marahfreedom

Archive for February 10th, 2012|Daily archive page

2 Articles on Mobile Phone and Electrosmog Dangers- reposted by @AgreeToDisagree – 12th February 2012

In Abuse of Power, checks and balances, Health, Informed Consent, Invasive Laws, Neurotech, Radiation, social freedoms, soul binding, soul theft, spirit of the law, technofascism, Technology on February 10, 2012 at 4:44 pm

ARTICLE 1

Mobiles warning for mums-to-be: Using phone while pregnant ‘can lead to behavioural problems in children’ By Jenny Hope Last updated at 8:27 AM on 7th December 2010

Pregnant women who regularly use mobile phones could increase the risk of their children behaving badly, claims a startling survey.

If their offspring then start using the devices at an early age, the chance of problems climbs to 50 per cent, according to researchers.

They found those exposed to mobile phones in the womb had a 30 per cent rise in behavioural difficulties at the age of seven.
Pregnant pause: Researchers suggest that pregnant women who regularly use mobile phones are putting their babies at risk of developing behavioural problems

Pregnant pause: Researchers suggest that pregnant women who regularly use mobile phones are putting their babies at risk of developing behavioural problems

But those exposed before birth and in their childhood, were 50 per cent more likely to have behavioural problems than those exposed to neither.

Children who used mobiles, but were not exposed in the womb, were 20 per cent more likely to display abnormal behaviour.

The findings by researchers in California are likely to reinforce warnings that children should not use mobile phones.

However, some British scientists were sceptical, saying the findings may be due to lifestyle factors rather than mobiles.

In the study of 29,000 youngsters, mothers provided details of their lifestyle, diet and environment during and after pregnancy.

Information on their children’s health and mobile phone use was also recorded. Around three per cent of children scored abnormal on behavioural issues, with another three per cent ‘borderline’.

The study found that more than ten per cent of children exposed to mobile phones in the womb had mothers who spoke on them at least four times a day.

Nearly half of the mothers had their phones turned on at all times while around a third of children were using a mobile phone by the age of seven.

The findings published in the Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health mirrored an earlier study by the survey team.

Researcher Dr Leeka Kheifets said both sets of results ‘demonstrated that cell phone use was associated with behavioural problems at age seven years’.

The scientists said social factors, such as mothers paying more attention to mobiles than their children, were only partly to blame. Dr Kheifets added: ‘We are concerned that early exposure to cell phones could carry a risk.’

Safety Tips

In Britain, Professor Lawrie Challis, a leading government adviser on the radiation effects of mobile phones, has gone on record saying children should not use them until aged at least 12. But more than half of under-tens own a mobile.

Patricia McKinney, emeritus professor of paediatric epidemiology at the University of Leeds, said it was difficult to see how mobile use could affect an unborn baby.

She said: ‘Exposure to radiofrequency radiation from mobile phones is highly localised to the part of the head closest. There is no evidence to suggest that other parts of the body are affected.

‘We also have no evidence that a pregnant mother’s behaviour is related to her mobile phone use and thereby affecting her baby.’

Professor David Spiegelhalter, from the University of Cambridge, was also ‘sceptical’ of the results.

He said: ‘One finding is that very young children who use mobile phones show more behavioural disorders. But is it plausible that the first causes the second?’

Professor David Coggon, from the University of Southampton, said: ‘The pattern of results suggests the increase in behavioural problems may have been caused by factors other than mobile phone use.’

In May, the largest study of its kind said that using a mobile does not appear to increase the risk of certain types of brain cancer.

The International Agency for Research on Cancer analysed data for more than 10,000 people and found no link between years of use and risk.

Original article can be read here : http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-1336265/Using-mobile-phone-pregnant-lead-behavioural-problems-children.html

 

 

ARTICLE 2

Would a dramatic change in the Earth’s magnetic field affect creatures that rely on it during migration? – 01/03/2011 02:18 PM – http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message1307797/pg1

Late on a January night in 1993 I found myself on a beach on the Pacific coast of Costa Rica, kneeling in the sand beside a leatherback sea turtle. Like a giant mango with wings, the huge black turtle had hauled herself up the beach in great stentorian gasps of air and was laying her eggs in a pit she had laboriously scooped out with her hind flippers.

Knowing basic facts about her ecology and physiology, I was in awe. How her kind, the largest living reptiles, had been around for 120 million years. How she lived solely on jellyfish, a thing more water balloon than animal. How she could collapse her lungs and dive to depths that would cause you or me to implode. How she had traveled thousands of miles around the Pacific Ocean, only to return there to the very beach she was born on years before.

That navigational and homing ability astonished me more than any other. How did she navigate around a trackless wilderness larger than the world’s total land area and find her way back to that same short ribbon of sand? One hypothesis was just starting to be floated in those days: that to aid their long-distance migrations leatherbacks and other sea turtles appear to use the Earth’s magnetic field (see Figure 1).

When I learned recently that our planet’s magnetic shield is rapidly weakening and may be ready to reverse its polarity, causing compasses to point south, I immediately wondered what that would mean for leatherbacks and the many other species that use the magnetic field to orient themselves and find their way around. Could they withstand a significant dwindling of the field’s strength or even a reversal? Or might extinctions, perhaps mass extinctions, be in the offing?

Animal magnetism

One of the first concrete signs that animals can tap into the magnetic field was observed, as in many a great discovery in science, by chance. It was the fall of 1957, and Hans Fromme, a researcher at the Frankfurt Zoological Institute in Germany, noticed that several European robins he kept in a cage were becoming restless and were fluttering up into the southwestern part of the cage. Nothing unusual there: it was known that migrating birds in cages become edgy at that time of year, and European robins in Germany migrate southwestwards to Spain to overwinter.

What made it striking was that the birds were in a shuttered room. They could see neither visual landmarks, nor their fellow, non-captive robins, nor the sun or stars, which were known to serve them as navigational aids. Clearly they were acting on something invisible, and Fromme deduced it must be the Earth’s magnetic field.

Numerous experiments undertaken by him and others since then have shown that many living things avail themselves of the magnetic field. Organisms as diverse as hamsters, salamanders, sparrows, rainbow trout, spiny lobsters, and bacteria all do it. “I would go so far as to say that it’s nearly ubiquitous,” says John Phillips, a behavioral biologist at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University who himself has detected this ability in everything from fruit flies to frogs. (There’s no scientific evidence that humans have this “sixth sense,” though curiously, our brains do contain magnetite, the mineral thought to aid other animals’ brains in detecting the field.)

How do we know organisms have this ability? A standard method to test for it is to throw a magnetic curve ball, as it were, at experimental subjects. In an effort, for example, to determine if the blind mole rat, a subterranean rodent that builds a home of branching tunnels with no exits to the surface, can sense the magnetic field, Tali Kimchi and Joseph Terkel of Tel Aviv University built an eight-armed maze within a device in which they could alter the magnetic field. They then tested two groups of rats—one in the Earth’s magnetic field and the other in a field shifted by 180°—to see whether they had directional druthers for siting their sleeping nests and food chambers. The first group showed a significant preference to build their beds and pantries in the southern part of the maze, while the second group opted for the northern sector.

So they can sense it, but can they use it like we do a compass, to orient themselves? In another experiment, Kimchi and Terkel trained 24 blind mole rats to reach a goal box at the end of a complex labyrinth. Then, when all had mastered the task, they had half the rats do it again under the natural field and half under a reversed field. Lo and behold, the latter rats’ performance fell far short of that achieved by their magnetically unmanipulated fellows.

Undersea superhighways

Other animals take things a step further than the blind mole rat, using the magnetic field like we do the Global Positioning System, to determine their location on the surface of the Earth and using that to negotiate unseen pathways during migration.

Kenneth and Catherine Lohmann of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and their team have shown through many experiments that during their 8,000-mile migration around the Atlantic Ocean, young loggerhead sea turtles can detect not only the field’s intensity but its inclination, the angle at which magnetic field lines intersect the Earth. The turtles use these two pieces of information, which vary at every point on the planet’s surface, as navigational markers that help them advance along their migratory route (see Figure 2).

Sometimes this navigational ability can serve its practitioners only too well. A mystery long bedeviling marine biologists is why otherwise healthy whales beach themselves, often in large groups. In the early 1980s, a British biologist named Margaret Klinowska first noticed a correlation between where whale strandings tended to occur along the coasts of England and where magnetic lineations written into the seafloor intersect those coasts. (These lineations, or anomalies, are different from those produced by the main magnetic field.) Joe Kirschvink of the California Institute of Technology and his colleagues later showed a similar association on the east coast of the U.S.

Whales, it seems, follow these magnetic lineations during migration (see Figure 3). “If that’s your game plan, and you get off track, and you follow a sharp magnetic anomaly that curves and runs into the coast, bang, you end up on the beach,” says Kirschvink. Because whales are very social, if the leader makes this mistake, so does its entire pod, hence the mass strandings.

Rising to the occasion

If whales can run into trouble when the field is reasonably strong, what might happen to them and other creatures that rely on it if the field becomes feeble or even flips? Hans Fromme had found in Frankfurt that when he placed his European robins into a steel chamber and reduced the strength of the ambient magnetic field by a third, the birds’ flutterings were no longer directional. This suggested that the birds needed the magnetic field to be a certain intensity to be of use. But Fromme’s colleague F. W. Merkel later showed that the birds were able to acclimatize to the new magnetic field within a number of days.

Indeed, the researchers I spoke with all thought that organisms would be able to adjust to an acute weakening or even complete reversal of the magnetic field. “My gut reaction is it’s not going to have an impact,” says Frank Paladino, the Indiana-Purdue University leatherback researcher whose project I was visiting that night in 1993.

History seems to back this up. There is no firm evidence that the many magnetic field reversals that have taken place throughout our planet’s history (see When Compasses Point South) have coincided with or triggered extinctions. Reversals take hundreds if not thousands of years to complete, and because for any one type of animal that represents hundreds or thousands of generations, species have time to accommodate to the change. Moreover, Kirschvink notes that even if the main dipole field were to collapse—an event that can last for up to 10,000 years during a reversal—residual fields 5 or 10 percent as strong as the main field would remain on the surface, and animals would be able to use those quite well for migration.

So as I watched that leatherback in Costa Rica use her oar-like front flippers to expertly disguise her newly laid nest with sand and then begin dragging her massive bulk back to the surf, I needn’t have worried, it seems, that she and others like her might lose their way and thus rupture the cycle leatherbacks have maintained since the Age of Dinosaurs. That’s a relief considering how many threats she and other wild animals already face today.

[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]

Think the smart meter issue (http://www.earthcalm.com/5582/emf-dangers-2/smart-meter-radiation-risks/) and various EMF/ELF/Satellite Cell Phone Tech and the effects on Human Brains as well . . . read the below on the EU’s concept of ‘white zone’ districts where no WiFii is allowed and no ELF or EMFs as well.

Electrosmog free / EMF/ELF Cellphone-Wireless Free Zones for Electro-Sensitives – Posted on February 7, 2011 by James Heddle

This is a human right if anything and also prevents invasion of MENTAL privacy with high tech devices in countries that have not yet chosen (intentionally so they can download people’s thoughts for their own financial and social advantage) to acknowledge the  abuse of minds with Neurotech.

 

4 Articles on Unconscionability of, and, Ending Forced Military Conscriptions (or at least adding Abstention Options to the rent seeking, contractor.supplier enriching bill) – reposted by @AgreeToDisagree – 10th February 2012

In Abuse of Power, bad laws, Conscription, critical discourse, criticism, Democracy, Forced Military Conscription, Malaysia, mental abuse, Mind Control, neurolinguistics, self policing, social freedoms, spirit of the law, taxpayer funds, use of tax monies on February 10, 2012 at 4:13 pm

ARTICLE 1

Najib’s Orwellian 1 Malaysia – Written by johnleemk (who most authoritarian-‘ly’ dubbed Malaysian online commentators and people interested in politics – ‘chatttering classes’ on 4:58:29 am Mar 11, 2010.

Datuk Seri Najib Razak was supposed to be a better Prime Minister than Tun Abdullah Badawi. But his charm offensive belies his failure to protect our democracy and our institutions. Najib replaced Pak Lah because of the Umno warlords protecting their own interests, rather than those of the country’s; he is a Prime Minister beholden to Umno politicos, not the Malaysian voters.

The biggest problem people had with Pak Lah was that he was weak. He said nice things, but he didn’t have the willpower to see them through. He was a career civil servant, not a politician. So we got Najib—a consummate politician.

But Pak Lah’s weakness was a double-edged sword. He let a lot of people get away with saying nasty things—our nation’s dirty laundry of corruption and racism was aired like never before during his time. But the Sarawak Tribune aside, the Abdullah administration also let people get away with a lot of productive debate. It was a breath of fresh air compared to the Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad regime.

The Najib regime is a return to the era of Mahathir. One of the most pervasive and repulsive examples of this is the insidious 1Malaysia campaign. It’s simply a tiruan ciplak of Bangsa Malaysia or Wawasan 2020—a pretence of vision for the country. Nowadays when I go to official events, the emcees greet us: “Assalamualaikum dan salam 1Malaysia.” This is nothing more than Orwellian propaganda.

Now, I could tolerate propaganda if this amorphous 1Malaysia idea were actually productive. It seems that Datuk Idris Jala has been working his butt off to make it so. But as The Malaysian Insider has reported, Idris’s attempts to redress racial injustices have been rejected by the Cabinet and replaced with vague, token promises of sweet nothings.

Other reform efforts, such as the amendment or abolition of the ISA and our other anti-democratic laws seem to have fallen by the wayside. Despite the fanciful KPIs flying around, the government still cannot convince the public that our law enforcement agencies truly work to uphold justice. In the public’s eyes, the MACC is as tainted and politically biased as ever. The constant foot-dragging in the prosecutions for the death of A. Kugan and the multi-billion ringgit Port Klang Free Zone disaster only suggest that Najib has no intention of meaningfully upholding the rule of law.

Under the Constitution, the same laws apply to all Malaysians: if one Malaysian has the right to peacefully protest, then all Malaysians must have that same right. Only a few days ago, the police stopped a major Pakatan rally in Kuala Lumpur because it was supposedly disturbing the peace.

When a bunch of rabble-rousers held rallies outside mosques across the country in January then—rallies where some people had the gall to call for further torching of churches—that wasn’t disturbing the peace? Apparently not: Najib’s regime protects your democratic rights only when it is convenient.

Now, Najib’s government is going further: it is confiscating books simply because it doesn’t like them. Cartoonist Zunar’s 1FunnyMalaysia is gone—I suppose because the title makes fun of 1Malaysia. Amir Muhammad’s Politicians Say the Darndest Things, which was perfectly acceptable for public consumption a year ago, is now gone from the shelves. Nat Tan and I edited a book on police brutality and custodial deaths, such as Teoh Beng Hock’s; this book, Where is Justice, is now gone too.

Again, forget the rule of law; these books are not officially banned. (Indeed, in some stores, the sales clerk will sell them to you from behind the counter.) What Najib has simply done is intimidate booksellers into taking these books off the shelves, so you do not even realise they exist. Again, the Orwellian parallels are frightening.

What I liked about Pak Lah is that as bumbling as he was, he was an accidental democrat. Under his still-authoritarian regime, we at least saw the beginnings of some productive and open debate. Heck, he even tried to reform the Anti-Corruption Agency and overhaul some of our draconian laws like the ISA before he stepped down. If Mahathir was Bapa Pemodenan, then I daresay Pak Lah could be Bapa Demokrasi.

Najib is set only on protecting himself and the cronies of his regime, democracy and the rule of law be damned. 1Malaysia does not do away with any of the serious injustices in our country; this is not a government for all Malaysians. This is a government for Umno. There is a chance, of course, for Najib to change course, and make 1Malaysia for all; he could, if he wanted to, be remembered as Bapa Reformasi. But unless he takes action, I fear we may well remember him as Bapa Kezaliman.

[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]

” What I liked about Pak Lah is that as bumbling as he was, he was an accidental democrat. Under his still-authoritarian regime, we at least saw the beginnings of some productive and open debate. ”

NO, John ‘Chattering Classes’ Lee, thats not true at all. Pak Lah was no accidental democrat. During Pak Lah’s time, FORCED MILITARY CONSCRIPTIONS without abstention options backed by fines and jail terms which still exist today were implemented. Those had caused near a score deaths and still cause deaths among trainees. There is nothing accidental or democratic about Pak Lah allowing that to occur under his watch. FORCED MILITARY CONSCRIPTIONS without abstention options backed by fines and jail terms  in fact draws influences from two of the world’s most oppressive regimes – Singapore’s dictatorship, Taiwan’s ‘Fear of Invasion Collusion for Contractor profiteering AGAINST the Chinese hinterland’  and Israel’s Zionism and directly contravenes the Human Rights Charter which Malaysia is a signatory of and perhaps even the Hadiths of Islam.

What’s so democratic about Pak Lah who allowed FORCED MILITARY CONSCRIPTIONS without abstention options to be inflicted on Malaysia (alongside with so many instances of less than subtle clique forming and nepotism)? Given PM Najib’s use of APCO Worldwide, an Israel based and possibly Zionist owned media company to promote 1Malaysia, we know where Malaysia is heading under the racist faction at UMNO, hopefully Pakatan Rakyat will abolish FORCED MILITARY CONSCRIPTIONS (sadly we have parachute CM YM Lim Guan Eng indirectly fetting the pernicious abstentionless militarisation system – doubtless influenced by DAP’s ppatron PAP Singapore to the point that DAP’s MPs and Assemblymen cannot declare their assets – by saying the Forced Abstention Clauseless Militarisation/Brainwash programme ‘helped’ Guan Eng’s daughter – well on the mind control note, NOTE CAREFULLY Guan Eng went down in a Malay staffed submarine for a few hours, this is enough to place any Neurotech implants or allow for any chemical induced brainwahing to occur – he’s just not made his move for his new ‘Masters’ yet so do know that DAP leadership is currently impacted by UMNO high tech infiltration/brainwash (unless PAP has some de-brainwash protocols?) in which case DAP is still subject to PAP fifth columnist influence, needs changing – note how shidty Guan Eng is on Hudud these days? Meanwhile ISA has not even been abolished, implement IPCMC as well as give Malaysia :

1) Freedom from Apartheid/Fascism
2) Freedom from Religious-Persecution/Religious-Supremacy.
3) Equality for all ethnicities and faiths in all aspects of policy, Law and Constitution.

;so that we will not mistake so pre-groomed Yes-Men (installed illegally as PM by the facts thus far) with so called ‘Bapa Reformasi’ and ‘Accidental Democrats’ who militarise the population by force (no abstention and under threat of fines and jailings) by the writings of possibly embedded writers such as the above. Slamming a single political (Najib) faction while promoting another (Pak Lah) has been faction does not make one a defender of Human Rights and Democracy John . . . while Malaysia becomes more and more oppressive with police state, militarised laws like FORCED MILITARY CONSCRIPTION and ISA which Pak Lah had power to remove but did not, we have people like John lying through his teeth whil calling politically interested citizens ‘chattering classes’. Just another spin-doctor counter-propagandist working for racists.

By God’s will (if you believe in God) Man is free, Man can choose, and unless Malaysians are not considered human and have rights as elucidated in the UNHCR, by which FORCED MILITARY CONSCRIPTIONS without abstention options rubber-stamps obviously are illegal, none (especially Federal Government) has a right to force anyone into military fatigues under threat of fine or incarceration. Pak Lah, why did you allow that to happen? Why did you not address the above ITEMS 1,2 and 3 and vacillate the people’s mandate away? Some of us believed in you and you let everyone down . . .

ARTICLE 2

Breaking the fever of militarism — Chris Floyd

MARCH 9 — All who draw the sword will die by the sword. (Yeshua Ha-Notsri, Palestinian dissident, c. 33 CE.)

As we all know — or rather, as everyone but those who climb and claw their way to the top of power’s greasy pole knows — the effects of war are vast, unforeseeable, long-lasting — and uncontrollable.

The far-reaching ripples of the turbulence will churn against distant shores and hidden corners, then roil back upon you in ways you could never imagine, for generations, even centuries.

Nor is “victory” in war proof against these deleterious effects. For the brutalization, moral coarsening, corruption and concentration of elite power that attend every war do not simply disappear from a society when the fighting stops.

They persist, like microbes, in myriad forms, working with slow, corrosive force to degrade and deform the victors.

Indeed, victory in battle often leads a society to enshrine war’s most pernicious attributes: violence is ennobled, and becomes entrenched as an ever-ready instrument of national policy.

Militarism is exalted, the way of peace dishonored: cries of “Appeasers! Cowards! Traitors!” greet every approach that fails to brandish the threat of extreme violence, that fails to “keep all options on the table.”

The apparent “lesson” of victory — that there can be no right without armed might to win and safeguard it — quickly degenerates into the belief  that armed might is right.

Military power becomes equated with moral worth, and the ability to wreak savage, unimaginable destruction through armed violence —via thoughtless obedience to the orders of “superiors” — becomes a cherished attribute of society.

War is no longer seen as a vast, horrific failure of the human spirit, a scandalous betrayal of our common humanity, a sickening tragedy of irrevocable loss and inconsolable suffering —although this is its inescapable reality, even in a “good” war, for a “just” cause. (And of course no nation or faction has ever gone to war without declaring that its cause is just.)

Instead of lamenting war, and girding for it, if at all, only in the most dire circumstances, with the most extreme reluctance, the infected society celebrates it at every turn. No national occasion — even a sporting event! — is complete without bristling displays of military firepower, and pious tributes to those wreaking violence around the world in blind obedience to their superiors.

Oddly enough, when a modern nation consciously adopts a “warrior ethos,” it casts aside —openly, even gleefully — whatever virtue that ethos has historically claimed for itself, such as courage in battle and honor toward adversaries.

In its place come the adulation of overwhelming technological firepower and the rabid demonization of the enemy (or the perceived enemy, or even the “suspected” enemy), who is stripped of all rights, all human dignity, and subject to “whatever it takes” to break him down or destroy him.

Thus our American militarists exult in the advanced hardware that allows “soldiers” to slaughter people from thousands of miles away, with missiles, bombs and bullets fired from lurking, unreachable drones high in the sky. (A recent study shows that even by the most conservative reckoning of who is or isn’t a “militant,” at least one third of the hundreds killed in the Bush-Obama drone campaigns on the “Af-Pak” front are clearly civilians.)

The drone “warriors” — often living in complete safety and comfort —see nothing but a bloodless image on a screen; they face no physical threat at all. This is assassination, not combat; it reeks of cowardice, and dehumanizes everyone it touches, the victims and the button-pushers alike.

Yet our militarists — most of whom, of course, have somehow never found the time to fight the wars they cheer for — wax orgasmic about this craven weaponry. In the transvaluation of values that militarism produces, cowardice becomes a martial virtue.

Barack Obama, the Nobel Peace Laureate, pushes forward with plans for the “Prompt Global Strike” system of “conventional” super-missiles that can rain down massive death — unstoppable, undeterrable, without warning — anywhere on the planet within an hour. All this, while expanding shorter-range missile “defense” systems that bristle with blatantly offensive potential, and intent, all over the world.

Plus spending billions to “modernize” the nuclear arsenal, ensuring that it stays effective enough to murder the entire earth, while weeding out some “redundant” warheads as a PR gesture.

Meanwhile, the drone programs — emblazoned with names that proudly proclaim their savage nature: “Predators” and “Reapers,” launching “Hellfire” missiles into sleeping villages — keep expanding relentlessly. As noted by Nick Turse — who is doing invaluable work detailing the deadly nuts and bolts of the militarist empire and its profiteers — the Pentagon is drooling over visions of vast robotic forces filling the heavens and roaming the earth, even down to the smallest crevice.

He rightly notes the main purpose of this massively funded R&D: to make war “easier,” less deadly to “our side,” and thus more palatable to the public:

“This means bigger, badder, faster drones — armed to the teeth — with sensor systems to monitor wide swathes of territory and the ability to loiter overhead for days on end waiting for human targets to appear and, in due course, be vaporized by high-powered munitions.

It’s a future built upon advanced technologies designed to make targeted killings — remote-controlled assassinations — ever more effortless.

“… For the Air Force, such a prospect is the stuff of dreams, a bright future for unmanned, hypersonic lethality; for the rest of the planet, it’s a potential nightmare from which there may be no waking.”

But while Turse outlines this potential nightmare in grim detail, we are of course beset by present nightmares in horrific plenty. And few are more chilling than the ruling establishment’s astonishingly swift acceptance of outright torture as an open tool of national policy.

This acceptance not only includes the increasingly frenzied praise and championing of torture by the circle of war criminals and accomplices led by Dick Cheney; in slightly more restrained tones, it goes right across the board among the political and media elite. Torture is now nothing more than a topic for “debate” — debates which center largely on the relative “effectiveness” of various torture techniques, or else on mindless (not to mention heartless) hairsplitting over the meaning of the word “torture.”

There is of course a myth that Barack Obama has “ended” the practice of torture. This is not even remotely true. For one thing, the Army Field Manual that Obama has adopted as his interrogation standard permits many practices that any rational person would consider torture.

For another, we have no way of verifying what techniques are actually being used by the government’s innumerable “security” and intelligence agencies, by the covert units of the military — and by other entities whose very existence is still unknown.

These agencies are almost entirely self-policed; they investigate themselves, they report on themselves to the toothless Congressional “oversight” committees; we simply have to take these organizations —whose entire raison d’etre is deceit, deception, lawlessness and subterfuge — at their word.

And of course, we have no way of knowing what is being done in the torture chambers of foreign lands where the United States often “outsources” its captives.

Finally, even if the comforting bedtime story of Obama’s ban of torture techniques in interrogation were true, there remains his ardent championing of the right to seize anyone on earth — without a warrant, without producing any evidence whatsoever of wrongdoing — and hold them indefinitely, often for years on end, in a legal limbo, with no inherent rights whatsoever, beyond whatever narrowly constricted, ever-changing, legally baseless and often farcical “hearings” and tribunals the captors deign to allow them.

Incarceration under these conditions is itself an horrendous act of torture, no matter what else might happen to the captive. Yet Obama has actively, avidly applied this torture, and has gone to court numerous times to defend this torture, and to expand the use of this torture.

Many thousands of innocent people have already been forced through the meat grinder of this torture — at one point early in the Iraq War, the Red Cross estimated that 70-90 percent of the more than 20,000 Iraqis being held by the Americans as “suspected terrorists” were not guilty of any crime whatsoever, much less ‘terrorism’.

And that is just a single snapshot, at a single point in time, of the vast gulag that America has wrapped around the earth — a gulag where many have been murdered outright, not just tortured or unjustly imprisoned. And it is still going on, with scarcely a demur across the bipartisan establishment.

The heinous and dishonorable practice of torture, physical and psychological, is now an intrinsic, openly established element of American society.

Murder, cowardice, torture, dishonor: these are fruits — and the distinguishing characteristics — of the militarized society. What Americans once would not do even to Nazis with the blood of millions on their hands, they now do routinely to weak and wretched captives seized on little or no evidence of wrongdoing at all.

We are deep in the darkness, and hurtling deeper, headlong, all the time.

Let’s not kid ourselves, however. The militarism that has now gained such a strangulating ascendancy over American life did not drop down suddenly from the sky (or arrive on the hijacked bus that Bush and Cheney drove to the White House).

Although this militarism has now reached unprecedented levels of institutional and political dominance, there has always been a strong warlike strain running through American history — indeed, through its pre-history as well, as Fred Anderson and Andrew Cayton demonstrate in their book, Dominion of War, detailing the decisive influence of war and imperialism on America’s development over the past 500 years.

Nor is it a peculiarly American problem. As Caroline Alexander notes in her excellent new work, The War That Killed Achilles:

“If we took any period of a hundred years in the last five thousand, it has been calculated, we could expect, on average, 94 of those years to be occupied with large-scale conflicts in one or more parts of the world. This enduring, seemingly ineradicable fact of war is … as intrinsic and tragic a component of the human condition as our very mortality.”

We human beings have been shaped by millions of years of genetic breakage and mutation, all of which is still on-going. We are compounds of chaos, ignorance and error. Our psyches are frail and variegated things, isolated, with each individual consciousness formed from a unique and ever-shifting coalescence of billions of brain cells firing (and misfiring) in infinite, unrepeatable combinations.

Beneath this electrical superstructure lie mechanical rhythms and erratic surges of instinct and impulse, dark, hormonal tides and drives that never reach the plane of awareness.

In the infancy of our species we began to cling — fiercely, in fear and desire — to patterns of behavior, emotion and thought that seemed to bring some sort of order, some containment of the whirlwind within us, and some protection from the dangers, known and unknown, that lurked outside.

We began to do “whatever it takes” to preserve these patterns from the ever-present threat of their dissolution in the whirlwind, to impose them, by violence if necessary, on the recalcitrant material of reality — including the always-unknowable, impenetrable reality of the Other, those mysterious combinations outside our isolated consciousness.

The patterns become ingrained, they sink into the substrate where they operate unquestioned and unseen, they become “natural,” the way that things must be. Domination and obedience are among the strongest, and most enduring, of these patterns, taking multitudinous forms — a “local habitation and a name” — in the ever-changing circumstances of existence.

War is their expression writ large. It is in us, it comes from us.

But to acknowledge war’s intrinsic, universal character does not absolve us of the need to resist it. To say, “Oh, that’s just human nature; it’s always been this way and always will be this way,” is not only a lazy, timorous acquiescence to base instinct, it also posits a settled, even eternal quality to human nature and human consciousness that simply does not and cannot exist.

To go against war, to step outside the ingrained behavioral patterns of domination and obedience is indeed an “unnatural” act — and it feels unnatural, it feels strange, and raw, and frightening. But the deeper fear — of psychic and physical dissolution — that lies at the foundation of these ever-more destructive patterns can only be faced down, changed, and wrenched into some more benevolent pattern by embracing the risk and discomfort of stepping forth, of stepping beyond — literally, “transgressing” — the boundaries of a wholly imaginary (or even hallucinatory) “human nature.”

The whirlwind that characterizes the imperfect, breaking, misfiring, evolving reality of human consciousness is not only a producer of (very understandable) deep-seated fears; it is also a force for liberation.

Because our nature is not ultimately fixed, we can, literally and figuratively, burn new connections in our brains, we can enlarge our consciousness and extend our empathetic understanding of those strange Others. And we have been doing this, in fits and starts, in lurches and staggers, with much backsliding and many wrong turns — indeed, in ignorance and error — for as long as we have been creatures cursed and gifted with self-awareness.

We do have the capacity, the space, to resist the patterns of domination and obedience, to seek out new ways of seeing the world, of being in the world, of communing with others.

This seems, to me, a worthwhile thing to be getting on with during our painfully brief time on the earth, during our infinitesimal window of opportunity to make some small contribution toward pushing the project of being human — or rather, becoming human — down the road, at least a few more steps, in the direction of a better understanding, a broader consciousness, a greater enlightenment. — http://www.counterpunch.org

* Chris Floyd is an American writer and frequent contributor to CounterPunch. His blog, Empire Burlesque, can be found at http://www.chris-floyd.com.

ARTICLE 3

Suppress ‘Anti-conscription System’

The National Police Agency (NPA) investigated internet sites of anti-military/avoiding military service. Two sites closed by themselves and discussion on it is getting passive.

What is difference between objecting military service and avoiding military service?

Where can we draw a line between discussing conscription system and agitating objection of military service? On Mar.20.2001 an investigation team on cyber crimes of the NPA announced that they are investigating on three inter-net sites, which informed people about how to avoid, military service, agitated people to object military service and recruited its members through the notice board on Internet. This announcement is controversial in Korea. The three sites, which are under investigation, are ‘Non Service Army site (NSA)’, ‘Organization of Objecting Military Service (OMS-Taum Cafe)’ and ‘Defense Ministry of Abusing Us (DMAU-Laicos)’.

The OMS is the most active discussion site among military service related sites and has been accessed more than 40,000 times. The police announced to exclude OMS from investigation because OMS had been a discussion site, which had pointed out problems of conscription system and suggested volunteer army instead of it, and it had also come under a sphere of ‘freedom of expression’. DMAU was also excluded because even though it had been considered the site which had informed people the way of avoiding military service in detail such as the amount of bribes, having an experience of treatment in mental hospital, and habitual dislocation, it had given information of recruit of special case of military service and played a role as a private bureau on military service. Moreover, ordinary people already know the methods of avoiding military service that had been shown on the notice board of DMAU.

The site that the police focused on is NSA because it declared the anti-military movement. The police announced to investigate the NSA because a member of the NSA had declared not going to the army in public, and their behaviors such as denying military duties and agitating objection of conscription are anti-social. Moreover, they had ‘offline’ meeting twice, and it was considered an action for spreading anti-military movement. Even though it is controversial, the police investigates and actively applies NMS’s behavior to Article 114 of the criminal code which stats a crime of being a member of group/organization of objecting military service. After an announcement of the policy of the police, more than 300 mails both of agreement and disagreement with it have been shown on the NMS site.

On the same day the police required Taum communication and Laicos Korea to submit managers’ personal record, and ‘the Council of Info-communication Ethics’ also required these sites to close. Although Taum communication submitted managers’ personal record and ID address, Laicos Korea rejected closing its site because it considered the close of conscription related site is too much restriction on the freedom brought by internet. The Council of Info-communication Ethics couldn’t decide an order of correction because the discussion in the council hasn’t been convened. However, on the notice board of OMS displayed its close, and all contents of the notice board of DMAU were removed the following day.

The managers of OMS and DMAU accepted the police investigation, but two managers of NSA didn’t. While the police insisted that they violated Article 114 of the criminal code (it read that people who organize groups for the purpose of objecting military duties or tax payment duties, or to be a member, will be punished 15 years of imprisonment or less than 15million won penalty), it seems the range of application to the law will be controversial. Furthermore, the fact that the police included not only managers of the sites but also members as its investigation objects is more controversial. The mangers of the NSA said, “We didn’t put the method of avoiding military service on the site. Moreover, we only required government to accept the rights of objection by political conscientious reason and the alternative service.”

During the police investigation, citizens’ organizations one after another announced their statements. On Mar.22.2001, 8 organization for peace and human rights such as the Solidarity of Peace and Human Rights, the Organization of Human Rights Movement and Mingahyop criticized and said “the police action is an expression of their will which they won’t sit and watch the rational discussion related to problems of conscription system and making it as public opinion. The following day the Progressive Network Center, the Democratic Labor Party and the Solidarity of All Nation participated in ‘Co-action against Info-communication censorship’ and announced its statement. The statement read that the idea, which the police justify, its censorship on the inter-net by considering only having discussion about conscription system being antisocial is out of date. And these organizations required withdrawing its investigation on discussion sites about conscription.

A person concerned the police said “I don’t think that the NSA established a big organization only after opening its site one month ago. But we want to prevent beforehand because we have to pay much social cost when this movement occurs in large scale. We also know that the discussion on conscription system in the society is already started, and we never think about stopping the discussion itself totally.

It is not sure that this incident is applied to ‘the crime of being members in organizations of objecting military service’. The police have to prove that the NSA organized an organization for the purpose of objecting military service, and the managers of the NSA have to prove that their purpose was not avoiding conscription. The policy for investigation of the police already brought passive (=not active) discussion just after the discussion on conscription started. It is proved by the two sites, which closed it by themselves.

Interview with Jo Yakgol (manager of the NSA) on a Meeting of ‘Offline’

“We oppose all kinds of violence and the military force.”

Is anti-military movement different from movement of conscientious objection?

Anti-military movement is a larger conception than movement of CO. We oppose militarism pervaded in every place of Korean society and CO. Avoiding military service is not a purpose of our movement. Our purpose is having doubts and reflection about the attitude that military system and conscription system are too justified by ordinary people.

Why anti-military movement?

For me, it is a struggle for surviving. I was terrified to see people (not only men but also women, disabled people, and homosexuals) living under oppression of nationalism and uniformity. If I endure this situation, it means that I aid violence. I think that the core of nationalism is conscription system. That is why I am doing the anti-military movement.

What is an aim of movement?

Getting rid of all kinds of violence and military force is our ultimate aim. However, CO by political, religious and humanitarian reasons should be accepted the first. If the alternative service is introduced, the next task is to change over to volunteer military system. I don’t think these are easy tasks.

Who do you cooperate with?

We welcome whoever stands for anti-military. An essence of military is monopoly of military force, and a few privileged people keep the present social order using it (military force). We want to work together with the weak and the minority against the present social order.

What are methods of movement?

We are planning to have a performance about anti-military on the Mayday. We are collecting songs about anti-military and already have some of them.

How is the situation of running the site?

I have received much response on the line, but people don’t turn up a meeting of ‘offline’. I guess that some people come here and look around, but they don’t show up. I can see deeply rooted fear of our mind through this behavior.

http://www2.gol.com/users/quakers/suppress_anticonscription_

 

 

[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]

We citizens in South Korea, Malaysia, Singapore, Thailand (this is a monastic conscription but still conscription nevertheless), Taiwan etc.. (Russia is ending Forced Military Conscriptions . . .  so not on this list) also need a UN Agency addressing FORCED MILITARY CONSCRIPTIONS to set up an office here in Malaysia as well. Normal citizens are having their human rights abused via the FORCED MILITARY CONSCRIPTIONS being forced on them via fines and jail terms. Via the UNHCR abusing NS Act, the government of the day has contravened the Articles of the Human Rights Charter :

Article 9.

* No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile.

Article 12.

* No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family . . .

Article 19.

* Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers. Expression of Conscientious Objection is trampled upon by the NS Act.

Article 22.

* Everyone, as a member of society, has the right to social security and is entitled to realization . . . of social and cultural rights indispensable for his dignity and the free development of his personality. A right to not being part of a Quasi-Military organisation under threat of fine and jail is given in Article 22. (i.e. Islam is a religion of peace, Indians have concept of Varna, Chinese do not regard the Military as a prestigious institution . . . )

Please set up a UN agency addressing the FORCED MILITARY CONSCRIPTIONS on Conscientious Objectors or people who do not subscribe to non-voluntary enforcement of military service.

 

 

ARTICLE 4

The rhetoric of oppression

MARCH 9 — Umberto Eco, in his article, The Wolf and the Lamb — The Rhetoric of Oppression (from which the title to this article is borrowed), posits that often enough, an oppressor — such as a dictator — would try to legitimise his oppression. He or she will even try “to obtain the consensus of those he is oppressing, or to find someone who will justify it” by using “rhetorical arguments to justify his abuse of power.”

(At this juncture, I would like to add to Eco’s example of an oppressor. In addition to a dictator, I would add a “totalitarian democrat” who is a so-called leader elected through a controlled democratic process. I would also add to the list what Rawls terms as the “benevolent absolutist.”)

The need for legitimisation of an act or acts of oppression, to my mind, stems from the desire to justify such acts,  which in turn is driven by  purely egoistical motivation, or perhaps is due to a deep feeling of guilt. Added to that must be the desire to gain acceptance of the people and to pander to the middle class intellectual probing.

Whatever the reason for the attempt to legitimise, at the end of the day, the rhetoric of the oppressor, to reasonable and probing minds, would often come out as completely lame and curious — sometimes even ridiculous, stupid and laughable — babbles.

That is because of the nature of the oppressor. He is so used to getting and doing what he wants without the necessity to justify any of his actions. He thus develops this inability to answer properly when questioned; to engage when called to question; to debate when argued against.

The oppressor rules with absolute subservience from his minions. He is the supreme leader. He is an idol of the people. His wishes are his people’s commands. All the years of absolutism contributes to his feeling of being infallible. That in turn numbs his mind and thought process.

Darwin’s evolution theory has proven that when any particular  biological or physical  mechanism is not used or needed for some time, it will soon disappear from the being. That is true with the oppressor. Soon, he ceases being a thinking creature.

All that matters to him is the untold power which he wields. And the idolatry which he enjoys.

Thus the  legitimisation of his acts is actually unnecessary. It is not a rational act. Or a rationalisation process. There is no need for such process. Because at the end of the day, all that matters to the oppressor is the achievement of a goal. And that is already assured and ensured. Not much care is then needed in the process of legitimisation.

Being so, when an oppressor tries to legitimise his oppression through rhetoric, it often sounds curious and ridiculous to reasonable people. Needless to say, they often fall flat.

Eco, in his work, gives us a classic “pseudorhetoric of oppression” in the form of Phaedrus’ fable of the wolf and the lamb.

In the tale, a thirsty wolf and a lamb came to a stream. The wolf was drinking upstream and the lamb was downstream. The wolf, ever the oppressor that he was, sought to start a quarrel.

“Why are you muddying the water I am drinking?” said the wolf.

If we stopped here, we could see the utter ridiculousness of the would-be oppressor’s starting line. How could the lamb, who was downstream, muddy the water which the wolf was drinking upstream? But the wolf, as with any oppressor, does not care about reasonableness of arguments. Reasonableness is only for the weak.

The lamb, however, represents a picture of reasonableness, when he sought to rationalise with the wolf. He answered, “I am sorry, but how could I do that? I am drinking the water that has passed you first.”

That is a polite answer. It is also an answer which any sensible member of a civilised society would offer to the oppressor’s rhetoric. Faced with such sensible — and probably irrefutable — rebuttal, the wolf changes the goal post and employs another line of attack.

“Six months ago, you talked about me behind my back,” charged the wolf.

To the reasonable mind, this is something which is totally unrelated to the first line of attack. It reflects the oppressor’s inability to engage in any meaningful debate about a stand taken by him. When faced with such a situation, the oppressor would create a new attack in a reckless manner.

The recklessness in the oppressor’s reply shows when the lamb said “but I wasn’t even born yet six month ago!”

Again, the oppressor’s inability is exposed. He is shamed but not ashamed. That is due to the power which he wields and the obvious physical prowess between the oppressor and the oppressed. The wolf would again change his charge.

The wolf, this time with impatience, said, “by Hercules, then it was your father who spoke badly of me.”

With that statement, the wolf pounced on the lamb, killing it before eating it up.

How frightening!

Regardless of the simplicity of the tale, the reflection of the oppressor’s mind and how it works in that tale is paralysingly frightening. The almost nonchalant attitude towards the exercise of extreme power by the strong and mighty over the weak and meek is symptomatic of any oppression.

Throughout Malay classical literature, we can see for example, the child Hang Nadim, who saved Temasek from the dreaded “ikan todak”, being executed for being too smart and therefore a possible threat to the Sultan. When Hang Tuah was perceived as being favoured by the Sultan, he was accused of partying with the Sultan’s “gundek” (concubine) and sentenced to death.

In not too far a time before, for some reason or other, the regime wanted Tun Salleh, the Lord President, sacked. That was the opening line as provided by the wolf. To which, Tun Salleh asked “Why?”

The answer was “because you have signed a resignation letter.”

The reply was “But I have changed my mind, because I was under pressure.”

The final rebuttal, before Tun Salleh was dismissed was, “You have to resign because you have abused your power by bringing your son to the authority to request a fishery license. You also have to be sacked because you promote Islam and Islamisation in your judgments and speeches.”

The utter ridiculousness and unreasonableness of the rhetoric did not matter. Because the oppressor had no ability to rationalise. Nor did he see the need to do so.

Later, Anwar Ibrahim had to go as the DPM.

“What did I do?” asked Anwar. That was the sensible and reasonable lamb asking the wolf who was starting a fight.

Just like the wolf accusing the lamb of bad mouthing him six months ago, Anwar was told that he had to go because he had committed sodomy.

The lamb, in the fable above said he wasn’t even born yet six months ago.

Anwar said “but the apartment in which I committed sodomy wasn’t even completed yet at the time you said I committed sodomy!”

Notice the uncanny similarities between the fable and the event which had actually happened?

Faced with that, the oppressor changed his story, just like the wolf. “Okay, but you did commit sodomy at that place on a different date. And I have the mattress too.”

With that, the lamb was pounced on, killed and eaten up.

Contemporary Malaysia is filled with stories of oppression and denied justice. The rhetoric of oppression has been perfected and repeated to utter death.

“You are too noisy and please shut up,” said the wolf.

“What have I done?” asked the people.

“You have insulted Islam and are a threat to national security,” came the answer.

Or, “You have to be detained for your own safety,” came the mind-numbingly curious answer.

I could go on and on. But I would just sound like a horribly scratched CD.

The question is, what is the lamb going to do about it?

Yes.

 

 

[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]

What is the lamb going to do about it? Why does the writer presume to make the reader into a lamb and show how helpless the reader is? That is my impression at any rate. We are HUMAN BEINGS and not lambs. Therefore we can do whatever any other HUMAN BEING can do. Just MANKIND here. No lambs sorry. By that let us live in a state of :

1) Freedom from Apartheid/Fascism
2) Freedom from Religious-Persecution/Religious-Supremacy.
3) Equality for all ethnicities and faiths in all aspects of policy, Law and Constitution.

That is what HUMAN BEINGS are going to do here in Malaysia. Wolves and lambs can go yiff and vore each other to death. We HUMAN BEINGS couldn’t care less. Neurolinguistic programming articles are the worst type of word litter on the web. Rhetoric of Oppression indeed !

Try the below site :

War Resisters International (this is nominally an end Forced Conscription Organisation as well) :

War Resisters’ International, 5 Caledonian Rd, London N1 9DX, Britain
tel +44-20-7278 4040 & +44-20-3355 2364, skype: warresisters, fax +44-20-7278 0444
email info@wri-irg.org

http://www.wri-irg.org/

Looking forward to a vigorous economy — Lim Sue Goan – 26th February 2012

In Apartheid, banks, Bumiputera Apartheid, corruption, Malaysia, political correctness, politics on February 10, 2012 at 3:12 pm

Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak has “lived up to expectations”. He personally announced that the gross domestic product (GDP) for the fourth quarter of last year has grown by 4.5 per cent. It was the first good news after a series of negative events.

The GDP was expected to grow in the fourth quarter but the 4.5 per cent growth has exceeded the expectations. It is good to have such achievements but it will turn bad if we are over optimistic.

Improved external situation was the main factor for the high growth. Advanced countries have filled up inventories to increase imports. Thus, many countries were able to walk out from the economic shrink, such as the United States achieved growth by 5.7 per cent, while Japan achieved 4.6 per cent of growth, Vietnam achieved 6.5 per cent and Singapore achieved 4 per cent.

The second factor would be the relatively low basis. Malaysia achieved only 0.1 per cent of growth in the fourth quarter of 2008.

Therefore, in addition to excitement, we must maintain a certain level of rationality as the world economy is not yet completely out of the shadows, particularly the outbreak of debt crisis in European countries. Consistency is the most pragmatic way to face the unknown future.

If the government is going to relax as it thinks that the economy has recovered and strong growth is expected this year, particularly if it gives up or slows down the pace of opening up when the new economic model is introduced in March, it will be impossible to attract foreign investment and talents. Once the world economy falls into the second recession and domestic demand remains weak, the difficulties will be exacerbated.

The government has to face many economic challenges, including the sharp drop in treasury income and increasing burden. How are they going to stimulate the economy through public spending? The government has been cutting subsidies while power tariffs and fuel prices will be increased. Together with the increase of tolls and housing prices, which are expected to increase by 10 per cent, the people’s purchasing power will fall.

It is estimated that if the government cuts subsidies by RM4 billion this year, the public’s purchasing power is expected to fall RM2.9 billion. The people’s misery index will increase as the government has failed to control prices while the incomes of most Malaysians are low.

Bank Negara is expected to raise interest rates in March and it will further increase the burden on loan bearers. Inflation has come back before the people’s incomes have been increased. It will be useless no matter how nice the economic data looks and the vision of becoming a high-income country will only be castles in the air.

The country’s economy is also facing a number of weaknesses, such as the dropping foreign investment and capital outflow. Foreign investment has fallen by 48 per cent last year. From 2007 to Sept 2009, Malaysian enterprises had invested RM102 billion abroad, which was 1.7 times of foreign investment received. The Ringgit exchange rate has also been continuously falling. All of these show that domestic and foreign enterprises are lack of confidence.

In the development of knowledge-based economy, the public has not yet seen any concrete plan from the government. If the government is unable to develop high-technology and innovative areas, the economic structural weaknesses will lead to a slower economic pace.

The people are still unable to feel the vigorous economic momentum of the Year of the Tiger. After all, the high-growth economic data will only play some effects after a period of at least six months.

During the announcement of the economic transformation plan in March, Najib should put forward more opening strategies that can boost confidence and open up new growth areas in order to make the economy shine in the Year of the Tiger. — mysinchew

[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]

Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak has NOT “lived up to expectations”, nor is it his duty to ‘put forward more opening strategies’. Rather it is the 2nd Finance Minister (why is the PM holding so many Ministries??? Conflict of interest anyone???) who has done the former and has to do the latter.

Under PM Najib’s purview should appropriately be matters of national importance, not the economy. He has not yet effected :

1) Freedom from Apartheid/Fascism
2) Freedom from Religious-Persecution/Religious-Supremacy.
3) Equality for all ethnicities and faiths in all aspects of policy, Law and Constitution.

These are inalienable rights of all Human Beings on this planet. How about EQUALITY Mr. Prime Minister?

The power of the female economy — Moira Clark – 7th March 2010

In 1% tricks and traps, 99%, FGM, mindless consumerism, women on February 10, 2012 at 10:21 am

MARCH 7 — “What does a woman want?” was a question that tormented Sigmund Freud despite thirty years of research into the “feminine soul”. He felt he was never able to answer this question, and sadly it would seem that many companies today still haven’t figured it out.

In a nutshell, women are a serious economic force to be reckoned with. Globally, women account for about US$20 trillion (RM68 trillion) spent annually on consumer goods; 85 per cent of all consumer purchases are made by women, and women represent the majority of the online market. Seventy percent of all US and UK wealth is owned by the over 65s (who are mostly women) and it is estimated that female millionaires will outnumber male ones in the UK by 2020. By 2025, women will control 60 per cent of the nation’s private wealth.

The statistics regarding the power of the female consumer go on and on, yet many companies are ignoring or downplaying this extraordinary trend. Could this be because of male dominance in the boardroom (only seven per cent of board members are women) or the reluctance to acknowledge that gender really does make a difference when it comes to consumer behaviour?

There are many examples of companies that misjudge the power of the female consumer. The car industry, consumer electronics and financial services offer countless examples of poor service to women — largely not understanding what they want and not knowing how to speak to them.
Turn up the style with Dell ™Inspiron™ 580 desktop!

Too many companies don’t have a strategy that is female-centric; you only have to go into a car dealer as a lone female customer to know what being ignored really feels like. They even have a label for female customers — “tyre kickers”, which is supposed to sum up the fact that these lone customers are time wasters and will only really buy a car if a man is present!

Mobile phone shops are another bastion of male dominance — mostly staffed by young, male technophiles who speak a language only they really understand and that is incomprehensible to many of their female customers.

Companies need to recognise that men and women have different buying behaviours. When men go shopping they tend to dash in get what they want and then leave as quickly as possible. Women, on the other hand, tend to take their time, preferring to shop around, chat with people and look for “the perfect purchase”.

The companies that understand the female consumer are few and far between, but those that ‘get it’ stand to reap significant rewards from this lucrative market. Gaining female customer insight and actioning that insight is at the heart of success for these companies.

Take for example Giant, the world’s biggest bicycle manufacturer. They understand the power of the female consumer. They have bicycles designed by women for women and have fundamentally redesigned the bicycle to be more female friendly — for example changing the frame, the seat and the relative positioning of the handlebars to fit the female form.

Then there is Ford, which is at last recognising that dialogue with customers should be tailored to who the customer is. Ford’s sales staff complete e-learning courses to relate better to female customers and they are endeavouring to recruit more females into their dealerships.

Even Harley-Davidson, long a symbol of masculinity, has added a “Women Riders” section to their web site with riding gear and apparel, advice on riding safely as well as personal rider stories. Harley has done this in response to the growing popularity of motorcycles amongst women, who now buy 10 per cent of all Harleys sold, compared to just two percent in 1985.

The growing economic power of women consumers is irrefutable and is here to stay. How companies choose to respond to this will determine their future success. International Women’s Day serves as a timely reminder to the corporate world not to ignore the female economy. It affords us an opportunity to celebrate the economic and social achievements of women and is as relevant in today’s society as it was 99 years ago when it was first launched. — Reuters

[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]

A European Parliament report from 2004 estimated the global sex industry to be worth $10 trillion, does this academic even think to legalize the adult industry towards a sex positive environment, normalized sex industry and thus putting an end to human trafficking via ending of Alcohol Prohibition-like conditions? Identifying which women are being forced into the sex trade or there of their own accord would already be a massive undertaking even after such legalisation has been implemented. Conversely do know that legal avenues for sex work and protection of consensual sex workers is also needed.

So instead of focusing on the privileged female class to exclusion of everyone else, there are women still suffering forced genital mutilations everyday. Are gender academics focusing attention on the wrong women, namely those who can more than take care of themselves and worse still, end up promoting meaningless consumerism to the exclusion of charitable causes? Causes which could effect permanent change for the world’s poorest nations instead?

Take on the IMF. Or certain food aid agencies indulging in corrupt practices or profiteering for their own benefit, or abuse cases in girl’s orphanages instead. The overfed, over privileged doyennes can jolly well wait their turn to be the very much needed focus of attention. So many other women and women’s issues, or aspects of women’s lib are being neglected this very second.

Moving forwards or backwards? — Martin Jalleh – 7th March 2010

In Ethics, Israel, Malaysia, opaque system, Public Accounts Committee, taxpayer funds, use of tax monies, vested interest on February 10, 2012 at 10:16 am

MARCH 7 — The catchphrase and chant of 2009 was “change”. The political tsunami of March 2008 brought about unexpected, unthinkable and unforgettable change to the political landscape of Bolehland. The country and the political divide were left with no choice but to change — for better or worse!

No one has been so conversant and committed to change than Najib Razak. As the year began he masterminded the change of the legitimate government in Perak. He tried successfully to convince the citizens of Bolehland that all dubious change is possible and can be made “legal”.

As the historic day of him being PM neared, Najib hammered home his message of change: “If we don’t have the courage to change, the people will change us at the next general election”. Umno heeded his warning. The first thing that they did was change their president! Pak Lah was hounded out of office in March.

Pak Lah had failed to translate rhetoric into reality. The Umno warlords wrapped in a world of their own made him a scapegoat. They were also largely responsible for reducing Umno into a fragmented “formidable” force. It was their resistance to change that had contributed to the rot. Such refusal to reform continued throughout 2009.

As the days passed, Najib’s “change” appeared to be one of taking the country back to the bad old days. Lim Kit Siang would remark: “In Najib’s pre-100 days as Prime Minister, the country is already seeing increasing signs of the powers-that-be reverting to the “old ways” of restricting freedom and silencing criticism…”

At the 59th Umno General Assembly held in March, Najib rallied on the delegates towards change. He said Umno needs leaders who “dare to change and are accepting of change, who dare to criticise and are willing to accept criticism”. Sadly, he and his cohorts did not appear to be receptive to criticisms in the days that followed.

Najib also reminded the delegates that if Umno was to remain relevant then the indispensable role of the new media must be recognised. He declared: “Like it or not, we cannot regard the new media as our enemy…” Unbelievably, six new-media organisa-tions would later be denied accreditation to Umno’s general assembly!

In October 2009, Umno held an extraordinary general assembly to take what Najib called “a bold and brave step in amending the party’s constitution to make it more transparent, inclusive and democratic”. Proud of the changes that took place the Umno President declared that the amendments are “not cosmetic. They represent concrete and significant changes.”

But former de facto law minister Zaid Ibrahim was unconvinced: “Of course, Umno…has introduced some change in their internal party processes but what about the mind-set of the leaders? We see no change whatsoever. It’s all cosmetic. The more things seem to change, the more they remain the same. They will never change.”

In an article, Barry Wain, author of the book Malaysian Maverick: Mahathir Mohamad in Turbulent Times believes Najib’s political background and baggage “doesn’t recommend him for the role of reformer” and “almost everything about Mr. Najib proclaims the status quo”!

Fanciful slogans

On April Fool’s day, The Malaysian Insider reported that Najib, in his final public address before his swearing in as PM “gave a hopeful glimpse into his administration … when he said that the new thrust of his government will be One Malaysia”.

For the rest of the year the citizens of Bolehland were bombarded with the slogan without knowing what Najib had in mind. Najib did not giv a clear picture of 1Malaysia, neither did Apco Worldwide, a global PR firm, employed to re-engineer and redeem the PM’s flagging image at a rumoured price of RM20 million or more. As columnist David D. Matthew would write: “slogans by itself are often nothing more than convenient rhetoric… 1Malaysia… is an empty slogan disguised as a solution.”

Tunku Abdul Aziz, a former chairman of Transparency International and DAP vice-chairman, argued that the PM has to “venture beyond sloganeering and spell out in terms that are concise and clear what he has in mind when pontificating on what appears to thinking Malaysians to be nothing more than a party dogma being shoved down their throats as part of a ploy to regain the non-Bumi electoral support.”

“How does Najib propose to give practical effect to his excellent concept given the reality of Malaysia’s race-biased policies of racial discrimination? Does he not see a contradiction? Is he clear in his own mind what he is talking about?

“For now, it remains a slogan and, without a clear vision of what

1Malaysia is intended to be, it could well turn out to be nothing more than a grand illusion. Does he really believe that he has what it takes to reconcile Umno’s pathological obsession with bumiputra rights on the one hand with the principles of inalienable equality for ALL Malaysians on the other?

1Malaysia without complete equality of opportunity is nothing if not a cruel and dishonest practical joke.”

Undoubtedly, Umno’s coalition allies were of no help in bolstering Najib’s 1Malaysia message of unity. They were busily engaged in bitter internal battles and endless bickering throughout the year, refusing or pretending to bury the hatchet in spite of the possibility that they could be burying themselves for good!

In his concluding line for the year, Lim Kit Siang highlighted the charade and chicanery the new PM had put the nation through: “After nine months (of Najib’s premiership), ‘1Malaysia. People First. Performance Now’ has proved to be mere publicity and propaganda puff of Najib’s premiership with no meaningful change or consequence to the lives of Malaysians.”

Fires of fanaticism

In September 2009, the United Nations General Assembly heard from Foreign Minister Anifah Aman the 1Malaysia concept which “aims at fostering appreciation and respect for all races…(and) envisages unity that arises from true acceptance instead of mere tolerance…” At home, the slogan remained but one perfect “performance”!

Relentless racism ran deep and wide in the year. Racial baiting was at its worst. Umno leaders had a free hand in playing the racist card to the hilt while they hid behind their hype and hypocrisy over 1Malaysia and went on a hysteria from time to time.

The racism was so glaring. It resulted in Minister in the PM’s Department Nazri Aziz revealing that the Cabinet had conceded that courses by the National Civics Bureau (or Biro Tatanegara, BTN) were racially divisive and used to promote certain government leaders. There was a need for an overhaul.

As the long debate raged on, Nazri told those who defended the BTN courses (which were compulsory for new civil servants and public university undergraduates), they were in a state of denial. Muhyuddin had sided with those who refused to acknowledge Nazri’s contention that the BTN was a mockery of Najib’s 1Malaysia concept.

The controversy began when seven Selangor Pakatan Rakyat lawmakers said a big part of the programme had nothing to do with nation building or education but was an Umno and BN race-based programme during which participants were indoctrinated with propaganda about “Ketuanan Melayu”.

When Dr Mahathir joined in and insisted there was no need to revamp the BTN courses, Nazri called the former PM a “bloody racist”! Mahathir told Nazri he should resign from Umno because if he were against racism, he should not be in a “racist party”. In return, Nazri conferred on Dr M the title “the father of all racists”.

In 2009, the Umno-owned mainstream press, especially Utusan Malaysia, went on a spree of spinning falsehood, spouting lies and spewing seditious articles with impunity whilst enjoying immunity of the Home Minister, who was ever ready to stop or suspend Opposition publications at the slightest and smallest excuse!

The Malaysian Insider reported Utusan’s ugly and unethical ways: “The Utusan (Malaysia) has been a mouthpiece for Umno ultra-nationalists and a tool for defending the party’s “Ketuanan Melayu” (Malay supremacy) policy. The newspaper has also been criticised for being used to attack the opposition and ratcheting up racial tensions.

The paper also suggested that DAP was anti-Islam and said Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim was willing to betray the Malays to be prime minister — both incendiary subjects in mainly Malay-Muslim Malaysia. Its articles have labelled the Chinese community as ‘pendatang’ (immigrants) and the Indian community as ‘keling’.”

As the year came to a close, Nazri Aziz (who had earlier castigated Utusan Malaysia for defending the BTN courses) condemned the Malay daily for its “outdated racist propaganda”, saying that the Umno-owned newspaper must accept that Malaysia is a multi-racial country.

Umno’s insolence also ruled in matters concerning religion. Using Utusan Malaysia as its main instrument, the party continued to politicise religion for its survival by creating unfounded insecurities amongst Muslims and a distrust of other religions and wrongly applying the concept of Malay supremacy and exclusivity to Islam. They also implored the name of the rulers when it was convenient.

Religious bigotry reared its ugly head. The event that laid bare Malaysia’s religious divide took place on 28 August 2009, after Friday prayers during the month of Ramadan, when about 50 Muslim protesters who opposed the relocation of a Hindu temple marched from the Selangor State Mosque to the State Secretariat with a severed cow head. (Hindus consider the animal sacred.)

Amid chants of “Allahu Akbar” they threatened bloodshed, kicked, spat and stomped on the cow’s head and left the severed head at the entrance of the State Secretariat while riot police stood by and watched!  Home Minister Hishammuddin Hussein later met some of the protesters and justified their demonstration!

It was only a matter of time before “Asia’s melting pot of races and religion” would boil over…and it did a few days into the New Year — in the aftermath of a landmark ruling on 31 December by the Kuala Lumpur High Court. The court ordered the lifting of the Home Minister’s ban against the Catholic church publishing the word “Allah” in its weekly paper, Herald.

The resultant fire bombs on churches reduced to ashes and made a mockery of Anifah Aman’s boasting of the “true acceptance instead of mere tolerance” amongst all races and religions in the nation. After being PM for nine months, Najib failed to fight the fires of religious fanaticism often fanned by his own party, but took flight behind the facade of 1Malaysia!

Faltering institutions

As Najib and his cohorts portrayed themselves as agents of change, they at the same time manipulated the nation’s democratic institutions to contain, cripple and crush legitimate dissent and/or to hinder genuine change advocated by the Opposition.

Key institutions such as the Judiciary, the office of the Attorney-General, the Police and the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission ended up becoming the tools of the government. They were no longer perceived as impartial. (See accompanying stories on the police and the judiciary.)

In early March 2009, the Pakatan Rakyat Perak state government was forced to hold an “emergency sitting” under a raintree. An Adun, when supporting one of the motions, spoke of an “institutional crisis” in the country. He then corrected it to “constitutional crisis”. He was in fact right: the country’s institutions were in a grave institutional crisis and the nation was heading towards becoming a failed State!

During the Perak constitutional crisis, then Bar Council president Ambiga Sreenevasan said that she was alarmed that “our institutions, that is the courts, the police, etc., are being tested….. What is going on in the state shows a total breakdown in relation to the structures and sanctity of the legislature”.

There is no better and lasting symbol of institutions decaying in Malaysia than the judiciary. In 2009, the V K Lingam video clip case reinforced its rot even further. The government took the findings of the Royal Commission rather lightly. It made the Commission, one appointed by the King, look like a lame duck.

The government ended its two-year charade when the de facto Law Minister made a laughing stock of himself as he lectured Parliament on what may be morally wrong could be legally or politically correct, correct, correct. With his ‘no further action’ declaration, public suspicion of the cattle-trading culture in the judiciary lingers on.

Another institution that allowed itself to be a mouthpiece of the political masters was the Election Commission. In Perak, it made a mockery of the Federal Constitution when it portrayed itself as a court of law and illegally usurped the authority of the Speaker of the Perak state assembly.

The above unconstitutional act was endorsed by a Federal Court ruling which opened the floodgates to potential interference by the Commission in the country’s legislatures including Parliament. During the year the Commision made declarations and decisions that were blatantly biased and undermined public confidence in its independence.

Fatal flaw

Another “institution” that failed was the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC): 2009 was the first year of its existence. It was frowned upon as a “monumental failure” and a farce in its task of tackling corruption. It became a favourite tool of the Umno government to repress the opposition.

Five months after the introduction of Najib’s slogans, the respondents in a Star online live chat revealed that the key national institution that they had least confidence in was both the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) and the police. Only two per cent of the respondents rated the MACC’s performance in fighting corruption as “good”.

The fatal flaw of the MACC was that it was not politically neutral as stated by Lim Teck Ghee. 74 per cent of the respondents in a poll by the Merdeka Centre said that they were dissatisfied with the government’s handling of corruption and abuse of power issues. A majority of them felt that the MACC was biased.

Since its much hyped up launch on 1 January 2009 the then MACC’s chief commissioner, Ahmad Said Hamdan, “has managed to put his mouth into overdrive while shifting his brains into reverse” as observed by Tunku Aziz. He chose to retire early and will remain haunted by how he had handled the “very small case” of the death of Teoh Beng Hock.

By the end of 2009, it was obvious that corruption in the country had worsened since the formation of the MACC. Malaysia’s anti-graft crackdown was, in reality, a breakdown that saw the country plunge nine places in the Transparency International corruption rankings ( The Malaysian Insider)!  It was also a mockery of Najib’s declaration that “the fight against corruption was one of the six KPI priorities of his administration”.

Parliament, the country’s supreme law-making institution turned 50 in September 2009. Sadly, in spite of Najib’s many slogans, it remained a rubber stamp. The shocking scene in February of wheelchair-bound Karpal Singh being surrounded by a hostile group of Umno Youth thugs while the police and security personnel stood idly by at the Parliament lobby said it all!

Speaker Pandikar Amin Mulia revealed in March that “Parliament is no longer like a first-world Parliament anymore”. He had a role in this. He was ever ready to reject the motions moved by the Opposition to debate crucial issues that would enhance radical reform and was at times ridiculously biased towards the government.

The civil service as an institution was also crumbling with civil servants failing to understand their role and the importance of their impartiality. In fact in January this year, Najib said he “wants the public sector in the country to become a fully professional service without political inclination”. It was obvious why he did not say it earlier in Perak.

Collapsed buildings and the collapse of a suspension bridge in Kuala Dipang, Kampar, in October where three young school girls were killed were constant symbolic reminders of the reality and repercussions of faltering institutions.

The impact of the breakdown in institutions could be increasingly seen not only in the political domain but in every arena of life – education, health care, environment, and use of natural resources. It also resulted in the further marginalisation of minority groups in both East and West Malaysia.

Tengku Razaleigh pointed to the source of the faltering institutions when he expressed sadness that Umno has “indeed lost its soul” and “become corrupt, this corruption has weakened it, and as it grows weaker it is tempted more and more to fan racial feeling and abuse public institutions to maintain power. This is a death spiral.”

He sagely added. “Our major public institutions and our political system have degenerated to the point that the public no longer trusts them. A democratic system of government cannot function below a certain threshold of public confidence. The suspicious death of Teoh Beng Hock under the custody of a watchdog body reporting directly to a prime minister who has his own public confidence issues may have pushed us below that threshold.”

He concluded: “What we must do now goes beyond political parties. We need the rakyat to rise up to claim their institutions, and demand that our public institutions are answerable to them. We must wake up to our sovereignty as citizens, reclaim the constitution which constitutes us as a nation and guarantees our rights, and demand a comprehensively reformed government to restore public confidence. We must do this before it is too late.”

A divided nation, decaying institutions, a dour economy and a PM dogged by allegations — perhaps the events and issues of the year 2009 point to the reality that all real, relevant and radical change can only come about by a change in government! There are those with raw courage whom we saw during the year, who are willing to risk their lives for such a change. But we are prompted to ask, is the Opposition ready? — aliran.com

[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]

” . . . neither did APCO Worldwide . . . ”

This should read ” . . . Israel based and possibly Zionist owned APCO Worldwide . . . ”

Not a bad article which at least mentioned Items (1) and (3), and also vaguely referenced problems related to Item (2).

1) Freedom from Apartheid/Fascism
2) Freedom from Religious-Persecution/Religious-Supremacy.
3) Equality for all ethnicities and faiths in all aspects of policy, Law and Constitution.

Vote only for politicians who believe in the above!

Various Stances By 4 Malaysian Politicians – reposted by @AgreeToDisagree – 10th february 2012

In 1% tricks and traps, Abuse of Power, advice, by-election, conflict of interest, Justice, Law, Malaysia on February 10, 2012 at 10:13 am

ARTICLE 1

Zulkifli won’t appeal, will stay as MP – by Clara Chooi – 6th March 2010

KUALA LUMPUR, March 6 – Sacked PKR MP Zulkifli Noordin has decided not to appeal his termination from the party and will remain as an Independent MP for Kulim–Bandar Bharu.

The controversial politician has chosen to remain calm in the face of his sacking, and just minutes after hearing about it, he laughed over the phone with The Malaysian Insider.

“There is no use crying over it,” he said.

He added that the party had made him a “forced Independent” when it decided to sack him as a PKR member.

“I will remain as an Independent for now but I will keep my options open. But joining Umno is a big no-no,” he told The Malaysian Insider when asked if he planned to join another party.

Zulkifli was sacked from PKR this evening when the party’s supreme council decided to endorse the recommendations made by the disciplinary board on the MP’s case.

Zulkifli was called to face the board when he infringed a party gag order and lodged a police report against Shah Alam PAS MP Khalid Samad over the “Allah” issue.

[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]

Whether he remains as independent or not is for the voters to decide. They might have voted for the party and not the candidate. Don’t tell me there is no mechanism for by elections to determine the voter’s response? Heres a NEW voting checkbox list for the Election Commission to consider implementing to prevent this betrayal of voters who voted for the party and not the candidate :

Party YES/NO
Candidate YES/NO

The party might win but the candidate is hated (So called independents now formalized as Konsensus Bebas).
Or the candidate might win but the party is hated (Tengku Razaleigh for example from UMNO party).

Therefore in the case where the Candidate does not have 51% of the vote and leaves the party, an immediate By-Election is called. Or in the case where the Party does not have 51% of the vote and expels the candidate, a By-Election will not be needed. Are our Election Commission officials thinking about things like this? Or just sitting pretty and doing nothing except maintaining status quo, serving interests of a specific political party instead of the Rakyat, and thereby betraying the Rakyat by wasting tax monies instead of thinking on how to improve the system??? Are they making the system worse in fact whenever new laws are passed. Are these laws legal by UN standards?

ARTICLE 2

Chinese will take over in the next election, warns Perkasa – by Asrul Hadi Abdullah Sani

KUALA LUMPUR, March 8 — Malay nationalist group Perkasa warns that the Chinese community will use the next general election to take over the country.

Perkasa feels that the last general election weakened the Malays and empowered the Chinese community.

Dr Zubir Harun, director of Perkasa’ economic bureau, who was at the Malay Consultative Council’s (MPM) round-table discussion, said during his presentation that a divided Malay community will empower the other races.

According to delegates at the discussion and documents received by The Malaysian Insider, Perkasa wants the New Economic Policy (NEP) to be the “spirit” of the New Economic Model (NEM).

“Perkasa believes that disunity among the Malays has weakened Umno, causing the non-Malays to be more vocal in their demands. They say that the Chinese are also blackmailing the government to give in to their demands by threatening to vote for Pakatan Rakyat,” said one of the delegates.

Zubir also said that Perkasa is worried that the New Economic Model will have a Chinese agenda.

“The Chinese people feel that the next general election is the best opportunity for them to gain power in this country.

“This is why Chinese NGOs, such as Ziong Dong and Associated Chinese Chambers of Commerce, are using this chance to make demands of the government. If their demands are not met, then they will vote Pakatan Rakyat who are willing to give everything to the Chinese,” he elaborated in his presentation.

Zubir added that the Malays have “sacrificed” for the country by allowing “the immigrants” to live in Malaysia.

“It must be reminded that the Malay people have sacrificed tremendously since independence with a quid pro quo policy…  the Malay race have compromised by allowing foreigners into the country. The Malays endured hundreds of years of colonization and the result is the migration of foreigners into the country. We were forced to accept this policy,” he said.

Zubir also slammed non-Malays and liberal Malays for wanting to rewrite the country’s Constitution and social contract.

Perkasa believes that the NEP is still relevant because it will help the Malay community to counter a market which is dominated by the Chinese.

The Malaysian Insider reported today that the government has decided to incorporate the proposed New Economic Model (NEM) into the 10th Malaysia Plan (10MP) in June, as fine-tuning and tweaks will go beyond its initial end-March launch.

It was learnt the delay came after feedback from various quarters prompted the government to rework its ideas and proposals that will turn Malaysia into a high-income nation based on innovation and creativity.

Among those with reservations about the NEM are the MPM which yesterday demanded it be based on the 1970s-era New Economic Policy (NEP) and should comply with Article 153 of the Federal Constitution that protect Malay and Bumiputera’s special position.
[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]

Take care with your words – don’t tempt the 2 rising superpowers into retaliating by fulfilling your words. The minorities are just asking for :

1) Freedom from Apartheid/Fascism
2) Freedom from Religious-Persecution/Religious-Supremacy.
3) Equality for all ethnicities and faiths in all aspects of policy, Law and Constitution.

Would you like to be treated as the minorities are treated now? The international community is behind the moderate Ummah and the right minded Malaysian in these issues.  Right now the Orang Asli know they could be treated better, elevated to the Prime Minister’s post as soon as GE14 or at least guaranteed the DPM’s post, by siding with the minorities. What has UMNO ever given them? Land titles to lands that originally belonged to them? Without Sarawak and Sabah, or international respect, UMNO’s racist faction will be finished, does MPM know how damned the side they are standing on is? The members of these 76 Malay Organisations will be identifiable and crushed wherever they go from now on. Is it worth it?

Only by embracing EQUALITY will the Malay race will be at par with humanity, and there are REAL heroes among the Malay race who would stand for ALL Humans this day. Special privileges are a myth and an abomination in the equilibrium of Human Development in a global context, the Prophet would have recognized that if he were here this day, the Human Rights Charter recognizes that and will continue to. What is MCM but a fool demented by selfish greed . . .

ARTICLE 3

An economist’s wet dream – by Jema Khan – 8th MARCH 2010

Having studied economics at university, I am eagerly awaiting Malaysia’s New Economic Model (NEM).

I believe there are many things that can be done to improve our country’s economy.

That is not to say that it will be done as politics has always been a major consideration in any country.

It is easy to say, for example, that we will put a poll tax to help the government’s coffers as Margaret Thatcher did in the late 1980’s.

From a purely financial viewpoint it would help the coffers but the British public were not supportive and this actually caused Thatcher’s downfall as Prime Minister after the poll tax riots in 1990.

I believe that to be effective, any economic prescriptive must have incentives and disincentives properly aligned and that the policy should be communicated clearly to the people.

The problem should also be clearly defined. I will try to illustrate by trying to tackle a real life issue in Malaysia: Kuala Lumpur’s traffic congestion.

In the case of Kuala Lumpur’s traffic congestion, I suggest a policy of cross subsidies where we charge cars coming into the city say, RM10 per day and motorcycles RM5 per day to be collected by a wholly owned Government entity, which I believe in this case should be Prasarana.

This will allay any fears of cronyism and its like. At the same time Prasarana should provide public transport such as buses, monorail and light rail for free as their revenue is collected from the congestion charge.

Prasarana’s buses should also be given dedicated bus lanes — for its buses, its tow trucks and public emergency vehicles only — on every 3 lane road.

The bus stops should be about 500 meters apart. The buses should come every few minutes and there should be at least half a dozen bus interchange stations within the city as well as integration of all its public transport facilities.

This will probably require about 5000 buses for KL and its surrounding areas. At the same time we should probably have more one way systems and reduce the number of traffic lights in the city by about a third to reduce bottlenecks.

Furthermore all the public transport should have lots of cameras for security reasons. Passengers should also have to provide their ID before they board any of these facilities so that if they misbehave we will know who to look for.

At the same time we can also find any wanted felons more easily.

Prasarana’s public transport should be upgraded over time to reflect that we are in the 21st century with things such as electric buses and green technology.

The incentive in this case is free, comfortable and efficient public transport. The disincentive is the congestion charge on cars and motorbikes.

The goal is to relieve traffic congestion. The challenge is to communicate effectively to the public that this will save a lot of time for all and make our city globally competitive and efficient.

I estimate that Prasarana can easily collect about RM2 billion a year and this should be more than adequate to provide KL with a free first class 21st century public transport system.

Furthermore if overall everyone saves just an hour a week in commute time, it will add up to 50 hours per year.

If we have two million people going in and out of KL, that adds up to 100 million man hours per annum saved on commuting, which by itself is worth a few billion RM per year.

The challenges to the above will be that there are more than half a dozen ministries involved in public transport and to coordinate them is difficult.

What of the private bus companies that will go out of business because they can’t compete with free transport?

What about the additional burden to people who have to pay the congestion charge?

What if we can’t collect enough money from the congestion charge to offset the cost of free public transport?

Can Prasarana provide an efficient and comfortable service for the public? There are a myriad of questions that can be asked.

The main thing to do is move forward and solve the problem. We can tweak the system as we go along but we must work on the basis of aligning incentives and disincentives and communicating clearly to the public.

Overall, I expect the coming New Economic Model to provide further liberalization of the economy which I support.

My only question is what is the point of liberalizing the economy if we can’t liberalize the mindset of our people?


written by JC, March 08, 2010
and it will always remain a dream, a very wet dream…
The reason is pretty simple, 60% of total cars sold each year in the country are from the 2 local car manufacturers. Let’s be frank, if we had a transport system like HK or Australia, would we buy one of those overpriced junks? They are a huge source of income for a lot of people in power. There are thousands of suppliers to the 2 companies and let’s just say you don’t get to supply to them based on merit. Same goes for petrol station licenses. There are many people who sit there doing nothing but churning out racist propaganda while getting filthy rich at the people’s expense. Any atttempts to disrupt their income stream will always be met with the strongest resistance.

* +5


written by Paul Ong, March 08, 2010
Singapore has imposed levy for vehicles coming to the central business area to alleviate congestion, they even have special road tax for cars that can only be used at night and week ends, but before they impose all this restrictions they already have first class transportation system.

Our public transport system in Kuala Lumpur is only comparable to the Lion City of the seventies, I am not trying to insult the planners in K.L. but this is the reality.

Can our Gomen do it like Singapore or like the author of this article suggest? Wake up man! They have to pour billions of ringgit to upgrade the public transport first, the problem here is fully 60% of the billions spent will disappear into “thin air”! If any organizations are given the permission to collect money for the private vehicles coming into K.L. We can only fore see one thing, that is huge amount of this money collected will do the disappearing act as well.


written by ManCung, March 08, 2010

There’s very little merit in this suggestion but I agree the author has the right to voice his opinion.
It is a very simplistic idea that fails to take into account the social, cultural, infrastructural & economic circumstances in the country/KL. Finally, any gov that tries this will become hugely unpopular and will lose at the next election. You want to improve public transport in KL – stop the policiticans/cronies from getting involved & making huge money out of it and create a level playing field for the private sector to invest & compete to provide the best service to the public.

“a policy of cross subsidies where we charge cars coming into the city say, RM10 per day and motorcycles RM5 per day” – the public already has to pay toll, parking, road tax, insurance, car maintenance etc; while incomes are barely keeping pace with inflation, and now u want to screw them further.

“What of the private bus companies that will go out of business because they can’t compete with free transport?” – If they’re non-bumi, can just screw them. If they’re bumi, the gov will subsidize.

What about the additional burden to people who have to pay the congestion charge? – if they’re bumi, they can join umno and make lots of money to help pay for the congestion charge. If they’re non-bumi, can just screw them.

What if we can’t collect enough money from the congestion charge to offset the cost of free public transport? – Taxpayers (majority non-bumi) already been screwed for so long, what’s a bit more screwing to use tax money.

I propose that to set a good example, all umno members & gov officials & BN politicians & VIPs should solely use biycles. Its healthy exercise, will reduce expenditure, its environmentally friendly & most importantly may instill some humility & understanding.

written by @AgreeToDisagree
A new decentralised paradigm of city planning (with lots of green lung) is needed. That way all the traffic and pollution will not be focused in a single high density zone. Meanwhile Malaysians will still need :

1) Freedom from Apartheid/Fascism
2) Freedom from Religious-Persecution/Religious-Supremacy.
3) Equality for all ethnicities and faiths in all aspects of policy, Law and Constitution.

And with the 13 point plan in place, Singapore will be re-assimilated as well.

ARTICLE 4

DPM: new economic model is for everyone [Muhyiddin says the NEM is for everyone] by Asrul Hadi Abdulah Sani

SUNGAI BULOH, March 8 — Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin today assured Malaysians that the proposed New Economic Model (NEM) is for all, regardless of race, background and religion.

The deputy prime minister stressed that the government will not only consider the interest of the Malays but other communities as well.

The Malaysian Insider reported today that the government has decided to incorporate the proposed NEM into the 10th Malaysia Plan (10MP) in June, as fine-tuning and tweaks will go beyond its initial end of March launch.

It was learnt the delay came after feedback from various quarters prompted the government to rework its ideas and proposals that will turn Malaysia into a high-income nation based on innovation and creativity.

Among those with reservations about the NEM are the Malay Consultative Council (MPM) which yesterday demanded it be based on the 1970s-era New Economic Policy (NEP), and should comply with Article 153 of the Federal Constitution that protect Malay and the special position of Bumiputeras.

Muhyiddin said Malaysians, including the MPM, will be provided with the opportunity to contribute the NEM.

“I want to assure every Malaysians, not just Malays but every Malaysians who have a vested interest in the New Economic Model that the prime minister is very well aware. Every Malaysians but not just Malay Consultative Council wants to have a say and I think they will be given an opportunity to look into what has been proposed by the National Economic Advisory Council,” he told reporters after launching 1 Community 1 Corporation programme at Kg Paya Jaras Hilir here.

The National Economic Advisory Council (NEAC) chaired by Tan Sri Amirsham Abdul Aziz is formulating the NEM and has briefed the Cabinet twice on its progress.

“Every Malaysian will have the opportunity to look into what the council proposed and what sort of input that they want to give to the prime minister and the government. So actually as a regard to the Malay interest or the Chinese interest, all are being taken care of but obviously we have to go into details on how those plan could be developed,” he added.

Muhyiddin also said that the NEM will be within the “spirit of the constitution.”

“At the same time, whatever decision that the government has to make will be constitutional and within the spirit of the constitution. We understand that very well so I don’t think any race need to be worry about.

“So there will be enough time for them to given the opportunity to have a look at what the proposed new economic model is all about. They can have a discussion among themselves to give input to the government,” he said.

The deputy prime minister also took great pains to say everyone will be consulted.

“I must assure you that all will be consulted. You have the various types of NGOs, not just the Malay Consultative Council. The Chinese and Indians have their own types of NGOs, all the social and economic NGOS have their own ideas but we will take note of them. We will assure that they will be given a fair chance but of course the final decision will rest on the government,” he explained.

The government had previously indicated the NEM could have been launched either late 2009 or early 2010. It was understood that Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak was due to launch the NEM at the annual Invest Malaysia conference to be held after Bank Negara Malaysia unveils its annual report  and economic indicators.

Muhyiddin refused to neither confirm nor deny if the launch of NEM has been delayed till June.

“Well, I think the prime minister will give sufficient time for various groups to submit their views on this. So do I hope the announcement will come from the prime minister himself,” he said.

The NEAC briefed the Cabinet for the second time on March 1, days after engaging with several quarters on various issues related to the NEM.

Sources said the Cabinet had “concerns of political implications” for some measures but Second Finance Minister Datuk Seri Ahmad Husni Hanadzlah has said the political risks would not stop the NEM which stressed on removing costly subsidies and improving competitiveness.

It is understood that eliminating policies that still adhere to the spirit of the NEP — even though the NEP no longer exists and was replaced by the National Development Policy in 1990 — has been received with “trepidation by the Cabinet.”

Fully aware that this radical shift away from the patronage system so many Bumiputra businessmen are familiar with, the policy makers took pains to pave the way for the NEM’s success by engaging with various pressure groups.

Datuk Mukhriz Mahathir yesterday maintained that the NEM would not neglect the Malay community and would have the spirit of the NEP.

MPM has also been campaigning that NEM should not sideline the Malays and remain in line with Article 153 which has 10 parts, with the first part making it incumbent for the Yang di-Pertuan Agong to safeguard the special position of the Malays and natives of Sabah and Sarawak.

Perkasa, a member of MPM, is worried that the NEM will increase the monopoly of the country’s economy by the Chinese community.

Its director of economic bureau, Dr Zubir Harun, has said that Perkasa is worried that the NEM will have a Chinese agenda and warned that the Chinese community will use the next general election to take over the country.

” MPM has also been campaigning that NEM should not sideline the Malays and remain in line with Article 153 which has 10 parts, with the first part making it incumbent for the Yang di-Pertuan Agong to safeguard the special position of the Malays and natives of Sabah and Sarawak. ”

[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]

The first part of 153 is unconstitutional in the sense that it drags the Princes and Agong into a minefield of inapplicable and indefensible articles which directly contravene Article 1 of the Human Rights Charter as well as tramples on the spirit of certain Hadiths of Islam prohibiting racism – i.e. Sin of Asabiya etc..

Amendments should be carried out to Article 153 immediately if the Malaysian Royal Collective (those assenting – heaven forbid, or those dissenting – Humanists in touch with the Human NEED to be treated with equality and dislike of disenfranchisement) is not to become an exemplar of what accomplices are. Via machinations of inconsiderate politicians like Muddy above, through badly written constitutions that are seriously outdated and that hamper the aspirations of all minority citizens, which is just to be treated as EQUALS, Muddy is muddying what should be a shining beacon of NEUTRALITY in Malaysia’s time of need.

Time for all supposed administrators of a supposedly modern country to grow into defensible positions as of now . . .

Generally Harsh and Uncensored Mix of Comments – reposted by @AgreeToDisagree – 10th February 2012

In Equality, Ethics, Malaysia, Muslims, Native Rights, non-Muslim rights, politics, subtle insults on February 10, 2012 at 10:09 am


written by Azli Othman, February 12, 2010
The sultans are now exercising their new powers, conferred by the Federal Court. They know that the government will not dare to challenge them as the sultans can now remove the government at will. They also know that they can control the court. So, they are willfully ignoring the court ruling on the Allah issue. Najib, see what you have done? We have all witnessed that rulers behave and act primarily on their self-interest – does that work for your religious needs, requirements, and satisfactions ?

When religion is used to assault others, what did the rulers do ? – nothing…..
(that’s because they can not remove the yoke of dependency on umno politicians) …
written by vince rajaratnam, February 13, 2010
the malays have forgotten their first religion was hinduism, they learned how to cook spicy food from the indians, the ‘songkok’ came from india,the malay vocabulary is of sanskrit origin. in other words their race,culture,rellgion are borrowed from indians.


written by lack loose, March 05, 2010
Idiotic Malay-controlled associates (MCA) are wasting and cheating on the Chinese community that voted for them. This selfish bunch of mca never serve the Chinese community except fighting for their own selfish gains. OTK must simply let such idiots resign for good for them to join UMNO as open members. OTK must seriously consider how to shift the paridigm to accommodate checkmate policy from evil UMNO. OTL should use your authority as President to sack all these traitors to stop them from tearing the party apart. Let them cry foul and take legal actions later,at least you stop the rot now.


written by lembu, March 05, 2010
MCA is just a party of treacherous self serving Chinese bigots. This is very clear from the latest episode. If the dvd actor can even join force with the person responsible for spying on his trysts, a convenience alliance to back stab and grab power, there is no moral at all in the party. It is just a shell for crooks, worms, snakes and other hateful creatures. We Malaysians cannot accept MCA. We Malaysians must not vote for any candidates from MCA. We cannot vote for crooks, worms, snakes and other hateful creatures. They will come back to bite us. Get rid of them once and for all. [[[ *** Oh look an Xian . . . *** ]]]


written by Mark them and vote them out, March 05, 2010

These clowns are abusing their privilege. They spend all their time playing politics and did nothing to serve the nation. Just vote them out next time. See, whatever the play or scheme will have no effect. Since they are useless MPs, just kick them out. The same goes to all parties. This is the only way to exercise your ultimate power of your votes.

written by @AgreeToDisagree circa 2010
(1) A BN-UMNO independent “MCA Xin” should be formed post-haste or MCA would not even be a minor party by GE13. Better a lifeboat to reach the shore than going down with the sinking ship. Any party part of UMNO-racist tainted, UMNO dominated BN will be distrusted by all Minorities. True non-lapdog MCA members whatever your position, time to blaze your own trail for a new MCA, survive as a minor party and not die . . .

Ong Tee Keat advised the delegates present of the need for MCA to forge stronger bond with its allies in Barisan Nasional. Minister Ong, no bonds can be forged without :

1) Freedom from Apartheid/Fascism
2) Freedom from Religious-Persecution/Religious-Supremacy.
3) Equality for all ethnicities and faiths in all aspects of policy, Law and Constitution.

MCA is better off as an independent asking for the above than pretending it is a partner in BN at all. It is not a partner but a lapdog and the minorities can see that. Before the MCA polls, try living with the power you still have with TRUTH and speaking TRUTH. You will never regret upholding TRUTH in what could be the last best moments of your lifetime, as MCA President. Think as a citizen with power to effect change, educate the masses and not a politician. At least if you fall, you would at least have done this for your community. No more lies, tell it as it is, ITEMS 1, 2, 3 . . .

(2) Addressed to various online mags that started censoring  comments : Stop trying to save face at the expense of the commentators. You guys obviously do not respect the Internet’s “Freedom of Commentary”. Without freedom of the commentators and the audience such freedom attracts, an online magazine would be a mere dictatorship with cronies and an agenda. There will be good and bad comments. And the readers will judge by the + or – tabs. Afraid of the truth? This form of censorship is cowardly, harmful and regressive.

(3) The NEP preferential status as demanded by MPM, subsidies and special aids for a privileged and protected segment of society are just like giving drugs for the addicts, or pacifiers for the infants.

What can you say about those who refuse to grow up and face the realities and challenges, or those who continue to complain and endlessly depend on crutches even though they could stand, walk and run like the rest of us?

While the rest of us choose to, or have no choice but to be independent, self reliant, work hard, toil, and take risks, face realities, encounter failures after failures, there are those who demand to be given all sorts of protection and free rides even though they have already been given much more than enough and for half a decade.

And yet some ( many of whom are living in huge bungalows, hold chairmanship in public listed companies, government appointed contractors, established political animals, well-off leaders of NGOs, etc., etc. ) have the gall to set up MPM to demand that the crutches be preserved and provided for eternity. Wonder if those fellows are thinking of their own interests or the interest of the really abject and sidelined?

For the sidelined, who sidelined them? Why did the government did not act on their problems before? Why did the NGOs did not take up their case and voiced their concern to the government until now? Why was MPM or MPM-like bodies not formed before? Hasn’t NEP done enough for those sidelined in the past decades? What went wrong?

Mukriz has lots of soul searching to do and must be honest and sincere enough to ask if those who are demanding for NEP-like treatments and privileges are those really in need of government protection and assistance? Mukriz would have contributed to propagating drug-addiction like behaviour and demands, or unwittingly or wittingly contribute to the backwardness of his own people by pampering and spoiling them with handouts and doles. For goodness sake, do not turn Malaysia a charity state.

Having one segment of our society to continuously and profusely contribute to another is akin to Robin-hood practices, whether Mukriz agrees with it or not. All in the name of interventionist or levelling the field policy. Stop the rot, Mukriz! MPM is just another excuse and ploy to promote ketuanan.

All members of these 86 MPM organisations had better be prepared to face “Special Hindrances” in the form of unwritten agreed upon economic, social and political retaliations worldwide. They will be finished internationally in any right minded nation, who will henceforth apply Counter-Bumiputra Policies upon the traitors of mankind’s EQUALITY. From this angle Mucky looks like a bug eyed worm . . .

(4) ” If Datuk Chua and Datuk Liow’s joint faction wins the MCA election . . . ” . . . MCA would be as good as dead.

Liow Tiong/Chew Meifung (oh great its THAT family) / Wee Ka Siong look to be lapdog through and through, while Chua who might be smart enough to handle UMNO, he could be equally likely to turn out to be a political opportunist who could be subverted by UMNO racist faction. MCA party members with weak wills and selfish natures are too many. Jui Meng was the smart/honest one who just LEFT and threw away all that UMNO racist faction could have offered him. MCA non-lapdogs no matter how few you are, how about setting up a new CLEAN splinter party? As for MCA, better go independent, that might fool the voters abit, but you guys are too afraid that UMNO racist faction will give you no more goodies. Goodies however are already in you.

Moral Fortitude and Ethics are goodies that everyone has until they themselves give those away. When given away, these will become an empty space no amount of material wealth or highest title can replace. In this the poorest beggar can be more noble than the richest Minister. How far the MCA has lost it’s way . . .

(5) Theres probably a spiritual angle for the disallowal of food or drinks on the MRT in Singapore. They once said that a Dragon formation had been impacted when the tunnels were first dug, I think drinking within the belly of the dragon is the issue they are targetting. Also there is the 3% sewer water issue from NeWater which handles Singapore’s water system by adding 3% waste water to it. Read up on drinking waste and eating of waste and how it impacts that person’s spiritual power. This again is intended to ensure that no person is ever superior or stronger than the non waste drinking PAP guys who 100% for sure have a separate water source that does not have 3% sewer. Just theories but likely true to a degree. Then watch out for GMO foods as well, obtaining quality of life is becoming a minefield of impossibility in Singapore IMHO . . .


written by Join the Malaysia Federation, March 02, 2010

Some say that the only way is to default and start with a clean slate. Large financial corporations, bad regulations, outright theft and extortion were working against the people of Iceland. Now the people were asked to foot the bills for the bankers loosing bets, but would the bankers share the spoilt of the winnings. So, the people of Iceland is in no obligation to tag along with the politicians that failed in its banking regulations. If the referendum is yes, then each Icelanders will be saddled with debts that is impossible to pay. It is the Laffer curve. 100% taxes will return zero because there is no incentive for anyone to work. Most will emigrate since there is no hope or a future. In the event of financial isolation, Iceland can join the Malaysia Federation. In spite of the incessant mumbo jumbo by both the Barisan and Pakatan politicians, the experts in civil services in the Federal Government can give a helping hand. Not too bad to have brothers and sisters that is over 20 thousand kilometres away.

Unbalanced views from the The Malay Consultative Council (MPM) – Mar 08, 2010 :

“The New Economic Model must concentrate on wealth distribution because if there is no wealth distribution then the country is not safe from political stability in the future. The government has the right to perform social intervention to ensure that there is national unity and economic equitability. This is important so that the country’s economy is free from monopoly and exploitation which may cause a fracture between the different races,” he said. He said the NEP will not stall the country’s economy but instead spur its growth. “We are against the notion that ethnic-based policies hinder foreign direct investment. This is not true because our economic growth sustained when NEP was in place. Not only did we have sustained economic growth but we also had a high foreign direct investment during that time. We reject this school of thought. We are of the opinion that there is less foreign direct investment now because of the dip in the international market and the perception of corruption in the country,” he added.

The MPM, an umbrella organisation for nearly 80 Malay groups, also slammed Tan Sri Francis Yeoh’s proposal for a brutal economy. “They talk about brutal competition but many of them receive subsidy and monopoly from the government,” he said. The YTL Group managing director had said that there is a need for a brutal economy for the country’s business environment to prosper and Malaysia could no longer have a “little brother” mentality where businesses are protected by the government.


written by Parameswara, March 07, 2010 – Mr Uthayakumar is a carbon copy of Mr Sothinathan.

Remember Sothinathan who was so determined to contest for the MIC Deputy President’s position? He was not out to win….that was not the secret arrangement he had with Samy Velu. He just contested, as requested by Samy Velu, to split the votes of MIC delegates that were very much in favour of Dato Subramaniam. Dato Subra lost to Palanivelu, but this time around the votes margin was much lesser than the earlier party elections for the same post.

Split he did, this Sothinathan fellow and his ‘boss’ Samy Velu did a fantastic drama by ‘condemning’ Sothinathan for contesting. Actually, Samy Velu was happy that his plan worked well and Sothi cooperated. Today, the story is going round that Sothi will be made senator or even the President of the Senate. Its payback time by Samy Velu and Sothi is going to benefit from the earlier ‘help’ he gave to Samy Velu.

Uthayakumar is just doing the same. Trying to blame Pakatan, and not even accepting the fact that Pakatan has been doing its best for Indians, Malays and Chinese. This fellow is just bothered about Indians, as though Human Rights is only for Indians. Such shallow thinking will lead him not far. But he is aiming for a ‘respectable’ position from BN in the near future and he does not care much for the efforts of his supporters ‘investing’ all their time and money to ‘prop’ him up as the hero. Once he gets what he wants from BN, and his debts cleared, he will be singing praises about BN.

Look out for the other Indian guy, Nallakaruppan. He too has started the ball rolling by lodging poilce reports. It is certain his reports will be investigated and many anti-BN folks will be hauled up because of his reports. In return his ‘masters’ will feed him with ‘special draw’ proceeds to shut him up. He will not care for the party he started and his party members will be left in the ‘lurch’. Funny Indians, these two. Trying to hoodwink other Malaysian Indians, using BN media might and enjoying ‘special draw’ proceeds. Sooner or later, the Indians will know the true colours of these ‘loyalists’.

… Anonymous

Its clear what young non-Malay voters see in the possibility of change. But what does young Malay voters see? When young Malay voters see unintelligent connected UMNOputras getting super rich with not much effort while they struggle hard everyday, they feel disconnected to the message of UMNO. What is the point of supporting a pro-Malay policy that only make someone else, someone less deserving, even if its Malay, get it? What is it got to do with him/her? There can only be that few connected UMNOputra and if you are not one of them, why support it?

…Jialat dot Com – I Curse The Day I Was Born A Singaporean Posted on 01/07/2009, 09:22, by admin, under Uncategorized.

It is very amusing to see how Malaysians (probably of the minority races) have spasms of ecstasy when referring to Lee Kuan Yew (LKY) in Malaysian forums. From across the border in Malaysia, Singapore seems like Wonderland and LKY like a benevolent god. As a Chinese Singaporean, born of Malaysian parents who took up citizenship here in Singapore, I can understand why they feel this way. The grouses are familiar: NEP, corruption and ineptitude in governance.

Let me provide an insight on how it is like to be a Singaporean. I must first stress that new immigrants or Permanent Residents (PRs) from Malaysia (like my parents) will not experience any disadvantages. It is the children of these people (like me) or new PRs’ children (who will be Singaporean) who will feel the disadvantages most sorely, and curse the fact they were born in Singapore:

On the relative development of both countries – Singpore developed well largely due to early good advice given to LKY, its strategic position, the lack of natural disasters and its easily-governable size. Malaysia lags behind in spite of its natural resources because of its larger size, poorer planning/ execution, more difficult decision-making and corruption.

However, Singapore has problems at present because its development model is outdated. As LKY still insists on the methods recommended tens of years ago, trouble is looming. There is no impetus to change because there is no one who dares to disagree. The media prints only propaganda, the courts will always find the government blameless as the government runs 70% of the economy.

The opposition has been persecuted to the point where only those with nothing to lose will dare to oppose, and the common people are scared to death of arbitrary arrest.

Yes, corruption is more widespread in Malaysia. But in Singapore, it also exists – though restricted to the top political elite and in a legalised form. In Malaysia, many get a share of the cake but in Singapore, only a select few get a share of the cake.

Many scoff at the position of the Malay rulers. But are they aware of the many dubious acts of LKY and his cronies – his ‘cooperation’ with the wartime Japanese, then the Communists and then the British (he betrayed the latter two in the end)?

And the actions taken by him and his courts to destroy the opposition, moves which are reported in a twisted manner by his press? A shining example of good character?

Yes, up till recently, Singapore was performing excellently. But at the same time, the ordinary people had the fruits of their labour taken away. We seem rich but yet are in debt. The government apartments are now exorbitantly priced. Cars are a necessity (given the poor performance of the profit-oriented public transport companies) but are also exorbitantly priced.

Much of our money is locked in the Provident Fund and it is becoming impossible to get it back while we are still alive. Yes, all races are treated equally – and they are sucked dry equally. This is the pivotal point in times when things became bad. By the way, the money in the Provident Fund (as well as in the reserves) is used for investment – for which there is almost no transparency and accountability.

Huge losses have been incurred in the current crisis yet the ruling party still baulks at spending a million or two on the poor. Oh, and we spend twice as much on defence as Malaysia despite being at least 400 times smaller.

Instead of addressing the root of the problems, LKY’s son (yes, his son – by the way did Dr Mahathir install his son as prime minister?) decided to take action on only one aspect of the problem, in a negative manner. Instead of lowering costs for citizens, and therefore maintaining wage levels, he decided to import foreigners to lower cost.

It is effective – foreigners earn much more per hour than they do back home. They are stuck with the same employer for the duration of their visa, hence they are obedient. If they are sacked, they have to go home. And home means facing unpaid debts which they incurred in getting to Singapore. So which foreign worker will dare to resist exploitation?

This means the ‘choosy’ Singaporeans get to twiddle thumbs at home. And would the Singaporean ministers care? They are paid $S$2 million basic per year, a performance bonus of up to eight months, and get a pension when they reach retirement age. Good clean governance, huh? Oh yes, the judges are paid the same too so not surprisingly they always find for the government.

Malaysians are LKY’s top choice. It gratifies him to poach bright minority students which his old pal Dr Mahathir had educated. They get good jobs (there is supposedly a quota to be filled), will not get sacked (as it means they go back to Dr M) and are favoured by corporations, as they do not have national service obligations.

None want to be citizens – at the end of the day, they will retire to the Malaysia (which they hate so much) to enjoy the Singapore dollar’s strength. God have mercy on the children they leave behind!
Currently one person in three is a foreigner in Singapore. The press chooses to obfuscate matters by lumping citizens and PRs together in their reporting (as ‘resident population’) so the huge number of foreigners in Singapore is understated.

To all Malaysians who love LKY, you have to be ruled by him, not as a PR turned citizen, but as a born and bred Singaporean, to understand that he is not what you think.Y ou curse Dr Mahathir because you know LKY will treat you like lords. You are correct but very shortsighted and shallow.

Dr Mahathir may be much less than perfect, but only ignorant fools will say LKY is better than him. Singapore residents receive two broadsheet pages daily on how bad things are in Malaysia, but no Singaporean commentator will blast LKY and compare him to Dr Mahathir.

Why? Because it is stupid to compare – we have not been ruled by Dr Mahathir or Umno so how are we able to compare? Using anecdotal evidence supplied by privileged fellow countrymen is poor practice.

I think you get the idea. It’s going to be whitebread Xian fundo land in Pee-nang. Lets get the punk-bandsters, truckers, rempits and ghetto foreigners to overrun this sick place!

…Cap’n Awesome (is that you Astro?!? Awesome wins! Duh .  . .) 07-02-2006, 07:04 PM       #1 Guest
I know that it’s hardly as popular as saying Fuck Christianity, or Fuck Islam. But this is something that really needs to be said, less more eastofile hippies decide to believe in this stupid shit. Sure Buddhism doesn’t neccesarily have the giant man in the sky, but it’s not as though Karma, Reincarnation, Nirvanna, etc are that much less stupid.

Ooooohhh, but they are a peaceful religion! Big deal, name me one religion that doesn’t claim to be peaceful. The largest single massacre until Auschwitz was committed by a Buddhist. In addition the Kashgar Buddhist Kingdom of Central Asia was oppressive to other religions far more then their Muslim neighbors. The Buddist Church in Japan was nothing more then a money hungry power grabbing organization for hundreds of years. Money grubbing, Massacre committing, oppression? Could it be that the history of this ‘Peaceful’ religion is no diffrent from other world religions?

Today Buddhists are no better then any other religion. They are prehaps the most anti-science faith there is, as the true path to enlightenment involves a complete withdrawl from secular society. Buddhist monks aren’t exactly known for advancing the cause of genetic engineering, or technology. If they had it there way there would be no technology at all, just a bunch of hippies with shaved heads grubbing around in the dirt to barely maintain their own sustanence.

This doesn’t even mention their deplorable practice of picking a little kid at random and proclaiming him the reincarnation of the Dali Lama, essentually fucking his life over. At least the Pope (royal asshole though he may be) wanted to be the pope. [[[ *** Don’t forget the nazi-type collusion with the psy-establishment to poison/drug to very unhealthy condition, political competition on excuse that they are insane because of their exotic sexuality, exotic learnings and exitic leanings. *** ]]]

In short, Fuck Buddhism.

… Choobus Obsessed Member Choobus’s Avatar Join Date: Apr 2005Location: prick up your earsPosts: 20,819

Buddhism may contain elements of meditation but it is still structured around an arbitrary dogma that has no basis in fact. You don’t need to believe in most of what they believe in order to reap the benefits you speak off. Sorry scatty, but I hate willful ignorance so much that I maintain the original position: fuck buddhism. Meditation and such is ok. Give me some micro dots and sensory deprivation tank over a long lunch at the Deli Llama anyday.
You can always turn tricks for a few extra bucks. If looks are an issue, there’s the glory hole option, but don’t expect more than … tips.
~ Philiboid Studge

… Choobus wrote

I concur: fuck buddhism.
Anyone who goes around with that smug “I know the secrets of the universe and you don’t” look had better be in a wheelchair with a computer voice, or they are a cunt, plain and simple. 😆 Thanks, I needed that.

Buddhism seems to be more empirical with many of its beliefs such as the relationship of cause and effect though, its much more advanced then Christianity. Yet still, theirs many parrellels between Siddhartha and Jesus. If you take out the diety’s and supernatural stuff, it looks like to me you basically have some sort of nihilism. [[[ *** Cult of personality as well. *** ]]]

…Cap’n Awesome Guest

Buddhism may contain elements of meditation but it is still structured around an arbitrary dogma that has no basis in fact. You don’t need to believe in most of what they believe in order to reap the benefits you speak off. Sorry scatty, but I hate willful ignorance so much that I maintain the original position: fuck buddhism. Meditation and such is ok. Give me some micro dots and sensory deprivation tank over a long lunch at the Deli Llama anyday.
This is pretty much my position also. So there may be some good stuff in Buddhism. So what? Prayer may be a good excersize if you took away the god fellow. Do unto others…… is basically a good philosophy. There’s good stuff in Christianity, but it’s so overwhelmed by the bullshit that it makes the religion a worthless piece of pig shit. I don’t see that Buddhism is any diffrent. Sure there’s some good stuff if you are willing to ignore the vast majority of what Buddhist Dogma teaches.

Not to mention I’d like one Buddhist Supporter here to condone the practice of taking an child and fucking over his life by telling him he’s the reincarnation of the Dali Lama. No sex for you, go live on this mountain and oppose China. It’s bullshit. Well, Budhism-psychosis is just another strain of the Religious-psychosis anomaly. It is the most benign while christ-psychosisis the most virulent…:)


“buddhism” is different things to different people. To me, it’s primarily about meditation. To Richard Gere, it is about sucking the Deli Llama’s sausage. Fortunately, I’m insulated from first-generation Asian buddhism, with all it’s bogosity. Instead, I get it filtered through graduate-school Zen freaks, who take out all the crap and sanitize it for Western eggheads. Xianity is all about an EXTERNAL locus of control, giving oneself over to jeebus who takes care of paying your bills and finding you a soul mate and all that utter shit. I’ve not seen anything of real value in xianity. It’s disrespectful of human intellect, of human endeavor, of humans in general, excepting when they are completely empty receptacles for the spooge of jeebus.

…Cheimison wrote View Post
Buddhism is anti-material, anti-rational and anti-self. The Big Three of Retarded Ideas. I do not think Buddhism is particularly benign. If it weren’t for the Chinese (not to say I endorse their behaviour), the Dali Lama would be a theocrat right now. When’s the last time the Pope ruled a sizeable nation? Robert Webb is funny. It’s his punchable “I’m a Mac” persona that reminds me of Buddhists.

I do kind of wonder, when Apple commissioned that ad, quite how they figured it was going to play out. “I’m a Mac – I’m a smug twat” – “I’m a PC…I fall over occasionally but I’m conscientious and likeable and get the job done”. Can Apple have really meant this to be their message? Or did the ad agency just look at Mitchell and Webb’s pictures and say “clearly he’s the cool one so we’ll have him as the Mac”?

3rd world types care for nothing but money, shooting, dogs and rat-catching, and will be a disgrace to themeselves. [[[ *** Meanwhile politically motivated ‘kitten killers’ using killing evil as an excuse butcher kittens, supported by local Buddhist Xian supporter based political parties, while the same political parties PAY your taxmonies to shoot strays in the streets . . . *** ]]] http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/2011/03/06/kitten-killer-apologises/

“When science was in its infancy, religion tried to strangle it in its cradle.” – Robert G. Ingersoll

…AgreeToDisagree

Monk puts on the robe and followers think the man’s possessed by Buddha. (Well know this, Buddha or any self respecting spiritualist does not possess ANYONE ever. It’s spiritual molestation or rape if anything. Though minor (rarer major) deities are supposed to be able to do that and do visit their favoured avatars. Maybe the robe possesses the Monks? . . . then think the Suits, probably possessed so shall we start the bonfires and burn bankers? . . . Fundos suck sh1t.

***mini-Article

Buddhist monks walk away from sex-abuse cases
Across the U.S., temples frustrate investigators by insisting they have no control over monks’ actions, whereabouts

The meeting took place at Wat Dhammaram, a cavernous Theravada Buddhist temple on the southwest edge of Chicago. A tearful 12-year-old told three monks how another monk had turned off the lights during a tutoring session, lifted her shirt and kissed and fondled her breasts while pressing against her, according to a lawsuit.

Shortly after that meeting, one of the monks sent a letter to the girl’s family, saying the temple’s monastic community had resolved the matter, the lawsuit says.

The “wrong doer had accepted what he had done,” wrote P. Boonshoo Sriburin, and within days would “leave the temple permanently” by flying back to Thailand.

“We have done our best to restore the order,” the letter said.

But 11 years later, the monk, Camnong Boa-Ubol, serves at a temple in California, where he says he interacts with children even as he faces a second claim, supported by DNA, that he impregnated a girl in the Chicago area. [[[ *** Try the ones who use tantra or yantra and black magic to control, drugs to drug, buy, sell and traffick women, children, even men, at the back of the temple. That’s why some of them look half asleep all the time and can sit so still, all night slave trading, f*cking and loads of drugs . . . then it’s day job time – put on robe, look stoned and holy, collect donations, drive around in massive SUV or luxury vehicle of choice – where are those ‘feel the healing aura from a mile away types’? These days monks who look so overfed (can vegetarians get that big?!?) but the real ones are looking far beyond this world types that will give the time of day to anyone without the corporate-loanshark b.s. offices are no longer present among us . . . *** ]]]

Excluding the impossible — Tay Tian Yan (Malaysian Insider) – 4th March 2010

In criticism, intent, Malaysia, media, neurolinguistics, subtle insults, Tay Tian Yan on February 10, 2012 at 10:02 am

MARCH 4 — The death of Teoh Beng Hock, according to local pathologist Dr Shahidan Md Noor’s statement, could be caused by one of the three probable factors:

1. He jumped down from the building;
2. He was murdered;
3. He was pushed down the building.

In “The Adventure of the Beryl Coronet”, Sherlock Holmes was famously quoted as saying: “It is an old maxim of mine that when you have excluded the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.”

One out of three, at least comes more convincing than the previously offered one and single option in the pathologist’s statement: He jumped to his death.

The biggest difference between a single option and multiple options is that the former has been largely driven by the will, where only one solution is offered, and it’s up to you to accept or reject it.

The latter, meanwhile, is more of a logical inference, where objective environments have been studied, various deductions and suppositions made, and the true answer sought out of all kinds of possibilities.

The most dreadful thing is that the most irrational factor has been offered as the only option!

This type of problems would not have occurred even when Holmes were investigating his cases, or more accurately during Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s Britain more than a century ago!

That said, in many societies where transparency is lacking and public authority rampantly abused, the only option offered has become the standard solution.

China is a clear winner in this respect.

Be it in the police force, municipal authorities or jails, the Middle Kingdom seems to excel in turning the unbelievable into truth.

Let me cite some real instances:

A Chinese man was locked up in a detention centre but died several days later due to head injuries. A report was subsequently issued by the detention centre, claiming that the man had played a “hide and seek” game with his fellow detainees and accidentally hit the wall and …

Another man fell into a coma due to “improper sleeping posture” while in police custody, and was proclaimed dead upon arrival at the hospital.

This could have been the first case of death caused by “improper sleeping posture” anywhere on this planet!

Yet another man was said to have been yelling “Here again! Here again!” in the middle of his sleep before he died at the lock-up. His family later spotted some bruises on his forehead.

Perhaps a Taoist priest should be hired if the place is that haunted!

A 20-year-old young man was said to have fallen from his bed and died, but from the video-recording, his family saw him blindfolded and assaulted by four people for 20 minutes before he collapsed.

The bed must not be too high, and the Japanese tatami should be perfect, and safe!

At a lock-up on the idyllic Hainan island, a man was said to have broken his neck spine and died while he was bathing.

Perhaps we should be much gentler and avoid excessive movements while enjoying a cold shower.

In Inner Mongolia, a suspect suddenly fell down when a cop “kindly” offered him some toilet paper when he was about to do his business.

The toilet paper must have been the latest product to join the ever growing list of dangerous products made in China.

A young man in central Henan province was sent to a lock-up, and was found dead after drinking a glass of water given to him by a cop and some flu pills from another cop.

Injuries were later found in his head, his nipples lopped off and genitalia mutilated.

This must be the “Miracle Water”!

As for whether Teoh Beng Hock really jumped to his death, the court of inquest has every obligation to bring out the truth! — mysinchew.com

*** Commentator Comments :


written by @Killer, March 04, 2010
What a confused journalist this Tay is….not just he’s confused but he’s also confusing the readers.

” Injuries were later found in his head, his nipples lopped off and genitalia mutilated. This must be the “Miracle Water”! ”

[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]

There is nothing ‘miraculous’ about such injuries. Tay Tian’s choice of words worries me . . . I concur with commentator ‘Killer’, not making alot of sense here. Maybe time for a short break Tay Tian?

ANALYSIS : That Malaysian Insider did not allow for this comment to pass through confirms that the magazine’s intent is not for people to participate in discussions but to set agendas and to unfairly propagate their preferences through online media. Perhaps not all at MI are intent on sidelining segments of the demographic they are not open minded enough to accept, but as of now the final effect is that MI is allowing only * voices they like * to be heard. MI is thus not a neutral online magazine, yet. Hope it matures sufficiently someday . . .

New woe for Vatican as usher linked to prostitution – 4th March 2010

In Catholic, choir boys, Prostitution, racism on February 10, 2012 at 9:56 am

[Pope Benedict XVI blesses the faithful at the end of his weekly audience in the Paul VI hall at the Vatican as scandals plague the Vatican. – Reuters pic]

Pope Benedict XVI blesses the faithful at the end of his weekly audience in the Paul VI hall at the Vatican as scandals plague the Vatican. – Reuters pic
VATICAN CITY, March 4 — One of Pope Benedict’s ceremonial ushers and a member of an elite choir in St Peter’s Basilica have been implicated in a gay prostitution ring, in the latest sexual scandal to taint the Vatican.

Ghinedu Ehiem, a Nigerian, was dismissed by the Vatican yesterday from the Giulia Choir after his name appeared in transcripts of police wiretaps, published by an Italian newspaper, in an unrelated Italian investigation.

The wiretaps were carried out in connection with a probe into corruption in contracts to build public works, including the planned venue in Sardinia of last year’s G8 summit. The summit was eventually moved to the Abruzzo region as part of efforts to help it recover from an earthquake.

Among four people arrested last month in the corruption probe was Angelo Balducci, a engineer who is a board member of Italy’s public works department and a construction consultant to the Vatican. Balducci was arrested on corruption charges and the allegatons of prostitution emerged only later.

Balducci is also a member of an elite group called “Gentlemen of His Holiness”, ushers who are called to serve in the Vatican’s Apostolic Palace on major occasions such as when the pope receives heads of state or presides at big events.

“Gentlemen of His Holiness” carried the coffin of the late Pope John Paul at his funeral in 2005.

Excerpts of the wiretaps and police documents published in the Italian newspaper La Repubblica showed that Ehiem, 40, had been in regular contact with Balducci before Balducci’s arrest last month and the subject of their conversation was gay sex.

A police document prepared for magistrates and published in part by La Repubblica said Balducci was in contact with Ehiem and an Italian who were part of what the police called “an organised network … to abet male prostitution”.

It was not immediately possible to contact Ehiem’s lawyer.

A Vatican source said Balducci, who is still in jail, has been dismissed from the elite group of ushers and that his name would not appear in the next edition of the Vatican’s directory.

“He obviously can’t come back here after being accused of these things,” the source said.

The latest black eye for the Vatican comes on the heels of major paedophilia scandals involving the abuse of children by priests in Ireland, Germany and the United States.

Balducci’s lawyer, Franco Coppi, one of Italy’s highest profile attorneys, told Reuters he had no comment on the newest accusations against his client, saying: “We have much more serious things to be concerned with right now,” referring to the corruption charges.

When the Vatican announced that Ehiem was dismissed from the Basilica’s choir, which was founded in the sixth century, it stressed that he was not a priest but a lay member of the group. He had sung in the choir for 19 years.

The Giulia Choir sings in St Peter’s at events when the pope is not present. The Sistine Choir sings when he is.

Wiretap transcripts published by La Repubblica showed that among the men Ehiem allegedly procured for Balducci were seminarians. In one, Balducci is quoted as asking Ehiem: “At what time does he have to return to the seminary?”

Apart from being a “Gentleman of His Holiness”, Balducci is listed in the Vatican’s directory as a consultant to a Vatican department that deals with missions and had close contacts with the Vatican during planning for events for the year 2000, when millions of pilgrims came to Rome for a special Holy Year. — Reuters

[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]

If the choir boy was White they would have covered it up. Or they intentionally hired a Nigerian choirboy and let him be part of the ‘Gentlemen’ and later induced/made opportunities to tempt him into running the gay prostitution ring to discredit black peoples in general. Such maneuvering in the Church is not unheard of and an all ‘white only’ Apostolic Delegate panel and history of White Popes only attests to that.

How to appreciate criticism — Fahri Azzat (loyarburok.com) – 4th March 2010

In advice, critical discourse, criticism, intent, social freedoms, spirit of the word, word of the law on February 10, 2012 at 9:50 am

MARCH 4 — Many of us take criticism the wrong way. We get angry. We paint the critic as the enemy. We hate them. Try to suppress if not annihilate them.

Many of us take criticism the wrong way. We get angry. We paint the critic as the enemy. We hate them. Try to suppress if not annihilate them.

It does not have to be this way. There is a better way to take criticism and make it of use to not just us but everybody.

Before I explain that way, allow me to first define criticism: it is simply the act of pointing out and explaining what is wrong or does not meet certain necessary or required standards. The necessity of an explanation is very important. Without it there can be no valid criticism, only unfair abuse.

From this we can appreciate that criticism is a vital and necessary expression towards improving something, be it an institution, a person, an idea, etc. It is applicable any and everywhere because perfection does not exist in reality — only in our heads or on paper (wherever reality does not need intervene).

The implication of reality’s imperfection is that everything can be improved in some aspect, facet or other. Whoever thinks otherwise ceases to live in reality and enters the realm of illusions. It follows that whoever resists criticism in that same moment resists reality. It also means that that person is very deep into and enthralled by their own illusions, which would undoubtedly find little evidence in reality. If there were an abundance of it that person would rather live in reality and face up to it.

This is generally why many people do not like criticism and some cannot stand it. The act of criticism inevitably results in the shattering of powerful personal illusions. It draws a person back into reality. It reminds them of reality’s harshness. It insists that they face up to their weaknesses and failings. And at the end of it, criticism implicitly demands improvement to those areas that illusion used to rule. Those areas usually tend to be personal and intimate areas of the self. This is also why some people become enraged when they are criticized — those areas tend to be the most sensitive to one’s ego.

A lot of this hurt and pain felt from criticism, I strongly believe stems from a lack of understanding of what criticism is and how to deal properly deal with it. I have explained already how important criticism is as a tool for improvement and growth.

Before I explain how criticism should be handled better, I need to first address the supposed distinction between ‘constructive criticism’ and ‘negative criticism’. Sometimes I hear those being criticised lashing back, for example, by saying, ‘I don’t want to hear negative criticism. I will only listen to constructive criticism!’

This is of course utter nonsense for this simple reason: constructive criticism is simply criticism with suggestions on how to improve. Negative criticism does not contain suggestions; it only focuses on the negative aspects. With ‘negative criticism’ the person criticized has to work out where and what those areas for improvement are from the criticism. With ‘constructive criticism’, the critic identifies those areas and offers suggestions for consideration. So the difference between them is only the effort the person criticized has to put into discovering those areas for improvement. That is why whenever I hear someone lash that in reply, I know that they are either lazy or do not want to hear criticism.

Now let me return to the main: how to deal with criticism better. I will use the concept of an idea to illustrate this.

Nobody likes to be told their idea is not good enough. The seemingly natural implication of being told your idea is not good enough is to think that you, as a person, are not good enough. We tend to think this because the proposed idea emanates from us, from our thoughts, our brains and so in a sense, it is personal to us.

This is perhaps why some people take criticism so personally. They think a criticism of their idea is a criticism and judgment on their integrity as a person. They think because their idea is defective in some sense, they too are similarly defective in their person in some respect.

This thinking is, of course, deeply flawed. Allow me to explain why.

Firstly, though an idea maybe shaped by us personally, the moment it is expressed, it ceases to become ours. It becomes everybody’s idea. The idea of flight may have come from Leonardo da Vinci, but he does not own it. The idea of the wired communications came from Alexander Graham Bell but he does not own it. Sir Timothy John Berners-Lee came up with the idea of the internet and he now does not own it. Though an idea may come from us, it is never personal to us. We are merely the fortunate or unfortunate vessels through which ideas pass through into expression. Though a part of us will always be a part of that idea, it is limited only to the idea’s heritage — not its ownership or future development.

The first lesson we can take from this is that do not be too personal about our ideas. They are not really ours. Ideas may come from man, but they are the property of mankind.

Secondly, though ideas spring from us, they will never be complete or thorough enough to define us. From philosophy we can observe that even the greatest of philosophers (men vastly wiser and more intelligent than the common man in terms of refinement of thought) are still unable to craft a general theory so wide, deep and thorough and so complete to define human nature. If the most powerful of philosophical ideas cannot define our nature (but they do provide great insight), common ideas are far less capable of representing the core of our being.

The implication is that though we are related to our ideas, they do not define us. And so criticism of our ideas cannot mean criticism of our integrity as a human being. These are two separate things. This is why it is said that our ideas are like our children. Children spring from us but they are completely separate independent beings with their own arc and path of development. Just like children, ideas though they reflect us in some ways, that reflection will never be enough to define us completely much less permit judgment about personal and intimate areas of ourselves i.e. our integrity.

The third lesson to be drawn is that criticism of our ideas is not a criticism of our person. It has nothing to do with us. Our narcissism just makes us think it does. So ensure that your narcissism levels are suppressed when you listen to criticism. If not, you will think the criticism is all about you instead of your idea.

Fourthly, all ideas are potentially flawed, especially at their germination and even at later, higher levels of refinement. An influential idea in one era may be discovered to be wrong or obsolete later. If you want examples just go through the history of science, medicine, and technology. So many times have ideas and theories been revised through the course of their respective histories. In another sense, ideas are also like art. There is always a sense of incompleteness about them and so room for completion. The great Picasso once said,

Woe to you the day it is said that you are finished! To finish a work? To finish a picture? What nonsense! To finish it means to be through with it, to kill it, to rid it of its soul — to give it its final blow; the most unfortunate one for the painter as well as for the picture.

Paula Bachtiger Kling, also an artist, explains the thrill of an artistic piece of work, “The best part is: I’m never finished! There are always new angles, new shadows, new lights …”

And what is art really but the mere expression of an idea in a less explicit and obvious medium? All of art, philosophy and science demonstrate that all expressions of ideas are necessarily incomplete, flawed and perpetually ready for improvement.

So to expect to propose an idea of such perfection expressed with such perfection that it becomes impervious to any sort of criticism is misguided as it is impossible.

Fifthly, criticism is subjective. Though the criticism itself may be objective (in the sense that it is free from bias and attempts to address reality), each critic comes from a subjective point of view — his (in the sense that it is unique as each human being is). Any idea therefore bears the potential to be criticised from infinite point of views. Not all of them are accurate, correct, strong or bona fide. These are often obvious and we can quickly dismiss them. But much criticism is also valid (because each idea has many facets) and this is when we must pay close attention to them.

How would we know?

If our mind does not discover it then our heart will tell us because it would sting if not hurt; make us angry; and provoke us to lash back maliciously. This is when we must resist the reflexive urge to do so, shut up and listen as attentively as we can. Valid criticism is the one that stings the most.

Finally all expressed ideas are inherently flawed and incomplete. If we see neither, we just have not looked hard or waited long enough. Do not hope or expect to come up with ‘the perfect idea’ and to express it perfectly. It does not exist. So either learn to expect and deal with criticism correctly or waste yourself in getting angry about it each and every time.

If we can understand these lessons, practise them to the point of internalization and recall them whenever we are criticized, I am certain that we would in time learn not to fear criticism but to welcome it. We would also learn that each instance of criticism is an opportunity for improvement, an opportunity to refine our ideas and be more productive with them.

We would learn not to look at the critic as a source of annoyance or hatred but as a friend. This is perhaps what Jesus meant when he commanded mankind to love your enemies (Matthew 5:44).

We only think someone our enemy because we do not understand yet how they can be our friend or a useful source of improvement for ourselves.

Once we train ourselves to take criticism we may find those we thought our enemies to be our best friends in waiting.
It does not have to be this way. There is a better way to take criticism and make it of use to not just us but everybody.

Before I explain that way, allow me to first define criticism: it is simply the act of pointing out and explaining what is wrong or does not meet certain necessary or required standards. The neces

Fishing for minnows . . .

(1) “The first lesson we can take from this is that do not be too personal about our ideas. They are not really ours. Ideas may come from man, but they are the property of mankind.”

This point is acknowledged on Page 5, line 6 and line 7. It was discarded by the rightful owner, just a restorer and custodian . . .

(2) ” So to expect to propose an idea of such perfection expressed with such perfection that it becomes impervious to any sort of criticism is misguided as it is impossible. . . .  Finally all expressed ideas are inherently flawed and incomplete. ”

It is actually possible because certain ideas are limited in scope and reach, and thus can indeed be perfected with time. Such as the wheel or wing design in aerodynamics which look to have peaked.

(3)  Do not hope or expect to come up with ‘the perfect idea’ and to express it perfectly. It does not exist. So either learn to expect and deal with criticism correctly or waste yourself in getting angry about it each and every time.

Not alone a person can’t. But a sufficient number of people in working in tandem over a period of time on CERTAIN projects as mentioned above can and have done so. See previous examples of wing and wheel.

(4) ” So either learn to expect and deal with criticism correctly or waste yourself in getting angry about it each and every time. ”

That is assuming ‘yourself’ does get angry. But are they to begin with at all? And if so what about? Don’t assume the worst, lots of even minded people out there, privacy when invaded however does cause upset . . .  after all lots of people like to be fully dressed before they are seen, don’t take that choice from them and then expect them to be happy about it, they make that choice not others, to be seen that is . . .

[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]

Nice article, abit punchy, abit skewed AGAINST, but expected given the difficulty of the endeavour. So walk with vigour with the ideas expressed by the writer, and avoid going off on gently counter-intuitive tangents and offer a helping hand to those floundering in their pathos and insanity, inability to accept differences in people . . . ah the limits again, so what else could be expected sigh.

Long past the friends and enemies thing, at this range and mobs of closed minded mob minded fools, anyway it is too nebulous to presume . . . but every journey however begins with a step, so here’s a reminder with those who care to, just like when BN had 90% of the vote . . .