Thursday, April 28, 2011

The Teoh Beng Hock death - MACC lies

The next witness from the MACC, Mohd Yusmizan Mohd Yusof, said he had sent a text message to console his good friend and fellow officer, Mohd Ashraf Mohd Yusof, for being one of the suspects leading to Teoh's death.

“There was suggestion that Mohd Ashraf had held the belt of someone and put him near the window on the 14th floor. There was a lot of pressure on him, and I sent an short sms to console him,” he said.

RCI catches MACC man lying to cops


There are indeed people who fear Allah swt and have told the truth.

The sh*t has hit the fan, as revealed in Malaysiakini’s
MACC attempted to ‘standardise’ testimonies.

Standardizing testimonies is another term for eliminating conflicting reports of truthful testimonies against untruthful testimonies. We now need to separate the lies from the truth.

Thus, the person organizing such a standardization should be called to account for his deeds or misdeeds before the Royal Commission of Inquiry into Teoh’s still-unexplained death in MACC custody (RCI).

MKINI reported that a witness, Azeem Hafeez Jamaluddin, stated before the RCI that
“…there were several meetings before the inquest into Teoh's death and the inquiry hearing, involving Hishammuddin Hashim, who was the Selangor MACC deputy director in 2009."

Azeem also alleged that Hishammuddin had instructed his men to cover up his role in the investigations against DAP state assemblypersons.

“The meeting was held three days after the incident, on July 19, and again several days before the inquest and commission. We were directed to be consistent in our statements to the police and also while testifying."

“Hishamuddin also ordered that no one can mention that he was the one directing the operation on the (DAP assemblypersons) and for the officers to inform that it was Hairul Ilham Hamzah who was in charge.”

Not only did the witness asserted that Hishamuddin Hashim was directing the standardization cover-up, but that “… the then director of investigations, Mohd Shukri Abdull (now deputy chief commissioner) and chief commissioner Abu Kassim Mohamed had also called for a meeting to standardize their testimonies.”

He said that the MACC's head of prosecution, Abdul Razak Musa, and his deputy Kevin Morais, coached the MACC officers on how to answer questions from the RCI.

In my previous post
Teoh Beng Hock – a cruel & unnecessary death, I had voiced my puzzlement over several points I had read in the newspapers, among which were the questions about the MACC officer who was absent during the DNA gathering exercise and that of Teoh BH’s belt.

I also wrote: We also know there was no justifiable cause for MACC to investigate Ean Yong by the overnight interrogation of his aide, Teoh Beng Hock. So by logical extension, we would be justified in arguing that it must have been a politically motivated case.

I must now pose another question: Is there any connection between HIshamuddin Hashim and any politician from UMNO Selangor?

Alhamduillah. Hopefully we needn’t wait for the hereafters of those guilty to see Teoh Beng Hock receives due justice.

Tuesday, April 26, 2011

Teoh Beng Hock - a cruel & unnecessary death

Today’s editorial in The Malaysian Insider is titled Blood on MACC’s hands, and the blood is that of the late Teoh Beng Hock.

Lim Kit Siang shares the same view - see The Malaysian Insider's
MACC must take full blame for Beng Hock’s death, says Kit Siang.

Their conclusion came about when the Royal Commission of Inquiry (RCI) into Teoh BH’s death stated that the MACC failed to find evidence of corruption in Selangor (DAP) ADUN Ean Yong Hian Wah’s financial managing of some minor projects. There was no evidence of Ean ever abusing State funds.

The AG and MACC had argued that Teoh committed suicide because he couldn’t take the guilt of being involved in his boss’ (Ean’s) corrupt practice nor the stress of covering those up. Thus the argument is that, if there was no evidence of corrupt practice, ipso facto, then there was no cause for Teoh to be so stressed that he committed suicide.

In other words his death could not be suicide, as the AG and MACC had attempted to prove.

And if it was not suicide, how then did Teoh meet his horrible death? How did he come to fall from the 14th floor of the MACC building?

Remember, he was ONLY a witness, not a suspect!

Remember, he was to marry on the day following his witness appearance and unexpected mysterious death. On the day he was to die, he had rang his best man to remind him of the wedding the next day.

Even more mysterious than Teoh's death, the MACC found a note in his handbag nearly ONE YEAR AFTER his death. The MACC attempted to present that as a suicide note.

There is a blogger whom I shall just call the 'Son of Han' because of his extreme Chinese chauvinistic views (politicised of course, like Chinese Malaysians should only vote for a Han Chinese Confucian-oriented party like MCA). His posts are usually laced generously with abuses, vulgarisms and obscenities against DAP and PKR female MPs and ADUNs. 'Son of Han' also offered his pompous analysis of the co-called suicide note, where he alluded to Teoh's authorship. It's ironical that the 'Son of Han' is the classical example of a running dog!

Now, when a government coronial inquest into Teoh BH's death gave an open verdict, we Malaysians know that in all likelihood, the coroner dared not say it was murder or manslaughter.

The following were gleaned from newspapers reports:

Recall, at the time of Teoh's death, the MACC building was mysteriously locked up for an hour. No one then could enter or exit.

Recall, after the death when DNA specimens of MACC staff were being taken, one staff (a senior bloke) was coincidentally not present. His DNA was not taken. This man was said to be fond of hoisting those unlucky to be interrogated by MACC up rudely by their clothing (belt?).

Recall, Teoh’s belt was found to have snapped. Where and when did it snap?

OK, at this stage, the RCI hasn’t made any official finding to indicate Teoh’s death was by murder or manslaughter. However, I’m a cynic who believes in the old sarcasm, that authorities don’t hold RCI unless they know what the findings will be.

But it does all come together why the government was soOOOOooo reluctant to have a RCI in the first place, when by stark and shameful contrast, ministers have recently called for a RCI into a puerile case of a sex video. Even then when Najib agreed to the RCI, the initial terms of reference for it was f* pathetic, which was only to investigate into MACC procedures for interrogations.

It was like extracting Najib’s tooth just to get, goad and galvanise him into including in the RCI's terms of reference a probe into the case of Teoh’s death, when this should have been the principal, commonsense and most obvious term of reference.

Why was there this unbelievable government (initial) reluctance to, firstly, have a RCI to look into Teoh’s mysterious death while he was in the MACC’s custody, and secondly, to have its (initial) terms of reference include an inquiry into the cause of death? No need to answer, as they were merely rhetorical questions.

But whatever the RCI’s findings may be, we know there was no reason nor cause of stress for Teoh so much so that he committed suicide on the eve of his wedding.

We also know there was no justifiable cause for MACC to investigate Ean Yong by the overnight interrogation of his aide, Teoh Beng Hock. So by logical extension, we would be justified in arguing that it must have been a politically motivated case.

We know a lot because, hey, we only know too well the Malaysian MACC, Police, Election Commission, Public Service senior officers, judiciary, etc.

Most of all we know Teoh Beng Hock died a tragic death., and for what? That’s why it’s so tragic.

There’s no flag large enough to cover the shame of killing innocent people (Howard Zinn) and if Najib still won’t act to dispense true justice, I hope Allah swt will call those responsible for Teoh's death to account in the hereafter.

Monday, April 25, 2011

PKR - a dog in Sarawak's manger

A few days ago I posted Baru Bian's brain baffling bullxxxx where I scoffed at his claim in Malaysiakini that PKR vied for 49 seats for the sake of Pakatan (note, he avoided mentioning PKR) being taken seriously by Sarawakians.

Baru Bian had attempted to explain away its greedy gluttonous grab of the Sarawakian state constituencies, initially (and preemptively) by a staggering 52 out of 71 seats, a 75% claim on the pie, to leave the remaining 25% to be shared among DAP, PAS and then SNAP, .....

..... as a sweet 'Mother Teresa'-ish altruistic reasons for Pakatan, when everyone knows it had been its selfish avaricious ambitions to dominate Sarawakian (and no doubt Sabah and Peninsula) politics among Pakatan members.

I asserted it was 100% unadulterated bull for a host of reasons detailed in my post. Those were in addition to PKR’s already known selfish treacherous behaviour in 2007 when it attempted to oust DAP out in a number of seats developed, nurtured and regularly contested by DAP, with some even with incumbent DAP members like Kulasegaran in Ipoh Barat.

From sickening avarice to sweet altruism, really, who would/could believe his fairy tale.

Today Nurul Izzah confirmed my belief.

She told The Malaysian Insider
PKR won’t cede Sarawakian seats to the DAP, despite evidence that the DAP has been the most successful component party of Pakatan in the recent State election, where its brand name is highly respected, more so than the other Pakatan members. Even PAS acknowledged this, wishing it had promoted the image that a vote for PAS is also a vote for the Rocket.

So how does Nurul explain her equally avaricious statement with Baru Bain’s lamentation that:

“... the Pakatan [note, he studiously avoided mentioning PKR] principle was that all seats must be fought for because the electorate must know that the coalition is serious about taking over the state government.”

"We cannot give the other side a free ride. If we did, it would demoralise us. This was the strategy”

... but ...

"... this strategy came with a heavy cost. The party was severely stretched because the rural campaign was resource-intensive".

Let me do it for her. The reason why PKR, as per Nurul’s continuous claim on that unbelievable greedy gluttonous grubby number of Sarawakian seats is two-fold, namely:

(a) It's just a dog in a manger, wishing to continue its unrealistic fantasy about dominating the Sarawakian political landscape, and preparing to lose rather than allow DAP to win,

(b) It has its greedy eye now spotlighted on federal parliamentary seats in Sarawak for the coming GE-13.

There is the question of DAP’s seniority in Sarawak since 1978, bettering that of PKR by a clear two decades of serious hard work. Ginny-come-lately doesn't see this. It thinks it has a birthright to dominate its partners and dictate to them its preferences - hmmm, wonder where it obtain that mentality from?

And then, despite (a) its pathetically piffling poor performance in the last Sarawak state elections, (b) DAP’s evidence of better campaigning and success, and (c) DAP being a far far more acceptable political party in Sarawak, it still insists on its so-called birthrights to monopolize the Sarawak poltiical terrain. That's why I call its selfish behaviour as that of the proverbial dog in the manger where it seems prepared to lose to BN rather than give way to another Pakatan member with a far superior prospect of winning.

Indeeed, that has been precisely why PKR had recently degenerated into frenzied furious fears when Lim KS proposed SNAP merged with DAP. It knows that the realization of this merger could enhance the probability of Pakatan winning the next state election, but with the new Sarawak SNAP-DAP emerging as the majority party among the partners. It also dreads the likelihood of a long-overdue Iban from SNAP-DAP becoming the next CM of Sarawak. For PKR, it would be Paradise Lost!

Until PKR rids itself of those UMNO rejects and their atavistic mentality, the future of a cohesive Pakatan doesn’t look good at all.

As I wrote in
Baru Bian's brain baffling bullxxxx:

PKR is like a ripe nangka with one side rotting away, infested by fruit flies. We Malaysians are familiar with such a fruit and know what needs to be done - the rotting part should be sliced cleanly away, allowing the rest of sweet fruit to be still enjoyed.

That’s what PKR requires, the amputation of its gangrenous portion.

Slice that bloody nangka.

Sunday, April 24, 2011

Son of Han

A blogger called himself son of Han
He thought he might have some fun
As he has the hots for Hanna
With her he dreams he wanna
But she laughs as his was only a wee ‘un


On Eli’s sarong he is deeply fixated
Just to grope beneath it, he’s excited
He feels something wet
But poor bloke didn’t get
That’s because he had masturbated


How could he hope for any headway
With PR sweeties in his disgusting way
He reeks of terrible B.O
And haven’t I told you so
For all his lust, bloke’s a closeted gay


So he rings up dear Teresa Kok
Ask to borrow her yellow frock
Saying he wants a date
With Saiful his soulmate
Who’s ‘clean’ as a whistle for a knock


Saturday, April 23, 2011

Is Dr Mahathir a racist?

Utusan’s ‘1Melayu 1 Bumi’ is not recent nor as original as it may sound. It existed earlier by another rallying call, ‘Malay unity’.

The only difference has been that Utusan couldn’t make up its mind whether it wants to be 1Melayu or 1 Bumi when it has been obvious its call was only to Malay political parties and organizations. It’s also known that as far as UMNO is concerned, the term 'bumiputra' means Malays or more specifically Peninsula UMNO Malays, and doesn’t in practice include Ibans, Kadazans, Muruts, Bidayuh, etc.

Thus I wonder why Utusan included ‘1Bumi’ to the more important ‘1Melayu’. Perhaps it sought some degree of justified rights under the official description of Malays as bumiputeras.

Anyway, ‘Malay unity’ was touted when the March 2008 tsunami hit Malaysia and dramatically changed the political landscape. UMNO obviously wanted, was desperate to split the Pakatan camp into Malays and non-Malays. PAS was immensely attracted to the clarion call for Malays from both sides of politics to unite to ensure the continuation of Malay supremacy in federal and state government.

In Selangor the sweetener for PAS was the MB’s post. Recall also the UMNO-PAS meeting at the Terengganu palace, though Nik Aziz stated that he was ambushed by UMNO. Indeed it was only Pak Haji Niz Aziz who put a stop to Pak Haji Hadi Awang and his deputy president Nasharuddin’s keenness to take up UMNO’s appeal for ethnic unity, before the Pakatan ship wrecked itself on hidden rocks by the lure of the siren song.

It’s not an unusual UMNO tactic when they are in political retreat, that of instigating fear among the Malays of the Chinese taking political control of Persekutuan Tanah Melayu, and hatred of same yellow skin peril by reminding the Malays of (true or otherwise) Chinese aggressive economic prowess, avarice, arrogance, rudeness and disrespect to the Malay rulers, etc. There's nothing like instilling a seige mentality a la Fort Apache. Dr Mahathir had taken this path several times.

Both Dr Kua and Josh Hong have called Dr Mahathir a racist, though I wonder whether the old man (confident, intelligent and politically astute as he continues to be) could well be suffering from some form of depression, where he ta’boleh tahan the very thought of Chinese millionaires walking this ‘Malay’ land while Malays are only chauffeurs (to those Chinese) in their own land. This imagined picture depresses him as no other scene does.

Stuff like the recent DAP victory in Sarawak could only fill him with dread and nightmare scenes, perhaps worsening his depression.

I fear his ‘illness’ could be a result of him being trapped in a time zone of the early 1940’s, 50’s and 60’s. He can’t, won’t believe that under Tun Razak and him in particular, the Malays have done very well, very well indeed, benefitting enormously from official affirmative policies and programs. There are many who can look after themselves very well, thank you.

Corruption and unaccountability have also heaped on to his worries. The Auditor General’s annual report has year after year brought out horror stories, which have never been effectively addressed. These make you wonder what other atrocities in government programs, contracts and whatnots the Auditor General was not able to put in its annual reports. Thus Dr M could well be concerned his charges are not quite ready for competitive economic-commerical lives.

There has also been the continuous bleating and wailing about the as yet unattained 30% equity, when we know from Malay sources that their equity has passed the 45% mark. Dr M himself frequently laments about this issue, to justify why the NEP must continue. Of course statistics indicate that there are still considerable Malay poverty, just as there are of Indians, Aborigines, non-Malay bumputeras (Ibans, Kadazans, etc), and to a lesser extent, Chinese. But Dr M won’t admit the supposedly affirmative-actioning NEP benefits only an exclusive elite, his UMNO boys and girls, and have resulted in the marginalization of the non-UMNO Malays and bumiputeras, and the Aborigines.

Sometimes I wonder whether he has been traumatized by the failures of his blue-eyed boys, people in Renong, MAS, Bank Bumi, Bank Negara and various other money mills that he had entrusted to them in the hope they’d churned out Malay millionaires and billionaires to walk the land as those Chinese ones do. I wonder whether he resents the Chinese for his blue-eyed boys’ failures.

Sometimes I wonder whether due to above failures, he can’t trust his UMNO boys and girls to succeed, fearing that without his strong guiding hands they will regress to being chauffeurs and laundry maids. I bet he must have grouped Pak Lah under these failures. Is he doing so with Najib?

Sometimes I wonder whether he is over insuring, where he wants to see a Malay equity of 99% before he can be satisfied that the millionaires who walk this land will be mostly Malays.

Sometimes I wonder whether he's really a racist, or just someone who's depressed by his fears, his constant thinking about Chinese millionaires versus Malay chauffeurs (and vice versa), imagining the worst things could happen to the Malays without his leadership against an economically aggressive yellow skinned horde. And there's no knowing what a depressed man could or would say.

Sometimes I just wonder … why the f* I am wondering?

[updated to 'read better' on 24th morning]

Friday, April 22, 2011

MCA - a Chinese guard dog or lap dog?

Friday night? Wakakaka, time for another Uncles’ story, though this time kaytee will have more input.

This one is about Ma Wah or the MCA, and may I qualify, on Unc’s insistence, that we are referring to CSL’s MCA, as different from, for example, Ong Tee Keat’s MCA.

Ready? ;-) Here goes:

Right on cue, predictably ‘perfect’ timing, Rover has responded to the ‘heel’ call by its master.

The moment Najib & Dr M spoke out against Utusan Malaysia '1Melayu 1 Bumi' movement, MCA’s deputy publicity chief Loh Seng Kok came out to say
‘1Melayu, 1Bumi’ movement will lead to apartheid.

Incidentally, has anyone heard CSL saying thus far against the Utusan racist call? Maybe he now will wakakaka.

Yet, worse than Loh Seng Kok’s echoing Najib, far far worse, has been CSL's falling into line with Utusan vindictive rant against the Sarawakian Chinese following the state election. The UMNO media mouthpiece had angrily proposed that
BN ignores Chinese vote, meaning Taib's government should institute deliberate marginalisation of the Chinese Sarawakians.

Its editorial (in its Awang Selamat column) states: “The average Chinese voters have rejected BN and supported DAP. Therefore the BN state government can no longer be too generous to give place to representatives from the community. Sarawak cabinet must be reflective of the decisions and attitude of the voters. The message must be sent.” […]

With virtually indecent haste, though not surprising at all, CSL called upon the
SUPP not to accept any position in the Sarawak state cabinet because he asserted the party had lost the Chinese community’s support.

CSL in talking down to SUPP, conveniently forgot that his MCA had also lost the Peninsula Chinese community’s support when it was trounced severely in March 2008.

Failing to first look into the mirror, he pompously explained: “If it takes part in the Cabinet, I feel the Chinese of Sarawak would think it (SUPP) is there only for the seats and not to serve the community. Besides, SUPP’s role in the Cabinet would be limited to only helping to resolve problems within the Chinese community. Even if its leaders are in the cabinet, I can foresee that they can’t solve the community’s problems.”

The sweet irony of CSL’s presumptuous advice to SUPP is that it applies perfectly to his own MCA. When he was reminded of this by Lim Guan Eng, on his hypocrisy in having a MCA ADUN in the Perak DUN where there was no significant support for the MCA, he blamed that aberration on Ong Tee Keat …

… which naturally brought the pugnacious Ong out to describe CSL as a contemptible liar for blaming others for his (CSL) own faults, as well as being an unmitigated hypocrite, because CSL had done what he told SUPP not to, in leapfrogging his own son, a junior to many far more deserving MCA MPs, forward for a deputy minister position.

MCA under CSL has been attempting to ‘frighten’ the Chinese community that the party is vital to their interests, just like Utusan, Perkasa and some UMNO members had been doing to the Malay community. These two race-based parties still believe the winning combination of 'fear' and 'hate' will ensure the desired negative motivation to vote for them.

Kaytee offers two observations:

Firstly, I’m not surprised that both CSL and Utusan failed to mention a single word about the alleged gross corruption and rampant abuse of power, etc committed by the Sarawak State government for the last 30 years. Those were some of the real reasons for the sea change in the rakyat’s political attitude towards the State BN government. 'Twas a case of Sarawakians (not just Chinese) 'ta'boleh tahan lagi'.

OK lah, with Utusan you can’t really be shocked by its deliberately slanted racist message, but it’s really sad to see CSL in the same mould of self-serving non-objective denial, as he bleats the danger of the Chinese community not having representatives in the cabinet. Obviously his advice to SUPP was intended to accentuate that threat, for his own interests.

What’s the bloody point of voting for CSL’s MCA which still refuses to acknowledge that Malaysians, not just the Chinese, are fed up with the corrupt excesses that have been going on for the last 25 years.

While on corruption, thus far has anyone seen any movement in the PKFZ case since Ong Tee Keat handed over the president’s post to CSL? Yawnnnn!

One thing before I move on to the next observation – don’t say nor believe that the Chinese community support CSL. They don’t; those who do are only the 500+ MCA central delegates who elected him over Ong Tee Keat as the MCA’s president, a mere handful of unrepresentative Chinese.

In a survey just prior to the last MCA presidential challenge the Chinese community had overwhelmingly voiced their preference for Ong Tee Keat to head MCA, but alas, it was just a survey which involve only the Chinese community, which naturally the majority of the MCA central delegates chose to ignore … at their own political peril.

Secondly, whether the MCA or for that matter Gerakan, is in the cabinet, doesn’t really matter to the Chinese community. It’s known PM Najib has planned to ‘work’ directly with the Chinese because he has long realized that they have lost respect for, and confidence and trust in CSL’s MCA. So, the Chinese community will still have a voice in the PM’s ear, a direct one without going through the MCA. Whether the PM chooses to listen or not, it will make no difference if that voice comes from the MCA or directly from the Chinese community.

In a way, I'm glad of the PM's unstated intention because it will start the breakdown of a long outdated political concept of ethnic representation. Many Malaysians are like me in that we want both BN and Pakatan represent Malaysians rather than Malays, Chinese, Indians, Ibans, Kadazans, etc.

Thus my advice to the MCA is that, rather than attempt to make silly threats or scare the Chinese, the party would be better off with (a) a feisty and honest leader like Ong Tee Keat, (b) an anti-corruption program and a readiness to openly support and strive for accountability and transparency, and not least, (c) a strong, firm but reasonable voice in the cabinet that’s truly representative of the Malaysian community (and not that of MCA leaders’ personal interests).

In other words, don’t just be Rover* that runs to heel at master’s command. Be the rakyat's guard dog!

* One of my elder Uncs had a tear or two in his eyes when we discussed this because he still fondly remembers a far better MCA in his days.

Thursday, April 21, 2011

Baru Bian's brain baffling bullxxxx

Malaysiakini reported in its news article Baru reveals why PKR vied for 49 seats that:

PKR state chief Baru Bian firmly believes that the party and Pakatan made the right decision.

Speaking to Malaysiakini recently, Baru said the Pakatan principle was that all seats must be fought for because the electorate must know that the coalition is serious about taking over the state government.

"We cannot give the other side a free ride. If we did, it would demoralise us. This was the strategy.”

I have never heard such self-serving BBB (brains baffling bullshit).

Let me tell you why I don’t believe a single word of Baru Bian’s explanation above.

(1) He talks about “the electorate must know the coalition is serious …..”, yet he avoids mentioning the fact PKR had persistently denied SNAP the seats the latter wanted, showing unmitigated arrogance in dictating to SNAP that it could have only 3.

(2) PKR even quarreled with DAP over a couple of seats, repeating its treacherous behavior in 2007, when it even claimed M Kulasegaran’s seat in Ipoh Barat. That's the nature of the beast.

(3) PKR preemptively announced its decision to contest in 52, not just 49 seats way ahead of SNAP and DAP, leaving a miserly 19 to be shared between DAP and SNAP.

(4) If it was concerned that the coalition, presumably Pakatan, should show the Sarawakians its serious intention in taking over the government, why didn’t PKR share out all 71 seats with SNAP and DAP? Leaving out the vexing question of whether PKR had treated SNAP respectfully as a valued coalition member, isn't DAP a member of coalition? Why seized 52 out of 71 seats available in such a Pearl-Habour-like preemptive manner?

Thus when Bian moaned about "... this strategy came with a heavy cost. The party was severely stretched because the rural campaign was resource-intensive" he doesn't deserve any sympathy but rather a padan muka.

The truth is that PKR is a party with leaders who are greedy, selfish, uncooperative, treacherous and dictatorial – just look at its internal mess in both Sabah and during its party election.

It went for 52 initially, then (after intense negotiations with DAP) 49, because it wanted/expected to emerge from the election as the Pakatan member with the most number of seats. Post-failed strategy, its claimed altruism is so unbelievable that even kaytee cringed at Bian's audacity in suggesting it.

No mate, PKR has not been a sincere coalition member, but one which has been fond of dictating to its allies rather than negotiating cooperatively behind closed doors.

SNAP complained that each time it got together with PKR to negotiate, PKR would refuse to tell which seats it really wanted (well, PKR wanted all 52), making negotiations impossible in the way peace talks between Israel and Palestine have been impossible ...

... because (PKR like) Israel has no sincere intention of negotiating for peace and was only using so-called peace talks as a heel dragging exercise to prolong the negotiation process for years and years while its religiously fanatical settlers gobbled up Palestinian land with the support of its government and the benevolent tolerance of the USA.

Having lambasted Baru Bian (and the man behind him, Azmin Ali) I know there are good people in PKR, but certainly not those UMNO rejects.

PKR is like a ripe nangka with one side rotting away, infested by fruit flies. We Malaysians are familiar with such a fruit and know what needs to be done - the rotting part should be sliced cleanly away, allowing the rest of sweet fruit to be still enjoyed.

That’s what PKR requires, the amputation of its gangrenous portion, the ex UMNO people like Azmin Ali and coterie. In my earlier post
RPK and the necessary destruction of Anwar Ibrahim? I wrote:

Anwar Ibrahim, Azmin Ali and their innermost coterie belong better in UMNO, though some UMNO members might take umbrage at this suggestion.

Anwar Ibrahim is more than just ‘damaged goods’. As he’s a biological creature, let’s use the term that I believe Peter sees him as being. Anwar Ibrahim is now ‘gangrenous’ to Pakatan, and thus, must be amputated off before his presence poisons the entire body and life of the coalition.

… I believe Peter [RPK] sees the (political) destruction and removal of Anwar Ibrahim (and his like-minded coterie) as a necessary step to the continuing life of Pakatan and in its fight against BN.

Likewise with Azmin Ali and gang, or PKR will never ever progress to the level of DAP, and may even drag Pakatan down.

Wednesday, April 20, 2011

Sarawak - 3 headaches for Najib

I read three pieces of really bad news for Najib. As I once explained to a sweetie (who incidentally no longer loves me, sob!), good things come in 'threes', and not from 'trees' as she had believed. These are of course ‘good things’ for Pakatan, but bad news to a very tired Najib who was forced to take up residence in Sarawak during the last 10 days of hectic election campaigning, thanks to his campaign director, Muhyiddin wakakaka.

The first goodie is Lim Kit Siang’s call today for
DAP and SNAP to merge.

It’s a brilliant idea because the merger will allow a debilitated SNAP to enjoy DAP support, organizational powers and discipline approach to election campaigning. For example, DAP had prepared for the Sarawak state elections months and months ahead, unlike Azmin Ali’s PKR which thought waltzing in to make a grand entrance at the last moment, coupled with a preemptive stake claim of 52 seats, was adequate for the Wunder Party under the presidential campaign direction of Anwar’s Wunderkind (Wonder Child).

Even the DAP mascot of the Ubah hornbill was carefully selected eons ago, with orders for its production in China obviously made well ahead of the election. Training its candidates and members for the campaign was part of its attention to details, which proved vital to its success.

The DAP brand is today a recognized symbol of political courage, resoluteness and justice which many Sarawakians have come to view with confidence. It would greatly benefit SNAP if their leaders are prepared to make use of it. Even PAS which didn't win any seats realized in their post-mortem they should have made known to the Sarawakians that a vote for PAS was equivalent to a vote for DAP - they were informed by their supporters that many Saawakians voting in their constituencies didn't recognize the 'moon' party symbol but were looking instead for the 'rocket' (which of course was not there on the ballot paper).

In turn, DAP will of course enjoy SNAP's historical connection with the Sarawak heartland, which will help accelerate its presence among the Ibans and other native groups.

I'm delighted that Lim KS has stretched out the DAP's hands to SNAP. It’s a win-win situation for both parties, but which will send a chill down Najib’s spine. I’m particularly sympathetic to SNAP and the Ibans, so here’s an agi idup agi ngelaban to the SNAP members.

The second goodie but again an unpleasant piece of news for poor Najib is contained in the erudite analysis of the election by Malaysiakini correspondent Bridget Welsh. In her article
The myths of S'wak polls results, Welsh dismissed the outrageous nonsense by Dr Mahathir of a Chinese racist ‘revolt’ via the ballot box.

According to her, there had been significant, in fact quite earth-shaking swings across the ethnic divides to Pakatan, notably in the Bidayuh and Orang-Ulu majority constituencies. The swings were (rounded up) 20%, 15% and 13.5% respectively in the semi-rural, rural and urban constituencies, thus indicating a far greater swing in the so-called BN heartland than in the urban (Chinese-majority) constituencies. Eat that, Tun.

Thus Welsh assessed that: “The 'safe' seats in the urban periphery are no longer 'safe'. The change in voting pattern reflected not just Chinese support for Pakatan, but Iban and Bidayuh support as well. In fact, what is especially interesting is that the movement in support in rural areas is more than the share in urban areas (although it is important to note that the urban areas have more voters)."

She said the only reason why Pakatan didn’t win more semi-rural seats despite the 20% swing towards them was due to the minuscule support for Pakatan prior to 2011, where it required a 40% swing for the opposition to win. But the 20% swing is still significant in any language, Iban, Malay or Chinese. The frightening outlook for Najib is that the seismic shift has already started. The general election in (latest by) 2013 may see realization of the full effect of a continuing swing towards Pakatan. I believe that both halo and bandwagon effect will help.

She also offered an ominous warning to the BN, stating: "More than anything, these findings point illustrate how much the 'fixed deposit' is no longer secure. Semi-rural and rural cracks in BN support are part of the new Sarawak, a more competitive polity that has become increasingly receptive to a stronger two-party system and critical of BN governance, especially in the areas of corruption."

Welsh noticed the swing to be greatest among the youth of Sarawak, the growing segment of voters for the future. There'll be more of these 18-year olds by 2013. I wonder whether this observation has triggered Najib’s hastily cobbled together 1Malaysia free email offer to the youth?

So no matter what Dr Mahathir has spun sinisterly on his blog, perhaps to re-marshal his pack or to vent his personal frustration at the Chinese Sarawakians or DAP, the facts on the Sarawak ground tells a different story, an unpleasant one which no doubt must have shaken Najib enormously.

Finally, the third goodie for Pakatan has been an assessment by local political pundits that everyone's bête noire, Datuk Peh Mor has no intention to leave at all.

Indeed, as Sakmongkol opined as a correspondent (under his real name, Mohd Ariff Sabri Aziz) in a Free Malaysia Today article
Najib’s hurdles after Sarawak, why should/would Taib leave? After all, didn't his PBB won all 35 seats contested? And ironically, in this solid PBB's win lies the humongous headache for Najib.

Sak revealed a possible conspiracy theory that Putrajaya was going to replace Taib with a bloke by the name of Sallah Jaffaradin who unfortunately (or fortunately for Pakatan) was knocked out in the election by a triumphant Taib. That could explained Taib’s obscenely hasty swearing in as he must have feared a Putrajaya’s coup d’etat.

Sak then posed this illuminating query:
"Now you tell me! Will a person who rushed his own swearing in as CM, indicating that he wants to stay put, go off in two to three years?

The problem now stays with the BN chairman Najib. He has promised the people of Sarawak that Taib will go off soon. On the contrary, Taib is sending signals that he plans to stay put for as long as he wants to.

He leaves on his terms and conditions, not on BN’s or Umno’s or the PM’s."

As I had posted earlier, Taib’s insistence on staying on will be a boon to Pakatan as he represents a central symbol of hate for the Sarawakians and thus a humongous item of motivation for voters in that State to swing even more to Pakatan.

Good things come in threes, wakakaka.

P/S - By the by, PAS should not give up. Bridget Welsh analysed that the Islamic Party had made some inroads in swaying the Sarawakians away from BN.

Just remember, DAP took more than 30 years to achieve the recent level of success. 'Twas all hard work, and lots of heartbreaks, but the break-through has been worthwhile. DAP has laid grounds for a combined DAP/SNAP, PKR and PAS success in the next election.

Monday, April 18, 2011

Dr Mahathir & PKR - birds of same feathers?

On Friday 15 April 2011 I posted RPK and the necessary destruction of Anwar Ibrahim? where I commented on the attitude of anwaristas that:

… those who criticize PKR, like RPK, must have been paid (by BN) while those who criticize BN are deemed to be doing the right thing.

In the aftermath of the Sarawak election results, PKR supporters irritated me when they condemned Ibans as stupid for succumbing to the BN’s money politics.

To those anwaristas, people who exercised their democratic rights to vote for a party are stupid because they failed to vote for PKR. That’s the pathetic state of their mentality and understanding of democracy. Quite frankly I dread to see these PKR people in ruling power.

Now, it seems that Dr Mahathir has the same attitude too. Today, The Malaysian Insider (TMI) reported him stating that Sarawak Chinese have been infected by DAP racism.

What led him to this conclusion?

According to TMI, Dr Mahathir accused the DAP of destroying the so-called 'power-sharing formula' that BN had implemented for half a century. More of this 'power-sharing formula' later.

He said: “I congratulate the DAP for bringing its racist politics to Sarawak. Before this, all races co-operated well with each other for the good of Sarawak. Now we see clearly that the Chinese community in Sarawak has rejected multiracialism.”

“They have become infected by the virus of Chinese racism that is the guiding principle of the DAP.”

So like PKR, Dr Mahathir sees his political views in black & white tones only, that if a Chinese votes or have voted for DAP, he/she must be a racist.

Now, that by itself would not have been so bad if we are not immediately reminded that Dr M is the patron of the Malay ultra-rightwing Perkasa, a man who has constantly urged Malays to be united and vote for UMNO to protect Malay rights from the Chinese.

So, what does that make him then?

The editorial of TMI has this to say of him and his comments about DAP infecting Sarawakians with racism:

Two days after the key Sarawak election, those batting for Barisan Nasional (BN) are talking about the loss of Chinese votes to DAP with Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad right in front calling them racists for drawing the community away from the ruling coalition.

The country’s longest-serving prime minister and one-time mover of Bangsa Malaysia is a fine one to talk.

Since 2008 he has been the patron of Perkasa the right-wing group that fights to preserve everything for the Malays at the expense of others.

For Dr Mahathir and Perkasa everything is at risk from the non-Malays although the Federal Constitution already provides safeguards through the Malay Rulers.

In his blog today Dr Mahathir wrote among others, “I congratulate the DAP for bringing its racist politics to Sarawak. Before this all races co-operated well with each other for the good of Sarawak. Now we see clearly that the Chinese community in Sarawak has rejected multi-racialism.”

“Perhaps the SUPP are at fault but others in the BN also committed many wrong things. But the rejection is almost entirely by the Chinese community.”

In his world-view and through his writing Dr Mahathir does not believe that people can make up their own minds and decide to vote for whoever they want, the essence of democracy.

Perhaps he does not see that the policies put in place by his administration such as privatisation has resulted in endemic corruption abuse of power and the weakening of the country’s institutions - some of the factors which has caused Malaysians to lose faith in BN.

Dr Mahathir does not lead BN now. It is Datuk Seri Najib Razak and before him Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi. Abdullah carried the baggage of Dr Mahathir’s rule but crumbled under the weight of his own unfulfilled promises. Now it’s Najib’s turn and his six days for the Sarawak campaign is a measure of what he had to do to counter criticisms against Dr Mahathir’s contemporary Tan Sri Abdul Taib Mahmud.

Yet Dr Mahathir only sees what he sees.

“I will be called a racist for pointing this out. For more than half a century the races in Malaysia had worked together to build the nation. The world saw stable BN governments with power and wealth being shared by all races quite fairly. None of the races got everything that they considered they were entitled to, not the Malays nor the Chinese nor Indians nor Ibans, Kadazans etc. All had to give up something. That is the essence of sharing. Now the DAP has destroyed this power and wealth-sharing formula by separating the Chinese from the rest,” he also wrote today.

Thing is Dr Mahathir is just not the right person to level any such accusations.

When he and others talk about the BN style or formula, what they mean is keeping cronyism and institutional racism entrenched.

He is no honest broker in this exercise of dissecting the Sarawak election and its aftermath. Malaysians have a right to vote whichever way they want. Taib returned 35 out of 35 seats back to the BN. Presumably there are people happy with his rule.

Yet there are others who are not happy and want an alternative. Nothing racist about that. It’s simply called democracy, the right to differ not defer.

Kaytee concludes that some PKR people and Dr Mahathir share the same lamentable attitude.

The Chinese Political Paradox

Once again the Chinese Malaysians are in the spotlight, not a place they would want to be. But the near complete sweep of Chinese-majority constituencies in the Sarawak State elections by DAP has refocused the attention of BN politicians on this (for them) vexing problem.

No doubt many in UMNO would like to paraphrase (apparently wrongly attributed to) Henry II when he voiced his frustration with Thomas Becket: “Will no one rid me of this turbulent Chinese?”

Utusan Malaysia came up with a more practical punishment, proposing angrily that
BN ignores Chinese vote after Sarawak polls.

Its editorial (in its Awang Selamat column) states: “The average Chinese voters have rejected BN and supported DAP. Therefore the BN state government can no longer be too generous to give place to representatives from the community. Sarawak cabinet must be reflective of the decisions and attitude of the voters. message must be sent. Taib must show gratitude to those that supported him and BN government.”

“Once again the attitude of the Chinese voters is clear in rejecting BN. Awang believes that sentiment of Chinese voters in the peninsular is also the same. The reality is that after dominating the economy for so long the Chinese community wants to have greater influence and become a dominant political force.”

Kaytee is not surprised at all that Utusan failed to mention a single word about the alleged gross corruption and rampant abuse of power, etc committed by the State government for the last 30 years.

Equally not surprising has been CSL’s pontification that
Supp should not accept any position in the Sarawak state Cabinet as the party had lost the Chinese community’s support.

He explained: “If it takes part in the Cabinet, I feel the Chinese of Sarawak would think it (SUPP) is there only for the seats and not to serve the community. Besides, SUPP’s role in the Cabinet would be limited to only helping to resolve problems within the Chinese community. Even if its leaders are in the cabinet, I can foresee that they can’t solve the community’s problems.”

Was CSL saying that on as a matter of principle, or was he indirectly warning Peninsula Chinese Malaysians that there won’t be any Chinese representatives in the cabinet if they follow the Sarawakians and vote for DAP instead of MCA? You tell me, wakakaka!

But my observation is that CSL has fallen into line with Utusan’s threat, typical of MCA, which calls for another wakakaka.

Again, there’s not one word of corruption, abuse of power, non-accountability, unlike a more gentlemanly George Chan who admitted so as the reason for the SUPP's near annihilation. Even my dear Penang larng, Ah Koon, has wisely euphemized his way through with his comment on the challenge of increasing support for the DAP and the opposition party’s ability to
add more seats in yesterday’s Sarawak state election.

Ah Koon noticed succinctly that “… this did not happen in the blink of an eye but rather a continuation of the political tsunami which started to be felt in urban areas in Kuching in the 2006 state election, and that it has grown more serious, resulting in repercussions for BN going into the next general election."

Well-known UMNO blogger Sakmongkol AK47 commented in his latest post
The Chinese voice in BN politics:

How will these two parties
[MCA and SUPP] operate in future? They have lost ownership as the voice of the Chinese people. The victories of DAP in Sarawak and the MCA's poor showing in the 2008 National Elections signal the rise of more strident voices and demands by the Chinese Community. There are two ways to stem the slide.

First, Chinese leaders in MCA and SUPP will ask the PM, as leader of BN to allow them more leeway to become MORE Chinese. Meaning, they want to behave like how UMNO behaves – as the unmitigated voice of Chinese interests. The more strident and belligerent the better as a means to regain the Chineseness of their political pronouncements.

Second, as anyone can assume, given the accommodative personality of the PM, he will be seen to giving in to more Chinese demands.

Sak then war-gamed around with the two options, pointing out that Najib will have a hard time balancing the repercussions of 1 and 2.

But let me say something about it as well. The recent political phenomenon of the Chinese Malaysians (both in March 2008 and now in Sarawak, and once before in May 1969) has been very much against the political grain of the Chinese community.

Unlike Indians and Malays, it has generally been an ethnic group which prefers to stay out of high visibility politics, only wanting to earn a living, their ‘3 bowls of rice’ and turning up at the election station once every 5 years, or even staying at home to instead play mahjung on that day.

So why has there been this paradox, that of a politically reluctant community suddenly making waves in Malaysian politics?

We can’t expect Utusan to come up with rational, logical and objective comments, so let’s examine Sakmongkol’s question, which is, will it help ameoliorate BN’s prospects in the next general election if Najib gives more leeway (or more correctly, more ‘face’) to Chinese leaders in MCA and SUPP, so they may be seen as the real voice of the Chinese community, for them to be as mucho macho Chinese as possible?

I personally don’t believe that’s what the Chinese really want. Sure, the MCA being regularly humiliated by UMNO does not help convince the Chinese that the BN is the party to represent them.

But far more important than 'face', if only Najib can both (i) stop the racist bigoted conduct of some of his UMNO colleagues, Utusan, Perkasa, etc (or for for that matter, Chinese and Indian rightwing utterances), and more importantly (ii) come straight out to reject, on behalf of his so-called 1Malaysia BN government, those inflammatory redneck utterances, I believe that’ll be a great start.

No 2 – will he stop the bloody rampant abuse of power (politically inclined or otherwise) by the BN politicians, Civil Services, Police, MACC.

No 3 – will he stop the gross corruption within the BN ranks (and cronies).

Yes, my take on why Chinese Malaysians have recently become more vocal, and expressing so via the ballot box, is that they have reached a stage when the BN bull, blatant corruption and arrogant abuse of power are suffocating them. The scum has risen way above their nostril levels. Thus they need to speak out or die of suffocation. They have no choice.

Sunday, April 17, 2011

Sarawak Elections - morning after

So … it’s over … at least for now until the next state or general election.

BN won its 2/3, but with only 55% of the votes. But that’s the way it has been and will always be, unless we change our voting system to proportionate representations like the Australian system (which the British proposes to do, but most unlikely to be adopted here as it won't favour UMNO).

As The Malaysian Insider
editorial puts it, “… when PR go to battle they are up against Umno, MCA, SUPP, PBB, Maybank, Utusan Malaysia, New Straits Times, PDRM, EC, Pos Malaysia, AirAsia, etc.”

But almost all are legitimate Pakatan’s political foes, with two frightening EXCEPTIONS, the PDRM and EC.

That the PDRM is not an impartial civil service but one which works directly for UMNO is already a given and almost accepted by frustrated opposition politicians and the public who work around those biased men in blue.

But the EC is an insidious evil organization for its partisan behaviour. The outrageous and arrogant refusal to hand over the Borang 14 has been a recent example of its unprofessional sins. If you’re the religious type (and Muslim) you may believe those EC staff demonstrating their partisan conduct will soon be burning in the Islamic Hell for their sins, wakakaka.

But leave that aside as we are still here in the material world. Like the case for the police, we have to work around the EC bastards.

The Malaysian Insider editorial believes two factors, apart from the above biased civil services, brought salvation for the BN, namely, Najib and RM500 million worth of handouts. They ensured the BN received at least 55% of the votes.

Traditionally the Deputy Chairperson of BN (also the deputy president of UMNO and DPM) is the BN’s election campaign director, with the chairperson only making the odd campaign speeches or two at various important centres, kissing babies, awarding grants, and making promises, etc. But Muhyiddin as a campaign director was hopeless; bloke was as lost as a skittish kijang in downtown Kuching.

But then these have been precisely his qualities which persuaded Najib (and probably Dr Mahathir as king maker) to push for Muhyiddin to be deputy president of UMNO (and thus DPM) because Najib doesn’t want an independent-thinking, dangerous and too smart Alec (e.g., like Ali Rustam) to be his deputy. So Najib has to reap what he has sown, a semi-dumbo deputy party president/DPM who proved to be pathetically ineffective as BN's election campaign director.

When I read that Najib had personally taken over from Muhyiddin during the second half of the campaign stage, I knew that the BN was in trouble. I know many of you hate Najib with a vengeance, but I am less biased, seeing in him a rather clever, (definitely) cunning, cosmopolitan-minded, charming, and convincing politician who can woo, persuade, and sell his bullshit rather well.

Mind, all these qualities are those required of an effective politician; Najib merely demonstrated his ability to work all these qualities well wakakaka, and to the benefit and relief of an initially terrified BN in Sarawak.

Of course delusional Taib would believe he must still have the persona and pull to win 2/3 of the seats, wakakaka.

Okay, it's frustrating the final election results haven’t reflected the true picture that while BN has taken more than 2/3 of the total seats, it has actually won only 55% of the votes. But as I said, that’s the nature of the election ‘first-past-the-post’ beast. No point in crying or moaning – work with that.

But I am glad that power-crazy Taib, delusional as he is, has with much obscene haste appointed himself as the CM straightaway the very moment he knew the BN has obtained the winning majority (but with the results of many seats still undetermined), no doubt to forestall any Putrajaya move to remove him, and naturally to the grave dismay of Najib.

I’m glad because the person of Taib can once again serve as the Pakatan central campaign issue in 2013. Getting rid of 'Peh Mor' had been an effective issue for Pakatan in this recent state election, so Taib continuing as a CM, hopefully into 2013, will again be a blessed boon to the opposition. Poor Najib must be cracking his head on how to remove this BN’s Old Man of the Sea.

DAP went for 15 seats and won 12. It could have won 13 if 3,000 postal votes didn’t save Wong Soon Koh in Bawang Assam. But anyway the end result is what DAP expected, and it should be happy it achieved its planned target, including the scalps of George Chan and a few others. Let’s hope CSL in Peninsula is next to join George Chan, Koh TK and Samy.

In a couple of previous posts I had sneeringly said of PKR’s outrageously preemptive stake-claiming of 52 of the 71 Sarawak seats, that it hopes to win 2 seats by doubling its 2006 efforts (25 in 2006 got 1, maybe 52 in 2011 will get 2?). Well, it did better than I predicted, having won 3 (including Batu Lintang) wakakaka.

I just wonder how many it would have won if it had not frittered away the earlier part of the campaign opportunities by unnecessarily squabbling with SNAP? But it’s a stark reminder to Azmin Ali to stop bossing Sarawakian and indeed Sabahan PKR activities. Those state leaders will do better without Peninsula party leaders micro-managing their affairs.

I suppose we can only hope.

Saturday, April 16, 2011

Sarawak Rocket landed on Moon?

Hottie sweetie Clara Chooi of The Malaysian Insider wrote in BN will keep Sarawak by a hair’s breadth, say analysts:

Universiti Teknologi Mara Associate Professor Shaharudin Badaruddin agreed with his comrades saying that this was by far the most heated state contest he had ever witnessed.

He explained that in the previous two state polls in 2001 and 2006, voters had generally stayed in the comfort of their homes and went about their daily businesses instead of joining in the campaign festivities by attending political events.

The professor expressed awe at the vast changes describing it as a ‘strong undercurrent’ sweeping the state.

“It is quite remarkable to see how accepting these people are. I have seen lorries driven by Chinese displaying PAS flags.”

Above for my matey Vinnan - The foundation stone has been laid for a cohesive cooperation among Pakatan parties in Sarawak, especially between PAS and DAP.

It doesn’t mean it’ll be all smooth sailing for Pakatan from now on. Yes, there’ll still be troubled waters and turbulent wake ahead, but at least the seed of mutual support has been sown.

If these inchoate grounds for inter-party cooperation are fertilised with earnest efforts of goodwill and sincerity (which unfortunately was missing in the BN during the last 15 years), Pakatan may have a bright future in Sarawak.

Friday, April 15, 2011

Drunk Malaysian graduate behaved like terrorist during flight

From the Sydney Morning Herald:

Drunk graduate 'behaved like terrorist'

by Steve Butcher 15 April 2011

A Magistrate has told a Melbourne University honours graduate, who had to be handcuffed and then bound to his seat by crew during a flight from Malaysia, that he had behaved like a terrorist.

Khairulddin Mohammad Yahya swore loudly at the inflight supervisor and poked him in the chest before the captain left the cockpit to deal with him.

Melbourne Magistrates Court yesterday heard that Yahya, 22, swore loudly at the supervisor while a passenger told his mother to shut him up because he was frightening people.

Prosecutor Aman Dhillon told the court that Yahya repeatedly left his economy seat and sat next to his mother in business class after her requests for his upgrade were refused.

Mr Dhillon said hours after the Malaysian Airlines flight left Kuala Lumpur on July 22 last year, he was seen in the vacant seat next to his mother. He complied with a request to return to his seat but, soon after, reappeared whereupon the supervisor detected alcohol on him.

Mr Dhillon said that several hours before landing Yahya again sat in business where he called the supervisor a "motherf-----" and to "f--- all of you".

The captain, who noticed Yahya slurred his words and smelt of alcohol, asked his mother to tell him to return to his seat and stop harassing the crew. Yahya complied, but later returned four times to business class before he was handcuffed in his seat and then was restrained with his ankles tied with tape.

Mr Dhillon said his mother tried to loosen the handcuffs and lead Yahya to the toilet, then she began screaming hysterically and fell to the floor as he shouted threats.

When the plane landed, he co-operated with police. Mr Dhillon said some crew felt threatened and some passengers appeared stressed and frightened. One was crying.

Defence lawyer Anna Balmer said Yahya was ''somewhat intoxicated'' but wanted to sit with his mother who had medical conditions that included chronic anxiety, neurosis and depression. Ms Balmer said Yahya, a chemical engineer, acted uncharacteristically with poor judgment and behaviour, and that a conviction could jeopardise his visa status and work.

Senior magistrate Dan Muling told Yahya, who pleaded guilty to disorderly behaviour on an aircraft, that he was out of control. "It's like you're a terrorist on a plane," Mr Muling said.

Yahya was convicted and fined $1500.



RPK and the necessary destruction of Anwar Ibrahim?

As one commentator wrote in the readers' comment section of The Malaysian Insider’s article RPK says Pakatan disunited, Anwar incapable to lead, those who criticize Pakatan (or to be more precise, PKR), like RPK, must have been paid (by BN) while those who criticize BN are deemed to be doing the right thing.

It’s not a observation unique to that news article but in fact typical of some comments on my blog and other blogs or online news portals, such as Malaysiakini or The Malaysian Insider, which permit readers’ comments.

Whenever I criticized Anwar Ibrahim, PKR or even DAP and wrote in defence of some BN issues (like use of nuclear power) or personalities, I would be accused variously of being a MCA cybertrooper, UMNO goon (wish I was paid by both), or just gila (crazy).

Peter (RPK) would now, because of his criticisms of Anwar Ibrahim, be seeing such condemnations against him on his own blogsite, M2D. However, he would have additional ones such as ‘turncoat’ and ‘every man has his price’, implying he is like Gobala, Zaid Ibrahim or Jonson Chong, etc, defecting treacherously to the other side.

But what Peter said of Anwar Ibrahim in particular has been the obvious (except to blind anwaristas), that Anwar has been a lousy (so-called) leader who couldn’t lead, the reformasi man who not only couldn’t take criticisms from party members but would move against them, an economic advisor who wasn’t able to advise, etc.

Alas, in our country, where to many, politics are in black & white tones only, Peter would have been seen as blaspheming sinfully, even an ‘apostate’ to the so-called reformasi religion, and thus must be ‘stoned to death’ … at least by condemnations if not by rocks.

Just to remind everyone, those criticisms of ‘turncoat’, ‘traitor’, and various other condemnations were hurled at the Great RPK himself, well … perhaps no longer the Great, by the very people who once wanted him to be PM (or President) of our nation wakakaka. Indeed Peter has gone from Hero to Zero in those commentators’ eyes.

But Peter shouldn’t worry, nor I believe he would, wakakaka. Those were made by people who aren’t yet ready for views alternative to theirs. They cannot accept any comments less than reverential for or sycophantic to their idol. Basically they have infantile, immature and (to an extent) idiotic political minds, great for idol worshippers but not so for the advancement of democracy for the interests of the Malaysian people.

Now, in my previous post
RPK a willing captive in his statutory declaration I didn’t excuse Peter from his foul deed of unfairly blackening Rosmah Mansor’s reputation, much as Peter had tried to spin it away. Be that as it may, we need to ask why Peter has now turned around and bitten the man he had served (virtually sacrificed himself and his family) for years as a stalking horse, PR agent and supporter.

I don’t believe for an instant that you can buy a man like RPK. Take it from cynical kaytee, a man known for not being particularly fond of RPK personally (though of course I do admire, respect and am a wee envious of his creativity and ability to influence), I believe (yes, I may well be wrong) there is actually greater good to come out from what Peter is doing. Maybe that's his plans, maybe ...?

Try to put 2 and 2 together, to see whether you can get 5.

We know that Anwar Ibrahim is NOT, repeat, NOT the reformasi champion he claims to be.

Recall, this has been the man (then DPM and director of BN elections in Sabah in 1994) responsible for the Great LEAP Forward in that State that year, when Pairin, leader of the party with the majority of seats from the election, went to the residence of the YDP Negeri to claim the CM post, and found that not only were the gates of the YDP Negeri's residence locked and closed to him, but that he had by then become the Opposition Leader, thanks to Anwar Ibrahim, Master of frog-ology.

Remember, this has been the man who wanted to be PM on 16 September 2008 with 82 federal parliamentary seats against AAB’s 140, and attempted to bully his mathetically-muddled claim through by nothing more than his hope for an encore of his dubious Sabah achievement, which, thankfully for democracy and the supremacy of the ballot box, proved to be a fantasy as surreal as some scenes in James Cameron's 'Avatar'.

And surely the most humiliating outcome for him (and embrassing for Pakatan) from that shameful incident had been the rejection of his vainglorious and failed coup d’etat by none other than His Snooziness, the Sultan of Somnambulation. Even AAB could see through his cheap trick.

Reminder, this has also been the man who sent a team of frog hunters to Taiwan. Reformasi? Surely my good sir/lady, thou but jest!

‘Twas only poetic justice that this has been the man, the de facto (what an abominable term) leader of a party which has been plagued by political frogs, not unlike the cursed Pharaoh-ic Egypt in biblical times.

And shall I go on about the recent PKR party elections?

This is also the man with 2 charges of sodomy, regardless of whether they have been false or otherwise, but which make him, as UMNO blogger Sakmongkol AK47 described Anwar Ibrahim, 'damaged goods'.

Meanwhile, in parallel occurrence, Haris Ibrahim and Peter have formed the MCLM, with its first high profile task being to offer de-frog-itized candidates to PKR (but not DAP or PAS) for the next general election.

Why? Because they believe Anwar Ibrahim could no longer be trusted to lead the charge against BN nor to select good candidates to offer to the rakyat as their parliamentary representatives.

The way I’ve read it, Peter and Haris are both fed up with the political incompetency, insincerity and lack of will of Anwar Ibrahim, Azmin Ali and their innermost coterie to truly reform their party and run it as a model of democratic, just and transparent process, thus as the natural and much required primus inter pares of Pakatan.

Instead, we've learnt those PKR leaders have been accused of stacking the odds in their personal interests, to shore up their own political positions, their fiefdoms, instead of nurturing true democratic conduct, and eliminating and removing genuine and legitimate dissenters within PKR. Yes, they’re light years from being political reformers where the only evidence of that so-called ideology or democratic process lies only with and in 9 alphabetical letters, r-e-f-o-r-m-a-s-i, that’s all.

Anwar Ibrahim, Azmin Ali and their innermost coterie belong better in UMNO, though some UMNO members might take umbrage at this suggestion.

Anwar Ibrahim is more than just ‘damaged goods’. As he’s a biological creature, let’s use the term that I believe Peter sees him as being. Anwar Ibrahim is now ‘gangrenous’ to Pakatan, and thus, must be amputated off before his presence poisons the entire body and life of the coalition.

Thus I do not see Peter, master of strategy extraordinaire, as having defected to the other side or being bought over by UMNO. I believe Peter sees the (political) destruction and removal of Anwar Ibrahim (and his like-minded coterie) as a necessary step to the continuing life of Pakatan and in its fight against BN.

Anyway, that’s kaytee's take wakakaka.

Thursday, April 14, 2011

RPK a willing captive in his statutory declaration

RPK admitted in an interview on TV3 that he doesn’t believe Rosmah was involved in Altantuya murder.

Yawnnnnnnnnn – mate, it’s not a revelation of monumental proportion, nothing unexpected lah insofar as I'm concerned.

He claimed he was given the green light from Anwar Ibrahim (via Din Merican) to make his earth-shaking but infamous Statutory Declaration.


RPK also stated “… people close to Anwar were behind the accusations against Najib to prevent him from succeeding Abdullah Ahmad Badawi as prime minster.”

Yawnnnnnnnnn – mate, nothing new lah.

On this silly topic, I don't want to be patronising and say "I told you so!", but for writing on what I saw and still see as a campaign of evil bullshit, I was variously accused of being an UMNO goon, frog, MCA paid cybertrooper, mad as an inmate in a lunatic asylum, and even Dr Mahathir himself writing under the pseudonym of kaytee wakakaka.

Please read my various posts on subject (embedded below in this post) to appreciate why I have never believed that preposterous declaration which was obviously targeted at Najib in a vain hope of sabotaging his chances of succeeding AAB as PM.

Indeed, if any question was to be asked, it should have been Cui Bono?

I had written in a March 2009 post
RPK's "I was reliably informed ... might not have been so reliable" the following:

I cannot help but wonder whether this is part of the G.A.N campaign to keep the Altantuyaa-rised ‘rage’ against Najib still blazing ... ... what more with a forecast by a university don that PKR has planned 4 or 5 more by-elections in constituencies where PKR has at least a 70% surety level of victory.

If true, then PKR is into deplorable disruptive destablizing destructive politics.

I was so dismayed by such politik kotor (dirty politics) that I penned a satire on what I saw as the misuse of statutory declaration titled
Statuesque Declaration

RPK confessed in that TV3 interview:
“I don’t believe the story anymore. Because I feel, maybe it’s impossible. How can the wife of the prime minister have been at that place (where Altantuya killed), as that place is in the middle of the forest.”

“I thought, ‘would she climb to such a high ground, enter the forest in the middle of the night, midnight? I thought that must be impossible.”

Look Peter (RPK), never mind the bullshit considerations about about forest, high ground or midnight factors. The suggestion of Rosmah, or for that matter, any woman, supervising or wanting to witness the explosive demolition of a corpse is just plain preposterous implausibility, as I had written in my June 2008 post
Raja Petra's Statutory Declaration - is it evidence?

... I have to admit I find the idea of the wife of a DPM who would turun padang to supervise or witness the placement of C4 on Altantuyaa's corpse, rather bizarre and, frankly, quite implausible. But then, I am sure there will be those who believe (or want to believe) that's exactly right up her alley.

Also in a March 2009 post
The R-A-H-M-A-N prophesy - to be fulfilled or forestalled? I said:

To me personally, it’s highly implausible that women would want to turun padang to personally witness the explosive destruction of a corpse … … which leads me naturally to suspect the theory that if one can’t get Najib himself, then one should try to get him through his wife.

But my dear Peter, you cannot simply disown your Stat Dec nor distance yourself from the evil rubbish of smearing a woman’s reputation (directly or indirectly).

As I wrote in the first post (above):
I wonder which of Ku Li’s staff persuaded RPK to make the Stat Dec? Is RPK the sort of person to require such advice before he made such a Stat Dec against Najib's wife?

Quite frankly I find that laughable, because I believe that RPK would only make a Stat Dec if RPK himself wanted to, full stop! He is such a man.

At best, Peter, I see you as a willing captive of the Gerakan Anti-Najib’s camp.

Ergo, what now about Balasubramaniam's twin statutory declarations?

In one of several posts about Balasubramnaiam's statutory declarations, I wrote:

The statutory declarations (SDs) of private investigator Balasubramaniam, when compared to other stories on Najib and Altantuyaa Shariibuu, carry too many contradictions, inconsistencies and implausibility. [...]

But what is not confusing is either Najib or Rosmah as the guilty party will mean the sorry end of Najib's political position. This is known as the 'shotgun' effect - kalau ta'boleh hentam Najib, hentam Rosmah pun jadi wakakaka.

OK, I leave it to you to browse through the following posts on Balasubramaniam's involvements:

(1) Balasubramaniam story - brave broadcast or Ben-Hur-ish bullsh*t
(2) Balasubramaniam's lawyer linked Najib to Bala's disappearance
(3) Americk Singh is back
(4) Americk Singh is pissed off with Zahrain Hashim

Other Related Posts:
(1) Sodomy allegations against Anwar Ibrahim - Season of bullsh*t
Trot out Shaariibuu Altantuyaa again

Saturday, April 09, 2011

2011 wakakaka 01

Luv this one, which I received via the usual email circular, wakakaka!

Friday, April 08, 2011

The Black Ninja of Dr Mahathir?

Friday night, so time for another uncles’ story – kaytee’s uncles of course wakakaka.

In the last few days I glossed over some news articles about that carpet bloke who was variously Rosmah Mansor’s toy boy, confidante, friend, fix-it-all man (‘mechanic’), brown bag carrier, younger ‘brother’ (alamak, how ungracious of him to describe a woman as 'older'), whoever, whatever, etc.

Quite frankly, it's not newsworthy to me. I can’t even recall his name other than it’s one belonging to a mamak, wakakaka.

But it triggered my uncles to relate to me a story in Dr Mahathir’s days, where there was another bloke like him, a fix-it-all-for-the-boss ‘mechanic. He too was an Indian but not a mamak.

In fact he was highly qualified and could be described as a lotus* (in the Chinese sense), you know, the admirable type who rose from very very humble beginnings on his own merits to very nearly the top of society, though ironically after he surmounted his difficult beginnings to become a someone in society on his own rights and achievements, he lingered mostly in the dark, as a ‘mechanic’ for his political boss.

* to know what is a Chinese lotus, read my June 2005 post The Lotus Will Not Bloom For One Man.

Unc said he was from the unfortunate lowest caste, an unjust and diabolically oppressive religio-social system that some Indian-Hindu* Malaysians even today, for some inexplicable reasons, voluntarily subordinate themselves to its ideological imperatives of strict social stratification and the associated evil of taboo-ed caste-miscegenation.

* either before or subsequent to their marriage they left Hinduism for another religion (no, not Islam)

Murphy's Law required that he fell in love with a sweetheart from an upper caste family, so it looked like it was going to be a sad impossible Romeo-Juliet type of scenario for them. But thanks to the courage and fortitude of his sweetie, they married in defiance of her family objections. He was a good husband and father.

Then like a Chinese lotus, he studied hard (while his wife worked hard to supplement their income), emerged above the muddy waters of his caste and unprivileged position to graduate as an outstanding electrical engineer, became a big corporate somebody, owned big house(s), Mercedes, the whole caboodle of 'I have arrived' material trophies, and the pinnacle of social achievement for him, a Datukship, all these even before he became a covert political aide. Eat that, family-in law!

Bravo to him, but why he went that extra bit, the whole nine yards so to speak, to become a political 'mechanic', one can only wonder? Was it greed for more, was it hubris he could move and shake the Malaysia political world (albeit from behind the scenes), was it a sense of thrill to be rubbing shoulders with the highest office in the land, was it his belief he would be doing some service for his nation, or was it to show his in-laws he was right up there with the nation's No 1 nyeh nyeh nyeh?

Who knows, though that won’t stop us from our favourite Malaysian pastime, speculating wakakaka.

The story went that he was so politically powerful even UMNO members, let alone MIC, MCA or Gerakan people, shivered when they heard of his name or involvement, because he was allegedly the No 1 ‘mechanic’ for Dr Mahathir. He was the man to make the Pharoah-ish "So it shall be written, so it shall be done" happened, and his reputation was such he ensured his boss' every 'wish' always happened.

They called him the Black Ninja, naturally only behind his back.

Does anyone know about this, and can share some stories? Or, were my Uncs being creative? Wakakaka

Thursday, April 07, 2011

Apparition in Padungan - 'Cursed Mother of PKR'?

When I read The Malaysian Insider’s In Padungan, a snapshot of Pakatan’s struggle for Sarawak (by sweet hottie Clara Chooi, yummy) I have to admit my suspicion grew exponentially (no, no, not at the sweet hottie). Please read on ...

In the run-up to the State election, DAP had surrendered its Batu Lintang seat in exchange for Padungan, an exchange which was initiated by PKR.

Unfortunately for DAP, Padungan was held by former PKR’s Dominique Ng, who already has a notoriety for going it alone in defiance of party stand.

The PKR-DAP agreed exchange resulted in poor Dominique Ng, then the PKR incumbent in Padungan, losing his seat to another Pakatan component party, and worse, in the absence of any announcement by PKR of another State seat for him to stand in. It was not surprising an angry Ng left with a huff and a puff (and who could blame him).

Azmin Ali made a belated mealy-mouthed statement that PKR had plans for Ng at the federal level, which only made my toes laugh.

And let it not be said that DAP went in blindfolded, because everyone knows even way before the exchange was signed and sealed that there’ll be a 3-corner fight in Padungan with maverick Ng as the 3rd (independent) candidate if PKR marginalised him – PKR did, as it habitually did to many of its erstwhile party members, like Nallakarupan, Gobala, Jenapa, Mustaffa Kamil, Zaid Ibrahim, even Chegubard, and a host of others - and I haven't even touched on Sabah yet!

So DAP walked willingly into a trap. But then, did PKR assure DAP during the negotiations that Ng would be given another State seat so as to prevent the politically-jilted bloke from standing in Padungan as a spoiler?

But you just can’t f* trust PKR, that vipers’ nest.

As if that’s not bad enough, guess how my temperature soared when I read The Malaysian Insider reporting:

Meanwhile PKR’s top leadership have refrained from condemning Ng for his contest with party president Datuk Seri Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail even sending the former an SMS to wish him well.

How f* sweet. I suppose as a parti sapu, it's wise not to burn any bridges.

She however reminded him that she would pray and hope for PR’s success in the seat and in the polls.

Fine but words (especially PKR's) are pretty cheap. But wait, here’s the froggie clincher:

“We cannot force him against his will” she said when asked if the party would accept Ng back into its fold should he request to do so in the future.

Madam, you bloody well explain! But then again, don’t bother lah, your party is renowned for the art of frog-farming, even at one time rushing off to Taiwan to hopefully court toads.

I get the nasty perception that in the Padungan-Batu Lintang exchange, PKR has played DAP out kau kau.

Look, there's a popular stated religio-political parallelism between Catholics considering Mary as the blessed Mother of God and anwaristas considering Wan Azizah as the blessed Mother of PKR. But if you had read an earlier kaytee’s post
Haris Ibrahim's MCLM candidates - a threat to Azmin Ali?, you would have known my recently revised opinion of Wan Azizah, where I wrote:

... there was the shameful silence of its President Dr Wan Azizah to Jonson Chong’s immaculate letter of appeal – see
Dr Wan Azizah ignores Jonson Chong's plea?

Haris Ibrahim praised Jonson for his constructive approach but alas, not so Dr Wan as she ignored him completely - yes, we would like to know whether Dr Wan had even replied to Jonson?

Why did a party president ignore a constructive proposal from a sensible, fair and balanced gentleman like Jonson Chong which would have put to rest all complaints if the polls had been conducted fairly, unless of course she …..

Since that day, my once-respect for the lady plummeted to zilch. Yes, she may be a nice and kind lady but she is not fit to be the president of a political party.

Thus, don't be surprised if the fallout from (what I see as) the treachery in Padungan eventually convince and lead me to describe Wan Azizah as the Cursed Mother of PKR. I hope I may be proven wrong.