SUPREME STUPIDITY!


By Martin Jalleh

Umno supreme council member Nazri Abdul Aziz declares that Anwar Ibrahim’s efforts to entice Sabah BN leaders will not affect BN (Mkini, 12 Aug 2012).

He then adds: “If Anwar want to take those who will not be fielded by (BN), go ahead. Anwar is also a frog because he left Abim (a Muslim youth movement) for Umno and then to PKR.

“It is no surprise that he takes in his own kind. The frog will accept another frog.

“Anwar’s political journey has made him ‘Bapa segala katak (King of frogs)’

Fact No. 1: Abim is not a political party. Therefore there was no hopping involved. Furthermore Anwar was invited by Dr Mahathir to join Umno!

Fact No. 2: Anwar did not leave Umno, he was sacked by Dr M and the Umno Supreme Council.

Fact No. 3: He did not jump into PKR, he formed it!

Fact No. 4: Nazri’s political journey has made him an idiot!

Print Friendly

  1. #1 by Bigjoe on Monday, 13 August 2012 - 11:09 am

    Its not stupidity, its ENTITLEMENT i.e., Ketuanan Melayu and so called cannot be questioned article 153 ‘special Malay right’ ..

    Like it or not, when you have such blanket ‘rights’, it will be abused, it will be hyperbolated.

  2. #2 by dagen wanna "ABU" on Monday, 13 August 2012 - 11:23 am

    Oh that makes nazri a classic frog, then. The type that lives under the “tempurung” all its life.

  3. #3 by monsterball on Monday, 13 August 2012 - 11:48 am

    When Nazri reads the facts, I wonder where is he going to hide his face?
    But he has a cow brain.
    He will blink and continue giving Malaysians his cow sense like an idiot.

  4. #4 by Jeffrey on Monday, 13 August 2012 - 12:34 pm

    As far as Anwar goes, never mind Abim is not a political party, sacked from UMNO, formed PKR and hence “no hopping involved” – when the fact is that he was first to proclaim over 30 frogs joining him on September 16, 2008 to enable him to take over Putrajaya from Pak Lah. The sheer no (30) at one go earns him “king” of frogs from Nazri! Anwar failed not because he had a change of heart on ethics of political leap frogging. He failed because the frogs after all the croaking just didn’t give him sufficient credence to his promises or dare risking a jump over to his side! Anway by today’s prevailing political standards who’s not a frog? It is becoming quite normal that the question of whether political leap frogging (for whatever reasons) has ceased to provoke moral outrage or indignation. Shock. What we see is hypocrisy. Both sides (BN& PR) place ends as justify the means and actively canvass for frogs to jump from the opposite side and label those who crossed over from opposite side as principled, free of sin & doing the right thing whilst those jumping from one’s own side over the fence to the other, as frogs with no principles and integrity – without caring for internal consistency!

  5. #5 by undertaker888 on Monday, 13 August 2012 - 12:49 pm

    Like sharizat says, which umno minister has no problem?

  6. #6 by sheriff singh on Monday, 13 August 2012 - 2:45 pm

    All BN and especially UMNO Ministers have got MENTAL problems.

    Nazri, Noh, Nor, Ah Jib Gor, Moo, JJ, Rais, Shahziman, Shahrizat …. gee, they all need to go to the Cuckoo’s Nest or that Tanjong Place urgently. The party has got very poor genes.

  7. #7 by Loh on Monday, 13 August 2012 - 5:53 pm

    Political frogging is possible because politics is the most lucrative occupation in Malaysia. It is so because of institutionalized corruption aided by malfunction of government institutions, the MACC, the AG and the Judiciary.

    Whether or not Anwar is the king frog is immaterial at the moment if frogging is the condition to have BN removed. In desperation, the end justifies the means, and that is how UMNO is saying that it did not use religion for political interest when it tells Muslims that it was their religious duties to vote for UMNO. When the opponent plays dirty, it would not be wise to follow the rules and be defeated. UMNO need not have to go down the road of dirty politics if it had honoured the profession of politics, that is to serve the people. But UMNO has chosen to serve the interests of UMNOputras, and thus in desperation to remain in power, and perhaps out of jail that it has chosen to play dirty. It is hoped that Anwar having remove BN would stop the environment for political frogging.

  8. #8 by Cinapek on Monday, 13 August 2012 - 8:31 pm

    When TDM described the UMNO ministers as HP6, he hit the nail on the head. Nearer to the GE, they are all queuing up to show off who will make the old man proud that his assessment is dead on.

  9. #9 by Kampong Orang on Monday, 13 August 2012 - 9:57 pm

    Anwar is a frog because he doesn’t want to stay in UMNO anymore who is a corrupted party and the country is spoilt by Mathir’s 22 years of ruling. That is not wrong at all to be a frog as he was not bought over by other. Unlike those frogs who were bought over by UMNO, Anwar still has a better image for us than Be End.

    What matter us normal citizens is to get those corrupted and brought national resources overseas like Taib’s billion Ringgit property in overseas. http://www.sarawakreport.org

    The Tangkak MCA president said Pakatan would cause Malaysia to be bankcrupt if the latter taken over Putrajaya.

    Those MCA and UMNO clearly show they do not know how to run national resources like Selangor and Penang.

    Pakatan certainly would start to get those responsible bringing US$300+ billion via illicit transaction.

    Patakan certainly would change anti corruption law and to confiscate all property and money of corrupted persons like Taib, Mathir, Razak Baginda, Najis, etc.

    To abolish toll, it is possible. We understand this would be later. To support MCA, is to support corruption. To support MCA is to support cronism. To support MCA is to support UMNO hooligan.

  10. #10 by yhsiew on Monday, 13 August 2012 - 10:33 pm

    How come Nazri Abdul Aziz did not call those who jumped ship to Umno/BN frogs? Nazri Abdul Aziz must not practice double standards!!

  11. #11 by ENDANGERED HORNBILL on Wednesday, 15 August 2012 - 10:50 pm

    Agreed, supremely stupid!

    Martin, can I add one more: egregiously idiotic.

    Thank you.

You must be logged in to post a comment.