Sunday, June 27, 2010

MCA VP and his lamentable support for sports betting

When PM Najib finally was forced to say ‘no’ to Vincent Tan’s sports betting (at least for now – can’t tell what’ll happen should BN win the next election), MCA Chief CSL (wisely) said he respected the government’s decision.

But according to Malaysiakini which reported in its MCA veep: Sports betting U-turn 'regrettable', MCA VP Gan Ping Sieu differed with CSL, stating:

“I regret that the government succumbed to political pressure to revoke its earlier decision to legalise sports betting. From day one, this issue has been politicised to the hilt by Pakatan Rakyat leaders who were posturing for selfish interests.”

“Had sports betting been legalised, the government would have been able to manage and mitigate the social impacts that come with the industry.”

Yes and no, or no and yes.

It’s true Pakatan had politicised the issue, perhaps for party interests or perhaps for public interests, or even both. So the politicising of sports betting licence is not necessarily a bad thing. It’s part of the democratic process.

And Najib’s government succumbing to such pressure is also not necessarily a bad thing, as he has been politically wise to do so.

"... the government would have been able to manage and mitigate the social impacts that come with the industry ..."? Utter bulldust! When has the government ever mitigated the adverse consequences of gambling?

More importantly, if sports betting is to be legalized, then there should an open tender for the award of the licence, so that the best deal could be obtained for both the authority and the gambling public. This could include legislating social obligations required of the licencee.

But we need to ask, and Gan should do as well, why was the original okay awarded to Vincent Tan’s Ascot Sports without any form of open tender?

There's no doubt that it had been awarded, as Vincent Tan claimed and Najib himself conceded indirectly by stating the government could withdraw what it had awarded.

The above had been the principal public disatisfaction, on what was perceived as yet another cosy crony award.

Thus, can you blame many for speculating that UMNO would be the main beneficiary, indeed extraordinarily via political ‘donations’ to its political war chest – and some had even speculated (without evidence of course) that Ascot Sports might have been a front for UMNO interests. The no-tender approach plus Dr M’s strong vocal support haven't help, adding unnecessary credibility to the speculations.

If Gan Ping Sieu is really for legalizing sports betting then he should propose a fair and open system of open tender for such a licence and the conditions and social obligations for holding such a licence. But I haven't read anything constructive in his comments other than blaming Pakatan. In that, he has been guilty of the very thing he had blamed Pakatan for, politicizing the issue rather than coming up with something constructive.

And why has he raised the issue of gambling at cyber cafes only now, after Vincent Tan has been denied his sports betting licence? Why didn’t he raise this earlier when BN was controlling Selangor, Penang, and Kedah?

And why mentioned Pakatan controlled states only in conjunction with the accusations of gambling at cyber cafes? Why not Perak, Johor, Sarawak and FT where there are many Chinese in these states?

After all, didn’t Dr M say gambling is part of Chinese culture and way of life, and legalizing what Lim Mun Fah termed as the 'demonic habit' would be showing respect for the Chinese culture? For more of 'the demonic habit' read The Malaysian Insider’s Chinese are not gambling addicts! by Lim Mun Fah.

Saturday, June 26, 2010

Gambling licence - politics all the way

UMNO supreme council member Dr Mohd Puad Zarkashi described the decision by Najib not to go ahead with the football gambling licence (well, at least for now) as appropriate and timely.

Then he spoiled it by stating: "I hope no one will take advantage and politicise the matter."

This is the typical patronising UMNO bullshit that I detest. WTF is he talking about not politicising the gambling issue.

Dumbo, it has been politics all along the way.

Politics on the side of Pakatan in objecting to it.

Politics on the side of BN (save a few UMNO branches) to support it, even to the ridiculous extent of arguing that Chinese rights to gamble should be respected – but of course not Chinese rights to have its Chinese education recognised.

In The Malaysian Insider’s Chinese are not gambling addicts!, Lim Mun Fah wrote:

For a few decades, the Chinese community in Malaysia has asked the federal government to accept and recognise the Unified Examination Certificate (UEC) awarded by the Chinese independent schools, but nothing comes out of the request.

Each time a plea is made the federal government would dismiss the UEC as being not in line with the national education policy and the UEC issue would become dormant for a while until it is brought up again.

This never-ending cycle of ask-reject-ask-reject goes on ad infinitum without any positive resolution.

On the other hand gambling which the Chinese community considers undesirable is being promoted as a part of Chinese culture and way of life and attempts to legalize the demonic habit is propagated as respect for the Chinese culture.

Neither the Chinese community at large or any of the Chinese associations had so far requested that gambling be legalized yet the political leaders are literally going all out to ensure the legalisation of sport-gambling is effected to respect the wishes of the Chinese.

Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad has also said that if he were still the prime minister he would definitely issue the sport-betting licence. Fortunately he is not the prime minister now.

Even the UMNO branches which were against issuing the footie gambling licence to Vincent Tan based their objections on politics – they were scared of losing the moral grounds (and hearland votes) to PAS, though other UMNO sections were more interested in ensuring UMNO's political war chest can be topped up via this footie gambling.

So WTF is this Dr Mohd Puad Zarkashi to come up with such a bullshit comment, trying not only to insult our intelligence but the intelligence of the heartland.

Friday, June 25, 2010

First Lady - Najib has been right!

Julia Gillard
[there's a story behind this photo - will blog in another post]

By the way, PM Najib just tweeted he congratulated Julia Gillard on her ascendancy as PM of Australia, the first woman to become PM of that nation.

Julia also jokingly said that she is probably the first redhead to be so. And she indeed is a gorgeous redhead.

To be frank, kaytee always has the hots for her wakakaka but alas, she already has a live-in partner. Can someone please tell that Perak Mufti what’s-his-name that the PM of Australia is living with a man she’s not married to wakakaka – who knows, maybe he’ll have cardiac arrest?

Anyway, the lucky bloke (envy envy envy) is Tim Mathieson, a 53-year old hairdresser cum salesperson (on hair dressing stuff) – bloody lucky bloke!

Incidentally he is now known as Australia’s ‘First Bloke’ (sometimes ‘First Man’), implying he is the PM’s de facto (not husband - but in Australia both are legally the same).

This brings me to what Najib Razak had said regarding the jeers against Rosmah Mansur and the ad in the USA stating that she’s Malaysia’s 'First Lady'. Of course RPK had been in the forefront of those who criticized her severely for daring to usurp a title that they believe rightfully belongs to the Raja Permaisuri Agong (Queen).

OK, this is kaytee’s view. The title of ‘The First Lady’ is unique only to the USA. For example, they have 'The First Lady' of country music (at one time Patsy Cline, etc etc, then Dolly Parton).

And typical of the American media, they have likewise addressed the wives of foreign presidents as so, for example Carla Bruni as 'The First Lady' of France.

Carla Bruni Sarkorzy

The queen of a nation, for example like Britain's, Holland's, Belgium's and Denmark's, is never referred to as 'The First Lady’, but as 'The Queen’.

In Australia Queen Elizabeth II is the Head of State whilst her representative in Australia is the Governor-General, Quentin Bryce, also a sweetie.

Quentin Bryce and hubby

If we were to follow RPK’s argument then either Prince Philip or Michael Bryce, the hubby of Quentin Bryce, should be called 'The First Man' (or 'Gentleman', the male equivalent of 'Lady').

But then, I have never heard of Elizabeth II (or Quentin Bryce) being referred to as ‘The First Lady’. She is simply the Queen (or respectively the Governor-General).

Thus, Najib has been right in stating that there’s nothing wrong in referring to Rosmah Mansur as 'The First Lady', because the Raja Permaisuri Agong is always the Queen, and never 'The First Lady'.

Much as RPK likes to char koay teow where Najib is concerned, I believe it’s also appropriate to refer to Rosmah as 'The First Lady' within an American environment (during her visit there) because most Yanks wouldn’t have a clue what a Prime Minister is, let alone the wife of a Prime Minister.

Of course Rosmah shouldn’t use this American style title when she's not in America.

FELDA bankrupt? Minister bankrupt of knowledge?

Malaysiakini Felda to sue over Suara Keadilan article.

This is an abuse of powers and public money.

By convention, a government ministry, department, agency or officer cannot sue any member of the public who questions its/his/her official financial propriety or official role, responsibilities and actions.

Only if an individual has been libelled in his/her personal capacity may he/she sue.

The only recourse for a government agency is to demonstrate (show evidence) that the public member’s accusations, allegations or claims are incorrect.

Obviously Ahmad Maslan the Deputy Minister in the Prime Minister's Department has no f* clue as to the government’s accountability and responsibility to the Malaysian public, and the limitations of his powers.

He should f* resign.

Thursday, June 24, 2010

The anti-Perkasa UMNO-ites

First, Minister Mohd Nazri Aziz dismissed Perkasa and Gertak as totally dependent on Dr Mahathir’s patronage, without which those two ultra Malay NGOs would not be able to survive. Some people read more into his comments but I won’t go anywhere near there.

Khairy rescues Wee Ka Siong from Ibrahim Ali.

Nazri and Khairy have been UMNO blokes who have not been particularly ‘kind’ to Perkasa, dismissing the ultra NGO as anything but a serious political voice, which naturally brought out shrill sickening screams from Ibrahim Ali – read
Perkasa to KJ: Don't sell out Malays.

Coincidentally ;-) both guys are immensely disliked by Dr M.

Are we in fact seeing a proxy war, where Nazri and Khairy are attacking Dr M through Perkasa?

Mind you, Nazri has done it before (attacked Dr M, that is) in far more straight forward manner. He is obviously a bloke who didn't, hasn’t nor will give a damn about Dr M, while Khairy has been more circumspect.

Khairy is of course pissed off that as UMNO Youth Chief he isn’t a Minister, as he would have been if UMNO tradition and party protocol had been followed. Needless to say, he must have blamed Dr M.

PM Najib has been tiptoeing through the tulips vis-à-vis the Grand Olde Man, by unprecedentedly not appointing the UMNO Youth Boss as a minister while making Dr M’s son, Mukhriz, who doesn’t hold any UMNO Youth post, a deputy minister.

But I wonder what Najib’s part is in this proxy war?

Is he using both Nazri and Khairy to neutralise Perkasa which has been sabotaging and damaging Najib’s campaigning to win back Indian and Chinese support, because he dares not directly offend Dr M?

Wednesday, June 23, 2010

Najib's Miaow Flop

My matey Dean Johns is at his English-best again in his latest Malaysiakini column Catcalls for Najib.

Given Najib's cat-naming invitation, the theme of his article is on anything feline, household variety of course.

I strongly recommend reading his piece where he shows his mastery of the English vocabulary ;-) on ‘cats’.

For example, the following are two paragraphs from his article - note my highlighting of the words and phrases he used:

Far from evoking warm and fuzzy feelings, this exercise appears to have put the proverbial cat among the pigeons, provoking an outpouring of catty names recalling the entire catalogue of Najib's shames.

Even putting aside proposed names involving variations on the word 'pussy' as too obvious for words, and also perhaps too improper to mention in a newspaper as respectable as Malaysiakini, the list of possibilities appears almost endless.

2nd paragraph = wakakaka

Najib Razak did try and had hoped to invoke an American style (favourable) public response to the ‘presidential’ pet.

In the USA, Americans are acutely interested in the presidential pet, usually a dog. Maybe those Americans wish they also have a monarch who keeps a pack of Corgis (or the American version, a Beagle a la America’s most favourite hound, Snoopy)

Obviously, as Dean said, Najib as a Muslim couldn’t well adopt a dog as a pet. Besides, a cat appeals to Muslims. So he had hoped to catapult his popularity with a wee PR pussyfooting around.

But alas, the people who read the invitation to name his cat are mostly anti UMNO so inevitably the responses have been not only unfair but in some cases quite crude – the result for him was catastrophic wakakaka.

I doubt the heartland, much as they may love cats, would bother to participate in his western style PR gimmickry.

As Malaysians say, lain padang lain belalang – American style vote catching PR campaign won’t work here.

In some ways, Najib is a wee too westernized, perhaps as a result of the American Israeli Apco PR machine.

On the other hand, we Malaysian love the following type of cat - grrrRRRRR or should it be miaow? ;-)

Sunday, June 20, 2010

Why SG appealing against Karpal Singh's sedition case

Karpal Singh, DAP chairperson, Khalsa warrior, erudite lawyer was accused of sedition against the Perak Sultan in the Perak constitutional imbroglio, which incidentally had prompted former Judge NH Chan to comment that HRH’s act in dismissing the State’s former MB, Mohd Nizar Jamaluddin, from his post was a show of ‘pretend-power’.

Malaysiakini reported that Karpal stated: … legal action could be instituted against the Perak sultan over his role in the state constitutional crisis …

In the sedition case against Karpal, Judge Azman Abdullah dismissed the charges, stating that what Karpal stated was kosher as Section 3(2)(a) of the Sedition Act 1948 provided for an exception, in that any Ruler could be told that he has been misled or mistaken.

What more, the judge said the prosecution had failed to prove Karpal violated section 3(1) of the Act, namely to incite hate and disloyalty against a Ruler. He judged that Karpal had been very clinical, and without malice, in his statement that HRH was mistaken in constitutional matters.

The judgement spelled it out clearly, unmistakenly and in accordance with the law – no disrespect had been directed at HRH, as evident by the provision of Section 3(2)(a) of the Sedition Act 1948.

No disrespect means no seditious act had been committed. HRH’s honour had not been tainted, well ... at least legally.

So why is the Solicitor General appealing against the Judge’s decision? Why waste taxpayers’ money to chase something which was not present in the first place? Why defend an honour which had not been besmirched?

There have been many accusations, chief among which has the popular notion that the authority will get Karpal in its favourite hunting ground, its padang pemati (killing field) so to speak, namely, the Court of Appeals.

But kaytee believes otherwise. Just speculating of course, but has it to do with Anwar Ibrahim’s case (Sodomy Mk II) where Karpal is Anwar’s lawyer?

As it's World Cup season, may I use the football terminology of a defending team’s tactic when a formidable striker of the opposite team has the ball?

I suspect it's a case of ‘kacau dia kacau dia’ to distract Anwar Ibrahim's leading striker?

Of course all at taxpayers’ expense, but then what is this when it's nowhere near the cost of a 'jolly' at Disney World, let alone those RM800 million x 2 projects.

Friday, June 18, 2010

Opportunity to politically finish off Koh Tsu Koon

If Tian Chua is disqualified from his position as representative for the Batu federal constituency, with a by-election in the offings, I’ll be more interested in the BN side rather than who will stand as PKR candidate in the by-election.

This is because I read in The Malaysian Insider that Tsu Koon, Si Pin could contest if Batu declared vacant.

Forget about the young chico Si Pin – after all didn’t he lose the Batu seat for Gerakan. Tian Chua swamped him by more than 9,000 votes wakakaka.

I hope Koh Tsu Koon will stand so that when (not ‘if’) he loses kau kau (teruk sangat) I want to see how he will sneak back through the back door into Parliament again.

And don't think it's not possible because those BN people are more than capable of BN-Boleh-ness; look at Tsu Koon as a typical example - didn't he say prior to the 2008 general election that should he lose he won't use the back door to be in Parliament - bay kean siau ay, been p'uoi cheen chnea cheen chnea kau (thick skin ler).

Thursday, June 17, 2010

Malays under siege or UMNO under siege?

In The Malaysian Insider we read that Dr M claims Malays under siege.

Well ;-) try not to read too directly into his assertion but let’s attempt to discern what his real agenda is.

For a start, his argument that "… Malay support was now split among three parties — Umno, PAS and PKR — and suggested that the 'other races' were now taking advantage of the division" is far too simplistic.

I don’t see MCA or Gerakan has succeeded yet in taking advantage of UMNO, or do I detect DAP likewise exploiting PAS.

In reality the heartland support is currently in favour of UMNO with PAS in second place while poor PKR (with significant Chinese and Indian members) is currently in topsy turvy condition for a number of reasons – leader under siege (now, that's who is really under siege!), defections, etc

Leaving hardcore DAP supporters aside (just as PAS can’t do much about hardcore UMNO supporters or UMNO about hardcore PAS supporters), we have most of the Indians back in the BN camp while most of the Chinese (as mentioned, other than hardcore DAP supporters) are backing PAS where there is/will be a PAS candidate.

It is this situation, of Chinese supporting PAS candidates, which worries Dr M.

I did read somewhere , though I can’t say it is correct, that there are over 60 federal parliamentary seats where the non Malay voters could play a pivotal role, like in Bukit Gantang and Hulu Selangor (hmmm, would PAS have won if it was allowed to stand there instead fo PKR?)

If PAS were to win these 60+ seats, it’ll be the end (forever) for UMNO. PAS knows this, and shivering UMNO certainly knows this.

Thus it’s not the Malays but UMNO which is really under siege, because should the '60 seats' forecast happen, there will be a PAS-led (thus still a Malay-led) government.

But what the hey, nothing motivates the heartland than fear of Chinese takeover.

Tuesday, June 15, 2010

The Gambler

Malaysiakini - Mahathir gives thumbs up to sports betting.

On Pakatan Rakyat’s objection to licensing sports betting, Dr Mahathir said: "They are doing it for politics and not (for) Islam. How could DAP (be expected to) uphold Islam? This is opposition politics. They are looking for mileage."

I am puzzled by his argument that if DAP has been against sports betting, it has to be only for politics and not religious belief, as stressed by his assertion “How could DAP be expected to uphold Islam?”

In that assertion, Dr M has virtually asserted that only Islam and therefore Muslims would be against gambling. But what about Christianity, Buddhism, and a host of other religions? Look, even some atheists are against gambling.

One doesn’t need religious belief to be against gambling. One only needs self evaluation, self control and self motivation.

Now it makes me wonder whether Muslims gambled away billions belonging to Bank Negara (and thus the Malaysian public) but unfortunately for us Malaysians, the gambler or gamblers ter-koyak (was ripped apart).

I wonder too whether 'twas Muslims who gambled away with tin at the London Metal Exchange and lost heavily?

Today there are members-only clubs where high ranking Muslims main judi (gamble) nightly by the thousands of ringgit, if not tens of thousands ringgit per hand. Credit? No problem, Datuk & Datin.

I always believe if you can afford it, it’s up to you.

If you can’t like my neighbour Makcik Puteh and her sad addiction to belangkas then don’t.

But let's not involve religion.

Sunday, June 13, 2010

Gambling - a personal experience

Even BN-ruled Johor has now joined Pakatan’s band wagon to oppose sports (football) betting. While I’m not against gambling per se (it's up to the individual) I would neither promote nor encourage it. We already have more than enough forms of gambling, so we needn’t introduce another one.

Vincent Tan might have argued that licensing gambling prevents the money from going ‘underground’ and the government will benefit from the taxation. Well, the government may well benefit, and the illegal bookies may lost out, while the legal ones (Vincent Tan's enterprise) will benefit.

But the question to ask Vincent Tan is who will lose, because in gambling, for someone to win, someone else has to lose – that’s an inescapable fact of gambling. And you can bet it’s the common people, those who can’t afford to lose, who would be the real loser.

I wrote an article for the Centre for Policy Initiatives website titled A disease deadlier than AIDS where I highlighted that gambling is a mental sickness which has to be dealt with through the support of medical-psychology experts. The government should either provide funding for, or tax casinos into funding public clinics to address the mental health needs of pathological gamblers.

I argued that Pathological gambling is an insidious disease far more threatening than AIDS as we tend to be more lenient and accepting of its presence within our midst even though its drastic effects and consequences on the innocents, especially the families of the gamblers, have been known to be far worse.

I have personally witnessed the sad story of an addicted gambler – for more, see my new posting Makcik Puteh & Belangkas over at my other blog KTemoc Kongsamkok.

Saturday, June 12, 2010

3 guesses for Chua Jui Meng

Much as it was unjust, at least we know why Sultan Mansur Shah sentenced Hang Tuah to death without trial. The tyrant so ordered his most loyal warrior to be executed on the basis of unsubstantiated hearsay, that Tuah was having a private nookie with one of HRH’s dayang (young sweetie attendant at the court). But at least we know why.

Then there was the case of a caddy, whose laughing at the wrong place and at the wrong time in front of the wrong person was disastrously wrong. Though the caddy was ‘wronged’ we again know why.

What about the hockey coach? Yup, we know why he was offside with someone.

But poor Jimmy Chua Jui Meng is still trying to find out why, though mind you, we all know why ;-).

In my previous post Being stripped of datukship I highlighted another case, that of former MCA deputy president, Lee Kim Sai, who had his datukship ripped away by the former (late) Sultan of Selangor. I also provided the reason. Maybe poor Jimmy Chua has suffered from similar 'sabo'*?

* Malaysian word for 'sabotage'

But we read in Malaysiakini’s Johor sultan's decision 'nothing to do with politics' that the secretary of the Johor Royal Council, Abdul Rahim Ramli, said the Sultan of Johor has the power to confer awards or withdraw them as he is above politics.

I know the sentence was written by Malaysiakini but please note my underlining of the word ‘as’, because I fail to see the logical relationship between the Sultan’s power (to confer or withdraw awards) and he being above politics?

Certainly in a constitutional monarchy the ruler is above politics, and we sincerely hope so, but that is not directly related to his inherent royal prerogative to award or withdraw datukships.

And his right to award or withdraw datukships has no direct relationship with his constitutional status of being above politics.

Like Sultan Mansur Shah, I suppose we should sentence either the Malaysiakini reporter or Abdul Rahim Ramli to additional detention classes in English, to write 100 lines of “I shall not recklessly misuse the word ‘as’” wakakaka!

Malaysiakini reported:

Asked why the awards conferred to Chua were withdrawn, he said the Sultan of Johor did not have to cite reasons as it was within his prerogative. He said those who had awards withdrawn should ask themselves whether they had done 'something honourable' or not.

Does Jimmy Chua get 3 guesses, though I believe one should be sufficient?

"Don't do things that are against that done by good people," he said adding three main consideration [sic] for awards were loyalty, diligence and meritorious service."

Great stuff because we know of Datuks (murderer, crooks etc) who went into and came out of jail with their datukships intact throughout their session of public funded food and accommodation.

Loyalty OK lah, but diligence and meritorious service? Wakakaka.

But wait, The Malaysia Insider may have something for us on this, where Abdul Rahim Ramli revealed:

“After deliberating on reports against some Members of the Most Honourable Order of the Crown of Johor the Johor Royal Council advised the Sultan to expel those involved and he has consented to the advice.”

above underlining are mine

So it was the Johor Royal Council rather than the Sultan who initiated the stripping of Jimmy Chua’s datukship. HRH merely put his royal mark onto the Council’s advice.

I wonder who are members of the Johor Royal Council? Does the MB sit in the council?

Darul Ta'zim? It's so pitifully and pathetically petty.

Thursday, June 10, 2010

Being stripped of datukship

Malaysiakini - Jui Meng stripped of Johor datuk-ship.

No reason has been given yet, though it's HRH's prerogative. But many speculate that it has to do with Chua Jui Meng’s crossover to PKR.

Unfortunately, ‘speculating’ is exactly what would happen in the absence of information.

Chua of course is no longer with MCA. But even if he is, he won’t be the first MCA bloke to have his datukship withdrawn. I have been informed that honour* belongs to Lee Kim Sai, former deputy chairman of MCA.

* today, can you blame anyone if they believe it's an honour rather than a stigma

To talk more on Lee, we need to return to 1987, when the infamous Ops Lalang had its genesis in the decision of an Education Minister (guess who - wakakaka) to appoint some 100 non-Mandarin educated senior assistants and principals to vernacular Chinese schools.

Chinese educationists were outraged and Chinese-based parties quickly fell into line to support them. Well, they had to because, as I have often remarked, ‘education’ is a central pillar of Chinese culture, and no pillar of such a culture would be stronger and more sacred than that of Chinese language education.

Well, those pollies could ignore the anger of the Chinese at the risk of losing their votes - such a delicate and sensitive issue was and still is something UMNO could never understand as it continuously undermine MCA and Gerakan standing in the Chinese community.

But it sure as hell didn’t look good when MCA, Gerakan, DAP and Dong Jiao Zong (Chinese educationists) banded together in a 2,000-strong gathering at the Hainanese Association Building beside the KL Thian Hou Temple.

Dr Mahathir was said to invoke the memory of Shaolin Temple which was renowned more for its opposition to authorities than martial arts. He said (words to the effect): We know what happened when Chinese gathered together in a temple to talk politics.
Guess he was advised by Chinese historical-cultural experts, unless he was a covert fan of Chinese martial arts films wakakaka.

Ops Lalang nabbed 106 of all races under ISA (including a few 'unwanted' UMNO personnel) whereafter they enjoyed free nasi curry at Hotel Kamunting - 2 years for some like Lim Kit Siang who I believe earned his law degree while residing there.

However, the two principal opponents in the Chinese educational imbroglio, a then young UMNO Youth chief, Najib, and Lee Kim Sai, were untouched by Ops Lalang, hence the term ‘Untouchables’ – of course, to Indians, ‘Untouchables’ are those of the pariah caste but that’s not exactly what I had in mind, though mind you, I won’t defend them if you apply the Indian meaning wakakaka.

Being UMNO and the son of the revered Tun Razak, Najib was naturally 100% teflon-ised while Lee was ‘coincidentally’ out of the country (in Australia) when Ops Lalang was launched. Even in such ‘untouchability’ there was a noticeable difference between UMNO and MCA, where one could repose in arrogant immunity while the other had to silently and sneakily scurry away ;-)

But apparently on the urging of a Najib-led UMNO Youth delegation to the former Sultan of Selangor, Lee Kim Sai had his datukship stripped.

I wonder whether his was restored after a period of political fallow. And if it was, I wonder whether he had the dignity to decline HRH's re-considered generosity.

Wednesday, June 09, 2010

Those Arab 'friends'

Below is my letter to Malaysiakini titled Knowing who your true friends are.


I am quite tempted to say that Helen Ang's article
Your children's future in an Islamic state has jackals snapping at her heels for nothing, but I won't [smile!].

But it's amazing that her quite factual essay has triggered off a few raves and rants accusing her of being an Islamophobe. I would like to know what or where Ang has written in her article to deserve such a wild accusation.

Ang made an astute observation that 'Malaysian involvement in the Gaza flotilla and Malaysia's response to the Israeli military operation against the pro-Palestinian activists both unite Umno, PAS and PKR in a cause beloved of the Muslim world' but by contrast there was an absence of similar outrage to atrocities witnessed in Myanmar, Sudan and Sri Lanka, a fact very few can deny.

Now, she made neither insult nor insinuation when she concluded that 'There is no mystery as it is quite natural that the Muslim brotherhood should be more concerned about the fate of their brethren. It is only the zealous proponents of universal brotherhood who mistakenly believe that this inclination of the ummah may be something unnatural.'

Talking about the Muslim brotherhood I'm going to leave Ang with her erudite and most observant article, and move on to highlight a few points about the ummah.

Following the Boxing Day tsunami, as the Western and Eastern world rallied to the reconstruction and rehabilitation of the victim, with a small nation like Australia donating Australian $1 billion to mainly Muslim Indonesians, the parsimony of the Middle-East Arabs, particularly the Midas-rich Kuwaitis should be recalled to remind Malaysian Muslims who their real brothers in need have been.

Kuwait initially donated US$1 million to the tsunami victims, an amount equal to the gift from an American individual Sandra Bullock. Meanwhile the Saudi Croesus offered (initially) US$10 million to equal another individual's donation, German Michael Schumacher. That these two Arab countries subsequently raised it to $2 and 30 million respectively but then only after they were lambasted by the media of the Gulf countries should not hide their pathetic commitments to helping the ummah.

Not only that, those miserly Gulf Arab nations added insult to injury by claiming from their mosque pulpits that the tsunami victims were evil sinners. Yes, the Kuwaiti Parliament heard one of its members, Walid Tabtabai, claimed that Allah sent the tsunami to punish the immoral and unjust, in other words, a case of azab-e-Ilahi or the wrath of God for the sins of those tsunami victims.

So the poor Muslim farmers and fishermen in Aceh were immoral and unjust. As Tarek Fatah, a progressive Muslim leader and television host based in Toronto, commented in disgust: 'What sick mind could come up with this description? The Kuwaitis and Saudi Islamists lecturing the world about morality is an outrage.'

'Or is it that in the eyes of most Kuwaitis and Saudis, the dead belonged to the despised underclass who live as fourth class citizens in the Gulf States. Dark skinned Indian, Sri Lankan, Indonesian; truck drivers, cooks and maids; all children of a lesser God in the eyes of these Islamists of the Gulf.'

I recall dashing off a letter
Asian victims children of a lesser God.

But whoa, when subsequently Katrina hit New Orleans, the Kuwait who offered the tsunami victims a miserly US$2 million (reminder: which it subsequently and grudgingly increased from 1 to 2 million only after much criticism from the Gulf press) become shockingly generous and immediately gave US$500 million, yes half a billion dollars, to the Americans.

Obviously to the Kuwaiti parliamentarians, mullahs and government, the American victims in New Orleans were less immoral and less unjust than Indonesians, and therefore more deserving and needier of their generous donations.

By the way, Qatar gave the tsunami relief $25 million but the victims of Katrina, $100 million. So much for Muslim brotherhood.

While I, too, have been one who criticised the Israelis for their atrocity against the Peace Flotilla, like some of my friends I wonder when the Malaysian Muslims will be criticising the Egypt government for its complicity in blockading Gaza.

Egypt's fratricidal backstabbing may be traced to the US's carte blanche imprimatur to Israel - Israel wants Gaza blockaded, US swiftly passes word to Egypt, and Egypt immediately complies. As reward for its obedience, US provides Egypt with arms (always inferior to what it gives Israel) and US$2 billion in aid annually.

To put it bluntly, while Palestine has been a victim to the Israeli rapist, Egypt has been a whore to the US godfather. I am beginning to wonder who's the Islamophobe.

Tuesday, June 08, 2010

Supporting Israel = Supporting UMNO

One of the reasons why people like kaytee have been and still am pissed off with the (rightwing/ultra) Israelis is that these ar$eh*les are supposed to be the children of the Holocaust victims, yet they behave precisely like Nazis, indulging in brutalities, ghetto-risation and group punishment of Palestinians (e.g. a Palestinian son is a suspected terrorist, his parents' house would be demolished and f* the parents and siblings-children). Therefore their crimes are doubly more difficult to forgive.

Thus it was hardly surprising that in Malaysia there have been criticisms against Israel for her usual brutalities and indiscriminate atrocities against the Palestinian people, most recent of which had been the slaying of 9 passengers on a ship in the Peace Flotilla.

Malaysiakini also reported that: The Dewan Rakyat has passed a resolution to strongly condemn Israel's attack on a humanitarian aid vessel and urged the UN Security Council to initiate legal action against the Zionist regime through the International Criminal Court (ICC).

It was an unanimous resolution!

But at the same time there have been some Malaysian bloggers, mainly non-Malays, who defended Israel's action and/or attacked the Turks' (thus the Palestinians') in their blogs or on Facebook.

I wonder which of the following reasons has led them to do so:

(1) They believe Israel was right or/and Palestinians were wrong;
(2) They support Israel politically, religiously or/and morally;
(3) They do so just to spite the Malays and local Muslims;
(4) They were practicing the concept of "the enemy of my enemy is my friend"?

If they support Israel or/and criticize/condemn Palestinians because of above reasons (1) and (2) I have to respect or just accept their views (though of course I don’t agree with them).

However, if they do so because of above reasons (3) and (4) I would find that ironical.


As racial 'victims', the Palestinians are precisely in the same position (actually worse off) as those bloggers are, or think/believe they are. Both Israel and UMNO-ruled Malaysia are ethno-religious racist administrations.

If you’re a non-Malay blogger who voiced your condemnation against or sneered at the Palestinians or/and your support for Israel, well, whatever grieves you because of UMNO policies, think of the poor Palestinians because those poor Arabs are getting it a thousand times worse off.

So, when you support the Israelis just to spite the Muslims or Malays (or because you are anti all Muslims) you’re effectively supporting UMNO in its ketuanan Melayu discrimination against you.

Food for thoughts?

Monday, June 07, 2010

Chua Soi Lek 'caught' again

Karn neen nare lay.

Read this from The Malaysian Insider’s
MCA MP questions appointment of Chua junior as deputy minister.

If what Gelang Patah MP Tan Ah Eng said is true, then Chua Soi Lek has not been kosher for saying ‘twas the PM who picked his son from a couple of names to be deputy minister, and the corollary? … nepotism!

The cat was let out of the bag when the aggrieved Ah Eng, also Wanita MCA deputy chairman, asked PM Najib why she wasn’t appointed. Good olde Najib told her that he appointed MCA people according to a list of names given to him by Chua. Najib was effectively telling her that her name was not there, contrary to what Chua had claimed.

Not a good start for the new president of MCA. He's 'naughty' wakakaka in more than one way ;-)

Israelis exploit the anti-semitism claim

Gaza, Not Anti-Semitism by Robert Dreyfuss.

[Robert Dreyfuss is a contributing editor to The Nation magazine, and the author of Devil's Game: How the United States Helped Unleash Fundamentalist Islam (Metropolitan)]


Whatever your thoughts about the Gaza flotilla incident, one thing is certain: Neither the event itself, nor the subsequent world reaction, has anything to do with anti-Semitism. But try telling that to Charles Krauthammer or Bibi Netanyahu.

In what may be his worst op-ed of 2010 -- and that is saying something -- Krauthammer lies and prevaricates through his viciously misguided column in the June 4 Washington Post entitled “Those Troublesome Jews” and includes this pathetic zinger:

“The world is tired of these troublesome Jews, 6 million -- that number again -- hard by the Mediterranean, refusing every invitation to national suicide. For which they are relentlessly demonized, ghettoized and constrained from defending themselves, even as the more committed anti-Zionists -- Iranian in particular -- openly prepare a more final solution.”

Krauthammer’s disgusting insinuation is echoed by Netanyahu, the thuggish Israeli prime minister, who says: “Once again Israel faces hypocrisy and a biased rush to judgment. I’m afraid this isn't the first time.”

Playing the anti-Semitism card means that you can play with the facts. Krauthammer, for instance, arrogantly claims that he can “prove” that the flotilla was an act of aggression rather than a political statement aimed at weakening Israel’s embargo of Gaza by this canard:

“Oh, but weren't the Gaza-bound ships on a mission of humanitarian relief? No. Otherwise they would have accepted Israel’s offer to bring their supplies to an Israeli post, be inspected for military materiel and have the rest trucked by Israel into Gaza -- as every week 10,000 tons of food, medicine and other humanitarian supplies are sent by Israel to Gaza.”

But, of course, Israel would not allow those supplies to reach Gaza under any circumstances precisely because many of the items -- cement, for instance -- are on the do-not-allow list that Israel arbitrarily maintains to weaken Gaza economically. To be sure, the point of the flotilla was not to provide Gaza with supplies. The point of the entire effort is to make a demonstration to the world that the continued embargo of Gaza is outrageous and cruel, and in that they have succeeded remarkably well.

It appears that the message has gotten through -- on some level at least -- to the Obama administration, which has tried to pretend since taking office in 2009 that Gaza doesn’t exist. Having ignored Gaza entirely -- never once sending George Mitchell, the special envoy appointed in January, 2009 -- Obama now says that things have to change:

“What’s important right now is that we break out of the current impasse, use this tragedy as an opportunity so that we figure out how we meet Israel’s security concerns, but at the same time start opening up opportunity for Palestinians.”

That’s a start.

I am no fan of Hamas. As far as I’m concerned, Hamas is a radical-right organization whose main leaders are fundamentalist Muslims with a penchant for blowing up pizza parlors. There are some elements in Hamas that are more enlightened. But overall Hamas is a creation of Israel itself: First, because in the 1970s and 1980s, the Israeli secret service helped fund and organize Hamas because it believed that radical Muslim Palestinians would split the Palestinian movement and fight Fatah. And they did. Second, because during the 1990s and 2000s Hamas’ nihilistic radicalism fed off the cynical radicalism of extremist Israelis such as Ariel Sharon and Netanyahu.

It was the extremism of Sharon and Netanyahu that led to the growing popularity of Hamas. If Hamas were serious about peace, they’d agree to accept a permanent ceasefire with Israel and to accept the principle of a two-state solution by recognizing Israel. That’s what the PLO under Yasser Arafat did in the 1980s and 1990s. By doing so now, Hamas could checkmate the Israel embargo and capitalize on the fact that Israel is on the defensive politically.

But to get there the Obama administration may have to change its policy and start talking to Hamas. Smart diplomats can figure out a dozen ways of doing so and of making it work.

Sunday, June 06, 2010

Egyptian question in the Israeli-Palestine equation

A very relevant question regarding the inhumane Nazi-like blockade of food and much needed material from entering Gaza has been “Why doesn’t Malaysia condemn Egypt because it’s also complicit in the blockade of Gaza?”

As a matter of fact I came across this question in Walski’s latest post Eyeless in Gaza.

Walkski is a great matey of mine and I want to offer one possible answer. The following is an expansion of my comments I left at walski’s blog myAsylum

From Day 1 of my amateur blooging, I've always been an advocate for Palestinian freedom from Israeli oppression, and its sovereignty and Statehood.

The Palestinians, especially in Gaza (not that those in West Bank have been let off, no sirree, not at all) have been confined like prisoners in the world’s biggest prison, an inhumane act of ethnocentric brutality akin to the WWII ghetto-risation of Polish Jews by the Nazis, no doubt the spiritual kinfolk of today's Israelis.

Forced to live in a ghetto under severely deprived conditions, the Palestinians are effectively oppressed in their own land by a cruel occupying (or imprisonment) force.

All the above Israeli atrocities, brutalities and sheer unaccountable arrogance may be traced to one root cause - America's (religious) blind obedience to Israel. As Goh Keat Peng wrote in his letter to Malaysiakini
So little has been done for Gaza:

The resolve isn't there and one favoured nation is allowed a free hand to do as it pleases without regard to any reasonable sense of proportion. There has been no semblance of fairness or justice.

The failure to address the needs of those who call the Gaza Strip home is a failure of the resolve of the international community to bring to book a belligerent military power in the Middle East.

You cannot be allowed to live and act unchecked as though you are alone in the neighbourhood. As though only you have the right to live and act.

Thus Egypt's complicity may also be traced to the USA's carte blanche imprimatur to Israel - Israel wants Gaza blockaded, USA swiftly passes that requirement to Egypt, and Egypt immediately complies.

As reward for its obedience or if you like, subservience, USA provides Egypt with arms (older and inferior to the ones it gives Israel) and US$2 billion in aid annually. Naturally, Israel gets more than $4 billion each year apart from intelligence, technology and special priority in arms delivery.

To wit, while Palestine is a victim to the Israeli rapist, Egypt is a whore to the USA godfather. So who should we criticise? I would imagine Egypt to be the last on the list.

And don't forget the other whores in the region, Jordan and to a lesser extent but also equally culpable, Saudi Arabia - because all these three Arabian nations fear republican Hamas, which has been modelled after the Muslim Brotherhood of Egypt (banned in that country) and Shiite (republican) Hezbollah.

So a combination of US patronage ($$$ for Egypt and Jordan - protection and armed support for the al Sabah family of Saudi) and self interests of the governments of Egypt, Jordan and Saudi has seen the betrayal of the Palestinian people for the last several decades.

That Egypt is now hypocritically opening up the blockade, just as it did after the recent horrendous pulverisation of Gaza by the region’s superpower (armed and supported by the USA), has more to do with its apprehension about its own backyard and perhaps even a nudge and a wink from sugar daddy - after all, didn't Hilary Clinton say of the recent Israeli atrocity: "The situation in Gaza is unsustainable and unacceptable".

Unless the USA does something about the Nazi-like ghetto-risation and evil group punishment of Israel, the blockade will soon be reinstated by a compliant complicit compassionless Egypt.

Friday, June 04, 2010

Lucrative sand

‘Corrupt’ means guilty of dishonest practices such as bribery, or lacking integrity, which then leads us to its noun ‘corruption’.

‘Corruption’ means, among many things, perversion of integrity or dishonest proceedings.

Would the act of paying oneself two months bonus after just 4 months on the job represent a corrupt act, a dishonest proceeding? Or that big term, perversion of integrity?

Even if the company rules permit the management to decide on such a bonus (or is silent on it), would the act of the management, which greatly benefits the management itself, be considered as a perversion of integrity?

Malaysiakini reported that Selcat stated there is no evidence of corruption in KSSB.

Just in case you don't know, KSSB or Kuala Semesta Sdn Bhd is the Selangor state government-owned sand mining company, formed by MB Khalid Ibrahim's administration to curb illegal sand mining in the state.

MKINI reported that Selcat panel chairperson Teng Chang Khim said the panel found no evidence of corruption, but rather, mismanagement in KSSB.

However, the dictionary says ‘mismanagement’ means to manage incompetently or dishonestly.

I believe Teng's mention of 'mismangement' in KSSB was more to do with incompetent management. However at the same time, to remind ourselves, ‘mismanagement' also mean manage dishonestly.

Once again, I ask: would the management giving themselves 2 months bonus for a mere 4 months work be considered as dishonest management or, as Teng probably suggested, incompetent management?

I know it's unusual to give bonus even before a year in business had been completed but obviously the spirit of Malaysia Boleh exists everywhere.

Whichever, I trust the MB and his exco will take appropriate action, namely, to sack the entire top management of KSSB. Such sheer breath-stealing incompetency has no place in a Pakatan-led State or a Pakatan established company.

Let’s not pussyfoot around, Khalid Ibrahim. Sack the lot! Wait, first retrieve the 2 months bonus as not justified nor approved.

I wait eagerly to hear your decision.

And for those die-hard PKR supporters, stop demon-izing Manikavasagam – would you prefer he kept quiet and allow the KSSB management to continue putting their snout in the trough? Don't let sand get in your eyes la.

Little drops of water,
little grains of sand,
make the mighty ocean
and the beauteous land.

So our little errors
lead the soul away,
from the paths of virtue
into sin to stray.

- Julia Carney, 1845 [1st and 4th stanza]

Thursday, June 03, 2010

Truth on the Israeli Attack on the Peace Flotilla by neutral sources

Paul McGeough is an award winning journalist, and probably next to Robert Fisk, the most knowledgeable and respected person in that profession on Middle-East affairs. He has interviewed al Qaeda and other groups that won’t normally provide interviews to western journalists.

McGeough and an Aussie photographer-journalist Kate Geraghty, both of whom worked for the Sydney Morning Herald (SMH), were among those on the peace flotilla and subsequently imprisoned by Israeli military until international pressure forced the Jewish State to release them.

Incidentally McGeough was the journalist who had to flee Iraq for his own life when in mid-2004 he revealed to the world how US pet and former Iraqi PM, Iyad Allapwi
, had cold-bloodedly executed 6 prisoners, who were nothing more than “suspects”, in front of his troops, it was said, to straighten up their (the troops’) spines. He shot each and every one of those prisoners as Saddam Hussein had been accused of doing.

For more see my post America the Unfair - America the UnChampion of Democracy and America Maintaining Tradition in Sponsoring Allies.

Well, in the SMH’s Freed journos tell of Israeli commandos like 'hyenas hunting' McGeough and Geraghty, who were on another boat (the Challenger) gave us their insight of what happened and how they assessed the conduct of the Israelis, not just at sea but on land as well.

Geraghty said while she was photographing the Israelis boats she was tasered. Shane Dillion, the 1st mate of the Challenger said:

‘‘[Kate Geraghty] was leaning over the side of the boat to take a photograph down of one of the boats approaching us and they blasted her with a Taser.’’

Here is a report from a neutral Aussie journalist of being fired at by Israelis without provocation. It goes to debunk the Israeli lies that the protestors were violent. The Israelis have refused to release the entire tapes to international journalists who wanted those rather than edited snips of the videos.

The more likely truth is the Israelis were hellbent on 'punishing' the protestors severely (whether to kill or just injure them, one can't say) in the silly hope of deterring future protestors. Israelis are BIG on deterrence but alas, which nowadays isn't working for them. The Israelis have failed to update themselves with the resolve of a modern opposition.

Extracts of the SMH report follow:

Nine people were killed in the confrontation but Israel maintains that its commandos were attacked by the protesters.
Geraghty believes she was hit by a stun gun fired by Israeli commandos after they boarded her ship. She suffered bruises, minor burns and nausea.

Geraghty said today that she was safe and "very happy" to have been released from detention.

While she had been "frightened" during the confrontation, she said her injuries were "minor" compared with what happened to others on board the boats.


His deportation was "an absolute disrespect by Israel" for democracy and the fundamental rights of journalists, McGeough said.

Well. so much for so-called Israeli democracy and freedom of the press.


The first mate on the Challenger One, Shane Dillon, called the Israeli raid "an act of piracy".

"It was an attack on a flotilla of peace boats in international waters. It was an act of piracy. The force used was excessive and unwarranted," Mr Dillon told Fairfax after arriving home in Dublin.

Mr Dillon said the mostly female activists on his boat were treated badly -- pushed and hit with rifles, shot in the face with paintball weapons at close range and beaten.

It's known that Israeli soldiers like to beat up or shoot women and children - they had demonstrated that in both Lebanon and Gaza.

And the congregation sent thither twelve thousand men of the valiantest, and commanded them, saying, Go and smite the inhabitants of Jabeshgilead with the edge of the sword, with the women and the children. [Judges 21:10]

If you want more of Israeli atrocities and war crimes, do read my other posts:

(1) Gaza war crimes till unaccounted for

(2) Neo-Nazis perpetuating Holocaust in Gaza

Wednesday, June 02, 2010

Compassion should be colour blind

Goh Keat Peng wrote one of the most compassionate and at the same time frustrated letters I have read in Malaysiakini – please do peruse his So little has been done for Gaza.

It’s a short letter and yet he expressed the same frustration I have with the evil machinations of the Israelis. He wrote:

My attempts late last night and early this morning at describing the meaning of Gaza and the plight of its people have all ended with neither coherence or completion. Words fail.

I could find no mind or talent or technique equal to the task. So much needs to be done yet so little has been done for the people of Gaza.

The resolve isn't there and one favoured nation is allowed a free hand to do as it pleases without regard to any reasonable sense of proportion. There has been no semblance of fairness or justice.

The failure to address the needs of those who call the Gaza Strip home is a failure of the resolve of the international community to bring to book a belligerent military power in the Middle East.

You cannot be allowed to live and act unchecked as though you are alone in the neighbourhood. As though only you have the right to live and act.

As though you alone are entitled to make all the decisions. As though only you have the right of survival.

But we can forget about the Americans being an impartial broker – they have consistently failed to rein in their Israeli master. Just as Paul Rees, a British journalist, had predicted accurately, they now refuse to condemn the Israelis for their recent atrocities on the high seas as the world had done. Paul Rees also asked us to picture how the Americans would have reacted had the illegal armed boarders been Iranian commandos who shot 19 people dead.

So long as the Americans continue to subserviently serve Israel as their religious guru, the Palestinians can forget about any justice via the Americans.

Example – what happened to George Bush’s roadmap to peace with the promise of a Palestinian State by 2008? It’s now 2010, and Palestinians continue to live under Israeli bondage. And the Americans continue to turn a blind eye on Israel’s deception to derail every peace talks that could lead to Palestinian statehood.

It even pressures countries like Egypt, Jordan and to some extent Saudi Arabia to toe the Israeli line – and the Jewish State doesn’t want to give up Judea, Samaria and half of Jerusalem.

But what saddens me most of all have been the anti-Palestinian comments by many Malaysians. Instead of judging for themselves the actions of the Israeli military actions against a civilian ship in international waters, they questioned why sympathizers have not expressed similar concerns for the Sri Lankan Tamils, Burmese or Dafur, etc.

How do they know that people like me haven’t?

It’s the same type of argument that Hindraf has posed to people: why voice concerns for Aminulrasyid Amzah but not Kugan or other Indians? Again, how does Uthayakumar know that we haven’t?

But this racially or religiously conscious approach is very lamentable because if one is sincere in expressing concerns, one shouldn’t calculate beforehand whether the victim is Indian, Malay, Chinese, Palestinian, Sri Lankan, Burmese, Muslim, Christian, Hindu, Buddhist, etc.

And what does it matter if our neighbour only expresses sympathy for X but not Y? Sometimes the world is so full of injustice and tragedies that we cannot provide or voice our compassion, care and charity for everybody. Even if the sympathy is limited and directed to one party, so what – at least it’s still compassion.

More importantly we should ask ourselves whether we have feelings for the sufferings of people. Just skip that pack of cigarettes or a lunch, and send the money to the Red Cross or other suchlike organizations. I give as much (and not much, I have to admit – just RM100) each month to an Indonesian boy I adopt via World Vision as I provide to the Red Cross for Darfur. And I am a member of Amnesty International too. What little we can provide, what few words we are able to say, just do it!

Reach into our own hearts, and stop worrying about the other guy – what he/she does is his/her concern.

Related: Gaza's misery lingers as convoy fails to break siege