Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News
Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News |
- Of wet dream, nightmare and Marty McFly
- Stupid law, stupid results
- Ketua Polis Negara harus perjelas program Umno dalam Markas FRU dan logo Umno memenuhi ...
| Of wet dream, nightmare and Marty McFly Posted: 27 Sep 2011 03:47 PM PDT Whatever public posturing Pakatan Rakyat puts up in relation to hudud, everybody knows that in hudud resides an issue within Pakatan Rakyat which is potentially explosive and may ultimately be destructive. Everybody knows that. Pakatan Rakyat knows that. And Tun Dr Mahathir, unfortunately to Pakatan Rakyat, also knows that. While the Barisan Nasional, particularly UMNO, was busy trying to out-manoeuvre Mat Sabu in history 101 and the Prime Minister eagerly venturing into a state of "coolness" and "sempoi-neity", Tun Dr Mahathir had other ideas. His was a meister stroke of all political strokes in Malaysia. That's because he knows what hurts the most as well as when and where to execute the hurting blow. So, in an interview one day he threw a seemingly harmless challenge to PAS. PAS has always maintained that he (Tun DrM) was the reason why it could not implement hudud in Kelantan. Tun DrM then asked why hasn't PAS written to Prime Minister Najib to implement hudud as he (Tun DrM) is now no more the PM. Those of you who of my generation will remember the character Marty McFly from the Back to the Future trilogy – to digress, I wonder when Hollywood is going to remake this film – apart from the totally cool and sempoi DeLorean DMC-12 in the movie. Marty boy was a smart kid. Very nice and mild-mannered boy. Quite cool and level headed too. That was until the antagonist started calling him "chicken". Upon being called "chicken", Marty McFly would lose all his good manners and level-headedness. He would turn reckless and completely berserk. He would even do really stupid things. Tun DrM knew all the while that hudud is to PAS and Tuan Guru Nik Aziz what "chicken" was to Marty McFly. Mention the word "hudud" and Tuan Guru Nik Aziz would instantly go ape and all bananas. The whole PAS would grimace in orgasmic pleasure like a 13 year old after his first wet dream. That would in turn be a nightmare for Pakatan Rakyat. In Pakatan Rakyat, DAP's stand on hudud is clear. DAP is against hudud. As for PKR, well, it depends on what day the issue is raised and on which side of the bed Anwar Ibrahim wakes up that day. TDM knows very well that hudud will cause Pakatan Rakyat to lose its "pakatan". His challenge was a calculated move to throw Pakatan Rakyat into shambles. That was exactly what had happened after his challenge. TGNA firstly dismissed as laughable suggestions by TDM that Kelantan can now implement hudud now that TDM has retired. He then challenged the present Prime Minister to withdraw Putrajaya's objection to the implementation of hudud in Kelantan. If TGNA was politically savvy, he would have stopped there. No, he did not. TGNA then continued to meet with Prof Aziz Bari and Dr Dzulkefli Ahmad on 25th September 2011 to discuss the implementation of hudud in Kelantan and gave assurance that hudud will only affect Muslims and will not be imposed on non-Muslims. (the full report is here). DAP, quite expectedly, responded. Karpal went into amok mode. Lim Guan Eng, meanwhile, said that the party's entire Central Executive Committee would resign from their position in the party if hudud was ever included in Pakatan Rakyat's Common Policy Framework or Buku Jingga. The Star newspaper of course saw this as an opportunity. On 25th September it apparently reported what Guan Eng said above. However on 26th September, the Star apparently modified the news to report that Guan Eng had threatened the resignation of the DAP's leadership from Pakatan Rakyat. The water gets even murkier when Anwar Ibrahim, quite recklessly (politically) said that he supports the Kelantan State Government's move to implement hudud (see here for the report). He later clarified his statement saying that all decisions affecting the people will have to be based on consensus within Pakatan Rakyat. He was quoted as saying: "We hold firm to the conviction that any issue which affects the interest of the people must be discussed frankly in a civilized manner with the objective of seeking an amicable resolution." That statement actually does not add or detract to what he had earlier said, namely, that he thinks hudud can be implemented in Kelantan. This was what he said earlier: "For now, in general, in principle, I believe this can be implemented…It is a specific area that affects Muslims and does not impeach rights of non-Muslims. The proceeding makes sure that administration of justice is guaranteed." By then a full storm was brewing within Pakatan Rakyat. PAS was again, showing its true colours.
|
| Posted: 27 Sep 2011 11:03 AM PDT Law is man-made regulations. People make mistakes and bad people makes bad decisions. When bad people make law, we ended up with bad laws. For decades, inadequate delivery systems have diverted our law makers from their original legislation duty to that of local councilors, rendering the due process of drafting progressive, fair and reasonable law as a secondary, or even ignored, role. World Class Parliament = World Class Law = Good Place to Live Crap Parliament = Crap Law = Crappy Place to Live Within the MP ranks, with characters such as "close one eye", "bocor" and "RM1 million FB page", how many right minded tax payers can safely say they have the utmost confidence in their ability then? This is what I have in mind when I read some of the laws relating to conduct of general elections. According to section 15 of AKTA PILIHAN RAYA 1958, PERATURAN-PERATURAN PILIHAN RAYA (PENDAFTARAN PEMILIH) 2002, 1. Objections to any addition to the voters' roll must be made within 7 days from the date the supplementary electoral roll is open for inspection; (supposedly every quarter hence 4 times a year) 2. A person can only object against up to 10 registered names only; and 3. A fee of RM10 is to be charged for each name being submitted for protest.
Section 15 made me choked on my tau foo fah, I tell you.
1. 7 days only limitation Every quarterly updates may contain hundreds and thousands of names. Is it reasonable to allow only a 7 day window period for public to review and investigate? Revisiting the disgusting errors DAP recently discovered – lesbian marriage involving a female army personnel, dozens of army wives carrying IC which actually belong to their husbands etc. These are not innocent, straight forward errors but sophisticated mischief not visible to the naked eye or reasonable bystander. "This shows there are systematic way ways of planting voters by irresponsible parties..." New voters have to wait for months before they can check if they are being registered properly so why the glaring double standard here? Income Revenue Board can investigate up to 7 years back, testing our memories to the limit and in case of fraud, there is no limit in the number of backlog years. Yet, how come the mistake ridden SPR / EC is so damn well protected with this 7 days only ruling? Does the legislators ever thought of interested citizens do have other things to do in life? After multiple orgamistic screaming of Rakyat Diutamakan, this punter is extremely disappointed with the fake front, all form no substance. How prominent and transparent are displays of these supplementary electoral rolls? We can see the newspaper publishing those lucky ones heading to National Service but where is the electoral roll being located for public inspection? SPR/EC has been doing a very poor job in this respect. 2. 10 objections per person Limiting a person's right to object more than 10, is without logic, especially with an error prone SPR/EC. If a policeman sees 3 men committing a crime should we legislate and limit him to say, he can only arrest 2 persons a day only? Would that make sense? Why limit pursue of correct records? To this tax payer, it appears to be a form of non-financial bailout of a Barisan Nasional dependent/supporting party. If there is a sysmatic abuse, e.g. the dozens of shemales in the army camp, then surely there would be more than 10. A talented and committed individual who uncovered this would be blocked by this stupid rule. I wonder what was said in the parliament when they scanned through this section, or did the ruling coalition bulldozed this through?
3. RM10 fee per protested person It is also adding insult to injury to penalize concerned and justice-minded citizens for RM10 when SPR/EC (already well funded by tax payers) is suppose to investigate and correct their own gross, laughable and irresponsible or even errors. Read more at: http://wangsamajuformalaysia.blogspot.com/2011/09/stupid-law-stupid-results.html |
| Ketua Polis Negara harus perjelas program Umno dalam Markas FRU dan logo Umno memenuhi ... Posted: 26 Sep 2011 10:48 PM PDT
Ucapan Dato Ishak sungguh bersifat politik kepartian Pada 26 September 2011, bertempat di Markas Polis Simpanan Persekutuan - FRU (Unit 7 PSP NS) telah diadakan satu program bersama di dengan parti politik UMNO. Pada hari tersebut bendera Umno memenuhi ruang sekitar Markas FRU dan jelas tertera logo dan nama Umno dalam pemidang dibelakang pentas. Malah ucapan Ketua Umno Bahagian Seremban penuh bersifat politik kepartian. Solidariti Anak Muda Malaysia Negeri Sembilan memandang serius perkara ini. Ini menunjukkan polis khususnya FRU sudah terjebak mengambil sikap dalam politik kepartian. Ketua Polis Negara harus tampil menyatakan pendiran dalam perkara ini. Dato' Hj. Ishak Ismail hadir bukan sifatnya selaku mana – mana kapasiti jawatan kerajaan tetapi hadir dan berucap atas kapasiti Ketua Umno Bahagian Seremban. |
| You are subscribed to email updates from Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. | Email delivery powered by Google |
| Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610 | |
0 ulasan:
Catat Ulasan