Archive for the ‘Culture & Politics’ Category


Robert Louis Stevenson’s Treasure Island? Yes, captured from Samoa where it was already surrounded by white treasure hunters when he arrived. They took everything, even the Samoan soul.


When Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde are the same Liberal


Author of Treasure Island and The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, Robert Louis Stevenson first sailed into Samoa 1889 Dec 7 and this is what he wrote to his friend Charles Baxter:

I am not especially attracted by the people; they are courteous, pretty chaste, but thieves and beggars, to the weariness of those involved.

Robert Louis Stevenson and his household in Samoa

Robert Louis Stevenson and members of his household in Vailima, Western Samoa. (Back row, from left: Joe Strong, Margaret Stevenson, Lloyd Osborne, Robert Louis Stevenson, Fanny Stevenson, and the steward Simi. Stevenson’s step-daughter Belle is sitting on the right in the middle row.) 


If Samoans are by Stevenson’s Christian morality standard ‘evil,’ then he should leave. He didn’t. Instead, this is what he wrote in a letter to the British artist Trevor Haddon about the Samoans:

No man can settle another’s life for him. It is the test of the nature and courage of each that he shall decide it for himself.


Robert Louis Stevenson’s tomb.

The tombstone atop Stevenson’s mountain grave in Samoa bears as an epitaph his poem ‘Requiem.’ Even in death Stevenson continued to assert his shadow on Samoan society: Scottish literary culture.


Note that Stevenson had arrived in the era when white Europeans made seizure and plunder a way of life, normal, from one end of the world to the other, from Canada to Central America and the Falklands, from Samoa to the Andamans to Africa. After which they divided it up among themselves. The Qing Dynasty fell, the South China Sea islands changed hands, Philippines, and onwards and onwards and onwards.

Between the time Stevenson arrived and died, the Samoans began changing, first in small ways. (Note the sarong in top photo). But not Stevenson. (Check out the photo again taken after he had taken a slice out of the Samoans.)

Samoans were still a free people despite British and German agents who tried seizing their land for the coconut oil for making soap, cosmetics and some kinds of medicine. Stevenson remained a liberal. Although he supposedly ‘bought’ from the Samoans 314 acres to build his mansion, calling the estate Vailima, but what were the Samoans to do with his British currency? Later it was used to buy British goods. Until then neither Samoan economy nor their secluded, self-sufficient lives ever needed British banknotes. What the fuck off? Toilet paper?

(Here’s an aside: entire Polynesian and Micronesian economies were, once upon a time, self-sufficient by fishing mostly and growing taro, a kind of root crop. See below. After the arrival of white people, they stopped fishing and began buying and eating canned fish imported from the British and other Europeans. Ayam brand? This is how people lose their freedom: they become dependent. What also followed is worse, Samoan lives actually depended on ‘advanced’, today called ‘state-of-the-art’ British medical services and pills. Why? What was once a healthy population, latter day Samoans — and not only them but virtually all the little Pacific islands — fell sick from nutrient deficiency because they ate only processed foods, including English potatoes in cans. Today, their economies, indeed their pitiable lives, are reduced to dancing for tourists. And it’s always, always, always the same dance for tourists after tourists after tourists to music played on western-made instruments. What’s there to change for different faces?)

What changed in Samoa was this: Stevenson became a liberal in the modern sense from the old Tory conservatism he was. This explains the contradictions in his letters and Stevenson’s own hypocritical actions. He takes other people’s land and yet say this to students at a theological college:

You may make all the good laws on earth, still your land will be sold, and when your land is sold, your people will die.

He says, No man can settle another’s life for him, and while urging Western powers to stop interfering in Samoan affairs for financial reasons, yet he tells Samoans to “make a little more money.” In other words, Samoans ought to be like him, a Liberal individualist, free, capitalist, laissez faire enterprise, to accumulate. Samoan culture was, once upon a time, shared culture, scarce property being shared assets, much of the land for example, not individualist. But in his own Vailima estate, Stevenson turned Samoans into minions, a person’s life being controlled by aristocrats, through the medium of money, serving as a kind of property class, a feudal idea imported from Britain and Europe and which is entirely alien to Samoan culture and even for most of the non-white worlds.

Until the arrival of the white man bringing in their ‘civilization’ — whatever the fuck that is — Samoan lives were free to themselves, as Karl Marx might say, work in the mornings and fish in the afternoons.

Stevenson helped instead ‘settled’ the lives of Samoans today. Land gone, the Samoan died, as Stevenson say they would. They became more and more like the Western man and over the decades less and less and less like Samoans were.

Today they called this culture process ‘assimilation’, an inevitability, white people say, in Cambridge in particular. This assimilation is odd. As did happened in Samoan assimilation, Malay assimilation, Malaysian assimilation, Indian assimilation, all went one way, in one direction, all towards white ways of life, and note this, assimilation was capped by white political culture and thinking: Liberal. Freedom. Democracy. Human rights.

Assimilation became white — it becomes, and it is, Francis Fukuyama’s The End of History and the Last Man (1992).

This definition of Liberal, in simultaneity with Assimilation is really bizarre: entire worlds convert to western ideas about what it is to be free and have human rights and now these worlds, from the Canadian ‘Indians’ to the Aztecs in South America, from the Samoans to Zulus in South Africa are instructed — America being the biggest and loudest instructor — to adopt that and only that, the liberal benchmark on what it is to be free.

This, being liberal and democrat, being Anglophile, is what Joseph Lim Guan Eng means when he says “I’m Malaysian” although there is no native Malaysian culture, identity nor native thinking nor native political philosophy. Not even in the beginning; there was no beginning. Guan Eng’s own life, as with all Anglophiles, starting in a Johor pigsty going on La Salle and white Australia, had been subverted to only one form and one content and one benchmark. His own freedom gone, all that’s left is a whiteness. A Banana.

Even Penans of Sarawak and the Orang Asal of the Peninsula are giving way, Mahathir Mohamad being instrumental in their conversion. But one nation stood up to survive the invasion and all that plunder, the conversion, the assimilation and the havoc. The Chinese.

We Chinese have our own clothes, own food, own political philosophy, own land, own music, own ethics, own freedom, own pine trees and firs, own forest and rivers, own language, own history. We don’t need white people tell us how to live nor tell us what it is to be free. We Chinese will stand up against white people, every time, any time they come near us again. History will not be repeated. Not in our motherland, not even near us. And should Anglophiles, Indians and Muslims join white people to undermine and threaten us, we’ll crush them as well. But you wouldn’t know a thing. It’s painless. Our ancients taught us that.

Last man, Francis Nipponie Anglophile Fukuyama? The end of history, you say? You ain’t seen nothing yet, boy…

image from BloggingHeads.tv podcast

Francis Nipponie Anglophile Fukuyama: He argues that the last, perfect man in the world is, White, Liberal, Anglophile. Nothing comes after — the End of History. Of course, this is after the White, Liberal made Anglophiles of everybody, the rest of the world, one country excepting. We’ll see, Francis!



Above is the taro plant. Looks familiar?  Guess its native origin? Southeast Asia, Malaysia in particular.


Today, Samoa is a ‘protectorate’, whatever the fuck that is, of the USA. Poor Samoans, fucked by the French, British, Japanese then Americans.

For a time, a century actually, the French and the British ‘owned’ almost all the areas marked above. Today Americans treat the entire Pacific, 16,000 km wide shore to shore, like it is their property-protectorate so they decide who lives where, when, and who passes through. They have rebranded this neo-colonial policy to call it ‘freedom of navigation’.



Stevenson’s own mansion in Samoa would be something like the one above in Batu Gajah, Perak, on land paid for with with dirt-poor currency value and that is used mostly by the British at the time.

This is the same idea behind the US dollar as foreign reserves and international currency: America prints the money, literally, then uses it to buy and own assets elsewhere and with which you pay for their Boeings so you can have a holiday in London, in US dollar, after you have tucked in your fucking bowl of nasi kandar, rice imported not even from America but Thailand. These stupid ‘Malaysians’.

No wonder Lim Guan Eng is swimming in one trillion worth of debts. He was counting in as well his wife’s Betty panties and his own Gucci briefcase that hadn’t yet been settled in US dollar. What a motherfucker. But hurray!


End Note: This article draws quotations from The Weekly Standard that’s helping to sell, it says, “Joseph Farrell’s excellent book” Robert Louis Stevenson in Samoa. Americans, Liberals, Anglophiles and Ahi Attan and Wong Chen will read then interpret it and say, See! White people have a heart. They are all for assimilation and freedom and reject colonialism.



A Message to our huaqiao 华侨 compatriots

Clip immediately below is for concerned overseas Chinese individuals and businesses, a FYI. Forward it if you can.

Also, prepare yourself for war and work out your lives towards that eventuality, mentally and in your daily routines without disruption. We can’t afford to repeat the mistakes of Ming and Qing China, both falling to foreign invasion in spite of early warning signs, none of which they at the time took for real, even possible, China being prosperous and strong. If we fail again, it would be catastrophic to our people.

We do not go out looking for trouble. But, as did Japan and Britain before, America and its allies have today made us Chinese their enemy and so it shall be. All other talk is just wayang.

We in China are ready, our soldiers instructed, our people told, and we are still perfecting our preparations and we wish you the best. Unlike before this won’t be a war fought on Mainland soil where the population lives, and therefore will suffer the more. No, not this time.



Thought to let you all know: We have moved ahead with the electronic guqin 古琴. Here it is, though, if you are experienced, you could tell it from the original instrument 3,000 years ago…

Conventional, non electronic: the timbre variation from the old is greater.



Read Full Post »


Liberal Totalitarianism



The Totalitarian as Liberal Gentleman…

A meeting to betray an entire continent and killed 25 million.


Two forms of totalitarianism: One as fine liberal British gentleman (left), the other a fine, upright Aryan national socialist. And both are white.

Sweet words.

The tyrant as liberal, Chamberlain: “Go home, get some sleep, I have brought you peace with honor….”


On Liberalism:

  • matrasad
    (Troll from Cambridge, UK, smack in between Cambridge University’s Christ’s College and Emmanuel College, red dot above.
    IP address

    Nonetheless, liberalism is the one of the few only systems where it is even possible for dissenting views to be published. Your views, and those of the many intellectuals quoted in that article, are usually not tolerated under most other forms of society. Furthermore, what the article calls “Anglo-American liberalism” is really a peculiar form of liberalism that evolved in 20th century America. It’s quite distinct from the classical liberalism of the British 19th century.

    It also posits no real alternative.


  • rihaku

    matrasad, you should re-read the article on these two counts (a) you conflate liberalism as a political form of ordering society, including governance, and as ideological worldview, and (b) you read it with the western mythological baggage, internalize into your worldview, that liberalism being liberalism is, therefore, the most ‘liberal’, the most free, hence tolerant of ‘dissent’.

    There are other related issues inferred in your comments, standard in liberal claptrap, which if stripped to the bare bones don’t stand up to scrutiny, and this shows up prominently today in the west: liberalism as ideology shares totalitarianism’s intellectual roots. That was the thrust of Rosenblatt’s essay.

    You also say, dissenting views are “not tolerated under most other forms of society”. Which society? Western societies only? The world? Since when? How do you know? And what’s so good about dissent? Or what’s the use of the dissent that should be tolerated? Especially your kind of dissenting stupidity? You, as liberal, can’t tolerate this dissent, which is why you are commenting, isn’t it? Are we not entitled to freedom from dissenting bigotry like yours? In Wonderland Alice, Muslims would tell you: “Off with the head!” If there’s dissent, it suggests that there’s something wrong with liberalism to begin with, No?

    You conclude, “It posits no real alternative.” How do you know?

    Get an education, boy. A real education. You’ve been brain-washed in liberal, classical Cambridge. Get your brains re-washed. That, or grow new roots. Or maybe ask your forebears, if you have one.



On Culture:

  • matrasad

    Even most Chinese today have ancestors that weren’t Chinese, but possibly Austronesian or Tai-Kadai speakers. Cultural change and assimilation happens all the time. New roots are always grown. Fossilising culture as if it has never changed, and insulting individuals who decide to adopt different cultures, is insulting to your own forebears.


  • rihaku

    matrasad: “Even most Chinese today have ancestors that weren’t Chinese…”

    Chinese whose ancestors weren’t Chinese? So, what’s Chinese? So they are today western cultures that are not in the past western? What were they? African? White but not white? Western but not western? What is that? You sound very confused.

    matrasad: “…but possibly Austronesian or Tai-Kadai speakers”

    Possibly? You are not sure? And “speakers”? My forebears are speakers of “Austronesian speakers”! Tell me about it! Read it to me! I want to hear….

    matrasad: “Fossilising culture…”

    Which culture has been “fossilized”? If I dig deep enough, will I find it under your bed? Do you know what was Chinese culture like, say, 3,000 years ago compared to the present? Don’t know? Want a hint? But, what for since you are so cocksure, so brain fossilized?

    matrasad: “New roots are always grown.”

    Oh! really? Show me your ass where your tail once was.

    matrasad: “Cultural change and assimilation happens all the time.”

    How do you know? Why, you were born a hundred years ago? Two hundred? Two thousand? And who says culture don’t “change”? But why should people “change” cultures? And who says, and why must, people assimilate? Who should assimilate to who? Or, what to what?

    matrasad: “…individuals who decide to adopt different cultures”…

    Why adopt? What’s the big deal with the culture Anglophiles had adopted? But why bother to adopt since, as you say, culture would be different tomorrow from today, No? What are Anglophiles buying into? Given change, Anglo-Saxon culture might even revert to their original (or worse) godless, heathen barbarism, No?

    matrasad: “…insulting to your own forebears.”

    My forebears would be delighted to read those insults. That fucking piece of banana. Are you a banana? Or, a coconut? Or, since new roots grow all the time, as you say they would, are you a cross between a banana and a coconut? What would you call your newly rooted cultural specie? Bananut?

    matrasad, you are a fine product of a pathetic culture, intellectual culture included. And inferior to boot. Why don’t you assimilate? Move up, you know. Try Islamism. Join ISIS, there you could learn to slice throats and truly assimilate.


Postscript note to self: Why do I even bother talking with this piece of motherfucking troll called mat.rasad….


Image result for hitler chamberlain quotes


Read Full Post »

Annie’s Free Fareed World


For someone who has never before, not even for a day, truly, truly lived in the ‘Free World’, understand it much less, Annie (of the Valley), like nearly every other Anglophile motherfucker in town, talk as if they know a lot, going gaga here and gaga there, and about how wonderful it is to live in such a world.

And like these other Anglophiles, people like Fareed Zakaria who despises his brown skin, and no blond hair, they suck up to their adopted (always white) country because a mamak name like Fareed is such a novelty in white society that helps justify, on the label of Islam, wholesale genocide in third world Muslim countries. Here’s the thambi Fareed helping President Bush justify Iraq (not unlike Joseph LGE making excuses for Mahathir Mohamad to pulverize Umno):

The place is so dysfunctional … any stirring of the pot is good. America’s involvement in the region is for the good.

Dysfunctional? Stirring the pot? What’s it to be functional? India is functional? America? (See bottom for the answer.) What good has come with America killing half a million Iraqis? Good for who? After the killing, Iraq, the region, are now functional? What the fuck is it to America if another country is dysfunctional? People’s lives, other people but not Americans, are just cubes of meat in a soup pot?  Already, they are saying the near exact same thing about China: it is oppressive, stirring it is good.

And that Annie thinks a world of that motherfucker, even dropping Fareed’s name like he’s some prophet who will rub off his aura on her damp, filthy cunt; and like he is some wise intellectual giant and, yet, someone who is on record to have plagiarized from Jill Lepore of the New Yorker. And that’s stealing not one line or two lines but half the fucking essay!

After Fareed, and like that Anglophile Saifuddin Abdullah, the Annies would brag about human rights and democracy in New Malaysia when the rest of the world had moved back to the Old, centuries Old before the existence of the thing called Malay or Malaya. Fifty years late, Anglophile Saifuddin (and Rais Hussin and Pakatan others) are now saying, like Fareeq Zakaria, human rights and freedom are ‘core’ Malaysian values and New Malaysia, this rising God-chosen, democratic beacon of Asia, is now ready to export those values to Myanmar! No doubt, Annie will join the bandwagon, such a goodie, goodie cunt hole she thinks she is.

Such conceited Malaiyoos, who have in their backyard an Islamic father fucking his equally Islamic child-daughter 632 times, Christian priests who fuck boys, Muslim teachers who test your holiness with instructions on how to whip wives, Anglophiles who have no idea what it is to be imprisoned by their Allah, by their imams and imprisoned in their minds by a single book called the ‘Quran’, the ‘Bible’ in earlier times, how could they know what it is to be free? Truly free.

So much for being ‘neutral’: Like the Islamic Sais and the Rais, Annie’s eyes are on the chocolate and the baker at the same time. That’s what they mean by being ‘neutral’. No wonder the Cunt was dumped for another Cunt. She was Fareed — the moral screwer got screwed. Allahuakbar!

Here, below, is a writer from the Free World, as America is supposed to be its epitome. There is more but what the fuck, it’d be waste of time to have to instruct the stupid Annies to think what they refuse and are unable to see:


I tried to be good. But I was fucked up.


Excerpted from an interview with Nico Walker:

…I think it’s a cultural problem. I think it’s a spiritual problem.

I think there are a lot of people coming up in America who don’t want anything to do with what our country is about, don’t want to be what our society demands that they be. People are lonely. People are not valued. They find a quick way to feel good. Unfortunately it often kills them.


Read Full Post »

Image result for rais hussin

Islam’s doctor is in…

Dear Dr Rais Hussin:


I wished deep inside that having a prayer room a few meters from my desk at work would suddenly make me a better Muslim, but it didn’t, and I’ve never prayed.


I read about Muslim porn star Nadia Ali and how she prays two to three times a day between shoots. She’s better at this religion than I am.


When I turned 14, instead of falling in love with a kaffir, I did worse: I fell in love with a Sunni.


God hates divorce, if we were going to be good Muslims, we’d find a way to make it work. In the two years we were together I almost killed myself three times.


The Ramadan rules are clear: no food, water, smoking or sex… (but) a nice consensual blow job outside of marriage. Does it ruin your fast if you swallow? 



So Many Muslim Rules to Break

My new workplace has a nice gay priest. When I started working there he changed the Christian worship room to be an all-faith room. He set up a prayer mat he got from IKEA. Put a sticker on the wall pointing to the qiblah. Smiled ear to ear when he told me about it. I said, “Thank you, I finally have a place to pray.” He said it was his absolute pleasure. Least we can do in this world, everyone is welcome here, all of that. I wished deep inside that having a prayer room a few meters from my desk at work would suddenly make me a better Muslim, but it didn’t, and I’ve never prayed.

I read about Muslim porn star Nadia Ali and how she prays two to three times a day between shoots. She’s better at this religion than I am.

In the New York Times piece “How to Be a Hoejabi,” Romaissaa Benzizoune talks about Western perceptions of Muslim Pakistani porn stars. For the West, they are a symbol of liberation: Break that mold, have all the sex you want, don’t be told what to do, you’re not your father’s property and you’re certainly not your husband’s either.

When I talk to my white friends they don’t understand why I hadn’t had sex already; if I’m in love, if I trust him, if I’m happy, if I want it, why don’t I do it?

In Iraq we say you can tell everything about a book from its title. So you become conscious of your title, of your cover. You care about how other people perceive you because they’d love to scrutinize your behavior, presume your motives, pick out the ways you’ve tainted your family’s name, compare you to their kids and how they’d never be as bad as you. Be good and try not to give them any material. What are you wearing outside the house? Will people like it, will they hate it, will they hate you, will they take your outfit to their gatherings after Friday prayer and dissect the fabrics on your skin? Your shoes were red, like a prostitute.

I haven’t inherited my parents’ commitment to religion, nor their hyper-awareness of their public image, nor their deep-rooted sense of belonging to the tradition. But I did inherit the discretion and the shame that come with being a sinner. If you’re going to be a harami, at least be a harami in secret. Don’t be open about your sin like it’s a normal thing to do. Don’t be a bad role model. Don’t sabotage the young kids who look up to you. Don’t make sin so accessible. At least acknowledge that it’s wrong, that it’s a crime, and if you must commit a crime, don’t celebrate it.

I feel like kissing someone today.
I go out on a date.
I get a kiss.
Tastes like the long ribbons of lychee candy we just bought at the carnival.
We go sit at a bench and I’m cold.
I put my legs on his and my lips on his.
We kiss, feels nice, tastes good.
Let’s do that again.
Keep going, let’s see where we stop.

I don’t have an explanation for why we draw the line wherever we do. Like that meme about Muslim kids committing every sin under the sun except eating pork. We’ll do it all: we’ll break our fast, we’ll have the sex, we’ll do the drugs, we’ll eat that steak, we’ll go to the club and we’ll drink the beer and we’ll smoke that cigarette and that weed, but don’t you get that pork anywhere near us. Do you want us to go to hell?

When Romaissaa published that article, some Muslims got angry. One man tweeted that if you raise your daughter amongst kaffirs, or infidels, then of course she’ll write a think piece about wanting to have sex with a kaffir.

When we left Iraq in the 90s, we went to Dubai. It wasn’t an easy time. Dubai lacked minimum wage laws, free health care, free education or social security, so for a few years, my family was poor as a mosque mouse. We watched our friends lead better lives than us as they transitioned from Baghdad, to Dubai, to Europe. Back then, the trip to Europe was relatively easy. Most of our friends didn’t have to swim to the mainland from small Greek islands, or walk across the Turkish borders, or hide in the backs of cattle trucks. Most of our friends applied as migrants, got visas, got on a plane and became Swedish citizens within three years. But Baba refused to apply no matter how broke we got, no matter how much hostility Dubai was developing towards us. To Baba, Sweden wasn’t worth it. He’d never let his girls grow up among the kaffirs. When he was awarded a full scholarship to MIT, he turned it down so that the kaffir lifestyle wouldn’t get the best of us. Our community was full of good Iraqi Shia Muslims who never turned their backs on their religion, ones who protected their women and segregated their places of worship and never missed a Friday prayer.

So you can imagine his disappointment when I turned 14 and he learned that instead of falling in love with a kaffir, I did worse: I fell in love with a Sunni.

There’s an ancient hadith in Islam that if you can afford to get married you really should, and if you can’t, you should practice fasting and abstinence. I couldn’t fast for that long and I never wanted to abstain, so I followed the hadith and I got married. We were technically perfect for each other. Two Shia Iraqis, not too liberal, not too conservative, kind, young, educated, from loving families who supported us all they could. If we were to fail against all these odds, despite doing everything as God wanted, something must really be wrong with us. So we tried our hardest not to fail, even when the more we learned about each other the more disappointed we became, even when we disagreed on the fundamentals of how to live our lives, what to wear, where to live, the politics, the ideologies. We slowly found out we couldn’t be any more different from one another, but God hates divorce and if we were going to be good Muslims, we’d find a way to make it work.

In the two years we were together I almost killed myself three times. I don’t know if my husband had it that bad too. After a certain stage, it felt like we only communicated via the sounds our phones made when we banged them against the walls, or the vases we tossed across the room in the midst of our nervous breakdowns—angry, hurt, alone, desperate for each other’s love even when neither of us had any to offer. …

The Ramadan rules are clear: no food, water, smoking or sex. None of these entering your system, otherwise you have to make up for it in various, arduous ways. Lying, cheating, stealing are haram year-round so there’s no case against them that’s specific to Ramadan and they don’t break your fast. I think of other things that are haram year-round, like maybe a nice consensual blow job outside of marriage. Does it ruin your fast if you swallow? Asking for a friend. If you don’t swallow, is it the equivalent of putting a pen in your mouth when you’re drowning in your thoughts at work, except that pen is a dick and you’re not at work and you’re not drowning in your thoughts, but in someone else’s bed?

What would Nadia Ali do?….


Read Full Post »

China has no quarrel — not for hundreds of years — with ‘Malays’ nor Malacca nor Malaya nor Malaysia. But, if Mahathir Mohamad, like he had since 50, 60 years ago made enmity between local Chinese and ‘Malays’, want to include the People’s Republic of China today as enemies of ‘Malays’ then we, China, will oblige him.


The two articles below appeared in CPI Asia eight years ago, 2010 February, in rebuttal to that mamak Kutty named Mahathir Mohamad who said inter alia, “one million outsiders were given citizenships during Independence.”

At the recent so-called ‘bumi’ congress — ‘bumi’ when its organizer Pribumi (PPBM) meant Malaiyoo — the Kutty recycled the same remarks, this time accusing China of wanting to flood Malaysia with 3 million Chinese, ostensibly to dispossess the Malays, put them out of business then push them into the jungle. Among which is, he has said, the Chinese strategy to buy properties in Forest City.

There has been no greater personification of a country’s division other than that piece of mamak. For their own sake, ‘Malays’, and the local Chinese, too, must now take sides. This has gone on for far too long and we, China, have been very, very, very patient, putting up with the man’s insinuations, insults and slanders.

It’s now gone beyond domestic politics.


The Outsiders

by Lim Teck Ghee

Dr Mahathir Mohamad has recently been giving distorted history lessons on minority populations. To top these rants, he even sounded almost regretful when he opined that the Holocaust had ostensibly “failed” in its ‘Final Solution’ to reduce the ‘Jewish problem’ beyond the six million loss of life.

On January 28 in his reflections on Malaysian minorities, he claimed in the same regretful tone that “one million outsiders were given citizenships during Independence.

Based on the Malaya 1947 census, 2.2 million of the population were Malays born in Malaya. Aside from Malays, this census also classed those of aboriginal and Indonesian ethnicities as ‘Malaysian’.

Does Mahathir simply consider those not born in Malaya to be “outsiders”. Among the ‘Malaysians’ counted in 1947 were 187,755 Javanese born in Java, 62,356 Bandjarese born in Borneo and another 20,429 Boyanese born in Sumatera. The Minangkabau, Bugis and other ethnicities born in other Indonesian islands made up roughly 35,000 persons.

So how does Mahahir define “outsiders”? Consider the first comprehensive census taken in British Malaya in 1911 when the total population was enumerated to be about 2.65 million. Of this number, 46.8 percent were classed as Malay, 34.7 percent Chinese, 10.1 percent Indian, and the rest ‘Malaysians’ (aboriginal) and ‘others’.

What then does he make of the near 35 percent Chinese and 10 percent Indian who were already on this land 100 years ago in 1911? Or of those of Peranakan descent in the Straits Settlements who can trace their ancestry back generations – many to as long ago as between 200 and 500 years? Or of the long-settled and assimilated Chinese in Terengganu who were already successfully cultivating pepper in the 17th century?

Rather than Mahathir’s claim that the horde of “outsiders” at the gates were being handed citizenship on a silver platter, the truth of the matter is that Umno pressured for citizenship criteria to be made very stringent. Following the scuttling of the Malayan Union plan, the subsequent negotiations for Independence in fact disenfranchised many Chinese and Indians who would otherwise have been eligible under the terms of the 1946 citizenship initiative.


The Insiders: But what is Malay?

by Helen Ting

Many of the arguments used regarding Malay identity are really peculiarly ‘Malaysian’ in dissonance with the wider reality and history. For instance, most of us would presume, or are told that all indigenous Indonesians are culturally Malay. However, in Indonesia, the term Melayu typically denotes only one ethnic group among others.

Even a person as learned as the director-general of Ikim, Dr Syed Ali Tawfik Al-Attas, fell into the trap of erroneously claiming that “the Malay language is derived from the Arabic language,” which he characterised as “the language of identity for the Malays.”

Syed Ali also said that “the Malays are Malays because of Islam.” He is unaware that the earliest issue of contention in the modern definition of Bangsa Melayu was the issue of descent (keturunan) versus Islam. Abdul Rahim Kajai, a prominent Malay journalist and writer, argued that bangsa Melayu should only consist of those of paternal Malay descent and stressed that “Islam does not designate a bangsa.”

As late as June 1939, Utusan Melayu called Muslim organisations of jawi peranakan membership who identified themselves as Malays as musang berbulu ayam.

The term Malayu was initially associated with the Palembang-based, Buddhist Srivijayan Kingdom, which existed between the 7th to 13th centuries. Malayu was then neither the name of a people nor a language. Most foreigners referred to the inhabitants of the archipelago as Jawa or Yava.

The Malay language as the lingua franca of the region was initially referred to as Jawi or Bahasa Jawi. It was a living language which was enriched with loan words from Sanskrit, Javanese, Arabic, Tamil, Mon, Chinese and Persian languages.

In parts of eastern Indonesia, “masuk Melayu” actually meant becoming Christian. Christianity was associated with the development of an earlier literary Malay style there, due to the proselytisation activities conducted in Malay by Portuguese missionaries, and its subsequent adoption as the language of the Dutch colonial administration. Christian Ambonese villagers abandoned their indigenous languages in favour of Malay due to the Malay-language Christian schooling and bible literacy acquired in the Malay language.

Islamic influence

The penetration of Islamic influence into the region, including the Melaka Empire which was founded as a Hindu Kingdom, was decisive in introducing the Arabic-based orthography as well as Arabic vocabulary into the language.

James Collins, a professor of Malayo-Polynesian Linguistics, also suggests that the establishment of anti-Islamic Portuguese power in Melaka had led to the “strengthening, or at least the affirmation, of Muslim-Malay identity and had “perceptible effect on the spread of Malay-speaking Islam.”

The term Melayu in the Melaka kingdom initially designated solely the royal descent of its ruling elites. The notion of Melayu then was associated with the mystic pedigree of kingship descending from Srivijaya and Melaka or Pagarruyung (Minangkabau). Its cosmopolitan population related hierarchically to the ruling elite as orang Melaka or hamba/anak Melayu.

The prosperity and authority of the Melaka Kingdom had endowed the name Melayu with great prestige associated with maritime trade.

The death of the last Johor Sultan who claimed direct lineage to the Melakan royalty in 1699 unleashed political struggle by competing groups for the right to assume the Melayu identity associated with power in the region. A historian, Timorthy Barnard, contends that the Malayness as understood during this period “was not associated with Islam, although religion did play a part; it was based instead on a common trading culture along the Melaka Straits and South China Sea.”

Meantime, a parallel dynamic was developing in places further away from the Straits of Melaka. After the fall of the Melaka port city in 1511, Portuguese hostility towards its Muslim inhabitants resulted in their exile throughout the archipelago, in search of new bases of operation.

During the 16th and 17th centuries, these migrants appeared to have given rise to a new connotation of Malayness: “a commercial diaspora that retained some of the customs, language and trade practices developed in the emporium of Melaka.”

This Malay-speaking Muslim trading diaspora dispersed by the Portuguese conquest composed of widely differing genetic stock: Javanese, ‘Luzons’, Chinese, Gujerati, South Indian, Ryukyuan.

Unlike the stereotypical association of the Malays as peasants and fishermen during the colonial era, early Melayu diaspora were primarily traders. The 17th century Melayu community on the island of Sumbawa asked to be exempted from port duties instead of being rewarded with rice fields, because “we are sailors and traders, not peasants.” An exiled prince from Siak in the 18th century who was a claimant to the Melayu identity, described himself and his followers as “children of the sea,” comfortable with riding the waves.

Subsequently, becoming a Melayu appeared to be increasingly based on the allegiance as a subject to a particular Malay ruler. Anthony Milner, the proponent of this thesis, suggests that Hikayat Deli and other Malay hikayat had served as teaching manuals for the acculturation of new adherents to such Melayu identity.

European records of the 19th century indicated evidences of a process of “Malayisation” whereby animist Bataks embraced Islam and adopted Malay culture: learning and speaking the Malay language, wearing Malay costume, acquiring a “Malay imagery” and acting and thinking in a Malay style.

Reversible identity

Interestingly, this Melayu identity was actually reversible and changeable. There were instances whereby those who adopted the Melayu identity reverted back to their original social identity. It was also not uncommon for the subjects of a cruel sultan to flee and shift allegiance to another Raja.

Notably, Milner did not regard the whole nusantara as “the Malay world”, but only clusters of Malay polities, each under the rule of a Malay Raja. In fact, the name Nusantara was first used by the early Javanese Kingdoms to denote the area outside the political influence of Javanese culture, but still under their suzerainty.

The current concept of race and nation was clearly an epistemological heritage of the European civilisation. It was Stamford Raffles who first described the Malayu as a ‘nation.’ Raffles also renamed the Malay chronicle, Sulalat Us-Salatin (in Arabic) or Peraturan segala raja-raja (in Malay) as Sejarah Melayu, as if it was the story of a people.

Then again, Stamford was merely referring to the population under coastal maritime sultanates and not the entire population of the archipelago. British colonialism was instrumental in introducing the categorisation of the Malay people as a race, and Malaya as Tanah Melayu.

As late as the 1930s, leaders of the Malay State Associations admitted only anak negeri as their members. Recent migrants from the surrounding islands, the anak dagang, were barred from joining the associations.

In fact, Ibrahim Yaacob who attempted to propagate a Malay nation covering the whole archipelago complained that most of those who migrated from the surrounding islands did not identify themselves as Malays. Even local Malays tended to be more attached to their respective state identity, calling themselves orang Kelantan, orang Perak, etc. rather than as Malays.

It is indeed a point to ponder how the historical fluidity of the Melayu identity as well as its vitality has been rendered so rigid and peculiarly “Malaysian.”


Further reading:

An English soldier’s account of Malacca.

Also, Killing the Kutty.



Mahathir et al, you may consider this as, fuck you and notice served.



Read Full Post »

Related image

The Orang Asli of Taman Negara

Malay government policies (especially since Mahathir Mohamad) towards them were identical to English imperialism: Write down your demands on a piece of paper called the ‘Federal Constitution’, teach the Orang Asal Malay then convert them to Islam. The Orang Asal have never been the same since.

Anglophile cunts like Helen Ang call that sort of colonial-styled conversion and suppression “assimilation”.

Coming from another side against natives are other Anglophiles (people like the PJ preacher-reporter Bob Teoh who went to Sarawak), seeking supposedly to protect the Asal aboriginal way of life. Instead they do the same as the Malay government, and more. Bobbie would sell to Sarawak natives his English language and Jesus Christ in the name of Christian charity — a colonized mind selling the colonizing language and culture within himself. Thus Bobbie continues the work of white imperialism in neo-imperial form.

The natives caved in to Anglophiles, people like Bobbie, Mahathir, et al, because their numbers are small and their political and intellectual foundations weak. It will not happen to the Chinese. Never! Even the once proud Japanese have given in to the West. We Chinese are the Last Man (Fukuyama) in the world, literally, standing up to neo-imperialism in all its forms, particularly of the mind.

Malaysian neo-imperialism has produced the like of motherfuckers from Kadir ‘Mad Dog‘ Jasin to Helen ‘Aku Cina‘ Ang, and more and more and more. Small wonder Malaysia is so fucked up.


The colonialist of the mind

When speaking and writing in English, Mahathir Mohamad and Lim Kit Siang and Anwar Ibrahim show how they are permanent features of imperialism’s tyranny. Worse for that, they don’t know it. Imagine, hence, all the (mostly dire) results they would wring out of Malaysia, a country and a cultural milieu so unsuitable to English ways of thinking and doing things.

Now, to the English language, add Christianity (Francis Yeoh, Joseph Lim), you produce the like of Stevie ‘Wonder’ Gan, the Anglophile extraordinaire. Into the cauldron, go farther, throw in Islam (Zakir Naik) and the Arabic language (Hadi Awang)….

As if not content with that state of affairs, successive Malay governments, in the guise of ‘national unity’ and ‘loyalty’ have forced the Chinese to learn Malaiyoo. This colonialism of the mind runs parallel to English imperialism: Most pertinently, it compares to Malays sequestering, first on paper, the Constitution, the native Orang Asal title, calling themselves ‘bumiputra‘. With that title, land was expropriated from the aboriginal people, from Johor and Kelantan to Sarawak and Sabah, a seizure justified, by Takiyuddin Hassan, for example, as  (Malay) ‘government’ land, a government right. How? It’s the Constitution, they say.

Here is one of Malaysia’s most fundamental problems: What you learned as a child cannot be unlearned. That is imperialism’s starting point and is contained in the warnings from Kenya’s Ngũgĩ wa Thiong’o, below. Native languages and cultures must be preserved at all cost, at any cost.

If people want to assimilate let white people assimilate. Helen Ang or Hannah Yeoh are even welcome to lie with and assimilate to dogs.



The Kenyan author Ngũgĩ wa Thiong’o, 2018


Decolonising the Mind

From the Tyranny of Language by Francis Wade in comments on ‘Decolonising the Mind’ (Ngũgĩ wa Thiong’o, 1986, Heinemann) :

Thirty years after graduating from his missionary-run high school near Nairobi, the Kenyan author Ngũgĩ wa Thiong’o had gained enough distance to reflect on the lasting effect of colonial education policy in Kenya. “Behind the cannon was the new school,” he wrote in Decolonising the Mind, the 1986 exposition on cultural imperialism in which he examined how the colonial classroom became a tool of psychological conquest in Africa and beyond. “Better than the cannon, it made the conquest permanent,” he wrote. “The cannon forces the body and the school fascinates the soul.”

The Alliance High School, which Ngũgĩ attended, was built in the 1920s and is now one of Kenya’s top-ranking schools. Like so many of the institutions that foreigners “gifted” to the colonies, it was seen by its founding patrons as a benevolent, civilizing instrument for Africans. It instructed in English; children who spoke in the local Gĩkũyũ tongue were beaten. English was the language of power, rationality, and intelligence; Gĩkũyũ, which Ngũgĩ would write in again only decades later, signified backwardness—an Africanness that, for the good of its carriers, had to be exorcized. A gun alone wouldn’t do the job; it needed, in Ngũgĩ’s words, to be “supplemented by the power of thought.” Decolonising the Mind, his attempt to examine how the mental space of colonized peoples came to be invaded and appropriated, is considered a seminal text on how language can be manipulated and pressed into the service of power.

The lectures that formed the basis of the book were delivered in Auckland in 1984, during that year’s Maori Language Week. I met with Ngũgĩ in May this year on his third trip to New Zealand, where we were both speaking at the Auckland Writers Festival. Clear-eyed and articulate at eighty, he recalled an encounter he had during those 1984 lectures that broadened his analysis of the relationship between language and power. A Maori woman had approached him soon after he left the podium. “You were not talking about Kenya,” she told him. “You were talking about us Maori people.” All the examples he had given were taken from Kenya or elsewhere in Africa, drawn from his teenage years in the Alliance High School and the creeping realization in the decades afterward of its insidious influence. “But she saw the Maori situation in it,” he told me. “The condition for acquiring the glory of English was the humiliation of African languages. This was the same in every colonial situation—in New Zealand, too.”

“The African bourgeoisie that inherited the flag from the departing colonial powers was created within the cultural womb of imperialism,” Ngũgĩ wrote in Moving the Centre: The Struggle For Cultural Freedoms, a collection of essays published in 1993. “So even after they inherited the flag, their mental outlook, their attitudes toward their own societies, toward their own history, toward their own languages, toward everything national, tended to be foreign; they saw things through eyeglasses given them by their European bourgeois mentors.”

Frantz Fanon, who died three years before Ngũgĩ published his first book, had issued similar warnings. He foresaw, accurately, a bleak future for societies in which a post-independence middle class, now in power, had—through clientelism and the hoarding of wealth—widened the socioeconomic fissures opened by the colonial project, and was thus in the process becoming the native face of the imperial enterprise. “Seen through its eyes, its mission has nothing to do with transforming the nation,” Fanon wrote. “It consists, prosaically, of being the transmission line between the nation and a capitalism, rampant though camouflaged, which today puts on the masque of neo-colonialism.”

Much of the thinking today about the enduring effects of colonial rule is imbued with a sense that many once-colonized nations still feel a need to validate themselves in relation to the West. Macaulay and his contemporaries saw Western values and achievements as a gold standard to which the rest of the world should aspire, and the architects of colonial language policies, in particular, developed their curricula of control in accordance with that standpoint. Secondary school literature syllabuses in many of the elite African schools still tend to be front-loaded with works in English, because the English canon is still held aloft as the ideal. African writing thus becomes an appendix, and little space is given to studying the oral traditions that were once the primary medium for communicating stories.

A momentum has developed to counter this: cultural theorists working in the postcolonial Asian setting, for example, are advocating a stronger field of inter-Asian studies, while at the same time examining the many discreet ways in which power imbalances between onetime colonizer and colonized are quietly perpetuated today—through the act of literary translation, for example. Propelling this movement is the belief that as long as the West continues to be a, if not the, normative pole of comparison, decolonization will remain in a state of arrest. In Ngũgĩ’s eyes, those validation efforts persist, while the “transmission lines” that Fanon wrote of, whereby post-independence governments serve as intermediaries between Western business interests and exploitative local ventures, are still clearly intact. This speaks to the durability of the psychological component of imperial conquest, one that didn’t announce itself with cannon fire and could not be repelled by force. …




Mindfucked in the USA

by Rachel Yoder

I had actually been fucked in the head years earlier, some might say, by my religious upbringing in a Mennonite commune. Or perhaps it was after I became involved with a charismatic man of dubious intent who convinced me of the failings of my religious upbringing and with whom I eventually made my iconic trip West. I contend the mindfuck really hit its pitch in Arizona, though, where, throughout my twenties, I committed myself to all things new age, therapeutic, and 12-step. My father had told me I would always be Mennonite; I could never change, and, moreover, change itself did not even exist. The therapists I saw later had been all about changing whenever I pleased, from troubled Mennonite girl into a secular, self-actualized über-woman-self.





Read Full Post »

Mad Dog Kadir

…Puny Little Maszlee and a Dead Balakong

A Rebuttal to Mahathir Mohamad’s Dog Mouthpiece

Kadir Jasin, below, in his present snarling incarnation, above.

Below, the Indianized and the Anglicized. They are a caste to themselves.

Kadir is third from the right. After him is Syed Akbar Ali, an Indian Muslim who, like Kadir, says, without worrying about contradiction, Malaysia is his ‘Motherland’, capital ‘M’ as in Dr M. If Malaysia is Akbar Ali’s motherland, then the Temiar tribe of Gua Musang (farther below) are what? Pendatangs?

Unless, of course, Syed Akbar has more than one mother.


Hannah Yeoh to giggling Maszlee boy: “The Lord knew to whom to make a little puny — the size of my little finger.”


Malaysia Caste System Lies Exposed

Saved at Last?


To poke at China, Anglophiles in Malaysia, the Indians in particular, would brag about India as the world’s largest democracy as if that is a moral accomplishment. Yet, since its independence in 1948, the Indian state, a highly militarized regime, has never, not even for a day, ceased to war against its ‘people’; if not dalits then Muslims, if not pubescent girls then widowers, if not Gujaratis then Kashmiris.

To explain this caste system that motorizes Indian society, writer and novelist Arundhati Roy once described her country as a tall building where there are no staircases and no lifts. You are stuck in the floor where you are born. Outside, however, everybody else think of India only in terms of lofty spirituality, yoga, Gandhi, sweet mangoes and that sort of a shit, but two complete contradictory realities of the same country.

It is the same about Malaysia. (Wherever white people went and exported their theology and ideology, there has been nothing but trouble.)

Malaysia is a country that has no citizens. It is lived in, ruled by and enjoyed only by a political elite, connected to each other by familial ties, by school, by business, and especially by membership and mutual affiliation to church and mosque. The rest of ‘the people’, where they are concerned, is an abstraction, just electoral numbers — how do I get their fucking vote?

Hence, you find Pakatan and their mouthpieces speaking the old language of the ancien regime.

‘Serve the people’, for example, didn’t begin on May 9, it is as old as is Mahathir Mohamad. In his time, ‘the people’ meant Malays, and Malays only. Today, it is the same code-word, but weaponized to bludgeon civil servants into obedience and submission, the same civil employees from Mahathir’s era who suddenly find themselves on the wrong side of the aisle. So, you read in Kadir Jasin who says:

We know who they are. We told them that what they did before this was wrong (sic), and we advised (sic) them to be loyal (sic) and committed to work for the country and the people. (sic)

It has always been like this in Malaysia: on the wrong side of the political aisle, you will always be wrong. Note the other code-word, ‘loyal’. In Najib’s time, civil employees and soldiers were told that their loyalty is only to the country, not BN. Today, no prizes for guessing who they are suppose to be ‘loyal’ to?

Kadir pontificating employs the use of morality language: ‘wrong’, ‘loyal’, ‘advise’, and especially ‘the people’. We all know, of course, that he is just a lot fart. What irks isn’t his hypocrisy — that’s SOP in Malaysian politics — hence they will break their promises with justifications 10 times longer than their manifesto. What irks is that this motherfucker won’t die so that while he is still at it, pontificating, he calls other people dogs. Like he is the new dog owner.

‘Work for the people’? Of course. The deputy prime minister named Wan Azizah has been working for the people, especially covering for a pedophile, who wants to sleep with a 11-year-old girl because it’s Allah’s will. And Mahathir, too, who’s been working for Zakir Nair, a permanent resident, yes, but still ‘the people’, and very Islamic at that.

But, other people, in particular, if you are weak and vulnerable are not ‘the people’. These are the expendables: the 11-year-old bride, the Temiars of Gua Musang, the Penans of Sarawak, the Chinese schools, the gays and the lesbians. Today, this government of ‘Hope’, no different from the ancien regime, pretend these groups of people don’t exist, not even as citizens. In India, such groups are collectively named dalits, the Untouchables. Like India, this great Hope government would prefer that the dalits of Malaysia would be wiped out by disease and starvation just by ignoring them.

Malaysia is a society of castes, at the top of which, one has to be Malay, Muslim and Male. Their politicians sit at the top of the pecking order. Bottom of this Malaysian caste system are the Temiars and other natives, given bumiputra status, yes, but not for their own sake. It’s for the sake of Malay-Muslim-Male so as to elevate their status and, after that, to legitimize their expropriation of local resources. It is an argument you would have heard from Kadir (plus Mahathir), who tells it in their pseudo-sociological, self-serving justification. For example: “(the fictitious) Malays constitute a larger group of (non-existent) Nusantara people stretching from the Celebes to the Indian Ocean.”

This caste exploitation is so endemic that if we Chinese were any less resilient in our material and cultural lives, we would be done in, long ago, reduced to Untouchables, as are Indian estate workers today, land seized from them (as were land seized from other natives), dumped into Puchong ghettoes then forgotten.

During GE14, Mahathir, Kit Siang, Wan Azizah, and DAP/PKR online mobsters (people like Alannah Cheah, Joshie Hong, and KTemoc come to mind) pleaded that they be given a chance at governance and if they do fail, ‘the people’ (again) were welcome to throw them out. We, of course, know how hard it is to throw out a government. The last time, it took 60 years. Even this isn’t the pivotal issue at stake.

What is instead central is their regard for, their attitude towards ‘the people’; utter contempt. Kadir calls them dogs. He thinks that some dogs are mad as some are…sane? That is, we are a people to be used so that, if you are not to be used by them, you are a mad dog that will be put in chains. The security of your job is now, therefore, a sort of chain. Which, in turn, infers that, the financial and material resources of the country are for Kadir to manipulate, indeed, to own and to use as they wish as if these are personal property and that they are not only the owners but employers as well. You are not ‘loyal’ to Mahathir — and, above all, show it sincerely — he will sack you.

Yet that is precisely the point that they had railed against Najib and Umno: both treating the government, that Najib treated 1MDB as if it were his personal property. That was fundamental to, the essence in kleptocracy.

The problem of Malaysia, hence, isn’t in the like of motherfuckers like Kadir nor their stupidity — if Kadir is dead the moment he finishes read this, and we pray to his Allah for it to happen soon, nobody would still be any better off. Kleptocracy is inbuilt into the caste system which, in turn, is designed and constructed to expropriate resources. Whoever gets to sit on top of the system gets the keys for the expropriation. All else is subsidiary. Promises are thus quickly forgotten. Manifestos are pulped. A 11-year-old Kelantan girl will get fucked, law or no law. The Temiars will still lose their land. No UEC, and on and on and on and on. Why would Mahathir or Kadir want to rescind the sedition laws which they can now use against you since you are disloyal — and a mad dog to boot?

Suddenly, only ‘the people’ who mattered are motherfuckers like Kadir because power is in their hands.

Here, in the caste system called Malaysia, with contradictions galore, is P Waythamoorthy, a member of Mahathir’s cabinet who had sued Zakir Naik, and the latter is in turn protected by Mahathir (below). Here is Maszlee Malik, talking about ‘studying’ the implications of the UEC recognition on Malays — yes, Malays — who themselves had nothing to do with the certificate. Here is Wan Azizah talking about ‘studying’ the implications of separating a 11-year-old bride from her twice married ‘husband’, who would otherwise been jailed for statutory rape. Here is PKR’s Sivarasa Rasiah visiting the Temiars. The next day when he leaves, chainsaw gangs descend on the Temiars.


Wan Azizah and Mahathir serve the people: top, ‘the people’ is a bigot; below, ‘the people’ is a pedophile. All others wait your turn, maybe for the next 100 days.




The man on the left, a civil service lecturer, is finished, which is just as well. He’s after all just a mad dog, an Islamic mad dog to boot. Ever wonder how Mahathir has fixed him? Demote him to another caste? Will he attack Mahathir? Or Kadir, or both? Woof, woof.



Temiar man in Gua Musang, his property destroyed with chain saws: A Malaysian native but, in Kadir’s reckoning, do you think he counts as ‘the people’?


Malaysia, it should be clear by now, has no ‘the people’. There are just Mahathir, Kadir, and their families, at the top of the pecking order of a caste of Malay-Muslims-Male. One rung below are Mahathir’s cronies — think of the motherfucker who owns the Mines. Abroad, we are always asked, Do you have any ‘Connections’? The rest, in varying hierarchical order are the Temiars, Chinese, Indians, the dalits of Malaysia. The civil service class of course have gotten Kadir’s special attention because he needs them in the expropriation and they can make his life difficult:

“Seperti yang kita baca, lihat dan dengar daripada laporan media massa, sudah banyak pegawai seperti itu telah meletak jawatan, bersara atau ditukarkan. Tetapi adalah mustahil menapis setiap orang daripada kira-kira 1.6 juta kakitangan awam dan mengambil tindakan ke atas mereka. Lagipun bukan semua mereka terlibat secara sukarela menjadi tali barut atau boneka kerajaan dahulu.

Yang terang-terang bersubahat dan terbabit dalam politik BN seperti berkempen untuk calon-calon BN sehingga sanggup naik pentas dan menari macam kera kena belacan atau orang mabuk todi sudah pun ditamatkan perkhidmatan.

Tak payahlah berlebih sangat berebut jabatan dan agensi. Jangan sampai dituduh cuba membina empayar atau pentingkan diri sendiri. Silalah buat kerja demi rakyat jelata.”

Like Maszlee, like Sivarasa, like Wan Azizah, here is Kadir talking about some civil servant dogs but ignores the mad dog he and Mahathir bred in the first place: Nor Mohamed Yakcop.

Kadir mentioned that name in his post, a man who was elevated to the post of Finance Minster II by the then Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi.

Yet, this is how Kadir now describes Nor Mohamed in another set of contradictions:

Nor Mohamed is a survivor extraordinaire. Despite losing billions in botched foreign currency trading at Bank Negara in the 1990s, he was rehabilitated by Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad during the 1997/98 Asian Financial Crisis, made minister by Abdullah and Deputy Chairman of Khazanah by Mohd Najib Abdul Razak.

A dog ‘rehabilitated’ by Mahathir, instead of being sacked? Had that dog Nor Mohamed serve the people so well he wasn’t sacked? Was that dog so loyal that he’d stayed on to serve three consecutive prime ministers? Never mind he lost 30 billion ringgit?


Saved, the Mad Dog of Asia

There are an estimated 2 million Malaysians who live and work elsewhere. More than half or close to 1.2 million left between the years 2008 and 2011, the period that mark the ascent of the DAP and Pakatan. Indeed, Hannah Yeoh, after she failed to get PR status in Australia, returned to Malaysia, joined the DAP and went on Twitter urging, ‘don’t change country, change government’.

Well, government has changed. Yet, in the New Malaysia, you hear nothing about them flocking back, not even among those who bragged about the high moral virtues of Pakatan, Christians and Anglophiles in particular; in Australia, the Malaysiakini’s Steve Oh and KTemoc, in the UK Petra Kamarudin, in Singapore Alannah Cheah of Petaling Jaya.

Do they know something we don’t? Or, perhaps, they are simply hypocrites.

On the ‘loyal’ side of the aisle they beat drums and flog the dogs. Now, inducted into art of kleptocracy and authoritarian Mahathirism, they, sitting in the luxurious felt of their leather chairs and satin sofas they suddenly discover virtue in meekness and silence. Hypocrisy is the least of what is found under the mossy stone in Malaysia saved. It is suddenly virtue in the:

  • small-minded (Yeo Bee Yin),
  • capricious (Joseph Lim Guan Eng),
  • vulgar (Anthony Loke),
  • pontificating (Hannah Yeoh),
  • sanctimonious (Wan Azizah),
  • feigning (Mujahid Yusof Rawa),
  • self-seeking (Maszlee)
  • lying (name your favorite)

On the bedrock of its Anglophile, Indianized caste structure constructed along lines of desert religious morality, Malaysia congeals immorality into a national value: Christians extolling the greatness of their god while, daily, they spit at heathens; Muslims spit at infidels; and, Christians and Muslims spit at each other.

It is what happens when mad dog Kadir meets a howling bitch Bee Yin, or when petty Hannah meets little puny Maszlee.

Hypocrisy? Nah…it is what they are, being true to themselves.

You talking about us, Kadir?

Kadir has warned, let loose the Muslim civil service dogs, especially the mad ones, they will attack Mahathir. Suddenly, Kadir is the only ‘loyal’ new mad dog master, who alone knows how to serve ‘the people’: “Enough with giving the prime minister a headache,” he adds. “Work for the people.”

Or else…?

We are Christian dogs! Gotta a problem with that? Since when you became our owner, motherfucking Kadir.



Mad Dogs at DAP Funeral.

DAP is at the pinnacle of glory but DAP Balakong man is dead mangled in his car — ‘Lord God, Thine Will be done’ — and, still, they made it look like he is some martyr. Look at that bunch of DAP monkeys with their syiok sendiri performance: Attention! It is a funeral for the DAP not that Balakong man.

 The Daoist and Chinese will go quietly, but an Anglophile…? You died well, DAP Balakong.

Chinese funeral rites is a family affair and, rarely, if at all a communal event, not even the ancients do it this gory, the ministers who served the emperor. For the DAP, they couldn’t help turn it into a Tony & Pony church charade, with political propaganda thrown in, not bothering even to dress respectfully.

Wonder if Hannah (foreground) and Ong Kian Ming (botak, left) will think: “No saved Malaysia for Balakong man. Pity.”

When will it be Hannah’s turn? Soon? Imagine all the funeral possibilities for her or for Ong Kian Ming but best in combo, their funeral script as thick as the Bible, lasting three days and three nights, visited by three Wise Men from the East. Or imagine Joseph Lim Guan Eng dead…. They’ll shut down the whole country and make salute mandatory, non-stop for three months.

Eternal life, Hannah? Bah….


BTW, Alannah Cheah of Christ PJ, you like the Tony & Pony show (pix above)? Die and I will salute you, five minutes, daily for one year. Want the same show for yourself when you are dead? How about you, Joshie Hong? Bob Teoh?

Hey, Annie: Kadir wants to know, Were you ever loyal? Of course, loyal before you are dead.

As you’d say, Just joke, okay? We’re on the same side, remember?



Read Full Post »

Older Posts »