Saturday, September 20, 2014

PAS - what could have been!

Extracts of TMI's The two sides of PAS


Take a bow, Hanipa Maidin, Mohd Sany Abdullah, Wan Kharizal Wan Khazim and their ilk.

These men refused to be cowed into silence or beaten into submission by the boos, walkouts and thuggish behaviour by a segment of delegates at the PAS muktamar this week.

They urged their party men to think carefully before accepting the position of menteri besar of Selangor, pointing out that it would betrayal of trust of their Pakatan Rakyat (PR) allies, not to mention setting in motion the demise of the coalition.

The most erudite of the lot was Hanipa, the party's legal chief and perhaps the one individual who should be an example for Malaysians in this period of bullying and intimidation.

It would have been much easier and rewarding for him to have stuck to the party line offered by Datuk Seri Abdul Hadi Awang and the hardliners. But no, he did not choose the easy way out.

Anecdotal evidence suggests that he has stood up to the hardliners in meetings as the crisis over the Selangor MB's position escalated. For more, read the TMI news article, linked above.


Eight and a half years ago I took notice of Mohamad Hanipa Maidin.


In 2006, then-PAS Youth Information Chief Hanipa Maidin came in from the left field when he condemned the Arab model as unsuitable for democracy and modern civilization.

Undoubtedly that condemnation would have been startling for the PAS Arab-philes. It must have been terribly shocking for them to hear one of the party's top Youth leaders declare that Arabs had shown a detestable example, resulting in a negative image of democracy and Islam.

Hanipa declared that the awful Arab archetype had unfairly dragged other Muslims down into the gutter with them. He deduced, quite correctly, that the West perceived (still does) all Muslims through that detestable Arabic prism.

He even blamed the Arab behaviour as the cause for the Europeans deliberately publishing the offensive caricatures on Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). Though I did then see his point, I had reckoned his analysis of the cause for Europe insensitively publishing the caricatures might have been a wee over the top.

I had greater suspicions that the ultra Zionists did that, to wit, sponsoring or instigating the publishing of the offensive caricatures on Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), so as to deliberately inflame the easily provoked Arabs in Europe to go on a muddle-headed self-destructive rampage (in Europe) which would frighten, offend and disgust their European benefactors into stopping their annual aid of nearly one billion Euro to the Palestinian Authority.

And sadly, for those stupid lame-headed European Arabs, the Zionists succeeded on this score. The Palestinians suffered, the Zionists and Israeli government were overjoyed.

Anyway, Hanipa didn't stop there and went on to attribute the phenomenon of the terrorist group al-Qaeda to the undemocratic practices of Arab leaders. He was spot on in this assertion, though he neglected to mention that those undemocratic Arab leaders were all (still are) propped up by the USA for the latter's own interests.

Indeed, currently it’s quite painful and very annoying to see those stupid Yanks support Saudi Arabia (for oil of course) while preparing to fight ISIL and (unfortunately) dragging Australia in AGAIN to join in a senseless battle in the Middle-East, but ignoring or 'acting dunno' (closing an eye) to the reality that today’s turbulent violence by ISIL terrorist elements in the Middle East has been directed and financed by Saudi Arabia.

It’s basically a war fermented by the rich Arab state to disrupt, diminish and where possible, destroy Shia influence in the region (Iran, Iraq, etc). For more, read the PressTV news report which informs that ISIL militants confess to direct Saudi links.

Back to our local hero, Hanipa Maidin - Obviously Hanipa had then started (or attempted) to move PAS away from the ultra-conservative right (for Malays-Muslims-only), and its low class brand of campaigning a la the blasphemous 'ticket to heaven' promotion prior to the 2004 general election. His attempted direction for his party appeared to be a more centrist Islamic democracy.

Then I was unclear of what Hanipa had in mind though I had hopefully visualized PAS new politico-religious ideology as one promoting and merging together the noble values of Islam and democracy, and returning to a gold standard a la the enlightened, knowledgeable and tolerant golden age of Islam during the acme of Islamic civilization, but within the practical reality of a modern 21st Century multiethnic multicultural Malaysian civilization.

I though how exciting that would be as it would make PAS more palatable to the non-Muslims and thus a viable alternative to UMNO, and enhance the Islamic party's 2008 campaigning as Malaysians were getting impatient with Ahmad Abdullah Badawi's non-functioning Islam Hadhari.

Hanipa Maidin, Mat Sabu, Nizar Jamaluddin, and the PAS Erdogens – a new breed of Muslim pollies for all Malaysians.

But I had then wondered too whether Hanipa was merely acting on his own accord (or his Erdogen group's accord) as he had radically sembelih (ritually slaughtered) the sacred ‘Arab’ camel, which in itself was a blasphemous act within the Arab-philic PAS.

Anyway, then to further show his democratic credentials and at the same time jab sideways at UMNO's ribs, Hanipa said PAS would not agree to use the Internal Security Act (ISA) against those who published the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) caricatures because the security law was wicked. He said: “Those who insult the prophet are definitely wicked but the ISA is worse and it is a law that has been abused.” 

I admired Hanipa for showing his cool on this lamentable caricature issue instead of behaving moronically like those Arabs who were wont to take to the streets to uselessly burn tires, effigies and Israeli-American flags, or if they had rifles, shoot meaninglessly into the air (wasting bullets for gaya only).

But I did wonder how many PAS leaders had agreed to his cool-headed wisdom?

And then in an amazing show of humility and frankness, Hanipa stated that Muslims in this country should also not assume that all of PAS actions were right, but they need to understand that PAS was a political organization, and sometimes would be forced to act according to its political agenda.

Like currently in Selangor? Wakakaka.

Anyway, he was a clever bloke, no doubt then (2006) covering his behind just in case, in the worst case scenario, some loose cannon in PAS started to sell 'tickets to heaven' again, wakakaka.

On a side issue, in 2006 I did wonder whether that 'salesman' or 'salesmen' had the permission of Allah swt to make such political promises? Aiyah, such would be those 'priesthood caste', as sneeringly mentioned by Kassim Ahmad.

Kassim Ahmad had said: “This priesthood caste did not exist at the time of the Prophet or the four caliphs. They only emerged about 300 years later by appointing themselves as interpreter of religion for Muslims.”

“They (Muslims) view their religious leaders like gods and goddesses, that these leaders are seen to be protected from maksum (protected from sin) and must decide on everything about their lives.”

But back to Hanipa again - Wouldn't we agree that we wouldn't have expected to hear the courageous and appropriately correct anti-Arab criticisms and equally courageous and frank confession of humility (namely, not to assume that all of PAS actions were right) from a PAS leader in a million years, but there you are, Hanipa Maidin did it.

Then, I wondered whether indeed PAS would abandon its unnatural and unhealthy infatuation with all things Arab and Arabic, which to be fair to UMNO, then-Cultural Minister Rais Yatim had already long urged Malay-Muslims to do so.

My thoughts then were that the PAS Turks (Erdogens) might have taken over and adopted a new and more inclusive direction in the party's political campaigning. I believed that would be a wise move as its previous campaign had been directed at the converted when their votes, while not 100% guaranteed, were more or less already assured.

By adopting a new liberal and more inclusive political direction, its campaign could then attempt to win over the yet-to-be converted voters (non-Muslim Chinese, Indians etc) because that's where the additional votes for PAS would have to come from.

I thought, and still do, that if PAS aspired to be the federal government (or at least its backbone), it needed to accommodate the 15% non-Malay bumis and the 35% non-bumis, their beliefs and concerns, before it could convince them that the PAS brand of Islam would not be oppressive or marginalizing.

There was/is no necessity for PAS to ever abandon its central pillar of Islam, but under the Erdogens it would hopefully be an Islam which would preserve the highest compassionate and just values of Islamic democracy, or if you like, democratic Islam without any medieval cruelty in legal punishment [eg. such as chopping off hands, gouging of eyes, whipping, beheading, stoning and misogynous practices].

The additional advantage for PAS in moving towards this direction was that it would maintain the political initiative against UMNO, who would then be forced to play catch up with the leader or leading political light.

And PAS indeed did succeed on 05 March 2008 in winning over, for the first time, significant numbers of non-Muslim vote, with the help of DAP and PKR.

But alas, post 2008 we saw PAS in Kedah forgetting its non-Muslim supporters when it started to interfere with non-Muslims activities and interests in the state (eg. dress codes, koe-tai, abattoir, the (ethnocentric) housing allocation, etc).

PAS in Kelantan wasn't any better in its intrusions into non-Muslim areas of interests in KB (eg. hair dressing salon, two males watching aeroplanes at airports wakakaka, non-Muslim women wearing tight jeans, etc).

Today, the conservative sector in PAS (ulamas and even some youth sections) have behaved badly in the Selangor MB issue, allowing its selfish interests to betray Pakatan coalition consensus, and its concealed but latent-brewing ethnocentric DNA to push aside its self-proclaimed but unpracticed Islamic credentials.

The PAS conservatives seem not to understand that the values of Islam are supra-nationalistic, meaning the values are above race, colour and creed. The ulamas and its youths seem more concerned about ketuanan Melayu, and just how would such an ideology of ethnic supremacy be in accordance with Islamic values?

Its conservative group has reiterated its un-Pakatan go-it-alone mentality by heckling Hanipa and his like-minded brethren at the recent PAS Muktamar. 

Hanipa, Mat Sabu and their Erdogens colleagues could well have been the future of Malay (and thus Malaysian) leadership, and there’s no denying this country still needs/depends on Malay leadership.

As PKR has lamentably shown it's devoid of the required leadership for Pakatan, and DAP still has a long way to go in developing its own Malay leaders, the Malay leadership requirement within Pakatan would have fallen upon PAS.

But PAS ulamas have shown their shameful shortsightedness in allowing their selfish interests, petty paranoia, puerile hubris and ethnocentric DNA to diminish PAS into nothing more than a kampung-or-Kelantan-limited political party.

Sadly, the Malay political leadership will now by default go to UMNO, thanks to Pak Haji Hadi Awang and a badly done rancid satay.

chao tar = overburn and too dry

Friday, September 19, 2014

Hadi Awang has already eaten the kueh

TMI - PKR, DAP sceptical over Hadi’s conciliatory tone

This post is just to emphasize on what DAP's Tony Pua said of Hadi. TMI reported (extract only):


Selangor DAP chief Tony Pua was more harsh [than PKR's Rafizi Ramli] in his assessment, saying bluntly that there is no point being in an alliance if a partner is unwilling to respect and accept the consensus of the majority.

"If they can't even agree to the president of a coalition party being a minister in a state where they have the prerogative, then what's the point of being part of the coalition?

"Is it fair for one to have his cake and eat it too at others’ expense?" he said in a Whatsapp text message.


This difficult-to-understand English proverb "a man can not have his cake and eate his cake" was first used on 14 March 1538 in a letter from Thomas, Duke of Norfolk to Thomas Cromwell.

It has nothing to do with the myth* of Marie Antoinette's "let them eat cake"

* 'twas a myth because she did not say it. It was a republican fabrication designed to demonize her

It means that a cake once eaten would no longer be available for the eater to be in possession of it. In other words one cannot have it BOTH WAYS.


In Pak Haji Hadi's case, he couldn't ignore Pakatan's coalition agreement on the Selangor MB issue to promote PAS own agenda (whether this be misogynistic or of some deal we don't know), and then say PAS will continue to stay in Pakatan (expecting the coalition members and supporters to continue supporting it).

Some claimed Pak Haji Hadi is only reaffirming PAS commitment to the coalition because he wants Selangor Pakatan to endorse PAS candidate, Iskandar Abdul Samad who is Selangor PAS commissioner, as the likely new MB.


And he hasn't made the matter any better by asserting PAS own agenda independent of (and likely at odds with) the coalition. TMI reported:

In his policy speech at PAS’s 60th assembly yesterday, Hadi said his Islamist party would continue its alliance with PR despite recent hiccups in their relations over the Selangor MB crisis and PAS's insistence in implementing hudud.

At the same time, he struck a note of independence in his speech, insisting that PAS would stick to its own principles and identity instead of blindly aping the agenda of other parties.



While the MB-ship of Iskandar Abdul Samad may be a factor in Pak Haji's suddenly-new-discovered friendliness towards Pakatan, I have a different take altogether, where I believe the bigger issue for Pak Haji is that he wants its Pakatan allies to continue persuading non-Muslims (Chinese, Indians, Sarawakians, Sabahans, Thais, Eurasians, etc) to continue supporting PAS, especially in GE-14.

No doubt some of the Erdogens' recent pragmatic screaming might have gotten into his thinking. So he still wants to have the Pakatan kaamcheng cake when he has already gulped it all down for his own party's agenda. 

That's what's meant by "He can't have his cake and eat it".

wakakaka, does above last line describe Pak Haji?

Nope, he can't have it BOTH WAYS. Pak Haji Hadi must choose between Pakatan and honouring all ensuing agreements reached by Pakatan, or (not 'and') his own PAS agenda which are at odds with Pakatan agreement.

But realistically, can he undo his sneaky swallowing of the Pakatan cake? By muntah-ing?

As the Malays would say "Nasi sudah menjadi bubur!"



Thursday, September 18, 2014

PAS' true colours

TMI - PAS must know this: Malaysia is not a theocracy

warts & all is still better than a Mullah-Land

The above is an excellent editorial by The Malaysian Insider, not that PAS will love it. In it are a few interesting points that I will quote to share with you.

However, here in my post I'm not so much into commenting on PAS' age-old ambition to implement syariah laws as a complete replacement of Malaysian civil laws, nor will I be commenting on PAS' obsession with that part of syariah laws which deals specifically with some aspects of Islamic punishment, to wit, hudud, nor will I be commenting on our frequently validated perception of PAS clinging on to its 3-P doctrine, namely, to prohibit, persecute and punish.

It's something I've already stated often in my posts and which I am very much, deeply, concerned about. It's about what Kassim Ahmad had mentioned, much to the ulama's ire. It's the 'priesthood caste', and worse, their role in Malaysian democracy or rather their incongruity with democracy per se.

For a quick glimpse of what Kassim Ahmad had said, let's peruse the Malaysian Business Tribune where we would be able to read:



Speaking at an event organised by the Perdana Leadership Foundation, controversial scholar Kassim Ahmad said that Islam in Malaysia has been abused through a “priesthood caste” system.

“This priesthood caste did not exist at the time of the Prophet or the four caliphs. They only emerged about 300 years later by appointing themselves as interpreter of religion for Muslims,” he said.

“They (Muslims) view their religious leaders like gods and goddesses, that these leaders are seen to be protected from maksum (protected from sin) and must decide on everything about their lives.”

And gnam gnam, TMI editorial today says about PAS: 

... the most dangerous theme running through the party is that the cleric class cannot be criticised*. This is akin to putting some really flawed individuals on a pedestal reserved for the Almighty.

They can't be criticised by their own members nor can they be criticised by their allies. When did it come to this, that thin-skinned clerics run a party without question? Is this a political party or one of scholars who think they have a heavenly mandate?

* but I just love the job description, wakakaka


Incidentally for Christians, this was how a jealous priest Samuel brought down the people's choice of a good king, Saul, and the eventual and horrendous decimation (genocide) of not only the House of Saul but also of the Tribe of Benjamin by the House of Judah. But let's leave this for another post.

My sole aim in raising a brief reference to that particular biblical evil by one of the 'priesthood caste' was to remind Christians the problem of an unchallenged priesthood caste lies not only among the ulama but also in Christianity (and indeed in Buddhism, Hinduism, Chinese native religions, etc).

The TMI editorial continues:

We have been making too many excuses for PAS for too long. Datuk Nik Aziz Nik Mat was an aberration. The likes of Datuk Seri Abdul Hadi Awang and Datuk Harun Din are the norm and till today none of the PAS leadership have condemned the barbaric beheadings by Isis.

Instead, they collected money for one Malaysian fighter who died in the Middle East despite him having been sacked from PAS. And they now dub him a martyr.


I have only one specific disagreement with the above. Pak Haji Nik Aziz might be held in reverence by many, but I remember quite distinctly that in August 2010 the frail grandfatherly-looking Pak Haji showed his hard cruel face when he called for the death sentence for those who dumped their babies born out of wedlock, but without mentioning or considering the social, cultural and yes, religious circumstances which left those young and probably teenage mums no or very little other choice.

Consider the typical treatment by a secular state in a Western democracy. It would have been diametrically opposite to Pak Haji's cruel crushing capital punishment for those very much frightened young 'mums', already suffering from desertion, desperation, and deprivation of love, support and compassion.

They would be, and we should be emulating them in, placing emphasis on compassion, education, guidance and counselling rather than stoning people to death. And if society has been more understanding, and parents or families of the unfortunate young women provide support in accepting and caring for the unwanted babies, we would have less of ‘baby dumping’.

As if that was not cruel enough, Pak Haji had then shocked us further by demanding that illicit (unmarried) lovers be stoned to death.

It's bad enough to have capital punishment without that barbarous Middle-Eastern atrocity, which is best left to the Arabs and Israelis
(recall in which country was this first said “He that is without sin among you, let him cast the first stone at her”?).

In Malaysiakini's Karpal locks horns with Nik Aziz over baby dumping, the late Karpal Singh commented that Nik Aziz's proposal was far far too harsh, when more should instead be done to study the root cause of the baby dumping.

But in the end we have seen not only the cruelty, dictatorship and arrogance of the 'priesthood caste', but the treachery of PAS towards its Pakatan allies (as if  great religion like Islam condones treachery), the misogyny of its old men, and what I had posted much earlier and in many of my posts, as follows:


I had warned in my post PAS - from Progressive to Pythonic that once Malaysia has been established as an Islamic State, we can forget about Westminster democracy, where any of its pseudo-democracy and associated institutions under Islamic rule will automatically come under the control of a supreme, non-questionable, non-challengeable (a la the fatwas of the former PAS Kedah MB), and totally dictatorial religious Majlis ...

... and as mentioned by RPK in his post Friday prayers are NOT compulsory, said the Mufti, the process in an Islamic environment is not democratic and not questionable even by logic, reason, precedent or rules.


Additionally, the Malay nationalists in PAS (and that's who some of them really are), much as they believe in bangsa, could only scream agama because politically it has only the religious warrant, unlike UMNO which can switch flexibly (or unscrupulously) from bangsa to raja to agama to negara and even to 1Malaysia as its clarion call of the day without any qualms or embarrassment, wakakaka.

Yes, more than a few PAS members, despite their religious profession of the supra-nationalistic Islam, possess a similar belief in UMNO's Ketuanan Melayu because the ethnocentric Devil is still ensconced in the local political-social-cultural DNA.

To remove or defeat it, we will require sterling leadership and example like those exhibited by Brother Haris Ibrahim, Zaid Ibrahim, Saifuddin Abdullah and indeed Kassim Ahmad.

In the end, perhaps we should even thank Anwar Ibrahim for his Kajang Satay, for though it had failed abysmally and disastrously (as it rightly should, for it was never about Pakatan objectives but merely those of the PKR's inner coterie), the move has nonetheless brought out some beneficial side effects, that of revealing the true colours of PAS, for what the political party really is, a so-called 'partner' who has been unreliable, treacherous and arrogantly hostile .

Most important of all, watch out for those 'priestly caste'.


Tuesday, September 16, 2014

Rambo Tee

Malay Mail Online - Utusan columnist says would have attacked Singapore over island


KUALA LUMPUR, Aug 16 — Malaysia should have waged war on Singapore to keep Pulau Batu Puteh instead of bringing the dispute to the International Court of Justice, Utusan Malaysia columnist Ridhuan Tee Abdullah wrote in an editorial today.

In a sharply-worded piece touching on criticisms by Singapore founding father Lee Kuan Yew (picture) in his book “One Man’s View of the World”, Tee said the republic was fortunate he was not the prime minister of Malaysia during the time.

“I certainly would not bring the matter to the International Court of Justice (ICJ). The only resolution to the dispute is war,” he wrote further.

“The world has witnessed the loss of Malay land to the ultra kiasu.

“Today, Malays are humiliated, but ‘we’ remain silent,” he added.

I like that part where the news report said: "Tee said the republic was fortunate he was not the prime minister of Malaysia during the time."

All I need to say is Alhamdulillah for Rambo NOT being the PM or the Defence Minister or anyone significant in Malaysia. We should all be thankful for small mercies.

BTW, if he includes himself as a Malay, then the Malays haven't remained silent, wakakaka.

Another aspect of UPSR exams

TMI - Racist-toned question in UPSR exam? – Ravinder Singh


The following question was suspected to be in the UPSR Malay language paper.


Keutamaan kepada melayan tetamu; Menghormati orang tua; Mementingkan sopan santun 
15. Nilai hidup diatas adalah sebahagian daripada identiti masyarakat Malaysia. Masyarakat manakah yang sering dikaitkan dengannya? 
A. Cina
B. Iban
C. India
D. Melayu

Ravinder Singh asked Education ministry officers the following:



If it was in the exam paper, then some questions need answers:

1. What aspect of Bahasa Melayu was this question testing the pupils on?

2. What is the evidence on which this question is based that only one of the listed communities is known to practise these values more than the others?

3. Is the question (if it was indeed in the paper) in keeping with the spirit of 1Malaysia?

4. Why was the question which is racist in nature put in the exam paper?

Shall we blame the BTN or the Education Ministry 'Lil Napoleons, or both?

I can guess at the answer for above question but I would like to hear it from the Education Ministry people.

I have a question to contribute to the Education Ministry for the UPSR exams next year, free of charge.

Kesetiaan kepada raja raja Malaysia
916. Nilai kesetiaan kepada raja raja adalah sebahagian daripada identiti masyarakat Malaysia, termasuk dan terutama daripada ahli-ahli parti politik. Bahkan nilai tersebut adalah nilai terkandung dalam Rukun Negara Kedua. Ahli-ahli parti politik manakah yang sering
ketidakpedulikannya?


A. MCA
B. DAP
C. MIC
D. UMNO
E. PKR
F. PAS

Excuse my poor Bahasa, wakakaka.



Saturday, September 13, 2014

'Tis the season

I was told this trivia by an old family friend (of my uncle) who was in the military.



In the early 80's, during the hey-days of the 2M Administration, DPM Musa Hitam, who was also deputy president UMNO, was on the general election campaign trail which took him to East Malaysia.

While there, and transiting through air force bases, he remarked apologetically to the military officers who waited to greet him on his arrivals (and departures) as a military mark of courtesy, that (words to the effect) "'Tis the season", an excellent use of words that politely explained away the election campaigning for indirectly bothering those officers.

I would like to use his "'Tis the season" to refer to what I have been alluding to my readers in many of my recent posts, that 'tis the season for hunting nons.

Yes, the nons are being hunted down to prove a point (whatever that may be). Even sweetie Susan Loone wasn't spared for just reporting what she was told.

Zaid Ibrahim has also taken to issuing this advice to the nons. In the Malay Mail Online, Zaid said: Non-Malays beware, this is the age of sedition in Malaysia. In the news article, the Mail reported:

The country's non-Malay and non-Muslim communities must exercise extra restraint when speaking in public or on social media today, Datuk Zaid Ibrahim warned, saying Malaysia has entered "the age of sedition".

The former de facto law minister suggested a racial bias in the current sedition crackdown, claiming that Muslims who utter derogatory terms about those of other faiths are less likely to face charges.

But non-Malays and non-Muslims must be "very careful" with what they post on Twitter or Facebook as they may find themselves thrown behind bars, he said.

"That's the way the cookie crumbles in this country," Zaid wrote in his blog yesterday.

"The loyalty of non-Malays and non-Muslims are (sic) being questioned all the time, as is the loyalty of those in Sabah and Sarawak who are unhappy with the treatment they have received since the formation of Malaysia.

"So do not say or write what you feel, unless you are prepared to spend time in (the) Kajang (prison)," he said.

"I know it’s tempting," he added, "... to exercise your freedom and express your views, especially since you are exposed to the world through social media, but please exercise restraint."


Well, we have the first casualty in 36-year old Chow Mun Fai, a site supervisor who had admitted to posting offensive comments in his Facebook which mentioned eating pork during Ramadan, bah kut teh and insults to the Prophet.

He was jailed for a year under Section 233(1)(a) of the Communications and Multi­media Act 1998, which was the MAXIMUM prison sentence for that crime.

look at the shock on his face

While Chow had been naughty, what shocked many lawyers was the sentence which as mentioned above was the MAXIMUM possible under the crime he was found guilty of.

Considering that he was a first offender, and had demonstrated his repentance by pleading guilty, the sentence handed down by the judge was considered extremely harsh and unbelievably excessive. It's most unusual for a judge to pass the MAXIMUM sentence on a first offender who had pleaded guilty to the charge.

Recall that Kiki-what's-her-name who in a road rage case, had threatened the victim with implied violence with an iron bar (car steering wheel locking handle), apart from banging the bar on the Ah Pek's car. She was only fined and ordered to do community service. Even her Ah Pek victim pleaded leniency for her.

I personally believe Chow should have been fined and ordered to do community service (eg. cleaning mosques' toilets for, say, 3 months). Jailing him for one year for his stupidity will effectively destroyed a major part of his life.

And far worse, it does nothing to rehabilitate him, au contraire I suspect, will only breed discontent and resentment.

Yet we have judges who allowed a rapist to get away scot-free because he was deemed to have a "bright future".

Well, what does Section 233(1)(a) of the Communications and Multimedia Act 1998 tell us about Utusan Malaysia behaving arrogantly in June this year in a most insolent way to HRH Johor.

As I had posted in an earlier post, TMI had reported in its Utusan says will snub Johor palace over criticism on new bill the following defiant Utusan statement to HRH Johor:
 
Utusan Malaysia today said it would not answer any royal summons to appear before the Sultan of Johor, following the paper's criticism against a controversial plan to include the ruler in the state's administration. […]

The Umno mouthpiece said if the Johor palace was unhappy with the criticism and wanted to reprimand or clarify, it could send a representative to meet the daily's editors.

It's like telling HRH to f.o and yet Utusan had gotten away with it. It makes us wonder at the disparity in treatment.

And I could go back to 1992 to recall how UMNO members demonstrated the ultimate in abusing the royals and suffered not an iota-fraction of what Chow Mun Fai now experiences.

Then we have some unbelievable blokes like Ustaz Shahul Hameed Seeni and Ustaz Ann Wan Seng who insulted Hinduism and Buddhism respectively, etc.

As we railed silently in frustration at the hunting down of (lower case) 'malaysian' nons, their plights seen in stark contrast to the (upper case) Malaysians who have gotten away with far worse, please do spare a thought for that 36-year old first offender who has been too harshly punished.

'Tis the sad season.

those ducks ain't got no "bright future"

One can only hope that the PM will advise HM the Agong to pardon him.

Thursday, September 11, 2014

Royal Dentist speaks

You've heard of the Royal Vizier (MB) but have you heard of the Royal Dentist?



Well, recently in June this year, when the Johor DUN heard a bill giving executive powers to HRH in the state Housing Board, the Royal Dentist Extraordinaire (wakakaka), warned: "There is already a feeling of disrespect for the royals. This may lead to other forms of disrespect."

You know who he is, don't you? Wakakaka.

The Royal Dentist was the medical specialist who de-fanged the royals in 1992, wakakaka again.


Their pain, my entire pleasure

wakakaka

Anyway, in today's Malaysiakini, Dr Mahathir was quoted as saying: I gave one name, [and] rulers have no issue in regards to the Selangor MB issue. MKINI reported:

The former premier revealed that during his tenure, he had only submitted a single name to the palace to be considered for the menteri besar's post.

"Throughout my time, it was always one name only. I never had any problem with any of the sultans," he said when asked if the monarchs had ever requested for more names to be submitted.



I have only one answer to the different treatment experienced by PKR and DAP.

UMNO is UMNO, and no one shakes it, not even the royals. Ain't that just the truth, as was experienced in 1992 when the royals were given the full abusive treatment by UMNO. For more, see my Insulting the Rulers, UMNO-style

Back to the Johor housing Board issue in June just to prove this point: TMI reported in its Utusan says will snub Johor palace over criticism on new bill the following defiant Utusan statement to HRH Johor: 

Utusan Malaysia today said it would not answer any royal summons to appear before the Sultan of Johor, following the paper's criticism against a controversial plan to include the ruler in the state's administration. […]

The Umno mouthpiece said if the Johor palace was unhappy with the criticism and wanted to reprimand or clarify, it could send a representative to meet the daily's editors.


Wah, but then Utusan was/is of course UMNO. And then, Utusan could not resist continuing in Jebat-ish fashion:


"Moreover, times have also changed. The media must stop being overly worried about criticism involving the rulers.

"This is the common question among media practitioners every time a sensitive issue arises regarding the Johor palace. "The anxiety of media practitioners towards this issue should stop immediately. There is no reason for such anxiety in today's new media landscape.”


TMI also reported: Awang said there was no reason for high-ranking palace officials to reprimand reporters and editors. 

Instead, he said in other countries with monarchies, it was a common practice for the media to send their representatives to the palace.

"That is how it is done in palaces in Europe, Japan and Thailand, even the royal institutions in other states in Malaysia. This is to avoid misunderstandings as if parties are being bullied."


Awang of course is Awang Selamat of Utusan (namely, UMNO).


And MKINI also reported Dr Mahathir concluding: ... that it is "up to the sultan" who he wants to appoint but ... if the person appointed does not hold a majority, the individual can be voted out through a vote of no-confidence. That is according to our system."

Of course as I have written, where palace issues are involved, it's best for Malays to deal with them (and for nons to stay out and f**k those constitutional limits or rights which would only apply or become meaningless depending on ........), and no Malay deals with them better than UMNO Malays, and in UMNO no Malay deals with them better than Dr Mahathir, wakakaka.

But no worries mateys, a totally mandate-less Khalid, as caretaker MB notwithstanding, will soon sign the water deal.

Now, on a separate issue, namely sedition, we have just heard the former IGP who was and still is most dislike and disrespected by many of us, proposing that capital punishment (death sentence) be considered for repeat offenders of sedition.

Well, Dr Mahathir has commented on that stupid sickening sinister proposal by asking the former IGP to try the death penalty himself, wakakaka - see TMI's Dr Mahathir tells former IGP to try the death sentence.

Besides being a Royal Dentist, Dr Mahathir is sure a doctor ... Dr Jekyll (that is) & Mr Hyde, wakakaka.


Love him or hate him, he is the formidable Dr Mahathir, wakakaka.

Tuesday, September 09, 2014

Malaysians and 'malaysians'

In Malaysia there are many ethnic groups. Ideally each and every citizen is and should belong to one race, namely, Malaysians or, as I had joked over at RPK's website, Machinta, a word made up from Malays-Chinese-Tamils, but not excluding Ibans, Kadazans, and the wonderful myriads of ethnicity our nation has been blessed with.


Malaysians now
Malaysians and 'malaysians' when they grow up?

But in reality, both in politics, legislation and various areas, we are Malaysians and 'malaysians', the second with lower case 'm'.

For example, the second group, 'malaysians' (with lower case 'm'), cannot be the menteri besar (MB) of a sultanate state unless and only if the state constitution is changed, which has been why DAP Selangor currently can't offer any of its ADUN as a MB candidate for HRH to consider.

In 2008, even the question of Teresa Kok being deputy MB (let alone MB) was strongly discouraged by a palace person while of course (and 'of course' became very clear with the advantage of hindsight, wakakaka) the Royal MB acted dunno on that issue, tap dancing away from the issue because it was too hard for him to deal with, just as he had done when poor Eli Wong was a victim under siege from cyber peeping toms and where his support would have been helpful to the PKR ADUN but alas, then not only forthcoming but Eli was about to be abandoned. Ironically UMNO's Nazri and MCA Chew turned out to the decent ones who supported Eli.

It was alleged that Muhammad Munir Bani, HRH’s private secretary, had advised Khalid Ibrahim about the palace's ‘preference’ for a Malay (and, alas, not a Malaysian) deputy MB.

However, when further queried Muhammad Munir belakang pusing-ed like Speedy Gonzalez and denied reports that HRH wanted ‘a deputy from a particular race’ (meaning 'Malay'), and instead added (meaning he started to spin) the sultan was the religious head for Islam and Malay culture, and thus the MB has the task of assisting in these duties, which in his absence would also have to handled by his deputy.

Thus, in that most unbelievable zigzagging explanation, Muhammad Munir, after denying HRH wanted a Malay deputy MB, in the same breath averred that it was only proper a Malay (not a Malaysian) be the deputy MB.

It was obvious that what he uttered in the first instance had nothing to do with HRH but was of his own interpretation, based on his personal prejudice, or rather that of a vanguard denying access to the Mongolian hordes at the gates.

After Speedy Gonzalez zigzagged away to safety, Malaysiakini reported in Expert: No legal need for Malay deputy MB that Dr Abdul Aziz Bari, a constitutional expert who then lectured law at the International Islamic University Malaysia, was consulted on the matter.

The Prof pordah-ed Muhammad Munir's assertion, and said: “The Sultan of Selangor does not need the menteri besar or the deputy menteri besar in matters pertaining to religion and Malay custom.” 

According to the doctor, the sultan, as the head of Islamic matters and the Malay adat, was (still is) in fact THE PERSON in charge of such matters in the state, and not the MB or his deputy.

He said: “Matters cited by the palace are entirely within the sultan's jurisdiction. As the sultan may act on his own discretion on these matters, the constitution provides that a council may be appointed to assist him. This is what is commonly known as religious councils or majlis agama, which looks after the religious department or the jabatan agama. In the other four states and federal territories, the Agong will have the same establishment.”

But Teresa Kok was then and still is a 'malaysian' and unfortunately not a Malaysian.

I have to admit that, yes, there was a brief hopeful and near orgasmic moment (or two, wakakaka) when in 2008 I thought HRH’s of Perak and Selangor, both being well-educated and modern thinkers, would come in from the left field and innovatively approve non-Malays as MB in their respective states. Alas, I was disappointed - maybe my expectation was far too futuristic, in which the 'm' hadn't yet (still hasn't) grown into a 'M'.


Of course being a MB is not the only position denied to 'malaysians'. Recently, a 'malaysian' student with straight A's in her final school results found that she couldn't secure a university place in medicine, dentistry or pharmacy, but only nursing.

Though there's nothing ignoble about the study and the profession of nursing we need to ask why she, with her grades, was denied a place in medicine? Wouldn't she have better contributed to Malaysian health as a doctor? Apparently not, and we suspect that's because she's a 'malaysian'.

Many of you may not be aware of a debate years ago when goalposts for entry into medicine were changed as rapidly as a baby's diaper being changed (both equally full of sh*t) even unto a moronic proposal by a 'certain' doctor to ensure applicants could stand gore (was he subjected to the same test?), or that academic results were NOT important.

The objectives of the constant changing goalposts were sinister but blatantly clear that the authorities wanted to prevent (or at best, minimize) 'malaysians' from applying for a place in medicine. 

Then in 2012 there was the infamous 'black' scandal regarding the abrupt de-recognition of degrees from the Crimea State Medical University (CSMU) as I had posted in Only some may be doctors. Too many blacks were studying there which did not meet the above-mentioned sinister objective - 'black' being a word used by a minister visiting the CSMU.

Thus, let me remind my dear readers that in Malaysia, the reality is that we are Malaysians and 'malaysians'.

If you wish to bang your head against the wall, please do so and you've my admiration, though I'm not too sure what results you'll get, especially in today's climate where there's a deliberate campaign to demonize Chinese 'malaysians', and in particular the DAP.

But unfortunately, some Chinese 'malaysians' rush in where angels dare not tread and facilitate those campaigning against Chinese 'malaysians' to call them arrogant, bidap, kurang ajar, derhaka, etc to royalty, who incidentally are sadly transformed by the sinister campaigners into 'Malay rulers' rather than Malaysian rulers.

Yes, it's your constitutional rights to cry out, complain, protest etc, and if today is still 1992, had I wanted to question our constitutional rulers on their non-constitutional remarks, I would have done so knowing I would be only one among those far far worse UMNO abusers of royalty.

But alas, today is not 1992 and UMNO has now changed its tack as it sees profit in pampering to royalty, because it wants to use royalty to demonize its foes, especially the DAP.

But some Chinese 'malaysians' heedlessly do it anyway, and as I mentioned, fools rush in where angels dare not tread. The end result of their mindless bravado has been to the DAP's disadvantage, alienating potential support from Malay voters for the party.

Take for example what we see in Malaysiakini headlines these days:

(a) Palace accuses PKR and DAP of 'defiance' which reported:

The Selangor palace has accused PKR and DAP of "insolent and defiant" acts for refusing to submit more than two names to the sultan as candidates for menteri besar as requested.

The Selangor sultan's private secretary Mohamad Munir Bani (left) said in a statement this morning that only PAS had complied with the ruler's request.

"The Selangor sultan is deeply saddened by the action of DAP and PKR, which went against his highness' decree on Aug 27.

"The action of DAP and PKR reflects insolence towards the royal institution and is a defiant act (tindakan derhaka) against the Selangor sultan," he said.


Forget about PKR, but the DAP has been described by the palace as exhibiting insolence towards the royal institution and is a defiant act (tindakan derhaka) against the Selangor sultan.

Nice, very nice .... for UMNO, wakakaka. Yes, you brave ones have helped UMNO and f**ked up DAP kau kau.


A state assemblyperson's majority support in the House is not the sole consideration for appointing the menteri besar, said the Selangor palace.

Therefore, the ruler might even choose a state rep from Pakatan Rakyat who is not on the lists of potential candidates submitted to the palace.

"As the power to appoint the menteri besar is the sultan's prerogative, therefore his highness will look at the names of other state assemblypersons in Pakatan who to the sultan's mind enjoys majority support in the state assembly," said the ruler's private secretary Mohamad Munir Bani in a statement today.

He said since majority support is not the sole criteria, the palace required more than two names from the respective parties in Pakatan as per convention.


Do you think I don't know a wee bit about the constitution, but anyway what does kaytee think of these two statements from the palace?

Leave the constitution aside for a moment because the argument will reach a fruitless dead end.

One highly sensitive issue in Malaysia, even more so than religion, has been and still is the sacrosanctity of a Malay ruler, who captures in his royal self all that Malays menjunjung tinggi (uphold highly or very dear), a God-King status not unlike the Chinese 'Mandate of Heaven' for their respective Emperors.

Chinese and Indian Malaysians are well advised to ether stand clear of or excise extreme prudence when commenting on or about a Malay ruler.

Strangely 
or perhaps not, many older Chinese (steeped in a 5000 year-old culture of monarchism - today's Communist Party is just another dynasty in an unbroken line of dynasties) and Indians are actually staunch monarchists at heart, perhaps possessing closer memories of their respective homeland dynastic monarchs as well as their ethnic social-cultural (and in the case of Indians, also religious) indoctrination. My own maternal granddad was a staunch monarchist.

Few would be the Indians who do not thrilled to the exploits of Rama, the son of a king and eventually a king himself, despite recent scholarly dissertations he was quite a cad in his treatment of his wife Sita. He also exhibited the most arrogant ketuanan mentality and injustice in justifying his sneak-murder of Vali, King of the Vanara.

And we know that quite a many Chinese and Indian Malaysians take pride in being honoured with awards by the rulers. I know a rich 'malaysian' businessman who paid a large sum to secure (not a datukship but just) a federal award, PPN, which is awarded annually to many police and armed forces sergeants and warrant officers.


No Chinese or Hindu Indian would have dared to do what UMNO did in 1992.

Anyway, back to the two Malaysiakini headlines - The first demonizes the DAP as being 'defiant' against HRH while the second invites the mindless easily-provoked and full-of-pompous-constitutional-rights 'malaysians' to make derhaka-ish protests, wakakaka - in other words, a bait to enable more demonization of the DAP because of those 'malaysians' who continue to be insolent to and defiant against a Malay (not Malaysian) ruler, so we'll continue to hear Heartland bangkitlah untuk mempertahankan Tuanku kita, where 'kita' addresses only the Malays (including PAS, wakakaka) and the Heartland.

Whether it's part of Najib's grand fight-back strategy in preparation for GE-14 or born out of someone's chip on his shoulder, wakakaka, it doesn't matter as the end result will see the DAP being hated by the currently as-yet non-committed Malays at a time when the party is just beginning to gain a tenuous foothold in the Heartland.

So, even if we know our constitution and its limits and conditions eg. the power to appoint the menteri besar as the sultan's prerogative is not without conditions (read the state constitution), I'm not going to deal with this because I'm a Chinese 'malaysian' and whatever I say will only result in the DAP getting the worse of it.

Let brave Malay Malaysians like Dr Bari, Zaid Ibrahim and others deal with it.

That's my advice for today, wakakaka.

Read also TMI's Guan Eng apologises to Selangor Sultan over sole MB nominee where he was reported to have said:

"On behalf of DAP, I would like to apologise to His Royal Highness the Selangor Sultan for causing him disappointment, over DAP's decision to present only Kajang assemblywoman Datuk Seri Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail's name as the new Selangor menteri besar candidate."

See what I mean! Lim GE may yet win a few nodding approvals from the Malays by his show of respect, belated as it might have been, to HRH.


[and f**k the constitution which is ignored by the other side, so fight fire with fire, wakakaka]