- Hitler and Mahathir: What you should know of dictators
- Endemic scourge
- He put his foot in his mouth big time so he had to apologise to his Zionist friends?!
- Trot out Shaariibuu Altantuyaa again
- Pua: DPM's 'bankrupt' remark a smokescreen
- Suara Keadilan defies suspension
- MB blasts Khir's RM220 mil sand mining claim
- Mahfuz: 'MA-sissies' afraid of Bala
- MP submits emergency motion on Penan rape
- Scholarship move will halt brain drain, says Chua
- TS Muhyiddin: I am a Malay first, than Malaysian- Betul ke tu?
- S'gor slammed for failing to honour election promise
- BN rep ejected for a day
- Irreligious: Why is Animal Rape Wrong, But Animal Slavery-Imprisonment-Murder Okay?
- Umno man to head PAC in S'gor?
- 'Military intelligence officers tortured me'
- Yes, Long live the Spanish
- Adun BN Kuang diarah keluar DUN Selangor
Posted: 12 Jul 2010 07:00 AM PDT
By G VinodCOMMENT The title itself is a give-away maybe. Many have written about both individuals on many issues -- be it their achievements, their brutal politics and what not. However, the question is, have we actually learnt anything from our history books? Authoritarian figures do not normally fall from the sky. They are made by a gradual process of political manoeuvring, sadly with mass support. The amazing part about authoritarian figures is that most of them normally share the same charasteristics. Take Adolf Hitler and Dr Mahathir Mohamad.
Though both came from two different eras, so many similarities can be seen between the characters. For example, both had strong nationalistic love for their motherland for their own reasons.
While Hitler wished to unite the nation as a military powerhouse, Mahathir wished to unite the Malays and transform Malaysia's economy to fit the modern age.
When Hitler rose to power becoming Chancellor of Germany in 1932, he instituted many economic reforms that saved the nation's economy from going bust altogether, eventually turning it into a military economy.
While Mahathir did not inherit a bankrupt economy from his predeccesor Hussein Onn, nevertheless he transformed Malaysia from an agriculture-based economy into a modern industrial-based one. By mid-90s, Malaysia became an economic tiger in Southeast Asia.
Everyone enjoyed economic and social comfort during their reign. Unemployment numbers were low and everyone had reasonable level of disposable income to spend.
In order to consolidate his power, Hitler merged the chancellory office with the presidential office to become the Fuhrer (supreme leader), effectively gaining controlling on crucial state apparatuses such as the military, police, parliament and the judiciary.
While Mahathir did not really remove the Council of Rulers and turned the nation into a republic, he nevertheless made it clear to them who was in charge by stripping the rulers of their immunity and royal assent to pass parliamentary bills in the 80s and the 90s.
Barry Wain aptly described Mahathir in his book "Malaysian Maverick: Mahathir Mohamad in Turbulent Times: "By the end of his 22- year tenure, Mahathir had remade his country in his own image and become Malaysia's presidential premier."
His controversial move not only sent shivers down the spines of those still attached to the feudal concept of Malaysian lifestyle, his move also ensured the royalty knew that he will not tolerate any opposition from anyone, rulers included. No one will be in his way of bringing Malaysia into the new age.
Both towering figures commanded respect and fear from their own Cabinet and lawmakers. Hitler commanded even the army to swear an oath of loyalty to him alone, and not to the nation. Dissenters were swiftly put away using the draconian powers he wielded via the Enabling Act 1933, be it opposition members or within his own ranks.
In Mahathir's era, he controlled the crucial two-thirds parliamentary majority which gives him power to amend the constitution at will. While lawmakers were controlled by the party whip, the Cabinet is bounded by collective decision. In other words, Mahathir became the Cabinet and the Parliament.
Dissenters suffered their wrath to the fullest extent. While Hitler used his Gestapo and the SS to get rid of critics, Mahathir used the state instrument such as the police and the legislation to silence dissenters.
Press freedom was at its lowest in both men's reign. Hitler as the Fuhrer controlled the judiciary and he became the judge, jury and executioner.
Mahathir stripped the judiciary of its independence in 1998, after the sacking of the then Lord President Salleh Abas and five other judges. A few constitutional amendments followed suit to ensure the judiciary no longer holds power to intepret law and dispense justice independently.
Like it or not, Germany was Hitler's baby then and Malaysia was Mahathir's. The difference is, Mahathir is still alive and he is still trying to influence policy-makers to run the country the way he wants it to be run.
While Hitler was in a confrontational mode -- defying the Versailles treaty and preparing for a military conquest of the United Kingdom -- his deputy Rudolf Hess was hoping UK would become an ally to fight against the Soviet Union.
Hess then flew to England to secure peace, incurring the wrath of the Fuhrer who ordered him to be shot if he was ever seen in Germany.
Mahathir had another "foe" to battle in 1997 -- the Southeast Asia financial crisis. While Mahathir was adamant on currency control and bailing out uncompetitive business entities, his deputy Anwar Ibrahim was adamant on helping only competitive entities and was more accomodating to the ideas proposed by the International Monetary Fund.
Hence, Mahathir "shot" his deputy Anwar with dismissal and sent him packing to jail on corruption charges.
There are many similarities which Mahathir and Hitler share even on a personal note. Both had very strict fathers whom they feared and very close personal bonds with their mothers.
Both do not drink alcholic beverage and are non-smokers. None was known to have been womanisers.
Nevertheless, Mahathir pursued higher education knowing full well of its importance while the latter never made in the Vienna school of arts and was loitering in the streets, doing menial jobs for sustenance.
While we can share more about both men's similarities or differences, one important point to note is that both men did not rise to power via military conquest or by some dubious means. Instead both were elected to power.
Dictators are not born, they are made by the people after creating certain emotional feeling over an issue that is close to the people's heart.
Hitler used the communists and the Jews as scapegoat in order to gain popularity among Germans, blaming them for Germany's defeat in World War 1. As nationalistic fever was high in Germans then, they swallowed his argument without even mincing it.
As for Mahathir, he worked on two strategies. When dealing with the outside world, he instilled fear among Malaysians of Western economic imperialism. When dealing with the locals, it was all about putting the fear among the Malays that they may lose political control to the non-Malays if they do not unite under his reign.
Both were master politicians and very Machiavellian in their ways.
Truth be told, Malaysians were fooled by the same "fear-generated political climate" perpetuated by Mahathir who knew his trade well.
While Germans have gained vast political maturity since Hitler days, unfortunately there are still Malaysians who are in awe of "Mahathirist politics" though he is no longer the premier.
We have organisations like Perkasa, Gertak and Umno itself still perpetuating nationalistic fear among Malays, citing the non-Malay threat to Malay domination.
Fortunately, many Malaysians of various races have wised up and dismissed such political rhetoric, knowing full well their words are nothing but to save their own political career, which is nearing its doom.
Ultimately, the people should wise up and study their leaders well before empowering them. We cannot undo the past but the next time a person shows up with the same traits, the people should decide whether to accept or reject them.
Posted: 12 Jul 2010 07:00 AM PDT
By Hilary ChiewCOMMENT It is systematic and endemic! screamed a report on the plight of the Penans. The report was titled "A Wider Context of Sexual Exploitation of Penan Women and Girls in Middle and Ulu Baram, Sarawak, Malaysia".
Indeed, from the testimonies gathered from the victims, family members and their fellow tribe members, it does seem that sexual violence against the Penans has taken on a life of its own and the "monster" has grown over the years.
The excuse given by the police for failing to follow through on this initiative which they eagerly embarked on between late 2008 and early 2009 following public outcry and the police reports filed by the two alleged victims is common knowledge now. And highly unpalatable to many sound-thinking Malaysians.
In the interest of transparency, the writer wishes to inform that she was the Star's journalist who verified the BMF's alert by obtaining first-hand information from the alleged victims.
Posted: 12 Jul 2010 03:35 PM PDT
Reproduced below without permission from this blogger, such an interesting write up and so refreshing to know to whom and to what group in the US did chameleon Brother Anwar Bin Ibrahim seeks for forgiveness over his anit-Semitic remarks:
By Shukor Idrose
A New York blogger, Elaine Meinel Supkis wrote that CIA and Mossad want Anwar Ibrahim assassinated. Sounds like a movie? Think again.
Anwar has been groomed by the west to become the next puppet leader of Malaysia. Anwar was 'designed' to be not only a leader of Malaysia but also an influential figure in the South East Asia.
It may be news to some that Anwar is suspected to be an agent of Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) of America. But, for those who have been digging and reading Anwar's background since his fall in 1998, the suspicion is really nothing new.
The thought of a 'real-life' CIA agent in Malaysia may seem very fiction-like, almost a wild imagination. When we mention CIA, almost automatically a character like Jason Bourne would come into the picture.
For those who are not familiar with American spy movies, would almost immediately brushed off the idea of real-life CIA agents all over the world doing spying jobs for America. A friend of mine once said that I just have a too high an imagination when I explain the modus operandi of the CIA and how our own people could be one of the agents.
I told her that imagination is the reason why America rules the world, and not us.
In the simplest words for people who aren't very keen of spy movies, allow me to explain that Anwar's link to CIA may not be the kind of link that 'Jason Bourne' may have. CIA agents don't really need to be a real spy. They could be in the form of informers who merely inform everything that happens or puppets who would do anything for the benefit of their masters (America/Jews).
His recent apology tour raised more suspicion as Anwar's connections with organizations which are under strong or direct influence of Zionists becomes more apparent:
ANWAR'S APOLOGY TOUR ITINERARY (20th – 24th Jun 2010)
20 June: Arrival at JFK Airport New York
21 June: 3.00 pm: Meeting with Malcolm Hoenlein at Third Avenue New York.
Who is Hoenlein?
1. Deputy Executive Chairman of Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations
2. Executive Director of Jewish Community Relations Council of Greater New York
22 June: Light lunch Meeting with Bret Stephens, Wall Steet Journa at Avenue of the Americas, 47/48th Street.
Who is Stephens?
1. A pro-Israel Jewish columnist.
2. An ex-Editor in Chief for Jurusalem Post in 2002 – 2004.
3.00 pm: Interview with Farid Zakaria at CNN Office, Time Warner on 58th Street.
Who is Zakaria?
1. A muslim reporter married to a Jewish woman
7.00 pm: York Forum "In Pursuit of a New Economic Paradigm".
23 June: 11.00 am: Meeting with Carl Gershman in DC
Who Is Gershman?
1. A Jew
2. President of National Endowment for Democracy (NED) since 1984. NED is a CIA sponsored organization set up to promote 'democracy' to the world.
Gershman is known to be in close relation with Neo-Conservative leaders such as Richard Perle, Frank Gaffney, dan Elliott Abrams. During the Bush administration, Gershman was known to support Doctrin Bush to force democracy in the Middle East especially by promoting liberal reformation ideas, freedom and containing Islamization influence as it is seen as anti-democracy.
2.00 pm: Apology meeting with Howard Berman in Rayburn House of Office Building.
Who is Berman?
1. One of the most influential figure in the US's foreign relation through Brooking Institute, a pro-Jewish organization which also acts as Anwar's lobbyist. A close friend and lobbyist for Israel in the US.
2. Born in Israel and a supporter of Likud Party of Israel under Ariel Sharon.
3. Often seen at events organized by AIPAC (American Israel Public Affairs Committee), a pro-Israel Lobbyist and contributor for America's election campaigns.
3.30 pm: Meeting with America's Defence Secretary, William Cohen, a Jew at Daniel Piper's office.
Who is Cohen?
1. a Pro-Zionist
2. An Obama's advisor
3. Anwar's Godfather who is responsible to build Anwar's image while he was the Deputy PM and after his release from jail.
4.30 pm: Apology Meeting with Danel Mariashchin
Who is Mariashchin?
1. An Executive Vice President of B'nai Birth International, a Zionist's organization which on the last 25th May had criticized Anwar for making anti-semitic's statements.
6:30 pm: Meeting with Dr Jamal Barzinji and Yakub Mirza in Sterling, Virginia.
Who are they?
1. Member of Institute of International Islamic Thought (IIIT) founded by Prof. Ismail Faruqi but was 'penetrated' and funded by CIA. IIIT is one of Anwar's lobbyist in America.
11.00 pm: Meeting with Muslim Leaders in Washington.
24 June 11.00 am: Meeting with Fred Hiatt of Washington Post
Who is Hiatt?
1. A Washington Post reporter. The Washington Post is owned by a Jewish family, Katherine Graham. Hiat was once a moderator in a conference organized by Foreign Policy Initiative, a Neo-Conservative's think tank.
2. A pro-zionist reporter who once suggested and lobbied for the attack on Iran.
2.00 pm: Discussion on Islam and Democrcy in Southeast Asia at Wilson Center, Ronald Reagan Building and International Trade Center, Pennsylvania Ave. near the White House.
5.30 pm: Meeting (lobbying) with Kurt Campbell, Assistant Secretary of East Asia Relations, US State Department.
AFP then reported that Anwar told Obama to be careful with Najib. Anwar stressed that he is more pro-America than Najib is.
Who is Campbell?
1. A member of Council of Foreign Relations where Anwar was involved in the signing of Annapolis Summit which declared the state of Israel.
Anwar was also arranged by Kazi Ahmad to meet with Chuck Allers, a PhD researcher and the medias namely, Fox News, Bloomberg and Charlie Rose.
9.00 pm Depart from Washington via Qatar Airways.
The itinerary shows that Anwar's involvement with the Zionists are serious and Anwar may be having a hard time convincing them that he really is a loyal puppet and never in his life an anti-semitic. Anwar's desperation is obvious when he had to pay the CNN to grant him an interview in order to 'clear' his name in the US, as exposed by President of Trevino Strategies and Media Inc., Joshua Trevino.
But I guess, a spy movie is not a good movie unless there's a twist here and there.
We have reasons to be worried with the word assassination used by the blogger and with Wolfowitz's words when he came to Anwar's defence, saying that Anwar's life, physically and politically is in danger. The blogger warned that Anwar is under threat of being assassinated by the Mossad and CIA, but Wolfowitz's words almost suggested that Anwar's life maybe under threat by the Malaysian government.
May I remind our government, especially our PM to catch up with the imagination of the CIA and be prepared for any twists and turns in their plans.
Again, this may sound like a movie but movies are made from imagination and imagination is what makes things happen.
The Hollywood spy movies show us how spies are recruited and how puppet leaders are selected all over the world and how they are eliminated when they are no longer needed, but we failed to see that it is all true. We failed because we have such limited imagination. We looked at all the hi-tech gadgets in the movies in awe but that's just it. We thought of them as only exist in movies or may not even have any thought about them at all.
Remember how our people who were caught by the Zionists while on aid-mission to Gaza on Mavi Marmara? Remember how the activists were surprised that the Zionists knew in detail the background of each and everybody on board? Even if you are not a big reader of Zionism but if you are a spy movie fan, you would not be surprised at all at the level of intelligence and information that the Zionists are able to access.
For the Jews or the Americans, nothing is impossible, a characteristic that we don't really have much thought about. This is why we are thousands of steps behind the Jews whom the Quran had long warned us about. For the Quran had also reminded us that the most important thing in life is to read and to learn from the universe. The Jews did just that and that is why they are the Khalifahs of the world, (admit it or not), and not us Muslims.
Whatever it is, what is more important now is that if this agent thing is true, then Anwar could not be the only agent in Malaysia. The only way to expose these enemies is to think like them. Therefore, never hesitate to use imagination in order to expose the highest CIA conspiracy of all time.
Last Updated (Monday, 12 July 2010 21:17)
Posted: 12 Jul 2010 07:21 AM PDT
Makin lama, makin tambah, or in Penang Hokkien, kair kong kair lemak ...
… in other words, Chinese whispers though the saying has nothing to do with the Chinese, but means that like the fish that got away, the exaggerations get bigger with each telling.
And I am talking about the Altantuyaa-Najib long tale.
If we give it another few more months, we'll eventually hear of Najib Razak personally plunging his keris into Altantuyaa's heart while shagging her – yes, that's what I predict the anti-Najib story will grow into.
When I read Malaysiakini's Altantuya and PI Bala: A story that won't sink I thought to myself: "Oh no, not another of those fishes that got away!"
For example, the statement "Altantuya's cousin testified that she had seen a picture of Najib together with the dead woman. However, she was quickly hushed by both defence and prosecution lawyers and the picture has not been produced. Why?" has obviously grown from the original report by Malaysiakini's journalist Soon Li Tsin.
I read Li Tsin's report on what Altantuyaa's cousin Burmaa Oyunchimeg said and which I posted in Did Najib Razak dine with Altantuyaa Shariibuu?
Extracts of my post:
This was what she (Burmaa) said, according to Soon Li Tsin: "I know why she wanted to see Razak Baginda - I have seen pictures of Altantuya with Razak and a government official."
Related: Murdering Altantuyaa Shaariibuu Again
Posted: 12 Jul 2010 05:55 AM PDT
Posted: 12 Jul 2010 06:20 AM PDT
Parti Keadilan's newspaper 'Suara Keadilan' has defied government suspension, imposed about a week ago. Its latest issue hits the news stalls as usual, without any delay.
The Home Ministry, in monitoring the paper, did not take any action. One of its senior officials, when contacted by phone today said the ministry is yet to consider other optional measures to curb the paper from circulation.
The Mnistry recently suspended the publication license of Suara Keadilan, the weekly newspaper of the Opposition party, after it ran an article that claimed the state-run land development agency was in grave financial peril (read here).
However, the party distributed 100,000 copies of the paper to newsstands over the weekend by exploiting an apparent loophole in the law, said editor Dzulkarnain Taib.
Two other newspapers belong to the Opposition also failed to obtain the printing permit recently.
Posted: 12 Jul 2010 05:48 AM PDT
Posted: 12 Jul 2010 05:33 AM PDT
Posted: 12 Jul 2010 05:26 AM PDT
Posted: 12 Jul 2010 05:44 AM PDT
Posted: 12 Jul 2010 05:17 AM PDT
KUALA LUMPUR: Political leaders have welcomed the move to award Public Service Department scholarships to students who score 9A+ or more, irrespective of race.
They said the decision, announced by Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak yesterday, was a morale booster to Malaysian students and parents.
MCA president Datuk Seri Dr Chua Soi Lek said the move would also stop the brain drain from the country.
"We want equal access to educational opportunities, especially at tertiary level. Without it, once they (the students) go overseas to study, they don't come back," he said yesterday.
He added that stopping the brain drain was a positive step towards achieving a high-income economy.
"This shows that the Prime Minister is walking the talk of 1Malaysia. Through this, we will convince sceptical Malaysians that Najib will achieve the 1Malaysia goal not through words but through action," he said.
MIC president Datuk Seri S. Samy Vellu said the move would provide an opportunity for more students to pursue tertiary education.
"We hope more students can get scholarships in future. The MIC has been requesting for more scholarships for Indian students and we are happy that the Government has listened to us. I thank Najib for this gesture," he said.
MCA deputy president Datuk Seri Liow said the decision showed that Barisan Nasional took education seriously and valued talent for nation building.
"We should continue to put emphasis on human resource development," he said.
MCA Youth chief Datuk Dr Wee Ka Siong said the move was a boost for top students to continue to excel in their studies and serve the country.
He added the decision was something that all Malaysians had been looking forward to.
THE STAR (Sunday July 11, 2010)
Posted: 12 Jul 2010 12:03 PM PDT
Last week TS Muhyiddin spent one whole day in his constituency with tight schedules and gave speeches and messages to his constituents that there is serious and urgent need for the Malays to be united.
He told the UMNO crowd that he was saddened at some quarters branding as ultra Malay. He said when anyone asks him he would admit that first; he is Malay, than a Malaysian.
"On the same equation", Muhyiddin said "If we were to ask Kit Siang, he would say that he is a Chinese first, than only a Malaysian"
This is a very interesting gallery that Muhyiddin stands on; that is on Malay struggles and that appeases many Malays especially the Malays in his constituency. AND also it sounds like authentic and dependable Malay and an UMNO leader.
He claimed that there are certain quarters that are not at ease with him and in the quiet brand him as ultra Malay. To my opinion Muhyiddin himself wants him to be seen as a Malay ultra as it works well in attempts to rally the Malay support for him and the party.
It worked perfectly well with Dr Mahathir when he subscribed to the illustration of Ultra Malay to galvanize and rouse the Malay support and that made him just a small step to reach the top of the party.
The situation then was more or less like what is happening today when the Malays were in need of so called Malay nationalist to lean on as the nation was just over with the 13th May 69 racial fight.
Prior to the 13th May incident nobody knew about Mahathir and he managed to rise with the occasion when he took up as Ultra Malay and since then he was the man that UMNO and the Malays regarded him as the savior of the Malays even though by his own admission that his blood that flows in him is not all Malay blood. I think and I keep on thinking that he was trying to tell us that he was Malay by choice.
When Mahathir was appointed as the Deputy PM in January 1976 many quarters received him with apprehension especially from the Non Malays as the residue of the Ultra Malay image with him was still felt and seen in him.
It was not long after that he was readily appreciated by these quarters as they, in the end realized that it was during his time that the big Chinamen Businessmen and corporate giants prospered without exertion.
When Mahathir dismantled the NEP officially in 1990 the Non Malays renounced their perception Mahathir as Ultra and since then Mahathir became the lovable leader for the non Malays. In essence it was the Chinese who enjoyed the Direct Negotiation and the express projects which were mega in scale.
There were also a few exclusive Malays who were in Daim's proteges like Halim Saad and his gang, and the untruthful heads of the GLC's who made wealth for themselves instead of building the GLCs which in actuality owned by the Rakyat.
The middle class Malays were suffering at length. BUT the class F contractors at the districts country wide enjoyed the abundance of jobs distributed by the district offices.
Back to Muhyiddin, his game plan to exhibit him as a Malay nationalist may secure him a good support from the Malays. In fact every UMNO leaders should be a nationalist as the party is a Nationalist party from day one of its inception.
BUT Muhyiddin is going away from basic struggle of Najib who will say "I am a Malaysian first" and than nothing other than 1Malaysia. What I am trying to say is, Muhyiddin is not for 1Malaysia. He cleverly declares himself as a Malay first and only after that as Malaysian.
1Malaysia slogan is not a Malay Nationalist slogan. It is all Malaysian slogans.
Muhyiddin wants to survive as a Malay Nationalist leader while Najib is trying to portray himself as a leader of the Malaysian and the kind of liberal like leader. Everyone within the border of this nation is equal. He is in desperado to get the support of the Chinese.
In short we can safely say that there seems to be a world of differences between the beliefs and values of Najib and Muhyiddin. Between both of them, who can find the conciliatory point? The answer is none.
I think Muhyiddin is building his brand and image in this time of despair for Najib. Many observers are convinced that Najib can't be long at the helm with all the problems surrounding him politically and personally.
Muhyiddin is subscribing as Malay small time Ultra to rise by rousing the Malay support like how Mahathir did. He will change once he gets the power, also like what Mahathir did.
BUT there are some from Johor who whispered softly to us, "We, Johorean still remember what he (Muhyiddin) did while he was the MB for the state"
Well, I don't have the privy to know what he did while he was the MB in JB. I hope it is not another bad story again.
Posted: 12 Jul 2010 04:44 AM PDT
Posted: 12 Jul 2010 04:21 AM PDT
Posted: 12 Jul 2010 04:12 AM PDT
Posted: 12 Jul 2010 01:51 AM PDT
I have asked before what justification the irreligous have for objecting to humans having sexual relations with animals. After all, I snarked, it seems the logical next step after the public acceptance of homosexuality – another form of sexual preference that is 'irrationally hated by backwards, bigoted religious fundamentalists'. (Incest is another, those mindless scripture-thumping sheeple!)
Religious nuts can cite this or that doctrine or verse or saying by a religious leader as their excuse – after all, they're RELIGIOUS right? Those fellas don't accept such blasphemy as logic, rationale and evidence!
One of the common responses in the comments was that zoophilia cannot be truly consensual (despite personal stories like this), because animals are not sentient and therefore cannot consciously choose to have willing sex with a human. Any apparent enjoyment on the animal's part is wholly an instinctual, uncontrollable, involuntary response.
Therefore, zoophilia is akin to rape or pedophilia rather than to the consensual relations between, say, two adult male humans.
Which makes me think: Why then are animal labour, pet rearing or eating meat considered acceptable?
In the same way that dogs cannot make the concious decision that they want sex with Dr. Dog-Doer, oxen cannot voluntarily agree to being harnessed and made to plow the field (nor give consent to being castrated for that matter).
Rabbits cannot grasp the concept of ownership by another being, let alone freely submit to the stifling existence of life in a cage.
Fish do not have the mental faculty to decide they really want to be hauled out into the suffocating air and served still writhing to the discerning sushi connosier.
I ask thee, are the harsh enslavement, lifetime imprisonment and outright murder of animals not worse than simply raping them?
So again, to the irreligious: If you don't base your ethics/morality regarding proper interactions between humans and animals on some outdated, arbitrary and probably mythical supernatural basis… Then what is your justification for objecting to zoophilia, but not to animal slavery, imprisonment and mass specie-cide?
PS. Just to get the message straight: I am no animal-rights activist. While I object to intentionally mistreatment of animals, I do not believe they are entitled to rights the same way humans are. I do not consider animal labour, keeping pets or barbeques unethical, however I consider sexual contact between humans and animals to be immoral. Being a theist, this dichotomy seems perfectly fine to me.
Posted: 12 Jul 2010 03:29 AM PDT
Posted: 12 Jul 2010 03:26 AM PDT
Posted: 12 Jul 2010 03:07 AM PDT
Posted: 12 Jul 2010 02:21 AM PDT
SHAH ALAM, 12 Julai — Ahli Dewan Undangan Negeri (Adun) Kuang (BN) Abdul Shukor Idrus hari ini diarah keluar dari ketika persidangan dewan selepas bertikam lidah dengan Speaker Dewan Undangan Negeri (DUN) Teng Chang Kim.
Tindakan itu dilakukan Teng mengikut peraturan mesyuarat 44 (2) selepas bertikam lidah dengan Abdul Shukor.
"Saya perintahkan di bawah peraturan mesyuarat 44 (2) disebabkan YB degil, saya arahkan yang berhormat keluar daripada dewan selama satu hari," kata Teng.
Abdul Shukor ketika itu ingin mengemukakan soalan berkaitan aktiviti kecurian pasir di negeri itu, namun disekat Teng.
Ketika ditemui di luar dewan Abdul Shukor mempersoalkan keputusan speaker kerana menolak untuk membahaskan isu kecurian pasir di Selangor.
"Saya mahu membahaskan isu kecurian pasir di negeri ini kerana mendapati terlalu banyak perkara yang tidak dimaklumkan terutamanya soal keuntungan dan kerugian.
"Rakyat hendak tahu kerana Menteri Besar (Tan Sri Khalid Ibrahim) kata banyak keuntungan tetapi tidak dimaklumkan secara lebih terperinci. Malah Menteri Besar seolah-olah tidak konsisten, kejap cakap untung banyak itu, kejap cakap untuk banyak itu, sebenarnya mana satu keuntungannya?
"Ini merupakan satu penipuan yang dilakukan kerajaan negeri," katanya kepada wartawan di sini.Beliau berkata usul yang ingin dikemukakan itu adalah untuk kepentingan rakyat tetapi ditolak daripada dibahaskan."Sebelum ini saya telah menyerahkan usul untuk membahaskan perkara ini dalam dewan tetapi ditolak kemudian saya serahkan lagi usul yang sama tetapi tiada jawapan diterima.
"Adakah usul ini tidak boleh dibincangkan dalam dewan? Adakah rakyat tidak berhak tahu apa yang berlaku sebenarnya? Usul yang ingin saya bahaskan ini adalah demi kepentingan rakyat negerin ini," katanya.
Terlebih dahulu ketika membahaskan isu tersebut Khalid berkata, kerajaan negeri akan mengambil beberapa tindakan baru untuk mencari penyelesaian kecurian pasir di negeri Selangor.
Menurutnya, kecurian pasir yang berlaku di Selangor semakin berleluasa sehingga menyebabkan kerajaan Nnegeri mengalami kerugian hampir RM30 juta.
"Kerajaan negeri menubuhkan jawatankuasa tindakan bersama pegawai daerah seluruh Selangor untuk memantau dan mengawal kecurian pasir.
"Setiausaha kerajaan negeri juga mengadakan mesyuarat secara berterusan setiap minggu bersama pegawai daerah yang berkaitan untuk menangani kecurian pasir.
"Saya percaya kerajaan negeri dapat mengembalikan royalti keuntungan pasir dengan segera supaya tidak merugikan dan semua pihak termasuk rakyat," katanya ketika sidang DUN tengah hari tadi
.Khalid berkata, Kerajaan Negeri mengeluarkan lesen untuk industri pasir sebanyak 800 tan hingga 1 juta tan setahun dimana keuntungan sepenuhnya melalui pengeluaran tersebut adalah 36 juta setahun.
"Namun pihak tidak bertanggungjawab yang diberi kelulusan melakukan perlombongan pasir tidak memberi pembayaran kepada kerajaan negeri menyebabkan kerajaan negeri mengalami kerugian."Pada 2006, Kerajaan Negeri hanya berjaya mendapat kutipan royalti pasir sebanyak RM 4.7 juta setahun manakala tahun 2007 sebanyak RM 4.2 juta sahaja.
"Jumlah kutipan yang sedikit ini terjadi kerana terdapat banyak kawasan perlombongan pasir berlaku kecurian tetapi gagal untuk kesan.
"Apabila berlakunya penglibatan dari pegawai kerajaan dan juga kumpulan samseng yang menguasai kecurian pasir di selangor, ia menyebabkan perancangan kerajaan negeri untuk menangani kecurian pasir terbatas.
Beliau berkata kerajaan negeri memerlukan keuntungan royalti 70 hingga 80 peratus untuk kembali pulih dalam mengambil keuntungan dari industri pasir di Selangor.
Beliau berkata sedemikian ketika menjawab pertanyaan Adun Sungai Burung (BN) Datuk Mohd Shamsudin Lias mengenai tindakan kerajaan negeri menangai isu kecurian pasir di Selangor.
|You are subscribed to email updates from ☪ Journal Sociopolitical Blogs |
To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now.
|Email delivery powered by Google|
|Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610|