The Fear of Capitulation

Coming Monday, the six-month PSC on the election practices will come to an end as they will present their final report to the Parliament on findings and recommendations that should be taken and implemented for the next General Election. While it has been established that one of the eight demands - indellible ink would ultimately see the light of the day, the goal of seeing all the eight issues addressed is not likely to happen. In the end, maybe about six would be addressed eventually.

Amendment 26 of the U.S Constitution occured largely of public pressure and student activism. Because of people pressure, there shouldn't be any excuse to lower voting age requirement from the present 21 to 18 below. Could it be because of some people sharing the thinking of Dr. Mahathir who views having UUCA is to have young people focus on studies instead of street-activism work? Any mature thinking parlimentarian in the house on both bridges should see that the time and trend of young people is far in contrast to the trend that was in the 70s. In fact, there thinkers who view Malaysia administering ways still stuck with the mindset of the 80s, particularly with there is a handful number of old men still running the country until today.

No doubt that until today, it's very unlikely that we would see fairer MSM media coverage or level playing field in elections even after the final report has been presented. There are a few things that explain it. First is likely the possible red tape that is likely to be encountered along the way - a legit excuse to say that it can't be implemented. Secondly, the final decision lies on the Election Commission (note that some have been cautioned of the agency being the unofficial component party of BN).

The third reason and the main point of discussion is the fear of capitulation.

The fear of capitulation exemplified is the Provisional IRA - the more violent faction of Irish Republican Army prominence during The Troubles at around late 1969 up to the 1998 Good Friday Agreement. At that time the Provisional IRA's sole goal is to remove Northern Ireland from London's control by force and political persuasion, contrary to the older faction's ideology and way of dealing with the nationalist community. Anytime within that period there will be countless of bombings and shootings with many civilians caught in the crossfire. Whenever there are events such as this happening or if you see any "No Surrender" banners around, it underlines their fear and dementia of capitulation.

The last well known documented attack before the ceasefire agreement was the 1996 Manchester bombings.

A loss or defeat to them by the English means handing Ireland in a platter to Britain.

This in Malaysian context means that BN owns Malaysia for life and if PR wins, BN hands Malaysia to PR (perceived as the enemy) in a platter. End of story.

Along the way, when people start to think and say something cock, e.g Chua Soi Lek's comment of Opposition raising issues to confuse people, they are actually scoring own goals into their own net. In that point above, MCA is scoring own goals in BN's net. Ditto for PR as well. The excerpt from "Aiyah! Why so Stupid One Ah" shows:

Aiyah! Why is the MCA President, Chua Soi Lek, so bodoh one ah? The Opposition has created endless issues to confuse the people, said Chua Soi Lek. But of course! That is the job of the Opposition. Why would the Opposition want to raise issues in support of the government? Their job is to raise issues against the government. What a stupid statement. No wonder he got caught with his pants down, literally.

And to make him even more bodoh, he held a press conference to confess that it was he in that sex video. No one asked him whether it was or was not he. Before anyone could ask, he quickly called a press conference to confess. Bodoh or not? At least VK Lingam was cleverer. He said that the man in the video looks like him, sounds like him, but is not he. And Anwar Ibrahim replied that the man in the sex video is too fat while he is thinner so it must be a double. But Chua Soi Lek goes and confesses it is he before anyone even asks him. No wonder he is making bodoh statements like the one reported by The Star.

And the Umno leaders are saying that the Opposition is trying to grab power, the Opposition is trying to kick out Barisan Nasional, the Opposition is trying to take over Putrajaya, and whatnot. Is this not what the Opposition is supposed to do, to take over the government? Why are these Umno people so bodoh one? Why state the obvious? Of course that is what the Opposition is trying to do. That is the job of Opposition parties all over the world.

Aiyah! Why so bodoh one ah? Can we hear more intelligent statements from these Barisan Nasional people? If they want to impress us then they had better stop making stupid statements.

And the Opposition is no better. They are now saying that the next general election is going to be a class war.

Aiyah! Why so bodoh one ah? That is what I have been saying for some time. When I say that they whack me and call me all sorts of names. I already said for some time that the next battle is going to be a class war. I said it is going to be a battle between the haves and the haves-not. When I said that you say all sorts of things about me. Now the Opposition is saying the same thing.

On the media issue, as to answer why is BN-owned media unwilling to allow some opposition side content into their own? Simple: in their logic they think that if the public is hearing anything that hurts (in means of inflicting their own defeats) them, the people will start coming in masses of asking all sorts of things, thus they start to lose control and handling of the people. But on the other hand, they, like the Provisional IRA wants to whack Britain kingdom come that almost every night on TV news that whack Opposition leader parties and no space is given for people like Mat Sabu to answer their thing. Child's play don't you think?

Even if should PR takes over the Federal government, the efforts to allow fairer media, even if promised would still be limited no matter how much relaxing of control and better press freedom they would give. Assuming that there is allowance for government-owned TV channels and radio, it is the BN-owned media companies that are unwilling to capitulate. There's no need to whine if we happen to see Utusan or TV3 taking remarks from politicians who lost that say "Malays lose power" or "Malaysia is destabilizing": it's already expected from someone who holds power that long for almost 55 years. 

But by nature and time, these attacks would eventually result in nothing that in the end, the IRA had to accept Northern Ireland being part of the UK and the Good Friday agreement details because people are already sick with the senseless and brute way of achieving their goals. See how this relates to our national political scenario right now?

Both coalitions BN and PR have the same problem where organization comes ahead of causes. In the US, even certain politicians have the right to disagree with the party's direction if the party's direction is heading against the cause. It's okay there but in Malaysia it is a long way to go to change the way a party's workflow / mechanism.


The reason for this is simple enough to analyse. Most people put their loyalty to the organisation or to their leader as paramount and above the cause. When movements or leaders override the cause then that is what happens. Muslims forget that they are brothers-of-the-faith and unite under the banner of a movement or a leader. Hence Islam saw three major civil wars that divided the Muslims forever

Some of these people have foam in the mouth talk in things that don't really make up the logic when they put loyalty to an organization

I may not the only one who may have the same observation as others do that we see people from both sides of the political divide keep being a butter up boys to the big brother party. A friend of mine pointed out that eventually, lower hierarchy people tend to be like salt that will ultimately be rinsed out of the washing of a plant / vegetable.

On the other hand, seeing how more people from BN makes stupid remarks, for example of the country pluging if they are not in power, I just love to sit back and laugh all the way while they score own goals and do the antics of Pak Pandir..

Remembering...

Today I will not write anything but observing a day's of silence and memory to my late grandfather. It's already 3 years, so I would be lighting a candle later on.

R.I.P.

There's No Harm Giving Them Chance of a Term

It is very certain that the elections would be around early June, as to take advantage of the school holidays. Arguably, a pointer to that is the launch of the Federal Territory BN election machine officiated by Muhyiddin Yassin himself at Titiwangsa yesterday. There's not much room of manuever and selecting the best date for election largely due to external factors. However I recalled having seen somewhere that having the election around that date is also one way of Najib telling his mentor Dr. Mahathir that he's not going to call the elections at the expiry of the term, as what the old man wishes for.

Everyone knows the saying of "lesser of two evils". If people are simply accepting what Najib Razak is begging over the last few days including going up and down Perak, KL and Selangor, then you are expected by them to be stupid, not well educated to allow them to commit the very sins that taint the nation - crimes unfounded, money spilling out and many that will take a lot of space to list up in one posting.

The fault of who decides it is simply the people themselves. Whatever we have taught with the still stagnant and mundane education system has made us more of robots and seeing things in the boundaries of a box. We are merely taught to memorize and excel in exams, but in reality whatever we've learnt will hardly be used in the real-world work experience as different material is being taught and utilized. So we were never educated properly of what we can do under the concept of democracy. What is still happening in Malaysia still falls under the ideology of neo-feudalism.

That ideology is defined as rebirth of policies of governance, economy and public life reminiscent of those present in many feudal societies. It is related to some of the ideas of neo-medievalism. Look at several aspects of society around us. Does it all relate to the neo-feudalism defined?  We all shout about cronyism, corruption, bias towards minorities, but are we doing at least something to back your words? Voting and going to demos is the simplest of the lot. It is part of translating your anger into action. No bloodshed is required and it requires a virtue needed to execute it: courage.

Okay, maybe we can say that 50 percent of those above 21 (legit, registered voters, Malaysians) with all the information from all avenues available have the same opinion as I do which is to give the other side a chance to demonstrate their governance. The only problem some may share as I do is the mindset of those who are unwilling to do so. There's the law of nature which says that everything is not indispensible or omnipotent. 

This too points out that UMNO's "Dulu, Kini dan Selamanya" motto is against the laws of nature, and it gives the picture of omnipotence, like how the Pharoahs think of themselves in Egypt. There are people who are afraid of what happens on a change of a Federal government. There's nothing unusual, as it's happening everywhere. People have been threatened and scarred of the so call Malay unity being destroyed, society in brink of problem, with other cock - in fact most of those threats are non-existent - just to keep them in power, so there's virtually nothing to be afraid about something proven to be non-existent. Maybe the "Myth of the Lazy Native" mindset still lives in us until today, for before 1957, it was by colonial powers for almost 4 1/2 centuries.

In this case, why not give the federal opposition at least a term? They did well in some states but in order to see the full capability, they need to be on the federal level, not state. 

Previously, people tried to give them a chance, but were there are another 300K to 500K move votes in their favor, PR would be running the federal government, and you won't hear all the "nothing promises" like the 16 September crossovers and so forth. The scenario could have changed - if there were more people who came out to vote. Even a sen makes a difference between 0.99 and 1 ringgit - not by rounding.

Give them the chance and a term to gauge how effective and fast they can be in doing things they have promised like reducing corruption, improving living standards, doing the tons of reforms they promised and so forth. The most important reason of giving them chance to manage the national coffers better. If there is a BN politician who argues that the opposition does not have experience in doing it, the argument is not proper because they were never given the chance to shine and demonstrate what they can do - BN hogs everything like a school child.

If they want to get people to decide and sell themselves out to the people, you definitely have to give coverage to both sides - not bashing every night and not letting them have a 15-minute spotlight! Is it because of IRA-thinking of capitulation that government-owned media are unwilling to give them a share?

On the other hand we should not expect so much from the PR-MPs to perform like Superman where all the 50+ years of dirt can be wiped slate clean in one instant. The most they can do is to remove as much grime and clean up as many areas they can cover.

If they still slack after the 5 years, then fine, we can go back to the dacing. The PR coalition has already stated that if BN-run Malaysia goes bankrupt in the next few years , they don't want a hand in running the state. Everyday, people in the city often hear Najib's "give us another term" thing or there won't be reforms, and surely from the words of one of the few men who splashes money for votes thing, do you find it a little insulting?

Superman-Level Expectations for Reps

I was at the IDEAS-organized forum early last month for the included academics, and two notable MPs from both political fronts. UKM's Anis Yusoff famously said during the forum that "The rakyat should not have this very high expectation that their MPs should be a Superman, the MPs have to be there [is] because obviously you are promoting corruption without realising [it]."

This quote above has brought out something to be questioned with. This is arguably a problem faced by first-time MPs / assemblymen or those who are from the different political front that replaced the other one from the opposite front. When this situation happens, expect calls from citizens in the constituency where you belong coming to their service centre doorstep to barge in and "demand" that their problems rectified in the first place. And if he / she is an assembly-person in a state run by non-BN, things get tougher because the funding from the BN Federal Government is not that much since they view opposition as their enemies.

One thing that people really did not get the picture is that there is a distinct difference between a first-time MP or a multi-term MP. One of the differences established is the room of error permitted. Of course, an newly-mint MP needs time to wet the feet and to do the duties required (meeting municipal councils, visit places and people, etc, getting funds). But if the MP selected is a multi-term MP then it's different. Making the same mistakes and overlooking the things the constituent have been asking over and over again is more or less not befitting the proper standard of a veteran MP. For that case, the MP is already past shelf life and should be replaced. Why would a person vote the same person over and over again if it is known that the MP / assemblyman is not doing the job properly?

A sub-question to be debated is how much room of error and how tolerant can people take before labeling a representative a slack?

To cite an example to the dilemma above, Palanviel was formerly a multi-term MP for Hulu Selangor before he got voted out in March 2008. How many things he didn't do or overlooked or how many mistakes did he make in his capacity as MP? Contrast this to an MP like Nurul Izzah who is a first-time MP with the same pair of questions above. Surely people in their constituency who want to bring up their problem will need to use a different way of approaching their MPs when talking, right? - particularly if it's a representative different from the last time. And the level of expectation has to vary and increments if the MP is re-elected for another term and so forth.

People should have a fair share of the blame, not just the politicians as well. As the last resort, they should not just leave everything to the representatives to do it but to do things at their own initiative - get together, and collaborate to get the attention of their representatives.

Winning By Crook

Back on 28 December 2011, Suhaimi Shafiei, an assemblyman in Selangor has criticized Najib's allocation of RM 2.71 billion to the state, but the money to be funded will bypass the state government. Shafiei described the action as "insolence from the Federal Government" towards the state government.

The assemblyman is partially correct at least. Barisan Nasional is viewing states under the Pakatan as enemies instead of having proper partners in nation building. Terengganu in 1999-2004 is the best case in example. The customary oil royalties was pulled out by Mahathir at that time and was reinstated by Pak Lah's administration after the 2004 GE landslide. What the YB and other people should constantly remind themselves is that BN is doing anything to regain Selangor back in the by crook method. The money announced by Najib is an indirect way to take back Selangor.

Najib remarked previously of winning back Selangor at all costs. Selangor is considered as UMNO's piggy bank. It is also no doubt the richest state of the country. UMNO sees losing it again is considered as the "IRA capitulation" - capitulating to the enemy. That is why they are playing a lot of dirty tricks. There are some analysts who opined that if Najib could not recapture the state, he would meet his Waterloo.

Dirty tricks includes making illegals - Banglas, Indons and others legit citizens of Malaysia by buying in cash, and in turn making them vote BN. The other way is splashing money as if it comes to the sky to the people there. We might be going back to the days of Khir Toyo if they are

Where does the RM 2.7 billion come from? Petronas royalties or borrowing money from international financial organisations?

This post is written because I was pointed to some article written in the PKR's mouthpiece Suara Keadilan last week by a friend of mine. I am aware that I am repeating what many people have said but it seems that many people may have forgotten about the state problem.

I've met and know a few PR die-hards of the state in the past. And it's better for them to be ready earlier as a possible GE date could be end of May / early June. The word of caution is that PR could lose the state even with a lot of votes is on the opposition hand largely due to several factors like illegals' votes, RELA / postal votes and of course the main factor being the Malay vote factor.

It is already established that the election can be decided primarily by the Malay voting community since they form a little more than half of the nation's population of 28 million people. Emotion and misconception plays part of the people's psyche, especially if they are being duped into believe that such things happening.

My understanding is that if PR wants to hold up another 5 years, there are at least two possible things that should be done. The first thing is to have the status quo or more than the 31/25 seat arrangement. Ideally, areas in Hulu Langat, Kuala Selangor and Sabak Bernam is where PR may want to attract and interest the voters there. Win there, and they can get another 5 to 6 more. Perhaps looking back at the election result chart at Undi.INFO could be considered as reference material.

Most urban areas are a foregone conclusion since BN is not really well liked there.

The other problem is egos in PR. DAP's state leadership and Khalid Ibrahim's ego must be put aside. These are potential problem risers as they have been noted to give problems previously. Alternatively, Khalid should step aside to give the MB to someone with an equal caliber as his. Presently, I notice that not all PR assemblymen might match his forte.

Do you remember what Bersih said that if all 8 demands are not met? Keep that in mind as well.

You're Your Own Worst Enemy

I couldn't recall who first said "You're your own worst enemy." but from my understanding, it was originated from "Man is his own worst enemy" spoken by the Roman senator and philosopher Cicero. The quote is what I've been summarizing about in regards of my observations of PKR, it's top two leaders and apart from that KITA's Zaid Ibrahim. Similarly, there are many fellow colleagues who view the famous Allies General George Patton's ego as his own worst enemy. One of them who famously alluded that was his close friend, Omar Bradley. It is the ego of man that gets the best out of him and it's a tough thing to defeat unless it can be kicked out of a man's system.

I've been reading rants and tweets from a friend of mine, KITA's former CEC-member who was unceremoniously dismissed with the other members of the committee. I can dig up the whole list of tweets in regards to what he said, if wished. Previously when Zaid said KITA will not contest in the elections and instead show unconditional support, I was certain that Zaid made several big mistakes while he's still at PKR. I did remarked previously that you need to understand the relationship between Anwar Ibrahiim and Azmin Ali before you can attempt to take on them. One friend of mine told me of Zaid being cautioned of that relationship during the Permatang Pauh by-election campaign. But having been in the party for less than year, many viewed his actions in the party as impatient and barging through.

When he announced today that instead of dissolving the party and have KITA contesting in seats in several states, a friend of mine opined of him as a flip-flopper. Easy enough to say. But this doesn't mean that I am anti-Mr.A or anti-Mr.B or something.

Which now brings back to Anwar. Anwar's main weakness is also about the ego getting the best of him. At times, he claims to have this and that, he can turn around things in Putrajaya. There's an acknowledgement that the need to win seats in Sabah and Sarawak to gain control of the government. But then the sentiment and mindset of Sabah and Sarawak is not the same as in Peninsular. Their's as they put it as their own independent sub-camp. If the big-three from peninsular wants the lion's share of seats in Sabah and Sarawak, it would be very difficult to accomplish the objective. Unless, they make partners and friends with the local-based parties like SNAP, STAR and so forth.

Why can't PKR and their two partners make more friends with their local partners? It's one way to demonstrate their show of autonomy giving to East Malaysia. If you recall the agreement points of the two states prior to joining the federation in 1963, it's not appropriate to push and exert over there. That's what STAR is doing right now in Sabah. That's fine if the peninsular parties can represent there, but the scale has to go lower. In other words, give them to the local parties there. Lest, the mistake is seen in Batu Sapi. Barisan Nasional has local partners there, and as the saying goes, there's no harm done in having extra partners to help them out in the agenda.

If the PR's agenda is to also inline of "Anything But UMNO" agenda, then the ego, being their own worst enemy has to be shed. People with notable egos like Anwar, Azmin and Khalid Ibrahim - not just the three of them, but others have to step aside or at least settle their differences with their other partners before going ahead with the agenda. There's not much time really, maybe at least another 2-3 months before the earliest time of a general election. The crisis in Kedah is also another example of Azizan's old methodology, considered obsolete in the current age compared to what was 30 years ago. Obsolete is also alluded to what some people and think-tanks look at the Pemandu's ETP as well.

It may be a harsh way to get those with high egos aside but it is also a way to pave for more caliber people to represent the community in the Parliament. Having watch Patton biographical movie many years ago, I was reminded of the infamous Cicero quote above - a man's downfall from an enemy he can't defeat: himself.

This Blog is 5 Years Today!

I really didn't have anything to write apart from one posting planned (had a write block today) but I know that today is the 5th year of this blog.

I took cue from a friend of mine who started writing a few months ahead of me and following that I finally decided to start one once I had this Maxis Broadband in 2007. At that time P1 has yet to be launched. 

For the first three months, I write whenever I please and by May 2007, I've mostly jumped into the social-political scene, while at times write something casual just out of the fun.

People asked me why "Taffer" at times. The answer is, I took cue from a two places: a video game series called Thief and a Welsh slang meaning of low-life. It's the video game's nice slang that caught my attention hence the name and moniker.

Anyhow, quite tired today, not that usual, so I sign off with a birthday greeting.

When Owners Barreling At The Front of The Door

It's the Scolari case over and over again 5 years ago. I was counting on the case where Villa-Boas would be fired at the end of the season as what happen to Carlo Ancelotti but it happened prematurely, with barely 2.5 months towards the end of the season. This assumes that the club has been knocked out of European football but still having to play the remaining Premier League games and continuing their FA Cup challenge.

The problem is that Roman Abramovich is a living example of people in the football industry that is barreling at the front door. No patience. Many failed to see the need to understand long term of having a great depth of squad before mounting a challenge of trophies. Instead, the approach was the opposite - buying great players at the start hoping to go past the post instantly. There have been a few clubs that really actually understood the value of long-term projects, like Man Utd and Everton. These are clubs that show the close and strong relationship with manager and the chairman; there's an acknowledgement of making a good team will take years on. It took Alex Ferguson 6 years to win his first Premier League trophy, 12 years to win his first European Cup. (they came agonizingly close to final in 1997 when they lost to Dortmund in both legs in semis)

By this barreling at the front door attitude, Abramovich had to spend millions to compensate Villa-Boas (28 months remaining of the 3 year contract). And it is 8 managers in 9 years, average of one per season. It's similar the rich mega-spending club in Russia, or a few clubs where the owner attempts to interfere with the manager's work on team selection, thus the manager will be complaining about how he's unable to have autonomy on work. Abramovich is not the only person or parties that adopt this attitude. Fiorentino Perez's first spell at Real Madrid was also case in point. His mistake was not to keep Vicente Del Bosque while at the club even if Del Bosque won 2 European Cups in the space of 3 years (2000 and 2002) and then going through lots of coaches. Fabio Capello's second stint at the club lasted only a full season, having left even if the team won the league trophy. Sates the club and fans satisfaction of winning trophy, yet being unappreciated and get thrown out? It really scratches my head really.

It's more frequent to see this problem and attitude of the owners / fans in Middle East football. Take Saudi Arabia for instance, where a coach's job hangs on the balance in no more than a dozen games unless the team either qualifies for the country-level continent competition. If one condition is not met, expect the man to be shown to the door. For the owners, their nigh-infinite amount of money from oil can be splashed in bringing in coaches here and there as they please. But it will be the squad that will suffer for each coach has a different way of traning and strategy and thus the struggle to adapt to the system desired. Until today most Arab-club owners and FAs still barrel in front of the door, impatient, expecting a magic pill to happen.

Still it's not as severe as in Brazil's famous Dance of the Coaches syndrome - coaches go in and out after a few games within a season. Much of it is because of intense fan pressure and owners' impatience - even a slight setback in form a league game defeat means of people taking offense and unable to accept it. In fact, it can - if overuse - drive players and coaches mad as hell. Can you imagine, like in 2002, at the end of the first month of the Brasilla state championship that 12 coaches were replaced? In Brazil, coaches are made scapegoats and if a team is elbowed, the coach gets it first.

Abramovich never has the passion of the game. His is strictly on the business and expecting the magic pill with no patience and no finesse. The passion component is missing and will never happen with his impatience and barreling at the front of the door. Only crazy money can really tempt a potential coach into joining Chelsea. A coach potential coach offered to join Chelsea should first hand know the history of the club of the last 10 years before taking the risk. Otherwise, it's best to snub any offer Abramovich would offer and let him keep searching and searching around. Then we can see who's laughing the last.

Unforgiven

Some call it as a point of desperation. Others call it as a cheap way of illicit sympathy votes from the people, while some call it begging then giving a slap in the face by reverting back to old habits. I guess that's the context behind Najib's begging for forgiveness for the mistakes made in the past. But the sheer magnitude of the mistakes committed in the last 40 years plus or so makes it technically very hard to be forgiven.

I am unable to understand the logic of BN starting to go into this mode apart from them realizing from the way they are moving, they are starting to lose more support from the public, particularly from the non-Malay community. Why Najib would move into that is clearly based on the people psyche. As what Raja Petra said recently in "Malay unity at is best", people are easily forgiving, unless you make them "small heart" (kecil hati). This is the factor that they are banking on, hoping that in flock they would return to conventional BN support previously.

Are they really sincere in begging forgiveness? If you look at how they ridicule Kelantan as the poorest, perhaps it could hint of insincerity. Kelantan has the potential of being rich, with its oil reserves, but because it is being run by opposition, they were refused the entitlement of the 5% royalty. If the Petroleum Act bill is being respected irregardless of which party running the state, then there is not going to be any ridicule and excuse that BN would do to Kelantan. After all, Mahathir's grudge against PAS is evident in the period of 1999-2004 in Terengganu. 

In the last 35 years, we could have earned about trillions from petroleum discovered, but yet the money was squandered in other things and to enrich only 0.5% of the population of 28 million, with further atrocities happened by the same group of people running the country. And then they are begging for forgiveness? It's like thieves trying to be pious at people and will resume their dirty habit once given chances over and over again.

What is also stated by Najib also hints that he could be out of power with Muhyiddin slated to take over. It also hints that Najib is going to be kicked out, in and out anyways. The statement by Muhyiddin after Najib's since to paint the impression. In the party scale, it also hints that UMNO is going to be out, unless if they win by the way of the crook. I once recalled my primary school standard 6 teacher, going by the name of Latifah, said that most Malays believe that prior to death, he / she would act rather strangely. A band of pirates acting arrogant and brash then suddenly does this act of begging at people? There are signs that elections happening within the next 3 months already.

What are we going to do with them? Hammurabi's Law is using the eye-for-an-eye concept. If they are asking for forgiveness, then don't give them the space needed to resume their heinous crimes. Why was our tax money paid to bail out Mirzan's company many years ago? 

It's unforgiven. We should never forgive them at all and it's hell to pay.

Have We Calculated The Cost?

The question is: which one is your friend and which one is your enemy? Your enemy is not the 51% Malay voters who voted Barisan Nasional in March 2008. Your enemy is certainly not the 49% Malay voters who voted Pakatan Rakyat in March 2008. Your enemy are those who walk in the corridors of power in Putrajaya and the 2,500 Umno delegates who attend the Umno general assembly to elect their party President who then becomes the Prime Minister of Malaysia.

- Malay Unity At Its Best (Malaysia Today, No Holds Barred 1 March)

I do not deny that it is very important for voters to identify who is the enemy and who is the friend. Once we have identified who is the real enemy and who are your friends, then at least you have a clear point of focus. I do not like to chastise or mock other people for voting for the wrong reasons. I acknowledge that it is their own choice to do so. However after seeing the effect from making the wrong choice and paying a terrible price in the way of suffering, I get very angry and agitated at those who made the wrong choice and as well at what Pete refers to "those who walk the corridors of power". 

What he wrote above has caught my attention to write my opinion which I have thought for a while back.

The aftermath of Hulu Selangor and Bagan Pinang by-elections is the case in point where I get angry at people making wrong choices. And I've seen news reports of people there complaining about not getting what they need when they put in the "grand old party and its scale" in power back. I am angry when by putting bad apples to run the country (those who do bad like corruption, getting away with crimes) people who choose their leaders poorly are indirectly saying that bribing, murder, white-collar crimes at the highest level is legitimate, permitted and we turn our eye blind from it as long it is money. But while we make these choices, have we actually calculated the cost of our mistakes?

The next general election will hinge on the 40% of the voters who are on top of the fence. They those who are full of uncertainty of picking which party to run the government from either mid-2012 or 2013 onwards. The issues to be raised here is have they see what would be the consequences like if they make a bad choice? Which side are they going for - those who want to keep the old guard or those who felt the need to shake the nation up after 55 years? Never mind the 30% of each side who are dead fixed on following the ideology of the coalition, but it will be a tug of minds to get the remaining 40% voting.

There have been people who worried, like myself over what future would behold if the wrong choice is ultimately made. Apart from seeing more corruption, bankruptcy can be reality in the next 3 to 6 years, with Malaysia ultimately capitulating to the demands of the IMF and the World Bank. Socially, the society ladder, where Malaysia is supposedly should move up will remain in the neo-feudalistic level as it is. And of course along the way, racial politics will still remain.

Everyone should take the share of the blame. We've been quite ignorant and making the same mistakes over and over again. We've been succumbing  / buckled to false threats and temptations to the same party who have been sweet-talking over the last 55 years and so forth yet at times break promises. 

How will one realize of the cost of making the wrong choice, particularly for those who have voted many times? I can identify one possible solution, but a very distasteful one. If I say that is the only way, I feel that some people would be "hati kecil" over an over-the-top act. I have said a few times way back that sometimes "an insult is necessary to wake people up". Sure, anyone who may have the same opinion as I do would do that at the risk of making people "small hearted" - but for greater good and shaking things up. 

One identified risk is that for us who are voting for the future, our children / grandchildren will someday scold us and despise us for all life if we give them the wrong future by making the wrong choice. This goes out to everyone and those who refuse to see the reality beyond the veil of illusion that is sown by the mainstream media - instructed to write things that sugar-coat realities mere to please. I worry that one day a child of mine would spit on me and said that "Daddy has been ignorant and making it legit for what is morally wrong." I've heard opinions and decisions from the young that many are prepared to move out to other countries to work and never come back if the situation and outcome remains as bad as it is right now. There goes TalentCorp to the waste.

 

While we are squabbling over the fault of one race or vice versa, we've been dropping our priority objective which is to ABU. Anything But UMNO can't just be another mere slogan. It has to be translated into action. The first and foremost objective and priority that has to be focused is to at least reduce the BN majority, or if desirable replace it with the other government. This of course needs people to know who's your friends and who's the enemy. If we're to whack the enemy to kingdom come, your friends have to avoid making the bad choice - and it requires helping one another to do so.

Does that reveal the key action point needed to ensure ABU success?

Namewee Screws Lynas

Note: There's a joke on Warcraft: It is a good day to die