Archive for the ‘Malaysia Stories’ Category

Part 1


From the Robert Kuok Memoirs

The overseas Chinese made enormous contributions to Southeast Asia. They are the unsung heroes of the region: the poor men and women who migrated and blazed trails into the jungle, accessing the timber wealth; Chinese workers who planted and tapped rubber, who opened up the tin mines, who ran the small retail shops. It was the Chinese immigrants who tackled these Herculean tasks, and created a new economy around them. The British were good administrators. Many of them in private enterprise were absentee landlords, sitting in boardrooms or plush offices in London, Singapore or Kuala Lumpur. It was the Chinese who helped build up Southeast Asia. The Indians also played a big role, but the Chinese were the dominant force in helping to build the economy.

The transplanted Chinese were born entrepreneurs. The bulk of the overseas Chinese in Southeast Asia have their roots in the coastal towns and villages of Fujian and Guangdong provinces – and these have been blessed with some of the best entrepreneurial genes in the world. They came very hungry and eager as immigrants, often barefooted and wearing only singlets and trousers. They would do any work available, as an honest income meant they could have food and shelter. Chinese entrepreneurs are efficient and cost-conscious. When they search for foreign hardware and expertise, they know how to drive hard bargains. They work harder than anyone else and are willing to “eat bitterness”, as the Chinese say. The Chinese are simply the most amazing economic ants on earth.

I have not come across any people as loyal as the Chinese. The Japanese have a kind of loyalty, but it’s an uncritical, bushido type of loyalty: they are loyal even if the boss is a skunk. Unlike the Japanese, every Chinese is highly judgmental, from the most educated to the uneducated. In every Chinese village and community, moral values are drilled into each child during his or her family upbringing. They are a very clueful people. They may have lived in a village or small town in China and come to Southeast Asia totally ignorant of the world, but they picked up ideas and strategies very quickly.

If there is any business to be done on earth, you can be sure that the Chinese will be there. They will know whom to see, what to order, how best to save, how to make money. They don’t need expensive equipment or the trappings of office; they just deliver.

If you look at the present generation of achievers in Hong Kong – men like Li Ka-shing of Cheung Kong, Cheng Yu-tung of New World, Li Shau-kee of Henderson Land, the late Kwok Takseng of Sun Hung Kai Properties – they all came from the school of hard knocks. Not one of them went to college. Since I was mainly brought up in the English-speaking world, I am almost an outside observer of the ways of China-born Chinese businessmen who are steeped in the Chinese language and culture.

This doesn’t mean to say that Chinese firms are the wealthiest or the biggest in the world. If you take companies such as GE, or businessmen like Bill Gates or Warren Buffett, their successes and wealth dwarf that of Chinese businesses. But Americans operate in the largest economy in the world, caressed by political and social stability, a strong legal system and generally sound institutions. The overseas Chinese in Southeast Asia operate in a much less benevolent environment. Moreover, they flourish without the national, political and financial sponsorship or backing of their host countries. In Southeast Asia, the Chinese are often maltreated and looked down upon. Whether you go to Malaysia, Sumatra or Java, the locals call you Cina – pronounced Chee-na – in a derogatory way.

Around the world, I have seen benevolent governments sponsor and even financially aid their nations’ businessmen so that they can compete overseas. It’s true in the US, Britain, France, Germany, Japan, Korea and Taiwan. National banks come to their citizenry’s aid; import-export banks subsidise their exports. In the commodity trade, the French and British governments and banks stand proudly behind their commodity brokers, who have lines of credit that I can only dream of. If the commodity traders’ capital is US$20 million, they receive US$200 million of credit; while if we have US$20 million of paid-up capital, we can barely hope for credit of US$20 million.

When I invested in Sucre et Denree in Paris, I was astonished at the enormous trade facilities Serge Varsano was receiving from the French banks. The Chinese have no fairy godmothers (I exclude here the type of Chinese who connive with leaders peddling cronyism, and therefore rise and fall with such leaders.) Yet, despite facing these odds, the overseas Chinese, through hard work, endeavour and business shrewdness, are able to produce profits of a type that no other ethnic group operating in the same environment could produce.


Why did the overseas Chinese survive, adapt and flourish in Southeast Asia? I say the answer lies in the great cultural strength of the Chinese. When they left their homeland, the overseas Chinese retained the culture of China in the marrow of their bones. I remember my father had coolies who, after humping numerous bags of rice, stank of sour sweat; their clothes were not properly laundered and they couldn’t afford to bathe with perfumed soap. But they were decent human beings at heart and they knew moral values. As a child of three or four years old, I would sometimes sit on their laps and they would regale me with stories of their days in China. Recollecting those stories, I would say they were very cultured people. They knew what was right and what was wrong. Even the most uneducated Chinese, through family education, upbringing and social environment, understands the ingredients and consequences of behaviour such as refinement, humility, understatement, coarseness, bragging and arrogance.

I remember being invited to a brainstorming seminar in Jakarta sponsored by their Centre for Strategic and International Studies, headed by General Ali Mutorpo, Suharto’s head of intelligence. Jakarta was just beginning to stand on its own feet under Suharto. I was interested in further developing my business in Indonesia, and here was a chance to get to know the leaders and to take the economic and political pulse of Indonesia. So I attended.

About thirty of us sat around a big oval table. From Malaysia, there was Ghazali Shafie and myself. From Singapore, there was Devan Nair, who later became President of Singapore. The topic of one session was economic development. When it came to my turn, I spoke into the microphone in front of me: “Gentlemen, I have heard a lot already today from my peers about how Indonesia should develop. Many of you say that we should bring in the multinationals of the world and draw upon their strength to bring up the nation. I beg to differ. European and American multinationals, with their bulldozer-type attitude and mentality, will succeed. I have no doubt of that. But they will also import high inflation and inflationary practices that will enter your bloodstream, into the very marrow of your bones. You will never shake it off! This nation is very poor and cannot afford that style of management.”

I continued, “I want to speak today about the Southeast Asian Chinese. The vast majority of overseas Chinese are decent Chinese. If you go into the smallest Malay kampongs in my country, Malaysia, you will find that a Chinese shopkeeper has set up a tiny provision store. His whole shop may be only 200-300 square feet, but it will be stocked with all the necessities required by that community. If it’s a fishing village, there will be many tins of biscuits and canned foods, flashlights and batteries – the food and essentials to keep a fisherman provisioned out at sea for a few days.” “These men are playing sterling roles everywhere.” I stressed. “They are entrepreneurs blessed with business brains, though many of them lack financial backing. The mark-up on the goods they sell is very small; thus, they play a vital role in the chain of distribution.”

I returned to the subject of Indonesia: “Should not the leaders of this brand-new Indonesian nation harness more of the Chinese entrepreneurs’ energies to develop the country? The Chinese can do it, and they will do it economically, not the bulldozing, multinational way. Use the overseas Chinese, shoestring-economy style and build up your economy like that. That’s my plea.”


I concluded with this: “Now, before I finish, I want to state one strong caveat. Some of these overseas Chinese will become very big crooks, and if you let them run rampant they could ruin your nation. Therefore, it is vital that you also build up an executive monitoring arm, one armed with teeth. What I am saying is that in a laissez-faire economy, you must let business develop freely; but at the same time you must have a very well-trained and highly disciplined monitoring arm. Where there is abuse and crimes being committed, you must come down very fast and very hard and punish the crooks severely. You should make examples of them so that the honest Chinese will help your country and the dishonest ones will be deterred.”

Later, when I went out to the washroom, I passed a room adjoining our meeting room in which tape recorders were whirring. So what I said – what everyone said – was recorded. In the ensuing years, Indonesia (and most other countries in the region) didn’t heed my warning about the need for watchdog institutions with bite. The decent Chinese have helped to build up Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand and the Philippines, and made these countries what they are today. But you also had the rise of the unscrupulous and ruthless Chinese, who in turn have devastated many parts of Southeast Asia.

Why were these people allowed to wreak havoc? It is because the leaderships have been weak. If the leaders were strong, all these devils would have disappeared overnight. Singapore had the same number of Chinese crooks, but you try and find one today. They are all hidden, camouflaged, or dormant. The crooks were held on steel leashes by two hands: Lee Kuan Yew’s left hand and Lee Kuan Yew’s right hand. With the unsavoury elements under control, look what Singapore has been able to accomplish by harnessing the energies of the overseas Chinese.

Source: SCMP


Read Full Post »

… and now wants to ‘save’ (with DAP help).

The signboard placed at the entrance to the launderette. - Picture from Facebook

Another Allah First Project by Tanah Malaiyoo… Allahuakbar!


Allah the Racist, the Pedophile, the Head Chopper, the Killer of Children and now the Launderette

Dear Muslim-Only Launderette,

Thank you for posting the sign. We, the Chinese, have been wondering how to identify so as to boycott Malaiyoo laundry shops. Now we know: Where there’s Allah, there is a Malaiyoo. Again, thanks for the tip.

BTW, you are welcome to buy Chinese phones, even our rice and our ships. No ‘faktor kesucian‘ required. Only leave, ‘tanggalkan‘, your money behind. Those are also not gifts from Arabia and from your fucked up Allah. You steal phones again, we chop off your fucking balls — after we are done with your hands.


Orang Cina

PS: Mahathir Mohamad and Lim Kit Siang will soon be coming to Muar and will want your vote. Don’t listen to them. Remember, always Allah First, Malaysia Second.


Read Full Post »

…to end Atheism plague.

That, ultimately, is Rizal Mansor’s wish if he were to fulfill his dream of ending the ‘plague of atheism‘. An atheist is someone who does not believe in Jesus Christ or Allah, and we, the Chinese, don’t give a fuck for this voodoo. So, the only way Rizal, Rosmah’s aide, can meaningfully proceed to end atheism is to turn Malaysia into a godly, Christian kingdom as per the wishes of Yeo Bee Yin and Hannah Yeoh.




How Malaiyoos Will Fuck Up Themselves

Zaid Ibrahim in The Sultans and the Malays:

[T]he Sultans have a constitutional duty to protect the customs and traditions of the Malay people. This means that the general character of Malays, such as being a peaceful and easy-going people who love fun, music and culture, whilst evolving, must be protected.

The Sultans must ensure that Malays are, like them, wise to the ways of the world and able to live in comfort. They will be failing in their duties if Malays shun modern education, modern music, oppose vaccinations and start living in “communes”.

The Taliban, on the other hand, are like the Wahhabis—they want to remove all traces of history and culture from the people, and they want the traditions of the early Bedouins to replace Malay culture. This austere culture is being touted as “Islam” although its traditions and practices existed thousands of years before Prophet Muhammad.

From overall economic and political management, government finances to simple daily chores of living, bus transport, daily food prices, pregnancy and naming names, Umno has done so much to fuck up Malaysia, there is just one thing left to be ruined — the Malay soul. We say, Malay, to exclude Chinese or Indian, because anything affecting the existential being, Umno can only afford, politically, to touch the Malays.


  • After Najib Razak stole 2.6 billion ringgit, he says he was doing Malays a favor; he never said Malaysia. Saying it was for Malays made easier to add that the favor was with Muslim Arab support.
  • When 1MDB was discovered to have stolen 50 bn or more, Najib made it look like he was giving Malays a free ticket to heaven, sending them to Mecca.
  • When Umno introduced Hadi Awang’s Act 355 on hudud law, Umno was at pains to stress it would not affect Chinese and others.
  • With the unilateral child conversion bill in parliament, Umno sees it as doing Chinese and Indians a favor.
  • When they pulled the same bill out of parliament, PAS interprets it as doing Malays a favor: a child has a right to be Muslim, that is, to be Malay. [If that were true, every Malay has a right to be Hindu as well.]
  • The same attitude goes into introduction of Kelantan hudud: doing Malays a public, religious duty.

All of which are sure ways of fucking up the Malay soul — truly the Islamic way — and Zaid is one of the rare, few Malays who actually understands the consequences (extract above).

As for us, we’ll lose a few Chinese to Allah (so what?) but the Malaiyoos can well fuck up themselves, beginning by doing nothing to stop the self-destruction by Umno and PAS.

Well, the Chinese wish Najib and Hadi every success in their endeavors.

Go ahead, press on, you Islamic, Malaiyoo motherfuckers: have more Islam, whip more Malays, chop more hands, slice throats, blow up a few suraus even, the more the merrier. We’ll just stand by and watch…. Over to you Rizal, stupid fucker.



Read Full Post »


Ten Reasons Why Mahathir is Unacceptable


1MDB is a very good reason to reject Najib Razak. But 1MDB can’t be the reason to accept Mahathir Mohamad in Najib’s place. Najib, it must be acknowledged, inherited the power and economic structures already paved in stone by Mahathir, leaving the former no room to innovate on policy ideas that won’t be self-destructive; Umno being prime example. It can’t be anything but the fascist party it was constructed to be.

A good orator by any (Malaysian only?) standard, Hew Kuan Yau is on the side of Mahathir Mohamad and Harapan. His ideas in the clip above calls for a reconfiguration of Malaysia power structure along a totally different line, with six deputies each reflecting the Malays, Chinese, Indians, Sabah, Sarawak and Women. He doesn’t say who sits on top, but that appears to be secondary.

The idea remains nebulous so needs work, which is to make Malaysia a better country, a better place than it is, and something for everyone to be proud of inside or outside the country. We’ve already wasted 60 years, along with all its natural resources wasted.

Twenty years ago, in the era of Mahathir, Hew would have been in certain trouble for saying the above. Someone like Kadir Jasin (pro-Mahathir today) or Ahirudin Attan (pro-Najib Razak) would have demanded for his head, before which they would be ten days of banner headline ‘news‘ in the New Straits Time, not to mention Utusan, denouncing him as a usurper of Malay power.

What makes the difference between then and now isn’t because a person such as Hew came out of the blue with some profound idea, which it is not, or because, as it’s popularly assumed, Najib’s influence has waned and Umno’s power is tottering at the edge of a cliff so anyone can say what he likes. If Mahathir, say, is in power today, and is confronted by similar circumstances, what might have been his reaction? History offers a good guide.

On that basis, here are 10 reasons why Mahathir cannot be counted on and, therefore to be rejected, along with Harapan if it amounts to that. The 10 reasons:

  1. Mahathir is less tolerant of political dissension than is Najib, having jailed far more people for political offenses in his first five years than in all the nine from Najib so far.
  2. Mahathir’s methods of oppression are as base and sordid as Najib’s methods are bumbling and inconsistent therefore reversible.
  3. Mahathir’s political culture strikes at the roots of a person’s humanity — instincts, fear and intimidation — whereas Najib wavers between legalism and persuasion, therefore, necessarily flexible.
  4. Mahathir’s national policies were paved on the basis of personal likes and dislikes, therefore totalitarian, whereas Najib is ad hoc and so susceptible to influences from all sides.
  5. Mahathir offers no coherent marriage of intellectual (science and culture) to progressive ideas (free market), he takes whatever fancies him; Najib is constantly exploring and so appears like he is uncertain.
  6. Mahathir is as materialistic as is Najib, differing only by outlook; Mahathir’s Vision 20/20 is a get rich scheme by another name, money for its own sake while Najib’s materialism aims to satisfy the personal.
  7. Mahathir, who once called AIDs as God’s punishment (sic) for the LGBT, interpret society values and cultures purely through the lenses of his personal biases; Najib accepts it on its own terms;
  8. Mahathir sees anyone and any society as deficient and defective primarily on material yardsticks (GDP growth, wealth, etc.) as opposed to physical necessity and advances; Najib’s view is far, far milder, you are what you make of yourself.
  9. Mahathir’s ethical values are bound to his own prejudices instead of any acceptance for natural human diversity; Najib’s laissez faire form encompasses a variety, Islam being primary for himself.
  10. Mahathir’s prejudices, mamak in quality and heavily western-influenced, are judgmental, so exacerbates his totalitarianism, therefore non-negotiable; Najib, the Malay that he is, is relaxed therefore subject to change.

From the same starting premise — the need for a new national partnership among its people — the above conclusion is entirely opposite to Hew’s who asked that the Chinese accept Mahathir. Hew argues that, at age 92, Mahathir can’t do anymore damage but Harapan needs him for the moment. Many things are wrong with the argument.

Be that as it may, Hew doesn’t see that, in post-Mahathir, there’s the thing called the Murti-Bing pill (farther below). It’s to be expected: Like Mahathir, like Umno, the rest of Harapan were never people of culture who like dancing and music for its own sake. They have only the Yeo Bee Yin doxology of politics and money that goes qing, qing, qing in Saddiq Rahman‘s pockets, yet another Mahathir fanboy.


A National Rejuvenation Agenda

Malaysia has nothing to lose: If we trust our peoples, the ordinary, if we set in place the minimum ground rules for policy, national and individual conduct, we could beat Singapore in ten years on most measures. Such are the possibilities with the internal dynamics and the innovation of our peoples.

Over-regulation, and this includes hudud, is a clear, unmistakable sign we got the wrong answers in the source of our problems which we first misidentify then made them worse. That or we simply don’t trust ourselves. Be done with Mahathir’s Murti-Bing pills and set our peoples free.

Six times one is not six, this is where Hew (above) is wrong; his calculation is too mechanical, inflexible. The answer is 12, wherein the whole is greater, far greater than the sum of the individual parts. Only this country in the world has such a potent combination.



If you take care of freedom, truth will take care of itself. — Richard Rorty, 1931-2007.


Let’s Try Something Else


In the book collection, Interviews with Richard Rorty, the American philosopher (above) was adamant in his revulsion for conventional western philosophy and thought processes:

“I do not see that we do anything called “appealing to truth.” We appeal to the statements of the tortured, the records in the archives, the monuments of the past, the slides under the microscope, the images in the lens of the telescope, and so on, but not to “truth.” Insistence on the existence or the importance of truth seems to me empty, at least by comparison to insistence on the need of freedom.”

Forever the pragmatist-philosopher, Confucius will wake in his grave to scream: At last! At last!

There is in the Rorty’s insight, a new formulation for application in Malaysia: stop chasing after the truth about 1MDB (the Americans will take care of it, like Singapore did), that after Najib Razak is gone Malaysia is saved; of chasing twin towers and towering Malaiyoos, of chasing the fiction called ‘Malacca empire’; of chasing Malay rights, that Malays are the undisputed master of Tanah Melayu. To all that, and more, so what?

Sixty years of chasing these ‘truths’ have produced only anguish and disappointments, racism and more racism, more sickness in the mind and greater impoverishment, more dead fetuses in trash bins, more god, and, meanwhile, more Umno and more Mahathir Mohamad.

It is good enough, as Rorty suggests, simply to look after freedom, including freedom from God, freedom to eat, drink, think and talk, and especially freedom to be human. The rest will simply fall into place. And that — freedom — should be the only principle of the Rukun Negara. The existing ones are just pig shit, useless to boot.


Hope’s Murti-Bing Pill

Image result for Czesław Miłosz

Czesław Miłosz, 1911-2004:

He who has power, has it by historical logic.
Respectfully bow to that logic . . .
Learn to predict a fire with unerring precision.
Then burn the house down to fulfill the prediction.


Mahathir & Harapan’s Pill

After the bookZniewolony umysł’ (1953) was published in the English as The Captive Mind, its Polish author Czesław Miłosz was a marked man. Poland’s Stalinist rulers made sure of that: his name would never be mentioned again, even if it is for denouncing him. (Reminds of Annie of the Valley who has banned Helen Ang’s name from her blog, prohibited even to denounce Helen. One can suppose that Annie is entitled to be the Stalin on her turf but this is arguable.)

Milosz’s book begins with a discussion of Nienasycenie, ‘Instability‘ in the English, from which the term Murti-Bing first appeared. It is the fictional name of a Chinese/Mongolian ruler who having conquered Poland distributed pills to the population to limit their ability to think. The pill has a deadening effect, and it is these effects that’s the central theme in Captive Mind where Milosz’s greatly expands on, calling it ‘enslavement through consciousness’.

Under Milosz, the pill became a metaphor for deeds or policies or combinations thereof that enslave consciousness or thought or thinking. This enslavement isn’t too far-fetched. It’s actually a precise term to characterize how Mahathir Mohamad, since his early political days, issued Murti-Bing pills to the Malay and the general population. Representative of which are, Malays can only trust Malays, Malay welfare can only be served by Malay power (i.e. Umno), Malay progress and stability is possible only my Malay materialism first, plus variants of the above positions, collectively and commonly known as Malay ketuanan.

This ketuanan is Mahathir’s Murti-Bing pill. Its effects are widely seen today in Najib Razak type of entitlement, even to steal; in government ineptitude and institutional paralysis; in one commercial disaster after the next; in unthinking education; in Malay slavery to Islamic dogma and in making Islam the primary requisite of the Malay character and so on.

In this way and through the state, Mahathir plans the economy; decides who get rich, gets the business; names his industry ‘captains’ (called cronyism today); fixes prices; determines who is Muslim authentic who is deviant; who is to judge, who not….

Is there a similar Murti-Bing pill being distributed by Harapan? The answer is, Yes, definitely.

It’s called the Harapan Murti-Bing pill. It has the function of disabling anyone from thinking any way other than to see Harapan as Malaysia’s only hope. Just as Umno once posited itself as the only Malay savior, so is Mahathir and the rest of Harapan today. Should they succeed at Putrajaya, there is only one outcome: Harapan people, since they made the present, will be the only ones who will decide the future. You need not apply because you are quite happy to surrender the entire reconstruction of Malaysia into the hands of Mahathir, et al.

This deadening effect can be seen today: Anglophiles and the urban Harapan class queue up mindlessly and daily in Malaysiakini to sing Mahathir’s praises and to denounce Umno/BN. Certain of their winner, they call for a revolution and a revolution does not entertain dissension.

Thus, if a third candidate were to contest against PKR’s Seri Muda seat, the PSM is shouted down and accused of ‘splitting’ the votes, that is, robbing them of Mahathir’s righteous mission, making look as if the PSM candidate elect Abdul Razak Ismail were an ally of Umno evil. Harapan’s Murti-Bing consumers who, on the one hand, demand for democracy never, on the other, see their hostility towards PSM as anti-democratic.

Milosz’s explanation for this sort of conduct and attitude is contained in the four line poetry above. As Harapan would burn down the citadel of democracy, the Vote, in order to be democratic, Mahathir would burn down the house of Umno to fulfill his prediction that Umno has been destroying everything about Malaysia.

The greater danger is this: from Mahathir and Lim Kit Siang down, they see no contradiction in their destruction. Like Yeo Bee Yin bragging her righteousness, the two men see themselves as saviors and so see in their totalitarian methods a necessary, remedial value. Milosz:

Learn to predict a fire with unerring precision.
Then burn the house down to fulfill the prediction.

Mahathir’s Murti-Bing maddening consequences bring out the worse in people: they steal and then cry wolf; fathers rape nieces; girls toss out infant babies like used diapers onto rail track and stations; the dead are kidnapped, killed if they are not first dead — all unprecedented acts rarely seen in the world.

In the future, ‘saved’ Malaysia, peasants, believing they can squeeze money out of husks, go nuts. Intellectuals do nothing but write for the state. Abnormality will require statistical compilation just so as to give this new sweep of events a semblance of normalcy.

So debilitating are the effects of the Murti-Bing pill that when Harapan argues against chasing happiness to replace it with the cessation of pain, the public is contented to accept. For 40, 50 years there was never much to be contented with anyway; Harapan has promised instead some future La-la land.

Mahathir acts today as if he is redistributing Murti-Bing pills left from the past. The difference between then and now is only in the packing, a matter of casting racial morality: before it was Chinese greed, now it is Bugis in nature. And to drive home this point, Mahathir sycophants like Kadir Jasin calls Najib, Datuk Seri I Mappadulung Daeng Mattimung Karaeng Sandrobone Sultan Abdul Jalil.

It would be presumptuous to argue Mahathir wants nothing else other than for Najib out of the way and thence to return to some kind of status quo. If true, he is nothing but a contract assassin and Harapan is the hirer. Realistically, it’s probably the other way around — Harapan as hired killer —  because Umno, with or without Mahathir, was the sort of despised local thug who wreck cars and lives then goes round asking for protection money. You want him dead, therefore, and Mahathir is the inside man looking to sapu all of Umno’s accumulated wealth.

The beginning of Najib’s troubles was Mahathir who never understood what it is to respect nor to live and let live. He didn’t know how. Like Ahirudin Attan, like Kadir and like other apologists, his dogma proffered the idea that, since Malays are masters of Malaysia, then Umno can bloody do whatever it likes and however it likes. When Najib’s turn came, he pretty well said to Mahathir a/l Kutty:

Who the fuck are you to say I can’t take 2.6 bn? You’re not even Melayu!

Umno drugged and held captive under Mahathir’s Murti-Bing pill does make its own life easier, much like the character Naphta in Thomas Mann’s The Magic Mountain who despises freedom and condones dictatorship.

Today, Harapan, Lim Kit Siang et al repeat the same experiment, and doing it all over again.


The Najib-1MDB Combination Pill for Harapan



When you read something like this, by Terence Netto — ‘Anwar is arguably the most intellectual of politicians to have put himself up for leadership of this nation‘ — you should be able to tell right off that Terence is, even by his own definition of intellectual, drugged day and night on the Mufti-Bing pill.

The like of Terence and, long before him, Mahathir and Anwar, hogged the public spaces of Malaysia’s intellectual environment, like a pair of pliers clipped to your nose. Nobody else could breathe. Philosophical and policy ideas were not debated to improve the conditions in which life is lived but these are trolled out instead as despairing jeremiads about the fate of Malays and the entire Malaysian humanity.

We could have been such a great nation. We could have been a world showcase of Asia’s varied cultures and civilizations, the ancient coming into modernity, coming together as partners instead of enemies, so that, really, this era is now our last stab at turning around all that has gone wrong.


Read Full Post »

Mrs Brown thinks Malaysia is her kitchen…


 Mrs Brown waves her rolling pin at thambi Arul: “Out of my kitchen, you piece of Indian prick!”


Arul is never going to be prime minister, for better or for worse. After many years his party has one seat, won under the banner of PKR.

But S Arutchelvam is very welcome to his purist views. He is the sort of person who might have remained a consciencious (sic!) objector, refusing to take up arms against tyranny in the Second World War.

We understand the determination of those who are willing to always remain on the sidelines and tick off others for their imperfections – we need to be reminded always there are better and worse ways of doing things.

However, in times of clear and present danger, in the face of impending tyranny, such as Malaysia now encounters, the rest of the people have to make a decision and take a stand.

Parti Sosialis Malaysia (PSM) leader S Arutchelvam will be in the opposition today and he will be in the opposition tomorrow – what is worrying Malaysians is who is in government today and whether he will still be in government tomorrow.

If people do nothing like Arul, unless it is done by his chosen book, Najib will remain that person. — Mrs Clare Rewcastle Brown, Sarawak Report (alternate site).

You’ve got to hand it to that White piece of nanny from London: After calling the Malays ‘Comical Alis’, she has now turned to Indians, specifically Arul. Being white and English, she knows name calling better than all Pakatan Harapan Anglophiles stacked up, and these are her words:

Arul is “the sort of person, for better or for worse”…

  • a purist,
  • never prime minister material,
  • an objector,
  • refusing to take up arms against tyranny, and
  • person who do nothing.

This piece of white Mrs Brown, lecturing Malaysians about how to deal with Najib, draws from the same sort of culture and morality once used by her predecessors when they sailed into Asia, collected countries like they collect stamps, and now, without an empire, they still lecture from afar like an ISIS nut head screaming Caliphate, Hallelujah and Allahuakbar over the Internet.

Mrs Brown thinks she is the only one who knows the “better and worse ways of doing things” so that all her references to the state of Malaysia is about this — War!

  • clear and present danger,
  • impending tyranny,
  • take up arms.

And, to take up arms and all the other yada, yada, what does Mrs Brown proposes to do? Why, she says, you sign up Hitler against Germany!

What a piece of motherfucker. Perhaps she suffers repressed anger or, as a child, was sexually molested by a Catholic priest, a haunting memory without an outlet until now. Here she is below with the Hilterian fascist extraordinaire. Wonder what’s in it for her, now that she is running amok in the kitchen named Malaysia. God or gold? Or maybe both, for the English they always come together.


From Clare to RPK with love

Cease and Decease Order in Manchester

When white people — one English, one Welsh — fight, they bring in the wife and daughter, below.

Related image

Here’s a picture to send back to the kampung coconuts: Whoa, I went to omputih university la! Even at her age Sara is already looking like the mother, like Rosmah, very round. Look at those muscles! At that tummy! After the next elections, they would be indistinguishable.

Above, Exhibit A. Below, Exhibit B: evidences that to be Malay you aren’t necessarily Malaiyoo, so not always can you get away with duplicating the fake. In that situation, when Umno says, ‘No’, there is always Tan Keng Liang’s makan dedak, five stalks party.

Image result for sara petra kamarudin

What a fucked up Malaixia… and that Hannah Yeoh naughty-twinkle grin.

It’s the inevitable outcome when the stupid do politics, because you have to wonder what grand ideological design is she looking at, what great political philosophy can a coconut head possibly hold?

Read Full Post »

 The Fraudulent Life:

Sister in Christ, Sister in Deceit

Image result for Yeo Bee Yin

Chinese, fresh-faced, English-speaking, Anglophile, very political, evangelical and buck-toothed with a silver tongue, Yeo Bee Yin, above, represents a new urban generation of DAP insiders skilled in the extraordinary gifts of duplicity and lying. More than 12 years ago, Lee Kuan Yew had warned about the like of Yeo surfacing in Singapore society. But, in Malaysia and in 2013, nobody warned the Chinese electorate.


Mattala, Rail & the DAP


Why Yeo Bee Yin?

Selangor’s legislator in the DAP for Damansara Utama, Yeo, age 34, is representative of countless anti-China tirades that has come out primarily from the west. In her case, the rhetoric centers on accusations that China is out to undermine Malaysia’s welfare. Through China’s investments, the prime example of which is the East Coast Rail Link (ECRL), Yeo sees an insidious plot to defraud Malaysia — this is what her accusations amount to.

Yeo’s accusations are outrageous. It parallels how Mahathir Mohamad once painted the Chinese as usurpers of Malay power. As Mahathir is to Malay welfare, Yeo projects herself on media platforms and in public representations as the protector of Malaysian interest.

China has not, even until now, mounted any defense against such accusations, in the western media especially. Partly this is because of language inhibitions. Partly also because it doesn’t make much of nor does it take in Yeo’s kind of criticisms, so it simply isn’t bothered nor is it bothered to countermand the attacks. This attitude is not indifference. To respond is to, in the first place, assume China has some American/Anglophile beggar-thy-neighbor policies. But it doesn’t think in those terms. Americans and Anglos would do so naturally, such thinking being rooted in some ‘us versus them‘ dichotomy. (The origin of which is biblical: good v evil, God v Satan, Adam v Eve and so on.) From this way of thinking are the results mercantile in policies and actions, the world is a zero-sum game, my welfare can’t be yours, and so on.

China simply doesn’t think in these terms.

Authors at shuzheng (just two) don’t pretend, therefore, to speak for China. We have, however, as ‘ultra Chinese‘ — and China is motherland after all — live sufficiently long in the country and worked long enough with its authorities to know what goes into their thinking and ideas; they’re our compatriots. This post is also not a defense of Najib Razak’s government. They don’t need our defense, and we don’t presume to know what they want because, really, what they want cannot make us any worse off. (For students of economics, this is called the Pareto optimality). The way things work is this: we, China and us, present our proposals. Take it for whatever it is worth, deliberate on it and after that lets see how the idea might look, good or better or to be thrown out.

This post, split into three parts, starts with the ECRL and ends with Yeo Bee Yin in person because therein, with her, with the DAP and with Mahathir Mohamad are the sources of the poison they have introduced into public debate and then spread especially via Malaysiakini. That online publication is, to all intents and purposes, the Opposition’s most prominent public propagandists no matter how much Steven Gan says he is ‘independent’, whatever that is. Realistically, he can’t be independent when he depends so much of his salary, and the staff as well, on the Opposition, its supporters and their advertising. To underscore this point, you have only to look at the Christians who write for it, the like of Josh Hong and Liew Chin Tong for example.

As reader you are most welcome to contest the rebuttals against Yeo and the DAP. Only be specific and be clear, not meandering, and stay away from polemic. If you are not up to the task then finish reading, go back to your meal and run over in your mind the arguments. This, after all, is an obscure blog against the pervasive might of DAP online propaganda, a David versus Goliath contest, if you will.


Image result for Port of Hambantota

Related image



1. ECRL in DAP Christian Economics


The series of maps above begin with China’s shipping lanes and these are identical routes used by others, Japanese, Korean, European and American ships. For our purpose, we’ll ignore them.

Twenty odd years ago, China had in mind financing and building the Kra Canal. Straight, narrow and unencumbered, it still looks the better option today than the ECRL. The problems with Kra are security and after that economic viability and the two affect each other closely. A way to describe Kra is, it’s just a short, expensive canal. Given the precedent of the Suez and Panama canals, you can see why nothing much is going happen between the two ends of the Kra.

Now, move the Kra idea south, not north because it defeats the core purpose. Note this is about idea, not whether the thing is a canal or not a canal. Kelantan to Penang would have been nice, but nothing goes on in between except monkeys, the rain and the mountains and we should leave them alone. It would have been nice if Kuantan-Klang doesn’t sit at the widest part of the peninsula. But, and here is how Chinese thought processes differ from Anglo-Saxons and their Anglophile cultures: wide is good because where there is life, there are possibilities.

The starting point about the ECRL was, therefore, to make it more meaningful than Kra, that’s to say, better than simply to move goods, better than merely connect two coasts, east and west. This idea isn’t new, so that, more than merely acting as a physical connection, an infrastructure like the ECRL ought to have the ultimate purpose of harnessing and mobilizing human activity.

In that, there is actually a precedent.

China had the Grand Canal, 1,800 km long, first built in parts, then completed 1,500 years ago during the Sui dynasty and last rebuilt and refurbished during the Mings. Today it is still widely in use. Of course, a canal is not a rail line and there were no railroads then. But the idea contained in both is the same, inland transport of goods and people. The bonus from the endeavor was this: between the two ends, Beijing and Hangzhou, passing four provinces, hundreds of towns sprung up on both sides of the canal, the largest, and most famous and most populated today are Tianjin, Jining, Wuxi, Suzhou and Yangzhou.

The seed of the ECRL idea is identical. Win or lose, who knows. Success or failure is not for history to determine but lies in the hands of humanity.


Jinghang da yunhe 京杭大運河 is what we call the Grand Canal

Related image



Farther above, the Grand Canal passing Huai’an 淮安, south of Shanghai, where pound locks, later modernized, was in use 1,500 years ago to overcome differences in elevation. Immediately above, a narrow point at Tongli, 25 km south of Suzhou, where a canal offshoot, equivalent to a rail loop, passes homes and shops. And directly below, is the same canal idea updated: simply put in steel tracks and electric locomotion in place of running water.


ECRL in Bee Yin Racist Bigotry

This, choosing between infrastructure and people, is an eternal chicken and egg problem about which comes first. No resolution is ever possible so one does not waste time even thinking it.

But Yeo Bee Yin’s condemnation of the ECRL was entirely based on that supposition — and it’s just a supposition — the chickens (assuming, people) must come before the egg (infrastructure).

By way of diluting the pain in the dilemma, China offered to build and finance the ECRL, with repayment stayed for 7 years, then spread over 20 years from Year 8. Repayment is closely attached to economic activity and so to kick start that China also offered to locate industries in Kuantan’s Malaysia-China industrial park, buy those products, and commit to trans-shipment, some ships stop over, pick or unload cargo, and then move on.

China have no need for the ECRL and this is the fact of the matter. It could go with the Kra, failing which it could go on with life as normal, using Singapore, and China could better put to use the MYR46 bn elsewhere — especially back in China. That it is willing not only to finance and build, but also to seed key industries, offer markets and buy things, is a measure of its commitment to ensure project viability. China’s method is unlike conventional World Bank-style financing in which Malaysia as borrower gets X amount of money, almost always with political strings attached and, when that’s done, the project, make or break, is your problem. Only pay up or else….

Yeo Bee Yin compares the cost of shipping through Singapore versus the ECRL, a comparison based entirely on a Singapore newspaper report, which cannot be without vested interest. Take that as it may, how does Yeo know that the costing is accurate or even reliable? Here she is:

The Strait Times in its news report “Malaysia’s East Coast Rail Line touted as game changer” has given an interesting calculation based on the information from Malaysian government officials (see picture). It compares the cost of the route from Shenzhen to Port Klang via Kuantan Port and the ECRL and via Singapore and the Strait of Malacca. It was said that the Kuatan-ECRL option will take 135 hours at a cost of USD 56 per tonne of bulk cargo whereas Singapore-Strait of Malacca route will take 165 hours at a cost of USD 50 per tonne of bulk cargo.

The Kuantan-ECRL option is about 10% more expensive with a time saving of 30 hours. However, is the saving of 30 hours worth the additional cost in transport and the hassle of loading and unloading?

What’s wrong with the passage above?

  • (1) Yeo uses bulk cargo ships for comparison. Who says and where did she get the idea that ECRL is purely for bulk cargo?
  • (2) What about transporting people?
  • (3) Nine of ten ships passing Malacca, total 50,000 a year, are container ships, what about those? Each year about 16,000 ships anchor at Port Klang, of which 12,000 are container ships and only 1,600 are bulk cargo. Container and passenger vessels don’t count?
  • (4) What about the savings in transporting cargo northwards from Singapore?
  • (5) What about the economic activities along the entire route? Those don’t matter? For people to have a stab at bettering their lives, this don’t matter, only immediate dollar and cent calculations?
  • (6) Why is loading and unloading, Yeo says with just that tinge of condemnation, a “hassle”? Why, loading and unloading means plenty of ancillary facilities, cranes, buildings, warehousing, offices, the like; it means more construction and transport; it means jobs, lots of honest, dock work, feeding families and more families; it means a new fire station, a new hospital, schools and so on; it means a whole new life for hundreds of thousands. It means economic activity. Why is she against all that?

After all said and done, the central plank in Yeo’s bitching has to do with her short-sighted, myopic view of money, money, money. Never the future, never truly about people and about lives. Grant money (how cheap it is) as the terms in arbitration, she then uses railroad price comparisons with the poorest, cheapest countries on the planet, Ethopia and Bangladesh.

Further suppose we, Malaysia and China, cut the price down to Ethopia levels, would that still appease her?

Of course, Not, because her criticisms on the surface might be about morality and about getting value for money, but where is the economic welfare in that stance: Where’s the economic future, and development and progress? Dig a little deeper, you will find something else in those criticisms and these are pretty obvious: From Day One of her time in the DAP, she has been all about politics so that if her attacks on China makes no sense, it didn’t matter. Only setting up China as the target matters.

Then, push back far enough, you’d see in her politics her anti-Chinese racism and her imitation of the white man’s religiosity. Like Charles Santiago, like Josh Hong, and like every Christian evangelical DAP leader without exception, Yeo despises China because, there, Christians aren’t allowed to go about as they like, preaching voodoo and breaking up families into those ‘sinful’ and those ‘born again’ categories, or between those destined for heaven and those condemned to purgatory.

Add that to her anti-Malay, anti-Umno, anti-establishment stance, we can see where, as they say, she is coming from: like Hannah Yeoh, an utter, detestable fucking cunt, the like of who Malaysia has never before witnessed nor produced.


2. Mattala in Bee Yin Immorality


In this Malaysiakini report, and even before that, Yeo equated Sri Lanka’s Mattala airport to ECRL, one because it is completed, empty and useless, and the other because it is not built and, therefore, certain to be empty and useless. Put this way, it sounds strange but that’s what it boils down to. Because it is so bizarre you immediately sense something isn’t right, not only in Yeo’s arguments but also in that woman herself.

Sri Lanka’s Mattala airport was opened in 2013. Three years later its government offered to sell it, asking for interest to bid from as far away as London.

Twelve years earlier, in 2000 or thereabout, and under competition pressure from the binge of airport construction in Malaysia, Singapore and Hong Kong, Sri Lanka also wanted a second airport. China at the time was not in the picture.

In 2010 when the Chinese completed the Port of Hambantota, we still had no interest in Mattala for obvious logistical and practical reasons.

Hambantota port had to do with sea traffic not air. Against IATA advice, which the Chinese had seen, Sri Lanka pressed ahead with Mattala nevertheless. This was on the suspicion that what’s good for sea is also good for a neighbor airport. They were wrong. Measured against China’s economic interest, Mattala offered next to no benefit — for both parties. Sri Lanka is small and didn’t need two airports (look, too, at this map). If Mattala comes up, the old Colombo airport ought to go, as it happened with Subang. If not, Chinese airlines had to choose between flying either to Colombo or Mattala, and they have no commercial rationale nor benefit to do both.

In that time and having done the port, China, worried at giving offense, gave in to Mattala. After all, it merely required transferring the entire construction team to a nearby site. Its financial term structure was the same as that with Hambantota.

Since Mattala’s failure, every motherfucking western reporter, every Anglophile in Malaysia blames China. Mahathir Mohamad leads the way, talking about Chinese colonization but ignores the more than 2 million foreigners illegally in Malaysia. The DAP, eager to chart its own political, Malay baiting agenda, has in the person of Yeo Bee Yin to do the Mahathir work; she being completely duplicitous and venomous in spitting at China from the same platform. While the latter adopts bigotry and racism, Mahathir’s trademark politics, she employs Anglophile morality, DAP’s trademark politics.

Now, consider Hambantota. It is a sea port, also built by China, with Chinese finance and debt. As you would examine the ECRL, start with geographic location.

Related image

Image result for Port of Hambantota

Between Europe and Malacca passing the Indian ocean are two vast water stretches, the Arabian and the Andaman seas. Sri Lanka sits in the middle, a location necessary for refueling and to take in fresh water without the need of ships to detour because if you missed the port, your chance to restock is going to cost you. Every ship heading east or west passes within 9 nautical miles of port at the tip of Ceylon (below). Stand there, you can see those ships on a clear day so that it is Hambantota that is better than Colombo where few will stop unless to load and unload. Because of Hambantota’s strategic location, it produced the results in the traffic statistics further below.

Image result for Port of Hambantota

Image result for Port of Hambantota

Below is Yeo cited in Malaysiakini with her charge sheet against Mattala but omits Hambantota:

Malaysia must learn from Sri Lanka’s experience before it is too late, and ensure the feasibility of all mega projects are thoroughly studied and they are awarded through open tender, said DAP’s Damansara Utama assemblyperson Yeo Bee Yin today.

Citing the huge debts incurred by Sri Lanka after taking in money from China to fund underutilised mega infrastructure, Yeo said there are chances that reckless mega infrastructure constructions will send Malaysia into a deep debt trap.

(For an impartial, objective indictment read this, Why Mattala couldn’t take off.)

But the evidences Yeo presented are so incredulous as to be unbelievable:  (a) huge debts? (b) under-utilised mega infrastructure? (c) most of its revenue? (d) from ports to airports? (e) reckless? (f) a trap?

There are a total six accusations and not a single number; not one digit to back up the charges. Yet editors lapped up all that, cover up these fraudulent assertions as news, and she gets away with it, while Malaysiakini subscribers sympathetic to the DAP can gloat: ‘truly the party looks after our interests, and they are so clever’.

Mattala is, of course, a representation of selective prosecution by DAP, the thing it perennially rails against Malaysian authorities. Hambantota is the opposite of Mattala precisely because it is also a ‘mega infrastructure’, also build by China, also with its financing. But, looking at the port statistics for the first three operational years, you must wonder, where’s the recklessness, where’s the trap, where is the under-utilised?


Mattala isn’t a Chinese airport

Once Yeo Bee Yin chose to look at a Mattala but not Hambantota, she has no problem fitting a square peg into the round hole she has constructed. Indeed, not once, not even in her own blog where she has all the space to whine, has she referred to Hambantota that’s actually a part of the China Belt and Road initiative and where business is booming and debt repayment has presented no problem. So, why?

We know, why, of course.

Unlike ECRL or Hambantota, Mattala was never a Chinese offer; it was done at Sri Lanka behest but Yeo Bee Yin made sure it’s China that gets the blame. She needed justification for the script, already written by Mahathir: China as aggressor and as colonizer.

To do that she linked money spent needlessly on the now empty airport that, she says, could otherwise have been used for health and education. That statement is utter Bee Yin fart which George Orwell would characterize as ‘political language designed to make lies sound truthful and respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind.‘ How so? How is a lie made to sound truthful? How to see Yeo for what she truly is? The answer is simple: a statement like that is, at one level, a matter of pure statistical veracity:

  • (a) Have there been, in the last three, four years, a decline in Sri Lanka’s budget allocations towards health and education? Grant that there is, is that decline traceable to Mattala’s repayment as the cause?
  • (b) Have there been in that duration more children dying, more children ill, without school and undernourished? And, if there is, is it because of the budget decline and because of Mattala?

At another level, her argument can be gauged for its veracity by pure analytical logic: Is it rationally deductible and therefore universally applicable enough to see if she actually makes sense.

  • (a) If something is under-used and therefore morally reprehensible, then would Yeo throw open her under-used house to receive all those homeless in Damansara? She won’t off course.
  • (b) If something that’s empty is also useless, therefore no good, she should then splay wide her legs and permit her cunt to receive the penis of men, all strangers, all customers, at 50 quid per shot, and then to pass the money to the Damansara Utama Full Gospel church where she sometimes preaches. Again, she won’t off course — or maybe she has — even though Bee Yin’s cunt is nothingness but cavity and completely under-used. (Is she a virgin? So obsessed with money, perhaps she has a secret, prostitute life? Who knows….)

All this also says that Yeo would happily set the Principle of Utilitarianism as the determinant of spending money and of welfare, only if it is applied to other people. On herself, No, and this is characteristic of Christians: they preach good when it fits them.

In plain parlance, she is an utter self-centered bitch, and stupid to boot. Yet, she is endlessly bragging about her Cambridge degree; exactly like Khairy J and like Kamarul Zaman, both of who she detests. Her legs won’t be able to prop her up if she isn’t worshiped, below.

Drugged by the adulation (above), she boasted about it and posted the photo in her blog pages. In the kingdom of the blind, indeed the one-eyed is Queen. Her lying and duplicity hadn’t ceased since she joined the DAP five years ago.

But, how to stop her when the innocent youths are so taken in? Against her fraudulent character, she has absolutely no counterweight because nothing like her type has ever existed in Malaysian politics — until now.


Image result for SJK (C) Hwa Nan

3. Born Again Bee Yin:


Saved by the Son, Fucked by the Father


In hanyu pinyin Yeo Bee Yin’s name 杨美盈 reads, Yang Meiying. She has so far said nothing about her background other than born May 26, 1983 and growing up in Batu Anam, Segamat. Nor has she said anything about her parents. Like many ‘born again’ Chinese Christians, they tend to be ashamed of their pre-Christian infidel family past especially if Yeo’s parents never came round to accepting her Christian dogma that they be ‘saved’, like she was ‘saved’, like Hannah Yeoh was ‘saved’, and like ‘Save Malaysia’.

Not until 18 was, she said, ‘born again’ meaning ‘saved’ by, supposedly, some Son of God. That, although a white man’s voodoo, became her entry ticket to the DAP in 2012 because Ong Kian Ming, a fellow Christian, had got her in. (She says, instead, that it was the work of God. Transcript of her words, below.)

That her primary and secondary schools, SRJK (C) Hwa Nan (pix above) and SMJK Seg Hwa respectively, should deliver such a character as Yeo Bee Yin is not an aberration. Her virulent, poisonous character couldn’t have been the result of Chinese education that encourages self-cultivation, deep introspection and individual responsibility. What she wants to become is her decision and only she has to answer to it. This needs some elaboration, even for Chinese educated readers…

Thanks to its Confucian beginnings, its Daoist characteristics and its deep historical roots in China, Chinese education (meaning formal teaching and learning in hanzi) is the most secular, the most ‘liberal’ (in inverted commas, for lack of a better word) you will find anywhere in the world. Anywhere. Imagine, at age 7 or 10, you are reciting poetry that concerns a man drunk beside a stream under the moonlight (clip below). Where in the world can you find such a curriculum — drunkenness? Yet, perhaps because of this laissez faire regiment, layered over its strong analytical and reasoning applications, Chinese education also produces among the world’s finest scholars and the smartest children. (If in doubt, check Pisa scores.)

The clip above is one of Li Bai’s poems put to music. It’s about drinking. Nothing like this exist elsewhere, in any other culture.

In logical methods, the clip below talks of one, though the presenters don’t realize it. This method is called Multiplicity, in which terms and expressions in Chinese are so flexible they can be flipped around at will and still be understood. This has the effect of giving the speaker or writer multiple ways of thinking over the same thing, event, ideas or a mathematical problem.


For evidence into DAP’s notoriety and the people driving it, examine Yeo’s record, written in her own hand.

Bee Yin’s lunatic dogma. Below, her unreasoning, bible-inspired thinking will leave you speechless. Consider this:

If you walk in God’s Will and pray, He will do exceedingly abundantly. Time may delay the dream or desire in our heart. But if it’s God’s Will, He will give it to us at the right time in a right way.

In those lines you can see how Christianity has left her so fucked up. You can also tell how those lines were copied straight out from some biblical verses, chopped up, stirred and served. Replacing God with the word Allah then posted on a PAS website, you won’t be able to tell that it came from Yeo but from the son of Nik Aziz.

Where then, one might argue, is her independence of thought that Chinese education drills into student minds? It isn’t gone. On the contrary, she knows all about twisting and stirring if that’s necessary to advance the party’s Christian agenda. Below….

Bee Yin materialist, money-minded politics. By her own account, politics is not, in the conventional definition, about bringing together the disparate and disconnected parts of a society to serve the whole. Instead it is a matter of profit and loss. On the ‘Christianity Malaysia’ website from which the passage was extracted, they called Yeo (and don’t laugh) ‘savvy‘:

As a businessperson, I was thinking of maximizing my opportunity cost. So, I thought about joining politics,” said the savvy-minded Bee Yin who was open to the prospect of joining politics.

Bee Yin’s cocksure righteousness. Like her churches out to save Malaysia, Yeo, herself suffused in her own conceited self-righteousness, actually believes she is anointed by some voodoo on-high. Here again is Christianity Malaysia  with its interview. God, it said, had picked her up from among 27 million souls, Hallelujah!

(A DAP) leader (Ong Kian Ming?) told her that if she wanted to make an impact, she should join them. (So) God flung open the door and she was offered to join as a representative of her political party.

Bee Yin’s racist, anti-Malay politics. No God was needed to fling open a door for her. DAP alone was enough. It completely fitted her political prejudices, her condescending attitude (“they couldn’t even speak proper English“), her inflated sense of superiority and her bitterness at Malays. DAP’s Ong Kian Ming, Hannah Yeoh, et al made sure they fed her racism, fed her bigotry and her jealousy. In her own words:

(A) small incidence in the (Petronas) education unit made me utterly disappointed with how things work in Malaysia. While waiting at the lounge, I met two returning scholars from Nottingham University, UK. I started to talk to them. To my very surprise, they couldn’t even speak proper English! After a while, an education unit guy came and met them, I accidentally saw their results – one of them get second class lower and the another one a third class. That blasted my mind. Here I was, with a CGPA of 3.95/4.00 begging only for 1 year of deferment, not even a scholarship, but was denied. Here they were, spent 4 years in the UK fully sponsored and yet graduated with at most, mediocre results.

Bee Yin irrationality. Things that pleases her can be explained by God; but bad things happened because this is Malaysia. Yeo, again and, would you believe this, God, known the world over for only listening and never speaking, actually spoke to her:

Going to Singapore, I told God that I am not going far. But He told me, ‘isn’t it the same for you if you go to Singapore? Why don’t you just stay overseas?’ So, I started my social marketing media company … Everything would fall into place in the right timing. We just need to pray, work hard and wait patiently for his Sovereign Will to be done in this nation….

That passage is revealing in two aspects: (a) It shows that sitting in the Selangor State Assembly isn’t merely a motherfucking whore but also an utter lunatic, talking and listening to some non-existent thing, thanking God one minute for favoring her then turns around to break her bond, doing the exact opposite of her God’s direction given her. (b) “Sovereign Will be done in this nation”? If that is not confessional evidence of a DAP Christian agenda in Malaysia, what is?


Bee Yin & Hannah Yeoh: Sisters in Deception



Finding good about Hambantota couldn’t be more difficult than finding fault with Mattala. But Yeo knows what to look for, what to pick out, and what to speak out against.

Christians are hypocrites? Of course, it’s their DNA.

Opportunists? Of course. Look at how they celebrated Mahathir in Penang, the man Yeo herself has not too long ago railed against, over and over again. Her diatribes are so heavily peppered in the language of Hadi Awang, the two are almost indistinguishable so that you have to asked: Is she any different from this great Islam fraud?

Why, therefore, shouldn’t DAP Christians be wiped out? For one thing, it will Save Malaysia.

These detestable DAP Christian cunts (Yeo Bee Yin, left, and Hannah Yeoh), so relentless at preaching good over evil and then, when you don’t look into their accusations closely, they commit the same evil they rail against others time and again. Should they take over government or influence its future, it’s almost guaranteed they will commit the same thing as the things ISIS did to the Iraqi town of Qaraqosh.


The photos below illustrate Yeo Bee Yin’s DAP and the evolution of its opportunism — the in-your-face Anglophile culture, PAS, Christian agenda, Mahathir, in that order — and its predatory habits and its hypocrisy, all of which put together is without parallel in Malaysian political history.

Seeing these photos you begin to see why Malays so detest these DAP pigs, even for Mahathir when he doesn’t need them.

Image result for pas yeo bee yin





Like Gerakan’s Tan Keng Liang: buck-toothed, a shrieking monkey, Christian, an utter motherfucker. With the like of her around, Allah help us….


Read Full Post »


Malaysia has wasted too much time going after Najib Razak with the truncheon named 1MDB. Not that getting rid of Najib is unimportant but because past results from expending the effort have been limited and often counter-productive.

Out of USD15 bn that 1MDB borrowed (see other entries in these pages), about USD10 bn was raised offshore and in US bank notes. Of this 10 bn, no more than 2 bn would have ‘genuinely’ been used by Malaysia, paradoxically, to buy its own assets. The remaining sums were, plainly said, looted.

Getting back the remaining USD8 bn is not a lost cause because, think about it, how much can a man spent in a day or a year or ten years: give 1 bn to Jho Low, 1 bn to Najib, 1 bn  to Arabs & others, plus expenses. Eight bn less 3 is 5 bn lying around, but where, what form, and in whose name?

Because of sheer numbers, any high cost of recovery still makes the effort worthwhile. Even in Low’s hands or in Najib’s, much of the money can be recovered because those sums are lodged in individuals, companies and assets such as subscriptions in funds. The efforts may take time but the financial rewards are worth it especially since USD1 buys MYR4.50 today compared to MYR3.20 six, seven years ago. Therein is already a forex profit.

The US could directly trace USD1.5 bn to many types of assets which are recoverable because of its forfeiture laws. It is a starting point but not good enough because Singapore is making no such attempts. Nor the Swiss, it appears. For example, between Yak Yew Chee and Yeo Jiawei they creamed off more than USD40 million and this sum have to exist; you name it, cash or non-cash assets? These assets, Singapore says, will be forfeited (it has such a law for it) but to who does the money go eventually, or where and when? It doesn’t say, that rascal of a state.

The money belongs to Malaysia and must be return to us. Similarly, hundreds of millions in USD lodged by Low in funds also belong to Malaysia and so, too, Najib’s money dissipated to various parties, whether in Malaysia or out it doesn’t matter. Those Arabs, princes and scammers combined, have our money as well and they must be made to cough it out.

A full accounting of 1MDB assets, their whereabouts and so on would need to be carried out but independent of government and Najib. This is possible.

To begin this process of accounting and recovery, Malaysia must first step off from looking at and dealing with 1MDB as a truncheon for use against Najib. Zaid Ibrahim, Mahathir Mohamad and Tony Pua have many times treated it as such. The reality is not so, and some of the reasons are spelled out below. Furthermore, if the political parties are serious about saving Malaysia they should be, for many good reasons, the first to step off the block in this recovery process.

Getting back USD10 bn, or even just USD1 bn, will invariably affect Najib. But this process cannot even begin if Malaysia does not or cannot disabuse itself of the notion that 1MDB is a victim of fraud. It is the fraud. As financiers would say, a special purpose vehicle (SPV) for fraud that the world has never before seen — and probably ever.

To disabuse ourselves of that notion, begin with understanding things: the background and the drivers in 1MDB’s creation, the mechanics of setting it up, its influences, why and how, the financial system, why most of the cash are lodged in Singapore and Switzerland but not the US. We, too, must understand the international laws related thereto: why is Singapore and the US doing different things to 1MDB. Also understand why Jho Low used private banks for much of 1MDB transactions and not, say, HSBC or Citibank. The answers are below.

Malaysia rely too much on newspaper reports to formulate ideas, make resolutions and pass judgment. This is dangerous: Example, the like of Bloomberg and Reuters have endlessly referred to 1MDB as a sovereign wealth fund, even now, and this long-standing, prestige badge once tied to 1MDB have been deceitful and most disadvantageous. It prompted worldwide subscriptions to 1MDB’s USD bond issuance not once but three times! It helped 1MDB get away with raising billions more in bank debt then squirreling away the money. Being a sovereign wealth fund, backed by Malaysia state power, have prompted no less than eight international banks, in Singapore alone, to aid 1MDB in its fraud by transferring money around the world and by acquiring other financial assets. All eight banks have since been penalized by Singapore.

The time has come for Malaysia to stand up and say stop, no more going around in circles: We want our money back! The posting below is the first stab at this effort.




Why Singapore?

Private banking developed in Europe, Switzerland in particular, from commercial or industrial or retail banks during the tumultuous decades between World War I and WWII when they helped many families and individuals preserved their wealth which, otherwise, might have fallen into the hands of governments, the Nazis especially.

The 140-year-old Swiss bank BSI (now defunct and renamed EFG) in Singapore is such an exclusive private bank. Exclusive because some commercial banks like HSBC offers private banking from within its range of businesses; they are the Johnny-come-lately. Also exclusive because, to open a private bank account in Hong Kong, requires satisfying certain conditions, such as personal background checks and USD1 million in minimum deposit which must be maintained.

Private banks are almost non-existent in — dare we say — third rate cities such as KL. But, as Singapore’s economy grew and wealth accumulated, a need for it grew, especially involving privacy, personal service, speed, and informality. Jho Low could toss around USD1 bn in a matter of days. (To appreciate this fact, try remitting USD1,000 from KL to Singapore via Maybank.) Falcon Bank which belongs to IPIC (remember Falcon? remember IPIC?) was an attempt to imitate this facet of banking; too many rich towel heads, you see.

Then something happened — 9-11 in 2001 — so that in this Era of International Terror a slew of tougher conditions grew for handling money, especially private wealth. These tougher conditions, collectively known as Compliance, issued under UN auspices, were especially placed on banks’ internal processes when handling large sums of monies. For the Compliance to be binding, laws were passed or were updated stringent so that being a banker might not be as fashionable as you once assumed. Before, when you fuck up you are fired. Today, you go to jail, on top of your criminal record. Yvonne Seah who once worked as deputy to Yak Yew Chee, BSI managing director, therefore taking his instructions, is one such casualty.

All the above is by way of background that drives Singapore’s jailing of its four bankers, its penalty fines imposed on eight banks, and closure of two, BSI and Falcon. Singapore, however, didn’t shut down Standard Chartered nor was its MD hauled before the court although, on behalf of the fraudulent company named Blackstone, it moved around more than half of the USD790 million that left 1MDB. It didn’t fine Goldman Sachs through which, and within 12 months, 1MDB got USD6.5 bn. It merely banned Tim Leissner from working there.

There are valid legal and expedient reasons for what Singapore did. In particular, it’s too faraway from the explosions in New York or London or Syria or Afghanistan to feel the compunction or the necessity to be so stringent. There is also an overriding reason to explain Singapore’s actions that we shall return to. For the moment, the purpose of mentioning the above is for a perspective so that you don’t place too much faith — or hope or bets — on reports (from Malaysiakini or Straits Times or blogger Syed Akbar Ali) that, because of Singapore, there’s even a “noose” tightening around the neck of Najib Razak. This ‘noose’ thing may be useful for political or electoral purposes but that’s it.

Illustrating the point above is Yeo Jiawei who is probably the last of the Singapore bankers to be jailed. Of five convictions of its bankers who handled 1MDB money, only Yeo was the most closely connected to Jho Low. His convictions also got the most jail time, total 7 years:

  • 30 months for witness tampering, December 2016;
  • 24 months for cheating BSI, July 12, 2017; and
  • 30 months for ‘money laundering’, also July 12, 2017.

Only the last one appears directly related to 1MDB, but the connection is doubtful. This doubt can be seen in the Yaw Yew Chee case (he got 18 weeks last November, which means he’s out today). There money laundering fell under the law Corruption, Drug Trafficking and Other Serious Crimes and under which Serious Crimes affected (i) ‘Cross Border Movements of Physical Currency and Bearer Negotiable Instruments, Regulations 2007’ and (ii) ‘Cash Transaction Reports 2014’. Money laundering is, therefore, a generic term that newspapers and their reporters conveniently employ but never bother to specify. The US defined it, briefly, as ‘placing “dirty” money in a service company, where it is layered with legitimate income and then integrated into the flow of money‘. It is this ‘layering’ that is illegitimate which meant that, although the operative word is “dirty” — which covers extortion, insider trading, drug trafficking, and illegal gambling — whether the money being ‘layered’ into the system was originally dirty or not dirty becomes irrelevant.

Singapore’s convictions were for failure to legally comply with preventive methods of laundering; in another word, Compliance.

Why only bankers?

Looked at in this way, Singapore’s money laundering affected only people in finance (bankers, insurers, stock brokers) because only they could be involved in the ‘layering’. Jho Low, on the other hand, doesn’t work in a bank and, therefore, doesn’t have the power nor, therefore, the liability involved. Once Singapore didn’t care for whether the money is dirty or clean, then many of its financial employees could easily have landed in court. Example: In October 2012, almost immediately after 1MDB’s USD1.75 bn bond issuance via Goldman Sachs, Jho Low used USD790 mn of it for subscription-purchases into:

  • the Christenique Investment Fund, USD291 million;
  • the SHS Enterprise Emerging Market Fund, USD76 million.

(Note: Not widely seen in Malaysia, these ‘Funds’ are so named to designate money pooled from various places and sources around the world then used by its managers to, in turn, buy equity or shares or bonds, private or government. EPF is such a manager of pooled funds, except it doesn’t directly operate such funds but passes its workers’ savings into these funds. Profit (but not losses) from these funds are shared between the fund manager and the subscriber such as EPF or Jho Low, who may be operating on behalf of 1MDB. The KL stock market typically receives buy-sell orders from these funds.)

If BSI and other banks were guilty of money laundering, regardless of whether money is ‘dirty’ or clean then, technically, these fund managers are equally liable in the laundering process of ‘layering’. Yet, lawyers for the bankers never offered this defense — that there was nothing illicit in the money — and this is because people like Yak and Yvonne were charged with offenses like forgery and cheating. Yak, for instance, drew up a BSI letter vouching for Jho Low as to the USD110 million — which is a part of 1MDB’s USD790 million received in October 2012 — deposited in his Selune company account with the Swiss Rothschild Bank. (This is the Compliance part of the receiving bank). There were several things wrong with the letter to the Rothschild CEO (again, don’t think highly of bankers, they can be pretty stupid): it required two signatories but only Yak signed; it has to be issued on a template, it wasn’t; it had to be cleared by the bank’s legal department, it wasn’t.

Although written about as a money laundering case, none of these facts presented in court that got conviction had any bearing on money laundering of money, especially if it is illicit. It was, simply, a failure in Compliance. With these bank convictions, you can see why the DOJ didn’t follow Singapore’s criminal prosecutions in the US. On top of combing through millions of emails and hundreds of thousands of correspondence pages, there is especially the difficulty, no, near impossibility, of:

  • (a) proving 1MDB money itself was originally obtained from illicit activities, which it was not; it was a bond issue gotten via Goldman Sachs;
  • (b) proving ‘layering’, that is, money in, money out, and routed through various channels to disguise the source of illicit money; which was not because the 1MDB money left for Singapore and Switzerland as soon as bond proceeds turned up in 1MDB’s US bank accounts;
  • (c) proving there was, as in the Singapore’s cases, forgery and non-Compliance conduct but these had little opportunity to happen because most transactions happened outside.

In the US, the next best thing to do was forfeiture, on the grounds that the 1MDB money, or a large portion of it, didn’t go to its intended purpose. Those are examples of fraudulent conduct, not money laundering. The Swiss has the best description for 1MDB: it is a ponzi scheme (ponzi definition here). This meant that 1MDB itself is a ponzi company and not a victim that Singapore has begun to paint it.

A Singapore-Najib Conspiracy?

We now return to Yeo Jiawei and Jho Low both of who have been accused by Singapore of looting 1MDB like it were a hapless ‘victim‘. This line of argument is highly presumptuous as if Low alone influenced the project and loan decisions, Low secured money for 1MDB, Low instructed 1MDB officers, including Najib, where to send the monies. In short, Low is more powerful than Najib.

Ignore for a moment these absurdities but to say 1MDB is the victim of Jho Low is as good as suggesting that the company along with its officers, namely Sharol Halmi, Casey Tang, Jasmine Loo et al are innocent of any complicity in the fraud, direct and indirect. Singapore’s assertion isn’t just false but also contradictory because some 1MDB senior officers have disappeared while Casey and Jasmine were, at one time, wanted by Bank Negara. In Singapore, Yeo is on trial but it was Low who, out of the blue, was singled out by prosecutors as if he was on trial, and that’s without even charging him for any crime. This is clearly an abuse of law.

The greater, sinister part is this: By declaring 1MDB as victim, Najib is exonerated, in exactly the same fashion as Apandi Ali had exonerated him. Being victim, Najib didn’t ask for any of this, money comes and go, he knows nothing, and all this is a conspiracy to topple him.

The inference of victim is this: Pity 1MDB, looted to the hilt, not once but repeatedly, and it didn’t suspect a thing. Poor fella.

Singapore could’ve just gone on cleaning up its own house, clearing it of its rogue bankers, redeem its clean reputation, and leave it at that. Instead it has deliberately gotten itself into the 1MDB dragnet, stepping right into it. Question, therefore: Has Singapore made a deal with Najib not only to get him out from under the pincers of worldwide investigations, but especially to declare him innocent of all alleged offenses? If so, what is in it for Singapore?

In contrast to Singapore, the DOJ depositions not only made clear that Najib Razak received financial benefits from the 1MDB scam, but  Jho Low was only one of numerous players. He couldn’t have succeeded without the support of financing, of numerous bankers, of Goldman Sachs, of Arabs, of Saudi Arabia and UAE and of two top IPIC executives, indeed the whole world and the entire financial system in which Singapore was representative. The scam didn’t just take place once, in a single strike, but went on and on for five years.

The claim that 1MDB is the victim is also mischievous because, if Singapore is right, then it is like saying Low received those monies in the exact same, mysterious manner as the MYR42 mn going into Najib’s AmBank account: 1MDB didn’t give it to me; I don’t know who the fuck left it there, or why?

How the Ponzi scheme?

Farther below is a table which details, step-by-step, the first 1MDB fraud involving the company and the Arab PetroSaudi International Ltd (PSI), creating 1MDB-PSI. In the table are salient features of the fraud, which goes to show Singapore is absolutely wrong to exonerate 1MDB in the way it did.

1MDB, and not Good Star, is the key, or central, to unlocking monies that were borrowed then taken out.

Good Star was the first big recipient of the outward transfers of MYR5 bn raised via AmBank with ‘Islamic’ bonds. After Good Star, the money was redistributed to various parties on a modus operandi that ran like this: 1MDB transfers to > Recipient company #1 > Other companies, #2 to #n then to > Individuals (including Najib, Jho Low et al).

This same method was repeated in every fraud that followed 2009, in 2012, in 2013 and 2014. Aabar BVI simply replaced Good Star as the primary Recipient company #1. The MYR5 bn Islamic bond issued through AmBank in 2009 was replaced by USD6.5 bn borrowed via the Goldman Sachs in 2011 and 2012.

In all cases, connivance, forgery, false representation and plain lying started from the top and in the heart of 1MDB:

  • As late as 2016, Sharol Halmi and 1MDB board continued to say PSI owned Good Star although this was later discovered by the Parliament’s PAC as false.
  • 1MDB continued to give money to PSI, USD2 bn in 2010 and 2011, although by then PSI had next to nothing to show other than what it produced on paper, and the 1MDB-PSI jv was turning belly up. That is, PSI had been talked up all along.
  • Between 2015 and 2016, Arul Kanda continued to deal with Aabar BVI and al-Husseiny, accepting every word of the latter, in spite of the suspicious circumstances of the company’s set-up.


1MDB Ponzi Distribution Model

Below is the proto-model of the 1MDB ponzi scheme; it was actually launched (officially) by Najib Razak no less:

  • Fraud #1: 1MDB-PetroSaudi International
  • Total amount: USD1 bn from 1MDB to and for PetroSaudi JV.
  • 1MDB source of fund: AmBank bond issue, MYR5 bn, Aug 2009

Remittance instruction date

Approving 1MDB officer

(Ostensible) Purpose of Remittance

Remitting account/bank

Recipient account/bank

Remitted amount

Final destinations


Tan Keng Chee ED & Sharol Halmi CEO

Payment, 1MDB to PSI

Deutsche MY

1MDB-PSI/JP Morgan, Swiss


Tarek Obaid, ‘Prince’ Turkey, others

2009/09/30 – 10/02

Tan Keng Chee & Sharol Halmi

Payment, 1MDB to PSI (which owns Good Star)

Deutsche MY

Good Star/RBS Coutts, Zurich


Jho Low, Najib, others

2011 May – Oct


Muradbaha financing (2010)

Deutsche MY

Good Star/RBS Coutts, Zurich



Total outward remittance amount by 1MDB



Postscript: The Dao of Finance

The penultimate point in the essay which didn’t make clear or specific is borrowed from Li Lin Seet, Jho Low’s man in Singapore: it is called ‘gaming the system‘. That is, if Najib Razak and Low can, at our expense, make a fortune from loopholes within the system without getting caught, then so can we in the reverse.

Call it the Dao of Finance: the high and low define each other, the winners and the losers cause each other.

Restated, it means we can make a fortune with some or all of the money the two men took and, in the process, impoverish both and turning them into dogs and paupers. We fail in getting back the money, Malaysia loses, and this admits they are smarter than us, even collectively as a nation. Instead of beating our chest and shouting curses at the two men, it is better to act — only the will is require — because it can be done.


River flows … and never returns. Never.



Read Full Post »

Older Posts »