – he wasn’t the CM for the last fifty years but the Gerakan Party provided the CM since 1969, though everyone knows the current Deputy CM Abdul Rashid Abdullah of UMNO is the de facto CM.

But it does prove that the Perikatan-Gerakan-BN, each in turn has been taking the poor Indians for granted, like vassals to be summoned to cast their votes for Sahib once every five years.

Dei, mama, auntie, aneh, aka, tambee and tangachee, time to flex your H-power - vote wisely.

Malaysiakini photo - some Penang sweeties

However only NGOs, temple committees and local community leaders who are presumed as Barisan Nasional (BN) supporters were invited to the meeting.

Raja Bodek claimed: "I can ensure you that the state government will (do everything in) its power to address all issues pertaining to Indian affairs" yet he’s marginalising non-BN Indian supporters. Where's the sincerity?

"If Koh and his government are serious, he would have unveiled a blueprint by now on current and future plans to improve the standard of living of the Indian community," said a delegate.

Too right mate, Raja is all talk only. But then for you from the BN to say this, must surely reflect on the wisdom of your political allegiance.

Although delegates raised various questions touching on housing, temples, Tamil schools and economic opportunities, Koh could not produce any concrete plans to allay fears of continued hardship for those in the community.

Hahahahahahahhahahaha – what can be worse than the BN for Indians?

Answer = Raja Bodek for Indians.

********

... and it surely came to pass that a tsunami struck the Penang BN on 08 March 2008.

Also, with the advantage of hindsight, what does this say about Kampung Buah Pala and Gerakan-BN's culpability?

I hope the DAP will learn from Raja's bull, namely, to "... to develop and unveil a blueprint ... on current and future plans to improve the standard of living of the Indian community ... and implement that a.s.a.p."

Best to learn from other's mistake than your own.

Kulim Koward Klearout to Korea

In its news article Zul Noordin dodging party disciplinary hearing The Malaysian Insider reported:

PKR deputy president Syed Husin Ali said today Kulim Bandar Bharu MP Zulkifli Noordin has been evading the party’s disciplinary board.

Syed Husin, in a statement issued today, said the errant MP, known for his Islamic hardline views, has been told to reply to a Feb 8 show cause letter but asked for a Feb 12 extension.

Zulkifli picked either today or Feb 23 to face the board but on Feb 16, the problematic Kulim MP told the media that he was going to Korea for a party trip. PKR denied there was such a trip today.

“The party has no idea about his trip. He never told the disciplinary board anything about the trip nor did he propose a substitute date for his hearing,” said Syed Husin. “This is typical of him ... Zulkifli has chosen his personal Korean trip over attending the hearing to defend himself.”

Alamak, how to be a warrior defending Islam when he doesn’t even have the gonads to defend his self-claimed Islamic stand?

When the going gets tough, the tough gets going, but the Kulim Koward Klearout to Korea.

Kurang K%t*k!

Hishamuddin & the secret caning of women

On 10 February Malaysiakini published my letter titled Rulers in politics a dangerous thing.

While my subject was on the inadvisability of royal activism in politics, I also mentioned that there were two monumental blunders in recent Malaysian political strategies. I had then written:

The first was when Dr Mahathir Mohamad, then as prime minister, wanted to outflank PAS' growing influence among the pious in the Malay heartland. He did so by declaring Malaysia as an Islamic nation, diametrically opposite to Tunku Abdul Rahman's earlier declaration that Malaysia was a secular state which upheld Islam as the nation's official religion.

Whatever good motive he might have in his manoeuvre to politically pre-empt PAS, he introduced a new element into the Malaysian judicial system, one that was and still is unwelcomed by non-Muslims.

Yes, as I had written, … By taking such a constitutionally radical step to neutralise PAS, he opened, what non-Muslims would call, a Pandora's Box, one which he couldn't close back again. From thence, he gradually gave in to the genie he unwittingly released.

We cannot accept the usual argument that only Muslims would be affected because Madam Kaliammal, wife of the late Moorthy (he of the body snatching case) was deeply affected and severely traumatised - and so were other non-Muslims in similar predicament.

Since then there has been an erosion of the supremacy of civil laws.

Four years ago I wrote in a previous post SUHAKAM Chairman: "Civil Court Judges Lack Balls" that Abu Talib Othman, the chairman of SUHAKAM and former Attorney-General in Dr Mahathir’s government, the very man who had drafted the contentious Article 121 (1)(A) in 1988, severely criticized the timidity of the civil courts in interpreting the constitutional rights [and limitations] of the syariah courts in the Moorthy case.

Abu Talib blamed the civil courts for lacking the balls to interpret the provisions according to the intentions of the proponents [of the Constitution].

When human rights lawyer Malik Imtiaz told him about civil court judges who admit to being Muslims first, Abu Talib advised him to report the matter and if there was evidence, those judges should be removed.

He said: “They are unfit to be judges, then. Judges should remember their constitutional oath to protect and uphold the Federal Constitution as the supreme law of the land.”

Yesterday we read that Three women [were] caned for extramarital sex in accordance with the sentences passed down by the syariah courts.

There was also the case of Kartika Sari Dewi Shukarno who was also sentenced to six strokes of the cane for drinking beer.

It’s not for me to question the decisions of the syariah courts … UNLESS … these had been against the civil laws.

Malaysian civil laws do not permit women to be caned. Additionally, in accordance with the civil law, a person cannot be caned by the prison authorities unless that person is a prisoner.

Kartika wasn't a prisoner, yet it has been reported that prison authorities had averred they were waiting for instructions from the syariah court to conduct the caning on her ... and presumably to f* with the civil laws of the nation.

So how, Minister? Haven't civil laws been violated?

The greater shame of the Home Minister has been that he allowed the illegal sentencing to be carried out secretly, yes, secretly as if he had been ashamed of the very actions of his own ministry.

Hishamuddin had the gall to say [as reported by MKINI]: "The punishment is to teach and give a chance to those who have fallen off the path to return and build a better life in future," ..... adding that none of the three sustained any injuries.

To recap, the secret caning of the women had been illegal in accordance with Malaysian civil laws.

Hishamuddin was too afraid or embarrassed to be upfront with those punishments. I bet if he could distance himself from ownership of the decision to proceed with the punishment he would have done so.

But alas, civil laws as we used to know it have become a victim of political opportunism and a faint heart.

And shouldn’t we apply Abu Talib’s admonition of those civil court judges to Hishamuddin as well, as in:

“They are He is unfit to be judges a minister, then. Judges A minister should remember their his constitutional oath to protect and uphold the Federal Constitution as the supreme law of the land.”

Ali Rustam cleared; Muhyiddin blurred?

Malaysiakini in its news article MACC drops graft case against S'gor MB, 7 others reported that: “…no further prosecution would be taken in eight high-profile cases involving both Pakatan Rakyat and BN politicians.”

The one I’m interested in is of course Ali Rustam. The Malacca CM had been under a cloud “…for allegedly throwing pre-party election dinners for Umno delegates last year.”

If we all recall, because of that Ali Rustam was barred from the UMNO election for the party’s deputy presidential post. There was a very high probability of him winning that post if he wasn’t disqualified. He would have been the DPM today.

Then Najib had favoured Muhyiddin. But now?

There have been rumours that all is not well between Najib and Muhyiddin.

I wonder whether the MACC clearing Ali Rustam, thus indirectly re-qualifying him as a potential candidate for UMNO's No 2 spot, is a warning shot across the bow for Muhyiddin.

Oh, by the way, just consider those Pakatan people being cleared as ‘collateral beneficiaries’.

Mind you, Najib may face a far more dangerous ‘deputy’ in Ali, and is thus unlikely to completely endorse him over Muhyiddin; but Ali's clearance from corrupt charges makes him a threat to the DPM.

Muhyiddin now needs Najib more than Najib needing him.

Related:
Is someone undermining Najib Razak?

Aesop's Fable No 1 - The fox & the grapes

It was a very hot and sunny afternoon. A fox, which had been hunting the whole day, was very thirsty.

"How I wish there was some water," the fox thought to himself, "It's been pretty dry since I left the place with the cesspool."

Just then, he saw bunches of fat and juicy grapes hanging from a vine at a golf course. The grapes looked ripe and ready to burst with juice.

"Oh, my! Oh, my!" the fox said as his mouth began to water. "Sweet grape juice, quench my thirst! And I only need a RM2 company crate to stand on and be high enough to reach it."

The fox stood on tiptoe on his RM2 crate and stretched as high as he could, but the grapes were out of his reach because the communist had set the trellis too high.

Not about to give up, the fox walked back a short distance and took a running leap onto the RM2 crate to reach the grapes. Again, he could not reach the grapes. “That damn chauvinist.”

Still not ready to give up, the fox walked back further and took another running leap at the grapes. Again, he could not reach the grapes. He cursed the man who set the CAT standard trellis so high, screaming “He’s dictator, yes, a communist-minded, chauvinist dictator.”

The fox jumped and leapt, again and again, but each time he could not reach the grapes. Until, at last, the fox was tired and thirstier than ever.

"What a fool I am!" said the fox furiously. "These grapes are sour and not fit for eating. Why would I want to stay around here anyway?"

With that, the fox walked away.

Mean-spirited Malaysians

There’s a lamentable mean-spiritedness in Malaysian politics, proving in more than one way that:

(a) we aren’t quite ready for a two-party political system,

(b) some politicians don’t consider all citizens of this country (including their own supporters and political opponents) as fellow Malaysians, and

(c) political attacks are often ad hominem rather than directed at the policies, governance and conduct of the other side.

The BN side

Of course we are familiar with the BN's denial of oil royalties to then PAS-ruled Terengganu and now PAS-ruled Kelantan. The States’ right to oil royalties has been enshrined as a legal Federal-State contract but the BN government has arrogantly ignored that, and is spitefully frustrating the PAS State government (then and now) in a disgraceful mean-spirited manner.

We have also read with disgust how the current federal government is channelling financial allocations for maintaining Penang’s heritage listings through Khazanah Nasional rather than the Pakatan government in Penang.

Just WTF has the investment holding arm of the government, roled as its strategic investor in new industries and markets, got to do with maintenance of the heritage buildings etc? Logic tells us that the State government should be responsible for the job, and thus the correct recipient of the funds.

Again, nothing more than BN's spite and mean-spiritedness, and a total disregard for logical and proper process.

We know that while BN MPs and ADUNs have received financial allocations for work in their respective constituencies, the non-BN MPs and ADUNs (in BN controlled States) are denied theirs.

The irony is there are actually BN supporters in those electorates represented by non-BN MPs and ADUNs. Such is the BN's spite that they would punish their own supporters as well. Perhaps those BN supporters should wake up and rethink who they ought to support the next time around.

The Pakatan side

Well, there’s that infamous DAP function where some of those DAP people stepped on the photos/posters of the Perak frogs as they entered the venue. Totally unpleasant, and I’m glad Lim GE took avoiding steps.

PAS of course has been known to issue a couple of death (or tummy upset) curses wakakaka at their opponents in the BN - c'mon lah, Pak Haji!

Today I have been disappointed to read in Malaysiakini the headlines Rosmah to lose Unisel chancellor post which states:

Calls for first lady Rosmah Mansor to be removed as Universiti Industri Selangor (Unisel) chancellor are again making rounds, this time, by PKR politicians on micro-blogging site Twitter.

In a Twitter posting by PKR vice-president Azmin Ali, Selangor Menteri Besar Khalid Ibrahim has agreed to Rosmah's removal in a month's time.

"Students urged the MB to remove Datin Rosmah (right) as Unisel chancellor.

"MB agreed and will announce in one month. Thunderous applause," read Azmin's posting.

Azmin's posting was referring to a gathering of 300 students from various universities with Azmin, Khalid and PKR de facto leader Anwar Ibrahim.

This is really pathetic, shamelessly partisan and totally mean-spirited.

She was invited by the previous Selangor government so why not let her term as Chancellor finish off without re-inviting her?

Why make such a spiteful announcement? It’s pathetic, pitiful, petty and utterly childish. Don’t Azmin Ali and other PKR leaders have more important things to do, like running Selangor State, than to dabble around with such masturbatory indulgences?

The argument that she should go because she is surrounded by controversies is not only too partisan but unsubstantiated.

We only have RPK’s word that she was allegedly at the scene of Altantuyaa Shariibuu’s last moments to personally ‘supervise’ the demolition of the late model’s corpse – which without any shred of evidence other than RPK's 'I have been reliably informed ...' has been, in my opinion, an incredulous preposterous allegation.

There was also an argument that her Masters degree wasn’t good enough – really, this is such a pathetic shabby argument.

OK, I know PKR is deliberately being vocal about Rosmah as part of their tactic to mitigate the Sodomy II fallout, by ratcheting up the anti-Najib campaign, but PKR should have remained on high moral grounds rather than ….. sorry, I keep forgetting they and UMNO are from the same stock … where spiteful pettiness and mean-spiritedness are their stock-in-trade.

I hope DAP will never descend to such petty bickering.

Ornithological specimens of identical plummage congregate in promixity

My matey Dean Johns has come up with another gem in his Malaysiakini column, titled Here's to the birds and the beast.

It’s a damn good read, full of humour, clever play of (English) words, and may even answer questions that some Muslim have concerns* over celebrating St Valentine’s Day with their sweeties or boyfriends.

* I read about this in someone's blog (maybe Jeff Ooi's?) some years ago

Instead Johns did a flowery satire (excuse my pun) on the ecological consequences of the day reserved for lovers (pssst, hubby and wifey can and should be lovers too).

Johns is at his trademark (tongue-in-cheek) best in this article, and the cream of the lot in my opinion would be the following ornithological specimen:

If, like me, you've started to think by now that St Valentine's Day sounds to be pretty much for the birds, you're absolutely right. Because it's actually with our feathered friends, or so some historians believe, that the whole thing actually started.

About mid-February, apparently, after the long, cold Northern-Hemisphere winter, all the birds start to feel spring in the air and take to pairing-off, necking, billing, cooing, building nests and so on. In other words, it's on or around Feb l4 that, as the old English proverb so succinctly puts it, 'birds of a feather flock together'.

Many centuries ago, it seems, humans took a gander at all this amorous avian activity and started thinking it might also be good for the goose. “If birds of a feather can do it”, people of medieval times must have reasoned, “we might as well have some flocking fun too.”

But even in those unsophisticated times it probably wasn't considered polite to come right out and invite respectable chicks out for a night of flocking around.

Look at word ‘gander’ in his third paragraph above and guess what it means in that context.

As for his last paragraph/sentence here – wakakaka - guess why I am guffawing.