Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News
Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News |
- Malaysia's goosey goosey gander story
- The Indefeasibility of Malaysia’s Territorial Sovereignty Over Sabah
- M’sian caped crusader?
- The Politician and the Intellectual Mandarin
- Wong Tack Should Not Stand on PKR Ticket Unless Anwar Ibrahim & Him Clarify Their Stand on Lynas
- Uncommon Sense with Wong Chin Huat: Lahad Datu — How might Malaysians vote in the GE?
| Malaysia's goosey goosey gander story Posted: 12 Mar 2013 02:53 PM PDT  Initially his guilt was by grapevine accusative allusions, but which become more firm with the statutory declaration of a private investigator Perumal Balasubramaniam (Bala). Bala made the accusation against Najib and even included a salacious titbit about Altantuyaa being partial to sex in her behind, this puerile information during a period when someone was accused again of sodomy (who knows whether the salacious titbit was to serve as some form of equalizing and/or compensating morality?). It was a declaration based on he was allegedly told by Razak Baginda, who Bala said was in turn allegedly told by Najib, who Bala said was in turn allegedly told by Altantuyaa herself (the enjoyable 'in her behind' bit) - all these from a chain of information told by and known only by Bala.
And that's why Najib is guilty as hell, until he can be proven innocent. Furthermore, his guilt is 'confirmed' by his own silence on the allegations ... though I distinctively saw on TV Najib telling a western reporter (Australian, I believe) that there was no truth in the murder allegations. But then, if we admit he wasn't silent about the accusations, it would f* up the desired depth of 'guilt' that we want people to see in him. So I suppose it's best we continue with the urban legend that Najib kept silent despite all the allegations and accusations. Incidentally, is it true Najib had also sworn on the Qu'ran that he didn't have anything to do with Altantuyaa? I can't be sure about this because I am a bit careful about touching on Muslim politicians swearing on Qu'ran as some politicians and a very new political party member have shown they have been leery of and possessed very distinctive disquiet dislike about swearing on the Qu'ran. It's sad and also unfortunate for us that Indonesian former president (Gus Dur), who came to Malaysia during the Permatang Pauh by-election to enlighten us about swearing on the Qu'ran, had passed away, or you would be able to confirm with him if you don't believe me.
| ||
| The Indefeasibility of Malaysia’s Territorial Sovereignty Over Sabah Posted: 11 Mar 2013 12:46 PM PDT The incursion into Sabah by a ragtag "army" of a now defunct "Sultanate" with the intention of having a picnic in their "homeland" (to borrow the description by a self-styled Princess of the said "Sultanate") would be comical, if not for the utterly tragic consequences that follows. In weeks after the incursions, eight Malaysian policemen were killed, some of whom were allegedly tortured, killed and their body mutilated by the "army" of the now defunct Sultanate. As of the date of writing, a total of 62 people have been killed. That the so-called Sultan declared a Jihad and the self-styled Princess calling the Malaysian army un-Islamic lend a surrealistic aura to the whole episode which would make Salvador Dali green in envy. The fact remains that their acts were an act of terrorism perpetrated by armed bandits on an unsuspecting State and her people. There was nothing Islamic about those acts. To use Islam and Jihad in this totally illegal and inhumane act of aggression against a peaceful State which has been treating some of them with unlimited generosity is a misuse and abuse of the religion and God of the worst kind. So, what does Jamalul Kiram want? He has been shifty about this. On one count he said he doesn't want to claim Sabah. On another, he said he wants recognition. Okay. So we call him a Sultan. Is that recognition enough? Of course not. At the end of it, he said he is the poorest Sultan in the world. That is more than sufficient answer to the question. He wants money. Forget altruism. Forget the advancement of his so-called people. Forget honour. Forget dignity. It is just about money. However, why must Malaysia, as a State, give money to some delusional people who live in the 17th century? What would prevent this very same people from coming back to ask for more when the money runs out? What basis do a people have to hold a State to ransom every now and then just because this people do not have a source of income other than from partaking in piracy, kidnapping and now, terrorism as well as prostituting Islam? Read more at: http://art-harun.blogspot.com/2013/03/the-indefeasibility-of-malaysias.html
| ||
| Posted: 11 Mar 2013 11:11 AM PDT When a Malay criticises the ruling party, he is seen as 'ungrateful'. He is told that he should be appreciative for all that Umno has done for him – all the opportunities for education and work. It is conveniently forgotten that not all Malays benefit from the New Economic Policy (NEP). Many middle-class Malay families complain that scholarships or study loans go to the children of well-connected parents. In businesses, and especially in government tenders, the same applies – connections count more than skills or expertise. Many senior politicians and their wives are more commonly known as Mr or Mrs "Ten percent".
Conversely, Malays have not realised that receiving an education or business opportunity via the affirmative action policies, should not deprive them of a voice. Malays must learn that keeping the government on its toes does not mean that they are unappreciative or disloyal. Some Malays have a child-like version of the world. In a discussion with a non-Malay, the Malay who cannot present his facts in a logical manner may invariably blurt out, "Go back to where you came from". It is like the frustrated child who does not get his way and threatens his sibling with, "I'll tell father what you did". He does not care about the consequences. He just wants to hurt and get retribution.
When all else fails, some Malays bring Allah into the argument. Malays are adept at emotional blackmail, especially when the threat of eternal damnation is involved. Malays fiercely defend their religious rights and condemn non-Muslims for entering the discussion. Some claim that as they do not interfere with other religions, then non-Muslims should not interfere in theirs. Could this be an explanation for the muted Muslim voices when a band of renegade Malays dragged a cow's head through the streets of Shah Alam? Why have Malays not acknowledged that for centuries, the word 'Allah' was used with no problems until Umno Malays decided it was wrong? Suffering trial by ordeal Malays swearing on the Quran in a mosque debases the religion. Compare this with trial by ordeal in medieval England. If someone was accused of a crime against the monarch, he might suffer trial by ordeal. If he did not sustain injuries when his arm was placed in a vat of boiling oil, then he is found innocent.
Why don't Malays consider a range of other views, to help shape theirs? Sadly, some non-Malays also fall into the trap of not entering into a discussion because they are told that "it does not concern them". Islam is the official religion of Malaysia, so all Malaysians are free to express the opinion on any aspect of Islam. Malays dislike being told that they are in the wrong. Instead of having a rational discussion, some prefer to bottle their emotions, than risk running amok. Decades of 'Ketuanan Melayu' have reinforced this flaw in their character. Mahathir said that the opposition would destroy the Malays and bumiputeras in Selangor. Mahathir's 'Project M' allowed illegal immigrants into Sabah. Najib and the Election Commission (EC) permit illegal immigrants into Malaysia. Malays are being betrayed by Umno Malay leaders. These policies of offering citizenship to illegal immigrants have contributed to the loss of lives in Lahad Datu.
A news blackout did nothing to quell criticisms of the handling of the crisis, it merely festered the spread of rumours. Najib has only himself to blame for this debacle. The country is being crippled by abuses of power, corruption, police brutality and high levels of crime, and the man in the street knows the perpetrators. Both Mahathir and Najib have portrayed Anwar as an agent of various foreign governments, a stud (from the various sex videos produced by Umno), and the one who will bring the Malays down. Anwar may be portrayed by Umno as a supervillain, but he is not responsible for these crimes. Contrariwise, he is the superhero who would like to avenge them. Read more at: http://hornbillunleashed.wordpress.com/2013/03/12/42993/
| ||
| The Politician and the Intellectual Mandarin Posted: 11 Mar 2013 11:08 AM PDT Let us make this country better. This country is now owned by all Malaysians. We are all equal stakeholders. We can make this country better by changing the government. That is why we are calling for a regime change. Surprisingly that simple proposition is too difficult for some people to understand. Chandra Muzaffar despite his intellectual self finds it difficult to understand precisely because he cannot understand the motivations, the hopes and fear of the people. These are but people riding the Clapham Omnibus. Mahathir on the other hand is worried about the change because a regime change will expose all his hollow achievements. Like someone close to him said- history will judge Mahathir on corruption. Why does Mahathir busy himself with desperate efforts to maintain the tyranny of the status quo? Mahathir's growing involvement in present politics is nothing short of a damning indictment on Najib. Mahathir's overshadowing presence in UMNO politics clearly shows that Najib is an incapable leader who is impotent most of the time. Mahathir considers Najib a useless and utterly ineffective leader. Long in form, very very short in substance. Therefore if Najib can become PM, anyone else can too. This coming election is not about the culmination of efforts to make Anwar Ibrahim Prime Minister. Mahathir and his followers would want us to believe in that big lie. It is a lie that we must politely refuse if we still can do so politely. Making Anwar Ibrahim PM, is secondary. The primary purpose is to install a good government. Now, a good government is constituted by good people. That is the fundamental requirement. We need good people, qualified, dedicated and selfless who work the system to make the country better. When we say that, it is easy for people like Mahathir and Chandra Muzaffar to pour scorn and ridicule. How could the others do and accomplish what we have done? It's only we the good people with the power who can do good whereas the others outside are evil and can do evil things. It's impossible for good people like us to do evil. That is unnatural. Now, how is it possible and easy for people like Chandra Muzaffar and a practising politician like Mahathir who has been PM for 22 years, demean those outside their group? How is it possible for these people to believe and consider themselves as the only group eminently qualified to rule this country?
| ||
| Wong Tack Should Not Stand on PKR Ticket Unless Anwar Ibrahim & Him Clarify Their Stand on Lynas Posted: 10 Mar 2013 05:57 PM PDT According to the news media, Malaysia's Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim has pledged to back Australian miner Lynas operating a controversial rare earths processing plant, if a new public inquiry proves it to be safe. Earlier he had demanded the plant's closure. Dr Anwar confirmed that if he won power, he would fast-track the inquiry but until then he would move quickly to shut the plant near the coastal town of Kuantan, 194 kilometres north-east of Kuala Lumpur. Dr Anwar said he would offer the company and others the opportunity to testify before any inquiry. He would also seek to involve world experts on rare earths that are used to make high-tech products such as smartphones, iPods, flat-screen televisions, hybrid cars and missiles. "If Lynas can come out with a convincing argument there is no risk to people's safety and security I will be the first to champion the plant there," Dr Anwar said. A friend and a renowned Malaysian socio-political scientist teaching in Singapore reacted when he first read Anwar's statement: " Apparently Anwar also said that Lynas might not be postponed if it is reviewed under PR???? WTH?? Im trying to confirm if he actually said this to the Australian press...Dude, what the hell Anwar has been smoking???" Anwar's stand is putting his PR's manifesto in jeopardy. The document has clearly stated that it shall STOP Lynas if the coalition comes into power. No compromise, no further enquiry and without a doubt. The argument is simple; the project has brought psychological pain and stress to the people surrounding the area. Fishermen are afraid of water contamination. Families are afraid of rare earth particles in the air. Anwar in his interview, which can be viewed from the link provided, said that he has confided in Wong Tack on his recent move to grant Lynas an opportunity to redeem itself by coming out with a convincing argument that there is no risk to people's safety and health. Hence, it is best that Wong Tack clarifies with Anwar Ibrahim his recent stand on Lynas. It would be prudent for Wong Tack to state his own stand too since his name was brought up by Anwar in the interview.
| ||
| Uncommon Sense with Wong Chin Huat: Lahad Datu — How might Malaysians vote in the GE? Posted: 10 Mar 2013 12:28 PM PDT THE Malaysian security forces finally launched a military offensive against Filipino militants who landed on Sabah's shores on 9 February 2013 to reclaim it for the Sulu Sultanate. Deaths have mounted, with more than 50 Sulu militants and eight Malaysian police personnel killed. (Update: an unidentified teenager was shot by Malaysian forces on 10 March.) But the Barisan Nasional (BN) government initially appeared more interested in negotiating with the armed intruders and downplaying their hostile intentions. The Nut Graph asks political scientist Dr Wong Chin Huat what to make of the government's response and what impact it may have on the coming general election. TNG: What are your comments on the BN government's initial response to the invasion? The government seemed to initially adopt an appeasement policy towards the foreign combatants who invaded our land and openly claimed ownership of it. The invaders landed on 9 February and on 18 February, Home Minister Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein actually claimed they were neither terrorist nor militant. It took 25 days for the Malaysian security forces to take action on 5 March. By then, two police commandos had been killed on 1 March in Lahad Datu and another six the following day in Semporna. Hishammuddin had tweeted on 28 February that our security forces had not fired any shots but were shot at that morning. It does seem that our government was initially bending over backwards to downplay the threat from the invaders. Especially when compared with their contrasting attitude when they detained Australian Senator Nick Xenophon at the Low Cost Carrier Terminal and thendeported him.
What do you think are the reasons for the government's slow response? There are three possible answers to our government's initial appeasement policy. First, our authorities could be pacifist to the core. They might beat up unarmed Malaysiandemonstrators to maintain public order but they will not mess with foreign combatants. In that sense, Xenophon's problem was not that he interfered in Malaysian internal affairs, but that he didn't do so backed up by over 100 militants. In Hishammuddin's words, "Since they had guns, it is important our action does not lead to bloodshed."  Mahathir (© Syrenn | public domain) Second, there are the conspiracy theories. Against the background of Tun Mahathir Mohamad's Project IC, some theorise that the Sulu militants are part of the BN government's plot to enfranchise more foreigners. The talk of the militants coming to claim land offered to them, claimed by Filipino sources, fuelled this line. Another variant pursues the possibility that the crisis was manufactured to either frighten the Sabahans to vote BN or to generate patriotic sentiments which BN may ride on. Alternatively, this could be used to justify an emergency in Sabah. The traditional media accusing the opposition leaders of triggering the crisis adds credibility to this variant of conspiracy theory. The third possibility is of course that the authorities have acted flawlessly. The appeasement in the first three weeks was part of the game plan to make the Sulu invaders look unreasonable, hence paving the way for their annihilation later. In other words, the delay and seeming indecisiveness were all part of the master plan. Which possibility is the most likely? It is difficult to say. It is unlikely that the claim about land being offered can be validated. Even if this is true, the Kiram clan may not press this as they may be busy negotiating to avoid criminal charges by both the Philippines and Malaysia. It is also subjective whether the three-week delay and appeasement manifested by Hishammuddin emboldened the Sulu militants' aggressiveness and contributed to avoidable loss of Malaysian lives. A critical assessment that truly puts national interests before partisan interests may not be possible for now as the nation is seemingly engulfed in a mood of unconditional patriotism. What effect could this invasion and the BN government's response have on the election results in Sabah and in Malaysia as a whole?  Thatcher (© Jay Galvin | Flickr) It really depends on whether Sabahan and Malaysian voters will accept a Johnny-come-lately Margaret Thatcher in Datuk Seri Najib Razak. When the Falkland Islands were invaded by the Argentineans on 2 April 1982 in an undeclared war, an emergency Parliament meeting was convened. Thatcher rallied her Parliament and the nation to start a campaign which saw the British triumph in 74 days. Looking like another determined and brave war leader after Winston Churchill, Mrs Thatcher won the nickname "Iron Lady". In contrast, Najib let his ministers handle the crisis while he went on his election campaigns, showing little sense of urgency. No emergency Parliament sitting has been convened despite calls from the opposition and the public to do so to enable national deliberation and resolution. Instead, the home minister made unimaginably appeasing remarks, as described earlier. Read more at: http://www.thenutgraph.com/uncommon-sense-with-wong-chin-huat-lahaddatu-how-might-malaysians-vote-in-ge/
|
When our leaders act in the same manner, this presents a very poor example for the Malays. As an example, former prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad had encouraged the stripping of Ambiga Sreenevasan's (right) citizenship because she wanted true democracy.
Saiful Bukhari's father, Azlan Mohd Lazim, has claimed that the sodomy charges against opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim had been politically motivated. Umno leaders treat Malays as simpletons. Will Malays ask Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak to respond to Azlan's latest revelation and also address the accusations made by carpet dealer Deepak Jaikishan and former inspector-general of police (IGP) Musa Hassan?
Whilst Najib fell under Psy's charms in Penang, and Deputy Prime Minister Muhyiddin Yassin had reportedly been in Indonesia for Chinese New Year, armed Sulu invaders had slipped into Sabah where they were allegedly plied with food and drink by the Umno government during negotiations.
| 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