19 thoughts on “Kasut

    1. The DAP evangelista men appear to be follicly challenged.

      Aside from @imokman, what did @limlipeng and @lauwengsan tweet today?


  1. Despite all the nasty things that the Dapsters are saying about Najib’s kitten in DAP evangelista Ong Kian Ming’s timeline,

    I think it is a kind man who loves animals and pet cats.

    At least Malays don’t eat cats and dogs unlike relatives of the Dapsters in China who roast puppies alive.

    At the end of the day, Umno is still a much kinder party. DAP is ruthless.

    1. Kak Helen,

      You know the other day my neighbour went to our pasar and then she bought three cute puppies. She then distributed the puppies to her friends who are willing to keep them. When I asked why, she said she rescued the puppies from being bought by people who wants to eat them. My neighbour is Chinese (but not the DAP kind. She’s nice and going to balik kampung for Wesak this Sunday). This is what already happening in Malaysia la Kak Helen.

      Yeah, I agree with you. Why must pick on Najib’s cat? They are filled with so much hatred that even a cat they wanted to target? We should organise an event call “I want to touch a cat” in Serdang.

      “Divisive Views, Dangerous Ideas: Hati-hati”


      1. Thank you Pwincess for clarifying that your nice, animal-loving Chinese neighbour is a Buddhist.

        Very likely the dog-eating Chinese in Malaysia are NOT Buddhists and I wouldn’t be surprised at which clan they actually belong to, i.e. same as the Dapsters hating on the prime minister’s cat.

        1. Since Lim Kit Siang and his anti-intellectual Red comrades have for so long idolized their Maoist prodigy Chin Peng, therefore we should revisit the terrible calamity of Chairman Mao’s Great Leap Forward that led to the Cultural Revolution, and its cannibalizing features – to better understand the Chinese taste for dogs and cats today.


          {A 1993 journey to Wuxuan’s horrific killings of 1968}

          “A victim might be paraded and abused for some time before one or two individuals ‘dared’ to kill him – watched with horrified fascination by the ‘masses’, and by local officials who feared for their own lives. At first the victims were dragged to a secluded place before dismemberment, but within a month they were being openly butchered on the main street. The official record frequently notes in a chilling phrase how other people then ‘swarmed around to remove the flesh’. The most active killers were young men in their teens and twenties, including former members of the defeated Small Faction who sought to prove their new loyalty.

          The taboo on eating human flesh was eroded by degrees. Zheng Yi suggests it followed this sequence: (1) furtive eating by night, by individuals or families; (2) human and animal flesh are mixed together: so those eating can delude themselves that they are ‘only eating pork’; (3) as the blood craze spreads, eating becomes a vogue. Different parts of the body are prized for their therapeutic value and cooked in a variety of ways. At the peak of the movement, human flesh is served at banquets with wine and loudly shouted guessing games.

          For Zheng Yi, passionately anti-communist in the Solzhenitsyn mould, the answer is simple. The Communist Party and Mao were more savage, more inhuman, than Chiang Kai-shek or even Hitler and there is no need for further explanation. His sole concern is to reveal what has been covered up by timid or complicit party officials for the past twenty-five years. These and other dark secrets certainly do need to be exposed. It is impossible to imagine real political progress in China – whether towards pluralist democracy or a more democratic communist regime – unless Beijing can ‘settle accounts’ with the past honestly and fully. The final reckoning will have to include the persecution of hundreds of thousands of intellectuals in the ’50s (barely admitted because of Deng Xiaoping’s role in this ‘anti-Rightist’ campaign); the millions of famine deaths in the Great Leap Forward (only properly recorded in local histories which are not easily available); and the real responsibility for the Tiananmen Square Massacre which no one yet dares to admit. Cannibalism in Wuxuan is another such ‘negative lesson’ to be learnt.”

          What was the “Anti-Religion” Maoist Cultural Revolution?

    1. Lady Gaga fashion sense. See the Lady Gaga shoes video link provided by Onsleuth Amir Yahya.

      We might see Hannah wear a “meat dress” (Lady Gaga fashion) next so that when she is craving for her favourite chicken rendang, she can just eat her baju.

      Yes, the dress is made from real meat.


  2. Not anybody can wear them. Only those with cita-cita/angan-angan tinggi!

    Need permit from Selangor state government or else a waiver from the speaker herself.

    1. This Alexander Mcqueen (Lady Gaga’s favourite designer) shoe is a perfect match for her baju kurung above.

      Maybe Madame Speaker can custom-make a pair from biawak skin.


    1. She can have all three. No law against her having as many pairs of designer shoes as she has branded handbags.

  3. That top picture should be sent to all Umno chiefs. Maybe that can open their eyes. That picture shows a very real threat to BN in Putrajaya. Stop attacking TDM (just go give him the answers he seeks) and tackle this problem. They need to realise that Dap’s Impian Sarawak is going to be BN’s nightmare.

Comments are closed.