At times I am surprised that many policy makers fail to appreciate the fact that every country that has elections is moving towards democracy. Malaysia has never been a democracy-it is a collective dictatorship protecting a particular religion-Islam to keep them in power. So UMNO the so-called stewards of the Muslim faith and up-holders of Malay supremacy can continue to govern Malaysia. Of cause, much assistance comes from the fact that Pakatan (the first real multiracial opponent) has a member who is branded as a fundamentalist Muslim party.
Frankly, as a citizen who was deprived an education in Malaysia because of the quota system received a scholarship from the UK and was asked to teach the very university I was barred from will be quite happy to embrace PAS on terms. PAS members have a moral responsibility unlike UMNO which is not only racist to other citizen is anti-semantic and the vehicle for corruption. Everyone in Malaysia knows that selected Malays became rich and so did at least 10 top Chinese billionaires with a few Arabs who became bumiputras and one Indian. But the rest of the Malays are suffering. The NEP like Tengku Razaleigh says was used to enrich UMNO and its cronies.
I wish policy makers all over the world will realize that every race, religion and creed must be incorporated into a party governing the country. As a Christian, I welcome PAS to participate in government and if a “Muslim” Chief Minister raped then following the law let him be caned under the Koran in public. So too, corruption among others. The non-Malays on the other hand will come under the civil jurisdiction. If the Malays don’t want PAS, then vote them out in the next elections. In 2012-we want plurality!
Let some other party rule Malaysia and work for the Rakyaat…enough of BN after 5 decades!
There is a Burmese proverb that says “scaffolds are for disposal once a pagoda is fully built”. The 2008 Constitution is part of the exit strategy crafted by military regime and meant to be dismantled soon after it has retreated to safety. There is no doubt about whether the Constitution will be amended or even be abolished and replaced with a new one. The question here is timing. When this will happen? Well, whatever the answer is, the word “trust” has a confirmed place in it. Like many societies in East Asia, Burmese has overwhelmingly high attachment to relationship and trust than the rule of law. There is no law in Burma that is straitjacket and this constitution is no exception.
On the other hand, the 2008 Constitution has nonetheless served as a catalyst for political process in which trust will take the centre stage. This has become more evident in recent months as both the government and the opposition try to reach out to each other’s camp. The government is reaching out to earn trust from the people (and the international community). Aung San Suu Kyi in her campaign speeches routinely praises government leaders for their reform efforts and stresses importance of military’s blessing in achieving democratic goal. Positive changes will trickle in if both sides continue to stick to friendly script while structural factors such as economic prosperity and personal freedom begin to take shape. Again on the day the rule of law has taken root in Burma will also be the last day of this constitution.
The crux of the matter is that the 2008 Constitution does not create the underlying power imbalance, but merely ratifies it. Whilst the question is not if Burma’s democratic opposition will be able to change the constitution, but rather when, what is of greater import is how, the Chilean or the Filipino way.
Burmese President Thein Sein made a rare mention (could well be the first) of Burma/Myanmar word in his first annual inaugural speech. He said “The international media has named our democracy transition ‘Burma spring’ or ‘Myanmar spring’.” A copy of government newspaper with official translation on the front page can be found here .
Sondhi may not be the best friend of the Democrats or the military but I doubt if they will totally outcast him. After all, Sondhi still has a big potential to command a considerable size of street crowd, which the Democrats and other ammats can make use of from time to time.
In September 1976 the king and queen never met with Thanom Kittikachorn after he returned and checked into Wat Bovornives.
There is a video memoralizing 6 October which shows a picture of HM King Bhumipol in military uniform at a Wat which looks like Wat Bovonives with a title reading… р╣Др╕Ыр╣Ар╕вр╕╡р╕вр╕бр╕Цр╕Щр╕нр╕б.
[…] vocabulary to adequately describe homosexuals. (By the way, New Mandala has a nice article on gay slang in Burma). FYI, it’s lein-thu chit-thu (сАЬсАнсАДсА║сАРсА░сАБсА╗сАЕсА║сАЮсА░), literally […]
I made this point in another comment but would also like to point out to you.
When the people loose trust in their government, no matter what you do, the people will not trust you.
Julia Gillard maybe doing a good job – but after the “Kevin Rudd” incident, the “there will be no carbon emission tax under my government”, and now the “Bob Carr” incident, – very few Australians would trust her.
The mob that runs Malaysia is a mob that cannot be trusted at all. The Prime Minister is now saying that Lynas has to send the waste back to Australia. What a joke.
In a normal and mundane government, where policies are determined through evidence, this decision would probably be less chaotic.
But for a government that manufactures evidence to suit them, and destroys or ignores it when it is not in their favour, you can’t help if Malaysians do not trust their government.
You should read more about this mob. The faceless men that run the ALP would look like wimps or angels compared to this mob that runs Malaysia.
Pakatan has good speakers but unable leaders, PAS, DAP, and PKR tie themselves with a spider’s web. They cannot work together to form a good and stable government for Malaysia. I fear Malaysia will be chaotic under Pakatan. On the other hand BN can still form a good government for Malaysia. The flaw in BN is not from their coalition but from some individual members who should be replaced by good, honest and capable leaders. Najib should see to that.
What is so entertaining about these Thailand ’rounds’ is it is all being fought by thumbs gamelike . . . remotely from a playstation by Thaksin S. . . The Red champion fights from Dubai (or Hongkong) at every round wearing his Red pants of course while the bloody rounds at Bangkok streets go on, for his benefit . . .
I worry about the rationality of some people who use this website. Take my above comment #123 as an example, in which I point out that the next instalment of Andrew MacGregor Marshall’s critique is now available.
One person has given it a thumbs down, yet I can’t figure a reason why anyone would take issue with it. In the comment I expressed no opinion, provided no view, additional information or insight. Even the most rabid yellow shirt supporter couldn’t accuse me of anything even remotely critical of their king. Likewise for the opposing view.
If merely providing a link to more information is somehow considered an affront to this person, then I suggest that New Mandala is not an appropriate website for you to read.
Reds will start asking questions and eventually get fed up with all the lies, undelivered promises and charades of the PT. And start demanding real action.
PT wont deliver, because they either can’t and don’t want to, and the real farce begins.
Round 3.
The old “paesano six” take over PT. Thaksin gets kicked out and has to start over with TRT 2.0. Now with bigger, better and bolder plans and even more promises, and with Chalerm AND Newin as wingmen.
Round 4.
The next election. When the “paesano six” remnants of todays PT joins hands with the democrats to fight of TRT 2.0. A TRT 2.0 that has got the military on it’s side because of promises of increased budgets and protection of ┬з112.
Then TRT 2.0 wins the election because A: a majority of the people love the royal institution, and B: The people love the idea of a “Democratic Peoples Professional Military” which will be one of Thaksins future slogans.
All the while Surachai rots away in jail and wonders what went wrong.
Together with a bunch of scholars from somewhere down under.
Malaysia is really racist and this is known by most expats and every adult citizen in malaysia. Malay have minimum 10% discount on buying properties and some areas only let malays buy. malays crime offenders are let go easily too. even i have read kfc which was franchised by malay here charges malay cheaper price. property can let these so-call aborgines to get even up to 50% discount. that included some national shares provide them sure earn money!
The truth is malays arent aborigines at all! From history they come from Sumatra, Indonesia! In my kids history, Parameswara which is the first empire builder in Malaysia kingship comes from Sumatra. He is pirate leader which was under chased by ancient Indonesia king’s man for pirates activity. He landed at Temasek (old name for Singapore) and befriended the king. Later Parameswara the traitor kilkled the Temasek king and named himself the king. Short time later, the Temasek orginal people went against Parameswara, so he ran to Melaka. There is where he built his new empire. So Malays, Indians and Chinese are all the same, non aborigines. Why Malays rules? Due to greed and believes on Indians and Chinese made them let the Malays to rule on the new Malaysia independence from British. Malaysia also means Malay sial. Sial in Malay language also means bastards, bad luck, whores, dirty, sluts,…
Too bad now the Malay had changed all the history books and the roads/buildings/temples/….. on most ancient chinese/indians names.
Much of this material is taken directly from the Criminal Court webpages related to Joe Gordon’s case, and has been draft translated for English language readership. also note that provisions of Criminal Codes mentioned have been pasted in to aid references.
р╣Ар╕бр╕╖р╣Ир╕нр╕гр╕░р╕лр╕зр╣Ир╕▓р╕Зр╕зр╕▒р╕Щр╕Чр╕╡р╣И р╣Т р╕Юр╕др╕ир╕Ир╕┤р╕Бр╕▓р╕вр╕Щ р╣Тр╣Хр╣Хр╣Р р╕Цр╕╢р╕Зр╕зр╕▒р╕Щр╕Чр╕╡р╣И р╣Тр╣Ф р╕Юр╕др╕йр╕ар╕▓р╕Др╕б р╣Тр╣Хр╣Хр╣Ф р╣Ар╕зр╕ер╕▓р╕Бр╕ер╕▓р╕Зр╕зр╕▒р╕Щр╣Бр╕ер╕░р╕Бр╕ер╕▓р╕Зр╕Др╕╖р╕Щр╕Хр╣Ир╕нр╣Ар╕Щр╕╖р╣Ир╕нр╕Зр╕Бр╕▒р╕Щ р╕Ир╕│р╣Ар╕ер╕вр╣Др╕Фр╣Йр╕Щр╕│р╣Ар╕Вр╣Йр╕▓р╕кр╕╣р╣Ир╕гр╕░р╕Ър╕Ър╕Др╕нр╕бр╕Юр╕┤р╕зр╣Ар╕Хр╕нр╕гр╣М р╣Ар╕Бр╕╡р╣Ир╕вр╕зр╕Бр╕▒р╕Ър╕Юр╕гр╕░р╕Ър╕▓р╕Чр╕кр╕бр╣Ар╕Фр╣Зр╕Ир╕Юр╕гр╕░р╣Ар╕Ир╣Йр╕▓р╕нр╕вр╕╣р╣И р╕лр╕▒р╕з р╕Лр╕╢р╣Ир╕Зр╣Ар╕Ыр╣Зр╕Щр╕Вр╣Йр╕нр╕Др╕зр╕▓р╕бр╕лр╕бр╕┤р╣Ир╕Щр╕Ыр╕гр╕░р╕бр╕▓р╕Ч р╕Фр╕╣р╕лр╕бр╕┤р╣Ир╕Щ р╕лр╕гр╕╖р╕нр╣Бр╕кр╕Фр╕Зр╕Др╕зр╕▓р╕бр╕нр╕▓р╕Жр╕▓р╕Хр╕бр╕▓р╕Фр╕гр╣Йр╕▓р╕вр╕Юр╕гр╕░р╕бр╕лр╕▓р╕Бр╕йр╕▒р╕Хр╕гр╕┤р╕вр╣М р╣Вр╕Фр╕вр╕Ир╕│р╣Ар╕ер╕вр╣Гр╕Кр╣Йр╕Щр╕▓р╕бр╣Бр╕Эр╕Зр╕зр╣Ир╕▓ р╕Щр╕▓р╕вр╕кр╕┤р╕Щ р╣Бр╕Лр╣Ир╕Ир╕┤р╣Йр╕з р╣Бр╕ер╕░р╕Ир╕│р╣Ар╕ер╕вр╕нр╣Йр╕▓р╕Зр╕Хр╕▒р╕зр╣Ар╕Ыр╣Зр╕Щр╕Ьр╕╣р╣Йр╣Бр╕Ыр╕ер╕лр╕Щр╕▒р╕Зр╕кр╕╖р╕нр╕Хр╣Йр╕нр╕Зр╕лр╣Йр╕▓р╕бр╕Щр╕│р╣Ар╕Вр╣Йр╕▓р╕бр╕▓р╣Гр╕Щр╕гр╕▓р╕Кр╕нр╕▓р╕Ур╕▓р╕Ир╕▒р╕Бр╕гр╕Кр╕╖р╣Ир╕н “The King Never Smile” (р╕Бр╕йр╕▒р╕Хр╕гр╕┤р╕вр╣Мр╕Ьр╕╣р╣Йр╣Др╕бр╣Ир╣Ар╕Др╕вр╕вр╕┤р╣Йр╕б) р╣Ар╕лр╕Хр╕╕р╣Ар╕Бр╕┤р╕Фр╕Чр╕╡р╣И р╕Хр╕│р╕Ър╕ер╣Гр╕Щр╣Ар╕бр╕╖р╕нр╕З р╕нр╕│р╣Ар╕ар╕нр╣Ар╕бр╕╖р╕нр╕Зр╕Щр╕Др╕гр╕гр╕▓р╕Кр╕кр╕╡р╕бр╕▓ р╕Ир╕▒р╕Зр╕лр╕зр╕▒р╕Фр╕Щр╕Др╕гр╕гр╕▓р╕Кр╕кр╕╡р╕бр╕▓ р╣Бр╕ер╕░р╕Чр╕▒р╣Ир╕зр╕гр╕▓р╕Кр╕нр╕▓р╕Ур╕▓р╕Ир╕▒р╕Бр╕г р╣Бр╕ер╕░р╕Щр╕нр╕Бр╕гр╕▓р╕Кр╕нр╕▓р╕Ур╕▓р╕Ир╕▒р╕Бр╕гр╣Ар╕Бр╕╡р╣Ир╕вр╕зр╕Юр╕▒р╕Щр╕Бр╕▒р╕Щ р╕Вр╕нр╣Гр╕лр╣Йр╕ер╕Зр╣Вр╕Чр╕йр╕Хр╕▓р╕б р╕Ыр╕гр╕░р╕бр╕зр╕ер╕Бр╕Ор╕лр╕бр╕▓р╕вр╕нр╕▓р╕Нр╕▓ р╕бр╕▓р╕Хр╕гр╕▓ р╣Ср╣Ср╣Т , р╣Ср╣Ср╣Ц, р╕Юр╕гр╕░р╕гр╕▓р╕Кр╕Ър╕▒р╕Нр╕Нр╕▒р╕Хр╕┤р╕зр╣Ир╕▓р╕Фр╣Йр╕зр╕вр╕Др╕зр╕▓р╕бр╕Ьр╕┤р╕Фр╣Ар╕Бр╕╡р╣Ир╕вр╕зр╕Бр╕▒р╕Ър╕Др╕нр╕бр╕Юр╕┤р╕зр╣Ар╕Хр╕нр╕гр╣М р╕Ю.р╕и.р╣Тр╣Хр╣Хр╣Р р╕бр╕▓р╕Хр╕гр╕▓ р╣У ,р╣Ср╣Ф
Between 2 November 2550 (2007) until 24 May 2011, continuously during night and day, defendant did place into a computer system [information] regarding His Majesty the King content of which was defamatory, insulting or threatening to the king whereby defendant used the alias “Mr. Sin Saejiew.” Defendant claimed to be a translator of a book banned from the kingdom titled “The King Never Smile [sic],” incident occurring in Nai Meung, meung district, Nakhonratchasima province, throughout the kingdom as well as outside the kingdom. Punishment requested according to Criminal Code Section 112, [Whoever, defames, insults or threatens the King, the Queen, the Heir-apparent or the Regent, shall be punished with imprisonment of three to fifteen years. (Section 112 amended by the Article 1 of the Order (No. 41) of the National Administrative Reform Council in B.E. 2519)] 116 [Whoever makes an appearance to the public by words, writings or any other means which is not an act within the purpose of the Constitution or for expressing an honest opinion or criticism in order: (1) To bring about a change in the Laws of the Country or the Government by the use of force or violence; (2) To raise unrest and disaffection amongst the people in a manner likely to cause disturbance in the country; or (3) To cause the people to transgress the laws of the Country, shall be punished with imprisonment not exceeding seven years.], and the Computer Crime Act of 2007, Sections 3 [“Computer System” means a piece of equipment or sets of equipment units, whose function is integrated together, for which sets of instructions and working principles enable it or them to perform the duty of processing data automatically. “Computer Data” means data, statements, or sets of instructions contained in a computer system, the output of which may be processed by a computer system including electronic data, according to the Law of Electronic Transactions.”Computer Traffic Data” means data related to computer system-based communications showing sources of origin, starting points, destinations, routes, time, dates, volumes, time periods, types of services or others related to that computer system’s communications.
“Service Provider” shall mean:
(1) A person who provides service to the public with respect to access to the Internet or other mutual communication via a computer system, whether on their own behalf, or in the name of, or for the benefit of, another person
(2) A person who provides services with respect to the storage of computer data for the benefit of the other person
“Service User” means a person who uses the services provided by a service provider, with or without fee
“Competent Official” means a person appointed by a Minister to perform duties under this Act.
“Minister” means a Minister who has responsibility and control for the execution of this Act.], 14 [Section 14. If any person commits any offence of the following acts shall be subject to imprisonment for not more than five years or a fine of not more than one hundred thousand baht or both:
(1) that involves import to a computer system of forged computer data, either in whole or in part, or false computer data, in a manner that is likely to cause damage to that third party or the public;
(2) that involves import to a computer system of false computer data in a manner that is likely to damage the country’s security or cause a public panic;
(3) that involves import to a computer system of any computer data related with an offence against the Kingdom’s security under the Criminal Code;
(4) that involves import to a computer system of any computer data of a pornographic nature that is publicly accessible;
(5) that involves the dissemination or forwarding of computer data already known to be computer data under (1) (2) (3) or (4);].
р╕Юр╕┤р╕Юр╕▓р╕Бр╕йр╕▓р╕зр╣Ир╕▓ р╕Ир╕│р╣Ар╕ер╕вр╕бр╕╡р╕Др╕зр╕▓р╕бр╕Ьр╕┤р╕Фр╕Хр╕▓р╕бр╕Ыр╕гр╕░р╕бр╕зр╕ер╕Бр╕Ор╕лр╕бр╕▓р╕вр╕нр╕▓р╕Нр╕▓ р╕бр╕▓р╕Хр╕гр╕▓ р╣Ср╣Ср╣Т р╕бр╕▓р╕Хр╕гр╕▓ р╣Ср╣Ср╣Ц (р╣Т) р╣Бр╕ер╕░ (р╣У) р╕Юр╕гр╕░р╕гр╕▓р╕Кр╕Ър╕▒р╕Нр╕Нр╕▒р╕Хр╕┤р╕зр╣Ир╕▓р╕Фр╣Йр╕зр╕вр╕Др╕зр╕▓р╕бр╕Ьр╕┤р╕Фр╣Ар╕Бр╕╡р╣Ир╕вр╕зр╕Бр╕▒р╕Ър╕Др╕нр╕бр╕Юр╕┤р╕зр╣Ар╕Хр╕нр╕гр╣М р╕Ю.р╕и. р╣Тр╣Хр╣Хр╣Р р╕бр╕▓р╕Хр╕гр╕▓ р╣Ср╣Ф (р╣У) р╣Бр╕ер╕░ (р╣Х) р╕Бр╕▓р╕гр╕Бр╕гр╕░р╕Чр╕│р╕Вр╕нр╕Зр╕Ир╕│р╣Ар╕ер╕вр╣Ар╕Ыр╣Зр╕Щр╕Бр╕гр╕гр╕бр╣Ар╕Фр╕╡р╕вр╕зр╕Ьр╕┤р╕Фр╕Хр╣Ир╕нр╕Бр╕Ор╕лр╕бр╕▓р╕вр╕лр╕ер╕▓р╕вр╕Ър╕Ч р╕ер╕Зр╣Вр╕Чр╕йр╕Рр╕▓р╕Щр╕лр╕бр╕┤р╣Ир╕Щр╕Ыр╕гр╕░р╕бр╕▓р╕Ч р╕Фр╕╣р╕лр╕бр╕┤р╣Ир╕Щ р╕лр╕гр╕╖р╕нр╣Бр╕кр╕Фр╕Зр╕Др╕зр╕▓р╕бр╕нр╕▓р╕Жр╕▓р╕Хр╕бр╕▓р╕Фр╕гр╣Йр╕▓р╕вр╕Юр╕гр╕░р╕бр╕лр╕▓р╕Бр╕йр╕▒р╕Хр╕гр╕┤р╕вр╣М р╕Хр╕▓р╕бр╕Ыр╕гр╕░р╕бр╕зр╕ер╕Бр╕Ор╕лр╕бр╕▓р╕вр╕нр╕▓р╕Нр╕▓р╕бр╕▓р╕Хр╕гр╕▓ р╣Ср╣Ср╣Т
р╕Лр╕╢р╣Ир╕Зр╣Ар╕Ыр╣Зр╕Щр╕Бр╕Ор╕лр╕бр╕▓р╕вр╕Ър╕Чр╕Чр╕╡р╣Ир╕бр╕╡р╣Вр╕Чр╕йр╕лр╕Щр╕▒р╕Бр╕Чр╕╡р╣Ир╕кр╕╕р╕Фр╕Хр╕▓р╕бр╕Ыр╕гр╕░р╕бр╕зр╕ер╕Бр╕Ор╕лр╕▓р╕вр╕нр╕▓р╕Нр╕▓ р╕бр╕▓р╕Хр╕гр╕▓ р╣Щр╣Р р╕ер╕Зр╣Вр╕Чр╕йр╕Ир╕│р╕Др╕╕р╕Б р╣Х р╕Ыр╕╡ р╕Ир╕│р╣Ар╕ер╕вр╣Гр╕лр╣Йр╕Бр╕▓р╕гр╕гр╕▒р╕Ър╕кр╕▓р╕гр╕ар╕▓р╕Ю р╣Ар╕Ыр╣Зр╕Щр╕Ыр╕гр╕░р╣Вр╕вр╕Кр╕Щр╣Мр╣Бр╕Бр╣Ир╕Бр╕▓р╕гр╕Юр╕┤ р╕Ир╕▓р╕гр╕Ур╕▓ р╕бр╕╡р╣Ар╕лр╕Хр╕╕р╕Ър╕гр╕гр╣Ар╕Чр╕▓р╣Вр╕Чр╕й р╕ер╕Фр╣Вр╕Чр╕йр╕Хр╕▓р╕бр╕Ыр╕гр╕░р╕бр╕зр╕ер╕Бр╕Ор╕лр╕бр╕▓р╕вр╕нр╕▓р╕Нр╕▓ р╕бр╕▓р╕Хр╕гр╕▓ р╣Чр╣Ш р╣Гр╕лр╣Йр╕Бр╕╢р╣Ир╕Зр╕лр╕Щр╕╢р╣Ир╕З р╕Др╕Зр╕Ир╕│р╕Др╕╕р╕Б р╣Т р╕Ыр╕╡ р╣Ц р╣Ар╕Фр╕╖р╕нр╕Щ р╕гр╕┤р╕Ър╕Вр╕нр╕Зр╕Бр╕ер╕▓р╕З./
Adjudicated that defendant committed the offense according to Criminal Code Section 112, 116 (2) and (3), and according to the Computer Crime Act of 2007, Sections 14 (3) and 5, act by defendant is a single act in violation of many sections of the law. Sentenced according to defaming, insulting or threatening the king, according to Criminal Code 112, whereby these are laws with severe penalties according to Criminal Code Section 90, sentenced to half, two years and six months- forfeiture of media [seized].
The Curtin University honorary doctorate issue still continues.
This well researched open letter from REFSA (Research for Social Advancement) to the Curtin University does question the very stated basis by Curtin University of their reason to award the Prime Minister’s wife with an honorary doctorate.
“…Vice Chancellor Hacket has admitted that one of the initial justifications such as (Dr) Rosmah’s contribution to ‘the advancement of women’ is incorrect. This has since been removed from the official statement by the university on the conferment of the honour to (Dr) Rosmah. How important was this criterion in the University’s decision to honour (Dr) Rosmah? Is its mistake grounds to revisit the decision? Also, it throws into question the thoroughness of the University in its procedures of fact-finding and verifying information required in the criteria for nomination…”
I just wonder why organisations today, still underestimate the power of the internet in sourcing and disseminating information.
If Curtin wanted to award her an honorary doctorate, they should have learnt what Monash and Adelaide did – and mention something that although untrue, at least cannot be challenged.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Malaysia after regime change – Thomas Pepinsky
At times I am surprised that many policy makers fail to appreciate the fact that every country that has elections is moving towards democracy. Malaysia has never been a democracy-it is a collective dictatorship protecting a particular religion-Islam to keep them in power. So UMNO the so-called stewards of the Muslim faith and up-holders of Malay supremacy can continue to govern Malaysia. Of cause, much assistance comes from the fact that Pakatan (the first real multiracial opponent) has a member who is branded as a fundamentalist Muslim party.
Frankly, as a citizen who was deprived an education in Malaysia because of the quota system received a scholarship from the UK and was asked to teach the very university I was barred from will be quite happy to embrace PAS on terms. PAS members have a moral responsibility unlike UMNO which is not only racist to other citizen is anti-semantic and the vehicle for corruption. Everyone in Malaysia knows that selected Malays became rich and so did at least 10 top Chinese billionaires with a few Arabs who became bumiputras and one Indian. But the rest of the Malays are suffering. The NEP like Tengku Razaleigh says was used to enrich UMNO and its cronies.
I wish policy makers all over the world will realize that every race, religion and creed must be incorporated into a party governing the country. As a Christian, I welcome PAS to participate in government and if a “Muslim” Chief Minister raped then following the law let him be caned under the Koran in public. So too, corruption among others. The non-Malays on the other hand will come under the civil jurisdiction. If the Malays don’t want PAS, then vote them out in the next elections. In 2012-we want plurality!
Let some other party rule Malaysia and work for the Rakyaat…enough of BN after 5 decades!
Review of A Life’s Work
#128: Unable to answer the question, but reading Wikipedia gives one the impression that Thanom had at least a few fans in high places: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thanom_Kittikachorn#6_October_1976_massacre_and_aftermath
Volunteering to fight in Burma
Jack Slade
can you please email me when you have a minute.
[email protected]
Burma’s Constitution: Straightjacket or red herring?
There is a Burmese proverb that says “scaffolds are for disposal once a pagoda is fully built”. The 2008 Constitution is part of the exit strategy crafted by military regime and meant to be dismantled soon after it has retreated to safety. There is no doubt about whether the Constitution will be amended or even be abolished and replaced with a new one. The question here is timing. When this will happen? Well, whatever the answer is, the word “trust” has a confirmed place in it. Like many societies in East Asia, Burmese has overwhelmingly high attachment to relationship and trust than the rule of law. There is no law in Burma that is straitjacket and this constitution is no exception.
On the other hand, the 2008 Constitution has nonetheless served as a catalyst for political process in which trust will take the centre stage. This has become more evident in recent months as both the government and the opposition try to reach out to each other’s camp. The government is reaching out to earn trust from the people (and the international community). Aung San Suu Kyi in her campaign speeches routinely praises government leaders for their reform efforts and stresses importance of military’s blessing in achieving democratic goal. Positive changes will trickle in if both sides continue to stick to friendly script while structural factors such as economic prosperity and personal freedom begin to take shape. Again on the day the rule of law has taken root in Burma will also be the last day of this constitution.
Burma’s Constitution: Straightjacket or red herring?
The crux of the matter is that the 2008 Constitution does not create the underlying power imbalance, but merely ratifies it. Whilst the question is not if Burma’s democratic opposition will be able to change the constitution, but rather when, what is of greater import is how, the Chilean or the Filipino way.
Name games and Myanmar
Burmese President Thein Sein made a rare mention (could well be the first) of Burma/Myanmar word in his first annual inaugural speech. He said “The international media has named our democracy transition ‘Burma spring’ or ‘Myanmar spring’.” A copy of government newspaper with official translation on the front page can be found here .
Sondhi Limthongkul going to gaol?
Sondhi may not be the best friend of the Democrats or the military but I doubt if they will totally outcast him. After all, Sondhi still has a big potential to command a considerable size of street crowd, which the Democrats and other ammats can make use of from time to time.
Review of A Life’s Work
There is a video memoralizing 6 October which shows a picture of HM King Bhumipol in military uniform at a Wat which looks like Wat Bovonives with a title reading… р╣Др╕Ыр╣Ар╕вр╕╡р╕вр╕бр╕Цр╕Щр╕нр╕б.
Does anyone know if it is accurate?
Going to Pagan: Gay slang in Burma
[…] vocabulary to adequately describe homosexuals. (By the way, New Mandala has a nice article on gay slang in Burma). FYI, it’s lein-thu chit-thu (сАЬсАнсАДсА║сАРсА░сАБсА╗сАЕсА║сАЮсА░), literally […]
Review of A Life’s Work
Not to sweat the small stuff. Sometimes people like to say nay. It does not mean a lot one way or the other.
Lynas – with love from Perth!
@ K. Howell #5 & #7,
I made this point in another comment but would also like to point out to you.
When the people loose trust in their government, no matter what you do, the people will not trust you.
Julia Gillard maybe doing a good job – but after the “Kevin Rudd” incident, the “there will be no carbon emission tax under my government”, and now the “Bob Carr” incident, – very few Australians would trust her.
The mob that runs Malaysia is a mob that cannot be trusted at all. The Prime Minister is now saying that Lynas has to send the waste back to Australia. What a joke.
In a normal and mundane government, where policies are determined through evidence, this decision would probably be less chaotic.
But for a government that manufactures evidence to suit them, and destroys or ignores it when it is not in their favour, you can’t help if Malaysians do not trust their government.
You should read more about this mob. The faceless men that run the ALP would look like wimps or angels compared to this mob that runs Malaysia.
Malaysia after regime change – Thomas Pepinsky
Pakatan has good speakers but unable leaders, PAS, DAP, and PKR tie themselves with a spider’s web. They cannot work together to form a good and stable government for Malaysia. I fear Malaysia will be chaotic under Pakatan. On the other hand BN can still form a good government for Malaysia. The flaw in BN is not from their coalition but from some individual members who should be replaced by good, honest and capable leaders. Najib should see to that.
My best bet is still BN to govern Malaysia
Thailand’s next round?
What is so entertaining about these Thailand ’rounds’ is it is all being fought by thumbs gamelike . . . remotely from a playstation by Thaksin S. . . The Red champion fights from Dubai (or Hongkong) at every round wearing his Red pants of course while the bloody rounds at Bangkok streets go on, for his benefit . . .
Review of A Life’s Work
I worry about the rationality of some people who use this website. Take my above comment #123 as an example, in which I point out that the next instalment of Andrew MacGregor Marshall’s critique is now available.
One person has given it a thumbs down, yet I can’t figure a reason why anyone would take issue with it. In the comment I expressed no opinion, provided no view, additional information or insight. Even the most rabid yellow shirt supporter couldn’t accuse me of anything even remotely critical of their king. Likewise for the opposing view.
If merely providing a link to more information is somehow considered an affront to this person, then I suggest that New Mandala is not an appropriate website for you to read.
Thailand’s next round?
Next round? Isn’t it plain to see already?
Reds will start asking questions and eventually get fed up with all the lies, undelivered promises and charades of the PT. And start demanding real action.
PT wont deliver, because they either can’t and don’t want to, and the real farce begins.
Round 3.
The old “paesano six” take over PT. Thaksin gets kicked out and has to start over with TRT 2.0. Now with bigger, better and bolder plans and even more promises, and with Chalerm AND Newin as wingmen.
Round 4.
The next election. When the “paesano six” remnants of todays PT joins hands with the democrats to fight of TRT 2.0. A TRT 2.0 that has got the military on it’s side because of promises of increased budgets and protection of ┬з112.
Then TRT 2.0 wins the election because A: a majority of the people love the royal institution, and B: The people love the idea of a “Democratic Peoples Professional Military” which will be one of Thaksins future slogans.
All the while Surachai rots away in jail and wonders what went wrong.
Together with a bunch of scholars from somewhere down under.
Easy… 🙂
Evidence of racism in Malaysia?
Malaysia is really racist and this is known by most expats and every adult citizen in malaysia. Malay have minimum 10% discount on buying properties and some areas only let malays buy. malays crime offenders are let go easily too. even i have read kfc which was franchised by malay here charges malay cheaper price. property can let these so-call aborgines to get even up to 50% discount. that included some national shares provide them sure earn money!
The truth is malays arent aborigines at all! From history they come from Sumatra, Indonesia! In my kids history, Parameswara which is the first empire builder in Malaysia kingship comes from Sumatra. He is pirate leader which was under chased by ancient Indonesia king’s man for pirates activity. He landed at Temasek (old name for Singapore) and befriended the king. Later Parameswara the traitor kilkled the Temasek king and named himself the king. Short time later, the Temasek orginal people went against Parameswara, so he ran to Melaka. There is where he built his new empire. So Malays, Indians and Chinese are all the same, non aborigines. Why Malays rules? Due to greed and believes on Indians and Chinese made them let the Malays to rule on the new Malaysia independence from British. Malaysia also means Malay sial. Sial in Malay language also means bastards, bad luck, whores, dirty, sluts,…
Too bad now the Malay had changed all the history books and the roads/buildings/temples/….. on most ancient chinese/indians names.
Lynas – with love from Perth!
K Howell #7
“Assuming the Malaysian Government is corrupt. Hence the speedy unquestioned, unsolicited approvals may sure apply.”
Assuming? assuming? HA Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha….. Please stop please stop.. I am having a stomach cramp.
Review of A Life’s Work
Much of this material is taken directly from the Criminal Court webpages related to Joe Gordon’s case, and has been draft translated for English language readership. also note that provisions of Criminal Codes mentioned have been pasted in to aid references.
р╣Ар╕бр╕╖р╣Ир╕нр╕гр╕░р╕лр╕зр╣Ир╕▓р╕Зр╕зр╕▒р╕Щр╕Чр╕╡р╣И р╣Т р╕Юр╕др╕ир╕Ир╕┤р╕Бр╕▓р╕вр╕Щ р╣Тр╣Хр╣Хр╣Р р╕Цр╕╢р╕Зр╕зр╕▒р╕Щр╕Чр╕╡р╣И р╣Тр╣Ф р╕Юр╕др╕йр╕ар╕▓р╕Др╕б р╣Тр╣Хр╣Хр╣Ф р╣Ар╕зр╕ер╕▓р╕Бр╕ер╕▓р╕Зр╕зр╕▒р╕Щр╣Бр╕ер╕░р╕Бр╕ер╕▓р╕Зр╕Др╕╖р╕Щр╕Хр╣Ир╕нр╣Ар╕Щр╕╖р╣Ир╕нр╕Зр╕Бр╕▒р╕Щ р╕Ир╕│р╣Ар╕ер╕вр╣Др╕Фр╣Йр╕Щр╕│р╣Ар╕Вр╣Йр╕▓р╕кр╕╣р╣Ир╕гр╕░р╕Ър╕Ър╕Др╕нр╕бр╕Юр╕┤р╕зр╣Ар╕Хр╕нр╕гр╣М р╣Ар╕Бр╕╡р╣Ир╕вр╕зр╕Бр╕▒р╕Ър╕Юр╕гр╕░р╕Ър╕▓р╕Чр╕кр╕бр╣Ар╕Фр╣Зр╕Ир╕Юр╕гр╕░р╣Ар╕Ир╣Йр╕▓р╕нр╕вр╕╣р╣И р╕лр╕▒р╕з р╕Лр╕╢р╣Ир╕Зр╣Ар╕Ыр╣Зр╕Щр╕Вр╣Йр╕нр╕Др╕зр╕▓р╕бр╕лр╕бр╕┤р╣Ир╕Щр╕Ыр╕гр╕░р╕бр╕▓р╕Ч р╕Фр╕╣р╕лр╕бр╕┤р╣Ир╕Щ р╕лр╕гр╕╖р╕нр╣Бр╕кр╕Фр╕Зр╕Др╕зр╕▓р╕бр╕нр╕▓р╕Жр╕▓р╕Хр╕бр╕▓р╕Фр╕гр╣Йр╕▓р╕вр╕Юр╕гр╕░р╕бр╕лр╕▓р╕Бр╕йр╕▒р╕Хр╕гр╕┤р╕вр╣М р╣Вр╕Фр╕вр╕Ир╕│р╣Ар╕ер╕вр╣Гр╕Кр╣Йр╕Щр╕▓р╕бр╣Бр╕Эр╕Зр╕зр╣Ир╕▓ р╕Щр╕▓р╕вр╕кр╕┤р╕Щ р╣Бр╕Лр╣Ир╕Ир╕┤р╣Йр╕з р╣Бр╕ер╕░р╕Ир╕│р╣Ар╕ер╕вр╕нр╣Йр╕▓р╕Зр╕Хр╕▒р╕зр╣Ар╕Ыр╣Зр╕Щр╕Ьр╕╣р╣Йр╣Бр╕Ыр╕ер╕лр╕Щр╕▒р╕Зр╕кр╕╖р╕нр╕Хр╣Йр╕нр╕Зр╕лр╣Йр╕▓р╕бр╕Щр╕│р╣Ар╕Вр╣Йр╕▓р╕бр╕▓р╣Гр╕Щр╕гр╕▓р╕Кр╕нр╕▓р╕Ур╕▓р╕Ир╕▒р╕Бр╕гр╕Кр╕╖р╣Ир╕н “The King Never Smile” (р╕Бр╕йр╕▒р╕Хр╕гр╕┤р╕вр╣Мр╕Ьр╕╣р╣Йр╣Др╕бр╣Ир╣Ар╕Др╕вр╕вр╕┤р╣Йр╕б) р╣Ар╕лр╕Хр╕╕р╣Ар╕Бр╕┤р╕Фр╕Чр╕╡р╣И р╕Хр╕│р╕Ър╕ер╣Гр╕Щр╣Ар╕бр╕╖р╕нр╕З р╕нр╕│р╣Ар╕ар╕нр╣Ар╕бр╕╖р╕нр╕Зр╕Щр╕Др╕гр╕гр╕▓р╕Кр╕кр╕╡р╕бр╕▓ р╕Ир╕▒р╕Зр╕лр╕зр╕▒р╕Фр╕Щр╕Др╕гр╕гр╕▓р╕Кр╕кр╕╡р╕бр╕▓ р╣Бр╕ер╕░р╕Чр╕▒р╣Ир╕зр╕гр╕▓р╕Кр╕нр╕▓р╕Ур╕▓р╕Ир╕▒р╕Бр╕г р╣Бр╕ер╕░р╕Щр╕нр╕Бр╕гр╕▓р╕Кр╕нр╕▓р╕Ур╕▓р╕Ир╕▒р╕Бр╕гр╣Ар╕Бр╕╡р╣Ир╕вр╕зр╕Юр╕▒р╕Щр╕Бр╕▒р╕Щ р╕Вр╕нр╣Гр╕лр╣Йр╕ер╕Зр╣Вр╕Чр╕йр╕Хр╕▓р╕б р╕Ыр╕гр╕░р╕бр╕зр╕ер╕Бр╕Ор╕лр╕бр╕▓р╕вр╕нр╕▓р╕Нр╕▓ р╕бр╕▓р╕Хр╕гр╕▓ р╣Ср╣Ср╣Т , р╣Ср╣Ср╣Ц, р╕Юр╕гр╕░р╕гр╕▓р╕Кр╕Ър╕▒р╕Нр╕Нр╕▒р╕Хр╕┤р╕зр╣Ир╕▓р╕Фр╣Йр╕зр╕вр╕Др╕зр╕▓р╕бр╕Ьр╕┤р╕Фр╣Ар╕Бр╕╡р╣Ир╕вр╕зр╕Бр╕▒р╕Ър╕Др╕нр╕бр╕Юр╕┤р╕зр╣Ар╕Хр╕нр╕гр╣М р╕Ю.р╕и.р╣Тр╣Хр╣Хр╣Р р╕бр╕▓р╕Хр╕гр╕▓ р╣У ,р╣Ср╣Ф
Between 2 November 2550 (2007) until 24 May 2011, continuously during night and day, defendant did place into a computer system [information] regarding His Majesty the King content of which was defamatory, insulting or threatening to the king whereby defendant used the alias “Mr. Sin Saejiew.” Defendant claimed to be a translator of a book banned from the kingdom titled “The King Never Smile [sic],” incident occurring in Nai Meung, meung district, Nakhonratchasima province, throughout the kingdom as well as outside the kingdom. Punishment requested according to Criminal Code Section 112, [Whoever, defames, insults or threatens the King, the Queen, the Heir-apparent or the Regent, shall be punished with imprisonment of three to fifteen years. (Section 112 amended by the Article 1 of the Order (No. 41) of the National Administrative Reform Council in B.E. 2519)] 116 [Whoever makes an appearance to the public by words, writings or any other means which is not an act within the purpose of the Constitution or for expressing an honest opinion or criticism in order: (1) To bring about a change in the Laws of the Country or the Government by the use of force or violence; (2) To raise unrest and disaffection amongst the people in a manner likely to cause disturbance in the country; or (3) To cause the people to transgress the laws of the Country, shall be punished with imprisonment not exceeding seven years.], and the Computer Crime Act of 2007, Sections 3 [“Computer System” means a piece of equipment or sets of equipment units, whose function is integrated together, for which sets of instructions and working principles enable it or them to perform the duty of processing data automatically. “Computer Data” means data, statements, or sets of instructions contained in a computer system, the output of which may be processed by a computer system including electronic data, according to the Law of Electronic Transactions.”Computer Traffic Data” means data related to computer system-based communications showing sources of origin, starting points, destinations, routes, time, dates, volumes, time periods, types of services or others related to that computer system’s communications.
“Service Provider” shall mean:
(1) A person who provides service to the public with respect to access to the Internet or other mutual communication via a computer system, whether on their own behalf, or in the name of, or for the benefit of, another person
(2) A person who provides services with respect to the storage of computer data for the benefit of the other person
“Service User” means a person who uses the services provided by a service provider, with or without fee
“Competent Official” means a person appointed by a Minister to perform duties under this Act.
“Minister” means a Minister who has responsibility and control for the execution of this Act.], 14 [Section 14. If any person commits any offence of the following acts shall be subject to imprisonment for not more than five years or a fine of not more than one hundred thousand baht or both:
(1) that involves import to a computer system of forged computer data, either in whole or in part, or false computer data, in a manner that is likely to cause damage to that third party or the public;
(2) that involves import to a computer system of false computer data in a manner that is likely to damage the country’s security or cause a public panic;
(3) that involves import to a computer system of any computer data related with an offence against the Kingdom’s security under the Criminal Code;
(4) that involves import to a computer system of any computer data of a pornographic nature that is publicly accessible;
(5) that involves the dissemination or forwarding of computer data already known to be computer data under (1) (2) (3) or (4);].
р╕Юр╕┤р╕Юр╕▓р╕Бр╕йр╕▓р╕зр╣Ир╕▓ р╕Ир╕│р╣Ар╕ер╕вр╕бр╕╡р╕Др╕зр╕▓р╕бр╕Ьр╕┤р╕Фр╕Хр╕▓р╕бр╕Ыр╕гр╕░р╕бр╕зр╕ер╕Бр╕Ор╕лр╕бр╕▓р╕вр╕нр╕▓р╕Нр╕▓ р╕бр╕▓р╕Хр╕гр╕▓ р╣Ср╣Ср╣Т р╕бр╕▓р╕Хр╕гр╕▓ р╣Ср╣Ср╣Ц (р╣Т) р╣Бр╕ер╕░ (р╣У) р╕Юр╕гр╕░р╕гр╕▓р╕Кр╕Ър╕▒р╕Нр╕Нр╕▒р╕Хр╕┤р╕зр╣Ир╕▓р╕Фр╣Йр╕зр╕вр╕Др╕зр╕▓р╕бр╕Ьр╕┤р╕Фр╣Ар╕Бр╕╡р╣Ир╕вр╕зр╕Бр╕▒р╕Ър╕Др╕нр╕бр╕Юр╕┤р╕зр╣Ар╕Хр╕нр╕гр╣М р╕Ю.р╕и. р╣Тр╣Хр╣Хр╣Р р╕бр╕▓р╕Хр╕гр╕▓ р╣Ср╣Ф (р╣У) р╣Бр╕ер╕░ (р╣Х) р╕Бр╕▓р╕гр╕Бр╕гр╕░р╕Чр╕│р╕Вр╕нр╕Зр╕Ир╕│р╣Ар╕ер╕вр╣Ар╕Ыр╣Зр╕Щр╕Бр╕гр╕гр╕бр╣Ар╕Фр╕╡р╕вр╕зр╕Ьр╕┤р╕Фр╕Хр╣Ир╕нр╕Бр╕Ор╕лр╕бр╕▓р╕вр╕лр╕ер╕▓р╕вр╕Ър╕Ч р╕ер╕Зр╣Вр╕Чр╕йр╕Рр╕▓р╕Щр╕лр╕бр╕┤р╣Ир╕Щр╕Ыр╕гр╕░р╕бр╕▓р╕Ч р╕Фр╕╣р╕лр╕бр╕┤р╣Ир╕Щ р╕лр╕гр╕╖р╕нр╣Бр╕кр╕Фр╕Зр╕Др╕зр╕▓р╕бр╕нр╕▓р╕Жр╕▓р╕Хр╕бр╕▓р╕Фр╕гр╣Йр╕▓р╕вр╕Юр╕гр╕░р╕бр╕лр╕▓р╕Бр╕йр╕▒р╕Хр╕гр╕┤р╕вр╣М р╕Хр╕▓р╕бр╕Ыр╕гр╕░р╕бр╕зр╕ер╕Бр╕Ор╕лр╕бр╕▓р╕вр╕нр╕▓р╕Нр╕▓р╕бр╕▓р╕Хр╕гр╕▓ р╣Ср╣Ср╣Т
р╕Лр╕╢р╣Ир╕Зр╣Ар╕Ыр╣Зр╕Щр╕Бр╕Ор╕лр╕бр╕▓р╕вр╕Ър╕Чр╕Чр╕╡р╣Ир╕бр╕╡р╣Вр╕Чр╕йр╕лр╕Щр╕▒р╕Бр╕Чр╕╡р╣Ир╕кр╕╕р╕Фр╕Хр╕▓р╕бр╕Ыр╕гр╕░р╕бр╕зр╕ер╕Бр╕Ор╕лр╕▓р╕вр╕нр╕▓р╕Нр╕▓ р╕бр╕▓р╕Хр╕гр╕▓ р╣Щр╣Р р╕ер╕Зр╣Вр╕Чр╕йр╕Ир╕│р╕Др╕╕р╕Б р╣Х р╕Ыр╕╡ р╕Ир╕│р╣Ар╕ер╕вр╣Гр╕лр╣Йр╕Бр╕▓р╕гр╕гр╕▒р╕Ър╕кр╕▓р╕гр╕ар╕▓р╕Ю р╣Ар╕Ыр╣Зр╕Щр╕Ыр╕гр╕░р╣Вр╕вр╕Кр╕Щр╣Мр╣Бр╕Бр╣Ир╕Бр╕▓р╕гр╕Юр╕┤ р╕Ир╕▓р╕гр╕Ур╕▓ р╕бр╕╡р╣Ар╕лр╕Хр╕╕р╕Ър╕гр╕гр╣Ар╕Чр╕▓р╣Вр╕Чр╕й р╕ер╕Фр╣Вр╕Чр╕йр╕Хр╕▓р╕бр╕Ыр╕гр╕░р╕бр╕зр╕ер╕Бр╕Ор╕лр╕бр╕▓р╕вр╕нр╕▓р╕Нр╕▓ р╕бр╕▓р╕Хр╕гр╕▓ р╣Чр╣Ш р╣Гр╕лр╣Йр╕Бр╕╢р╣Ир╕Зр╕лр╕Щр╕╢р╣Ир╕З р╕Др╕Зр╕Ир╕│р╕Др╕╕р╕Б р╣Т р╕Ыр╕╡ р╣Ц р╣Ар╕Фр╕╖р╕нр╕Щ р╕гр╕┤р╕Ър╕Вр╕нр╕Зр╕Бр╕ер╕▓р╕З./
Adjudicated that defendant committed the offense according to Criminal Code Section 112, 116 (2) and (3), and according to the Computer Crime Act of 2007, Sections 14 (3) and 5, act by defendant is a single act in violation of many sections of the law. Sentenced according to defaming, insulting or threatening the king, according to Criminal Code 112, whereby these are laws with severe penalties according to Criminal Code Section 90, sentenced to half, two years and six months- forfeiture of media [seized].
Lynas – with love from Perth!
I’m Malaysian and I really thanks for whom support us from Australia.
We hate Lynas. For example, you’ll be getting angry if someone throw rubbish with radiator to your home.
Malaysia’s First Lady
The Curtin University honorary doctorate issue still continues.
This well researched open letter from REFSA (Research for Social Advancement) to the Curtin University does question the very stated basis by Curtin University of their reason to award the Prime Minister’s wife with an honorary doctorate.
I just wonder why organisations today, still underestimate the power of the internet in sourcing and disseminating information.
If Curtin wanted to award her an honorary doctorate, they should have learnt what Monash and Adelaide did – and mention something that although untrue, at least cannot be challenged.