Sunday, March 28, 2010

Malaysia Should Be Embarassed

Malaysia Should Be Embarassed


Malaysia Should Be Embarassed

Posted: 28 Mar 2010 01:56 PM PDT

The first thing to say is that – even allowing for cultural and religious sensitivities – Malaysia should be embarrassed that it is threatening to send a man to prison for consensual sex with another adult. But there are also considerable doubts about the case against Mr Anwar. The evidence against him is thin and the political context is very clear.

The government of Najib Razak sees Mr Anwar as a threat and has been trying to wreck his political career, using a variety of tactics. Aside from the criminal charges that have been brought against the opposition leader, Mr Anwar has been crudely smeared as a tool of "Jewish" interests. Asked once whether Mr Anwar would make a good prime minister, Mahathir Mohammad, the former prime minister of Malaysia, replied: "He would make a good prime minister of Israel." A modern state should be ashamed of exploiting racism and homophobia to head off a legitimate political challenge.

But it is not just the Malaysian government that deserves to be chastised. Malaysia is an important market and an influential voice in the Islamic world. As a result, western governments that claim to place human rights at the centre of their foreign policy have been very circumspect in their comments on the Anwar trial. Respect for the courts, for national sovereignty and for cultural difference are all worthy ideas. But sometimes, it is important to speak clearly. The trial of Anwar Ibrahim is a disgrace and an embarrassment to Malaysia.

Read the Full Article from the Financtial Times HERE


Ringgit Not Wanted!

Posted: 28 Mar 2010 01:33 PM PDT

Prime Minister Najib was posed a question in the recent Credit Suisse Asian Investment Conference on the Malaysian Ringgit, on the plans of his government in reconverting the capital control and freeing up the Ringgit. Najib commented that Malaysia was "rather prudent on this issue and was not in a great hurry to make the Ringgit fully convertible".

Under capital control our Ringgit is not accepted out of Malaysia and if you were to travel it is suggestted that you carry enough foreign currencies like the USD or the destination currency of your travel as it will be difficult to convert your Ringgit and foreign banks will not take your Ringgit. And you will have to seek out "street changers" or money changers and will have to find the right one who will take your Ringgit and when you find the right changer, it will be at a very much discounted rate.

Some Malaysians are still unaware that the Ringgit is of no use out of Malaysia and foreign banks will not change your Ringgit, as most will just use their credit cards but there are times when credit cards are no good and when you need cash of the local currency. Thanks to Mahathir capital control was imposed since 1998 which have effectively retarded the Ringgit. And which is reflected in the fall in Foreign Direct Investment since capital control was imposed.

In my last trip to Hong Kong when Najib was attending the Asian Investment Conference, i was attending a meeting in an International Bank and had wanted to find out about the latest exchange rate for the Ringgit which has surprisingly been strenthening but to my utter dissapointment was that not only does the bank not take the Ringgit, they can't even offer me the latest exchange rate for the Ringgit. The reply was that they don't keep track of the Ringgit. In the global scenario, Malaysia is becoming more and more irrelevant and have been disregarded and are out of consideration. Other than our commodities of Oil and Gas and Palm Oil, we are not of primary consideration for other investments.

Under capital control, it is sometime seen to be a form of currency manipualtion and can be manipulated. Capital control as a form of counter measure can be considered in time of crisis but prolonged controls will bear no beneficial economic benefits as it is only a reflection of the weakness of the government fiscal policies.


Kepenting Melayu Marhein atau kepentingan Melayu korporat?

Posted: 25 Mar 2010 05:51 AM PDT

Apabila ada percanggahan antara kepenting Melayu Marhein dan kepentingan Melayu korporat, apakah pendirian Ahli Parliament Umno? Itu merupakan soalan pokok yang dikemukakan oleh Jeyakumar Devaraj.


Malaysian scholars, be more critical, please!

Posted: 20 Mar 2010 09:00 AM PDT

PKR deputy president Syed Husin Ali has taken issue with scholars who failed to provide critical analysis of what ails the country out of fear.


Perlis Speaker, stick to the book!

Posted: 23 Mar 2010 05:23 AM PDT

Perlis state assembly member Yip Sun Onn must be commended for resigning from his Titi Tinggi seat over his differences with the MCA/BN leadership.


Tak mahu!

Posted: 23 Mar 2010 07:58 AM PDT

As long as key ingredients are missing, the 1Malaysia concept will remain a farcical gimmick, says Tota.


Malaysia's migrant hell-holes

Posted: 27 Mar 2010 09:00 AM PDT

Angeline Loh looks at Malaysia's 'migrant hell-holes' – the immigration detention camps, where evidence of cruel, degrading and inhuman conditions is overwhelming. 


Accountability and language: Obfuscation in action

Posted: 22 Mar 2010 03:10 AM PDT

Stop paying consultants who are parrots for corporate-speak, and let's really get some meaning back into words like 'accountability' and 'transparency' and 'justice', asserts our correspondent.


Contextualising "The Fajar Generation"

Posted: 18 Mar 2010 09:00 AM PDT

We reproduce the foreword to the Fajar Generation book, penned by Lim Kean Chye, who describes the fascinating political backdrop of that period.  


Blues over education system

Posted: 26 Mar 2010 09:00 AM PDT

Over the long-term real change will be facilitated through a revamp of the education system which, as Teacher's Blues describes, now falls desperately short of expectations.


“I am not re-writing history. I am writing history.”

Posted: 17 Mar 2010 09:00 AM PDT

From left: Poh Soo Kai, Lim Kean Chye and Tan Kim Hong

The launch of a book, The Fajar Generation, about a group of idealistic university students in the tumultuous setting of Singapore in the 1950s. 


Rising social inequality in Malaysia

Posted: 20 Mar 2010 02:58 AM PDT

It is always important to ask the key question: who in society is benefiting from economic growth? This question, unfortunately, is not much asked these days. Instead, the obsession is only with growth, writes Toh Kin Woon.


Soi Lek the President, Ka Ting degrades himself.

Posted: 28 Mar 2010 12:06 PM PDT

Chua Soi Lek wins with 906 votes. From today he is the President for MCA until the annual General Assembly when another round of election will be concluded again eleven months from now.

At about 6pm a friend, one of the delegates jokingly sent me SMS message "we chose a good 'performer' as the president" and instantaneously I knew that Soi Lek won the contest.

Whether we like it or not we must congratulate him for being the victor in the intense 3 corner fight with Ong Tee Kiat and Ong Ka Ting.

With his win Dr Chua Soi Lek has made a good calculated move to get the Presidency by resigning from the Deputy President together with sufficient number of CC members to make way for yesterday's EGM and subsequently elected as the President.

His tenacity and endless effort made him the elected President and MCA is going for a big change; not too sure for a good or for a bad change.

Apparently his record of taped sex scandal does not circumvent his aspiration to lead MCA as the delegates accept that issue as normal and treat it as non-issue at all.

BUT what I heard clearly is the reaction of the ordinary public was quite mixed and the heavy loss by the incumbent Ong Tee Kiat was taken as a big surprise.

The public at large were hoping that Tee Kiat to win and defend his position as he is outward and noticeable in his struggle to unveil the truth surrounding the PKFZ issue.

The result simply indicates that the delegates were not interested in wanting to see the PKFZ issue settled in front of naked eyes of the tax payers. The 12 billion ringgit public funds going down the drain is of no consequence the MCA delegates.

The public are some what disappointed as they now feel that the covering up of the PKFZ issue will be expedient and many of those MCA leaders involved both the previous and the current line up will be able to sleep soundly.

"It's the trend set these days that all component parties in the BN are all led by distrusted leaders and don't feel bad bro" said a friend who sat with me when the results were leaked an hour ahead of the announcement.

Another friend said, "biasalah! Kalau korap mesti menang zaman sekarang ni. I knew the moment Tee Kiat expressed his desire to bongkar PKFZ dia akan mati politiknya! Semua serupa dalam BN. One cannot be truthful for political survival lah!"

Ong Ka Ting became the unnecessary victim of circumstances as he is now looked upon as the apparatus of unscrupulous individual in MCA and his (Ka Ting) credibility is crushed and flattened for taking position in the party's squabble and bicker.

His regally and grandly retirement live now is now tainted and soiled. It would take a long while to heal and he would be licking his own wound all alone.

Lim Ah Lek who encouraged him to offer his candidacy won't be around him to console him for his 'unexpected' defeat.

Some commentators perceive him as the real spoiler and the respect for him his certainly falling and dipping to the eyes of the public especially the retiring community.

Ka Ting should be spending his time playing a bit of golf and be active in social and charity works which is more meaningful.

After all some people say, he has loads of money to do that.


Thanks………………………………………………….Aspan Alias


Thanks Pete,the evil woman and the Prime Minister of Malaysia considering you need to be a bastard (metaphorically speaking) to be the Prime Minister

Posted: 28 Mar 2010 09:08 AM PDT

"It's a male-dominated society. If I ask my wife, Rabri Devi, to vote for a particular party, do you think she will vote for another party?." Of all the critiques of the Women's Bill this chauvinistic exposition by RJD strongman Lalu Prasad sticks out. Its medieval logic angers more than just feminists, it actually makes the case for adopting the historic legislation stronger. But then at least Lalu cannot be faulted for talking through his political hat. For eight years between 1997 and 2005 Lalu was the power behind the throne in Bihar, ruling by proxy through his wife who was deftly eased into the CM's chair while he was being investigated for corruption. His every wish was Rabri's command. Needless to say no one has ever upheld Rabri's elevation to the CM's post as an advertisement for women empowerment. But the Bill might just be.
It is from all accounts a persuasive argument for delivering women from the clutches of 'entrenched patriarchies'. But while it might free the polity of one aberration it might perpetuate quite another. For, written into the Women's Bill is the worrying impetus towards concentrating greater power in the hands of party bosses – a select coterie of patrons.
According to the Bill, every three elections each constituency will be reserved once for a woman. Political parties will have to find a woman candidate to field from a constituency occupied by a male MP. And the MP who has to surrender his seat may not have a choice in the matter but to obey the party's writ. The only way he can dodge the axe is by fielding his kin from the seat so as to rule by proxy. This is not ideal on two counts. One, power will flow in a closed loop benefiting only those women who are part of the existing political structure and second the party boss who sanctions this cozy arrangement will exercise total discretion. The situation will reverse when it's the turn of women candidates to relinquish a seat in favour of a male MP once the constituency is de-reserved. In the long run MPs, male or female, will be at the mercy of the whims of party high priests.
Of course this is not to say that it is beyond parties to act with a degree of equity when the situation demands. One only has to look to the BJP's recent decision to not issue a whip when the Women's Reservation Bill comes up for vote in the Lok Sabha. By allowing its MPs to vote according to their conscience the BJP has preserved their democratic freedom to act according to their personal conviction. At another level it also signals a welcome departure from the tendency of the party top brass to impose its will upon the party rank and file at the cost of quashing inner party democracy.

this is what that evil huband snatcher did to a pregnant woman which the IGP IS VERY CONCERN


Politicians can learn about change from rosmah the lady who

change her life by snatching husbandAtlantuya wants Prime Minister as company.She is feeling lonely because Razak Baginda jilted her to pursue his Ph.D in England.Her children in Mongolia still thinking that their mother will come back someday with lot of cookies and sweets from Malaysia . Unfortunately, PM did not mentioned about sweets and cookies for them yesterday.

FACE TO FACE THE TAXIDRIVER PICKED GHOST Atlantuya

Atlantuya RELATES TO HIM WHAT REALY HAPPEN

readmore click this below

Do you know that 51% of registered voters are women (at least when I last checked maybe three or four years ago) and that 53% of women come out to vote on Polling Day? This means women are more responsible than men. But are 50% of the Members of the Malaysian Parliament women?
No need to answer that. It is not even 30%.
In some countries, it is the law that 30% of the candidates in an election must be women (I think it is one of the Scandinavian countries but maybe someone can correct me here). Malaysia, in fact, should pass a law in Parliament that at least 30% of the candidates in an election must be women. Instead, the Malaysian Parliament wastes its time…well, you know what I mean, I have already written about this matter this week (about how two weeks have passed and nothing of national importance has been discussed in Parliament).
So can we focus on arguing that a woman candidate must be fielded in the coming by-election in Selangor instead of arguing about what race this candidate should be? This, to me, is a more important issue.
I remember back in the 1980s in Terengganu, a couple from my kampong, Kuala Ibai, was on the way to cast their vote. For many years both the husband and wife were staunch PAS supporters. However, just before that particular election, Umno splashed a lot of money in the kampong and the husband was 'turned'.
While walking to the polling station the husband told the wife that this time around they should vote for Umno. After all they had taken Umno's money.
The wife retorted indignantly: you can vote for Umno, I will vote for PAS. The husband replied that a wife must obey the husband and if she defies him then the husband has a right to divorce her.
The wife said, "Divorce me then," and walked off and voted for PAS.
I know about this because the wife came to my house after that to pour her heart out.
I not only had to act as a marriage counsellor. There was another case where my servant came crying because her husband and son had quarrelled and the husband had chased the son out of the house and 'tak mengaku anak' (disowned him). The husband was wearing an Umno badge and the son a PAS badge. Guess what happened then.
So you see, it is not so easy to buy women. The so-called 'staunch' PAS man, however, was easily bought. So I would trust women more than men (Hee of Perak notwithstanding — who is the exception rather than the rule). And since elections can be won or lost because of the votes of women, why not have more women elected into office?
Why are we are always talking about racial breakdown and racial quotas? Why are we not also talking about gender breakdown and gender quotas? Can Pakatan Rakyat (or PKR in case that seat goes to PKR) look into the possibility of fielding a woman in the coming by-election in Selangor? And never mind if it is Malay, Indian, Chinese or whatever, as long as it is a woman.
Okay, enough talking about the coming by-election. Let us now talk about the subject I really wish to talk about today, about the IGP's statement: Help, not condemn unwed mums, says IGP.
Yes, I support what the IGP said. So who says I oppose the IGP for the sake of opposing him? When he does or says the right thing I will support him. The problem is, it is not often he does or says the right thing so I have very little opportunity to support him.
I am with the IGP on this one. Society shuns women or girls who get pregnant out of wedlock. Their families disown them and they get treated as pariahs. So they would rather abandon their illegitimate babies, even kill them, rather than bring the baby home. This is not the fault of the unwed mothers but the fault of society.
The religionists would disagree with me here. They consider unwed mothers as immoral women or girls. But then, how does one define morality? Should not the definition of morality and immorality be redefined? Furthermore, are there not other things more immoral than unwed mothers, even if we still wish to classify unwed mothers as immoral people?
The point is, what if there is something more immoral than unwed mothers? Should we not then look at unwed mothers as the lesser of the two evils?
I know of many cases of young girls getting married at the age of 18 or 19 and then becoming jandas (divorcees) barely a few years later. You have many 22 or 23 year-old divorcees, sometimes with two or three children, running around the Malay heartland of Terengganu and Kelantan.
You see, because it is 'immoral' for these girls to frolic with boys, they get married. But the marriage is merely for the sake of sex or to satisfy the lust of the boys or young men. And once these males have had their fill and no longer find these girls exciting (especially after they have given birth to two or three children), these girls are abandoned. And they get to keep the children (or are forced to keep the children) while the males move on to 'greener pastures'.
No doubt these boys and girls, or young men and women, get married before having sex — which is the 'moral' thing to do. But they got married merely for the sake of having sex. And once the novelty has worn off the boys move on to a new 'sex partner'. So we may not have many incidences of unwed mothers in situations like this. But we certainly have many incidences of young abandoned mothers with children to support and no husband to assist them.
I have met many young Malay women or girls working as part-time prostitutes in Kuala Terengganu and Kota Bharu (the two most 'Islamic' states in Malaysia). And do you know that nearly all these women are young abandoned ex-wives with children to support? They have no qualifications or education so they do the only thing they know what to do — open their legs for money. (Hey, I met them as part of my academic research so perish that dirty thought).
So which is more immoral? Unwed mothers or abandoned mothers? The religionists would say unwed mothers. I would say abandoned mothers. There are far more abandoned mothers than unwed mothers. So that is more a problem.
But unwed mothers are pariahs of society. Men who abandon their young wives after 'milking the cow' are not considered pariahs of society.
When we talk about the issue of morality and immorality we must not confine the discussion to only the issue of unwed mothers. The scope of immorality is wider than that. Therefore, maybe society needs to redefine the new parameters.
For example, Tan Sri Sanusi Junid, the one-time Agriculture Minister, would be able to tell you that the highest incidence of AIDS is amongst the Malay fishermen. The Malaysian fishing boats rendezvous with the Thai boats, which masquerade as fishing boats but are actually floating brothels, in the high seas. And this is why there is a high incidence of AIDS amongst the fishermen.
Is this moral? Okay, so the fishermen do not leave unwed mothers all over the place. But this does not mean they do not indulge in illicit sex. And the worst thing is they come home and have sex with their wives and then infect their wives. So the women become unsuspecting AIDS victims even though they have led pious lives.
Society considers people who pray, fast, go to Mekah, and whatnot, as moral people, even though they may take bribes. I would consider those who do not pray, do not fast, and do not go to Mekah, but fight against corruption, as people with higher morals.
It all depends on the parameters you set to define morality and immorality. One man's morality is another man's immorality. Sex outside marriage is the least of this country's problems. Even if you consider it a problem it is at the bottom of the list of priorities. But we place that as priority number one and this results in unwed mothers abandoning their illegitimate babies.
Why can't the government set up halfway houses for unwed mothers? Don't ostracise them. Don't treat them like pariahs. Treat them with compassion. Many Malaysians would love to adopt these children if the unwed mothers would like to give them up for adoption. Just don't kill them or throw them in dustbins for dogs to eat.
Who knows, one day one of these illegitimate children may even become the Prime Minister of Malaysia considering you need to be a bastard (metaphorically speaking) to be the Prime Minister.

"It's a male-dominated society. If I ask my wife, Rabri Devi, to vote for a particular party, do you think she will vote for another party?." Of all the critiques of the Women's Bill this chauvinistic exposition by RJD strongman Lalu Prasad sticks out. Its medieval logic angers more than just feminists, it actually makes the case for adopting the historic legislation stronger. But then at least Lalu cannot be faulted for talking through his political hat. For eight years between 1997 and 2005 Lalu was the power behind the throne in Bihar, ruling by proxy through his wife who was deftly eased into the CM's chair while he was being investigated for corruption. His every wish was Rabri's command. Needless to say no one has ever upheld Rabri's elevation to the CM's post as an advertisement for women empowerment. But the Bill might just be.
It is from all accounts a persuasive argument for delivering women from the clutches of 'entrenched patriarchies'. But while it might free the polity of one aberration it might perpetuate quite another. For, written into the Women's Bill is the worrying impetus towards concentrating greater power in the hands of party bosses – a select coterie of patrons.
According to the Bill, every three elections each constituency will be reserved once for a woman. Political parties will have to find a woman candidate to field from a constituency occupied by a male MP. And the MP who has to surrender his seat may not have a choice in the matter but to obey the party's writ. The only way he can dodge the axe is by fielding his kin from the seat so as to rule by proxy. This is not ideal on two counts. One, power will flow in a closed loop benefiting only those women who are part of the existing political structure and second the party boss who sanctions this cozy arrangement will exercise total discretion. The situation will reverse when it's the turn of women candidates to relinquish a seat in favour of a male MP once the constituency is de-reserved. In the long run MPs, male or female, will be at the mercy of the whims of party high priests.
Of course this is not to say that it is beyond parties to act with a degree of equity when the situation demands. One only has to look to the BJP's recent decision to not issue a whip when the Women's Reservation Bill comes up for vote in the Lok Sabha. By allowing its MPs to vote according to their conscience the BJP has preserved their democratic freedom to act according to their personal conviction. At another level it also signals a welcome departure from the tendency of the party top brass to impose its will upon the party rank and file at the cost of quashing inner party democracy.
Do you know that 51% of registered voters are women (at least when I last checked maybe three or four years ago) and that 53% of women come out to vote on Polling Day? This means women are more responsible than men. But are 50% of the Members of the Malaysian Parliament women?
No need to answer that. It is not even 30%.
In some countries, it is the law that 30% of the candidates in an election must be women (I think it is one of the Scandinavian countries but maybe someone can correct me here). Malaysia, in fact, should pass a law in Parliament that at least 30% of the candidates in an election must be women. Instead, the Malaysian Parliament wastes its time…well, you know what I mean, I have already written about this matter this week (about how two weeks have passed and nothing of national importance has been discussed in Parliament).
So can we focus on arguing that a woman candidate must be fielded in the coming by-election in Selangor instead of arguing about what race this candidate should be? This, to me, is a more important issue.
I remember back in the 1980s in Terengganu, a couple from my kampong, Kuala Ibai, was on the way to cast their vote. For many years both the husband and wife were staunch PAS supporters. However, just before that particular election, Umno splashed a lot of money in the kampong and the husband was 'turned'.
While walking to the polling station the husband told the wife that this time around they should vote for Umno. After all they had taken Umno's money.
The wife retorted indignantly: you can vote for Umno, I will vote for PAS. The husband replied that a wife must obey the husband and if she defies him then the husband has a right to divorce her.
The wife said, "Divorce me then," and walked off and voted for PAS.
I know about this because the wife came to my house after that to pour her heart out.
I not only had to act as a marriage counsellor. There was another case where my servant came crying because her husband and son had quarrelled and the husband had chased the son out of the house and 'tak mengaku anak' (disowned him). The husband was wearing an Umno badge and the son a PAS badge. Guess what happened then.
So you see, it is not so easy to buy women. The so-called 'staunch' PAS man, however, was easily bought. So I would trust women more than men (Hee of Perak notwithstanding — who is the exception rather than the rule). And since elections can be won or lost because of the votes of women, why not have more women elected into office?
Why are we are always talking about racial breakdown and racial quotas? Why are we not also talking about gender breakdown and gender quotas? Can Pakatan Rakyat (or PKR in case that seat goes to PKR) look into the possibility of fielding a woman in the coming by-election in Selangor? And never mind if it is Malay, Indian, Chinese or whatever, as long as it is a woman.
Okay, enough talking about the coming by-election. Let us now talk about the subject I really wish to talk about today, about the IGP's statement: Help, not condemn unwed mums, says IGP.
Yes, I support what the IGP said. So who says I oppose the IGP for the sake of opposing him? When he does or says the right thing I will support him. The problem is, it is not often he does or says the right thing so I have very little opportunity to support him.
I am with the IGP on this one. Society shuns women or girls who get pregnant out of wedlock. Their families disown them and they get treated as pariahs. So they would rather abandon their illegitimate babies, even kill them, rather than bring the baby home. This is not the fault of the unwed mothers but the fault of society.
The religionists would disagree with me here. They consider unwed mothers as immoral women or girls. But then, how does one define morality? Should not the definition of morality and immorality be redefined? Furthermore, are there not other things more immoral than unwed mothers, even if we still wish to classify unwed mothers as immoral people?
The point is, what if there is something more immoral than unwed mothers? Should we not then look at unwed mothers as the lesser of the two evils?
I know of many cases of young girls getting married at the age of 18 or 19 and then becoming jandas (divorcees) barely a few years later. You have many 22 or 23 year-old divorcees, sometimes with two or three children, running around the Malay heartland of Terengganu and Kelantan.
You see, because it is 'immoral' for these girls to frolic with boys, they get married. But the marriage is merely for the sake of sex or to satisfy the lust of the boys or young men. And once these males have had their fill and no longer find these girls exciting (especially after they have given birth to two or three children), these girls are abandoned. And they get to keep the children (or are forced to keep the children) while the males move on to 'greener pastures'.
No doubt these boys and girls, or young men and women, get married before having sex — which is the 'moral' thing to do. But they got married merely for the sake of having sex. And once the novelty has worn off the boys move on to a new 'sex partner'. So we may not have many incidences of unwed mothers in situations like this. But we certainly have many incidences of young abandoned mothers with children to support and no husband to assist them.
I have met many young Malay women or girls working as part-time prostitutes in Kuala Terengganu and Kota Bharu (the two most 'Islamic' states in Malaysia). And do you know that nearly all these women are young abandoned ex-wives with children to support? They have no qualifications or education so they do the only thing they know what to do — open their legs for money. (Hey, I met them as part of my academic research so perish that dirty thought).
So which is more immoral? Unwed mothers or abandoned mothers? The religionists would say unwed mothers. I would say abandoned mothers. There are far more abandoned mothers than unwed mothers. So that is more a problem.
But unwed mothers are pariahs of society. Men who abandon their young wives after 'milking the cow' are not considered pariahs of society.
When we talk about the issue of morality and immorality we must not confine the discussion to only the issue of unwed mothers. The scope of immorality is wider than that. Therefore, maybe society needs to redefine the new parameters.
For example, Tan Sri Sanusi Junid, the one-time Agriculture Minister, would be able to tell you that the highest incidence of AIDS is amongst the Malay fishermen. The Malaysian fishing boats rendezvous with the Thai boats, which masquerade as fishing boats but are actually floating brothels, in the high seas. And this is why there is a high incidence of AIDS amongst the fishermen.
Is this moral? Okay, so the fishermen do not leave unwed mothers all over the place. But this does not mean they do not indulge in illicit sex. And the worst thing is they come home and have sex with their wives and then infect their wives. So the women become unsuspecting AIDS victims even though they have led pious lives.
Society considers people who pray, fast, go to Mekah, and whatnot, as moral people, even though they may take bribes. I would consider those who do not pray, do not fast, and do not go to Mekah, but fight against corruption, as people with higher morals.
It all depends on the parameters you set to define morality and immorality. One man's morality is another man's immorality. Sex outside marriage is the least of this country's problems. Even if you consider it a problem it is at the bottom of the list of priorities. But we place that as priority number one and this results in unwed mothers abandoning their illegitimate babies.
Why can't the government set up halfway houses for unwed mothers? Don't ostracise them. Don't treat them like pariahs. Treat them with compassion. Many Malaysians would love to adopt these children if the unwed mothers would like to give them up for adoption. Just don't kill them or throw them in dustbins for dogs to eat.
Who knows, one day one of these illegitimate children may even become the Prime Minister of Malaysia considering you need to be a bastard (metaphorically speaking) to be the Prime Minister.



Mahathir officiates launch of Perkasa

Posted: 28 Mar 2010 01:54 AM PDT

Former premier Mahathir Mohamad officiates the launch of Malay-rights group Perkasa.
Views: 286
5 ratings
Time: 09:47 More in News & Politics


MCA Leads By Ex-Health Minister Who Involved in Sex Scandal

Posted: 28 Mar 2010 06:11 AM PDT


Those bloody rich Chinese!

Posted: 28 Mar 2010 05:35 AM PDT

The Malaysian Insider just published an article titled Government will update data on wealth distribution.

It reported that Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad has called for an investigation into wealth distribution in our country following accusations that Malays have been grabbing everything.

DPM Muhyiddin Yassin agreed to that (natch!). He said:

"The data is available, maybe needs to be updated. According to current records, a large portion of the nation's wealth is in the hands of non-Malays."

"We acknowledge this matter, previously under the New Economic Policy we had targeted for Malays to own at least 30 per cent of the nation's wealth but it is has been proven that till today we have not achieved it.

"On the other hand, wealth ownership among the non-Malays increased especially the Chinese. We need to have an approach whereby we do better towards meeting the aspirations of all communities."

Incidentally kaytee has recently completed an informal private study on the same topic, and found the following ethic groups own the respective proportion of national wealth:

Chinese – 97.73% - bastards, Perkasa has been right all along!

Indians – 2.25 % - stop grumbling, Perkasa has been right all along!

Malays – 0.02% - didn't I tell you Perkasa has been right all along?

I told my village neighbour when he came to Selangor for a weekend visit of my findings. He gasped in amazement at the statistics which showed him as among the wealthy Malaysians. He asked me pointedly: "Kaytee, when is Ah Pek going to get in real terms my share of that wonderful percentage that Chinese own?"

As I was about to answer him, I was distracted by the fantastic mansion on my left. It resembles a Bali palace, and it's even bigger than the one in Klang, home of a late satay king. As my Kancil spluttered along the Great Wall of the Bali Palace, a sleek BMW coupe zoomed by me. 'Ere its 4.2 litres engine took it out of my sight, I recognize it as belonging to a Datin whose hubby is one of the directors of a GLC.

I whispered to Ah Pek, "Don't tell anyone, with the exception of Perkasa, but we Chinese will be taking over the country soon, and when we do, you'll then get your share."

"Are you crazy? Perkasa is the last organization we should tell," he glared at me for my seeming gross stupidity.

I told him it was in fact the leader of Perkasa who told us that the Chinese will take over running Malaysia.

He gasped again and exclaimed, "You mean that bloke who was a student activist about to be arrested under the ISA in 1970, and who ran to seek help from then Opposition Leader Lim Kit Siang?"

This time it was my turn to gasp, "Really?"

"Yes, that f* lying ingrate! Now he claims that the DAP, which he ran to for help in 1970, was responsible for May 13."

"Karn neen nare, just imagine, one year after May 13, he desperately went to the very man, the leader of the DAP in 1970, for help, and now he accuses the DAP of being May 13 trouble-makers."

He looked despondent after that, realizing he was not about to go on an immediately spending spree in KL for all the wealth kaytee has informed him the Chinese in this country own, and would be still plodding away at his char koay teow stall in Ayer Itam when he returned to Penang.

Then he sighed loudly and conceded, "I guess I ought to be grateful that I'm luckier than my father. He was just a trishaw man, toiling away like a beast of burden everyday, for peanuts, until he eventually died a physically broken man! Kuan Yin has been merciful to me. I hope my grandson will be able to take over my char koay teow stall in 3 years from now, when I am 67."

Indeed, Omitofu!


Liow is MCA No 2

Posted: 28 Mar 2010 05:26 AM PDT

Congratulations to UMNO! Half a loaf is better than none, and Chua can be ........

Related:
Who will be MCA's new president?


MCA - Who Won?

Posted: 28 Mar 2010 01:25 PM PDT


What a Load of Rubbish!

OKT Win! (Strike Lottery Again)

PKFZ Win! Corruption Win!

2315 Delegates Win!

Congratulations to the 3 delegates who did not turn up to vote!

Bye, Bye, MCA!


Kemenangan CSL adalah kemenangan 1Malaysia

Posted: 28 Mar 2010 04:29 AM PDT


Berita sudah keluar.

Chua Soi Lek diumumkan menang untuk jawatan Presiden MCA dengan undi lebih 900. Ong Ka Ting dalam 800 ratus. Manakala Ong Tee Keat hanya dapat 578 undi.

Kemenangan Chua boleh dianggapkan sebagai kemenangan untuk gagasan 1Malaysia.

Rakyat diutamakan. Yang lebih penting, pencapaian atau performance didahulukan.
Tahun depan pemiliahan lagi.


No comments: