Archive for January 1st, 2016

Dear Annie…

It was generous of you to say this: ‘Okay, my dear sister Helen, you win, I lose‘. But, this: ‘Johor MB DS Khaled Nordin and his boys in Kota Iskandar should follow Helen’s advise and start cutting off people who love Umno but refuse to support its leadership‘…?

Supposed Khaled were to take up your suggestion and then Helen’s – an advise on an advise, you see – what would Khaled or Umno Johor have committed to? And this applies not just to Johor but the country’s future as well.

On the other hand, though, you probably meant your words in a satirical way.

You concede much to Helen. If indeed she is so clever, ask yourself this: which part of her post is supposed to be even remotely new? Out of 2,378 words, she spent 300 of them flogging you on a post done at a spur two years ago. You, of course, know Helen’s intention.

That aside, here are the counterpoints: Najib began actively courting PAS as early as 2013, waited for Nik Aziz to die then cashed in when Hadi Awang took over. If Najib weren’t willing to trade off on the Malay votes, would he have removed Muhyiddin Yassin? Recall that, at stake for Najib, wasn’t just Umno’s electoral future but his own life — he could be jailed! Might Najib, therefore, declare ‘No retreat, No surrender’ if he would ‘take prisoners’ – in Helen’s words, ‘open season’ as if Umno people are ducks and Najib should just shoot them.

Forget not that Helen’s work is as a reporter albeit a rather bitchy one. Reporters in Malaysia earn their keeps, in Arul Kanda’s word, ‘recycling’ other people’s ideas then label them news. And that’s that. They know which side of the bread they must butter with an eye gummed to a hot Press Secretary position for some political big shot. Helen missed all that, and she now has much catching up to do.

All this is to say, you give her far too much credit. Take language and read her post again: her forte is not logical proof but recycling (that word again) hackneyed, fluffy, gaseous political language ‘designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable and give … solidity to pure wind’ (that was from Orwell).

But it is not difficult to see through her mask. In the part Nur Jazlan’s Parliament seat of Pulai, she peppers it with phrases like ‘ballpark figure, estimated, hypothetical estimates, could have been’… What do they collectively say? She is just guessing. Yet, once those words are parked camouflaged alongside some numbers, guessed-at numbers, they give the appearance of factual solidity and objective academic reliability when it is actually the reverse.

She is spinning.

Then for good measure she talks of ‘regression graph’: ‘A better but more painstaking method to get the numbers is by inputting the data for all the Johor constituencies and plot a regression graph. This would yield the percentage of Malay support for Umno/Pakatan.’ Which is what?

Astonishingly, she leaves it at that, produces no graph – because Helen doesn’t know how to produce one. (Recall, she is a reporter, regurgitating stuff not producing original material.) Yet, rather than acknowledge that, she transfers to the reader the burden of her proof, saying in effect: ‘You draw the regression graph and prove me right‘. And, of course, ten out of ten won’t, and she is thereafter assumed to be correct.

Why then did Helen talk about ‘regression graph’? For the obvious reason her regular readers, like her, are as bigoted and as stupid so that, eventually, she does get away with the appearance of being clever and academic. Like her, too, her ardent readers know shit about regression analysis because it is never, never seriously used for electoral predictions and strategies since every variable is simply an imponderable. You could use such statistical models to forecast 10-year farm yields per acre or find out the population trend over 20 years. But politics is not science, elections much less.

Helen’s premise is simple, even Al-Azhar PAS mullahs could figure it out: For an ‘x’ number of Umno votes lost (because of Najib?), how many will be replaced by ‘y’ number of PAS votes? She already has the answer even before setting out the arguments. That is, she knows what she must do and who to beat up so as to get there. Her answer, as a result, is not statistical but polemical and racist to boot; there is an agenda behind the answer. It says this: Helen’s pathological hatred for the DAP people and for the Chinese in general is so bad she’d marshal anything to make her point then mask it in some pseudo-academic babble. This explains why, once a cheerleader for Mahathir Mohamad, she now denounces him as ‘Protun’ all because the old man turned up at Bersih4.

For predicting the electoral outcome, regression analysis is useless because who is to say how many Umno members won’t vote for Umno and what they’ll do with their ballots. This is not even counting what PAS members will do with theirs, and the influence Amanah would have on their voting preferences. And then, there are two more years to go. Every argument she puts up assumes this and that as if she knows the hearts and minds of voters better than themselves. Simply said, there is no telling, much less to actually quantify those unknown variables into a regression model and, after that, to extrapolate a forecast.

In short, Helen is a farce.

But, you knew all that, didn’t you, Annie? Naughty, naughty, you. It is why you parodied yourself: ‘I can’t even come up with a nice chart to support my arguments like her. I also can’t even write a long posting with fancy and grammatically correct words without getting a headache.

That is, you do see through Helen’s character for what she truly is. As evidence to that, one doesn’t have to dig up from a post two or three years ago. Take any month the past year. Out of seven posts in seven days, if it ain’t about Hannah Yeoh (ranked number 1 in her targets), it is about the Chinese, or the DAP or Christians. And all for what if not because she was once slighted. She wants vengeance which, in its turn, reveals how her thinking and character is not far different from an ISIS thug: with a gun she’ll blow out your brains. No regression graphs needed.

Her desire for revenge draws its strength from the exact same perverse creed provided by A Voice and Johor Umno’s Haron Abdul Hamid: either you are with me or you must be against me. Yet, for years, day in, day out, she would rail against the DAP and its cyber troopers for doing exactly that to her. Thus, over a nonsensical statement (‘take no prisoners‘) by an idiot Umno man, she finds justification to spend a whole day on her computer — not to prove Haron’s point because, after all, what’s there to prove – but simply to bulldoze you over. She just can’t take a contrary position: ‘Annie, you’re not with me? I will steamroll over you‘. And that’s what she set out to do.

From you, ten words — ‘PAS was never much of a force in the state‘ — had more than adequately answered 2,378.

There are times one must act with humility, be generous even to our enemies, to leave an exit door open, but grovelling to Helen only feeds her appetite. She is sustained by venom, not by its antidote. What else do you think keeps her awake at 2 o’clock in the morning — sex? — tap, tap, tap, tapping on her keyboard, growing plumb and ugly by the minute on her chair, well-worn by her fat arse, loveless and alone, waking up the next morning, dashing to her computer, even skipping brushing her teeth all in the expectation of adulation from her readers. Anything less she will not tolerate: If you are not with me, you are against me. One morning she saw your post (this one lah). Can you picture the steam streaming out of her orifices, clouding even the monitor?

That’s Helen. Her life crashed and literally flipped over after she came out of a police interrogation session some three or five years ago. She hasn’t been the same since: Mad woman running down a PJ street cursing. Ahi Attan called her chilly. That’s appearance. In truth, she is, inside, just toufu.

And, this note of yours: ‘No nasty remarks about Helen Ang allowed in this blog as she had requested me not to publish them‘. It says so much, doesn’t it?

You’ve a life better to live than to dally with that thug of a bitch.

Happy new year. Best wishes too,


PS: Sorry, that it has been you who is taking the brunt of the abuse. First A Voice and now Helen Is-Not-Christian Ang. We will not stand by idle! Remember those words?

But, don’t you think Helen et al share the ISIS mentality, dogma and thuggery: ‘Either you are with us, or we’ll slice off your fucking throat.‘ Take no prisoners, you see.

It reaffirms one point Muhyiddin et al has indicated a few times: Najib and his people must be stopped before they can go any farther. Even before winning, they’re issuing threats and talking about ‘open season’ on people like you. And if they triumph, imagine then what might be in store. They wouldn’t have qualms lining up people on the shores of the Malacca Straits (bottom), cut their heads and run to the ground what’s left of the country. Probably learned this from some Wahhabi-Arab donor.

Warning voices have begun surfacing. Mahathir: upside down world. Zaid Ibrahim: Madness in Malaysia. Jebat has added a most pertinent point: they’ve begun selling the Family’s silver.


Jebat, salam:

Truly, nice fitting title. A small suggestion, please, if one may: Najib! Rascal! You sold the Family jewels!

That land belongs to the Family. Think about it.



Read Full Post »