Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for July, 2010

KTemoc Konvolute, Noraini Yusedbrain

It’s been considered improper and so forbidden…

to “rip” or to “flay” KTemoc because the “ripping” is into KTemoc  the man, and KTemoc only. He’s so important he imagines nothing else but himself. So thin is his skin, and with ego bruised, he sobs all over his own pages. Sob, sob. Here’s a hanky, boy. Poor Chinaman in Australia, calls himself Malaysian, yet so full of Joshie’s White Christian sensibilities. Jurgen Habermas could not have imagined the extent of Western corruption. Says he: Christianity, and nothing else, is the ultimate foundation of … Western civilization. Everything else is postmodern chatter.

KTemoc: I’m honoured to be among the Jesus people, but don’t you dare call me Christian. Actually I’m better than Christians … I’m a proud Malaysian. You know who am I? You know who’re my uncles?  

 

 

to be “anti-LGE” or to write long pieces. Noraini Yousoff can’t take long pieces, especially if they’re “Chinese centric”. Long pieces are hazardous to Noraini’s brain, turning it “unstable”. Today, according to Noraini, even articles or essays have ethnic classes, like the NEP. Exceptions to the new classification: articles that are Malaysian-centric or Anglo-centric. Here, thus, is Noraini, lover of the White English model of life – a true Malaysian coconut – brown outside, White inside. So much like LGE.

Noraini: Don’t you touch LGE again, you hear! I swear I’ll tell his Father. This is my last warning to  you, we can be very unstable, mentally. Do you not know the word ‘amok’?

 

Advertisements

Read Full Post »

This gets to be tiresome: burial, death everywhere, on the streets, in police stations, at the foot of some tower buildings. But one presses on….

城裡的月光

許美靜:

每顆心上某一個地方
總有個記憶揮不散
每個深夜某一個地方
總有個最深的思量

世間萬千的變幻
愛把有情的人分兩端
心若知道靈犀的方向
哪怕不能夠朝夕相伴*

#城裡的月光把夢照亮 請溫暖他心房
看透了人間聚散 能不能多點快樂片段
城裡的月光把夢照亮 請守候他身旁
若有一天能重逢 讓幸福撒滿整個夜晚

*********************

An Essay in Memory, Zhao Mingfu 赵明福

The last time somebody was asked if he was Chinese – the MACC death question – and said “yes”, he would have been thrown or driven out of a 14th floor window.

This post’s (English) title is quoted from Paul Jauri, Indonesian, which is his legal name. In Chinese script his actual, true name is Yao Ziying, whose ancestral roots are in a village in a mountainous, lower part of Fujian province. Yao has said: “I’m from Indonesia, and I’m Chinese.”

Yao has no problem with both identities, one ethnic and cultural, one citizenship, and says so openly because the two are not at odds, an antithesis. In Malaysia, it would be in conflict simultaneously with both Umno and the DAP (see how the two parties are alike in worldview?). It could, in particular, also mean death at anytime.

Ahirudin Attan will however say Yao’s  allegiance to country is suspect (but not Ahirudin’s loyalty to Indonesia). Mahathir Mohamad, Perkasa, and Umno, perpetually, will hold his ethnicity to ransom, using his Chinese identity to extort money, in the name of the Malays – today the Chinese is called a “bait” –  from the largesse of state-controlled resources, taxes, oil, and so on. (Mahathir has that “bait” strategy before, using Francis Yeoh’s YTL for example. See bottom paragraph for amplification.*)

In another or future set of circumstances, Yao will be target for a PAS conversion programme to Islam – he would be considered an infidel. PKR says the like of him are banished; like Lim Guan Eng and his father, they recognise no Chinese. In the DAP’s political position, Yao is Chinese Second so that, for an especially anti-capital, leftist party, and if the business is conducted by a Chinese, he has slim hopes of even getting started, much less get anywhere.

After decades of anti-Chinese and anti-Indian racism (adopted even by DAP-PKR today in various guises) as well as Malay apartheid, now rooted in all corners and inside all levels of society, showing up in the attitudes of the municipal health inspector to the low-rank policemen, inside Parliament and Penang, extolled in political circles and the online media, it makes life just to move on, get ahead, make some money, a political burden of 52 years accumulation.

Yao Ziying finds that being Chinese, especially in Indonesia, is an asset, not a liability. So, in miniscule ways, those assets once added up, serve both sides, lifting up the lives of common peoples in the two lands, beginning with family, friends, colleagues (who else?) and widening from there. This is not new. In the past, and against tremendous odds, the Chinese in Malaysia (not the DAP or PKR types) have used the connection to the motherland that eventually benefited all.

Neither Umno nor the DAP nor PKR could, or was willing, to see this wider, social-economic benefits from tapping the connection. Instead DAP ideological sympathisers call such Chinese chauvinist or extremist. Ibrahim Ali still says the Chinese “control” the economy and Mahathir adds that they are out make the Malays go down on their knees, to kowtow. In short, all aim to beat up the Chinese. Umno hacks label the Chinese prostitutes. Petra Kamarudin calls them pimps and money cheats. And, in a not untypical response, one of Helen Ang’s family members, a cousin it seems, go the extra mile to hide his Chinese identity, naming his son Jebat ‘Kutty’ Kee.

It is an impossible situation.

One simmering consequence of this continuing racism today is this: the honest life cannot be conducted inside Malaysia, that is, preferably not to be Malaysian. Robert Kuok may be weighted, measured and classed as Malaysian and Malaysia’s richest. But Malaysians (Ibrahim Ali, for example) repeating that 50-year-long refrain to instigate the Malays don’t even know Kuok makes most of his money outside Malaysia. Where? It shall not be stated. As does many, many others who shall not be named also.

Lesser mortals, the salaried worker, just graduated (hopefully you went to a Chinese school, primary at the minimum), must therefore think in such wider terms. You see, to be Chinese outside Malaysia can be an asset although only in rare, usually politically-connected circumstances can you work like Yao Ziying acting for both sides.

*Here, however, is the better part missing from the Yao narrative and there are two.

  1. Yao needs Indonesia to move ahead. As Chinese from Malaysia, you can do without the country – it has little, not even the dwindling oil, but dengue swamps, the fascist Guan Engs and the racist Mahathirs.
  2. You don’t need control of resources to advance, contrary to what the Mahathirs and the Ibrahims have been preaching to the Malays, telling them about control of “strategic” industries. Indeed, you’re better off without the accursed country because “control” – getting involved in Kg Baru, for example – locks you down. In Malaysia assets should be liquid (bank deposits, equity) and minimal on fixed property – land, house, factories, buildings – so that you should be able to pull out at a moment’s notice (recall Mahathir at one time cancelled the international exchangeability of the ringgit – a stupid move but it pinned down everybody’s assets inside Malaysia).

Thinking Malaysian constraints your advance for the reason that being Chinese (or Indian) in Malaysia is a liability. Already the DAP party and the Pakatan governments have conceded to that point as a religious calling, and so knuckles down to the position by declaring Chinese or Indian second (think, hence, of how being Chinese second should extrapolate). Absent of such thoughts, however, one is freed in your pursuits. Free of the constraint of thinking purely in Malaysian terms, one becomes free. But, remember at all times, act only in silence. It’s been said elsewhere, “hide your capabilities, do not claim leadership.”

你能理解马?

Read Full Post »

A Response to Khalid Samad (below, and to LGE).

************************

UPDATE

Testing: Can Islamic Governance be Just?

The case cited in the clip above is in Kedah, a PAS state under Islamic governance. It illustrates not an exceptional but a representative case, testing the notion if Islamic governance can be “just”, an idea talked about most recently by Khalid Samad, PAS, at other times by the PKR and the DAP. Let’s watch how they shall deal with the issue. Or is it too trivial? Or they are too busy tweetering their juvenile chatter? The DAP is on record to say their legislators don’t maintain streets and sewer drains. DAP legislators, Lim Kit Siang says, don’t look after longkangs (and Indians are Malaysia’s sewer cleaners); his legislators are made for higher things.

But, here is a case so fundamental to test Khalid’s notion of just governance (with or without Islam), it will decide if he lied or if his intentions are honourable. It is fundamental because the family on the one hand is inviolable, at all times and in all circumstances deserving of state protection and preservation. Yet, on the other, the Welfare Department, as with officialdom infused with its version of Islamic values up and down the country, behaves exactly the opposite. Islamic governance not only supercedes the family; it has amassed for itself powers to intrude into, to invade another life, break up another culture, a family, in this case on a trifling ground – no money, no food – that could be easily and immediately resolved with a monthly cheque made conditional on cashing it. In Kedah, however, the preferred method is Islamic governance.

************************

Like the way it is with Anwar Ibrahim, Khalid Samad scatters words to the wind, calculating that the seeds in them will find root somewhere and a new society blooms. Khalid’s latest addition to his portfolio of speeches:

  • Islamic governance;
  • just, justice; variants of which are “reasonable,” and “fair” (for Khalid’s propaganda benefit try the word, “even-handed”);
  • prove by word and deed.

Khalid’s intentions may not be dishonourable at all. In a fetid swamp called Malaysia, debased and degenerated by the like of Mahathir Mohamad and Anwar simultaneously, anything goes. So emerging politicians such as Khalid (or Lim Guan Eng*) appear as if a welcome change and their words feel like a soft breeze on the face baking in hot afternoons. Says Khalid:

“It is up to us to prove by word and deed that Islamic governance is just.”

In those words one can imagine Tian Chua or Eli Wong or the entire Lim family of Malacca, resident now in Penang*, rising from chairs to clap in unison: “Yeh, yeh, yeh!”

Malaysia already has Islamic governance in “word and in deed” and in myraid forms, long before Khalid entered active politics. Just for a sample, see this or this. Or recall the Lina Joy trial and the numberless conversion cases, or visit Nut Graph for what is told in the words and deeds of Islamic governance. The Islamic state is not an end state; if it were, Iran won’t need a government or mullahs and Saudi Arabia would be the finest place in the world to live. Rather, the Islamic state is a continual process and Malaysia is well on the way.

The words and deeds cited in those cases (above) reflect deep injustices and cannot be otherwise. So, Khalid’s insistence that Islam can make governance just, raises the question: how do you make Islamic governance just when its core tenets, to begin with, are fundamentally prejudiced and are intended to be bias? Lina Joy is forever Muslim in her identity card not because the government has been unjust (which it is) but because her fate had been determined at birth and ever since there has been the Constitution of Malaysia. Neither Khalid nor PAS has the powers to turn a crooked timber straight.

Thus, Khalid relies on the time-honoured tradition in Malaysian political demographics for an answer to the Islamic state:

“If the majority of the people in one state agree to the setting up of an Islamic State, it will then be implemented in that state.”

The statement, which has been repeated countless times in and outside Umno and Perkasa, is composed of two parts:

  • PAS – Anwar’s Pakatan by extension – wants to go state by state in Islamic rule. It is sort of lowering the cane gently. Kelantan has Islamic governance; Kedah has followed; Trengganu next?
  • In using the “majority” argument then Perak, because it is majority Muslims, would be a prime candidate for the PAS religious and political design.

In Khalid’s state-by-state, step-by-step pursuit of Islamic governance, then it is only a matter of time before all states, Penang and Sabah included, will be made syariah-compliant. After which, trust Anwar to find the rationale to convert Sarawak. This means that the state-by-state approach is entirely disingenuous, or plainly put, outright dishonest. No state will be spared syariah.

The “majority of the people” argument is a more deceitful method, said before by Ibrahim Ali, the half-Arab Syed Alwis, and the phony Malay commentators showing up in the pages of Nut Graph and online elsewhere. It means that Khalid, Anwar, et al, are on principle no different from Umno padding up the Sabah population with Muslims from the Philippines – that is fixing up the demographics – in order to advance a political hegemony that for Mahathir Mohamad was to put infidel Chinese in their places or drive them into the sea (while on the seashore Christians like Hannah Yeoh and Nathaniel Tan smirk).

In invoking the “majority” argument Khalid is also saying PAS or Pakatan has the right to impose Islamic law on the Chinese and Indians. The answer to him is this: “No.”

If Khalid is worried about justice, here is the ultimate test to see if he’s true to the words he spits into the wind:  free the Malays; free them from the constitutional and legal strictures that force Islam on their lives even before birth. Permit them alone individually – and freely – to decide if they want Islam. That’ll be true justice – and, it’s constitutional.

There is a “majority” only because the Malays had no say to begin with; worse, they had been led to believe in the fiction for 50 years and more they have mortal enemies ashore. Khalid’s statement buys into that fiction because to fight off the enemies, Malays needed numbers and needed Islam, therefore, needed Umno yesterday and, Khalid now says, needs PAS tomorrow and in the next general election.

In Khalid, Malays are not asked if that’s what they want – Islamic rule. It’s shoved on them because they are Muslims and they are Muslims because they have to be Muslims. In another way of phrasing it: the majority was made up, that is, forced. By equating Islam and Malay, constitutional law made the majority, the 60 pct Ibrahim Ali and Mahathir Mohamad say exists. If the Malay were to be freed from the law tomorrow, Khalid will risk losing his majority. So far it has existed purely by the default of legal application; in truth, an Arab colonisation of the Malay mind and heart.

That’s because the same “majority” has lived free of the colonisation before, and had thrived and multiplied without Islam for centuries. Why not again forever? And their political position, running their own lives independently were never before threatened by the Chinese. Malays without Islam might even be the beginning of a true and just state, thinking not of the Chinese but themselves first. Unless he were to say otherwise, Khalid’s end purpose is after all justice inside a humane society. Why does he care how everybody gets there? Or, why does he insists there is only one way to get there?

*Postscript note: Ban, ban, ban, ban, ban…

The same idea has been tossed about before (good Christian boy Nathaniel Tan, for eg.), so Lim Guan Eng (above) is saying nothing new when he repeated the call in a Twitter message for the “ban” on “race-based” parties. But, why stop there? Ban all the Chinese guilds and associations, and all those “race-based” cultural societies, lawyer and business associations and so on. Why not also ban “race-based” languages? Start with Mandarin in Penang. Like PAS that had banned Malay dances in Kelantan, ban all “race-based” cultures. Why not ban “religion-based” parties? Start with PAS. Ban the “religion-based” government departments. Why not ban White society-based parties? How about socialism-based parties? Why not ban race altogether? Ban Chinese. Ban Lim Guan Eng from existence. Ban his father and his mother. Ban his wife, his kids. Seize their identity cards and change all their names so they’ll constitute a New Model Race: Bangsa Malaysia or Malaysian First; take your pick, it’s the same. Ban Hannah Yeoh. No Christians permitted. Ban her husband. No Indians permitted. Ban Mahathir Mohamad; no mamaks, no rojaks permitted.

Malaysia boasts numberless politicians who, to judge by the things they say, are so incredibly stupid and fascists to boot. Small wonder the country is a mess: from running basic municipal services to law and order and to electing legislators.

Read Full Post »

Life for the Palestinians has been a living hell over the years, since Israel started on its aghast aggressive aggrandizement of the land soon after becoming a nation state. – Thomas Lee, above.

Khoo Kay Kim, Anglophile Grand Historian of Malaysia, often complains to the Chinese Press that the Chinese language schools deliver copycats who can’t excel in product innovation or collect intellectual global prizes. By the same token, and on the flip side, Khoo Kay Kim’s La Salle English schools must be producing geniuses.

In the top quotation is the product of La Sallian types, good Christian to boot, and he would never have spent a day in a Chinese school. More than that, he is editor at Sin Chew‘s online English edition, ex-editor at The Star, and an illustrious contributor at Malaysia Today. (Thomas is the same man who, after churches were torched in January, wrote to say that Muslims should have no fear, Christians won’t retaliate. Two days later, severed pig heads were thrown into mosques.)

What’s wrong with the Reverend’s Queen’s English?

Repetition and needless words:

  • in the same sentence, “since Israel” … “soon after becoming”;
  • Israel is a nation state;
  • unless dead a Palestinian is a life, so “life for Palestinians” says nothing common to those lives.

Error in objective fact:

  • Israel does not occupy Gaza that Thomas would count in the word “land”;
  • unless the Rev had been despatched there by his god and had returned alive, “hell” is not even a metaphor. It’s pure Thomas Lee fiction invented by White missionaries from whom and from whose Bible he had copied the word.

Contradiction:

  • “living hell”. Even to assume hell exist, it is for the dead not the living. But then, Thomas subscribes to the voodoo belief of “eternal life”.

Pompous vocabulary:

  • “aghast aggressive aggrandizement of the land” is a phrase designed purely to impress Thomas Lee’s non-English speaking employers. They don’t even rhyme. Substituting and simplifying the phrase would read as, “horrific and forceful enlargement of the land”;
  • aggrandizement is also inaccurate because in its etymology “to aggrandize” refers to personal acts intended to inflate or to exaggerate an individual’s influence or self-worth. And foreign policies are not for self-worth unless, of course, you are American or a Yankee sympathiser.

To rewrite the Editor’s English, the good Rev could simply say:

“Palestinian lives have been made harsh since Israel took on the military factions among them with horrific consequences to the land and people.”

But then one cannot expect that from Thomas Lee. He is, to recall, (a) La Sallian type and (b) he is on a missionary agenda.

For benefit to the Sin Chew Board of Directors, here is the Chinese translation from the Thomas original:

多年来巴勒斯坦人的生活一直是人间地狱. 不久成为一个民族国家以色列在把巴勒斯坦土地征服侵略扩张.

就像是有人放屁马?

The “Writer” & the 40 Ulamas

In the bottom credit line, Thomas Lee is gloriously defined as:

The writer, who is the chief editor of this news portal, has done extensive research on the Middle-East issue and has degrees in theology and biblical studies.

Yes, indeed, like Ridhuan Tee, fistful of the theology stuff, and like Josh Hong, and Abdullah Badawi and all those PAS ustazs and the 40 ulamas who just joined Umno. Why are they so alike, always? They are everywhere, an infestation. Tian-ah! Save us from them.

Read Full Post »