A true bastard mamak and self claimed "Malay" who self claimed "MB" of Perak! Perakian will make sure he lose in disgrace in the coming election! The Gestapo polis diraja is helping him to corrupt the state of Perak! Pity the poor Sultan Azlan who is a real puppet of UMNO! Thursday, April 30, 2009
Zambry Abdul Kadir, A true bastard mamak and UMNO goon in Perak!
A true bastard mamak and self claimed "Malay" who self claimed "MB" of Perak! Perakian will make sure he lose in disgrace in the coming election! The Gestapo polis diraja is helping him to corrupt the state of Perak! Pity the poor Sultan Azlan who is a real puppet of UMNO! 
Tuesday, April 28, 2009
Ismail Merican..Stupid DG of Health Malaysia making stupid statement in the press! Malaysia free from swine flu: Health DG
This stupid mamak Ismail Merican DG thinks that he is a superdog that can prevent virus from crossing the borders of Malaysia and causing the flu epidermic in Malaysia! Shame on him as a so claimed doctor who is now so politically motivated that he is stupid enough to claimed that Malaysia will not be affected by the flu.
Even developed country like Europe, Canada and US is taking extra precaution but this stupid Mamak Ismail Merican is making statement in New Straits Times that there is nothing for Malaysian to worry about the flu outbreak! He is indeed a frog living under the coconut shell like what the Malay proverb said! The virus can easily cross the borders as it can be carry around by asymptomatic carrier who do not even have fever then spread to those who had weak immunity like children and elderly people!
Thursday, April 23, 2009
Iban are the most stupid and backward race in Malaysia....being manipulate by the UMNO cronies like PBB and SUPP
Sad to see that after 50 years of independence, the Iban are still the most stupid and idiot race among all the Malaysian.
Look at the recent Batang Ai by election and you will know that they are so stupid that they keep electing the corrupted UMNO agents from PRS despite of the political awareness in West Malaysia which saw the public voting for Pakatan Rakyat. They will remained to be a backward and sakai race for many years to come as we can't forsee that this race will be able to act unstupidly in the coming state election.
Iban is an useless tribe as they are uneducated and the BN would like to keep this status quo as they will remain to vote for the UMNO agents in Sarawak!
Look at the recent Batang Ai by election and you will know that they are so stupid that they keep electing the corrupted UMNO agents from PRS despite of the political awareness in West Malaysia which saw the public voting for Pakatan Rakyat. They will remained to be a backward and sakai race for many years to come as we can't forsee that this race will be able to act unstupidly in the coming state election.
Iban is an useless tribe as they are uneducated and the BN would like to keep this status quo as they will remain to vote for the UMNO agents in Sarawak!
SPR Abdul Aziz another UMNO bastard......of Suruhanjaya Penipuan Rakyat(SPR)!
This is the face of another UMNO bastard who is representing the Suruhanjaya Penipuan Rakyat Malaysia.......A shit product of UMNO!
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
3 Most important Agency in Malaysia..Polis Dimakan Rasuah M'sia PDRM, Malaysian Agency for Cow and Car (MACC) and Suruhanjaya Penipuan Rakyat (SPR)!
Suruhanjaya Against Cow and Car.......with UMNO logo in the middle (same keris)!
Polis diraja Malaysia......aka "Gestapo Malaysia"
Suruhanjaya Penipuan Malaysia...well known agent for ghost voters for UMNO in Malaysia!
Polis diraja Malaysia......aka "Gestapo Malaysia"
Suruhanjaya Penipuan Malaysia...well known agent for ghost voters for UMNO in Malaysia!Monday, April 20, 2009
The crooked man wanted the crooked bridge back!
The Mahathir Mohammed The Cobra Mamak is named the Father of corruption of Malaysia. He is trying to revived the corruption through his sons and family. Shame and Curse on him and his corrupted family.
Cobra Mamak Mahathir is out of his cobra dent to intimidate the people of Malaysia ......He is equilavent to "Marcos" of Philipine and "Taksin" of Thailand who had stolen tons of money from the people for his family. His family is rich because he gave AP to his own son to import the luxury car and extort money from the people!
Unit Trust to cheat the rakyat of Malaysia!
The Unit Trust scam recently anounced by Najis is a plot by UMNO to cheat the money from rakyat as they had lost a lot of money in their corruption (i.e. paying for the submarine) and buying votes in the recent by election.
Imaging the PNB is a pariah bogus company which is a empty shell now and you can check any foreign bank and no one will lent any mony to them.....so they had to resort to cheating the people.
Beware of Najis and his mahathir gang.
Imaging the PNB is a pariah bogus company which is a empty shell now and you can check any foreign bank and no one will lent any mony to them.....so they had to resort to cheating the people.
Beware of Najis and his mahathir gang.
Saturday, April 18, 2009
Kangaroo Court in Malaysia inteferes with politics! Judges are ashamed of their UMNO colleagues
See how the UMNO clown had controlled the Court of Malaysia and use them freely for their corruption in POLITICS!
The judges of the Federal Court have failed the people and the government of this country when they chose to ignore the law of the Constitution of Malaysia. In other words the judges have refused to do justice according to law.
By NH Chan
The front page of the Star newspaper of Friday, 17 April 2009 carries this startlingly outrageous decision of the Federal Court. The headline proclaims “Court: Siva does not have right to suspend seven”. The report reads:
PUTRAJAYA: The Federal Court has unanimously ruled that Perak Assembly Speaker V Sivakumar does not have the power to suspend Mentri Besar Datuk Zambry Abd Kadir and six state executive council members from attending the assembly.It granted a declaration that the seven assemblymen were entitled to take part in all the assembly sittings and to carry out their duties.Court of Appeal president Justice Alauddin Mohd Sheriff, who chaired a five-man panel yesterday, said the Speaker’s decision to suspend the seven applicants was ultra vires (outside the law) and invalid.… The other judges were Chief Judge of Malaya Arifin Zakaria and Federal Court Judges Nik Hashim Nik Ab. Rahman, S Augustine Paul and Zulkefli Ahmad Makinudin.
This is a perverse judgement of the Federal Court. It is perverse because it is a decision that was made in blatant defiance of Article 72 (1) of the Federal Constitution which says,”The validity of any proceedings in the Legislative Assembly of any State shall not be questioned in any court”. The judges of the Federal Court have failed the people and the government of this country when they chose to ignore the law of the Constitution of Malaysia. In other words the judges have refused to do justice according to law.
Incidentally, ultra vires does not mean “outside the law”. It means “outside one’s jurisdiction, beyond the scope of one s power or authority”. And we may ask, who is the Federal Court to say what is beyond the jurisdiction of the Speaker when the supreme law of the country says that “the validity of any proceedings in the Legislative Assembly of any State shall not be questioned in any court”.
Don’t these judges realize that they have actually done a disservice to the Government of the day? Perhaps they have never heard of the Taff Vale case.
In 1900 the English House of Lords, which as you know is the highest court in the land just as our Federal Court is the highest court in this country, handed down an outrageous decision which was unpopular to the common people of England. The judges of the House of Lords by their judgment had unwittingly done a great disservice to the Conservative Government of the day because in the general election of 1906 it was toppled by a landslide. The case which was the cause of the fall of the Conservative Government by a landslide was Taff Vale Rly Co v Amalgamated Society of Railway Servants [1901] 1 QB 170, [1901] AC 426, HL. It is best that I let Lord Denning take up the story from his book Landmarks in the Law, Butterworths, London, 1984, pp 119-121:
There was the great Taff Vale case. To understand it, you must know that the trade unions were virtually friendly societies. The members paid their subscriptions into a fund out of which benefits could be paid to members if they were ill or out of employment. Now in the Taff Vale case the railwaymen’s union called a strike at the railway station at Cardiff. The men left work and set up peaceful pickets so as to persuade others not to go to work. The trains could not run, and the company lost money. The railway were advised to bring an action against the union itself, seeking an injunction and damages. The Court of Appeal threw out the action. But the House of Lords, in a startling judgment, overruled the Court of Appeal. They issued an interlocutory injunction against the trade union itself, restraining it from setting up the pickets, and said that the railway company could recover damages which could be enforced against trade union funds. Later, at the trial itself, the damages were assessed at £23,000 and that sum was paid out of the funds of the trade union. £23,000 in 1900. What would that be now?
In the eyes of trade unions, that was an outrageous decision. It meant that the railway company could take all the funds subscribed by the members so as to meet the damages. It meant that, in future, a trade union could never call a strike, else it would be in peril of losing all its funds. It meant virtually the end of trade unions. As G.M. Trevelyan says in his History: ‘It struck at the very heart of trade union action’.
That case had immense political consequences. At the general election of 1906 there came into being a new political party. It was the Labour party. They ran a host of candidates themselves. They pledged complete immunity for trade unions. Many of the Liberal candidates gave the same pledge. The result of the general election was like an earthquake. Liberals had 397 seats. The new Labour party had 50 seats. The Conservatives only 157. It was a sweeping victory for the trade unions.
Parliament immediately passed the Trade Disputes Act 1906. It is probably the most important Act ever put into the Statute Book. It reversed all the judicial decisions against trade unions. The Taff Vale case was overruled. No trade union could there after be sued for damages for any wrongs done by its members. Its funds were unassailable.”
I think the message of the Taff Vale case to our judges of the Federal Court should be clear enough. The electorate may decide, just as the voters did in 1906 England to the Conservative Government, to use the power of their vote to unseat the BN government in the next by-election or general election because they do not trust the judges. Poor Najib our new Prime Minister, it is the judges who have let him down. Unfortunately it would be the Prime Minister who has to carry the baby, but not the irresponsible judges who did all the damage by not administering justice according to law.
To all those judges who think they are above the law, I would suggest that they pay careful attention to the warning by Lord Denning M.R. in Gouriet v. Union of Post Office Workers [1977] 1 Q.B. 729, 761-762:
To every subject in this land, no matter how powerful, I would use Thomas Fuller’s words over 300 years ago: “Be you never so high, the law is above you”
And the law, in the present context, is the Federal Constitution, in particular, Article 72 which states:
72. (1) The validity of any proceedings in the Legislative Assembly of any State shall not be questioned in any court.
(2) No person shall be liable to any proceedings in any court in respect of anything said or any vote given by him when taking part in proceedings of the Legislative Assembly of any State or of any committee thereof.
(3) No person shall be liable to any proceedings in any court in respect of anything published by or under the authority of the Legislative Assembly of any State.
Suppose the Speaker Sivakumar were to ignore the declarative decree of the Federal Court, what then? Clause (2) of Article 72 of the Federal Constitution says that “No person shall be liable to any proceedings in any court in respect of anything said or any vote given by him when taking part in proceedings of the Legislative Assembly of any State or of any committee thereof”. The Federal Court can say anything they like but the Speaker is not liable to any proceedings in any court in respect of anything said or any vote given by him when taking part in proceedings of the Legislative Assembly. The order of the Federal Court seems to me to be a brutum fulmen which in Latin means “ineffectual thunderbolt; (action which is) loud but ineffective”. It reminds me of the words of Horace: Parturient montes, nascetur ridiculus mus which in Latin means “Mountains will be in labour, the birth will be a single laughable mouse”.
The errant judges of the Federal Court should heed the warning of the late Lord Denning, What Next in the Law, Butterworths, London, 1982, p 330:
May not the judges themselves sometimes abuse or misuse their power? It is their duty to administer and apply the law of the land. If they should divert it or depart from it a - and do so knowingly - they themselves would be guilty of a misuse of power.
And he posed this question:
Suppose a future Prime Minister should seek to pack the Bench with judges of his own extreme political colour. Would they be tools in his hand?
The judges of the Federal Court have failed the people and the government of this country when they chose to ignore the law of the Constitution of Malaysia. In other words the judges have refused to do justice according to law.
By NH Chan
The front page of the Star newspaper of Friday, 17 April 2009 carries this startlingly outrageous decision of the Federal Court. The headline proclaims “Court: Siva does not have right to suspend seven”. The report reads:
PUTRAJAYA: The Federal Court has unanimously ruled that Perak Assembly Speaker V Sivakumar does not have the power to suspend Mentri Besar Datuk Zambry Abd Kadir and six state executive council members from attending the assembly.It granted a declaration that the seven assemblymen were entitled to take part in all the assembly sittings and to carry out their duties.Court of Appeal president Justice Alauddin Mohd Sheriff, who chaired a five-man panel yesterday, said the Speaker’s decision to suspend the seven applicants was ultra vires (outside the law) and invalid.… The other judges were Chief Judge of Malaya Arifin Zakaria and Federal Court Judges Nik Hashim Nik Ab. Rahman, S Augustine Paul and Zulkefli Ahmad Makinudin.
This is a perverse judgement of the Federal Court. It is perverse because it is a decision that was made in blatant defiance of Article 72 (1) of the Federal Constitution which says,”The validity of any proceedings in the Legislative Assembly of any State shall not be questioned in any court”. The judges of the Federal Court have failed the people and the government of this country when they chose to ignore the law of the Constitution of Malaysia. In other words the judges have refused to do justice according to law.
Incidentally, ultra vires does not mean “outside the law”. It means “outside one’s jurisdiction, beyond the scope of one s power or authority”. And we may ask, who is the Federal Court to say what is beyond the jurisdiction of the Speaker when the supreme law of the country says that “the validity of any proceedings in the Legislative Assembly of any State shall not be questioned in any court”.
Don’t these judges realize that they have actually done a disservice to the Government of the day? Perhaps they have never heard of the Taff Vale case.
In 1900 the English House of Lords, which as you know is the highest court in the land just as our Federal Court is the highest court in this country, handed down an outrageous decision which was unpopular to the common people of England. The judges of the House of Lords by their judgment had unwittingly done a great disservice to the Conservative Government of the day because in the general election of 1906 it was toppled by a landslide. The case which was the cause of the fall of the Conservative Government by a landslide was Taff Vale Rly Co v Amalgamated Society of Railway Servants [1901] 1 QB 170, [1901] AC 426, HL. It is best that I let Lord Denning take up the story from his book Landmarks in the Law, Butterworths, London, 1984, pp 119-121:
There was the great Taff Vale case. To understand it, you must know that the trade unions were virtually friendly societies. The members paid their subscriptions into a fund out of which benefits could be paid to members if they were ill or out of employment. Now in the Taff Vale case the railwaymen’s union called a strike at the railway station at Cardiff. The men left work and set up peaceful pickets so as to persuade others not to go to work. The trains could not run, and the company lost money. The railway were advised to bring an action against the union itself, seeking an injunction and damages. The Court of Appeal threw out the action. But the House of Lords, in a startling judgment, overruled the Court of Appeal. They issued an interlocutory injunction against the trade union itself, restraining it from setting up the pickets, and said that the railway company could recover damages which could be enforced against trade union funds. Later, at the trial itself, the damages were assessed at £23,000 and that sum was paid out of the funds of the trade union. £23,000 in 1900. What would that be now?
In the eyes of trade unions, that was an outrageous decision. It meant that the railway company could take all the funds subscribed by the members so as to meet the damages. It meant that, in future, a trade union could never call a strike, else it would be in peril of losing all its funds. It meant virtually the end of trade unions. As G.M. Trevelyan says in his History: ‘It struck at the very heart of trade union action’.
That case had immense political consequences. At the general election of 1906 there came into being a new political party. It was the Labour party. They ran a host of candidates themselves. They pledged complete immunity for trade unions. Many of the Liberal candidates gave the same pledge. The result of the general election was like an earthquake. Liberals had 397 seats. The new Labour party had 50 seats. The Conservatives only 157. It was a sweeping victory for the trade unions.
Parliament immediately passed the Trade Disputes Act 1906. It is probably the most important Act ever put into the Statute Book. It reversed all the judicial decisions against trade unions. The Taff Vale case was overruled. No trade union could there after be sued for damages for any wrongs done by its members. Its funds were unassailable.”
I think the message of the Taff Vale case to our judges of the Federal Court should be clear enough. The electorate may decide, just as the voters did in 1906 England to the Conservative Government, to use the power of their vote to unseat the BN government in the next by-election or general election because they do not trust the judges. Poor Najib our new Prime Minister, it is the judges who have let him down. Unfortunately it would be the Prime Minister who has to carry the baby, but not the irresponsible judges who did all the damage by not administering justice according to law.
To all those judges who think they are above the law, I would suggest that they pay careful attention to the warning by Lord Denning M.R. in Gouriet v. Union of Post Office Workers [1977] 1 Q.B. 729, 761-762:
To every subject in this land, no matter how powerful, I would use Thomas Fuller’s words over 300 years ago: “Be you never so high, the law is above you”
And the law, in the present context, is the Federal Constitution, in particular, Article 72 which states:
72. (1) The validity of any proceedings in the Legislative Assembly of any State shall not be questioned in any court.
(2) No person shall be liable to any proceedings in any court in respect of anything said or any vote given by him when taking part in proceedings of the Legislative Assembly of any State or of any committee thereof.
(3) No person shall be liable to any proceedings in any court in respect of anything published by or under the authority of the Legislative Assembly of any State.
Suppose the Speaker Sivakumar were to ignore the declarative decree of the Federal Court, what then? Clause (2) of Article 72 of the Federal Constitution says that “No person shall be liable to any proceedings in any court in respect of anything said or any vote given by him when taking part in proceedings of the Legislative Assembly of any State or of any committee thereof”. The Federal Court can say anything they like but the Speaker is not liable to any proceedings in any court in respect of anything said or any vote given by him when taking part in proceedings of the Legislative Assembly. The order of the Federal Court seems to me to be a brutum fulmen which in Latin means “ineffectual thunderbolt; (action which is) loud but ineffective”. It reminds me of the words of Horace: Parturient montes, nascetur ridiculus mus which in Latin means “Mountains will be in labour, the birth will be a single laughable mouse”.
The errant judges of the Federal Court should heed the warning of the late Lord Denning, What Next in the Law, Butterworths, London, 1982, p 330:
May not the judges themselves sometimes abuse or misuse their power? It is their duty to administer and apply the law of the land. If they should divert it or depart from it a - and do so knowingly - they themselves would be guilty of a misuse of power.
And he posed this question:
Suppose a future Prime Minister should seek to pack the Bench with judges of his own extreme political colour. Would they be tools in his hand?
Tuesday, April 7, 2009
The disgusting and Disgraced Director General of Health in Malaysia , Ismail Merican the Mamak! See his press conference on Kugan case!
It is an open secret in the Ministry of Health that this Iamail Merican Mamak is a sex maniac and he had many mistress even among the ministry staff and in order to fund his mistress he had to falsify all the evidence against the government in order to get pay! He is a disgusting man and no sounded doctors and nurses in the ministry likes him but he is being kept in the post by the UMNO clown in order that cases like Kugan can be covered up...more so in the sodomy cases involving Anuar Ibrahim.Ismail Merican The Mamak is a disgrace to the Medical Profession! He will sure end up in the fire of hell.
Prostitution of Malaysian Medical Council
Reuben Sher Apr 7, 09 4:26pm
I refer to the Malaysiakini report Blunt force trauma did not cause Kugan's death.
In the aftermath of the horrific death of A Kugan when he was in police custody, Health Minister Liow Tiong Lai reportedly asked the Malaysian Medical Council (MMC) to examine the two post-mortem reports on the car theft suspect. He said this in view of a complaint lodged by Kugan’s mother N Indra with the MMC.
The very next day almost in knee-jerk fashion, the Health Ministry director-general over whom the MCA minister has zero control, stated that the Malaysian Medical Council has acted against 13 doctors — including striking the names of two of them off the medical register — for various offences last year.
MMC inquiries go on for ages. Why make a statement regarding their status within 24 hours after Liow’s well-intentioned statement?
The DG either appears to have taken Liow’s request as an affront and published the names of these ‘errant’ doctors for the public to view. Or maybe he just wanted to show Liow who really is the boss.
But Merican coming to the defence of the beleaguered Indonesian pathologist Karim Tajuddin whilst running down University Malaya’s expatriate pathologist Prashant N Samberkar even as the MMC hearing is ongoing is nothing short of disgraceful.
His media statement on the pathological features that caused Kugan’s death is clearly designed to get the government off the hook by trying to hoodwink the very public whom he thinks can be fooled, by rehashing and re-categorising the quantum and extent of the battered boy’s injuries.
He blatantly tries to cover up the cause of death by shifting the primary etiology of trauma as the precipitating factor causing Kugan’s death to underlying acute myocarditis as the predisposing factor that hastened the boy’s eventual renal shutdown and ultimate pulmonary edema (‘water in the lungs’).
The timing of the Kugan statement means that the director-general of health sees it convenient to make use the supposedly independent Malaysian Medical Council of which he is puzzlingly president.
With a health DG more interested in playing politics, is there any wonder why we have a relentless mosquito-borne epidemic with almost half of this country’s population hypertensive and diabetic?
Forget about Sabahans in Kota Kinabalu who don’t even have a general hospital anymore.
With this DG’s reckless disregard compounded further by his lack of attention in providing quality healthcare access for the Malaysian public, Merican should perhaps take his mask off and instead do what he really aspires to be…stand as a Umno candidate in the very next by-election.
Saturday, April 4, 2009
Mana MACC Cuma Siasat Kerbau dan Kereta! Khir Toyo dan Bini Tamak Terlepas!
Guna Duit Rakyat pergi melancong....bukan seratus ringgit tetapi berjuta ringit tetapi MACC bisu! sebab MACC....Malaysia Agency for Cow and Car!Don't be cheated by this man callaed Najis alias Najib Tun Razak!
Jangan ditipu lagi oleh Ular Si Najis bahawa dia dapat ubah negara ini......Read this and you will know why?
Malaysian had being cheated again and again....In 2004 and now again ...UMNO try to cheat the people in 2009!
While Najib is making the same promises himself, there is little question that he is cut from the same cloth as the Umno delegates who gave a standing ovation to the latest additions to the Malaysian corruption hall of fame. Even if Najib were sincere, his track record strongly suggests that he does not have the discipline or willpower to seriously impact the morass of corruption and inefficiency that burdens our government and our politics.
John Lee, The Malaysian Insider All is settled: Datuk Seri Najib Razak is our sixth prime minister. As any Malaysian should, I hope he does his job well. But unfortunately, as any Malaysian also should expect, every sign points to his being yet another lacklustre premiership. His track record in government suggests that his administration will not markedly improve on Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi’s; if anything, its only distinguishing mark may be the rollback of the few reforms Abdullah was able to carry out.
Those expecting Najib’s capabilities to exceed Abdullah’s are, I fear, mistaken. While it is true that unlike Abdullah, Najib is not a career civil servant, it is also true that his career in government has been distinguished by its complete lack of remarkable achievements. Like all prime ministers except our first, he had a stint at the Education Ministry — can anyone name a single thing he did as education minister? Even opposition leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim at least made his mark as education minister, albeit in rather negative way.
As defence minister, Najib’s tenure was characterised by corruption and scandal; while he was rarely directly implicated, this certainly suggests that those hoping for a change in the tone of politics and administration under Najib shouldn’t expect much. And as finance minister, Najib has unveiled a lacklustre stimulus package that mostly comprises ill-advised infrastructure projects. There is not a single sign of promise here.
In terms of intellectual promise, Abdullah and Najib are virtually on par. Tunku Abdul Rahman secured our independence by skilfully tailoring his rhetoric to suit both British and local audiences. Tun Abdul Razak not only birthed the New Economic Policy but also the backbone of our public education system. Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad will always be remembered, not just for his achievements as prime minister, but for his ability as a politician and his intellectual tour de force of Malay society and history in The Malay Dilemma. Abdullah’s biggest achievements upon taking office were being brave enough to oppose Dr Mahathir in the 1988 Umno crisis, and then being unassuming enough to wait for his invitation back into the halls of power — having learnt his lesson, he then diligently avoided disturbing the apple cart to protect his position. And now as far as anyone can tell, upon taking office today, Najib is only known for his ill-advised comments on ethnic bloodshed during the 1988 constitutional crisis, his scandal-ridden Defence Ministry, and of course, for his unclear association with the death of the woman whose name now cannot be said.
As such, I have extremely low expectations of Prime Minister Najib. Malaysians had every right to expect a breath of fresh air when Abdullah succeeded to the premiership in 2003, and we were sorely let down. Perhaps we are now overcompensating for this by our extreme cynicism; opinion polls suggest that Najib’s approval ratings are lower than even his unpopular predecessor.
But I think we are just being realistic. Our euphoria in 2003 and 2004 was irrational — beyond vague promises, promises which we had heard many times before from even Dr Mahathir himself, we had little reason to believe Abdullah could seriously deliver on his promises of reform. While Najib is making the same promises himself, there is little question that he is cut from the same cloth as the Umno delegates who gave a standing ovation to the latest additions to the Malaysian corruption hall of fame. Even if Najib were sincere, his track record strongly suggests that he does not have the discipline or willpower to seriously impact the morass of corruption and inefficiency that burdens our government and our politics.
I say all this not because I hope Najib fails; nothing would give me greater pleasure than to see him succeed in reforming our institutions and fixing all that is so clearly wrong with our country. But until he proves otherwise, there is every indication that Najib cannot and will not make these reforms a reality. Malaysians elected Abdullah in 2004 and then rejected him in 2008 based solely on his promised reforms. Unless Najib can make a clear break with his sordid and otherwise unremarkable past, Malaysians will reject him even more resoundingly than they did Abdullah.
Malaysian had being cheated again and again....In 2004 and now again ...UMNO try to cheat the people in 2009!
While Najib is making the same promises himself, there is little question that he is cut from the same cloth as the Umno delegates who gave a standing ovation to the latest additions to the Malaysian corruption hall of fame. Even if Najib were sincere, his track record strongly suggests that he does not have the discipline or willpower to seriously impact the morass of corruption and inefficiency that burdens our government and our politics.
John Lee, The Malaysian Insider All is settled: Datuk Seri Najib Razak is our sixth prime minister. As any Malaysian should, I hope he does his job well. But unfortunately, as any Malaysian also should expect, every sign points to his being yet another lacklustre premiership. His track record in government suggests that his administration will not markedly improve on Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi’s; if anything, its only distinguishing mark may be the rollback of the few reforms Abdullah was able to carry out.
Those expecting Najib’s capabilities to exceed Abdullah’s are, I fear, mistaken. While it is true that unlike Abdullah, Najib is not a career civil servant, it is also true that his career in government has been distinguished by its complete lack of remarkable achievements. Like all prime ministers except our first, he had a stint at the Education Ministry — can anyone name a single thing he did as education minister? Even opposition leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim at least made his mark as education minister, albeit in rather negative way.
As defence minister, Najib’s tenure was characterised by corruption and scandal; while he was rarely directly implicated, this certainly suggests that those hoping for a change in the tone of politics and administration under Najib shouldn’t expect much. And as finance minister, Najib has unveiled a lacklustre stimulus package that mostly comprises ill-advised infrastructure projects. There is not a single sign of promise here.
In terms of intellectual promise, Abdullah and Najib are virtually on par. Tunku Abdul Rahman secured our independence by skilfully tailoring his rhetoric to suit both British and local audiences. Tun Abdul Razak not only birthed the New Economic Policy but also the backbone of our public education system. Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad will always be remembered, not just for his achievements as prime minister, but for his ability as a politician and his intellectual tour de force of Malay society and history in The Malay Dilemma. Abdullah’s biggest achievements upon taking office were being brave enough to oppose Dr Mahathir in the 1988 Umno crisis, and then being unassuming enough to wait for his invitation back into the halls of power — having learnt his lesson, he then diligently avoided disturbing the apple cart to protect his position. And now as far as anyone can tell, upon taking office today, Najib is only known for his ill-advised comments on ethnic bloodshed during the 1988 constitutional crisis, his scandal-ridden Defence Ministry, and of course, for his unclear association with the death of the woman whose name now cannot be said.
As such, I have extremely low expectations of Prime Minister Najib. Malaysians had every right to expect a breath of fresh air when Abdullah succeeded to the premiership in 2003, and we were sorely let down. Perhaps we are now overcompensating for this by our extreme cynicism; opinion polls suggest that Najib’s approval ratings are lower than even his unpopular predecessor.
But I think we are just being realistic. Our euphoria in 2003 and 2004 was irrational — beyond vague promises, promises which we had heard many times before from even Dr Mahathir himself, we had little reason to believe Abdullah could seriously deliver on his promises of reform. While Najib is making the same promises himself, there is little question that he is cut from the same cloth as the Umno delegates who gave a standing ovation to the latest additions to the Malaysian corruption hall of fame. Even if Najib were sincere, his track record strongly suggests that he does not have the discipline or willpower to seriously impact the morass of corruption and inefficiency that burdens our government and our politics.
I say all this not because I hope Najib fails; nothing would give me greater pleasure than to see him succeed in reforming our institutions and fixing all that is so clearly wrong with our country. But until he proves otherwise, there is every indication that Najib cannot and will not make these reforms a reality. Malaysians elected Abdullah in 2004 and then rejected him in 2008 based solely on his promised reforms. Unless Najib can make a clear break with his sordid and otherwise unremarkable past, Malaysians will reject him even more resoundingly than they did Abdullah.
The Malaysian Cobra and Viper is actively promoting corruption and Racism! shame to the country!
This 2 biggest snakes in Malaysia is actively promoting corruption in Malaysia! They are holding the people of Malaysia Ransom by spreading cronism and racism in the country! The Mahathir cobra had decided to join back the snake dent UMNO again after oust the previous prime minister and he will influence the Najib Viper to do more corruption to enrich his sons Mukhiz the Shit!
They are just cheating for their family not saving the country! Don't trust these snakes!
Friday, April 3, 2009
A lesson in Malaysian culture, for foreigners
Ladies, ladies, ladies, let’s get down to business.
Welcome to Malaysia. You are going to be here for at least two years and to make your stay here enjoyable and free of sticky situations, we shall take you through a crash course in how to understand Malaysian culture.First of all, there is no such thing as a Malaysian. What we have are four groupings labelled as Bumiputera, which is another word for Malay; Chinese, spelt C-I-N-A and pronounced Chee-Ner; Indians, sometimes referred to as Keling or Hindu by the Bumiputera; and the lain-lain or ‘others’. We, I’m afraid, do not fit into any of these four categories. The Bumiputeras call us ‘Mat Salleh’ while the Chinese refer to us as ‘Kwai Loh’.
Now, while I said there is no such thing as a Malaysian, the Indians and Chinese will insist you refer to them as Malaysians. The Indians, however, would argue that they are Indians and will talk about Indian rights and Indian interests. But, while they claim to be Indians, you must not call them Indians. They will get very offended. You must call them Malaysians. And the same goes for the Chinese.
For the Malays it is even more complicating. They insist they are Bumiputeras, which means ‘sons of the soil’. But they will demand you refer to them as Melayu and they will argue about things such as Ketuanan Melayu, which means Malays as Lords, and other such rhetoric. But never mind, over time you will begin to understand how Malaysians think, which will eventually give you the impression that they can’t really think.
Each grouping has its own culture when it comes to gatherings. Chinese culture is quite straightforward. They love lavish dinners and young half-naked women dancing and singing on stage while they eat. The Malaysian government has officially adopted this as Chinese culture and you will notice that all government-sponsored gatherings will be of the like.
Malay gatherings are not as sexy. They always start their gatherings by screaming ‘Ketuanan Melayu’ and which will end with the kissing of little curved knives that are called keris, pronounced ‘Chris’. Being Muslims, they are not allowed to have young half-naked women publicly singing and dancing on stage. Most of these things are done behind closed doors and away from the public eye.
Indian culture, when it comes to gatherings, is less sexy or militant. Normally, they will invite the President of the Malaysian Indian Congress to grace their gatherings and they will sing his praises, hug him, and kiss his hand. Sometimes, they go into frenzy and will wail and throw slippers at him. It, of course, depends on what time of the day it is to see which ritual the Indians would adopt.You will never see a Chinese chauffeur. While most of the big and lavish cars are owned by the Chinese, their chauffeurs are always either Malays or Indians. The same goes for security guards. They are all either Indians, Malays or lain-lain, never Chinese. We assume this is because the Chinese do not trust their own kind to drive their cars or to handle their security.When entering a Malaysian home you must take off your shoes. This appears to be the one and only thing that all four groupings share in common. When you invite Malaysians to your home you will notice that they will also take off their shoes before entering. So it is advisable to place a shoe rack outside your house in the event you wish to invite Malaysians over to your home.Religious holidays are synonymous with the handing out of little packets that contain money. The Chinese will hand out red packets and the Malays green packets. The Indians do not appear to share this Chinese and Malay custom of handing out packets of money on religious holidays. However, they will never refuse receiving it if you offer them one, especially during an election.
The official language for Malaysia is not constant and keeps changing. It used to be Bahasa Kebangsaan and then was changed to Bahasa Melayu. Then, for a short while, the government adopted Bahasa Baku as the official language. Now, the official language is Bahasa Malaysia. Actually, all four are the same except for the spelling, which changes each time they switch over.Therefore, there is no such thing as a Malaysian language per se. So, maybe this is the problem the government faces in establishing an official language for Malaysia.
Most of the Malay vocabulary is borrowed from the Thai, Indian, Chinese, Portuguese, Dutch, Arabic and English languages. I was told there are only five or six words that can be regarded as originally Malay.
The federal government is led by three main political parties within the ruling coalition called Barisan Nasional. You will notice, however, that the names of all three of these parties -- Umno, MCA and MIC -- are in English. None are in the Malaysian national language. Nevertheless, all these three parties are very passionate about defending the Malaysian national language even though none of them use the Malaysian national language in their party names.Okay, that ends our first lesson in how to understand Malaysian culture. Tomorrow, we shall talk about other aspects of Malaysian culture and traditions, such as the education and economic policies of this country and the quota system attached to these policies.
The education quota system is actually quite easy to understand. In certain institutions of higher learning, 100% of the students are Malays and none of the other groupings are allowed places in these institutions.We hope, by the end of this three-day crash course, you will be able to understand Malaysia better. Invariably, you will discover that Malaysians are quite difficult to comprehend. They say one thing but they mean the opposite. For example, when you invite them to join you for dinner, they will say ‘no thank you’. Actually, they mean ‘yes please’. And if you take that to literally mean ‘no thank you’ they will get very upset and consider you sombong or pompous.
Welcome to Malaysia. You are going to be here for at least two years and to make your stay here enjoyable and free of sticky situations, we shall take you through a crash course in how to understand Malaysian culture.First of all, there is no such thing as a Malaysian. What we have are four groupings labelled as Bumiputera, which is another word for Malay; Chinese, spelt C-I-N-A and pronounced Chee-Ner; Indians, sometimes referred to as Keling or Hindu by the Bumiputera; and the lain-lain or ‘others’. We, I’m afraid, do not fit into any of these four categories. The Bumiputeras call us ‘Mat Salleh’ while the Chinese refer to us as ‘Kwai Loh’.
Now, while I said there is no such thing as a Malaysian, the Indians and Chinese will insist you refer to them as Malaysians. The Indians, however, would argue that they are Indians and will talk about Indian rights and Indian interests. But, while they claim to be Indians, you must not call them Indians. They will get very offended. You must call them Malaysians. And the same goes for the Chinese.
For the Malays it is even more complicating. They insist they are Bumiputeras, which means ‘sons of the soil’. But they will demand you refer to them as Melayu and they will argue about things such as Ketuanan Melayu, which means Malays as Lords, and other such rhetoric. But never mind, over time you will begin to understand how Malaysians think, which will eventually give you the impression that they can’t really think.
Each grouping has its own culture when it comes to gatherings. Chinese culture is quite straightforward. They love lavish dinners and young half-naked women dancing and singing on stage while they eat. The Malaysian government has officially adopted this as Chinese culture and you will notice that all government-sponsored gatherings will be of the like.
Malay gatherings are not as sexy. They always start their gatherings by screaming ‘Ketuanan Melayu’ and which will end with the kissing of little curved knives that are called keris, pronounced ‘Chris’. Being Muslims, they are not allowed to have young half-naked women publicly singing and dancing on stage. Most of these things are done behind closed doors and away from the public eye.
Indian culture, when it comes to gatherings, is less sexy or militant. Normally, they will invite the President of the Malaysian Indian Congress to grace their gatherings and they will sing his praises, hug him, and kiss his hand. Sometimes, they go into frenzy and will wail and throw slippers at him. It, of course, depends on what time of the day it is to see which ritual the Indians would adopt.You will never see a Chinese chauffeur. While most of the big and lavish cars are owned by the Chinese, their chauffeurs are always either Malays or Indians. The same goes for security guards. They are all either Indians, Malays or lain-lain, never Chinese. We assume this is because the Chinese do not trust their own kind to drive their cars or to handle their security.When entering a Malaysian home you must take off your shoes. This appears to be the one and only thing that all four groupings share in common. When you invite Malaysians to your home you will notice that they will also take off their shoes before entering. So it is advisable to place a shoe rack outside your house in the event you wish to invite Malaysians over to your home.Religious holidays are synonymous with the handing out of little packets that contain money. The Chinese will hand out red packets and the Malays green packets. The Indians do not appear to share this Chinese and Malay custom of handing out packets of money on religious holidays. However, they will never refuse receiving it if you offer them one, especially during an election.
The official language for Malaysia is not constant and keeps changing. It used to be Bahasa Kebangsaan and then was changed to Bahasa Melayu. Then, for a short while, the government adopted Bahasa Baku as the official language. Now, the official language is Bahasa Malaysia. Actually, all four are the same except for the spelling, which changes each time they switch over.Therefore, there is no such thing as a Malaysian language per se. So, maybe this is the problem the government faces in establishing an official language for Malaysia.
Most of the Malay vocabulary is borrowed from the Thai, Indian, Chinese, Portuguese, Dutch, Arabic and English languages. I was told there are only five or six words that can be regarded as originally Malay.
The federal government is led by three main political parties within the ruling coalition called Barisan Nasional. You will notice, however, that the names of all three of these parties -- Umno, MCA and MIC -- are in English. None are in the Malaysian national language. Nevertheless, all these three parties are very passionate about defending the Malaysian national language even though none of them use the Malaysian national language in their party names.Okay, that ends our first lesson in how to understand Malaysian culture. Tomorrow, we shall talk about other aspects of Malaysian culture and traditions, such as the education and economic policies of this country and the quota system attached to these policies.
The education quota system is actually quite easy to understand. In certain institutions of higher learning, 100% of the students are Malays and none of the other groupings are allowed places in these institutions.We hope, by the end of this three-day crash course, you will be able to understand Malaysia better. Invariably, you will discover that Malaysians are quite difficult to comprehend. They say one thing but they mean the opposite. For example, when you invite them to join you for dinner, they will say ‘no thank you’. Actually, they mean ‘yes please’. And if you take that to literally mean ‘no thank you’ they will get very upset and consider you sombong or pompous.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
