Good idea for Najib to emulate his father

January 17, 2016 at 8:55 pm 62 comments

Then the DAP troublemakers would similarly be thrown into Kamunting.

Lim Kit Siang was among the oppo leaders detained post-May 13 under Emergency law that was implemented by the National Operations Council.

The NOC was headed by Tun Razak as its Director of Operations.

Advertisements

Entry filed under: Duri dalam Daging. Tags: .

Perception that Tun no longer cares if his attacks bring down Umno Puak “hanya 9 peratus” mula terasa dan mahukan campurtangan PM

62 Comments Add your own

  • 1. islam1st  |  January 17, 2016 at 11:12 pm

    ‘Then the DAP troublemakers would similarly be thrown into Kamunting.’

    Speaking of which, betul ke ni Helen? Wong Chin Huat of Penang Instutute, kerajaan DAP terlibat??

    Reply
  • 2. truth  |  January 18, 2016 at 10:17 am

    i don’t really know much about tun abdul razak (may Allah shower His mercy on his soul). i had a little reading abt him before and i think he was a good leader ; if not great (someone can be great but not good).

    i like his effort with the DEB, i think it’s for the people. alas, he passed away during his short tenure as PM. Allah took his soul. Allah does what He wills and He is full of knowledge and wisdom.

    Reply
    • 3. Helen Ang  |  January 18, 2016 at 10:32 am

      Tun Razak brought the Chinese and Indian opposition Gerakan and PPP back into the national mainstream post-May 13 by creating BN, a bigger umbrella than the Alliance.

      But Tun Razak adamantly kept DAP out of the BN. He knew what he was doing and he did right.

      Najib should emulate his father in this too. DAP can continue to stay out. There is no place for dajjal among decent people.

      Reply
      • 4. drinho  |  January 18, 2016 at 10:49 am

        re: There is no place for dajjal among decent people.

        So DAP is dajjal and BN is decent?

        Reply
        • 5. Spectre  |  January 18, 2016 at 11:29 am

          Timeo Danaos et dona ferentes = Beware of Greeks bearing gifts.

          We all know what the devil the BN is but the DAP ? Judging by their rule in Penang over the past 8 years, no thanks. We’re not interested.

          Reply
        • 6. Prodak Sekolah Umum  |  January 18, 2016 at 11:30 am

          Yes, yes and more yes.
          DAP is Musang dajjal berbulu ayam…..no doubting about it!

          Reply
        • 7. islam1st  |  January 18, 2016 at 11:31 am

          Yes!

          Reply
      • 8. abdul rahman noor  |  January 18, 2016 at 4:28 pm

        yr statement abt tun razak rejecting DAP is slightly inaccurate.
        tun invited all parties in his effort towards national reconciliation.
        DAP turned down d offer may b at d behest of PAP then. we must not forget that d DAP is n offshoot of PAP.

        Reply
  • 9. abdul rahman noor  |  January 18, 2016 at 10:17 am

    pls do not get me wrong !
    I hv d greatest of respect 2wards arwah tun razak. what more when our family is indebted 2 him.

    on hindsde, don’t u think that we r overstating his successes?
    granted he has done very very well 2wards putting a strong foundation 4 uplifting d living stds of d malays. equal gratitude shld also b xtended 2 his honest n sincere advisers (malays n non malays)

    b as it may, 2 my mind his greatest unaccomplished mission was 2 establish a strong foundation 4 national unity. we wld not b in such a nat unity mess now if tun razak were 2 take conscious n measured strategies in roping in every races in molding a true Malaysian identity.

    6 yrs at d helm cld b 2 short a time 2 do both. who knows he may hv d idea of seriously forging a true nat identity after first addressing d plight of d malays.

    I hv written n article ‘hari2 terakhir tun razak d london’ n posted it in addy’s blog. it records my personal xperience as a duty officer when he underwent treatment in London. in para 22 of d article ,I did mention certain unpleasant observation . if I were 2 reveal them now ,it may cause a re evaluation (especially d rural folks) of how people look up 2 him.

    Reply
    • 10. Helen Ang  |  January 18, 2016 at 10:27 am

      re: “we wld not b in such a nat unity mess now if tun razak were 2 take conscious n measured strategies in roping in every races in molding a true Malaysian identity”

      You can bring a horse to water but you can’t make it drink.

      re: “a true Malaysian identity”

      Tun Razak or no Tun Razak, Chinese want to be Chinese. Being Malaysian is incidental and secondary.

      When he was Education Minister and drafted the Razak Report, he had hoped that BM would eventually become the main medium of instruction in schools. Tak jadi pun.

      Reply
      • 11. abdul rahman noor  |  January 18, 2016 at 12:10 pm

        that is exactly what I mean. tun razak had d golden opportunity 2 change that . he cld hv molded a situation where d Chinese wil first n foremost feel being fully Malaysian of Chinese origin rather than being Chinese who happens 2 live in Malaysia.

        Reply
        • 12. Helen Ang  |  January 18, 2016 at 12:37 pm

          re: “tun razak had d golden opportunity … where d Chinese will first n foremost feel being fully Malaysian”

          Tun Razak was not a miracle worker. There was nothing he could have done to budge the Chinese. Therefore he was right to concentrate on the NEP and help lift Malays into the middle class rather than expend futile efforts on the cucu-cicit komunis.

          Chinese, if non-Christian, are oriented to the motherland. If Born Again, they’re oriented to London or their own imagined Heavenly Kingdom of Jesus on Earth.

          It may interest you to know that in 1899 in the Federated Malay States, there was an enactment that stated Chinese Christians are not to be considered China nationals – see snapshot below.

          Christianity is an anathema to Chinese civilization and that’s why over the past two years, the Chinese provincial governments, particularly Zhejiang, have demolished hundreds of churches and removed thousands of crosses from rooftops. Latest reported incident about three weeks ago on Dec 29.

          null

          Reply
          • 13. abdul rahman noor  |  January 18, 2016 at 2:23 pm

            I may hv 2 disagree wth u on this pt. tun azak had d absolute power then 2 chart a new course 4 national unity even by force using d adat resam melayu as a base.

            I/4 of me is Chinese n 1/4 is batak mendeliang. it is natural 4 me 2 gravitate 2wards my roots. but that does not make me less patriotic. and religion has got nothing 2 do wth nationalism n patriotism. Indonesia is a living example.

            say what u may. 2 me tun razak has failed in this department.

            and I truly pity d son who is in a mess mainly due 2 his own doing.

            Reply
            • 14. Helen Ang  |  January 18, 2016 at 2:42 pm

              re: “but that does not make me less patriotic”

              Okay. You’re not the one who application for Permanent Residence in Tasmania got rejected.

              Reply
              • 15. abdul rahman noor  |  January 18, 2016 at 2:52 pm

                ms Helen,
                kadang2 saya rasa amat terhibur menyaksikan ‘running battle’ d antara u n yb subang jaya. it wld b very interesting if u decide 2 challenge her in ge 14.

                Reply
                • 16. Helen Ang  |  January 18, 2016 at 3:09 pm

                  I’m not sneaky.

                  Hence I lack the attribute to make the cut as a politician.

                  Reply
                  • 17. abdul rahman noor  |  January 18, 2016 at 4:23 pm

                    what attributes do we need to posses. pls elaborate bcos I plan 2 enter d fray this ge 14 – if ever it materializes.

                    Reply
                    • 18. Helen Ang  |  January 18, 2016 at 5:06 pm

                      LOL, politicians are the least trusted.

                      Gallup poll taken in December 2015

                    • 19. abdul rahman noor  |  January 18, 2016 at 5:53 pm

                      tq 4 d gallup poll result. whether we like it nor not ,in a democracy politicians r elected 2 govern. so it is our solemn duty 2 minimize d trust deficit we hv wth politicians.

                      in Indonesia president joko widodo (jokowi) n gub basuki jahya purnama (ahok) r leading d way n they r succeeding. we hv 2 start somewhere wth somebody relatively clean 2 lead d way.

                      I m pretty sure their corruption perception index wil b better than ours in a short period of time – god willing.

    • 20. truth  |  January 18, 2016 at 11:50 am

      each and everyone of us have the good and bad side (of us), so do you and i. how can we expect anyone to be so perfect ? if we insist so, then insist ourselves not to make any mistake too.

      about leaders, which leaders on the face of this earth did not make mistakes, even the best of them prone to mistakes. i would say that malaysian leaders/PMs can be categorized among the good ones. just take the other leaders in this region SEA for instance, in term of their atrocities, corruptions etc., our PMs were/is much better for their care for the people and also in being tolerant ; and i want to add ‘patient’ for the present leader owing to the current situation. i learned from my filipino friends, if malaysia were to adopt their government’s way of administering the country, we will see the ecomic inequality / a huge gap between the poor and rich. we are very priviledged and way too pampered be it the malays or non malays. if malaysia is not too good then anyone is free to migrate to ‘hujan emas di negeri orang’ for example europe, north america, australia etc. i admit that malaysia to compare to those countries is like ‘hujan batu di negeri sendiri’.

      i agree with you on ‘government should acknowledge and recognize the former government servants/officials due to their honesty and sincerity’. to be frank and i believe it is very impossible to fulfil it for many of them let alone all, as we know. may Allah pardon and reward these honest and sincere people in the hereafter instead or guide them to His path.

      Reply
    • 21. HY  |  January 18, 2016 at 10:28 pm

      “b as it may, 2 my mind his greatest unaccomplished mission was 2 establish a strong foundation 4 national unity. we wld not b in such a nat unity mess now if tun razak were 2 take conscious n measured strategies in roping in every races in molding a true Malaysian identity.”

      interesting. what is a true malaysian identity? via assimilation or integration or diversity?

      i disagree with helen that chinese refuse to integrate, i believe at least 60% to 80% is fine with bm and english as their first language. most chinese do not wan to be chinese, however if there is no chinese then no point to have a constitutional malay. n umno mca mic can close shop.

      Reply
      • 22. Helen Ang  |  January 18, 2016 at 10:34 pm

        re: “i disagree with helen that chinese refuse to integrate”

        Please give some examples of successful integration.

        re: “i believe at least 60% to 80% is fine with bm and english as their first language”

        Then why so many complaints from the Malays that the majority of Chinese in the West Coast are unable to speak the national language?

        re: “most chinese do not wan to be chinese”

        Then there is no need for SRJK(C).

        Reply
  • 23. AK47  |  January 18, 2016 at 11:13 am

    Ms H. Some one alleged that our Prime Minister Tun Abdullah Badawi was the Secretary to the NOC !

    Reply
  • 24. Surrhead  |  January 18, 2016 at 12:40 pm

    Tun Razak is not a saint, he was partly orchestrating May13 fiasco, all for the lust of power…meanwhile, najib just uses the chinese as boogeyman to scare the malays….that’s why najib need the mass of Malaysians to be stupid, and easily spooked….

    “To this day I find it very hard to believe that Razak, whom I had known for so many years, would agree to work against me in this way” – https://noto513.wordpress.com/2008/06/21/the-real-story-behind-may-13-by-tunku-abdul-rahman/

    http://www.malaysia-today.net/the-real-story-of-may-13-part-1/

    Reply
    • 25. Helen Ang  |  January 18, 2016 at 1:06 pm

      re: “he was partly orchestrating May13 fiasco”

      That’s a DAP lie.

      As head of the NOC, Tun Razak was responsible for the decision to ISA Lim Kit Siang in the aftermath of May 13. The Kim Klan (Lim clan) is full vengeance. That’s why the DAP is vilely tarnishing Tun Razak’s reputation.

      re: “all for the lust of power…”

      If Tun Razak had really been power crazy, he would have ousted Tunku long before. He was Umno deputy president from 1957 to 1970.

      (Compare Anwar who became Umno deputy president in 1993. Within five years, he had already tried to topple Mahathir.)

      For 13 years that Tun Razak served Tunku loyally in the party as his deputy.

      Tunku was already unpopular in Umno (c.f. Mahathir’s infamous open letter). Tun Razak was at the same time also more popular than Tunku among the Malay civil service.

      It would have been easy for Tun Razak to take over power (through normal and democratic party mechanism) from Tunku if he had wanted, due to the latter’s unpopularity. There was no need to “orchestrate” anything the like of May 13 to remove Tunku.

      Furthermore, if the DAP and its followers in 1969 did not behave like dajjal, there would have been no cause for the Malays to be provoked or to run amok.

      If race relations was all warm, fuzzy kumbayah, there would’ve been nothing that any Umno hawk could do to ignite the spark.

      Look in the mirror, lah…

      Portuguese — 130-year rule — Melayu takde amok
      Dutch — 184 years — Melayu takde amok
      English — 166 years — Melayu takde amok
      Japanese — 3-¾ years — Melayu takde amok pun
      Chinese — three weeks in 1945 interregnum — Melayu amok sakan

      re: “meanwhile, najib just uses the chinese as boogeyman to scare the malays”

      You mean that before Najib became PM, the Malays trusted the Chinese?

      re: “that’s why najib need the mass of Malaysians to be stupid, and easily spooked….”

      Malaysians who back Najib are the thinking and rational ones. It is the Tun supporters who are emo.

      Reply
      • 26. An Ordinary Malaysian  |  January 18, 2016 at 3:34 pm

        Helen,

        re:”Portuguese — 130-year rule — Melayu takde amok
        Dutch — 184 years — Melayu takde amok
        English — 166 years — Melayu takde amok
        Japanese — 3-¾ years — Melayu takde amok pun
        Chinese — three weeks in 1945 interregnum — Melayu amok sakan”

        So, what happened in the first three weeks of Portuguese, Dutch, British or Japanese rule? :)

        Teh tarik and kuih? :)

        Reply
        • 27. Helen Ang  |  January 18, 2016 at 3:56 pm

          AOM,

          There is fighting (warfare) and there is amok. These are two different words and carry separate and different meanings.

          With the English, it was almost tea and scones over the signing of lopsided treaties. Some of the Malay Sultans, like Sir Sultan Abu Bakar of Johor and other Johor royalty were knighted by the British.

          Opponents fight each other – mostly honorably – in the battlefield. But Dapsters can be quite something else.

          “After the Japanese forces pulled out, about 20 MPAJA guerillas led a predominantly Chinese procession through Temerloh town wherein several Chinese had carried aloft a roast pig.” – Ishak Haji Mohammad aka Pak Sako

          [See article ‘Kenangan Hidup Pak Sako’, No.33 in Mingguan Malaysia, 15 Aug 1976]

          In The Malay Dilemma, Dr Mahathir said the Malay is able to repress his anger when provoked until suddenly he “sees red”, then he explodes.

          That’s amok.

          13 May 1969 was amok.

          The what-kind-of-people-are-they have provoked anti-Chinese riots in several cities around the world. It’s due to the what-kind-of-things they’re capable of doing … such as blowtorching dogs to death for the meat, or the history of maid abuse in Malaysia.

          Malaysian employers who have been charged and/or convicted by the court for maid abuse (and in some cases causing death) are: Yim Pek Ha, Serene Ong, Fong Kong Meng, Teoh Ching Yen, Soh Chew Tong, Chin Chui Ling, Hau Yuan Tyng, Yap Sow Li, Cheah Lai Mooi, Tan Mong Huwai and Eng Lay Sang.

          Is there a pattern in the names of the culprits above?

          Reply
          • 28. An Ordinary Malaysian  |  January 19, 2016 at 12:27 am

            Helen,

            re: ” blowtorching dogs to death for the meat”

            I am a meat eater so I am hardly one to debate how meat ends up in my diet. :)

            re: “Is there a pattern in the names of the culprits above?”

            Are those the only people who have been convicted for maid abuse?

            Reply
            • 29. Helen Ang  |  January 19, 2016 at 12:38 am

              (1) If you have the stomach for it, click HERE to look at the campaign poster.

              There’s a line between animal husbandry (which has been practised since the dawn of human civilization) and wanto cruelty.

              (2) The entire list is on the Internet. You can copypaste the name(s) and Google for each case details/particulars.

              If you come across other Malaysians who have been convicted for maid abuse, pls share with us.

              Reply
      • 30. Surrhead  |  January 18, 2016 at 3:50 pm

        whatever you spew, the perception that umno lies and cheats, and backstabs fellow members (TAR, Muhyddin, PAS etc) are widely known. As for the look in the mirror part, umno was formed in 1946, and messed up the Malay mind to run amok after that. it’s a clear pattern after umno. umno was great under Datuk Onn Jaafar and TAR. Mahathir did well in modernizing up the nation. The rest are so and so. Najib is a crook. This is how a lot of Malaysian see umno. Just don’t know how are you going to scrape off that perception and umno cheats and lies.

        Reply
        • 31. Helen Ang  |  January 18, 2016 at 4:17 pm

          re: “whatever you spew, the perception that umno lies and cheats”

          I do not spew (and I do not use the ‘f’ word). I’m the most rational arguer you can hope to meet.

          Perception is also that the Mother of God appeared in the SJMC window in Subang Jaya. And that DAP idols walk on water. I would question the state of mind of the person who’s doing the misperceiving.

          re: “and backstabs fellow members (TAR, Muhyddin, PAS etc)”

          TAR was out of his depth to deal with the Dapsters of his time.

          It was Muhyiddin who backstabbed Najib.

          And it was DAP that backstabbed PAS (and TS Khalid Ibrahim too). You can ask Hadi Awang, TG Harun Din, Dr Zuhdi, Ustaz Tantawi, Nik Abduh or any of the PAS leaders on this.

          re: “umno was formed in 1946, and messed up the Malay mind to run amok after that”

          The Malays mengamok against Bintang Tiga (Chinese communists) between Aug 14 and Sept 3, 1945. That was before the birth of Umno.

          re: “umno was great under Datuk Onn Jaafar”

          Onn Jaafar said MCA was a tool to make Malaya the 20th province of China. See, https://helenang.wordpress.com/2014/04/01/onn-jaafar-mca-alat-menjadikan-malaya-satu-wilayah-negara-china/

          re: “Najib is a crook.”

          Gopal Raj Kumar has made you an offer. You specify what is the PM’s crime and GRK has volunteered to draw up the impeachment charge.

          re: “This is how a lot of Malaysian see umno.”

          The DAP black propaganda has been very effective.

          Umno facilitated the giving away of two million Merdeka citizenships to undeserving Chinese and Indians in 1952-1960, and barely anyone supporting the oppo is aware of this historical fact.

          Hannah Yeoh donates RM1,000 each to a handful of suraus dan fuyoh, bukan main riuh sekampung, siap bergambar dengan memakai tudung untuk dicanangkan merata-rata di media sosial.

          Umno’s greatest sin is being Parti Paling Tidak Apa.

          re: “Just don’t know how are you going to scrape off that perception and umno cheats and lies.”

          As far as I’m concerned, it is the DAP that cheats vindictively and lies viciously.

          Reply
          • 32. Surrhead  |  January 18, 2016 at 5:48 pm

            of all the points stated, i am just wondering how long more can you pull this crap that umno gave away 2 mil merdeka citizenship? you know those people who were given citizenship under British orders, may all be dead now. This crap of yours and umno doesn’t hold to anybody who was born in this land. you lie and cheat as well as umno too.

            Reply
            • 33. Helen Ang  |  January 18, 2016 at 6:11 pm

              Sigh. I pull out the real facts and you persist in regurgitating DAP black propaganda.

              And on top of that, you’re so delusional as to accuse the truth-tellers of lying and cheating. Dunia terbalik. Sad, pathetic case lah you.

              Do you have an iota of ability to do any research?

              (a) Below is the set of Malaya naturalization figures starting 1957. To see an enlarged view of the table, click HERE.

              The data by the Registrar-General of Citizens can be found in Tun Mohd Suffian’s book on the constitution. I hope you’re not going to accuse the late Lord President of being an Umno stooge.

              (b) Are you aware that under Onn Jaafar (yup, Umno founder) as Home Minister during British rule, our citizenship law was relaxed in 1952 and took effect in 1953?

              “It is stated that the 1952 nationality legislation had enabled 1.2 million Chinese and 180,000 Indians to obtain citizenship in Malaya.”

              source: Dr Helen Ting’s academic paper, see Google Books

              Only Chinese living in Malacca and Penang (Straits Settlements) pre-1957 were British subjects. The rest were largely stateless.

              And no, the Raja-Raja Melayu did not have to agree to give citizenship to the Chinese and Indians whom were not their subjects.

              They could have followed the path taken by the Sultan of Brunei and leave a large number of the Chinese stateless, like the Chinese resident in Brunei today where Christmas is banned.

              Reply
  • 34. drinho  |  January 18, 2016 at 6:41 pm

    re: barely anyone supporting the oppo is aware of this historical fact

    re: Below is the set of Malaya naturalization figures starting 1957

    The above are facts. Cannot be denied. but does it mean that the non-Malays are forever indebted to Umno? The non-Malays must vote and support Umno/BN in every election?

    Anyway, the citizenships given to non-Malays are iron-clad. They are legal citizen with voting rights, their future generations will stay in Malaysia and they are not going back to their homeland.

    Reply
    • 35. Helen Ang  |  January 18, 2016 at 6:52 pm

      drinho,

      Facts are facts.

      Unfortunately the ignorant (buta sejarah) oppo supporters harbour a lot of misplaced and negative misperceptions.

      re: “Cannot be denied. but does it mean that the non-Malays are forever indebted to Umno?”

      Surrhead remarked that Umno cheats and lies. I would contend that Umno is the more generous, responsible and ethical party compared to the DAP.

      If the DAP had successfully formed the government in Selangor in May 1969 (note: the Alliance had failed to obtain a simple majority in the state), we would be an apartheid today and the Malay masses would be downtrodden.

      re: “their future generations will stay in Malaysia and they are not going back to their homeland”

      The Rohingya were made stateless by Burma’s 1982 citizenship law. They have been in Rakhine several generations, and longer in Myanmar than the Chinese have been in Malaysia.

      Reply
      • 36. drinho  |  January 19, 2016 at 9:03 am

        re: The Rohingya were made stateless by Burma’s 1982 citizenship law. They have been in Rakhine several generations, and longer in Myanmar than the Chinese have been in Malaysia.

        Playing the Rohingya card again? Simply pick an example and use in the Msian context? Have you ever consider other relevant/bigger factors (apart from the fact that Rohingya stayed in Myanmar longer than the Chinese stayed in Msia)?

        Consider below:-

        1. Political system of Myanmar (military rule 1962-2011) vs Msia (parliamentary democracy since Merdeka).
        2. Current population of Rohingya (approx 2.5%) vs Chinese population in Msia (approx 20%).
        3. Economic ownership of Rohingya in Myanmar (no info, but I think should be negligible) vs Chinese in Msia (approx. 40%).
        4. Most importantly, the Myanmar government denied citizenship to Rohingya whereas in Msia, the FedCon protected the citizenship of the Chinese.

        A person may commit the heinous crime (eg. terrorism, drug trafficking etc). He may be imprisoned for life or even sentenced to death. Yet he retains his citizenship in Malaysia.

        You are not using an apple-to-apple comparison.

        Reply
        • 37. Helen Ang  |  January 19, 2016 at 9:39 am

          re: “Msia (parliamentary democracy since Merdeka)”

          I thought your friends have been saying that Umno’s Darth Vader is ruling the country like it’s his “evil empire” / the Dark Side.

          re: “Chinese population in Msia (approx 20%)”

          Kit Siang recently whinged that the Chinese-majority Parliament seats in Malaysia are “only 13 percent” (which is not quite true). But then again, whatever whinge card is convenient to the Dapster family – like “we’re only 9 percent” – will be played.

          re: “Economic ownership of Chinese in Msia (approx. 40%)”

          So the towkays are amply funding the evangelical party as well as the campaign to oust Najib.

          re: “Most importantly … the FedCon protected the citizenship of the Chinese”

          For which the Chinese should give thanks to Umno or to the DAP?

          Reply
          • 38. drinho  |  January 19, 2016 at 9:57 am

            re: For which the Chinese should give thanks to Umno or to the DAP?

            You mean by voting Umno/BN in every election?

            Reply
            • 39. Helen Ang  |  January 19, 2016 at 10:30 am

              I mean by being fair.

              The accusation by Chinese that Malays are a “racist” people is not at all fair given the two million Merdeka citizenships granted the Chinese.

              In 1957, the population of Malaya was only 6.3 million.

              Compare: The population of Germany today is 81 million. They’re taking in one million Middle-Eastern/Muslim refugees, mostly Syrians. That’s absorbing a fresh/additional 1.2 percent new immigrants into the population. But look at the amount of resistence from the native Germans.

              Around Merdeka, Malaya took in non-Malays amounting to roughly one-third of its then current population as new citizens.

              Reverse the situation: Do you think a Chinese province with 6.3 million population would take in (within less than a decade) as China nationals two million new citizens who have darker skin and belong to a different religion?

              And yet the Dapsters are screaming, Umno/Umnoputras “racist” x3.

              Umno has barely raised or publicized the issue or Merdeka two million Chinese citizenships. In contrast, Hannah Yeoh giving RM1,000 to each of the handful of suraus in Subang Jaya is made a big fuss of.

              The behaviour of many of the DAP and opposition’s hardcore Chinese supporters is beyond hope and beyond cure.

              Reply
              • 40. Ah BenG  |  January 19, 2016 at 1:43 pm

                The comparison with present Germany is moot. For starters, the “refugees” are only currently coming into Europe (and the decision to allow them entering in the first place is decided by Merkel and co), while the non-bumis were brought in by the British, and left in Malaya to be dealt with by the young country. In essence, the decision to bring in immigrants was borne by the British, and it was Malaysia that had to deal with the consequences.

                What if citizenship wasn’t granted to the 2 million non-bumis, where will this 2 million (stateless) people go now? Transporting them (and to where? who will accept them?) will take decades (with 1940s tech). Imagine the infamy the young country of Malaysia would receive from the international community for this. Somehow I feel that this choice of giving them citizenship wasn’t really a choice to begin with, they just had to come up with something to appease the bumis instead.

                Reply
                • 41. Helen Ang  |  January 19, 2016 at 2:03 pm

                  re: “The comparison with present Germany is moot.”

                  Some of the natives (white Christian Germans) believe that the masses of Muslim (Syrian, north African) immigrants will not be able to integrate and thus become a disruptive social force.

                  Berlin should look to Malaysia. We are an example of what Germany will encounter in the near future. If we use Bersih 4.0 as an example, then the Germans can expect some second-generation immigrants to step on Ms Merkel’s portrait or fart on her ‘face’ (photo).

                  re: “while the non-bumis were brought in by the British, and left in Malaya to be dealt with by the young country.”

                  Indians were also left by the white colonialists in Burma and Uganda. Both countries expelled them.

                  re: “In essence, the decision to bring in immigrants was borne by the British, and it was Malaysia that had to deal with the consequences.”

                  Same with Brunei. The Sultan did not give away citizenship on a silver platter to the Chinese.

                  re: “What if citizenship wasn’t granted to the 2 million non-bumis”

                  The two million refers to Chinese. Indians are a separate set of figures.

                  re: “where will this 2 million (stateless) people go now?”

                  On slow boats to Tasmania.

                  re: “Transporting them (and to where? who will accept them?)”

                  Try their luck with Hobart.

                  re: “will take decades (with 1940s tech)”

                  1957 technology.

                  re: “Imagine the infamy the young country of Malaysia would receive from the international community for this.”

                  What about what the Dapsters are telling the international community today about Malaysia? “Basket case”, “failed state”, “rogue state”, “Taliban land”…

                  re: “Somehow I feel that this choice of giving them citizenship wasn’t really a choice to begin with”

                  The Raja-Raja Melayu could have opted to do the same as their cousin, the Sultan of Brunei. The only consequence would be that independence would be delayed.

                  re: “they just had to come up with something to appease the bumis instead”

                  Article 153. But the DAP sneaky bastards trying to subvert this by saying there are no Malays, only bangsa Anak Malaysia.

                  If there are no Malays, and to be a Malay is to be a “racist”, then what use is the Malay “special position” spelled out in the constitution?

                  Reply
                  • 42. Ah BenG  |  January 19, 2016 at 2:42 pm

                    The comparison is moot because it was the German government’s decision to allow the entry in the first place, thus they should have known of the consequences of taking such an open door policy. At the moment when Merkel made than infamous speech, she had the majority support of the people, which means they should know what they are getting themselves into. Now its a different story (with the recent NYE chaos), but that is irrelevant here.

                    Malaysia never had such luxury (of deciding entry in the first place), instead was required to deal with the consequences.

                    For Berlin’s case, you don’t even have to look at 2nd generation. The current batch of “refugees” are already causing problems. Interestingly, some study in the US showed that terrorism is far more prevalent in 2nd gen immigrants.

                    Again, quantity, percentages and government backgrounds matter here in relation to the decision of granting citizenship. Burma kicked out around 300k Indians, while Uganda maybe 100k or less, both of which makes up I daresay <10% of the population of the country. The same with Brunei with 10% population and 50k. Malaysia had 2mil immigrants, nearly 10x that of Burma (40x of Brunei), with a percentage of 30% (the percentage is much higher in cities). Just imagine the chaos if the immigrants decided to rebel. Slow boats to vegemite-land ain't gonna work.

                    Not to mention both Burma and Uganda had militaristic governments, which meant that they were free to do anything (even killing) while we had the British breathing down our necks (ie Brunei), effectively prohibiting any kind of violence.

                    Reply
                    • 43. Helen Ang  |  January 19, 2016 at 3:27 pm

                      re: “thus they should have known of the consequences of taking such an open door policy”

                      Likewise Umno in the 1950s. MCA and MIC don’t/didn’t count because both parties possess no clout with the monarchy, and it was the Sultans who negotiated (with Umno as their reps) and signed Independence with Queen E II.

                      So if there’s any legitimate reason for Malays to be angry with Umno, this is one of them.

                      re: “At the moment when Merkel made than infamous speech, she had the majority support of the people”

                      Pls provide a link to back up your claim that Merkel had majority support of the German public when her govt decided to throw open Germany’s doors.

                      re: “which means they should know what they are getting themselves into”

                      Like when they gave the DAP (Deutsche Arbeiter Partei/German Workers’ Party better known as Nazi party) the majority support in their 1930s democratic election.

                      re: “Now its a different story (with the recent NYE chaos)”

                      So the Germans are learning after the fact. So are the Malays.

                      re: “but that is irrelevant here”

                      On the contrary. It is most relevant. Learn from experience so that you don’t repeat mistakes.

                      re: “Malaysia never had such luxury (of deciding entry in the first place), instead was required to deal with the consequences.”

                      The treaties – Pangkor, and the ones separately between the individual Malay states and the British thereafter – were signed by the Sultans whom were recognised as sovereign authority.

                      Of course the Raja-Raja Melayu had the “luxury” of deciding the future of their states.

                      The Chinese and Indians – except for the Straits Settlements British subjects – had no say because they did not have any legal standing. They were merely transient workers like the Burmese, Nepali and Bangladeshis in Malaysia today.

                      re: “Interestingly, some study in the US showed that terrorism is far more prevalent in 2nd gen immigrants.”

                      Likewise the MCA older generation did not cause trouble. It is the DAP born agains who are being subversive and fascist.

                      re: “Burma kicked out around 300k Indians”

                      Correct. That was in 1962. There was also a series of anti-Indian riots in the 1930s.

                      Then in Feb–June 1978, villages were burned, ransacked and after four months of repression some 200,000 Indian-origin peoples fled to neighbouring Bangladesh.

                      Dec 1991–March 1992, massive and widespread police operation targeting the ‘Bengalis’ (Indian Muslim) in Arakan caused 250,000 Rohingyas to flee to Bangladesh.

                      Again, in February 2001, full-scale riots led by Burman Buddhist and Arakanese mobs targeted the Bengalis. Then there is the recent pogrom against the Rohingya who’re leaving by the boatloads, as we know.

                      All told, easily more than a million ‘Indians’ have been evicted from Burma since 1962.

                      re: “while Uganda maybe 100k or less”

                      In 1972. They were given 90 days to pack up and leave.

                      re: “Malaysia had 2mil immigrants”

                      And why are Umno and the Malays being labelled “racists” when they allowed so many foreigners to remain? Ibarat melepaskan anjing tersepit. Digigit orangnya pula.

                      re: “Not to mention both Burma and Uganda had militaristic governments”

                      We’re going to get an Umno war general.

                      re: “which meant that they were free to do anything (even killing) while we had the British breathing down our necks (ie Brunei)”

                      We have the option of National Security Council, once the bill – already approved by Dewan Rakyat and Senate – is gazetted into law.

                      re: “effectively prohibiting any kind of violence”

                      That’s what the NSC option is. To prohibit any kind of violence.

                  • 44. drinho  |  January 19, 2016 at 2:54 pm

                    Helen, again I say “No point crying over spilled milk”. The grant of 2 mil citizenship to Chinese cannot be reversed by the present Umno government. Doing so will be unconstitutional, not to mention the international backlash. You can only blame Umno leaders i.e. Tunku Abdul Rahman for not having the wisdom of Sultan Brunei.

                    While Umno was eager for Independence in 1957 and agreed for mass citizenship, Brunei refused to join the Federation in 1963. It remained as British protectorate till full independence in 1984 without the need to grant citizenship to its approx. 10% Chinese population. Umno should have postponed its struggle of Independence like Brunei.

                    Reply
                    • 45. Helen Ang  |  January 19, 2016 at 3:42 pm

                      drinho,

                      Will Umno ever learn?

                      Has Najib learned from the Chinese tsunami? If he has not, then let the Protuns kick him out.

                    • 46. drinho  |  January 19, 2016 at 5:51 pm

                      Let me divide Umno into 2 periods, i.e. Umno pre-Tun M and Umno post-Tun M. For the former, Umno under Tunku, Razak and Hussein really struggle for the people and nation. If 1MDB, NFC, PKFZ, 2.6 bil donation scandals happened back then, the PM will resign.

                      But for the latter, Umno under Tun M, Abdullah and Najib is different. Not fight for people/nation but for self interest. NEP is manipulated to create cronies, strategic assets being privatised, lopsided concessionaire contracts given, 2.6 bil taken as donation and various corporate scandals (NFC, 1MDB, PKFZ, Bank Bumi etc). No accountability. Najib stayed on as PM.

                      Relatives/cronies/children of PMs under Umno post Tun M are rich:-

                      1. Tun M – Syed Mokhtar, Vincent Tan, Mokhzani
                      2. Abdullah – Kamaluddin (son), Ibrahim (brother)
                      3. Najib – Nazifuddin (son), Nazir (brother), Riza (stepson)

                      Umno will never learn. They will only learn to protect self-interest.

                    • 47. Helen Ang  |  January 19, 2016 at 9:31 pm

                      You forgot to include Mirzan and KJ.

                    • 48. Spectre  |  January 19, 2016 at 6:58 pm

                      The tsunami is history. One only has to look around why countries like China, Japan and South Korea are relatively peaceful. I say relatively because although these countries are not crime free, their people enjoy the sort of peace most countries can only dream of. Look at their demographics. China is 92% Han, Japan is 98% Japanese, Korea 99% Korean. That should tell you something. You can have immigrants, ethnic minorities but you keep their numbers at a figure you feel comfortable with. That’s how you keep and preserve the peace.

                    • 49. drinho  |  January 20, 2016 at 8:30 am

                      re: You forgot to include Mirzan and KJ.

                      Aiyo, if like that the list will be endless.

                      Bottomline, the enrichment of cronies, relatives, children under Tun M, Abdullah and Najib are too obvious to ignore. The scandals in term of absolute RM figure under these 3 PMs are also too big to be unnoticed. Of course, not to forget the hike in cost of living.

                    • 50. Helen Ang  |  January 20, 2016 at 10:36 am

                      What about the enrichment of cronies in Penang? There’s currently a scandal over the cost of the multi-million ringgit bicycle lane.

                      https://aidcnews.wordpress.com/2016/01/19/lorong-basikal-disiapkan-secara-hentam-kromo-tanpa-ikuti-garis-panduan-mbpp/

                    • 51. Helen Ang  |  January 20, 2016 at 10:39 am

                      Postscript:

                      The irony of it.

                      Kos sara hidup naik. Awam diminta untuk kurangkan perbelanjaan. Jangan bawa kereta. Naiklah basikal.

                      And then you get the rip-off bicycle lane where someone made a tidy profit.

  • 52. drinho  |  January 19, 2016 at 9:52 am

    re: For which the Chinese should give thanks to Umno or to the DAP?

    FedCon drafted/created by Umno meh?

    Reply
    • 53. Helen Ang  |  January 19, 2016 at 10:49 am

      If you will read the watikah pemasyhuran kemerdekaan Tanah Melayu, the instrument of Independence was co-signed by the Queen of England and the Raja-Raja Melayu.

      It was the Rulers Council that appointed the Reid Commission.

      Don’t forget Umno’s close ties with the palace.

      Tunku was a Kedah prince. Dato’ Onn Jaafar was brought up in the Johor palace and his father and brother were Menteri Besar Johor, as he himnself was too at one point. Tun Razak belonged to one of the four noble houses, the Orang Besar closest to the Pahang royal house.

      If Umno had advised the Rulers against the Chinese citizenships, then the Merdeka absorption would not have happened. It was Umno that persuaded the Sultans, after being softened up by MCA and MIC.

      Perhaps Umno is living to regret that impulsive decision. And maybe the Umno hawks circling today will rectify what they consider to be a historical mistake.

      Reply
  • 54. drinho  |  January 19, 2016 at 12:17 pm

    re: If Umno had advised the Rulers against the Chinese citizenships

    re: Perhaps Umno is living to regret that impulsive decision.

    No point talking retrospectively. Things already happened and cannot be undone. No use crying over spilled milk. While Tunku Abdul Rahman can expelled Singapore in 1965 to reduce the population of Chinese in Malaysia, the same tactic cannot be done now.

    Reply
    • 55. Helen Ang  |  January 19, 2016 at 12:27 pm

      re: “No use crying over spilled milk.”

      Those who do not learn from history will repeat old mistakes.

      Reply
      • 56. drinho  |  January 19, 2016 at 12:37 pm

        Let say Umno really regrets giving mass citizenship, what it can do now to reverse the situation?

        Reply
        • 57. Helen Ang  |  January 19, 2016 at 12:42 pm

          Team up with PAS. Get Isma on their side.

          The fissures are showing. MCA is attacking the ‘parti Islam’. See, https://helenang.wordpress.com/2016/01/19/mca-is-becoming-more-dap-than-dap/

          Reply
          • 58. drinho  |  January 19, 2016 at 2:12 pm

            Team up and do what next? Though I doubt the cooperation with PAS will materialise in short term.

            Reply
            • 59. Helen Ang  |  January 19, 2016 at 2:42 pm

              re: “Team up and do what next?”

              Malays should have more faith in PAS and Isma to protect the interests of Islam. Umno is too tidak apa.

              Reply
              • 60. drinho  |  January 19, 2016 at 6:16 pm

                Team up and protect Islam can reverse the grant of mass citizenship?

                Reply
                • 61. Helen Ang  |  January 19, 2016 at 9:17 pm

                  If there was no granting of mass citizenship, most of the states in Malaya would be like Hadi’s Terengganu. Very heavily Muslim in population.

                  Reply
                  • 62. drinho  |  January 20, 2016 at 8:39 am

                    Sorry, but I don’t think you are answering my questions directly. You responded using an ‘If’ scenario.

                    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

RSS TKO — Tranungkite

  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.

Kalender

January 2016
M T W T F S S
« Dec   Feb »
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031

Pengunjung

  • 7,481,325 hits

Archives

Feeds


%d bloggers like this: