Remember my posting Najib's facts, principles, goose & gander.
I lamented that DPM Najib was more concerned about form than substance. He said the cabinet’s reprimand of Deputy Higher Education Ong Tee Keat (MCA) for alleging officials' misuse of funds meant for Chinese schools' refurbishment was a matter of ‘principle’ and that the ‘facts’ of Ong’s allegation was entirely a different matter, meaning he didn't want to 'touch' that with a 10-foot pole.
The cabinet reprimand came about after Education Minister Hishamuddin Tun Hussein had railed against Ong’s allegation. Hishamuddin had rejected Ong’s claim. Ong didn't budge but everything was swiftly galvanised into 'elegant silence'.
Well, the ‘fact’ that Najib wasn’t interested in (and we now know for ‘good reason’) was raised in parliament when Parliamentary Opposition Leader Lim Kit Siang (DAP-Ipoh Timor) told Works Minister Samy Vellu that a Public Works Department official had actually admitted to Ong's allegation. The official said that the refurbishment works carried out on SJKC Kung Yu in Johor cost only about RM3,000 when the allocation was RM30,000.
In other words, the ‘facts’ of the missing 90% of funds, the alleged embezzlement of special funds meant to repair and upgrade schools, is still not explained - and which Hishamuddin had strenuously denied, and which DPM Najib had conveniently dismissed, undoubtedly as inconvenient 'fact' not involving cabinet 'principle' of ensuring an UMNO leader must never be embarrassed by a non-UMNO leader.
Apparently the works department official revealed all when Samy Vellu and MCA president Ong Ka Ting visited the school day yesterday. The ‘confession’, or rather ‘revelation', received prominent coverage in Chinese dailies today.
Lim said the official’s revelation proved what Deputy Higher Education Minister Ong Tee Keat had alleged.
Lim asked Samy Vellu: “Will you bring this up at tomorrow’s cabinet meeting and ask the Higher Education Minister (Mustapa Mohamed) to retract his apology which was made on behalf of his deputy to Education Minister Hishammuddin Hussein?”
Samy answered: “I have nothing to do with that. I am not going to answer.”
Lim persisted and asked what immediate actions are being carried out to avoid such problems in other schools.
Samy Vellu blew his top and said: “I don’t have a license to shoot or hang a person. The (public works) department will take action. I just asked for an investigation this morning ... how can you ask me on what I’m going to do?”
That's Samy's 'Must I Comment?'
The minister said he will wait for the outcome of the investigation into the Kung Yu school before deciding on the next move. He has also reportedly asked for documents, including notes of every material and their cost pertaining to the construction of the school.
Maybe this explains why Hishamuddin railed against Ong; maybe it explains Najib's ‘principle’ over ‘fact’?
Principle? I doubt that the cabinet will reprimand Hishamuddin and ask him to apologise to Ong.
Wednesday, September 20, 2006
Coup dé’tat in Thailand
Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra of Thailand is in New York to address the opening of the UN General Assembly. That’s when the Thai army conducted a coup dé’tat, and seized control of Bangkok without a shot being fired.
The army has dismissed Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra, revoked the constitution but promised a swift return to democracy after political reforms.
In a vain attempt to head off the coup, Thaksin’s government spokesman at the UN telephoned a Thai television station to announce a state of emergency. He made a brave but futile effort to say that the army could not succeed and PM Thaksin is still in control.
But tanks and troops took over Government House in the capital and surrounding provinces. Armoured vehicles and soldiers took up position on many street corners, but life in most of Bangkok continued much as usual with traffic moving through rain drenched streets and the airport operating normally.
The army announced on TV that the seizure would be temporary and power "returned to the people" soon.
The army told all soldiers to report to base and banned unauthorised troop movements, suggesting the military leadership was worried that Thaksin loyalists in the armed forces might attempt a counter-coup.
The armed forces and police had set up a body to decide on political reforms, accusing Thaksin of subverting Thailand's 74-year-old democracy.
An army spokesman said: "Never in Thai history have the people been so divided. The majority of people had become suspicious of this administration, which is running the country through rampant corruption.”
"Independent bodies have been interfered with so much they could not perform in line within the spirit of the constitution."
Weerasak Kohsurat, a deputy minister in a previous government, said he believed royal adviser Sumate Tantivejakul would steer the political reform process. He said that elections would be called when it was done and Thaksin, Thailand's longest serving elected prime minister, would be allowed to take part.
Another miloitary officer stated: "There is no other means to solve the political deadlock. It's been almost a year that the country has no democracy, no legitimate government to run the country. I've told foreign diplomats Thailand may need to take a step backward, if they think a coup will, in order to leap forward."
Thailand's army chief General Sonthi Boonyaratglin has met with the nation's revered king after declaring that he had staged a coup against Thaksin. The leaders of the navy and the air force were with him at teh palace for more than two hours in Bangkok immediately after announcing the coup.
Meanwhile in Mew York, at the UN, Thai officials who asked not to be named (can you blame them) said that PM Thaksin is still in command of the nation and that he will spell out his position in his UN speech later in the day. Thaksin is monitoring events in a New York hotel with his aides.
The spokesman said: "The Thai Prime Minister is quite calm. He feels that he is the elected Prime Minister and he would like to safeguard the constitution of the country."
Related:
(1) Thailand's Constitutional Crisis
(2) Thailand can't say "Mai pen rai"
The army has dismissed Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra, revoked the constitution but promised a swift return to democracy after political reforms.
In a vain attempt to head off the coup, Thaksin’s government spokesman at the UN telephoned a Thai television station to announce a state of emergency. He made a brave but futile effort to say that the army could not succeed and PM Thaksin is still in control.
But tanks and troops took over Government House in the capital and surrounding provinces. Armoured vehicles and soldiers took up position on many street corners, but life in most of Bangkok continued much as usual with traffic moving through rain drenched streets and the airport operating normally.
The army announced on TV that the seizure would be temporary and power "returned to the people" soon.
The army told all soldiers to report to base and banned unauthorised troop movements, suggesting the military leadership was worried that Thaksin loyalists in the armed forces might attempt a counter-coup.
The armed forces and police had set up a body to decide on political reforms, accusing Thaksin of subverting Thailand's 74-year-old democracy.
An army spokesman said: "Never in Thai history have the people been so divided. The majority of people had become suspicious of this administration, which is running the country through rampant corruption.”
"Independent bodies have been interfered with so much they could not perform in line within the spirit of the constitution."
Weerasak Kohsurat, a deputy minister in a previous government, said he believed royal adviser Sumate Tantivejakul would steer the political reform process. He said that elections would be called when it was done and Thaksin, Thailand's longest serving elected prime minister, would be allowed to take part.
Another miloitary officer stated: "There is no other means to solve the political deadlock. It's been almost a year that the country has no democracy, no legitimate government to run the country. I've told foreign diplomats Thailand may need to take a step backward, if they think a coup will, in order to leap forward."
Thailand's army chief General Sonthi Boonyaratglin has met with the nation's revered king after declaring that he had staged a coup against Thaksin. The leaders of the navy and the air force were with him at teh palace for more than two hours in Bangkok immediately after announcing the coup.
Meanwhile in Mew York, at the UN, Thai officials who asked not to be named (can you blame them) said that PM Thaksin is still in command of the nation and that he will spell out his position in his UN speech later in the day. Thaksin is monitoring events in a New York hotel with his aides.
The spokesman said: "The Thai Prime Minister is quite calm. He feels that he is the elected Prime Minister and he would like to safeguard the constitution of the country."
Related:
(1) Thailand's Constitutional Crisis
(2) Thailand can't say "Mai pen rai"
Tuesday, September 19, 2006
His Ampu-ness the Raja Bodek of Penang
In an article in Malaysiakini ‘Opinions & Features’ column, DAP sec-gen Lim Guan Eng bemoaned the behaviour of UMNO’s leaders in bullying and humiliating Penang CM, Koh KT. The following is an extract of what Lim had written:
… Pak Lah, his deputy Najib Abdul Razak and Hishammuddin have also indulged in some Big Lie tactics of their own by refusing to condemn Umno Youth members who demonstrated with banners and humiliated Penang Chief Minister Dr Koh Tsu Koon to his face with slogans at an Umno event.
[…] - my underlining
Koh appeared to have capitulated by agreeing to Najib's suggestion for the powers of the Umno deputy chief minister to be strengthened to help marginalised Malays. This ignores the overwhelming mandate that Koh obtained in the last general election to be a chief minister with power and not one without power. Again no mention is made by Umno of their failure to honour their promise to rotate the position of the Sabah chief minister post amongst all ethnic groups.
Then I browsed around in Bernama and guess what I read? Here’s the report about Malaysia Raja Bodek:
Gerakan holds Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi's leadership in high regard as he uses a very democratic approach and considers the views of all, said its deputy president Tan Sri Dr Koh Tsu Koon.
He said the Prime Minister also adopted a consensus-based approach in determining the direction of the nation.
"He is also open to criticisms from Cabinet members and others who have differing views," he told a press conference after opening Brady Technology Sdn Bhd's new factory, here Tuesday.
Dr Koh said Abdullah's democratic style should not be misjudged as having lost control of his administration.
"In fact, this is what the people want, a more democratic government than an autocratic one. Abdullah's leadership in this respect is very clear to all," he said in commenting on the remarks made by Kota Baharu MP Datuk Zaid Ibrahim in Parliament last week that the Prime Minister had not brought about the changes he had promised after being in power for three years.
On Sunday, while in Havana, Cuba for the Non-Aligned Movement's summit, the Prime Minister stressed that he had not lost control of his administration of the country and that he had his own style of doing things.
Dr Koh, who is also Penang Chief Minister, said each Prime Minister had his own style of leadership and that Abdullah was no exception.
"With the total support of the component parties of the Barisan Nasional and the Cabinet, it is his right to administer the nation as he sees fit," he said, adding that it was unrealistic of people to expect changes to be made overnight.
Now, can you understand why Koh makes me sick. He is a sickening, shameless, sycophantic, servile, self-serving* clown, the court jester to UMNO's leaders.
* can you think of any more words starting with 's' to describe Koh?
He stumbled forward to defend Khairy Jalamuddin who had badmouthed him as the CM. He waved Hishamuddin’s keris as an ampu favour for the UMNO Youth leader even after the latter had demanded a rotation of the CM’s post amongst the BN component parties (meaning only UMNO). And once again, see how he has tripped and crashed disgracefully as he rushed forward to carry AAB’s you-know-what.
Does that explain why Penangites want to trade off Koh Tsu Koon!?
… Pak Lah, his deputy Najib Abdul Razak and Hishammuddin have also indulged in some Big Lie tactics of their own by refusing to condemn Umno Youth members who demonstrated with banners and humiliated Penang Chief Minister Dr Koh Tsu Koon to his face with slogans at an Umno event.
[…] - my underlining
Koh appeared to have capitulated by agreeing to Najib's suggestion for the powers of the Umno deputy chief minister to be strengthened to help marginalised Malays. This ignores the overwhelming mandate that Koh obtained in the last general election to be a chief minister with power and not one without power. Again no mention is made by Umno of their failure to honour their promise to rotate the position of the Sabah chief minister post amongst all ethnic groups.
Then I browsed around in Bernama and guess what I read? Here’s the report about Malaysia Raja Bodek:
Gerakan holds Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi's leadership in high regard as he uses a very democratic approach and considers the views of all, said its deputy president Tan Sri Dr Koh Tsu Koon.
He said the Prime Minister also adopted a consensus-based approach in determining the direction of the nation.
"He is also open to criticisms from Cabinet members and others who have differing views," he told a press conference after opening Brady Technology Sdn Bhd's new factory, here Tuesday.
Dr Koh said Abdullah's democratic style should not be misjudged as having lost control of his administration.
"In fact, this is what the people want, a more democratic government than an autocratic one. Abdullah's leadership in this respect is very clear to all," he said in commenting on the remarks made by Kota Baharu MP Datuk Zaid Ibrahim in Parliament last week that the Prime Minister had not brought about the changes he had promised after being in power for three years.
On Sunday, while in Havana, Cuba for the Non-Aligned Movement's summit, the Prime Minister stressed that he had not lost control of his administration of the country and that he had his own style of doing things.
Dr Koh, who is also Penang Chief Minister, said each Prime Minister had his own style of leadership and that Abdullah was no exception.
"With the total support of the component parties of the Barisan Nasional and the Cabinet, it is his right to administer the nation as he sees fit," he said, adding that it was unrealistic of people to expect changes to be made overnight.
Now, can you understand why Koh makes me sick. He is a sickening, shameless, sycophantic, servile, self-serving* clown, the court jester to UMNO's leaders.
* can you think of any more words starting with 's' to describe Koh?
He stumbled forward to defend Khairy Jalamuddin who had badmouthed him as the CM. He waved Hishamuddin’s keris as an ampu favour for the UMNO Youth leader even after the latter had demanded a rotation of the CM’s post amongst the BN component parties (meaning only UMNO). And once again, see how he has tripped and crashed disgracefully as he rushed forward to carry AAB’s you-know-what.
Does that explain why Penangites want to trade off Koh Tsu Koon!?
Melayu Mudah Lupa Minus One
This post had been delayed for a number of days due to more pressing news.
Maybe Melayu tidak mudah lupa, well, at least for one of them, an UMNO supreme council member and the regional and rural development minister.
Abdul Aziz Shamsuddin said he has been embarrassed that the Malays (meaning those at the Kubang Pasu division) had rejected a prominent leader such as former premier Dr Mahathir Mohamad in the recent Kubang Pasu Umno division delegates contest.
He said: “I am embarrassed to face other races as the Malays did not have any respect nor give Tun (Mahathir) the space to be a delegate. He was willing to contest just to sit with other delegates at the annual general assembly, but his hope was shut out.”
Abdul Aziz also urged Umno leaders and members to cease and desist from making derogatory remarks (eg. like alluding to Dr M as an ‘ape’), that can hurt Mahathir’s feelings. He warned that the actions of certain party members in making such statements will only aggravate the situation.
He reminded UMNO members: “Recently, many people have been speaking about Dr Mahathir’s shortcomings without realising the amount of contribution he has made to Umno and the nation as prime minister for 22 years.”
“I was once his political secretary and as far as I know, Tun (Mahathir) had never been combative towards Pak Lah (Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi). His (Mahathir’s) reprimands are not aimed at belittling Umno or the country.”
You’re too late, Abdul Aziz!
While one expects UMNO blokes like Mr Jantan alias Mohd Nazri Abdul Aziz to ampu AAB by posing as the PM's personal Hatchet Man, one has been utterly disgusted that former so-call friends of Mahathir like Johari Baharom, personally picked by Mahathir to take over his Kubang Pasu position, and former Kedah Menteri Besar Osman Aroff, for whom Dr Mahathir had created a special post when Osman was ousted as the state MB, had deliberately badmouthed him severely.
But kudos to Abdul Aziz for having the guts to speak up. But I wonder whether he’ll continue to be a minister?
Maybe Melayu tidak mudah lupa, well, at least for one of them, an UMNO supreme council member and the regional and rural development minister.
Abdul Aziz Shamsuddin said he has been embarrassed that the Malays (meaning those at the Kubang Pasu division) had rejected a prominent leader such as former premier Dr Mahathir Mohamad in the recent Kubang Pasu Umno division delegates contest.
He said: “I am embarrassed to face other races as the Malays did not have any respect nor give Tun (Mahathir) the space to be a delegate. He was willing to contest just to sit with other delegates at the annual general assembly, but his hope was shut out.”
Abdul Aziz also urged Umno leaders and members to cease and desist from making derogatory remarks (eg. like alluding to Dr M as an ‘ape’), that can hurt Mahathir’s feelings. He warned that the actions of certain party members in making such statements will only aggravate the situation.
He reminded UMNO members: “Recently, many people have been speaking about Dr Mahathir’s shortcomings without realising the amount of contribution he has made to Umno and the nation as prime minister for 22 years.”
“I was once his political secretary and as far as I know, Tun (Mahathir) had never been combative towards Pak Lah (Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi). His (Mahathir’s) reprimands are not aimed at belittling Umno or the country.”
You’re too late, Abdul Aziz!
While one expects UMNO blokes like Mr Jantan alias Mohd Nazri Abdul Aziz to ampu AAB by posing as the PM's personal Hatchet Man, one has been utterly disgusted that former so-call friends of Mahathir like Johari Baharom, personally picked by Mahathir to take over his Kubang Pasu position, and former Kedah Menteri Besar Osman Aroff, for whom Dr Mahathir had created a special post when Osman was ousted as the state MB, had deliberately badmouthed him severely.
But kudos to Abdul Aziz for having the guts to speak up. But I wonder whether he’ll continue to be a minister?
Nazri sneered at Karpal Singh's wheelchair situation
Bernama reported that DPM Najib Tun Razak averred the disabled too can be assets to the nation.
But it seems that Minister in the PM’s Department, Mohd Nazri alias Mr Jantan must have disagreed.
During a parliamentary session, the DAP MPs sought clarification from Nazri regarding the direction of the country under the leadership of Prime Minister AAB. Lim Kit Siang raised the statement by AAB in Havana that he (AAB) had not lost control of his administration. Nazri ignored them completely.
Nazri continued talking about the Tsunami funds instead of answering the DAP’s questions. Karpal was angry at by his refusal to respond to parliamentary questions and urged Deputy Speaker Lim Si Cheng ‘to restrain the minister since he has gone crazy.’
An argument broke out between the DAP MPs and Nazri, whence at one stage Karpal Singh repeatedly called on the minister to sit down.
Nazri then retorted to a Karpal Singh who was confined to a wheelchair: “You are just jealous because I am standing.”
Karpal has been using a wheelchair since an accident last year.
Fong Po Kuan (DAP-Batu Gajah) immediately demanded an apology from the minister. She said Nazri had not only hurt Karpal but all disabled peopled as well.
Later, outside the Monkey House, Karpal said Nazri’s remark on his inability to stand was in poor taste. He said that nobody should wish for another to be confined to a wheelchair.
Maybe Karpal should refer Minister Nazri to the DPM’s statement.
But it seems that Minister in the PM’s Department, Mohd Nazri alias Mr Jantan must have disagreed.
During a parliamentary session, the DAP MPs sought clarification from Nazri regarding the direction of the country under the leadership of Prime Minister AAB. Lim Kit Siang raised the statement by AAB in Havana that he (AAB) had not lost control of his administration. Nazri ignored them completely.
Nazri continued talking about the Tsunami funds instead of answering the DAP’s questions. Karpal was angry at by his refusal to respond to parliamentary questions and urged Deputy Speaker Lim Si Cheng ‘to restrain the minister since he has gone crazy.’
An argument broke out between the DAP MPs and Nazri, whence at one stage Karpal Singh repeatedly called on the minister to sit down.
Nazri then retorted to a Karpal Singh who was confined to a wheelchair: “You are just jealous because I am standing.”
Karpal has been using a wheelchair since an accident last year.
Fong Po Kuan (DAP-Batu Gajah) immediately demanded an apology from the minister. She said Nazri had not only hurt Karpal but all disabled peopled as well.
Later, outside the Monkey House, Karpal said Nazri’s remark on his inability to stand was in poor taste. He said that nobody should wish for another to be confined to a wheelchair.
Maybe Karpal should refer Minister Nazri to the DPM’s statement.
Penangites want to trade off Koh Tsu Koon!
Beginning of this year I blogged on:
(1) Koh Tsu Koon should go (1)
(2) Koh Tsu Koon should go (2)
(3) Koh Tsu Koon should go (3)
(4) Koh TK willing captive of UMNO?
Yes, he's not exactly my favourite person ;-)
I remarked that Koh TK’s greatest contribution to Penangites had been his regular demonstrations of his world-famous hands-wringing sandiwara.
Some readers were more sympathetic to him, stating that Koh faced inpossible odds like a dominant and strangulating UMNO, a treacherous MCA and anti-social behaviour Penangites.
I refused to accept those true but irrelevant points to excuse Koh, for the reason Koh had chosen to be the Chief Minister. Koh cannot push and put himself to be a State's leader yet claim immunity from public criticisms because the politics in Penang are difficult or that his hands have been tied behind his back by UMNO or he's been sabotaged by a treacherous MCA.
Tough! He needs to wheel and deal to get on top. Sure, everyone knows UMNO has been pressing the button but don’t forget, Koh has made himself a willing captive. If so, then he needs to get the best out of the worst, but not to merely capitulate in order to keep his premiership.
Because of his desire to be their CM, Penangites have a right to bash Koh!
But Koh being Koh just cannot help himself. Despite Khairy Jamaluddin attacking the Chinese community and his UMNO Youth wanting Koh’s position, Koh rushed pell-mell forward to defend Khairy when the latter was questioned on his bloody nerve in ordering MBs and CM around – see my posting Penang's CM Koh KT's testimony for Khairy J
(1) Koh Tsu Koon should go (1)
(2) Koh Tsu Koon should go (2)
(3) Koh Tsu Koon should go (3)
(4) Koh TK willing captive of UMNO?
Yes, he's not exactly my favourite person ;-)
I remarked that Koh TK’s greatest contribution to Penangites had been his regular demonstrations of his world-famous hands-wringing sandiwara.
Some readers were more sympathetic to him, stating that Koh faced inpossible odds like a dominant and strangulating UMNO, a treacherous MCA and anti-social behaviour Penangites.
I refused to accept those true but irrelevant points to excuse Koh, for the reason Koh had chosen to be the Chief Minister. Koh cannot push and put himself to be a State's leader yet claim immunity from public criticisms because the politics in Penang are difficult or that his hands have been tied behind his back by UMNO or he's been sabotaged by a treacherous MCA.
Tough! He needs to wheel and deal to get on top. Sure, everyone knows UMNO has been pressing the button but don’t forget, Koh has made himself a willing captive. If so, then he needs to get the best out of the worst, but not to merely capitulate in order to keep his premiership.
Because of his desire to be their CM, Penangites have a right to bash Koh!
But Koh being Koh just cannot help himself. Despite Khairy Jamaluddin attacking the Chinese community and his UMNO Youth wanting Koh’s position, Koh rushed pell-mell forward to defend Khairy when the latter was questioned on his bloody nerve in ordering MBs and CM around – see my posting Penang's CM Koh KT's testimony for Khairy J
So, was Khairy grateful? The young UMNO leader then accused the predominantly-Chinese Gerakan state government of marginalising the minority Malays in Penang island, to the extent of driving them to move to the mainland – to Butterworth and Sungai Petani.
And in the face of the wild irresponsible attacks, all Koh did was to mumble for proof. It had to take Lim Keng Yaik to come to Koh's rescue with a counter-attack on Khairy. Lim at least had the guts to call Khairy a 'low standard opportunist', as blogged in Dr Lim KY: "Hang Putih's a low standard opportunist".
Recall when Hishamuddin went for his throat as blogged in Penang CM's post - bleating lamb and strutting roosters, again Koh chose to apple-polish Hishamuddin as mentioned in The Brilliance of Hishamuddin Tun Hussein
Today a Malaysiakini reader wrote the following:
***
If we compare the leadership quality of Penang Chief Minister Dr Koh Tsu Koon and MCA’s Ong Tee Keat, I begin to worry for Koh who will soon be president of Gerakan.
The Umno Youth in Penang, plus one Khairy Jamaluddin - son-in-law of Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi - are all ‘publicly’ firing one shot after another directly hitting Koh, and yet Koh dares not rebut publicly.
From the Umno division AGM’s resolutions to the banners hanging in front of Koh, insulting him from head to toe, Koh remained and acted like a silence lamb. Is this the quality of a future Gerakan chief?
One the other hand, (MCA vice-president) Ong Tee Keat is keeping to his principles and daringly rebut and fired back every shot, hitting at (Umno Youth chief) Hishammuddin Hussein Ong without showing any sign of retreat, just because he believes he has done nothing wrong by helping to reveal the possible missing of funds allocated to two Chinese schools in Muar. Ong shows the quality of an excellent leader who dares to stand by his principles and couldn’t care less about his political future.
Honestly, Ong’s head might be chopped off because of this episode, but he gained thunderous applause from people from all walks of life for many years to come. On the other hand, Koh’s performance did not just disappoint his own Gerakan members, but we as ordinary people, are also having the view that Gerakan’s future will be very bright under Koh’s leadership.
We could understand it is wiser to ignore - sometimes - other people’s once-a-while provocation. But, to remain ‘cool’ and act like ‘nothing happened’ after receiving insults after insults, slaps after slaps, we could only see that Koh is a weak leader who will bring very little glory to Gerakan.
We are not stupid and we are watching closely. We shall tell these politicians that we, the voters, will not forget what you did this time. When the right time comes, don’t be surprise we will show you the cold shoulder.
***
The silent lamb receiving insults after insults, slaps after slaps! Well, that's Koh TK for you!
It's hard for me, a Penangite to say this of him, also a Penangite, but can we trade him for someone from another state?
Monday, September 18, 2006
Muslim Woman in Space
Anousheh Ansari, an Iranian-American telecommunications entrepreneur, paid US$20 million for a 10-day journey.
The destination?
The International Space Station (ISS)
She has blasted off at 0409 GMT or 12.09 pm Malaysian time in a Russian Soyuz spacecraft, and in doing so set up three space records: first female tourist, first female Muslim, and first Iranian in orbit.
She will return to earth in 10 days with the outgoing US-Russian crew from the ISS.
The destination?
The International Space Station (ISS)
She has blasted off at 0409 GMT or 12.09 pm Malaysian time in a Russian Soyuz spacecraft, and in doing so set up three space records: first female tourist, first female Muslim, and first Iranian in orbit.
She will return to earth in 10 days with the outgoing US-Russian crew from the ISS.
photo from al Jazeera
Ansari, who left Iran in 1984 to become a US citizen based in Dallas, Texas, said she wants to be an example to her Iranian compatriots.
She said: "I think my flight has become a sort of ray of hope for young Iranians living in Iran, helping them to look forward to something positive, because everything they've been hearing is all so very depressing and talks of war and talks of bloodshed."
photo from Sydney Morning Herald
She put on an Iranian flag on her space suit but was told to remove it at the insistence of the Russian and US governments. They also don’t want her to make any political messages during her trip. However, Ansari said she would still pack an Iranian flag for her trip.
Here's a chance for our Boleh-nauts to chat her up when she returns - maybe to ask for tips on how she prays in space.
Related:
Muslim in space
The Malaysian Kow-Tim Loop
Bernama has reported that Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR), has accused the Kedah Government of misusing the special fund set up for tsunami victims. The party has lodged a report with the Anti-Corruption Agency (ACA).
State PKR chairman Mocktar Mansor - as to be expected, opposition people usually don’t have Datuk, Datuk Seri or Tan Sri in front of their names - said the Sungei Petani ACA should conduct thorough investigations on the abuse of RM9.84 million from the fund meant for the purchase and repair of fishing equipment.
He based his complaint on the Auditor-General's findings which I blogged in Menteris Besar Rorted Money for Poor.
According to the Auditor-General's Report, the Kedah State authorities used RM701,222 to buy caps, shirts, lapel pins and to erect billboards to mark the visits of PM and DPM to the state last year.
Well, I suppose we could argue that it was a tsunami show of bodek-ing (apple polishing).
Mocktar Mansor handed his report to Sungai Petani ACA. Mocktar also wanted the ACA to investigate into the alleged misuse of RM1.2 million to buy 700 computers in 2004 without calling for a tender, thus violating the Treasury directive.
Sungai Petani ACA Assistant Director Mohamad Fauzi Husin said he would forward the report to the State ACA headquarters in Alor Star for further action.
I predict the Alor Setar ACA will forward the report to the ACA headquarters in Putrajaya for further action.
Then the Putrajaya ACA Headquarters there will forward the report to the PM’s Department for further action.
The Minister in the PM’s Department - there are so many of them (ministers) there that it will take a year or two or even more before they decide who will pick up the file - will forward the report to the PM for his action.
The PM will, in what is now known as the Elegant Manoeuvre, call for a report from the Sungai Petani ACA, saying: “I’ll leave it to them to make a report. They know best what’s going on.”
Then the Sungai Petani ACA, on receiving the returned file, will forward it to the State ACA headquarters in Alor Star for further action, which will then forward it to the ACA headquarters in Putrajaya for further action, which will then forward it to the PM’s Department for further action, which will then ……………………
You get the idea, otherwise known as the kow-tim* loop.
* kow-tim = beres = 'dealt' with
State PKR chairman Mocktar Mansor - as to be expected, opposition people usually don’t have Datuk, Datuk Seri or Tan Sri in front of their names - said the Sungei Petani ACA should conduct thorough investigations on the abuse of RM9.84 million from the fund meant for the purchase and repair of fishing equipment.
He based his complaint on the Auditor-General's findings which I blogged in Menteris Besar Rorted Money for Poor.
According to the Auditor-General's Report, the Kedah State authorities used RM701,222 to buy caps, shirts, lapel pins and to erect billboards to mark the visits of PM and DPM to the state last year.
Well, I suppose we could argue that it was a tsunami show of bodek-ing (apple polishing).
Mocktar Mansor handed his report to Sungai Petani ACA. Mocktar also wanted the ACA to investigate into the alleged misuse of RM1.2 million to buy 700 computers in 2004 without calling for a tender, thus violating the Treasury directive.
Sungai Petani ACA Assistant Director Mohamad Fauzi Husin said he would forward the report to the State ACA headquarters in Alor Star for further action.
I predict the Alor Setar ACA will forward the report to the ACA headquarters in Putrajaya for further action.
Then the Putrajaya ACA Headquarters there will forward the report to the PM’s Department for further action.
The Minister in the PM’s Department - there are so many of them (ministers) there that it will take a year or two or even more before they decide who will pick up the file - will forward the report to the PM for his action.
The PM will, in what is now known as the Elegant Manoeuvre, call for a report from the Sungai Petani ACA, saying: “I’ll leave it to them to make a report. They know best what’s going on.”
Then the Sungai Petani ACA, on receiving the returned file, will forward it to the State ACA headquarters in Alor Star for further action, which will then forward it to the ACA headquarters in Putrajaya for further action, which will then forward it to the PM’s Department for further action, which will then ……………………
You get the idea, otherwise known as the kow-tim* loop.
* kow-tim = beres = 'dealt' with
Pope issued personal apology
Pope Benedict XVI has made a personal apology, and this time he had made his expression of sorrow stronger than that the ‘sincere regret’ that he conveyed through a Vatican statement previously. However, analysts commented that he didn’t exactly retract those provocative remarks in the speech which started it all.
While some Muslims seemed mollified by his sincerity, there remains those who would never be satisfied. KTemoc feels that an apology, especially a personal one and not issued as an official statement, is an apology, regardless of whether the original remarks had been withdrawn. An apology indicates that he regretted saying those things, even if, as he averred, he didn’t mean it the way Muslims have perceived those words. An apology signals that he wouldn’t, if he could turn the clock back, have said those words.
Pope Benedict went on to clarify that he does not share the offensive views of an emperor he quoted in a speech earlier this week. He reiterated he is ‘deeply sorry’ for the anger he caused.
The Pope voiced his regret during the traditional Angelus blessing from the papal summer residence at Castel Gandolfo, his first public appearance since the speech.
He said: "I am deeply sorry for the reactions in some countries to a few passages of my address ... which were considered offensive to the sensibility of Muslims."
"I hope that this [apology] serves to appease hearts and to clarify the true meaning of my address, which in its totality was and is an invitation to frank and sincere dialogue, with great mutual respect."
However, just to be on the safe side, the Italian Government has ordered police chiefs to raise the level of national security, amid violent threats by Islamist groups overseas. A hardline cleric linked to Somalia's powerful Islamist movement has passed a fatwa, calling for Muslims to hunt down and kill the pope, while an armed Iraqi group has threatened to carry out attacks against Rome and the Vatican.
In Palestine, people saw a third day of attacks on Christian places of worship in the territories, where unknown assailants throw Molotov cocktails and a burning tire at two Catholic churches in the northern West Bank.
Palestinian Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh of Hamas condemned the acts of terrorism. He called on Palestinians on Sunday to refrain from sectarian strife.
He stated: "All Palestinian citizens must prevent all harm to all Christian churches on Palestinian land. Our Christian brothers are citizens of Palestine. They are Palestinians."
[you won’t get this in the Jerusalem Post, except his condemnation of the pope’s speech]
Turkish Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul says the Pope's visit will go ahead as planned because it's too late to change things, meaning the Turkish government still welcomes the Pope's tour even though it won't say so because of current Muslim feelings. He had earlier described the Pope's remarks in Germany as 'really unfortunate' and a setback for efforts to promote better understanding between religions and cultures.
Related:
(1) Pope Benedict Shattered Glass House & Goodwill
(2) Why Pope Benedict said it
(3) Pope says sorry
While some Muslims seemed mollified by his sincerity, there remains those who would never be satisfied. KTemoc feels that an apology, especially a personal one and not issued as an official statement, is an apology, regardless of whether the original remarks had been withdrawn. An apology indicates that he regretted saying those things, even if, as he averred, he didn’t mean it the way Muslims have perceived those words. An apology signals that he wouldn’t, if he could turn the clock back, have said those words.
Pope Benedict went on to clarify that he does not share the offensive views of an emperor he quoted in a speech earlier this week. He reiterated he is ‘deeply sorry’ for the anger he caused.
The Pope voiced his regret during the traditional Angelus blessing from the papal summer residence at Castel Gandolfo, his first public appearance since the speech.
He said: "I am deeply sorry for the reactions in some countries to a few passages of my address ... which were considered offensive to the sensibility of Muslims."
"I hope that this [apology] serves to appease hearts and to clarify the true meaning of my address, which in its totality was and is an invitation to frank and sincere dialogue, with great mutual respect."
However, just to be on the safe side, the Italian Government has ordered police chiefs to raise the level of national security, amid violent threats by Islamist groups overseas. A hardline cleric linked to Somalia's powerful Islamist movement has passed a fatwa, calling for Muslims to hunt down and kill the pope, while an armed Iraqi group has threatened to carry out attacks against Rome and the Vatican.
In Palestine, people saw a third day of attacks on Christian places of worship in the territories, where unknown assailants throw Molotov cocktails and a burning tire at two Catholic churches in the northern West Bank.
Palestinian Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh of Hamas condemned the acts of terrorism. He called on Palestinians on Sunday to refrain from sectarian strife.
He stated: "All Palestinian citizens must prevent all harm to all Christian churches on Palestinian land. Our Christian brothers are citizens of Palestine. They are Palestinians."
[you won’t get this in the Jerusalem Post, except his condemnation of the pope’s speech]
Turkish Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul says the Pope's visit will go ahead as planned because it's too late to change things, meaning the Turkish government still welcomes the Pope's tour even though it won't say so because of current Muslim feelings. He had earlier described the Pope's remarks in Germany as 'really unfortunate' and a setback for efforts to promote better understanding between religions and cultures.
Related:
(1) Pope Benedict Shattered Glass House & Goodwill
(2) Why Pope Benedict said it
(3) Pope says sorry
Sunday, September 17, 2006
War Crimes in the Middle East
PeterP asked me to comment on the Amnesty report on Hezbollah committing a war crime in its rocket attacks against Israel.
Was the Allied bombing and sheer destruction of the German city of Dresden a war crime? What about Vietnam (with millions slaughtered) and Iraq?
The moral of the story is that the powerful writes the book and thus the verdict.
Flash forward to Lebanon recently.
Amnesty International has accused Hezbollah of acts amounting to war crimes in the conflict with Israel. It said that Hezbollah’s deliberate targeting of civilians with rockets was a serious violation of humanitarian law.
Of course Hezbollah rejected the Amnesty report, accusing it of being an outcome of US and Israeli pressure, which I would say is a bit far fetched. Amnesty doesn't kowtow to anyone.
Hezbollah MP Hassan Fadlallah said Amnesty should analyse the number of civilians killed on each side, before accusing Hezbollah of war crimes. The Israelis destroyed an entire nation with more than a thousand civilians dead, while Hezbollah’s rocket attacks killed around 43 civilians and wounded 33 or so.
But Amnesty retorted that Israel's violations didn’t justify Hezbollah's actions.
It noted that although Hezbollah had said its policy was not to target civilians, its leader Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah subsequently said the policy was changed in reprisal for Israeli attacks on Lebanese civilian areas. Sheikh Nasrallah had said: "As long as the enemy undertakes its aggression without limits or red lines, we will also respond without limits or red lines."
I agree with Amnesty International's Secretary General, Irene Khan, who said: "Civilians must not be made to pay the price for unlawful conduct on either side."
However, we need to note too that was exactly what Israel did to Lebanon, making Lebanese civilians including children pay dearly, perhaps even before Hezbollah retaliated.
Earlier, Amnesty had already condemned Israel of committing war crimes by deliberately targeting Lebanon's civilian infrastructure, such as homes, bridges, roads and water and fuel plants. It said that the deliberate destruction of those infrastructures was an ‘integral part’ of Israel's strategy in the recent war.
Kate Gilmore, Executive Deputy Secretary General of Amnesty International declared: "The pattern, scope and scale of the attacks makes Israel's claim that this was 'collateral damage', simply not credible."
The Amnesty document detailed the ‘massive destruction by Israeli forces of whole civilian neighbourhoods and villages’, together with attacks on bridges ‘in areas of no apparent strategic importance’, on its list of supporting evidence.
It also said Israel targeted supermarkets, water pumping stations and water treatment plants, which may have broken a prohibition in humanitarian law against targeting objects crucial to civilian survival.
Incidentally the US did that to Serbia too when it deliberately destroyed the latter's infrastructure. Initially the US bombing had confined itself to military targets only, but when it saw that Serbian resistance was still very strong, it began attacking essential Serbian infrastructure.
The Amnesty report also referred to Israeli statements, like those made by Israeli Chief of Staff Lt Gen Dan Halutz that "nothing is safe [in Lebanon], as simple as that".
I saw on TV how Dan Gillerman, Israeli ambassador to the UN, arrogantly and defiantly responded to accusations that Israel had attacked in ’disproportionate’ fashion. His words (as near as I recall) during the press conference were “You’re damn right we attacked disproportionately.”
In diplomatic parlance, the term ‘disproportionate’ as in ‘attacking with disproportionate force’ means the unjustified over-the-top use of brutal barbaric violence unbefitting that of a civilised nation. It’s a very revulsive label, but the arrogance of Israel, aware that the USA would teflon-ise it, was unbelievable. It's like the Nazi Party retorting: "You're damn right we exterminated the Jews."
Amnesty repeated its call for "a comprehensive, independent and impartial inquiry" by the UN. It said those responsible for civilian suffering were "escaping all accountability".
Ms Khan said: "Justice is urgently needed if respect for the rules of war is ever to be taken seriously."
Undoubtedly if Hassan Nasrallah were to be caught by Israeli soldiers he would be made to stand trial for war crimes, but who is going to arrest Ehud Olmert or George Bush for the most heinous war crimes in recent history?
As I had said, the powerful writes the book and the verdict.
Was the Allied bombing and sheer destruction of the German city of Dresden a war crime? What about Vietnam (with millions slaughtered) and Iraq?
The moral of the story is that the powerful writes the book and thus the verdict.
Flash forward to Lebanon recently.
Amnesty International has accused Hezbollah of acts amounting to war crimes in the conflict with Israel. It said that Hezbollah’s deliberate targeting of civilians with rockets was a serious violation of humanitarian law.
Of course Hezbollah rejected the Amnesty report, accusing it of being an outcome of US and Israeli pressure, which I would say is a bit far fetched. Amnesty doesn't kowtow to anyone.
Hezbollah MP Hassan Fadlallah said Amnesty should analyse the number of civilians killed on each side, before accusing Hezbollah of war crimes. The Israelis destroyed an entire nation with more than a thousand civilians dead, while Hezbollah’s rocket attacks killed around 43 civilians and wounded 33 or so.
But Amnesty retorted that Israel's violations didn’t justify Hezbollah's actions.
It noted that although Hezbollah had said its policy was not to target civilians, its leader Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah subsequently said the policy was changed in reprisal for Israeli attacks on Lebanese civilian areas. Sheikh Nasrallah had said: "As long as the enemy undertakes its aggression without limits or red lines, we will also respond without limits or red lines."
I agree with Amnesty International's Secretary General, Irene Khan, who said: "Civilians must not be made to pay the price for unlawful conduct on either side."
However, we need to note too that was exactly what Israel did to Lebanon, making Lebanese civilians including children pay dearly, perhaps even before Hezbollah retaliated.
Earlier, Amnesty had already condemned Israel of committing war crimes by deliberately targeting Lebanon's civilian infrastructure, such as homes, bridges, roads and water and fuel plants. It said that the deliberate destruction of those infrastructures was an ‘integral part’ of Israel's strategy in the recent war.
Kate Gilmore, Executive Deputy Secretary General of Amnesty International declared: "The pattern, scope and scale of the attacks makes Israel's claim that this was 'collateral damage', simply not credible."
The Amnesty document detailed the ‘massive destruction by Israeli forces of whole civilian neighbourhoods and villages’, together with attacks on bridges ‘in areas of no apparent strategic importance’, on its list of supporting evidence.
It also said Israel targeted supermarkets, water pumping stations and water treatment plants, which may have broken a prohibition in humanitarian law against targeting objects crucial to civilian survival.
Incidentally the US did that to Serbia too when it deliberately destroyed the latter's infrastructure. Initially the US bombing had confined itself to military targets only, but when it saw that Serbian resistance was still very strong, it began attacking essential Serbian infrastructure.
The Amnesty report also referred to Israeli statements, like those made by Israeli Chief of Staff Lt Gen Dan Halutz that "nothing is safe [in Lebanon], as simple as that".
I saw on TV how Dan Gillerman, Israeli ambassador to the UN, arrogantly and defiantly responded to accusations that Israel had attacked in ’disproportionate’ fashion. His words (as near as I recall) during the press conference were “You’re damn right we attacked disproportionately.”
In diplomatic parlance, the term ‘disproportionate’ as in ‘attacking with disproportionate force’ means the unjustified over-the-top use of brutal barbaric violence unbefitting that of a civilised nation. It’s a very revulsive label, but the arrogance of Israel, aware that the USA would teflon-ise it, was unbelievable. It's like the Nazi Party retorting: "You're damn right we exterminated the Jews."
Amnesty repeated its call for "a comprehensive, independent and impartial inquiry" by the UN. It said those responsible for civilian suffering were "escaping all accountability".
Ms Khan said: "Justice is urgently needed if respect for the rules of war is ever to be taken seriously."
Undoubtedly if Hassan Nasrallah were to be caught by Israeli soldiers he would be made to stand trial for war crimes, but who is going to arrest Ehud Olmert or George Bush for the most heinous war crimes in recent history?
As I had said, the powerful writes the book and the verdict.
Hat Yai Bomb Blasts Update
Of the four people killed in Hat Yai, two were foreign tourists – a Canadian man and a female Chinese national.
The wounded has since doubled to 62, including 11 foreigners. At least 7 are Malaysians. They are Chong Ka Chin, Sioh Soo Wai, Tonu Kung Boo San, Chua Mon Khiang, Lok Moon Long, Loke Oui Lan and Rama Chandran.
Police say the bombs exploded almost simultaneously in an area crowded with bars and cafes, as well as at department stores.
The wounded has since doubled to 62, including 11 foreigners. At least 7 are Malaysians. They are Chong Ka Chin, Sioh Soo Wai, Tonu Kung Boo San, Chua Mon Khiang, Lok Moon Long, Loke Oui Lan and Rama Chandran.
Police say the bombs exploded almost simultaneously in an area crowded with bars and cafes, as well as at department stores.
MIC's tak laku letters
Read this Malaysiakini report and weep twice – once for poor S Subramaniam’s medical problem, and a second time for him for being given the bullsh*t runaround by the MIC.
********
The world came crashing down on S Subramaniam, 45 and unemployed, when he was diagnosed with a tumour on his right kidney in early June. But he saw a glimmer of hope when friends told him that MIC leaders gave financial aid to worthy cases.
After seeking advice from the MIC headquarters, he headed for the office of party deputy president G Palanivel who is also women and family development minister which oversees the Welfare Department.
That was when he met Palanivel’s private secretary, Dr Vijay Shanmugam, who listened to his plight and subsequently issued a letter of appeal to the hospital concerned to waive Subramaniam’s medical bills which was about RM2,000.
“Dr Vijay told me that I needn’t worry, as the letter would settle everything,” said Subramaniam (right), a former lorry driver.
Back at the hospital, Subramaniam was met with a rude shock when admissions staff refused to entertain the letter and demanded a RM1,000 deposit for his treatment, despite his repeated pleas.
“I was told that the MIC issue these letters all the time and that they were tidak laku (worthless),” he said, adding that he spent the whole day at the hospital as he was given the run-around to meet various admission department officers.
“I have a tumour in my kidney and doctors said it would leak anytime. But eventually, they sent me away. I was humiliated and embarrassed. If it wasn’t for that letter and assurance that I don’t have to foot the bill, I would have found ways to finance the operation,” he added.
Eventually, Subramaniam sought a guarantee letter from the Employees Provident Fund which agreed to release enough funds for his medical bills and had the kidney removed on Aug 3.
But this was not before having sought Vijay's help again, who issued another letter, this time urging the Hulu Langat Social Welfare Department to provide supporting documents for the medical bill waiver.
Even the department’s letters, was met with the same response from the hospital, said Subramaniam.
“If government institutions, such as hospitals, do not accept these letters, why is the deputy minister’s office issuing them? They have done me more harm than good,” said an upset Subramaniam, who had to travel from Semenyih to Kuala Lumpur frequently by public transport during the three-month ordeal.
Repeated attempts yesterday and today to contact Vijay at his office were futile.
Two opposition leaders known for their grassroots activities said such letters often give false hope to the lesser informed members of society.
Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR) vice youth chief S Manikavasagam said Subramaniam’s cases was not isolated as he has in possession plenty of ‘endorsement letters’ signed by top MIC leaders which did not solve anything.
“Take for example the letters by (MIC president) Samy Vellu which asked local authorities to stop demolition of Hindu temple. Not even one worked,” he said.
********
What can we say about the new leaders in MIC? I suppose it's the same old same old.
********
The world came crashing down on S Subramaniam, 45 and unemployed, when he was diagnosed with a tumour on his right kidney in early June. But he saw a glimmer of hope when friends told him that MIC leaders gave financial aid to worthy cases.
After seeking advice from the MIC headquarters, he headed for the office of party deputy president G Palanivel who is also women and family development minister which oversees the Welfare Department.
That was when he met Palanivel’s private secretary, Dr Vijay Shanmugam, who listened to his plight and subsequently issued a letter of appeal to the hospital concerned to waive Subramaniam’s medical bills which was about RM2,000.
“Dr Vijay told me that I needn’t worry, as the letter would settle everything,” said Subramaniam (right), a former lorry driver.
Back at the hospital, Subramaniam was met with a rude shock when admissions staff refused to entertain the letter and demanded a RM1,000 deposit for his treatment, despite his repeated pleas.
“I was told that the MIC issue these letters all the time and that they were tidak laku (worthless),” he said, adding that he spent the whole day at the hospital as he was given the run-around to meet various admission department officers.
“I have a tumour in my kidney and doctors said it would leak anytime. But eventually, they sent me away. I was humiliated and embarrassed. If it wasn’t for that letter and assurance that I don’t have to foot the bill, I would have found ways to finance the operation,” he added.
Eventually, Subramaniam sought a guarantee letter from the Employees Provident Fund which agreed to release enough funds for his medical bills and had the kidney removed on Aug 3.
But this was not before having sought Vijay's help again, who issued another letter, this time urging the Hulu Langat Social Welfare Department to provide supporting documents for the medical bill waiver.
Even the department’s letters, was met with the same response from the hospital, said Subramaniam.
“If government institutions, such as hospitals, do not accept these letters, why is the deputy minister’s office issuing them? They have done me more harm than good,” said an upset Subramaniam, who had to travel from Semenyih to Kuala Lumpur frequently by public transport during the three-month ordeal.
Repeated attempts yesterday and today to contact Vijay at his office were futile.
Two opposition leaders known for their grassroots activities said such letters often give false hope to the lesser informed members of society.
Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR) vice youth chief S Manikavasagam said Subramaniam’s cases was not isolated as he has in possession plenty of ‘endorsement letters’ signed by top MIC leaders which did not solve anything.
“Take for example the letters by (MIC president) Samy Vellu which asked local authorities to stop demolition of Hindu temple. Not even one worked,” he said.
********
What can we say about the new leaders in MIC? I suppose it's the same old same old.
Malaysian Killed in S Thailand & Hat Yai Bomb Blasts
Yesterday evening, after a peace rally in south Thailand organised by the Thai military to promote peaceful coexistence, bomb blasts occurred in three department stores in the Hat Yai business district. The places attacked were the Odean, Lee Garden and Big C stores.
Four people were killed with around 30 wounded. Unlike the Middle Easten problems, the bombs were planted on motorbikes instead of cars.
I hope no Malaysian was affected, as Hat Yai is very popular with our northern folks in Penang, Kedah and Perlis who would regularly nipped across the broder for cheap and delicious Thai food and shopping of … er … various kinds.
Thai authorities blamed separatist insurgents for the attack. Since 2004, the separatists have waged an insurrection that has killed at least 1,700, most of them civilians.
Meanwhile, in a separate incident a Malaysian was killed in the Thai village of Kampung Kokje in Tak Bai, Narathiwat. An unkown gunman shot Che Ayub Yaakup, a fisheries officer, from Lubuk Kawah in Bachok. His Thai penghulu friend was also among the four people killed in the shooting.
IGP Musa Hassan said although Che Ayub was a civil servant, his trip to southern Thailand was a private trip, and the killing was an isolated case. But he advised that people intending to visit southern Thailand have to exercise caution.
Four people were killed with around 30 wounded. Unlike the Middle Easten problems, the bombs were planted on motorbikes instead of cars.
I hope no Malaysian was affected, as Hat Yai is very popular with our northern folks in Penang, Kedah and Perlis who would regularly nipped across the broder for cheap and delicious Thai food and shopping of … er … various kinds.
Thai authorities blamed separatist insurgents for the attack. Since 2004, the separatists have waged an insurrection that has killed at least 1,700, most of them civilians.
Meanwhile, in a separate incident a Malaysian was killed in the Thai village of Kampung Kokje in Tak Bai, Narathiwat. An unkown gunman shot Che Ayub Yaakup, a fisheries officer, from Lubuk Kawah in Bachok. His Thai penghulu friend was also among the four people killed in the shooting.
IGP Musa Hassan said although Che Ayub was a civil servant, his trip to southern Thailand was a private trip, and the killing was an isolated case. But he advised that people intending to visit southern Thailand have to exercise caution.
Saturday, September 16, 2006
Pope says sorry
From the ABC Online:
The Vatican says Pope Benedict XVI is "extremely sorry" for offending Muslims with a speech he made on Thursday.
The comments he made in Germany have sparked outrage across the Muslim world.
In his speech, the Pope quoted a 14th century Christian emperor, who said everything Prophet Mohammad brought was "evil and "inhuman", "such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached".
He also said "violence is incompatible with the nature of God and the nature of the soul" in the oration, in which he used the terms "jihad" and "holy war".
The Vatican's new Secretary of State, Tarcisio Bertone today said: "The Holy Father is extremely sorry that certain passages of his speech appeared offensive to Muslim believers and were interpreted in a way that does not correspond in any way to his intentions".
"The Pope is unequivocally in favour of dialogue between religions and cultures," he said.
He says the pontiff respects believers in Islam and hopes they will understand the true sense of his speech.
There had been widespread calls from political circles in Islamic countries for Pope Benedict to issue an apology.
In Turkey, the country the Pope is due to visit in November, a senior religious figure said the Pope should reconsider his trip for his own safety.
I hope the issue is now put to rest! Here is the hallmark of a great man who is not afraid to say that 'S' word.
The Vatican says Pope Benedict XVI is "extremely sorry" for offending Muslims with a speech he made on Thursday.
The comments he made in Germany have sparked outrage across the Muslim world.
In his speech, the Pope quoted a 14th century Christian emperor, who said everything Prophet Mohammad brought was "evil and "inhuman", "such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached".
He also said "violence is incompatible with the nature of God and the nature of the soul" in the oration, in which he used the terms "jihad" and "holy war".
The Vatican's new Secretary of State, Tarcisio Bertone today said: "The Holy Father is extremely sorry that certain passages of his speech appeared offensive to Muslim believers and were interpreted in a way that does not correspond in any way to his intentions".
"The Pope is unequivocally in favour of dialogue between religions and cultures," he said.
He says the pontiff respects believers in Islam and hopes they will understand the true sense of his speech.
There had been widespread calls from political circles in Islamic countries for Pope Benedict to issue an apology.
In Turkey, the country the Pope is due to visit in November, a senior religious figure said the Pope should reconsider his trip for his own safety.
I hope the issue is now put to rest! Here is the hallmark of a great man who is not afraid to say that 'S' word.
Why Pope Benedict said it
It seems that Pope Benedict has ideas of doing what his predecessor did – no, not building bridges but taking sides in an ideological war.
The previous head of the Catholic Church, John Paul II with his Polish background, saw it as his mission to crusade against the godless communism. He took sides in that war, with such fervour that the Kremlin of the old USSR saw it necessary to launch a (failed) assassination attempt against him.
Pope Benedict thought he wanted to do likewise, taking sides in the Western world’s declared war against terrorism, which in the minds of the West, has been instituted by mainly Islamic states or groups.
His address on Tuesday at a German university, where he taught theology, have been interpreted by many experts in interfaith relations as a signal that the Vatican is now assuming a new and more demanding stance for its dealings with the Muslim world.
They said that Pope Benedict appears to believe that the West's confrontation with radical Islam as a fateful moment in history that demands the Vatican's moral authority, in the same way as his predecessor reshaped the Church’s stance by openly taking sides in the Cold War.
Unfortunately, by needlessly quoting a medieval statement by a Christian Emperor, Manuel II Palaeologus, his message has now been received by the Muslim world as the Vatican actively participating in a broader Western cultural and political campaign against Islam.
Reader xpyred was annoyed that the Pope's speech has been taken out of context. He(?) said: "If people have actually read and understood what he was saying, they'd know that he was actually making a huge, massive attack on post-Enlightenment rationality, which prizes a certain view of human ends devoid of any considerations of religion. Also, he makes an attack on the view of the divine devoid from reason. There's just so much more that he says that make those quotes sensible in the context in which they are said."
I think ;-) that xpyred meant the Pope's speech postulated that today's people take drastic actions without bearing in mind the sacred teachings of religion, and then one shouldn't use religion without reason, as in perpetrating acts of killing in the name of religion.
I am sure that would be something everyone would agree to, especially victims of Islamist and Tamil Tigers' suicide bombings or those of US-Israeli hi-tech wanton massacres.
However, John Voll, director of the Centre for Muslim-Christian Understanding at Georgetown University in Washington analysed the papal speech as also reflecting deep dismay over the current conditions of Christians in the Middle East and the rest of the Muslim world.
Voll said Pope Benedict intends to ‘distinguish himself from his predecessor on his approach to interfaith dialogue’. He wants more reciprocity, meaning that it’s not just going to be all give and no take. Voll predicted that the Pope may now instruct Vatican envoys to stress more forcefully on issues of forced conversions of Christians and limits on Christian rights and worship.
Meanwhile, and predictably, PM AAB, also as Chair of the OIC, has demanded that the Pope apologises and withdraws his remarks.
AAB said: "The Pope must not take lightly the spread of outrage that has been created. The Vatican must now take full responsibility over the matter and carry out the necessary steps to rectify the mistake."
"It is unfortunate that such an eminent figure like the Pope has not shown leadership in promoting good relations between religions. Instead, his statement has had the effect of sowing more seeds of discord and will not be conducive for dialogue among religions."
Related:
Pope Benedict Shattered Glass House & Goodwill
The previous head of the Catholic Church, John Paul II with his Polish background, saw it as his mission to crusade against the godless communism. He took sides in that war, with such fervour that the Kremlin of the old USSR saw it necessary to launch a (failed) assassination attempt against him.
Pope Benedict thought he wanted to do likewise, taking sides in the Western world’s declared war against terrorism, which in the minds of the West, has been instituted by mainly Islamic states or groups.
His address on Tuesday at a German university, where he taught theology, have been interpreted by many experts in interfaith relations as a signal that the Vatican is now assuming a new and more demanding stance for its dealings with the Muslim world.
They said that Pope Benedict appears to believe that the West's confrontation with radical Islam as a fateful moment in history that demands the Vatican's moral authority, in the same way as his predecessor reshaped the Church’s stance by openly taking sides in the Cold War.
Unfortunately, by needlessly quoting a medieval statement by a Christian Emperor, Manuel II Palaeologus, his message has now been received by the Muslim world as the Vatican actively participating in a broader Western cultural and political campaign against Islam.
Reader xpyred was annoyed that the Pope's speech has been taken out of context. He(?) said: "If people have actually read and understood what he was saying, they'd know that he was actually making a huge, massive attack on post-Enlightenment rationality, which prizes a certain view of human ends devoid of any considerations of religion. Also, he makes an attack on the view of the divine devoid from reason. There's just so much more that he says that make those quotes sensible in the context in which they are said."
I think ;-) that xpyred meant the Pope's speech postulated that today's people take drastic actions without bearing in mind the sacred teachings of religion, and then one shouldn't use religion without reason, as in perpetrating acts of killing in the name of religion.
I am sure that would be something everyone would agree to, especially victims of Islamist and Tamil Tigers' suicide bombings or those of US-Israeli hi-tech wanton massacres.
However, John Voll, director of the Centre for Muslim-Christian Understanding at Georgetown University in Washington analysed the papal speech as also reflecting deep dismay over the current conditions of Christians in the Middle East and the rest of the Muslim world.
Voll said Pope Benedict intends to ‘distinguish himself from his predecessor on his approach to interfaith dialogue’. He wants more reciprocity, meaning that it’s not just going to be all give and no take. Voll predicted that the Pope may now instruct Vatican envoys to stress more forcefully on issues of forced conversions of Christians and limits on Christian rights and worship.
Meanwhile, and predictably, PM AAB, also as Chair of the OIC, has demanded that the Pope apologises and withdraws his remarks.
AAB said: "The Pope must not take lightly the spread of outrage that has been created. The Vatican must now take full responsibility over the matter and carry out the necessary steps to rectify the mistake."
"It is unfortunate that such an eminent figure like the Pope has not shown leadership in promoting good relations between religions. Instead, his statement has had the effect of sowing more seeds of discord and will not be conducive for dialogue among religions."
Related:
Pope Benedict Shattered Glass House & Goodwill
Najib's facts, principles, goose & gander
Barisan Nasional (non-UMNO) members have been questioning the Cabinet’s decision to reprimand Deputy Higher Education Ong Tee Keat for alleging officials' misuse of funds meant for Chinese schools' refurbishment, while ignoring UMNO Youth leaders' criticism of Penang Chief Minister Koh Tsu Koon for allegedly neglecting issues concerning the Malays in the state.
But DPM Najib said the decision was made as a matter of principle. The Cabinet arrived at that decision in the presence of all BN component party heads.
"... in the presence of all ..." but was the decision unanimous?
He doesn’t want any more discussion on that issue. He averred that while Ong’s case was a matter of principle for the government, the others, referring to UMNO Youth leaders criticising Koh, was politics.
It’s also significant that Najib had earlier conceded that the criticism against Ong was made at the procedural level, that a deputy minister cannot criticise a different ministry, and not based on facts (of Ong’s allegation). He said the ‘facts’ would be a different issue.
He stated: “I don’t want to talk about facts, that’s another issue. But as a matter of principle, deputy ministers and ministers, except the prime minister and deputy prime minister, must look (at issues) under their own jurisdiction and not touch on other ministries.”
So, based on the above, principle requires the Cabinet to reprimand Ong regardless of whether his allegations were factual (they don’t want to know about that), but not when UMNO members criticised non-UMNO BN leaders.
Principle - now you see it, now you don't!
And of course, whilst Najib may not want to go into the ‘facts’ of Ong’s allegation, we do, oh yes, we do.
But DPM Najib said the decision was made as a matter of principle. The Cabinet arrived at that decision in the presence of all BN component party heads.
"... in the presence of all ..." but was the decision unanimous?
He doesn’t want any more discussion on that issue. He averred that while Ong’s case was a matter of principle for the government, the others, referring to UMNO Youth leaders criticising Koh, was politics.
It’s also significant that Najib had earlier conceded that the criticism against Ong was made at the procedural level, that a deputy minister cannot criticise a different ministry, and not based on facts (of Ong’s allegation). He said the ‘facts’ would be a different issue.
He stated: “I don’t want to talk about facts, that’s another issue. But as a matter of principle, deputy ministers and ministers, except the prime minister and deputy prime minister, must look (at issues) under their own jurisdiction and not touch on other ministries.”
So, based on the above, principle requires the Cabinet to reprimand Ong regardless of whether his allegations were factual (they don’t want to know about that), but not when UMNO members criticised non-UMNO BN leaders.
Principle - now you see it, now you don't!
And of course, whilst Najib may not want to go into the ‘facts’ of Ong’s allegation, we do, oh yes, we do.
Pope Benedict Shattered Glass House & Goodwill
The previous Pope, before he passed away, was a man who made serious attempts to bridge the ideological gaps between faiths. He did much to heal the centuries-old hostility and suspicion between the Roman Catholic Church and Judaism, Islam and the Orthodox Church. The world of faith improved that bit more under his leadership and open heartedness.
But his successor, Pope Benedict, has gone the other way, stomping on toes. I wonder whether it’s a reflection of his Teutonic heritage.
Just this week, Pope Benedict in delivering a speech at Regensburg University in his homeland quoted, for whatever reason still unexplained, a 14th-century Byzantine emperor as saying: "Show me just what Muhammad brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached."
Even though that was all he said about Islam in his speech, at the end of which he did state that reason could be the basis for ‘that genuine dialogue of cultures and religions so urgently needed today’, it was too little too late, for the hurt was done.
Pope Benedict subsequently admitted that what he later had said were ‘brusque’ words about Islam.
Predictably, the Muslim world is in an uproar about the Pope’s insult to the prophet Mohamad (pbuh) and his teachings of Islam, despite a Vatican spokesman hastily attempting to institute PR damage control, averring that ‘it certainly wasn't the intention of the Pope to carry out a deep examination of jihad [holy war] and on Muslim thought on it, much less to offend the sensibility of Muslim believers.’
Ali Bardakoglu, a cleric who is head of the Turkish Government's directorate of religious affairs, commented on the Pope’s coming visit to Turkey: “I do not think any good will come from the visit to the Muslim world of a person who has such ideas about Islam's prophet. He should first of all replace the grudge in his heart with moral values and respect for the other."
Aiman Mazyek, president of the Central Council of Muslims in Germany, told the German press that the Pope should recall the episodes of the Crusades, the Spanish Inquisition and the Vatican's relations with Nazi Germany, before badmouthing Islam’s prophet.
Ouch, ouch & ouch! A lesson for us that people who lived in glass houses shouldn't throw stones!
I am also glad that Aiman Mazyek employed an intellectual approach to smash the Pope's hurtful statement than for Muslims to take to the streets burning this and that, like they are the aggressors rather than the victims of religious bias and insensitivities.
Given those ‘things only evil and inhuman’ perpetrated by the Roman Catholic Church, maybe the Pope shouldn't be pointing any finger at extremist activities in other religions. But in the final analysis, with just one thoughtless sentence that quoted a medieval Christian statement, he has effectively destroyed the good work of his predecessor.
But why in the world did he choose to quote the biased opinion of a 14th-century Byzantine emperor, who was no better nor more enlightened than any people of that era?
Only God knows!
But his successor, Pope Benedict, has gone the other way, stomping on toes. I wonder whether it’s a reflection of his Teutonic heritage.
Just this week, Pope Benedict in delivering a speech at Regensburg University in his homeland quoted, for whatever reason still unexplained, a 14th-century Byzantine emperor as saying: "Show me just what Muhammad brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached."
Even though that was all he said about Islam in his speech, at the end of which he did state that reason could be the basis for ‘that genuine dialogue of cultures and religions so urgently needed today’, it was too little too late, for the hurt was done.
Pope Benedict subsequently admitted that what he later had said were ‘brusque’ words about Islam.
Predictably, the Muslim world is in an uproar about the Pope’s insult to the prophet Mohamad (pbuh) and his teachings of Islam, despite a Vatican spokesman hastily attempting to institute PR damage control, averring that ‘it certainly wasn't the intention of the Pope to carry out a deep examination of jihad [holy war] and on Muslim thought on it, much less to offend the sensibility of Muslim believers.’
Ali Bardakoglu, a cleric who is head of the Turkish Government's directorate of religious affairs, commented on the Pope’s coming visit to Turkey: “I do not think any good will come from the visit to the Muslim world of a person who has such ideas about Islam's prophet. He should first of all replace the grudge in his heart with moral values and respect for the other."
Aiman Mazyek, president of the Central Council of Muslims in Germany, told the German press that the Pope should recall the episodes of the Crusades, the Spanish Inquisition and the Vatican's relations with Nazi Germany, before badmouthing Islam’s prophet.
Ouch, ouch & ouch! A lesson for us that people who lived in glass houses shouldn't throw stones!
I am also glad that Aiman Mazyek employed an intellectual approach to smash the Pope's hurtful statement than for Muslims to take to the streets burning this and that, like they are the aggressors rather than the victims of religious bias and insensitivities.
Given those ‘things only evil and inhuman’ perpetrated by the Roman Catholic Church, maybe the Pope shouldn't be pointing any finger at extremist activities in other religions. But in the final analysis, with just one thoughtless sentence that quoted a medieval Christian statement, he has effectively destroyed the good work of his predecessor.
But why in the world did he choose to quote the biased opinion of a 14th-century Byzantine emperor, who was no better nor more enlightened than any people of that era?
Only God knows!
Friday, September 15, 2006
Siapa Yang Biadap?
There's a new bimonthly tabloid in town, called Putra Post. It's run by Gen-M, the support group for Dr Mahathir.
An extract from Malaysiakini, which reported on Putra Post's debut:
The article then said that Umno leadership “has treated Mahathir far worst than the opposition ever did”, and that Mahathir has been turned into a ‘pariah’.
The Post’s opinion piece on page 10 focussed on Umno deputy youth chief Khairy Jamaluddin’s statement at the Umno Youth Tangga division meeting where Khairy reportedly told members to be wary of ‘traitors from within’.
“Khairy needs to reveal to Umno or the Malays just who these traitors are ... As politicians, don’t hide behind the title of deputy youth chief and son-in-law of Umno president. If transparency is desired, then expose the story to its entirety.”
The piece, entitled “Siapa pengkhianat dan siapa api dalam sekam?” (Who is the traitor and who is the fire in the husk?), said that Khairy “should show more respect to the elders as they have enough asam garam (experience) to lead Umno”.
I read in the UndurLAH blog that Khairy alluded to Dr Mahathir as an 'ape'. The new blog said that AAB has failed to act against his son-in-law who hinted that Mahathir was an ape.
Here's a young 31-year old UMNO novice, who parachuted into power through a marriage, insulting the former president of the political party, a man who led both his party and the nation for 22 years, as a simian. Even the chief opposition party, the DAP doesn't do that.
An extract from Malaysiakini, which reported on Putra Post's debut:
The article then said that Umno leadership “has treated Mahathir far worst than the opposition ever did”, and that Mahathir has been turned into a ‘pariah’.
The Post’s opinion piece on page 10 focussed on Umno deputy youth chief Khairy Jamaluddin’s statement at the Umno Youth Tangga division meeting where Khairy reportedly told members to be wary of ‘traitors from within’.
“Khairy needs to reveal to Umno or the Malays just who these traitors are ... As politicians, don’t hide behind the title of deputy youth chief and son-in-law of Umno president. If transparency is desired, then expose the story to its entirety.”
The piece, entitled “Siapa pengkhianat dan siapa api dalam sekam?” (Who is the traitor and who is the fire in the husk?), said that Khairy “should show more respect to the elders as they have enough asam garam (experience) to lead Umno”.
I read in the UndurLAH blog that Khairy alluded to Dr Mahathir as an 'ape'. The new blog said that AAB has failed to act against his son-in-law who hinted that Mahathir was an ape.
Here's a young 31-year old UMNO novice, who parachuted into power through a marriage, insulting the former president of the political party, a man who led both his party and the nation for 22 years, as a simian. Even the chief opposition party, the DAP doesn't do that.
WMD Lies - Version II
Extracted from a SMH news item, sourced to Reuters and the Washington Post, with the first two paragraphs re-positioned by KTemoc for context:
********
The IAEA had openly clashed with the Bush Administration on pre-war assessments of alleged weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Relations all but collapsed when the agency revealed that the White House had based some allegations about an Iraqi nuclear program on forged documents.
After no weapons of mass destruction were found in Iraq, the agency came under criticism for taking a cautious approach on Iran, which the White House says is trying to build nuclear weapons in secret. At one point, the Administration orchestrated a failed campaign to remove the agency's director, Mohamed ElBaradei.
Today:
United Nations inspectors investigating Iran's nuclear program have angrily complained to the Bush Administration and a Republican congressman about a report on Iran's capabilities, calling parts of the document "outrageous and dishonest".
International Atomic Energy Agency officials, who produced evidence to refute the report's main claims, said in a letter on Wednesday that the report contained "erroneous, misleading and unsubstantiated statements".
The letter, signed by a senior director at the agency, was addressed to Peter Hoekstra, the chairman of the House of Representatives intelligence committee, which issued the report. A copy also was hand-delivered to Gregory Schulte, the US ambassador to the IAEA in Vienna.
The agency noted five significant errors in the committee's report, which claimed Iran's nuclear capabilities were more advanced than either the agency or US intelligence had shown.
The report said Iran was producing weapons-grade uranium. The IAEA called that "incorrect", noting that weapons-grade uranium is enriched to a level of at least 90 per cent; Iran had enriched uranium to 3.5 per cent, and done so under agency monitoring.
The UN letter surfaced as the Iranian President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, said he was open to new conditions to resolve Tehran's standoff with the West over its nuclear program and believed talks could end the dispute.
"I am announcing that we are available, we are ready for new conditions," Mr Ahmadinejad said yesterday, before leaving for a Non-Aligned Movement summit in Cuba.
Several intelligence officers privately said the report included at least a dozen claims that were either demonstrably wrong or impossible to substantiate.
"This is like prewar Iraq all over again," said David Albright, a former nuclear inspector who is president of the Washington-based Institute for Science and International Security. "You have an Iranian nuclear threat that is spun up, using bad information that's cherrypicked, and a report that trashes the inspectors."
The report's author, Fredrick Fleitz, is a one-time CIA officer who had been a special assistant to John Bolton, the Administration's former point man on Iran at the State Department. Mr Bolton, now US ambassador to the United Nations, had been highly influential during President George Bush's first term in crafting a policy that rejected talks with Tehran.
Also read the article John Bolton's Yellowcake to see teh nefarious activities of John Bolton and his aide Fredrick Fleitz.
That's how Washington chickenhawks like Bolton and Vice President Cheney, who themselves craftily avoided the draft for Vietnam, send young Americans to die in other wars in distant lands.
********
The IAEA had openly clashed with the Bush Administration on pre-war assessments of alleged weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Relations all but collapsed when the agency revealed that the White House had based some allegations about an Iraqi nuclear program on forged documents.
After no weapons of mass destruction were found in Iraq, the agency came under criticism for taking a cautious approach on Iran, which the White House says is trying to build nuclear weapons in secret. At one point, the Administration orchestrated a failed campaign to remove the agency's director, Mohamed ElBaradei.
Today:
United Nations inspectors investigating Iran's nuclear program have angrily complained to the Bush Administration and a Republican congressman about a report on Iran's capabilities, calling parts of the document "outrageous and dishonest".
International Atomic Energy Agency officials, who produced evidence to refute the report's main claims, said in a letter on Wednesday that the report contained "erroneous, misleading and unsubstantiated statements".
The letter, signed by a senior director at the agency, was addressed to Peter Hoekstra, the chairman of the House of Representatives intelligence committee, which issued the report. A copy also was hand-delivered to Gregory Schulte, the US ambassador to the IAEA in Vienna.
The agency noted five significant errors in the committee's report, which claimed Iran's nuclear capabilities were more advanced than either the agency or US intelligence had shown.
The report said Iran was producing weapons-grade uranium. The IAEA called that "incorrect", noting that weapons-grade uranium is enriched to a level of at least 90 per cent; Iran had enriched uranium to 3.5 per cent, and done so under agency monitoring.
The UN letter surfaced as the Iranian President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, said he was open to new conditions to resolve Tehran's standoff with the West over its nuclear program and believed talks could end the dispute.
"I am announcing that we are available, we are ready for new conditions," Mr Ahmadinejad said yesterday, before leaving for a Non-Aligned Movement summit in Cuba.
Several intelligence officers privately said the report included at least a dozen claims that were either demonstrably wrong or impossible to substantiate.
"This is like prewar Iraq all over again," said David Albright, a former nuclear inspector who is president of the Washington-based Institute for Science and International Security. "You have an Iranian nuclear threat that is spun up, using bad information that's cherrypicked, and a report that trashes the inspectors."
The report's author, Fredrick Fleitz, is a one-time CIA officer who had been a special assistant to John Bolton, the Administration's former point man on Iran at the State Department. Mr Bolton, now US ambassador to the United Nations, had been highly influential during President George Bush's first term in crafting a policy that rejected talks with Tehran.
Also read the article John Bolton's Yellowcake to see teh nefarious activities of John Bolton and his aide Fredrick Fleitz.
That's how Washington chickenhawks like Bolton and Vice President Cheney, who themselves craftily avoided the draft for Vietnam, send young Americans to die in other wars in distant lands.
Thursday, September 14, 2006
BTN - Put up or shut up
ASA (Asian Students Association) regional secretary Lee Khai Loon who is based in Kuala Lumpur challenged Biro Tatanegara (BTN) to show proof that American and Jewish elements were sponsoring certain student groups in local varsities, and meet with ASA representatives face to face.
Meanwhile, Kong Wee Cheng, international affairs secretary of Dema, one of the student group accused of being funded by Jews, asked a pertinent question - why were students attending the seminar warned not to record or snap photographs of the proceedings if BTN has nothing to hide?
He said BTN had bullsh*ted (Ktemoc’s word but which conveys his intended meaning) with the aim of creating tensions between students of different races by provocatively manufacturing a schism between Jews/Chinese students and Muslim students.
Well, we all know that whenever UMNO has internal trouble, there’s nothing like a jolly spot of Chinese-bashing to unify the Malay voters and UMNO supporters behind the party. Khairy did it, the Penang UMNO had done it, and now Hishamuddin is locking horns with a couple of MCA leaders.
USMPBT chairperson Loo Chuan Boon said this is not the first time USM authorities have tried to badmouth his society. There were also unfounded allegations made against the society during the university’s orientation week in July.
He did question USM deputy vice-chancellor (student affairs division) Dr Jamaludin Mohaiadin over the allegations during a meeting early this year. Loo said of Dr Jamaludin: "He avoided our question by saying let bygones be bygones."
Well, obviously he has not.
Loo said that USMPBT received its funding through Chinese guilds and associations and fund-raising programmes.
Chinese guilds? Maybe Chinese Jewish guilds?
Meanwhile, Kong Wee Cheng, international affairs secretary of Dema, one of the student group accused of being funded by Jews, asked a pertinent question - why were students attending the seminar warned not to record or snap photographs of the proceedings if BTN has nothing to hide?
He said BTN had bullsh*ted (Ktemoc’s word but which conveys his intended meaning) with the aim of creating tensions between students of different races by provocatively manufacturing a schism between Jews/Chinese students and Muslim students.
Well, we all know that whenever UMNO has internal trouble, there’s nothing like a jolly spot of Chinese-bashing to unify the Malay voters and UMNO supporters behind the party. Khairy did it, the Penang UMNO had done it, and now Hishamuddin is locking horns with a couple of MCA leaders.
USMPBT chairperson Loo Chuan Boon said this is not the first time USM authorities have tried to badmouth his society. There were also unfounded allegations made against the society during the university’s orientation week in July.
He did question USM deputy vice-chancellor (student affairs division) Dr Jamaludin Mohaiadin over the allegations during a meeting early this year. Loo said of Dr Jamaludin: "He avoided our question by saying let bygones be bygones."
Well, obviously he has not.
Loo said that USMPBT received its funding through Chinese guilds and associations and fund-raising programmes.
Chinese guilds? Maybe Chinese Jewish guilds?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)