Following the bombshell by Sabah Progressive Party (SAPP) president Yong Teck Lee yesterday announcing that its two MPs Dr. Chua Soon Bui (Tawau) and Eric Enchin Majimbun (Sepanggar) would move a no-confidence motion against Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, many questions are swirling for answer, including whether it is possible for a no confidence motion to be moved in Parliament on Monday when it looks procedurally impossible as up to yesterday no such notice of motion had been submitted to Parliament.
In fact, although a proper motion of no confidence has not been submitted to date to Parliament, it is not impossible to duplicate a no confidence vote in Parliament on the Barisan Nasional government on Monday.
Whether a no confidence motion could be moved, debated and voted upon in Parliament on Monday, however academic it appears, is however not the foremost question created by Yong Teck Lee’s announcement yesterday.
The most important question from the SAPP action, which has dealt another mortal blow on the Barisan Nasional government after the March 8 “political tsunami”, is:
Will the declaration by the two SAPP MPs of no-confidence in Abdullah as Prime Minister trigger support from other BN MPs in Sabah, Sarawak and Peninsular Malaysia or will the incipient revolt by disaffected BN MPs be crushed with SAPP expelled by BN today with the engineering of a SAPP Baru?
The Barisan Nasional supreme council will be holding an emergency meeting in 90 minutes’ time at 2.30 pm over Yong Teck Lee’s shock announcement yesterday.
Even if SAPP is expelled from Barisan Nasional and a SAPP Baru engineered from SAPP elements who dissociate themselves from Yong Teck Lee’s action, and the incipient revolt of the other disaffected BN MPs from Sabah, Sarawak and Peninsular Malaysia snuffed out with a “regime of white terror” by a show of power and intimidation, the Barisan Nasional government will only further alienate itself from the support and sympathy of the people of Sabah, Sarawak and Peninsular Malaysia by ignoring the long-standing popular grievances of Malaysians all over the country.
#1 by Jeffrey on Friday, 20 June 2008 - 12:47 pm
It is also not a question of hammering him constantly : he is embarked on a major project of changing a government that has been ensconced for 50 years – which all of us have an interest. If he is bungling it or going about it amatuerishly (so it seems to me now though granting events later may well prove me wrong) I see no reason why we cannot criticise his actions. Especially the part that he proceeded upon the whole project unilaterally (so again it seems to me), without conferring, strategising and coordinating with the top leaders of his so called ‘equal’ political partners).
#2 by Jeffrey on Friday, 20 June 2008 - 12:48 pm
Is this ‘one man’ show?
#3 by m.hwang on Friday, 20 June 2008 - 12:53 pm
Let Kasim Amat continue with his ramblings. If u feel it’s justifiable to respond then go ahead. We are not like TDM who will crucify dissenters. This is democracy at work. Agree to disagree.
But most of the time this Kasim guy is talking s*@*. So pls don’t degrade ourselves by extending a reply.
#4 by Lee Wang Yen on Friday, 20 June 2008 - 1:17 pm
I share Jeffrey’s reservation about Anwar’s integrity. But I tend to think that Anwar is a very capable man. In any case, I agree with limkamput that it’d be best to wait for a few more days before assessing his moves.
The ‘advance notices’ Anwar has been giving seem to be a good strategy in a war of nerves. Announcing every single plot in advance would be foolish. But announcing some plans within the whole strategy could be a clever move in a war of nerves.
Events are still unfolding, and for all we know, there may be plans and agreement achieved between several parties that we’re not aware of.
Wait and see!
#5 by citizenwatch on Friday, 20 June 2008 - 1:23 pm
There’s an Arabian curse which can be suitable for Kasim Amat. “May all your teeth drop except for one- and that tooth will give you toothache forever.”And Mr Broom will help extract it for you.
#6 by k1980 on Friday, 20 June 2008 - 1:38 pm
Waaa… so fast one man! If like this, no more corruption in this country because all corrupt buggers will be charged within 24 hours! This means that the PM has a dossier on each and every one of his lackeys. If found guilty, Judas Yong Iscariot will have to resign as president and relinquish control of SAPP.
http://themalaysianinsider.com/index.php/home/42-lead-stories/795-aca-to-question-yong-over-rm5m-payment
#7 by gofortruth on Friday, 20 June 2008 - 1:59 pm
k1980 Says:
Today at 13: 38.13 (11 minutes ago)
———————
At last the ruling BN has revealed to the whole wide world the true face of ACA. What a disgrace!!!!
#8 by seage on Friday, 20 June 2008 - 2:03 pm
Way to go ACA~!! We suddenly felt your presence! HAHAHAH Right~!! Pigi Lah!!
#9 by alancheah on Friday, 20 June 2008 - 2:07 pm
Good luck to Pakatan Rakyat.
Waiting for you people to make bigger change
for this country.
#10 by highhand on Friday, 20 June 2008 - 3:03 pm
all the current sabah leader jump down from kinabalu n perish
#11 by rainbowseahorse on Friday, 20 June 2008 - 3:06 pm
“A “little” SAPP is going to move a motion of no-confidence against the Prime Minister in the Parliament. Is Yong bold or foresighted?
Is he taking the opportunity to raise his bargaining chip to exchange for more capitals or does he really want the Prime Minister to step down?”.
Indeed, what is a minnow like SAPP with “no official position Yong” trying to accomplish with that either “bold” or “foresighted” move? Or, perhaps, it is a political “hara kiri”?
Yes, the “powerful” BN (UMNO) could immediately expel SAPP from the coalition according to the usual ritual so that it would disappear from the political arena forever. But they chose not to, and with Pak Lah saying,”We cannot simply take action against any one party…We have to be correct…against any leader…or component party”. Why, why, and why? So many questions with plenty of fodder for speculations but no clear cut answers..for now!
Yong openly and willingly admitted to having met with Anwar on two occasions, but I find that strategized for the BN to speculate and to read into those two meetings as SAPP intention to join PKR. As agreed all round, Yong is an educated man and he too knows full well that there is only a very slim chance, if at all, of his motion to be tabled in Parliament. Still, regardless, Yong decided to drop that bombshell!
On the face of Yong’s explanations for his “no confidence” motion, they all have merits, justifications, and very noble cause not especially to Sabahans but to all Malaysian at large. I think Yong must have factored into his gambit that the parliament speaker is a Sabahan and should therefore consider or even support his motion in parliament. He must also have included the two BN MPs who turned down the federal deputy ministry posts, and the other Sabah BN MPs who have been very vocal in pushing for more equal treatment and actions for Sabah. Yong even roped in the two SAPP’s MP to back him up, but apparently did not consult with his deputy Raymond. That further adds dimension to the mystery of Yong’s grand scheme.
Pak Lah, on being asked of Yong’s announcement, had retorted: “I could not satisfy his greed”, and said he will elaborated at a later time which he did with: “Yong had demanded for more seats for SAPP during the 12th general elections as well as expressing his desire to contest Kota Kinabalu constituency even though the seat had been allocated to Parti Bersatu Sabah (PBS)”. But that hardly amounts to very much in “satisfying Yong’s greed” as it is just as could be expected request from all political parties jockeying for more seats. I think Pak Lah thought his people must have a dossier on Yong’s past political activities for him to “elaborate” on some of Yong’s skeletons when he (Yong) was the Chief Minister of Sabah. Pak Lah must have been greatly disappointed that Tun M, being the PM then, has all such dossiers in his possession. Hence that lamb elaboration on “unable to satisfy Yong’s greed”.
So, exactly why did Yong did what he did and, more puzzling is what does he hope to GAIN out of all this?
1. If the BN kicked out SAPP from the coalition, that would not go down well with Sabahans as SAPP is perceived to be fighting for the rights and justice for Sabah. Yong knows this and factored that into his assessments.
2. Yong had hoped that some BN MPs, motivated by his announcement, would jump on the bandwagon. When that did not materialize, Yong immediately switched to damaged control by having his deputy make a declaration to distance SAPP from Yong’s announcement. Pak Lah conveniently lapped up Raymond’s statement and decided not to punish SAPP for Yong’s announcement. Two MPs is much better than two less MPs.
3. The normally sarcastic Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Datuk Seri Nazri came out with a very mild rebuttal for Yong’s action by saying, “ ..the party can accommodate dissenting voices and didn’t think there was a need to expel SAPP from the coalition party” and added, “It’s their right to express their views”.
This really is a very strange reaction by Nazri and just adds plenty of fuel to exactly who is instrumental in Yong’s course of action. Even the DAP is puzzle and PAS quizzical. Tun M is taking it easy and I would dare hedge my bet that he is behind the scene. Until we see who would come to take the final bow would we know the director, scrip writer, and producer of Yong’s theatrical.
Nothing seems to be what it appears to be when it comes to Yong & Tun M…especially Tun M!
But then, I might have greatly over credited these two gentlemen and the whole Yong thing is nothing more than just a political fiasco.
#12 by kingkenny on Friday, 20 June 2008 - 3:18 pm
Lengthy but pls take some time to read this…very interesting…I promise….you can say it’s out topic or relevant…eveything the bn gomen did created all these chain reaction…pls spare some time for this thoughtful piece…..enjoy…..
For your knowledge…….amazing homework….
Today Tenaga stock rose by about MYR1.00. Volume traded in excess of 35 million units.Yesterday Tenaga stock was suspended.
Put these points together:
1 If you know that an announcement would be made on Wednesday that TNB rates will be revised upwards you would surely buy Tenaga shares on Tuesday.
2. If you own an investment bank or have sufficient credit line with an Investment Bank you would have bought as much as you could knowing that the price will surely go up.
3. Since you have to pay within 3 days (T+3 rule), you would have
planned to sell on Friday. Â So you could have bought 1Million Tenaga shares on Tuesday and sold it today for a cool MYR1Million profit without paying any money (perhaps some borrowing costs for 2-3 days).
4. Of course none of us are privy to the announcement of the fuel
hike, but the family of the PM are privy to it.
5. Of course none of us have a large credit line with an Investment Bank but the family of the PM owns an investment bank.
6. Why the surprise announcement on 05 June when the PM has said that it would be in August ? Well you can only make a big and quick profit if you control the timings and surprise others.
7. For those in the know (the powers that be and their cronies) this
has been one hugely profitable week buying and shorting the related shares. The poor rakyat had to queue just to fill up their tanks and perhaps save between MYR20-MYR100.
Now read below….. Need those in know of the basic economics of crude, fuel etc to comment.
WHAT IS NEVER MENTIONED IN Mainstream Media like NST/TheStar/Utusan/BH are these facts….
Malaysian PerCapita Income USD 5000 VS
Singaporean PerCapita Income USD 25000
Further The Star made a comparison of prices in Thailand , Singapore and Indonesia .
For Thailand it is quoted at RM3.90/liter, however are they aware
that in Thailand new cars are cheaper than Malaysia by RM10,000? They pay only one life time for their driving license? No renewal fee after that?
Also that goes for road tax as well? And do TheStar also aware that you can drive all the way from Hadtyai to Bangkok on a six lane highway without paying any Tolls ??!!
Whereas here in Malaysia you have to pay yearly renewal for road tax, driving license and TOLLS, TOLLS, TOLLS!!!
For Singapore how can you quote RM 5.20 ? Please quote in Singapore Dollars because they are earning in Sing Dollars. You might as well say Europeans are paying RM10/liter. RM5.20/liter = Sing $ 2.20/liter, still cheaper than Malaysia in view of fact that Singapore is not a crude oil exporter. Are you saying that you fill up petrol in Singapore by paying Ringgit?
In economy, dollar to dollar must be compared as apple to apple. Not comparing like durian in M’sia is much cheaper than durian in Japan!! Of course-lah, Japan is not durian producer!!! Comparing Malaysian durian with Thailand durian make more sense!!
For Indonesia we might say is cheaper there at RM2.07/liter but compare that to their level of income!
Now, let us compare the price with OIL PRODUCING countries:
UAE RM1.19/litre
Eygpt RM1.03/litre
Bahrain RM0.87/litre
Qatar RM0.68/litre
Kuwait RM0.67/litre
Saudi Arabia RM0.38/litre
IranRM0.35/litre
Nigeria RM0.32/litre
Turkmenistan RM0.25/litre
Venezuela RM0.16/litre
MALAYSIA RM2.70/litre !
RM 2.70!!! From an individual perspective:
As of last month a Toyota Vios would ’cause a damage’ of about RM89,000. In the international market, a Toyota Vios is about USD 19,000
USD 19,000 = RM 62,700 (using the indicative rates of USD 1 = RM3.30)
That makes Malaysian Vios owners pay an extra RM 26,300.
This RM 26,300 should be cost of operations, profit and tax because the transportation costs have been factored in to the USD 19,000.
RM 26,300/ RM625 petrol rebate per year translates to a Vios being used for 42.08 years.
I do understand that the RM 625 is a rebate given by the government, but it also means that one has to use the Vios for 42.08 years just to make back the amount paid in taxes for the usage of a foreign car. Would anyone use any kind of car for that long?
Now with these numbers in front of us, does the subsidy sound like a subsidy or does it sound like a penalty? This just seems to be a heavy increment in our daily cost of living as we are not only charged with high car taxes but also with a drastic increase in fuel price.
With all the numbers listed out, I urge all Malaysians to join me in analyzing the situation further.
Car taxation is government profit, fuel sales is Petronas’ (GLC) profit which also translates into government profit. The government may ridicule us Malaysians by saying look at the world market and fuel price world wide. Please, we are Malaysians, we fought of the British, had a international port in the early centuries (Malacca), home to a racially mixed nation and WE ARE NOT STUPID!!!
We know the international rates are above the USD 130/barrel. We understand the fact that the fuel prices are increasing worldwide and we also know that major scientist are still contradicting on why this phenomenon is happening. Some blame Bush and his plunders around the world and some blame climate change and there are others which say petroleum ‘wells’ are getting scarce.
Again we go back to numbers to be more straight fwd
1 barrel = 159 liters x RM2.70/liter = RM 429 or USD 134
On 1 hand, we are paying the full cost of 1 barrel of crude oil with RM2.70 per liter but on the other hand the crude oil only produces 46% of fuel.
Msia sells crude oil per barrel at USD130 buys back Fuel per barrel at USD134. And not forgetting, every barrel of fuel is produced with 2 barrels of crude oil.
1 barrel crude oil = produce 46% fuel (or half of crude oil), therefore
2 barrel crude oil = approximately 1 barrel fuel
In other words, each time we sell 2 barrels of crude oil,equivalently we will buy back 1 barrel of fuel.
Financially,
Malaysiasell 2 barrel crude oil @ USD 130/barrel = USD 260 = RM 858
then, Malaysia will buy back fuel @ USD 134/barrel = RM 442/barrel
Thus, Malaysia earn net extra USD 126 = RM 416 for each 2 barrel of crude sold/exported vs imported 1 barrel of fuel !!!
(USD 260-134 = USD 126 = RM416)
So where this extra USD 126/barrel income is channeled to by Malaysian Govt???????? ?
Another analysis:
1 barrel crude oil = 159 liters.
46-47% of a barrel of crude oil = fuel that we use in our vehicles.
46% of 159 = 73.14 liters. @ RM 2.70/liter x 73.14 liter = RM197.48 of fuel per barrel of crudeoil. This is only 46% of the barrel, mind you. Using RM 3.30 = USD 1, we get that a barrel of crude oil produces USD 59.84 worth of petrol fuel (46% of 1barrel).
USD 59.84 of USD 130/barrel turns out to be 46% of a barrel as well.
Another 54% = bitumen, kerosene, and natural gases and so many more.
And this makes a balance of USD 70.16 that has not been accounted for.
So this is where I got curious. Where is the subsidy if we are paying 46% of the price of a barrel of crude oil when the production of petrol/barrel of crude oil is still only 46%?
In actual fact, we still pay for this as they are charged in the forms of fuel surcharge by airlines and road taxes for the building of road (because they use the tar/bitumen) and many more excuse charging us but let us just leave all that out of our calculations.
As far as I know, only the politicians who live in Putrajaya and come for their Parliament meetings in Kuala Lumpur (approximately 60+ km) are the ones to gain as they claim their fuel and toll charges from the money of the RAKYAT’s TAX.
It is so disappointing to see this happen time and time again to the Malaysian public, where they are deceived by the propaganda held by the politicians and the controls they have over the press.
Which stupid idiot economist equates rebates for rich or poor with the cc of the vehicles? An average office clerk may own a second hand 1300cc proton Iswara costing $7,000 (rebate = $625) while the Datuk’s children can own a fleet of 10 new cars of BMW, Audi and Volvo all less than 2000cc costing $2 millions and get a total rebate of $625 x 10 = $6,250! Wow what kind of economists we are keeping in Malaysia…wonder which phD certificate that they bought from…
Misleading concept of Subsidy:
The word “subsidy” has been brandished by the BN government as
if it has so generously helped the rakyat and in doing so incurred losses. This simple example will help to explain the fallacy:
Example:
Ahmad is a fisherman. He sells a fish to you at $10 which is below the market value of $15. Let’s assume that he caught the fish from the abundance of the sea at little or no cost. Ahmad claims that since the market value of the fish is $15 and he sold you the fish for $10, he had subsidised you $5 and therefore made a loss of $5.
Question : Did Ahmad actually make a profit of $10 or loss of $5 which he claimed is the subsidy?
Answer:
Ahmad makes a profit of $10 which is the difference of the selling price ($10) minus the cost price ($0 since the fish was caught from the abundance of the sea). There is no subsidy as claimed by Ahmad.
The BN government claims that it is a subsidy because the oil is kept and treated as somebody else’s property (you know who). By right,
the oil belongs to all citizens of the country and the government is a trustee for the citizens. So as in the above simple example, the BN government cannot claim that it has subsidised the citizen!
UMNO/BN MUST DISAPPEAR FROM MALAYSIA!
SEPT16 OR PRU13!
ONCE AND FOR ALL!
#13 by kingkenny on Friday, 20 June 2008 - 3:24 pm
m.hwang says:
But most of the time this Kasim guy is talking s*@*. So pls don’t degrade ourselves by extending a reply.
===================================================
Guys, m.hwang’s got a bullseye here…we should boycott this guy kasim amat here just like we want to boycott his government.
Let him continue mocking his own intelligence and that of his masters. He is truly what his fathers are! Bapa borek anak rintik!
Ignore him…he is as useless as can be! Nothing true comes out from his mouth. Talk c@ck!!!
#14 by pandancsy on Friday, 20 June 2008 - 3:24 pm
support SAPP to leave BN and join PAKATAN
please vote at :http://sapphq.blogspot.com
#15 by Godfather on Friday, 20 June 2008 - 3:36 pm
“I share Jeffrey’s reservation about Anwar’s integrity. But I tend to think that Anwar is a very capable man.” Lee Wan Yen
For the past few months, Jeffrey has been hitting out at Anwar’s integrity, starting with the Pakatan stance on islamisation and the potential crossovers of BN MPs to PR. Now he tries to equate my condemnation of BN to his criticism of Anwar. [".....there being no measuring cast of a difference in principles between PR’s defacto head and his boys, what’s the reason to attack incessantly Pak Lah and his?"]
Jeffrey implies that Anwar is a dictator (“Is PR a one-man show?”) or that Anwar is amateurish in his attempts to force a change in regime.
My criticism of BN as a den of thieves is obvious. We elected a federal government that allows UMNOputras to dip their hands into the till. We elected a government that is totally incompetent. They deserve the criticism (or attacks if you want to call it) heaped upon them.
What has Anwar done to justify the negative postulating that Jeffrey has been making all this while ?
#16 by kingkenny on Friday, 20 June 2008 - 3:38 pm
Petronas said it’s “financial report” is always on their website….bullsh!!t….their’s is only the financial position….we want to look at its expenditure and assets accounts!!
The government is misleading and lying again!!!
UMNO/BN OUT!
#17 by Godfather on Friday, 20 June 2008 - 3:47 pm
I agree with what Limkamput said about us analysing too much or postulating too much. Of course we live in a free world, so we can postulate for all we want, but when the postulations take a negative slant on almost all issues regarding Anwar, then I can’t help but be suspicious about the motives of the people making those postulations.
#18 by kingkenny on Friday, 20 June 2008 - 3:49 pm
“”Jeffrey implies that Anwar is a dictator (”Is PR a one-man show?”) or that Anwar is amateurish in his attempts to force a change in regime.”"
from: Godfather to: Jeffrey
====================================================
I totally agree with Godfather here. Jeffrey deserves to be whacked.
If one (1) is ‘good’ enough for the time being, then so be it.
If I am not wrong, Gandhi alone led India to independence. And India has a lot more citizens than Malaysia. Moreover, almost 50% of the people supported PR. All talks about good ethics and the law when dealing with dirty corrupt politicians are useless. Think a while here, are the current administrators of this country playing by the rules? They are not even afraid of you, the Citizen, which is also you Jeffrey, who voted them to power, literally.
History has a place for the bold. And bold leaders often possess charisma, oratory skills and the power to influence. Anwar has all the above ingredients.
Let a NEW Malaysia emerge before we talk of any ethics. There is no ethics when the Rakyat are struggling now, daily since the fuel hike!
#19 by lakilompat on Friday, 20 June 2008 - 3:50 pm
UMNO or BN is not wrong, the chief has been too much, naive and ignorance of people’s plight for too long after the March 8th, as a result people wanted to vote “no confidence” and demand him to handover the party position to other capable candidates. Is UMNO lacking in leader who can steer the country to WAWASAN 2020?
They think of MP or parties as commodity to be bought over with millionth from the country coffer and Petronas revenue? In the future who will suffer the most?
#20 by i_love_malaysia on Friday, 20 June 2008 - 4:12 pm
lakilompat,
“Is UMNO lacking in leader who can steer the country to WAWASAN 2020?”
I wonder why you are asking a no brainer question here and talked about steering the country to Wawasan 2020 i.e. that UMNO will still be running the country after GE13 and beyond !!!
There’s no capable leader in UMNO at all !!!
#21 by i_love_malaysia on Friday, 20 June 2008 - 4:16 pm
Kingkenny,
Your assumption that we sell 2 barrels of crude oil and import 1 barrel of crude oil may not reflect the real situation in Malaysia, as the govt is not disclosing how many sold and imported.
#22 by NG on Friday, 20 June 2008 - 5:05 pm
i wonder why the ACA now only start to investigate YTL??
#23 by Jameswong on Friday, 20 June 2008 - 5:10 pm
it’s b’cos ACA is under Bodohwi
they never investigate why the government official bought a screw driver at few hundred ringgits and those jack up price items.
those are our hard earned money but got into someone pocket.
this is what you called ” pai pai jou, che kou kou, ni ik ker, woh ik ker” (Mandarin)
#24 by sheriff singh on Friday, 20 June 2008 - 5:15 pm
SAPP Supreme Council has finally come out to support Yong Teck Lee’s motion of no-confidence on Pak Lah today.
#25 by sheriff singh on Friday, 20 June 2008 - 5:16 pm
But they still find it difficult to leave BN. I wonder why? Are they passing the ball back to the BN Supreme Council?
#26 by sheriff singh on Friday, 20 June 2008 - 5:22 pm
The whatever split in SAPP is actually those who have and those who have not.
Those who have are on the gravy train and are holding government posts like Deputy Chief Minister and the like. They fear losing everything and become nobodies overnight. The gravy is just too thick to give up.
Those who have not, like Yong Teck Lee, the only party leader who was not given a kerusi to contest, are merely wishing they were on the gravy train. If they were, then no problem, but they are not so they come out with their frustrations.
Everybody wishes they are on the gravy train, the Molar Express. Tom Hanks, where are you? You giving out tickets?
#27 by k1980 on Friday, 20 June 2008 - 5:34 pm
Will YTL now by investigated by police for sodomy with Kasitah Gaddam?
#28 by Jeffrey on Friday, 20 June 2008 - 6:09 pm
Reference to Godfather’s remarks, I don’t know on basis it could be said that my comments are ‘postulations’ of negative slant, as the term is understood, ie asserting a claim or making an argument based on nothing but likely personal antipathy towards DSAI. There is nothing personal here. I’ve got nothing against him. The criticisms are based on what I – rightly or wrongly – interpret is the inevitable conclusion based on the events that have so far unfolded, whether one chooses to acknowledge them or not.
Neither did I say he was a ‘ dictator’ by question “Is PR a one-man show?”
When someone who is defacto head of an opposition coalition acting concert with Sabah politicians launches an ambitious project to start a change of government about which his partners within the coalition knew not much (see the comments of Nik Aziz, Guan Eng & Kit which are running counter to the smooth operation of the plan of the Sabahan politicians acting in concert), what do you call the ‘brains’ behind such an ambitious operation – dictator or fool, when your own people (top leaders of Pakatan Rakyat), not being privy to plans, express surprise and by their comments are shooting at and not openly supporting your plans or the plans of your Sabah operatives???
As I said, events as they unfold may prove me wrong – that he might well turn out to be a consummate operator – that remains to be seen – but based strictly on what has happened thus far, I think it is amateurish. (That’s just my personal opinion, as it occurs to me, and I have not made a claim that it is irrefutable truth that you must believe).
However an opinion based on one’s interpretation of facts (whether interpretation is right or wrong) is no basis for Godfather to suspect or impute personal bias or antipathy or hidden agendas – his posting Today at 15: 47.33 (2 hours ago refers when he said “when the postulations take a negative slant on almost all issues regarding Anwar, then I can’t help but be suspicious about the motives of the people making those postulations”.
Godfather has such a visceral antipathy towards BN and all in it that he is prepared to (1) gloss over the limitations, errors, wrong doings, whether committed by Anwar or PAS as long as they are against the BN and (2) criticize and oppose any one for anything, no matter how true, as long as it is perceived as undermining or running counter against any effort to dislodge the BN!
I humbly submit that such a benchmark set in looking at any issue is a true reflection of real selective and personal bias.
#29 by kingkenny on Friday, 20 June 2008 - 6:18 pm
Dear i_love_malaysia,
however much barrels are traded between Malaysia and the rest of the world isn’t only the issue.
As said, government officials are only the trustee for the Rakyat when it comes natural resources derived from this soil, which belongs to the Rakyat.
And so far, various responses from these officials can’t fully explain the so called high subsidy that the government said were drilling a gigantic hole in the state’s coffers, thus creating the massive chain reaction in this country where everything including politics are inter-related.
Petronas said its oil (in its natural form), are more suited to aircrafts usage and heavy industrial vehicle than our sedans. But until is properly explained, their actions and consideration towards the welfare of the Rakyat will be open to assumptions.
Shell got Regular fuel (cheap) and V-Power (expensive) types. But Shell is American, we do not expect initiatives from them to make our lives better, but, we expect the Malaysian government would, after all its profits they earned.
A 747 can use our fuel, why is it not suitable for domestic cars.
And remember what AAB said, the reason for the increase of fuel is to “slow down” the premature death of Petronas, what is the basis?!
If Petronas profits are handled and channeled correctly (i.e. no foul play or corruption), maybe AAB would have kept his promise in PRU12 to only raise the fuel in August, at least.
UMNO/BN OUT!
#30 by Jeffrey on Friday, 20 June 2008 - 6:22 pm
Because the benchmark of such an approach is always let the BN be damned and there is no price that is not worth paying, no truth that is not worth sidelining as long as the BN is damned and even if the truth should conflict with the damning of BN and den of thieves, then the latter must still prevail over truth, which is not as important as the imperative of the former. I regret that I don’t share such an approach.
#31 by Godfather on Friday, 20 June 2008 - 6:23 pm
“….criticize and oppose any one for anything, no matter how true…”
You mean no matter how untrue, don’t you ? OK, All I need is to for you to highlight some instances of your sweeping allegation that I “oppose anyone on anything, no matter how untrue”.
I plead guilty to the charge that I am anti-BN. I have simply seen too much.
#32 by Godfather on Friday, 20 June 2008 - 6:30 pm
After Jeffrey asserts that he is not calling Anwar a dictator, he goes on to say this:
“When someone who is defacto head of an opposition coalition acting concert with Sabah politicians launches an ambitious project to start a change of government about which his partners within the coalition knew not much (see the comments of Nik Aziz, Guan Eng & Kit which are running counter to the smooth operation of the plan of the Sabahan politicians acting in concert), what do you call the ‘brains’ behind such an ambitious operation – dictator or fool, when your own people (top leaders of Pakatan Rakyat), not being privy to plans, express surprise and by their comments are shooting at and not openly supporting your plans or the plans of your Sabah operatives???”
Jeffrey now says that Anwar is either a dictator or fool. Or have I misunderstood this form of legalese ?
#33 by Godfather on Friday, 20 June 2008 - 6:31 pm
Maybe I am not used to legal doublespeak.
#34 by Jeffrey on Friday, 20 June 2008 - 6:31 pm
Nothing wrong with being anti BN : who is not??? But extreme antipathy should not cloud objectivity to the extent that we are screwed the other way by the other side aligned against the BN eg what PAS trying to do, and Anwar’s shortcomings in certain respects, which I have said in earlier posting. I have absolutely nothing against Anwar and no motives in the comments made except they are based on developments as happening up to today known to me.
#35 by Lee Wang Yen on Friday, 20 June 2008 - 6:35 pm
As Godfather points out, Jeffrey says or implies that Anwar is EITHER a dictator OR fool.
Earlier Jeffrey denied that one of his earlier comment implied that Anwar was a dictator.
There is strictly speaking no doubletalk here.
#36 by Jeffrey on Friday, 20 June 2008 - 6:38 pm
Repost: there is nothing wrong with being anti-BN : who is not??? But let not extreme antipathy against BN compromise objectivity in acknowledging wrong doings of those opposed to BN and whom we depend on opposing BN, for example, what PAS is trying to do in Selangor and PR’s MB Khalid is mediating with the Sultan or the less than effective way Anwar has so far launched the first salvos (through his Sabahan collaborators) to change the government that many here are pinning their hopes that it would be successful after all the early promises by him.
#37 by Godfather on Friday, 20 June 2008 - 6:43 pm
Another quote of Jeffrey’s from a very recent thread:
” And the third is on the chameleon record of DSAI, his Islamic credentials past links with ABIM, betting that when the crunch comes, DSAI would for the PM’s position, side PAS against DAP with PAS pulling the strings behind in newly formed PR Govt.”
#38 by Godfather on Friday, 20 June 2008 - 6:45 pm
Lee Wang Yen:
You make me laugh. You engage in more doublespeak than a lawyer !
#39 by Godfather on Friday, 20 June 2008 - 6:47 pm
I am still waiting for Jeffrey to highlight some instances of me bashing BN based on untruths.
#40 by Godfather on Friday, 20 June 2008 - 6:52 pm
Some people use convoluted writings, long sentences, long paragraphs etc to hide their bigotry, but when you distill their writings, the truth inevitably comes out.
#41 by kingkenny on Friday, 20 June 2008 - 6:56 pm
Dear Jeffrey, excerpt below was taken from a super popular Malaysian website, look for the truth before you speak the untruth, this is a clear case of mismanagement of funds that in turn breed “extreme antipathy” (as you called it) towards BN, by the way it was available in the news too:
>>He added that the state would call for tenders soon and award the logging contract to the highest bidder. “We will discuss the logging method to be used with the Forestry Department,” he told newsmen after chairing the state executive council meeting yesterday.
He added that the Federal Government had promised to pay an annual compensation of RM100 million in 2003 following the state’s decision to cancel its proposed heli-harvesting project to log timber in catchment areas. “However, until now the payment has not been made. We have also asked the Federal Government for financial assistance for the water supply to Penang and Perlis and for the rice we are producing for the country. Since the Government cannot assist us financially, we will carry on with the logging activities,” Azizan added.<<
#42 by Jeffrey on Friday, 20 June 2008 - 6:59 pm
Yes, but if you must quote then do so presenting the proper context so that the true meaning of what is said is divined and njot misconstrued . I was talking in the other thread about PAS and it having four advantages going for it, the first being “its state of preparedness and better organisational skills – including organising demonstrations” and amongst others, the third being what you quoted. I was speaking of what I thought was PAS’s possible calculations, deliberations and projections that give the party the strength to persevere its agenda, notwithstanding its privy to PR’s manifesto, which saying what PAS is calculating on is a far cry from saying that I agree or am calculating that DSAI is a chameleon, that based on his Islamic credentials past links with ABIM, he would definitely, when the crunch comes, side with PAS against DAP when it comes to the crunch for the PM’s position. Please read the context it is said (in relation to PAS) excluding which, when you pick a quote like that in isolation to what went before and after, it gives an unfair impression that I say this of DSAI deliberately. But then again perhaps that is your intention..
#43 by Lee Wang Yen on Friday, 20 June 2008 - 7:01 pm
When a person P makes a statement S and then says something that entails ~S, then there is a doubletalk.
But when someone says or implies ‘S or R’ (e.g. XXX is either a dictator or fool) and then says ‘~S’ (e.g. XXX is not a dictator), there is no doubletalk at all.
#44 by Jeffrey on Friday, 20 June 2008 - 7:04 pm
Dear kingkenny,
Did I say BN fellas do not mismanage funds? Do I say it is wrong any “extreme antipathy” towards BN? I only said, don’t just because of “extreme antipathy” towards BN, which by itself is nothing wrong, we slide over to a pathological state to gloss over , excuse and forget the wrongs that those opposed to BN do.
#45 by Lee Wang Yen on Friday, 20 June 2008 - 7:07 pm
When I say that Jeffrey’s statements are strictly speaking not a doubletalk, in what sense is my statement a doubletalk? Would Godfather please enlighten me? If that is not the doubletalk Godfather discerned in my comment, would Godfather please let me know which of my comments gave him the impression of doubletalk?
#46 by Godfather on Friday, 20 June 2008 - 7:08 pm
So please give some examples where I (or other anti-BN people) have “glossed over”, “excused” or “forget” the wrongs that those opposed to BN do.
#47 by Jeffrey on Friday, 20 June 2008 - 7:10 pm
///I am still waiting for Jeffrey to highlight some instances of me bashing BN based on untruths///.
Did I say you were bashing BN based on untruths?
Is saying (1) gloss over the limitations, errors, wrong doings, whether committed by Anwar or PAS as long as they are against the BN and (2) criticize and oppose any one for anything, no matter how true, as long as it is perceived as undermining or running counter against any effort to dislodge the BN – the same as bashing BN based on untruths??? How did you make that quantum leap from one to the other???
#48 by Jeffrey on Friday, 20 June 2008 - 7:12 pm
Did I say you were bashing BN based on untruths?
Repost
Have I ever said you were bashing BN based on untruths?
Is saying (1) gloss over the limitations, errors, wrong doings, whether committed by Anwar or PAS as long as they are against the BN and (2) criticize and oppose any one for anything, no matter how true, as long as it is perceived as undermining or running counter against any effort to dislodge the BN – the same as you bash BN based on untruths??? How did you make that quantum leap from one to the other ending up putting words in my mouth ???
#49 by Godfather on Friday, 20 June 2008 - 7:15 pm
“Because the benchmark of such an approach is always let the BN be damned and there is no price that is not worth paying, no truth that is not worth sidelining as long as the BN is damned and even if the truth should conflict with the damning of BN and den of thieves, then the latter must still prevail over truth, which is not as important as the imperative of the former.”
Are these not your words ? Maybe you could tell us in plain English, hopefully abbreviated, as to what you really wanted to say.
#50 by Jeffrey on Friday, 20 June 2008 - 7:21 pm
examples of where I (or other anti-BN people) have “glossed over”, “excused” or “forget” the wrongs that those opposed to BN do?? I thought the whole argument is about that, its replete all over the place, self explanatory eg downplaying significance of PAS initiatives in Selangor as “much ado about nothing” and criticising my criticisms of DSAI in relation to the plan to change govt using this mention of no confidence vote by Yong/SAPP about which his partners also criticise.
Now don’t get me wrong that you are not entitled to refute my criticisms of DSAI. I don’t have the monopoly of the truth and could be wrong and you can question and point based on facts where in my anaysis I went wrong. But that you did not do, but instead question why I am having negative slant, as if I have made bare faced assertions not based on any fact, and further in the process imputing motives.