DAP berkuasa, sekarang sudah buat ikut suka hati di Selangor

April 16, 2015 at 9:53 am 34 comments

Pada 29 Nov 2013, Speaker DUN Selangor Hannah Yeoh telah membentangkan usul bagi mewajibkan ketua pembangkang untuk mempengerusikan Jawatankuasa Kira-kira Wang Awam (PAC).

Sebelum itu, ketua pembangkang Selangor telah dua kali menolak jawatan tersebut atas alasan tawaran itu berunsur muslihat politik.

Komposisi PAC Selangor dicadangkan akan terdiri wakil empat Adun Pakatan berbanding hanya seorang Adun BN. Keadaan berat sebelah yang demikian tidak membenarkan wujudnya ‘semak dan imbang’ dan lantaran itu, pembabitan BN dalam PAC pasti sekadar sebagai boneka (rubber stamp).

Namun DUN Selangor – yang dikuasai Pakatan dengan majoriti besar empat perlima – kemudiannya meluluskan pindaan peraturan tetap agar tidak memberi pilihan ketua pembangkang kecuali setuju untuk mempengerusi PAC.

Selangor4fifth

Hannah pemangku Pengerusi PAC

Hasil paksaan yang dikenakan oleh Speaker Selangor itu, maka YB Mohd Shamsuddin Lias (Sungai Burong-Umno) telah memutus untuk melepaskan jawatan beliau sebagai ketua pembangkang pada Disember lalu.

Adun-adun BN lain turut enggan terikat dengan peraturan ketua pembangkang mesti jadi pengerusi PAC juga. Kesannya sampai sidang dewan bulan ini, Selangor masih tidak mempunyai ketua pembangkang kerana BN belum lagi lantik sesiapa untuk mengganti Shamsuddin.

Terkini, Speaker Hannah Yeoh menggunakan kuasanya untuk melantik Ng Suee Lim (Sekinchan-DAP) sebagai pemangku pengerusi PAC. Kata Hannah, “Umno tidak mahu menamakan ketua pembangkang di Selangor”.

hannah speaker mouth

Perkembangan ini menunjukkan bahawa DAP boleh buat sesuka hati.

Mula-mula DAP cuba memaksa ketua pembangkang mempengerusi PAC, lalu DAP telah mengusulkan ketetapan tersebut di dewan.

Kaedah paksaan DAP itu diluluskan dewan gara-gara super majority yang dipegang Pakatan.

Setelah menemui jalan buntu ekoran pihak pembangkang tidak akur kepada arahan supaya Adun BN mesti mempengerusi PAC, sekarang ini Puan Speaker menukar haluan.

ng suee lim

Boleh pula Hannah Yeoh melantik rakan DAPnya (gambar atas) YB Ng menjadi pengerusi PAC meskipun peraturan DUN sudah dipinda untuk mewajibkan ianya ketua pembangkang yang menyandang jawatan tersebut.

Ikut suka DAP buat undang-undang dan selepas itu diabaikan saja undang-undang baru yang mereka sendiri cipta.

HannahSpeaker

YB Nik Nazmi (Seri Setia-PKR) tunduk kepada Puan Speaker DAP

Advertisements

Entry filed under: BIAWAK. Tags: , , , .

Dua beranak ditahan ludah, tampar anggota polis Hudud: PAS tolong jawab pertanyaan Tun

34 Comments Add your own

  • 1. tebing tinggi  |  April 16, 2015 at 10:43 am

    When you had the power ,you can do whatever you want .

    Reply
    • 2. g  |  April 17, 2015 at 1:26 pm

      Absolute power corrupts, absolutely?

      Reply
  • 3. danontheroad  |  April 16, 2015 at 11:15 am

    Putting aside the fact of the Speakers’s power grab, why can’t UMNO for once show leadership & take on the role of Ketua Pembangkang?

    These cowards will soon learn that by GE14, the whole northern rural belt of Selangor will be captured by PAS.

    Reply
    • 4. mfma  |  April 16, 2015 at 2:14 pm

      Errr!?

      Can’t be Ketua Pembangkang unless must be PAC chairperson?

      Chairing PAC in which PR have 80% voting power (4/5)?

      ……………………

      To me, this is classic case of damn if you do, damn if you don’t.

      Reply
      • 5. danontheroad  |  April 16, 2015 at 5:22 pm

        Well, if this 80% PR PAC member vote against the Chairman for raising a relevant issue, he can go to the media telling them that PR has blocked PAC’s investigation of a certain discrepancy.

        But to me, Ketua Pembangkang as the Chairman of PAC is already advantageous because audit has been done by the Auditor General on the Selangor administration so he can call out those accountable, be it civil servants, GLC members and State EXCO.

        Reply
        • 6. Helen Ang  |  April 16, 2015 at 5:29 pm

          My response here is not on the same subject but nonetheless the example does reflect on the DAP’s highhanded methods and censorship, i.e. how they operate.

          See ‘Dodgy Podgy porky and pie .

          It is a compilation of screenshots showing how Hannah Yeoh blocked scores of Twitter users from her timeline including public figures like Tan Sri Fong Chan Onn, Datuk Ti Lian Ker, political aides (MCA, MIC, Gerakan) and some known bloggers/tweeter personalities as well.

          Reply
          • 7. danontheroad  |  April 16, 2015 at 7:18 pm

            That I do not doubt :)

            Reply
          • 8. bnm  |  April 18, 2015 at 12:07 am

            Why the obsession with HY? So many politicians in Msia. Yet you choose HY. From her tweet to her ‘tudung’ to her children etc etc. What so special with HY?

            Reply
            • 9. Helen Ang  |  April 18, 2015 at 1:12 am

              re: “What so special with HY?”

              She’s the sneakiest.

              (1) Other non-Muslim politicians have worn tudung (but only the DAP evangelista women though). However, even the other DAP Yang Berhormat tudung wearers don’t make it a mission to Occupy Masjid and spread the staged event/photo ops all over social media.

              (2) No other politician has exploited their children like she has. We can’t name Muhyiddin’s children off the cuff. And we don’t even know how many children Liow Tiong Lai has.

              When Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter were president, their daughters Chelsea and Amy were young, and the girls’ privacy was strictly protected. When G.W. Bush was president, his twins Jenna and Barbara were attractive teenagers but kept out of the limelight as well.

              Not so with Hannah Yeoh’s daughter. As a newborn, Shay Adora Ram was made into political fodder for her mother to get mileage on Anak Malaysia.

              (3) As another example (there are plenty), I’ve never heard Twitterjaya complain so much about any politician blocking tweeters who disagree or question his/her opinion. Other politicians known to block are Rafizi, Guan Eng and Tony Pua – it’s a Pakatan trait, not BN’s (BN is actually more democratic).

              I’ve provided evidence that @hannahyeoh blocked scores of Twitter accounts from her timeline.

              Yet she’s so hypocritical as to posture to be a defender of freedom of expression.

              Here she is kononnya fighting for Nurul’s freedom to speak freely in the House. Aiseyman, even in her Twitter timeline Hannah does allow people to speak freely. Cakap tak serupa bikin. Another Pakatan politician trait.

              null

              Reply
              • 10. bnm  |  April 18, 2015 at 8:19 pm

                re: wear tudung, exploit own children, block twitter (all in reference to HY)

                These are all within HY’s personal domain/rights. The tudung was worn on HY’s head, the children were HY’s and the twitter account belongs to HY. She maybe morally wrong to do the above. But what is morally wrong to you may not be morally wrong to HY.

                I don’t see how the public is aggrieved/affected whether directly or indirectly by the actions of HY. If the actions above by HY qualified her as ‘sneakiest’ as per your definition, what about politicians that corrupted money from public coffers or mishandled the same that resulted in wastage and leakage?

                Question:

                (HY wear tudung, exploit own children, block twitter) vs (corrupt politicians)

                Who is sneakier in your opinion?

                BTW, why you equate the rights of anyone to speak freely in HY’s twitter as the same as the rights of an MP (i.e. Izzah) to speak freely in Parliament? Are Twitter and Parliament comparable?

                Reply
                • 11. Helen Ang  |  April 18, 2015 at 9:47 pm

                  re: “I don’t see how the public is aggrieved/affected whether directly or indirectly by the actions of HY.”

                  You’re wrong. Members of the public were aggrieved. Those directly affected had complained about her Twitter censorship.

                  Moreover it’s very hypocritical when the DAP, incl. Hannah herself, is the chiefest proponent of freedom of expression.

                  And yes, some segments of the Indian community were aggrieved that Hannah’s daughter was officially categorized a ‘Chinese’. A couple of MIC special officers were blocked from her Twitter for calling her out on it.

                  The National Registration Department officer was aggrieved because Hannah made her/him out to be a racist to be blamed for the fiasco when she/he was simply following standard procedure.

                  As for the tudung worn on Hannah’s head, although there has been no reprimand but nonetheless the circular by MAIS forbidding politicking in the mosques was a consequence.

                  The Selangor Sultan reinforced this when he bertitah – in connection with the above prohibition – that the mosque should be regarded as a place of worship specifically “FOR MUSLIMS ONLY”, stressing on the function of the mosque as tempat orang BERIBADAH.

                  re: “what about politicians that corrupted money from public coffers or mishandled the same that resulted in wastage and leakage?”

                  They face a barrage of criticisms, like Shahrizat – even from Malay supporters of her own party. I don’t see Chinese opposition supporters criticizing DAP or the party’s icons. It’s only the opponents like Huan Cheng Guan and Tan Keng Liang who criticize the DAP, not people from their own side.

                  re: “BTW, why you equate the rights of anyone to speak freely in HY’s twitter as the same as the rights of an MP (i.e. Izzah) to speak freely in Parliament? Are Twitter and Parliament comparable?”

                  Don’t set up a strawman lah by pretending to compare Twitter with Parliament. It’s the same principle: Tolong cakap serupa bikin. What hypocrisy when you preach one thing but do another, even though the thing is – as you say – conducted in two different domains (Twitter, Parliament).

                  Reply
                  • 12. bnm  |  April 20, 2015 at 11:34 am

                    Politicians are also private individuals. If you judge their personal affairs using the benchmark of public expectations (like HY’s advocacy of rights to speak in Parliament vs HY’s personal twitter, children, tudung etc), you will never find consistent politicians. So many examples to quote here. Say Proton is on par with BMW but personally drives luxury foreign brand. Say local education standards are high but send children to private/international/overseas schools. Question the financials of 1MDB but during his tenure, so many financial wrongdoings happened. Say hudud is not part of common platform but still table a private member’s bill.

                    Cakap tak serupa bikin is very common. What important is cakap serupa bikin in the same context. To illustrate, read this link:

                    http://www.themalaymailonline.com/malaysia/article/woman-wins-rm300000-in-landmark-case-on-discrimination-over-pregnancy

                    The law on gender equality applies to public sector only. The same cannot be applied in private sector. It means that private sector employers are free to discriminate based on gender, race and religion (which is already happening anyway).

                    No doubt there are people upset/aggrieved by HY’s personal action as quoted by you. What remedies they have? I don’t see any except for what you did. Criticize HY in your personal domain like your blog here. It is HY’s personal domain vs your personal aggravation.

                    re: ……. not people from their own side.

                    Wastage/leakage/corruption of public funds are public interest matters. It must be handled by authorities. Not supporters or detractors of the politicians. Authorities have all the powers to investigate, prosecute and punish. There were few allegations of wrong doing against PR politicians. If authorities were unable to discover anything wrongful, why should the supporters of PR condemn? What is the basis to condemn. It is like putting the cart before the horse.

                    BTW, what is the value/impact of Umno supporters’ criticism against Sharizat? She stepped down as minister due to expiry of her senatorship. She didn’t resign immediately or being sacked. The millions were still not returned to government years. She is still the Umno Wanita chief. Correct me if I am wrong. She is still untouchable. Why bother to criticize? The legal system and authorities failed to deal with Sharizat.

                    Reply
                    • 13. Helen Ang  |  April 20, 2015 at 12:23 pm

                      re: “Politicians are also private individuals. If you judge their personal affairs using the benchmark of public expectations (like HY’s advocacy of rights to speak in Parliament vs HY’s personal twitter, children, tudung etc), you will never find consistent politicians.”

                      Oh come on lah! Sometimes you people attempt to take your tegakkan benang basah too far.

                      A principle is a principle whichever the domain. The same rule applies: You don’t steal from your law partner (politicians have other jobs whether running their own law firm, clinic, logging company, etc) and you don’t steal from the state coffers either.

                      As for Hannah’s Twitter – is it private? No! In her Twitter profile, her first description is characterizing herself as Selangor Speaker and secondly as state assemblymen. Her home persona as Wife & Mother only comes third.

                      Does Hannah Yeoh use her Twitter for political business? All the time!

                      She tweets to promote her role and power as Speaker – see below – and takes potshots at Umno, at Gerakan esp. Tan Keng Liang, at MCA esp. its Beliawanis, at reporters (Utusan editors, Joceline & Helen, etc). So how can you consign her Twitter to private and personal, and thus exempted from responsibility to cakap serupa bikin?

                      null

                      re: “So many examples to quote here. Say Proton is on par with BMW but personally drives luxury foreign brand.”

                      The official car of members of the Federal Cabinet is Proton. It is only the Pakatan state exco that wanted Toyota.

                      re: “Say local education standards are high but send children to private/international/overseas schools.”

                      Some walk the talk. Hate to say this but KJ’s kids are in national school.

                      re: “Cakap tak serupa bikin is very common. What important is cakap serupa bikin in the same context.”

                      Hannah Yeoh’s Twitter is used for political purposes and her Twitter followers are her political fan boys. Only if her Twitter was confined only to family and friends, then you’d have a case. As it is with Twitter being her most potent political tool, you’re not convincing anybody.

                      re: “The same cannot be applied in private sector. It means that private sector employers are free to discriminate based on gender, race and religion (which is already happening anyway).”

                      Private sector employers who want to discriminate based on gender, race and religion do not go around campaigning on Good Practices, and asking the public to vote for them by promising of Equality, Transparency and all that Holy Water.

                      The DAP political platform is to do away with racial discrimination, to break the glass ceiling for women, etc. How can you compare DAP politicians with private sector employers? The Yang Berhormats are public officials.

                      re: “No doubt there are people upset/aggrieved by HY’s personal action as quoted by you.”

                      Glad to hear your acknowledgment but don’t fudge. It’s not her PERSONAL action when the DAP carried out an Anak Malaysia campaign on her behalf and she also said she would petition the PM over the matter of her baby’s birth certificate Race categorization.

                      re: “What remedies they have? I don’t see any except for what you did.”

                      I build up my blog platform from scratch so that I can have a public voice. Unfortunately, few of the other individuals upset by her hypocrisy and sneakiness have this avenue.

                      re: “Criticize HY in your personal domain like your blog here.”

                      The media controlled by the MCA should have taken up some of the issues, like the blocking of scores of Twitter users from her timeline.

                      re: “It is HY’s personal domain vs your personal aggravation.”

                      It is not my “personal aggravation”. My blog with thousands of readers daily is public as is Hannah Yeoh’s Twitter. With her 107,000 Twitter followers, her reach is greater than most newspapers. NST‘s circulation is way, way smaller.

                      re: “Wastage/leakage/corruption of public funds are public interest matters. It must be handled by authorities. Not supporters or detractors of the politicians.”

                      There you go again with your straw man argument. Criticizing and investigating are too different matters.

                      I don’t see any reluctance on the part of Dapsters to criticize Shahrizat even though they’re in no position to handle any enforcement of the law on her. Likewise they’re now happily rallying behind Tun’s criticisms of 1MDB even though Tun is not the Auditer-General’s office or PDRM or MACC who have the authority to investigate and prosecute and punish.

                      re: “If authorities were unable to discover anything wrongful, why should the supporters of PR condemn? What is the basis to condemn. It is like putting the cart before the horse.”

                      If they refuse to speak up on DAP potential wrongdoing (like the proposed undersea tunnel to connect Penang island to the mainland), then they should keep quiet on 1MDB too. Don’t be so double standard. You’re defending the indefensible. Pakatan supporters do this. BN supporters don’t. Umno supporters are not keeping quiet on 1MDB the way DAP supporters are keeping quiet on the undersea tunnel plan.

                      re: “BTW, what is the value/impact of Umno supporters’ criticism against Shahrizat? […] Why bother to criticize?”

                      Then advise your Pakatan friends to shut up with all their criticisms if you think there is no point to bother.

                    • 14. bnm  |  April 20, 2015 at 7:53 pm

                      Looks like you mixed the concept of public/private domain of a politician. Take HY as example. She is also the Speaker of Selangor DUN and runs her own twitter account. As DUN Speaker, she cannot arbitrarily gantung any DUN member or prevent the entry of any DUN member into the assembly. She has assembly rules to follow. She cannot act on her whims and fancies. In fact, she can be legally sued/sanctioned for breaching house rules.

                      Contrast that with HY’s twitter account. She is the absolute administrator and possess total control. She can block or remove any users from her account. Can she be legally sued/sanctioned by any blocked users? The answer is no. That is why people who are arbitrarily blocked by HY have no remedies recognized in law. At most, these people can only criticize HY at their respective private domain. If HY block you, you block HY back.

                      The differentiating factors are control and remedy. HY may use her twitter account for political purpose and have thousands of followers. But still, she has absolute control and aggrieved users have no formal remedies.

                      re: A principle is a principle whichever the domain. The same rule applies: You don’t steal from your law partner (politicians have other jobs whether running their own law firm, clinic, logging company, etc) and you don’t steal from the state coffers either.

                      That is the most ideal. However, you won’t find any politicians that fit that. Please show if you find any. BTW, stealing irrespective of the domain is a crime (i.e. a public domain offence).

                      re: The official car of members of the Federal Cabinet is Proton. It is only the Pakatan state exco that wanted Toyota.

                      I am comparing official car vs personal car. Minister claimed that Proton is on par with BMW. Yet for personal use, they choose foreign brands. Eg. Hishammudin recently bought an Audi as personal vehichle. Even KJ has foreign marque as his personal wheels. For PR, official car is Toyota as they never concur with the standards of Proton. I don’t see the issue if they use foreign marques as their personal car.

                      re: Hate to say this but KJ’s kids are in national school.

                      For how long the kids will stay in national school?

                      re: Hannah Yeoh’s Twitter is used for political purposes and her Twitter followers are her political fan boys.

                      No reasonable politicians will allow adverse/unfavourable tweets in his/her twitter. Especially if the account is entirely under his/her control.

                      re: How can you compare DAP politicians with private sector employers? The Yang Berhormats are public officials.

                      Try ask the question whether a person supports gender equality in employment of both public and private sectors. Anyone will say yes irrespective of the respondents’ affiliation in terms of politics, race and religion. Universally, all will agree. But sadly, the law in Msia said otherwise. Rights to gender equality is only applicable in public domain, not private domain. This is why I used the example to draw distinction between the 2 domains. No doubt HY as YB is a public official. But not everything she does is subject to public domain standards. She has her personal space. Eg. her twitter account despite having a very wide reach.

                      re: Umno supporters are not keeping quiet on 1MDB the way DAP supporters are keeping quiet on the undersea tunnel plan.

                      How to remain quiet if the issue of 1MDB is simply cannot be swept under the carpet due to its huge size of debt? Speaking of the undersea tunnel projects, BN/Umno has made some noice. At federal level, they are the one that control all the authorities. Any avenue to discover and punish wrongdoing like checking bank accounts, confiscate documents, summon for investigation, initiate prosecution and even deliver guilty verdict are within the powers of BN. Till todate, no indication of wrongdoing. If you are PR supporters and you see no such efforts by BN to incriminate, will you still criticise the undersea tunnel project?

                      When it comes to 1MDB it was PR that first highlighted the wrongdoings. Mahathir came in later. Same case as Sharizat NFC. Rafizi broke the news then only investigation followed. The BN controlled authorities and BN supporters must be ‘lazy’ to expose PR wrongdoings.

                    • 15. Helen Ang  |  April 20, 2015 at 9:25 pm

                      re: “Looks like you mixed the concept of public/private domain of a politician.”

                      Nope, it’s Hannah Yeoh who erased the boundary between public and private domains.

                      Giving birth is entirely her own personal affair. However when she turned her newborn into political capital to gain further mileage on her party’s Anak Malaysia pitch, then it becomes a public matter esp. when the DAP started a campaign around Shay Adora. Plus Mommy Dearest announced that she was going to petition the PM and thereby got the Dapster horde highly energized and cheering wildly.

                      re: “Contrast that with HY’s twitter account. She is the absolute administrator and possess total control. She can block or remove any users from her account. Can she be legally sued/sanctioned by any blocked users? The answer is no.”

                      Yup, the answer is ‘nein’. However DAP and Hannah have been projecting themselves as the defenders of free speech and transparency. Blocking critics is denying them the right to express their opinions, particularly if the feedback is pertaining to Hannah’s job performance as an elected rep. Where then is the transparency and accountability always touted by the DAP?

                      re: “That is why people who are arbitrarily blocked by HY have no remedies recognized in law. At most, these people can only criticize HY at their respective private domain. If HY block you, you block HY back.”

                      Joe Public can block her back but they’re unequal powers in Twitter. Hannah Yeoh has 107k followers. The average mamat has 1,000-2,000 (itupun kalau rajin tweet). DAP clearly encourages inequality and does not care to remedy the imbalances of society.

                      She has more than a hundred thousand followers. That is a huge leverage for cyberbullying which she has a track record of. And you’re right – aggrieved users have no formal remedies. This same ‘no recourse’ situation is what the public should expect should the DAP acquire federal power.

                      re: “The differentiating factors are control and remedy. HY may use her twitter account for political purpose and have thousands of followers. But still, she has absolute control and aggrieved users have no formal remedies.”

                      Hannah Yeoh uses her absolutely controlled Twitter to publicize DAP events, activities and party report card. But when the (blocked) Twitter users try to counter her skewed and sugar-coated info, they are denied the opportunity to offer a check and balance. Hannah’s Twitter is very lopsided.

                      Like one of the blocked victims had complained, all Madame Speaker wants to hear is praise.

                      re: “That is the most ideal. However, you won’t find any politicians that fit that. Please show if you find any. BTW, stealing irrespective of the domain is a crime (i.e. a public domain offence).”

                      Alright, granted that a politician is less than principled. Most people around the world certainly think so and this is reflected in opinion survey results that consistently show politicians to top the Trust Deficit list (of least trusted people in any job category). It’s only the Dapsters who believe that their DAP politicians are saints.

                      re: “Minister claimed that Proton is on par with BMW. Yet for personal use, they choose foreign brands. Eg. Hishammudin recently bought an Audi as personal vehicle.”

                      You’re not applying the same excuse you provided for Hannah, meh? Public vs personal, neh. What the BN politicians drive as their second car is their own business. The government can only do so much, which is order a Proton fleet for its ministers.

                      re: “For PR, official car is Toyota as they never concur with the standards of Proton. I don’t see the issue if they use foreign marques as their personal car.”

                      If you don’t see any issue for Pakatan politicians to use foreign marques as their personal car, then there should be no issue either for BN pollies doing the same. However at the public level, BN leaders are given Protons while Pakatan leaders are given Toyotas. That’s that – it speaks for itself. Bloody hypocrites.

                      re: “For how long the kids will stay in national school?”

                      Let’s just give KJ credit where it is due even if he’s not my favourite person.

                      It may interest you to know that Tony Pua – before he became an MP and pre-2008 when he was better known as blogger running an Education website together with Ong Kian Ming – had toyed with the idea of sending his daughter to Sekolah Kebangsaaan. It all sounds very Bangsa Malaysia and makes for good rhetoric. Urm, guess he didn’t carry through with the plan.

                      re: “No reasonable politicians will allow adverse/unfavourable tweets in his/her twitter. Especially if the account is entirely under his/her control.”

                      I find that BN politicians do allow adverse/unfavourable tweets in their Twitter. It is the Pakatan (DAP & PKR) politicians who like to censor. Hence because BN politicians and their supporters are more reasonable and democratic, I was prompted to change my vote in 2013.

                      re: “Try ask the question whether a person supports gender equality in employment of both public and private sectors. Anyone will say yes irrespective of the respondents’ affiliation in terms of politics, race and religion. Universally, all will agree.”

                      Memang lah politikus DAP, terutama mereka yang kabilah evangelista, akan cakap jer apa-apa yang sedapkan telinga.

                      re: “No doubt HY as YB is a public official. But not everything she does is subject to public domain standards.”

                      Then don’t drag her children into the public domain to be made party mascots. The Russian public don’t even know what Putin’s daughter(s) look like. And don’t showboat as a free speech freedom fighter when you’re unwilling to practise what you preach.

                      re: “She has her personal space. Eg. her twitter account despite having a very wide reach.”

                      Her Twitter a/c is use to conduct DAP propaganda and outreach.

                      re: “If you are PR supporters and you see no such efforts by BN to incriminate, will you still criticise the undersea tunnel project?”

                      Let’s compare apples to apples, okay? I said Umno supporters are willing to criticize their party but Dapsters are unwilling to criticize the DAP.

                      A number of Umno people / pro-establishment Malays condemned Shahrizat. I don’t hear DAP people / anti-establishment Chinese condemning. Those who do, such as Norman Fernandez, are soon purged.

                      re: “When it comes to 1MDB it was PR that first highlighted the wrongdoings. Mahathir came in later. Same case as Sharizat NFC. Rafizi broke the news then only investigation followed. The BN controlled authorities and BN supporters must be ‘lazy’ to expose PR wrongdoings.’

                      Hey, wasn’t it you yourself who remarked @ 2015/04/20 at 10:42 am in reply to Shamshul Anuar, “How would ordinary citizens like you and me will have evidence to implicate/absolve Najib?”

                      So how do you expect BN supporters (who are similarly no more than ordinary citizens either) be able to korek OSA evidence to expose Pakatan wrongdoings? Why accuse them of being “lazy” when it is pragmatically beyond their capability?

                      Rafizi was a whistleblower, that’s true. But he’s also Anwar’s right-hand man. So obviously Anwar has a lot of cables, including his Zionist friends in Washington who are privy to Wikileaks-type info. There’s only one Anugerah Tuhan in Malaysia (or maybe two, if we take Ibrahim Ali’s word for it).

                      The rest of us do not have that kind of access. But on the other hand, when part of the info has already been made public – both 1MDB and undersea tunnel – then how the supporters in the two opposing camps react should be compared.

                      The Umno supporters are pressing Najib whereas DAP supporters have always endeavoured to suppress or bury the news whenever it is adverse to LGE while at the same time rabidly attacking the DAP critics through smear campaigns – hoping that by throwing enough mud at the messenger, the message he carries will be equally discredited. Sneaky bastards.

  • 16. Xynal Hamzah  |  April 16, 2015 at 11:28 am

    Dengar ceritanya penghapusan etnik kat sebuah bank juga Dap main peranan penting. Lebih malang bila pembesar melayu yang berkuasa buat tutup mata melihat bangsanya dihapuskan.

    Reply
    • 17. Helen Ang  |  April 16, 2015 at 11:33 am

      re: “penghapusan etnik”

      P. Uthayakumar had to spend three years’ jail (1.5 years detention in Kamunting under ISA & another 1.5 years in Kajang prison) for using the “ethnic cleansing” word in his 2007 letter to the British prime minister.

      Reply
  • 20. bnm  |  April 16, 2015 at 11:31 am

    re: Keadaan berat sebelah yang demikian tidak membenarkan wujudnya ‘semak dan imbang’ dan lantaran itu, pembabitan BN dalam PAC pasti sekadar sebagai boneka

    Correct me if I am wrong. All this while, the PAC chairman is always from the ruling coalition. Majority of the members are from the same as well. Opposition members will get a minority seats in the PAC.

    If you look at the practices of UK and India, their PAC chairman is always from the opposition. The composition of members will reflect the composition in the assembly. This is what PR Selangor is trying to emulate.

    Accept the reality. BN is the minority in Selangor. They are the opposition. They have to play by the rule of the majority. Read this:

    http://www.thesundaily.my/node/286580

    Using the logic of YB Mohd Shamsuddin Lias, then no PAC will function if the members of the minority in the assembly refuse to be appointed whether as member or chairman of PAC.

    Reply
    • 21. Helen Ang  |  April 16, 2015 at 11:55 am

      re: “Accept the reality. BN is the minority in Selangor. They are the opposition. They have to play by the rule of the majority.”

      Thanks for the reminder of how teruk BN kalah.

      See ‘Adun Sungai Burong Letak Jawatan Ketua Pembangkang DUN Selangor’ (Suara TV, 8 Dec 2014)

      ref.

      “Jika kerajaan negeri benar-benar ikhlas atas prinsip demokrasi, mereka seharusnya ada ‘check and balance’ dan bukan hanya meletakkan satu Adun BN berbanding empat Adun PR dalam jawatankuasa tersebut,” katanya kepada pemberita di sini hari ini.”

      So with Shamsuddin’s refusal, the PAC will presumably now follow a ratio of 5-0 considering that Pakatan already has 4/5 control of the assembly.

      re: “This is what PR Selangor is trying to emulate.”

      Democratic practices elsewhere are fine to cite as examples but we shouldn’t neglect to take cognizance that the small and weak opposition in Selangor are being confronted by the sneakiest of bastards.

      I don’t blame Shamsuddin for his fear of being made a patsy and inadvertently lending his name to whitewash the Pakatan shenanigans.

      What is Pakatan capable of? See what they did to their own Menteri Besar Khalid Ibrahim.

      Reply
      • 22. bnm  |  April 17, 2015 at 7:03 pm

        re: mereka seharusnya ada ‘check and balance’ dan bukan hanya meletakkan satu Adun BN berbanding empat Adun PR dalam jawatankuasa tersebut,

        Getting one out of 5 seats in PAC reflects the actual Selangor assembly composition of 12 BN and 44 PR. Do your own maths. This is certified by Nur Jazlan, an Umno man.

        re: Nur Jazlan said the composition of the Selangor PAC naturally reflects Pakatan’s majority in the state assembly (with 44 assemblymen)
        (from http://www.thesundaily.my/node/286580)

        re: I don’t blame Shamsuddin for his fear of being made a patsy and inadvertently lending his name to whitewash the Pakatan shenanigans.

        So, should PR representatives quit their positions in PAC (federal and state levels) just because they are the minority and will be ‘inadvertently lending their names to whitewash the BN shenanigans’? What about BN representatives in PACs of BN states?

        Reply
        • 23. Helen Ang  |  April 17, 2015 at 7:21 pm

          That depends on whether the BN Aduns are sneaky bastards. It’s a matter of trust.

          Reply
          • 24. bnm  |  April 17, 2015 at 7:29 pm

            So when it comes to a PAC which has PR as majority, this PAC is ‘sneaky bastards’? For other PACs which have BN (parliament and BN states) as majority, they are not ‘sneaky bastards’?

            re: trust

            There is no trust in partisan politics. No way BN will trust PR whether in assembly, the various committees etc etc. But as minority, you need to accept this fact. Play according to the rules set by majority. If not happy being a minority, work harder to win the next election.

            Reply
            • 25. Helen Ang  |  April 17, 2015 at 7:57 pm

              I’m not privy to the goings-on in the PACs.

              In other areas however – I’m thinking media spindoctors and political operatives – then yes, Pakatan people are indeed sneaky bastards. TMI would be a prime example, i.e. how they doctored that demo banner to say “Undur Hadi” and how they spun something non-existent against the Majlis Raja-Raja and Majlis Fatwa.

              And between the politicians, I wouldn’t say that Umno or MCA leaders are sneaky bastards. However when it comes some in the DAP and PKR, most certainly.

              re: “But as minority, you need to accept this fact. Play according to the rules set by majority. If not happy being a minority, work harder to win the next election.”

              So as a minority, I hope that you will accept the fact that Article 11 of the Federal Constitution prohibits the proselytization of Christianity and other faiths to the majority Muslims. One of the ‘side effects’ is that the ‘Allah’ Bible in bahasa Melayu is not allowed to be distributed in some states.

              Play according to the rules set by majority. If not happy being a minority, work harder to win the next election and amend the Constitution.

              Reply
              • 26. bnm  |  April 18, 2015 at 12:00 am

                re: sneaky bastards

                What may tantamount to ‘sneaky bastards’ to you may not be applicable to others. Don’t want to harp on this term.

                re: One of the ‘side effects’ is that the ‘Allah’ Bible in bahasa Melayu is not allowed to be distributed in some states.

                Agree with you. Law is law. Too bad it is the AG that refused to prosecute BSM despite the overwhelming evidence of wrong doing. With this precedent, any future ‘Allah’ bible seizures by Jais is rendered ineffective by the AG as all confiscated bibles have to eventually be returned. ‘Kesian’ all the hard work of Jais.

                Most importantly, Article 11 is undermined as the authority at most can prevent the distribution of hard copies of ‘Allah’ bibles. What about the internet? Half past six enforcement by Jais.

                Reply
    • 27. jentayu  |  April 17, 2015 at 9:33 am

      yes. dap try to emulate but only on face value. in uk for example the membership of public committee as follow : labour 6 (including chairman); conservative 7 (the ruling party) and 1 liberal democrat (who form unity goverment with conservative). so the ratio is 43 % (labour) and 57% (conservative and liberal democrat). not 80% from state government and a mere 20% from state oppo. 40% : 60% should be a healthy ratio (2 from bn and 3 from state government).

      Reply
      • 28. Helen Ang  |  April 17, 2015 at 10:24 am

        The Selangor Speaker submits an amendment (new inclusion) to the House rules to make it compulsory for the Opposition Leader to also chair the Public Accounts Committee.

        The House which Pakatan controls with a 4/5 majority passes the proposed amendment. So now the BN Adun who is Opposition Leader will be forced to become the PAC chairman.

        Since the BN Aduns don’t want to be steamrolled into rubber stamping the PAC, they decide not to pick an Opposition Leader from among the BN (well, actually Umno only) ranks.

        As a result, Madame Speaker is unable to compel YB Sungai Burong or any of his Adun colleagues to hold the post of PAC chairman despite the Selangor DUN approving the new regulation.

        And what does the DAP do after it has been checkmated? Pakatan appoints DAP Adun YB Sekinchan as acting PAC chairman. Eh, but what happened to that new rule which Pakatan recently created? Buat ikut suka hati diorang jer.

        This episode goes to show that it is not the process of law which Pakatan cares about but the power they have at present to do things their way by bulldozing through whatever they like.

        Reply
      • 29. bnm  |  April 17, 2015 at 7:07 pm

        re: ot 80% from state government and a mere 20% from state oppo. 40% : 60% should be a healthy ratio (2 from bn and 3 from state government).

        Read here: http://www.thesundaily.my/node/286580

        Quote: Nur Jazlan said the composition of the Selangor PAC naturally reflects Pakatan’s majority in the state assembly (with 44 assemblymen)

        Note: Nur Jazlan is an Umno man and chairs the Parliament PAC.

        If you want a ratio of 2BN and 3PR, then BN needs to command 22 seats in Selangor Assembly as opposed to the current 12.

        Reply
  • 30. Onsleuth Amir Yahya  |  April 16, 2015 at 11:42 am

    Guess what ? Now we know the DAP chinese Quartet doing in Egyt & Jordan. Don’t think many malaysian chinese student there, so guess the target audience is.

    Any PAS people read this ? Don’t you feel anything ? Even islamic religious Exco in Penang was given to PKR’s Malik Itik. ( Just look how youthful is woman in this pic. Why use old photo ?)

    Reply
    • 31. MCA.8481  |  April 16, 2015 at 4:53 pm

      wah, Dap begitu pro-aktif sekali. ini ada gambar2 sasaran Dap di timur tgh tuu…. https://www.google.com.my/search?q=lembu+dalam+kereta&biw=1517&bih=741&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=xHcvVa7TIIKBuwTc7YDACQ&ved=0CAYQ_AUoAQ&dpr=0.9

      Reply
      • 32. jentayu  |  April 17, 2015 at 9:39 am

        they want to breed as many melati clone as possible. pas cannot be trusted in the long run to mind control the malay population to its cause. these young arab wannabe confused between Islamic struggle and arabization and will support anything against bn even though these dapsters resembles very closely to Zionist Israel. clearly they have wasted so much time there and not learn enough from the political turmoil in the middle east that have been shaped by Zionist all along.

        Reply
  • 33. kuman  |  April 16, 2015 at 12:49 pm

    This is what DR M worries and PM just dont bother, seems so. It will take another decade to recapture Selangor by BN-UMNO provided UMNO still exist.

    Youngs are not with UMNO they are ‘rebels’ and they look for ‘rebel’ party and will be happy to involved in street demos for the sake on being there for NOTHING.

    Reply
  • 34. rossab  |  April 16, 2015 at 2:33 pm

    No not all youngs are rebels,only the stupids. Most young are responsible people. They know that the rebel party is controlled by DAP who are anti MALAYS and ISLAM.They know that they are hypocrites .We wait for the Permatang Pauh eletion then we will see

    Reply

Dijemput memberi komen anda

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed


My blog, my like

Helen Ang

Recent Posts

Kalender

April 2015
M T W T F S S
« Mar   May »
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
27282930  

Pengunjung

  • 7,532,007 hits

Archives

Feeds


%d bloggers like this: