Saturday, June 25, 2011
Prime Minister Dato' Sri Najib Tun Razak said the public can decide whether the man featured in a sex video clipping is indeed that of opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim.
"This is something they have to judge for themselves. The most important thing is to determine the authenticity and find the truth. It's up ton the people to decide," he said recently.
My only problem is if the video is authentic and the man may turned out to be the leader of the opposition, then the police report that he made to pronounce the video was doctored and the man featured in it was not him was false, shouldn't he then be also charged for making a false report? Isn't it against the law to do such thing?
Or may be he thinks the laws in this country is a joke!? He probably said to himself: "Hey I can fucked Malaysian judicial system and laws at any time to my liking and nobody can touch me-(sniggered)."
Well, as far as I am concerned the man feature in the sex video clipping is that man. There is no doubt in my mind that it is him! You decide then! Read further here....
Thursday, June 23, 2011
A new web site has just been born, one that reports balanced and fair news about Malaysia and launched in the UK and written by UK bloggers. A very interesting sign of increasing positive interest in Malaysia from independent journalists around the world. We recommend a glance and following it...!
Monday, June 20, 2011
Those were the exact sentence used by former prime minister, Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad, to stress a point to former MCA chief Neo Yee Pan when the latter tried to threaten a massive Chinese demonstration. Mahathir said if you think you can have a bigger demo we can even have bigger one.
"Yours can be big, but mine can be bigger," he told the belligerent Yee Pan. The Chinese demonstration did not take place since it was common sense that prevailed at the time.
So I hear there is this planned massive demonstration against the present government, what else can the demonstration be against right, by the opposition to force the government to accept its demands.
I was told the opposition under the control of Brother Anwar Bin Ibrahim (BABI) has a hand in this dangerous manoeuvre to make the government of the day succumbed to its demands.
Well the bad new is this is not the Middle East where rampant street demonstrations, dubbed the Arab Spring protest and demonstration, have many repressive governments starting with Egypt's Hosni Mubarak being overthrown.
The good news is this is Malaysia, one of the most successful Asian countries in the region. Far from being a repressive country, even the leader of the planned massive demonstration led by a very vile and ugly man-looking Hindu Malaysian woman lawyer will go back to her luxurious home driving her expensive car after a hard days work demonstrating against the present government.
The good news is, Malaysia is nothing like any of the Arab Spring countries, like Egypt where unemployment rate is so high that people in Cairo is so poor that they have overtaken a cometary compound for a living space.
Malaysia is nothing like Sudan, Tunisia, Egypt, Syria, Yemen and many more repressive and dictatorial governments!!
I will say this: If the Bar Council or any other group and association that have any misgiving about many things try to remove this government via a democratic ways but not through blood shed for all of us to regret later on!
Until then use you head guys!
Tuesday, June 14, 2011
Surfing through the net and found this interesting article written by an American writer, Benjamin Domenech, who made a very interesting observation on world politics and of Malaysia especially and he has been writing quiet a bit on our Brother Anwar Bin Ibrahim. Below is an excerpt...
I’ve made no secret of the fact of my distaste for Anwar Ibrahim, and not just because he’s the Muslim Brotherhood’s kept man, and not just because his choice of coalition partners includes a band of hardcore socialists and Islamists who regretted not being able to shoot Americans during the invasion of Afghanistan. But I will freely confess that he is a terribly interesting person — and one clearly suffering from the same encompassing wave of uncritical love that enabled Congressman Weiner to telegraph his eponymous body part to any woman he felt would want to see it.
In Anwar’s case, that love — from Western media and politicians who should know better, from Malaysian websites that uncritically regurgitate his talking points, from his bands of loyal followers — has at the very least deluded him into a sort of messianism, where the democratically elected government of Malaysia is Olympus to his Prometheus. At the worst, if the allegations against him are true, it has led him to believe that forced sodomy and infidelity are excusable for him.
Anwar is fascinating not for his apparent proclivity to do vile things — small men do small things, and there are many small men in the world — but for the uncritical love he inspires from men who should know better, and how he reinforces that love while allegedly doing terrible things; the reinforced love simply provides him another buffer to continue the range of behaviors that make him so vile. Like Dominique Strauss Kahn, whose alleged proclivities to serial infidelity and at times (still allegedly!) brutalization of women were quietly known and ignored or excused, Anwar has generated the sort of blind loyalty that leads men to suicide charges into set pike formations. Strauss-Kahn is a complete puzzle, a short, dumpy man possessed of neither good looks nor telegenic charm, who has nevertheless apparently managed to gain a reputation as a Lothario (a feat comparable Michael Moore winning acclaim as a dieting expert) and qho nearly rose to the highest levels of power in French politics. Anwar and Weiner at least know the value of making the cameraman feel like you’re smiling just for him. Read more here
Thursday, June 09, 2011
PAS lied again! Najib visits to Kazakhstan is official and nothing to do with his daughter getting married!
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs wishes to clarify an issue raised in Hazlan Zakaria’s article, "PM’s use of public funds for wedding trip morally wrong” (Malaysiakini, June 7).
2. The Prime Minister’s visit to Kazakhstan is to fulfil his acceptance of the long-standing invitation by H.E. Nursultan Nazarbayev, President of Kazakhstan for our Prime Minister to undertake an official visit to Kazakhstan. The visit which took place on 5 to 6 June 2011 was the Prime Minister’s first official visit to the country and reciprocated the visit to Malaysia by President Nazarbayev himself in June 2006.
3. During the visit, the Prime Minister paid a courtesy call on President Nazarbayev and also held bilateral consultation with H.E. Karim Massimov, Prime Minister of Kazakhstan. The visit did not just elevate the bilateral relations between the two countries but had also generated many business opportunities for Malaysian business community. It may be worth highlighting that Kazakhstan is Malaysia’s biggest trading partner among countries in Central Asia.
4. The visit to Kazakhstan also coincided with the 7th World Islamic Economic Forum (7th WIEF) from 7 to 9 June 2011 in Astana, the capital of Kazakhstan. The Prime Minister’s attendance at the 7th WIEF was in his capacity as head of government, representing Malaysia and as patron of WIEF. As you may well be aware, WIEF is an initiative started by Malaysia which has evolved since its inauguration in 2005 as one of the important platforms for dialogues and exchanges of cutting edge ideas, and business networking between governments and business leaders across the Muslim world and beyond. The decision for Kazakhstan to host the 7th WIEF on these dates was reached more than a year ago, when Malaysia hosted the sixth series of WIEF in May 2010.
5. On the whole, the visit had brought about a substantial development in Malaysia-Kazakhstan bilateral relations which is mutually rewarding. It has also reinforced the close relations between the two countries as well as promoted meaningful cooperation and dialogues among developing countries primarily members of the Organisation of the Islamic Conference (OIC).
6. As such, the claim by some quarters that the visit was for the wedding of the Prime Minister’s daughter is totally unfounded.
Department of Information and Public Diplomacy
Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Malaysia
9 June 2011
Tuesday, June 07, 2011
This is what an influential American online news portal the New Ledger wrote about our prime minister:-
It is perhaps common for citizens of the Western world to look out in despair upon the panoply of Muslim-majority countries in the world for a ruling government whose understanding of history and world affairs is not warped and distorted by paranoia of Israel and the West. The average exposure the Western citizen has to a Muslim leader’s understanding of world affairs is doubtless limited to the rantings of demagogues like Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran and others. Many of these leaders publicly see the world through the prism of Holocaust denial, Jewish conspiracies, and plots by the Great Satan to oppress Muslims.
Some of these leaders come by these beliefs honestly; others doubtless espouse them in order to deflect their own citizens’ discontent away from their government and onto a handy target. In either case, a common theme arises – while many majority-Muslim countries have governments that are very wealthy, their citizenry is often horribly poor and disconnected from any sort of meaningful and unbiased news source. And so men like Ahmadinejad grab Western headlines with their inflammatory headlines and here in the United States we are left to wonder: Are there no leaders of Muslim countries who have any understanding of how to guide their country into a prosperous partnership with the rest of the world?
To any who are thus concerned, Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak’s remarks at the 10th International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) Shangri-La Dialogue should provide a welcome antidote. Like many majority-Muslim countries, Malaysia is a multi-ethnic country. Although the majority of Malaysians are Malay Muslims, a non-trivial portion of Malaysia’s population consists of Chinese expatriates (who are heavily Christian), along with countless other smaller minorities of various faiths. Many majority-Muslim countries in today’s world respond to their minority populations with brutal oppression; Najib’s government has eschewed this path in favor of peaceful cooperation with Malaysia’s minorities, allowing them a meaningful voice in a truly functional democracy. It is perhaps not surprising that the result of this is that Malaysia has a modern economy that interacts peacefully with the world around it.
In his Keynote Address at the Shangri-La Dialogue, Najib demonstrated that this fact was no accident, but rather was the result of the leadership of a government with a keen understanding of its region and an ability to view the world through the prism of its trading partners, even favorably invoking Henry Kissinger’s “long arc of history,” an unthinkable prospect for many leaders of majority-Muslim countries.
The cynics thought that Asia and the West could never truly come together as a cohesive whole, that we had too little in common, that life in Surabaya was simply too far removed from life in San Diego. The last 10 years have proved them wrong. Yes, we come from many cultures and we speak many languages but, as US Defence Secretary Robert Gates – and I wish him well in his retirement – said in this room last year, the Pacific Ocean is not a barrier that divides us but a bridge that unites us.
Next month will see the 40th anniversary of Henry Kissinger’s secret mission to China, ahead of President Nixon’s historic visit in 1972. Coming in the midst of the Cold War, Nixon’s visit shocked many in the United States. How could the fervently anti-communist leader of the Western world possibly sit down with his ideological adversary? The answer of course is that the United States saw in China the potential to become a counterweight to the Soviet bloc, but this new alliance went much further than that. Nixon’s visit was not just about the United States opening itself up to China; it was about China opening itself up to the United States. It is a relationship that has benefited both countries ever since, but such productive dialogue can only take place if there is an openness to engagement on both sides.
It is likewise welcome to find a leader of a majority-Muslim country confronting the problem of extremism head-on and unsolicited:
In Islam, we have a concept wasatiyyah, which means moderation or justly balanced. It is this spirit of moderation that has made Malaysia the country it is today, and that I believe will now be the key to overcoming the challenges we face together as a region. That is why, at the United Nations last year, I called for a new global movement of the moderates that would see government, business and religious leaders around the world face down extremism wherever it is found. Just as you cannot make the world a better place by passing a law proclaiming that it will be better, you cannot rid the world of extreme views simply by making them illegal. I have no doubt we can best foster tolerance and understanding not by silencing the voice of hatred, but by making the voice of reason louder and louder.
As responsible leaders, we cannot and should not squander the opportunity before us to help build a new world order, where a just and equitable peace predicated on the rule of law is the norm, rather than the exception. We know that governments that do not practice good governance are existing on borrowed time. We must ensure peace and stability at all levels – national, regional and global.
Najib’s speech as a whole displays the kind of regional leadership that has for too long been lacking among Muslim leaders. And the actions of his government bear it out – unlike many governments, Malaysia does not have a token democracy, but rather Najib’s governing coalition faces a real threat from Anwar Ibrahim’s coalition (which harbors within it the only true Muslim extremist party in Malaysia). And what this demonstrates to us is that when a Muslim leader must actually be responsive to his population and ensure their prosperity (or risk electoral defeat), then there is hope that perhaps things are not as bleak as we have supposed.
(An interesting perspective from a reader. Published from a blogsite, Unspinners, without permission.)
Sunday, June 5, 2011
Many a time in the course of the Anwar Ibrahim sodomy II trial, the question was raised as to how a strong and reluctant twenty-something-year old man could be sodomised by a sixty-plus-year old person.
This question presupposes that an element of physical force was involved to bring the victim to submission. That supposition may be entirely erroneous.
A person of authority using his position or influence to gain sexual gratification from a person answerable or beholden to him is not a phenomenon either unknown or rare. It is in fact very common.
Think of those sexual abuse cases involving Catholic priests and altar or choir boys which till now are plaguing the Catholic Church, those cases in the US military where superior officers sexually harass and exploit junior female personnel, instances in academia where instructors use their position to gain sexual advantage over students.
In many cases, because of their shame, confusion and emotional trauma, the victims took a great deal of time, sometimes years, to speak out on the victimisation committed against them.
Very often, there was no physical violence threatened or inflicted and the victims appear to have physically consented to the sexual relations.
In actual fact, their mental confusion and reluctance to question or resist the ‘requests’ or ‘suggestions’ by a person they look up to made them vulnerable to sexual exploitation. Or the exploiter is someone the victim is dependent on for job security or career advancement. The Anwar/Saiful sodomy case can easily fit into this pattern.
Some people consider it inconceivable or impossible for Anwar to have forced Saiful to submit to be sodomised. This is a very blinkered view, almost wilfully ignorant of what had happened in other parts of the world.
The answer to the question posed many times by observers as to how it was possible that a 60-year old man can sexually exploit a physically strong 20-something year-old man is that the former by using his charisma, position and influence can persuade or coerce the latter to do things against the latter’s better judgement with no physical violence or threats necessary.
So the act can appear to be physically consensual but in the mind of the victim during or after the act, it is something done against his or her will and is forced on him or her.
Far from it for me to say at this point that was what actually transpired in the Anwar/Saiful sodomy case. That’s for the trial to decide. What I’m saying is that it’s time people stop playing stupid and start to accept that it is not an impossibility for sexual exploitation to have taken place with no actual physical resistance on the part of the victim.
Things get very complicated once the victim ‘submits’ to the exploitation as the element of consent arguably becomes apparent. It is for this reason that sexual harassment laws have been formulated to deter persons holding positions of authority and power in organisations from even attempting to take sexual advantage of their underlings.
ANGELINE TAY MEI LIN
Cheras, Kuala Lumpur.