‘Have we learnt nothing from the Bota fiasco?’ thundered Haris Ibrahim today.
Aiyah… Why lah, this Haris scolding people “How soon we forget!” when it is he himself who has a short memory.
His favourite mentee Hannah Yeoh had previously answered Haris’ question already wor (you forgot, neh?)
“Some may also say, well what about the earlier defection of Bota assemblyman, Datuk Nasarudin Hashim? Why did Pakatan Rakyat accept him? Why not force his seat to be vacated for a by-election? Let’s keep things in perspective here. His defection was that of an opposition lawmaker to a governing lawmaker. His defection did not alter the balance of power in the State Assembly. Pakatan Rakyat remained as government, and BN as opposition. Status quo. Logically and intelligently, anyone can safely assume that Pakatan Rakyat didn’t need a defection from BN. Thus, he defected on his own accord and on his own will. There was no need for Pakatan Rakyat to force him to vacate his seat as he did not win the seat on a Pakatan ticket. The Pakatan government really has no standing in forcing him to vacate a seat which wasn’t earned by Pakatan in the first place!”
There, Haris. You ask a question, you get your answer.
It was you yourself who pronounced that Hannah Yeoh has the “ability to articulate them well” with regard to ”principled position on important national issues”.
Has Haris forgotten that his “excellent candidate material” confidently declared Pakatan did not act unconstitutionally and nor did Pakatan lure defections?
Albeit the Q&A above belong to a different time frame but that is immaterial because ‘Principles’ – and according to Haris, Hannah is the very paragon of principle – remain constant through time.
Furthermore, Haris has sworn that Hannah possesses “strong religious convictions that guide her actions”.
Moses handed down the Ten Commandments from Mt Sinai 1,400 years before Jesus was born. Although for instance ‘Thou shall not steal’ was revealed to God’s children 3,400 years ago, it still holds to the present day.
If a principle and a religious conviction can be steadfast over the course of three-and-a-half millenia, then what is the mere short span between the Haris-and-Hannah proclamations on Bota?
What’s more important is that Haris – taking the superb reading from his Integrity Meter – has enthusiastically promoted Hannah as a cut above all the rest of Malaysia’s piddling politicians.
More of the ‘He Says, She Says’ ping-pong below.
By using the description “Bota fiasco”, Haris signals his disapproval of Yang Berhormat Revolving Door and the line dancing which the YB Bota led the Aduns of Behrang, Changkat Jering and Jelapang which then led to the collapse of the Pakatan state government in Perak.
Hannah’s contrary-to-Haris views on the Perak defections not only appeared in Anwar Ibrahim’s website (see screenshot below) but was righteously carried by pro-opposition media and in Pakatan blogosphere.
“How can anyone claim that Najib and Anwar are one and the same?”
So how now Haris? Today you quoted some critics as saying:
“Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim’s triumph in snaring [Bota Adun] Nasarudin has now made the electoral pact lose its ‘moral standing’ and unable to complain about Umno’s move to entice Pakatan Rakyat state legislators …”
As mentor, Haris had sounded seven heavenly trumpets for Hannah and her high moral standing.
The Saya Anak Bangsa Malaysia mascot must now be most puzzled as to “How can the SABM guru today claim that Najib and Anwar are one and the same” dealers in the frogology business?
Remember also that Haris credited Hannah with “strong academic qualification”. In her learned epistle, Hannah claims that Najib and his BN made “A Mockery of Our Democratic Institution” during the Perak constitutional crisis.
On why “you can’t say that Najib’s coup and Pakatan’s [Sept 16] plan were one and the same”, Hannah retorts:
“To those who argue that the political crisis in Perak now is a taste of Pakatan’s own medicine, they have failed to see the key differences between the two.”
Applying the Hannah line of rebuttal, we can extrapolate: “A-yo-yo Haris, you have failed to see the key differences between Bota and urm, what is it you’re complaining about now? More PKR potential frogs?”
Funny how Haris today alludes to, “If Anwar can’t comprehend this then he has lost the plot”.
Haris’ own plot has meandered too, from ABU (Anything But Umno) to ABB (Anything But BN) to ABC (Anything But Corruption).
Again the memory jiggy by Haris to his acolytes:
“You may or may not remember but soon after the 12th GE, PKR starting (sic) talking about the possibility of BN MPs crossing. … [Anwar] must speak up, and speak up now.”
Today Haris preaches: “Have we learnt nothing from the Bota fiasco?”
Before asking others, Haris might first want to ask Hannah, his Chosen One from among the carefully vetted potential election candidates.
“Pakatan should only “choose those who are qualified, good, and are firm in defending the principles of a clean and fair government for the people”.
Since Haris has put the words in bold red, it’s quite clear that he is concerned that Pakatan might not have “learnt its lesson” yet.
The “excellent candidate material” Hannah approved by Haris, even while knowing her views earlier on Bota and Sept 16, to him must still exemplify “those who are qualified and good”.
How does your Integrity Meter work, leh? Does it need to be sent for servicing?
Haris says, ‘Anwar, can we hear from you on this, please?‘ (21 Feb 2012)
Shall we also say:
“Haris, can we hear from you on this, please?” on Aduns who are “firm in defending the principles (nothing wrong with taking Bota what, she claims) of a clean and fair government for the people” since you’re still going around ABU-ing everywhere?
7 thoughts on “Game of ping-pong, enjoy!”
Helen Ang u are a scream:) – your tongue in cheek style is really refreshing. keep at it and keep it going.
Haris Ibrahim is a case study in middle-class lala-ism.
Kalau nak lala seorang-seorang tu kita tak kisah sangatlah. Tapi ni dia ada pula kutip dana (waktu dekat MCLM) untuk buat MLM ‘Lala get Lala’ kempen besar-besaran serta membentuk jaringan untuk mengembangkan lautan biru Twits.
Haris Ibrahim is a nut-case study. Period.
Why do people still entertain someone like Haris Ibrahim?
Media promotion. In this video, Haris is interviewed by a Malaysiakini reporter.
When the same reporter covered another event where Haris had a public spat with Uthayakumar, her report was blatantly biased in favour of Haris and against Uthaya.
The reporter has since left Malaysiakini and is now with The Star. She’s Hannah Yeoh Twitter BFF. Can you see how the biases are carried?
Yeah, Star may be owned by MCA but it doesn’t make its staff sign a pledge of political allegiance.
In that sense, MCA is more democratic than the Democratic Action Party b’cos an MCA-owned paper has pro-DAP staff but does S’gor Times, Buletin Mutiara and the other Pakatan media have any pro-BN people on their payroll?
HI-HY would make excellent MLM leaders with their eloquence.
They’d be making money ethically & be helping folks with their miraculous products. But then, I’m contradicting myself.
Comments are closed.